^ I'll buy it for $25K.

The ride was a breeze today! I guess that's what happens when 1/2 the downtown workers take the day off for that one religious holiday this Sunday.

I also got on a #11 bus and it had seats on it I'd never seen before. they were still the blue cloth ones, but each seat was separate, not like the double bench like seats on the rest of the busses/trains. When did those come out? I saw another one on Diversey later that night.

Oh sure. If you give a big company enough money up front, they will skim off a nice profit, hire a nonunion workforce, and neglect the basic maintenance until public pressure forces the government to take it over again. Witness the privatization of British Rail.

I don't know that Disney sees public transit as their core competency, but there are plenty of companies (Halliburton, anyone?) that will give it a try if the money is good enough.

Seriously, a number of systems contract out their bus operations on a contract or cost-plus basis. But the only real cost savings turn out to come from shedding unionized drivers (along with their work rules and benefits). If--for political reasons--that's taken off the table beforehand, the savings dwindle to almost nothing. And the coherency of the system often suffers when broken up among different operators, as proven repeatedly in Britain and Australia over the last 15 years.

The best systems in the world are public-private partnerships, including Hong Kong and Singapore which are both much better than Chicago or anything in the US for that matter.

Anything privatized by the city remains unionized (which is probably a bad thing to begin with). The maintenance stuff is all worked out before bidding ever takes place with specific requirements in place. The profit usually comes from a segnificant increase in efficiency. A private company can usually provide the same service as the government with a 10-20% decrease in cost of operations within 1 year, as seen in Sao Paulo Brazil's new subway line.

I'm not sure it's safe to make comparisons to public-private partnerships in other countries, due to the vast differences in terms of government and culture. Are there (m)any examples of successful transportation public-private partnerships for a capital-intensive and politically-sensitive operations** in this country?


** By this I mean, it would be increase efficiency to slash bus service and shut down rail lines that run through poor neighborhoods, but that's simply not going to happen.

Not necessarily. The city can put in certain requirements, such as "you must run buses on the following routes the following times..." The city can also fully fund these "less profitable" routes, or subsidize them more so than the "more profitable" routes. Even with this in mind, there are some bus routes in this city that are mostly unnecessary and are only there because of a powerful politician somewhere. A public-private partnership can help eliminate redundancy in the system that a government-run program would otherwise be incapable of doing simply due to political pressure. I'm not sure we should be taking a zero-tolerance view on service cuts.

There are quite a few. Almost everything the goverment does is, in fact, a public-private partnership ranging from military contracts (a partnership with lockheed, boeing, etc...) to social security administration (lockheed handles earning verficiation, system support, etc). So we're really only talking about where you draw the line and choose to call something "private". Nothing in the US is really completely public.

Metra is fundumentally different than the CTA but we can't ignore its much higher satisfaction rate and overall better state. While it doesn't have to run as many routes through "less profitable areas", it really just comes down to government's lack of whillingness to subsidize those areas and subsidize more trains. These problems can be resolved with the CTA.

One of the best parts of involving a private party is govt can displace some of the financial risks associated with a large capital program while allowing it to focus on other services, such as healthcare, schools, etc. At this point, however, I'm not sure anyone will be whilling to take the CTA as a whole at a payout that makes it worth while for the city. If a private party is brought in, it would be be done one line or even a few stops at a time on a pilot program basis and would be coupled with an infusion of cash to fix infrustracture.

Please tell us which ones are unnecessary. I'd also be interested in the criteria you use (riders/day, peak riders/hour, half-mile service standard, farebox recovery ratio) to make this determination.

Metra has the luxury of not owning any of its infrastructure. It runs well because that is really all they have to worry about, keeping the trains on time. The rails, ties and ballast are all taken care of by private railroads and many of the stations and park n' ride lots are largely built and managed by the municipalities. Vastly different than the CTA, which has to pay and care for everything and seek out federal grants through a very lengthy process for major repairs and renovations. I highly doubt any company would offer to purchase any part of the original system that has not already been rebuilt such as the green or pink lines, which really would do nothing to help the state of the overall system.

Well don't you think having numerous smaller companies working on manageable portions of track (as long as they are in sync with each other) would work well. If Metra (sort of) does this, and still as a whole operates smoothly, don't you think the CTA could do it as well?

That will come as a surprise to the Metra workers on the Rock Island, Milwaukee, Heritage, and Electric Divisions.

Only UP, BNSF, North Central, and SouthWest are purchase-of-service or trackage rights. The other lines are owned and maintained by Northeast Illinois Rail Corporation, which does business as Metra.

It's also worth noting that Metra owns, operates and maintains other major capital assets like rolling stock, yards, and shops.

Since when has an oversight organization with zero responsibility ever funded something they mandate? Remember the federal government with paratransit?

It's more like, representatives of those poor areas are key votes in Springfield in terms of anything pro-transit getting passed, so if they say service stays (think: Green Line, Cermak branch, etc.), then service stays.

Marcu, I think your problem (I'm being somewhat fecetious) is that you're trying to come up with rational, fact-based solutions, when rationality and facts on the ground are only a minor input into the huge political equation that actually leads to anything happening in the public transit world.

By this logic, CTA is largely a public-private partnership, since many of these administration functions are contracted out...I think you're copping out of my question. Has there ever been a large scale privatization of a major transportation operation in this country, and if so, what was it and is it relavent, and if not, why not?

Opps, my bad, thanks for clearing that up. So is this rail corporation soley in use as a seperate divison for track maintanece? Do they gain revenue from allowing frieght opperations to occur over the Milwaukee and old IC lines?

I'm not in a position to pick out lines since, as most people in the city, I only use a fraction of the system. I would imagine overlap would be a big factor. I personally can't stand being on a 3rd mostly empty bus in line waiting to make a stop on Sheridan Road.

I guess I just have a problem with the complete unwhillingness to cut any service anywhere. Hypothetically, even as something as basic as increasing wait time from every 6 minutes to every 8 minutes, even if it is shown to segnificantly cut costs, seems to face uncompromising opposition.

I guess you're right. I should try to be more realistic. Just can't help envisioning a HK-style system here in Chicago

As for the oversight organization point, there are quite a few of oversight organizations like this on the federal level. Almost everything under Homeland Security. The entire state court system has madates in terms of docket management, etc.

You're right. It is. So a move to have private maintenance or private operations wouldn't be a radical move that some are portraying. Just a slight shift along the line of a public-private partnership.

Isn't that the point? Have smaller entities with particular areas of expertise?

Never say never...If our mayor, along with guardian angels in Springfield and Washington, actually believed in taking public transit and smart growth development seriously, all sorts of amazing things could happen. It's not like we as a society don't have the money or know-how to do it right.

We'll all just keep doing what we can in the meantime.

On the topic of service cuts, the situation is such that when they do come, it has to be drastic, by nature, as in 1991, 1997, etc. Politically, you can't get away with cutting a route here and there, slashing hours of service for certain routes, etc. Such cats can only be enacted under the "cover" of massive (i.e. 10+% systemwide) cuts that are "necessary" to balance the budget. After the big cuts in 1997, CTA actually ran an operating surplus for a few years.

And as a result of politics, it's natural that now and then, the CTA system gets pretty bloated...routes that shouldnt exist, routes that get way more service than they warrant (since an old widow complained to an alderman about an awful wait this one time on an old streetcar route that no else rides anymore like the Sedgwick/Ogden which is now the #38, and, well....can't say no to old widows. As a demographic, they single-handedly kept the green line in existence in the mid-90s while also ensuring that the east 63rd street branch would be demolished. If you were around here then, you really missed out on the circuses that took place at those community meetings).

Ahem, long story short, every once and a while, "doomsday" service cuts are necessary just to keep things from getting out of hand.

I don't know the precise corporate details, but I think NIRC is an ordinary operating railroad that just happens to be owned by the Regional Transportation Authority. It was created to purchase the commuter operation parts of the Milwaukee Road and Rock Island, and later purchased the ICG's commuter lines (renamed Heritage and Electric, as ICG didn't want to sell the name along with the tracks). In the 80s NIRC started using the marketing name "Metra."

I'm not sure that there are still any freight moves over NIRC tracks, though there may well be customers remaining on the Milwaukee West line that get freight cars dropped off and picked up, presumably by another railroad with trackage rights. I believe Metra Electric's commuter lines were able to be completely separated from CN's remaining freight operations, which run on parallel lakefront tracks. When elevated, the IC's line along the south lakefront had 10 tracks! Only six remain, I think, two for CN's freight operations and four for Metra Electric.

^^^A few corrections (it didn't seem proper to just edit the original post 12 hours later) after discussing the matter with one of my railfan friends. He provided incredible detail; here's a quick summary:

The Heritage line is not owned by NIRC/Metra; it's still owned by CN. BNSF uses it in some sort of pooled trackage arrangement with its parallel mainline.

There's still a substantial amount of freight traffic movement over Metra's former Milwaukee Road lines. CP, purchaser of much of the old Milwaukee Road, has a big yard at Bensenville and moves a lot of freight trains in and out. The lines are dispatched by CP. The Wisconsin Southern operates MILW-N west of Fox Lake and has trackage rights on other portions.

Several other railroads have theoretical trackage rights over pieces of NIRC's lines, including the Rock Island and the C&WI, but usage is pretty rare. Also, I shouldn't forget the National Rail Passenger Corporation, which does business under the name Amtrak. As owner of Union Station and operator of the approach towers, NRPC controls a lot of Metra train movements as well as operating passenger trains over several Metra lines.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/othervi...-REF09.article

A snippet from Mayor Daley's op-ed in the Sun-times:

Red Line extension routes recommended
 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...l=chi-news-hed

Red Line extension routes recommended

By Jon Hilkevitch and Emma Fitzsimmons

Tribune staff reporters
Published April 10, 2007, 10:13 PM CDT

The Chicago Transit Authority recommended three possible routes Tuesday night for extending the Red Line from its current end point at 95th Street to a new rail terminal at 130th Street serving Far South Side residents and suburban park-and-ride commuters.

Traffic congestion has worsened the problem over the years, leading to near-gridlock on the Dan Ryan Expressway and other area highways, and overcrowded conditions during rush hours on Metra and South Shore trains as well as at the CTA's 95th Street Red Line station in the median of the Dan Ryan (Interstate Highway 90/94).

The CTA says it now takes South Side residents 20 percent longer to get where they are going than it does for commuters traveling in the rest of the city.

Nine different corridors to extend the Red Line to 130th Street are still under consideration, CTA officials and consultants told an audience of about 75 people who attended a meeting Tuesday night at Chicago State University to hear a review of the alternatives-analysis study and offer their feedback.

But the CTA recommended narrowing the nine options to three routes for further study:

•Jogging the tracks west to near Halsted Street and south along Halsted, crossing the Blue Island branch of the Metra Electric before reaching 130th Street.

•Using the existing Union Pacific Railroad right of way that runs south between Halsted and Michigan Avenue until about 112th Street, then bends southeast, crossing the Metra Electric main line tracks and terminating near the South Shore Line and the Bishop Ford Freeway (Interstate Highway 94).

•Extending the Red Line alongside South Michigan Avenue.

The six other corridors that were looked at include using rights of way along Interstate Highway 57 or the Bishop Ford; or extending the Red Line tracks alongside either Wentworth Avenue, State Street, King Drive or Cottage Grove Avenue/Metra Electric.

At the meeting Tuesday, Ald. Freddrenna Lyle (6th), whose ward includes the 95th Street Station, said that having a reliable and environmentally friendly train service was paramount.

"We want to make sure it works for the community it serves," she said.

A neighborhood group that has advocated for the extension of the Red Line favors the Union Pacific corridor route because it runs through the center of the Roseland community and would provide the highest ridership, said Lou Turner, a consultant for Developing Communities Project.

"On the Far South Side, one in four households does not have a car," Turner said. "This area is heavily transportation-disadvantaged."

No recommendations were made regarding whether the extension would be at street level, on elevated tracks, in a trench or underground, officials said.
In addition, the transit agency suggested using either traditional CTA heavy-rail cars for the project or a bus rapid-transit system, which would offer faster travel and fewer stops than regular bus service.

One rail expert said the CTA should still consider commuter rail as the best option for the Red Line extension, because CTA-style rapid-transit lines cannot operate on the same tracks used by commuter and freight railroads.

"Why not build it so that the same infrastructure can be used flexibly to provide transit services to both city and suburban passengers?" asked Adam Kerman, who heads the Transit Riders Authority. "With a wide enough right of way, tracks for freight, express passenger and local passenger services can share one alignment."

The CTA's paring down of possible corridors does not mean that the Red Line extension would be built soon. The CTA is seeking federal funding for a number of massive rail projects, including a plan to build the proposed Circle Line connecting all CTA and Metra rail lines.

"We are working to move all our projects along so we are in the best position to get funding," said CTA spokeswoman Noelle Gaffney.

Metra is also competing for scarce federal dollars, pushing its 55-mile suburb-to-suburb STAR Line project, and also studying the viability of a new Southeast Service Line between downtown Chicago and south suburban Crete.

CTA president Frank Kruesi has called the Circle Line the "single most important" transit project in the Chicago region. A second public meeting on the Red Line extension project will be held from 6 to 8 p.m. Wednesday at the West Pullman Chicago Public Library, 830 W. 119th St.

Suburbs: Transportation attention favors Chicago
 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...l=chi-news-hed

Suburbs: Transportation attention favors Chicago

By Richard Wronski
Tribune staff reporter
Published April 10, 2007, 8:35 PM CDT

With two-thirds of the Chicago area's residents living in suburban Cook and the collar counties, there must be greater emphasis on providing new transportation services to those areas, members of the newly formed Suburban Transportation Commission agreed Tuesday.

The region's transportation needs have for too long been Chicago-centered, and funding discussions have been dominated by the needs of the CTA, U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) said.

"Suburb-to-suburb commuting has increased by 56 percent, while traditional suburb-to-city commuting increased only 9 percent," Kirk said. "Our transportation plans should set a priority on the needs of the new suburban majority where our economy is growing fastest."

Kirk and U.S. Rep. Melissa Bean (D-Ill.) teamed up to form the bipartisan commission intended to focus attention on suburban transportation, service inequities and funding needs.

Kirk took aim at the CTA's pension funding shortfall.

"No one is arguing against helping the CTA, but not at the expense of suburban commuters," he said.

Officials from McHenry and Lake Counties urged the panel to push for increased suburban representation on the Regional Transportation Authority board, which oversees CTA, Metra and Pace and approves their budgets. The officials also said Metra and Pace should have seats on the RTA board just as the CTA has.

But RTA Chairman Jim Reilly urged that efforts remain focused on building a regional consensus for increased transportation funding.

"It should not be city-versus-suburbs or city-versus-collar counties. This will only serve to divide us," Reilly said.

The region must act together to encourage the General Assembly this spring to approve the RTA's five-year plan for $10 billion in capital improvements and $400 million a year for operating funds, Reilly said, or service cuts and higher fares will loom.

Also testifying with Reilly before the commission in Libertyville were Metra Executive Director Phil Pagano and Pace board member Dick Welton. The commuter rail and suburban bus agencies outlined how service to the collar counties, particularly Lake and McHenry, has improved over the past 20 years.

Pagano pointed to development of the proposed STAR Line, the 55-mile rail route that would link suburbs and four Metra lines in a semicircle from O'Hare International Airport to Hoffman Estates to Joliet.

Not testifying at the meeting but in attendance was CTA President Frank Kruesi, who said he was "surprised and disappointed" by Kirk's opening comments regarding the CTA.

Kruesi said he was heartened to hear "less of that rhetoric" and more about bipartisanship and consensus-building from others as the session continued.

rwronski@tribune.com

Although I hope you would also recognize that there are real benefits to keeping lines that aren't used very heavily. For one thing, knowing that the transportation system is relatively comprehensive is important in convincing people to rely on it. A lot of the Chicagoans who don't own cars do so by choice. When you cut lower-performing routes and lines from the system, you are likely to induce more car ownership even among people who don't use those lines as part of their daily commute. I would guess that effect is more extreme when you reduce hours and frequency, but I'm no transit expert. And of course, one could argue that just because the decision to keep lines open can be a political one does not necessarily make it a bad one--I would say the Green Line performs an important service because it offers transportation options to a lot of people who don't have any other options, and eliminating it would only make those neighborhoods poorer. But as a former Oak Parker and a Green Line rider, I have some self-interest in saying that.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...l=chi-news-hed

All-transit fare card is on way
It would cover Metra, CTA, Pace

By Richard Wronski
Tribune staff reporter
Published April 15, 2007

Commuters in the Chicago area may soon have the means to make transferring between trains and buses much easier: a single fare card that works on Metra, CTA and Pace.

After a long history of resisting the idea, the agencies are putting the finishing touches on a plan to offer a joint transit pass, officials confirmed.

The card would likely be a hybrid of Metra's monthly pass and the fare card now used by the CTA.

Creation of the new integrated transit pass, which officials plan to announce in the coming weeks, is expected to be popular with riders who have long complained about the inconvenience of the current system.

State legislators and transit watchdog groups for years have criticized CTA and Metra officials for accentuating the differences in their operations rather than focusing on giving riders seamless transit connections and a simplified fare structure.

The release last month of a top-to-bottom state audit of the Chicago area's transit system was key to prodding the agencies into getting serious about finding ways to better coordinate their operations.

The audit concluded that the current Regional Transportation Authority system is flawed and requires restructuring, along with reforms in how mass transit is funded.

An integrated fare system for the CTA, Metra and Pace was among the changes the audit recommended.

RTA Executive Director Steve Schlickman called the move by the CTA and Metra "encouraging."

"I think they are responding at least partially to the auditor general's report," he said.

Jim LaBelle, a transportation expert with the civic group Chicago Metropolis 2020, called the plan important and long overdue.

"Absolutely. It's not the only solution, but it's an important part of moving toward an integrated system in helping people move around the region."

Metra Executive Director Phil Pagano and CTA President Frank Kruesi and their staffs have been meeting in recent weeks to work out details.

"We have been working closely with Metra to make it easier for customers to use one fare card on all systems," Kruesi said Friday.

Pagano said officials hope to have a working proposal completed within the next 30 days so it could be presented to CTA, Metra and Pace directors. He acknowledged that having better fare coordination among transit agencies has long been a concern of the public.

"If we can work this through, I think it's a good first step" toward providing fare coordination, Pagano said. "Fare coordination and [system] integration are important for our riders."

Pagano would not discuss specifics, saying that many remained to be worked out. "The devil's in the details," he said.

CTA officials declined to elaborate on the plan. "We have been working closely with Metra to make it easier for customers to use one fare card on all systems," Kruesi said.

But Schlickman said the pass will probably be a "flash" card akin to the CTA's Chicago Card.

Schlickman's deputy, Leanne Redden, said the CTA and Metra are working "on a combined monthly pass. It has been on the table for a while, as a potential interim step" toward an eventual universal card, she said. "They are dealing with the monthly-pass users first."

Redden said the popularity of the free trolleys that operate in downtown Chicago points to the need to simplify Chicago's public transit system.

"It's easier for the tourist or the weekend visitor to jump on the trolley rather than trying to figure out which of four CTA buses will take them to where they are going," Redden said.

"We already have attracted many daily commuters to transit. The more difficult part will be to develop the policy and program to draw in people who are not currently transit customers. A straightforward, truly integrated fare system is part of the solution," she said.

Redden said the RTA is working toward conducting a pilot project involving fare-collection technology similar to a test under way in New York City. There, customers use a special MasterCard for transit and at retail outlets ranging from Starbucks to McDonald's, she said.

One of the major obstacles to fare integration in Chicago has been dealing with the different types of service. CTA and Pace riders simply pay per trip, while Metra riders pay on a per-distance basis.

Worldwide, there are very few truly integrated transit fare systems, Redden said. Even the Paris transit system, often identified as the standard, does not have integrated fares with the commuter rail lines serving the suburbs outside Paris, she said.

Redden said the initial CTA-Metra integrated pass represents "a relatively low-cost way of combining fare media. The big question is, will this encourage Metra riders to use the CTA more?"

The CTA Chicago Card is being used in the experiment because travel patterns can be tracked. All trips are recorded by the computer chip embedded in each card. Riders now use the plastic Chicago Card for bus and train trips like a debit card, replenishing it with cash at fare machines. Also available is the Chicago Card Plus, which is replenished from a customer's credit card account.

The CTA and Pace fare systems already are integrated; CTA fare cards are accepted on Pace buses. But coordination between the bus systems and Metra has proved problematic. Most riders simply pay two separate fares.

Metra riders who buy monthly passes also can buy a Link-Up Sticker for $36, giving unlimited connecting travel on CTA and Pace buses. But CTA usage is restricted to the peak 6-to-9:30 a.m. and 3:30-to-7 p.m. travel hours.

Metra monthly pass holders can also buy a $30 sticker for unlimited travel on all Pace suburban buses.

Link-Up users number only 5,000 to about 9,000 a month, officials said.

The number of transit riders who would use both a Metra monthly pass and a CTA Chicago Card is relatively small, officials said.

"Our point to the CTA and Metra is we won't know how many people would use the new combined pass until we try it," Schlickman said.

As a transit nut, I'm glad the green line still exists, and I wish other abandoned and destroyed lines (Humboldt Park, Kenwood, Jackson Park, etc) still existed. But I really hate how politicians expect CTA to keep all those lines opens without accepting that doing so drastically increases CTA's need for a significant public subsidy, which same politicians have no interest in providing.

Speaking of the Kenwood line... Has there been any moves to reinstate it, or build a linear park like the Bloomingdale Trail or the High Line in NYC? Who owns it?

I know portions of the viaduct are missing (at Jazz on the Boulevard) and the lakefront access is now blocked by Lake Park Crescent, so this isn't such a no-brainer as it seems.

Lake Park Crescent, however, has interestingly placed parkland between the end of the viaduct and the IC tracks. A short subway could be built beneath the park to connect with the IC if transit service were ever to be reinstated. I would continue the Pink Line around the loop like the Green Line and then divert it after Indiana onto the Kenwood viaduct.

Put bluntly....not going to happen anytime soon, it's not on anybody's radar. Plus, that area is still very low density (in contrast to 60 years ago, when it was about the highest density area in the city)....not really supportive of rapid transit. But of course, after CTA spent $400 million rehabbing a line that nobody rode, you can never again use ridership projection as an acceptable excuse (politically speaking) to not spend oodles money on any given transit project. And hence, maintenance on the lines people do ride (North Main, State and Dearborn Subways, etc.) get deferred....

Regarding serving that area, I think the best step would be infill local stations on the Metra Electric (perhaps at 35th and 43rd). My reasoning being, those residents will want a quick commute option to downtown but will likely drive for just about any other trip. But again, we're talking probably $15-30 million a pop for each, and money like that is nowhere on the horizon. However, if transit became a priority at city hall....

Further, historically riders have never significantly used transfers between the L system and commuter rail. With any luck, the aforementioned fare integration will increased demand for intermodal transfers, and put services like that back on the radar. There used to be a transfer between the South Elevated and IC at 63rd and Dorchester, and nobody used it....there used to be a transfer between the Lake Elevated and the CNW terminal at Clinton/Canal.....and no one used it. Not sure why; it may well have been the complete lack of fare integration.

What? Gray Line? What? aahhmm.

But.. densification IS occurring, and it would be unwise for the city to sell off the remaining portions of the viaduct. That's why a linear park would work well here - it would placehold for future transit use, and it would make an eyesore, liable for demolition, into a neighborhood asset.

As for the new IC stations.. why doesn't Metra increase train frequency on the Blue Island and South Chicago branches, and have them act like rapid transit for the city's stations, making all stops. Then streamline the Main Branch so it acts like an express to the suburbs, and decrease train frequency on it. This would accomplish most of the aims of the Grey Line proposal, without adding to CTA's woes.

There's already new construction blocking much of the old right-of-way, and similarly, much of the embankment has been removed. Further, what's left of the embankment is probably unusable. I'm not saying bringing back the branch is impossible, but it would essentially be an all-new line, with all the eminent domain and acquision politics involved. There would have to be alot of muscle behind it.

Well, Metra's current frequencies are somewhat appropriate given the ridership level, if anything the frequencies are a bit high relative to the other Metra lines (but granted, frequency vs. ridership is often a self-fulfilling prophecy). What complicates the issue also is that Metra receives zero operating funding from sales taxes collected within the city of chicago, but still operates its highest frequency line (the Metra Electric) largely within the city. The counterpoint is that Metra receives a disproportionately high share of suburban tax revenue, relative to CTA. But you see how getting Metra to spend money in the city is a sticky issue with the current funding formula. It's yet another reason there needs to be a stronger RTA to direct regional strategic planning of transit service, rather than almost-entirely-independent service boards.

The other issues with turning the ME into a more rapid-transit like service are the downtown terminal constraints, and the manner of segregation of fare controls and such...unless they would simply hire many many more conductors at a starting salary of $56,000/year...

Can someone post us a population density map for the areas they want to extend the red line through on the southside?

while I'm sure it got overshadowed by the olympics I can't believe nobody's making a bigger deal about the all-transit card. When I saw that article I was floored. Fare integration has been such an obstacle in terms of agency cooperation and system use that its hampered the development of the entire public trans. system. If they've actually tackled this problem its a HUGE step in the right direction.

We've heard it many times before, let's see what actually transpires.

Fare integration wouldn't be hard, just expensive.

Build a hand-held Chicago Card reader with a keypad. The Metra conducter keys in the cost and you touch your card to the reader. The fare is then deducted. This would cost about $100-200 per reader, depending on how fancy you want it.

The expensive part would be adding the infrastructure. Each train would need some sort of wireless connectivity throughout the entire train so the conductor's reader works everywhere. Then the train needs to communicate to the central server to authorize and deduct the amount.

The CTA should be able to help out with the train-to-central-server communication as all the busses do it currently. The connectivity within the train is a different matter.


I would like to see this done and it would be cool if they made it into a framework where the money is just sent to the appropriate agency. Then the South Shore and the proposed southeastern Wisconsin trains could link in easily.

^^^ This is an overly simplistic model though.

You would think that the agencies want to figure out some sort of system where you can have transfers so a commuter doesn't have to pay for two full fares.

You would also think that Metra would be interested in reducing the amount of conductor-to-customer contact required. If a customer could purchase and validate their fare without the need for a human on the other end, it could definitely reduce costs for Metra!

^ You're thinking about it too rationally, and ignoring the politics of it all. Every battle factors in here... city v. suburbs, state v. chicago, union v. administration, cta/metra vs. rta....etc.

Not necessarily. The reader can store the information and communicate it to the central server once it's plugged in or within a specified wireless zone.

On a different note, why not use this opportunity to wifi metra trains.

Kruesi is gone. At the very least, the successor will have the backing of Daley but he doesn't seem like the right guy for the job...

"Huberman, whose confirmation as CTA president by the agency's board is virtually guaranteed, has served as a senior Chicago Police Department official, head of the city's Office of Emergency and Communications and, for the last two years, as Daley's chief of staff. In recent weeks, he has been viewed as a possible contender to succeed retiring Police Supt. Philip Cline.

But he acknowledged that his only hands-on transit experience was in college, when he drove a bus for three years."

You have got to be kidding me.....this is his first quote as the new leader of the CTA.

I think this is a positive development. He isn't a political hack. He is a very intelligent, aggressive manager who has great interest in systems and efficiencies.
This appointment so ties into scandal management and IOC bids.
Huberman is clean. He didn't get his jobs through patronage, but because he is smart and was effective in the Emergency and Communications office. It may be only for political reasons, but Daley would REALLY want a bright, meritocratic manager. Kruesi was losing any effectiveness he had. Better CTA means better Olympics bid.

That doesn't worry me at all, he's shown that he knows how to manage. The first thing he needs to do is get the RTA funding formula fixed, and that requires more political skills than any transit specific skills. I think part of the problem with Kruesi was that he had the transit experience but lacked the political skills the job requires.

I can't believe that some of you aren't worried that he has no experience as a transit leader.

There should be someone in charge that knows the perils of transit systems, how to improve them and at the same time, be an amazing lobbyist. Not someone that needs to "get to know the job" at a time which is extremely vital for the transit agency to get it right. At all levels.

While this guy may become a fine manager of the CTA, that's not what worries me most. Kruesi for all accounts and purposes was not a bad manager. He was however, awful at negotiations and horrible at public relations.

This is Daley finally showing committment to improving the CTA. Huberman is a guy Daley trusts more than anyone out there.

Also in the news today was Daley's trip to DC to confer with IL's congressional delegation to discuss a funding bill for transportation and security.

I imagine the transportation bill would include the Mid-City Transitway (in some form, transit, highway, or both), rehab monies for the O'Hare Branch, and MAYBE the Circle Line, but doubtful.

Daley: City's Olympic bid panel seeks top executive
 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...l=chi-news-hed

Daley: City's Olympic bid panel seeks top executive

By DEANNA BELLANDI
Associated Press Writer
Published April 19, 2007, 7:47 PM CDT

CHICAGO --Transportation and security needs should Chicago host the 2016 Summer Olympics dominated a meeting between members of the Illinois congressional delegation and Mayor Richard M. Daley, who was in Washington Thursday to press the city's federal agenda.

Outside the meeting, Daley also announced that the city's Olympic bid committee was looking to hire a chief operating officer, said Jodi Kawada, a spokeswoman for the mayor.

A national search is under way for a COO who would work with businessman Patrick Ryan, who is chairman and CEO of the Chicago 2016 committee, said the group's spokesman, Patrick Sandusky.

Chicago beat out Los Angeles last weekend to be named the U.S. Olympic Committee's bid city. The International Olympic Committee won't pick a 2016 host until 2009, and other bidders are expected to include Madrid, Prague, Rome, Rio de Janeiro and Tokyo.

Not surprisingly, the Olympics were a hot topic of conversation at Daley's meeting with a bipartisan group of about a dozen lawmakers that included Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin and Republican Reps. Ray LaHood and Judy Biggert.

"It isn't as if the mayor came in and said 'I need $100 million and I need it now,' thank goodness," Durbin said in a telephone interview after the meeting.

But Durbin said the mayor did talk about what the city will need to be successful in its bid, including transportation and security.

"Receiving and moving people efficiently and safely is going to be a major task that we're gonna help him with," Durbin said.

Lawmakers say when it comes to transportation — roads and mass transit — Illinois has projects that need to get done regardless of whether the Olympics are in Chicago. That's why delegation members say they want to urge Gov. Rod Blagojevich and state lawmakers to pass a capital budget with matching dollars to claim federal money.

"The CTA clearly has financial problems and its aging infrastructure," Durbin said. "That has to be addressed, Olympics or not."

Chicago Transit Authority president Frank Kruesi resigned Thursday and Daley immediately recommended the CTA board hire his chief of staff, Ron Huberman, to head the nation's second-largest transit system.

Talk about the Olympics did not include specific requests for money, focusing more on concepts rather than hard details, LaHood of Peoria said in a telephone interview after the meeting.

If Chicago gets the Olympics, LaHood said there would be more federal money for transportation and security, made easier by prominent Illinoisans in Congress, including Durbin, the Senate's No. 2 Democrat, and fellow Sen. Barack Obama, who is running for president.

"We've got some pretty high-profile, powerful people," LaHood said.

Daley's federal agenda also includes urging lawmakers to pass immigration reform, increase funding for affordable rental programs and "commonsense" federal gun legislation in light of the Virginia Tech killings.



Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune

End of the line for CTA boss
 

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/3...-cta20.article

End of the line for CTA boss
STAFF SHUFFLE | Kruesi's exit may improve relations with lawmakers

April 20, 2007
BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter fspielman@suntimes.com

Convinced that CTA President Frank Kruesi has made too many enemies in Springfield, Mayor Daley on Thursday took that polarizing issue off the table in the quest for mass transit funding.

Daley accepted the resignation of his longest-serving and most trusted adviser and handed the reins to a more recent version: chief of staff Ron Huberman.

Huberman's only transportation experience is the three years he spent driving a school bus while working his way through college. But Daley said he has what it takes to make the cost-cutting decisions lawmakers will demand in exchange for more funding.

To avoid fare hikes and service cuts, the CTA needs $110 million in operating funds. A pension funding mandate that takes effect in 2009 will require another $176 million a year.

"He's very knowledgeable. Very smart. Very practical," Daley said of Huberman. "He works with people well. He brings in very innovative, creative people. ... It's all about management. If you start selecting people because of their background ... dealing with one issue, many times, they cannot manage."

The mayor said he has given Huberman a mandate to do a "top to bottom" review in the quest to cut costs. "I don't say, 'You can't do this and you can't do that.' ... Everything has to be on the table. There can't be any restrictions," Daley said.

Huberman, 35, said he was committed to finding innovative ways "to tighten the belt and ... deliver service more efficiently."

Kruesi said his decision to step down has nothing to do with him becoming a lightning rod for lawmakers and riders fed up with derailments, mechanical breakdowns and daily service delays.

"It struck me as a good time to go because I've been doing this for a long time and also because we got through the winter well, the three-track operation [on the Brown Line] went well and really now, it's up to the General Assembly," said Kruesi, who's angling to play a major role in Chicago's 2016 Olympic bid.

Kruesi and Daley have been a team for more than 30 years. In 1993, he was banished to Washington after a behind-the-scenes falling out with Daley only to be welcomed back as CTA president four years later.

Thursday, Daley insisted there would be no pension sweetener like the one Kruesi tried to arrange for himself in 2003, only to have the mayor pull the plug. Hours later, a top mayoral aide appeared to crack the door open to that possibility.

The Sun-Times reported the day after the mayoral election that Kruesi's departure was imminent. Daley angrily denied it. The mayor also had defended Kruesi after a pair of aldermen called Chicago a world-class city with a "third-world transit system."

But City Hall sources said the mayor now has concluded Kruesi has made so many enemies in Springfield -- including powerful House Speaker Michael Madigan -- lawmakers won't even think about helping the CTA until he's gone. Kruesi also has been engaged in behind-the-scenes power struggles with CTA chairwoman Carole Brown.

"He's a difficult human being. It's an imperial kind of attitude. ... The next person is unlikely to be as abrasive as Frank. There'll be a lot of contented smiles around the [Statehouse] building," said a legislative source.


''The next person is unlikely to be as abrasive as Frank.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/3...cbox20.article

Ron Huberman's transit itinerary

April 20, 2007

• Outgoing CTA chief Frank Kruesi's pet project, the Circle Line, is still in discussions, but the $1 billion goal is to build a 13-mile loop stretching from Old Town to Bridgeport between the United Center and downtown. The biggest project since the L was built, the line would connect the city's CTA and Metra lines.

• Lobbying the General Assembly for badly needed infrastructure repairs. The CTA says it has $5.8 billion in unmet capital needs.

• Service improvements that will allow the trains -- and buses -- to pull into stations on time.

• The ongoing $500 million-plus Brown Line reconstruction project that already has begun -- and Huberman likely will see to completion.

New leader's track record: cleaning up government
 

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/3...side20.article

New leader's track record: cleaning up government

April 20, 2007
BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter fspielman@suntimes.com

If CTA riders are looking for somebody who will shake things up at the agency they love to hate, they've got their man in Ron Huberman.
For the last two years as Daley's corruption-fighting chief of staff, Huberman wore out his housecleaning broom while keeping a lid on future troubles.

He presided over a nearly total overhaul of the mayor's Cabinet and uncovered a Water Management payroll scam involving a Bridgeport ring that included the brother-in-law of the mayor's brother, John Daley.

He ordered ethics training for all city employees and installed an elaborate performance accountability system to hold department heads' feet to the fire and improve the productivity of city crews.

Huberman, 35, said Thursday he plans to bring that General Electric-style system to the CTA.

"That will be a welcome change," said CTA board chairwoman Carole Brown, who had a power struggle with outgoing CTA president Frank Kruesi.

Longtime cynics laughed when Huberman claimed he didn't know who sponsored Hired Truck czar Angelo Torres while promising in the same breath to turn the city's rigged hiring system into a "meritocracy."

But City Hall has taken genuine steps in that direction at the behest of federal hiring monitor Noelle Brennan. Huberman also hammered out the Shakman settlement that creates a $12 million fund to compensate victims of City Hall's rigged hiring system. And he played a pivotal role in Chicago's 2016 Olympic bid.

The CTA will be a different kind of challenge for the Israeli-born Huberman, a former Chicago Police officer and 911 center chief who hails from a family of Holocaust survivors.

With the clock winding down on the legislative session, Huberman must cut costs and smooth feathers Kruesi ruffled in Springfield. Depending on how he does, CTA riders will either dodge another bullet or face a combination of massive service cuts and fare hikes.

I agree.

I'm always looking for ways to take transit, but if a system is broken it is broken. You should have seen the look on my face when I was literally in stop and go rush hour traffic, the worst traffic at the worst time of day on arguably one of the worst freeways in the metro area working AGAINST the express lanes (Kennedy inbound from O'Hare to Montrose at 5PM, you can imagine), and I was passing the Blue line on my left.

And everyone in their car was witnessing this too. We were all in stop and go, creeping along at 15mph when we were moving, and here was this in-your-face advertisement to our left that read "Don't take CTA! Driving even at rush hour is faster!"

Something needs to be done. The transportation infrastructure is ready to snap here. I am seeing this first hand--the whole network of transit and freeways has gone far downhill just in the past 3 years. Maybe I'm ignorant but is ANYTHING being done about this? There are horrible freeway bottlenecks that simply shouldn't exist to move people efficiently (I-290 goes from 4, to 3, back to 4 lanes, with HUGE backups on either side of this bottleneck, for example), and if driving inbound Kennedy from O'Hare to Montrose at rush hour in stop and go is literally faster than the Blue line, there is something not right.

A lot of people in this city are between a rock and a hard place. People WANT to like and take transit, but the CTA is giving them absolutely no reason to get off the road when sitting in your car at rush hour is faster!

The CTA, particularly the Blue Line, can obviously be incredibly frusterating. However, the problems with transit, highway congestion, etc, are deeply complicated. I encourage you to browse through this thread as there are many good points made about reasons for congestion, slow trains, etc, before just venting without anything meaningful to add. I don't mean to pick on you, but I get frusterated when I'm on a train platform and someone sees me with a hardhat and vest on and simply asks, when are the slow zones going away?? As if I could just tell them - well, the CTA is just putting up these slow zones for fun. No - in reality the powers at the CTA - higher ups in rail ops, engineering, etc, are deeply concerned about the state of their rail system and its current state of safety and dependibility. The answer to that question is as much political as it is about the CTA, and I encourage you to educate yourself about the issues the CTA is facing, and help educate others as well. I feel that a top down overhaul with Kruesi being gone is a good first step, and more support from Springfield is vital as well.

Anyway, VivaLaFuego as made some great points about how the CTA truely has overhauled a lot of its rail system recently - it just doesn't happen to be any portions that (to be brutely frank), white citizens ride very often. I'm talking Dan Ryan Redline Branch, Green Line, and Douglas Blue Line. Now that northside branches are falling into the state of disrepair that those other branches were in its an uproar. Should any line every reach the state the Blue Line currently is? - No. But this isn't a new development, and with time the CTA will get it straigntened out. Hopefully moving forward the CTA is efficient enough and allocated enough money to keep the system from reaching the state it currently is in.

I think a lot of it has to do with the northside branches that are falling apart are ones moving 185,000 people every day into downtown for work. Not just that it's white people. Not to mention the blue line to O'hare. Such an embarrassment for the tens of thousands of visitors who use that line each summer when on vacation.

Pink Line
 

Is the pink line here to stay? I always thought it was a bad idea and I wasn't really sure why the CTA was focusing on running a second line through a lower density area while neglecting repairs. Does anyone know its approx. annual operating budget?