Chicago didn't get a penny of the FTA's 2011 New Starts Construction Grants.

Way to go Chicago! :tup:

Hardly surprising ... none of the Chicago projects is far enough long to receive any substantial award (a completed EIS/preliminary design would do wonders here), and the availability of local funding is highly questionable.

If the Red/Orange/Yellow extension EISs proceed this year rather than continuing to get peridodically delayed for various political reasons like the Alternatives Analyses were, it's conceivable the 2012 and 2013 New Starts could have something for the region, but until then...

That's just CTA. Then there's Metra. The unglamorous but useful projects for the UP-W and UP-NW could well both qualify by 2012 (preliminary engineering supposed to occur in 2010). The Southeast service is farther behind, I don't think there's even an approved "locally-preferred alternative" yet so it may not be up for another few years. And the STAR Line, well, we should be so lucky that atrocity dies.

That said, the luck of any "small starts" projects for the region is a tad less explainable or defensible.

In defense of Chicago and in critique of the entire program and structure of American transit funding, note that Houston is getting money for it's $600 million Southeast Light Rail line projected to serve... 12,000 daily transit riders. CTA has, roughly, 40 distinct bus routes that serve that level of ridership or greater. Money well spent, dear taxpayers.

EDITED per ardec's correction below.

It's the UP-W, not the UP-N. The only project on the UP-N is the viaduct replacement in the city, and Metra is paying for that without federal funds.

Interesting article on Wired
 

"Could Cars Have Caused the Mortgage Meltdown?"

Part of the study was done in Chicago, they cited that people who lived in densely populated areas with easy access to public transportation were less like to foreclose that those who lived in sprawling suburbs with no PT acess. I think the title is a bit of a stretch obviously, but an interesting article none the less.

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/02...wn/#more-19091

The thing is, carbon based power plants do not change their putput throughout the day that much. Its cheaper to just let them run.

So how much extra electricity is needed to propel one additional rail car? Im guessing very little. So the rail car will use up a tiny bit of electricity that would have existed anyway.

^its still stupid. Just admit it. Rebuild the L station and put a green roof on the canopy or grow ivy on the L structure before you haul a potting soil wagon around. And what someone said about idiots hopping on it or throwing garbage on it is true, that's exactly what would happen.

^Not to mention the extra costs of maintenance and additional electricity that CTA must pay for. I still really don't understand how this adds greenery to commuters, it will sit in each station for 30-60 seconds, and its not like anyone can ride with the garden if they choose to.

In fairness to Houston, there is a lot of private money flowing in by way of a private-public partnership to build out much of the LRT system. METRO is in very good financial standing, and built the Main Street (Red Line) LRT without any federal funds. Additionally, because of the lack of zoning in Houston, that ridership level might grow significantly after the line opens. The Red Line is already way ahead of its initial ridership projections.

while Houston is building a transit system Chicago is dismantling.

CTA cuts coming this weekend
http://www.wgntv.com/news/wgntv-cta-...,1347570.story

get ready for a 20% reduction in bus service and a 10% reduction in train service. That reduction is enough to make getting around the city as a primary means of tranportation not reasonable. Its time to seriously reconsider living here, oh I know, its the same old threatening to leave that everyone does but I like having no car and the urban lifestyle. If Chicago can't provide that than adios, I live once and am going to live and enjoy life how I want whether it be here or elsewhere.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,4856524.story

It blows my mind that the Unions get to pick the arbitrator and that it isn't a joint choice between the union and the CTA. Still, they lost. Now they want another month in the hope the money will appear. They clearly were not taking this seriously enough. It's a shame. Transit ridership has been on climb over the last decade and I bet this takes a chunk out of that ridership.

The arbitrator has to be approved by both parties, I believe. Each side proposes a few arbitrators and then they agree on one. The wording here suggests management proposed this particularly arbitrator and the union approved the choice.

Of course, this still begs the question of why an unelected, unaccountable arbitrator is in the position to make decisions impacting the level and quality of public services and implied changes in taxation.

Would you rather have the decision go in front of the city council who neither have knowledge of nor care about the contents of the collective bargaining agreement? I would've personally preferred a judge, but that raises the same issues of unaccountability.

Quinn made the choice to keep rates steady, reduce service (coicidentally several days after the primary elections), and raid the capital fund to limit back lash before the primary election. Your beef should be with Quinn for being a union lacky incapable of making a tough decision. Having said that, comparing Houston to Chicago is absurd, even if Chicago does cut transit 10-20%.

the comparison was more in jest but it still is ironic. I don't care if its Quinn's fault or who ever's. The fact is Chicago will no longer be able to offer the lifestyle I want. Then after this round two of cuts comes this Sept.

^ That's BS.

Every transit-legacy city in America has had to do this here or there.

Reality is, a city is like a human body. Body goes into shock, it clamps down the blood vessels and supplies the vital organs (brain, lungs, heart). Same with a city. This economy is, in every way, a shock to the system, and the unions don't want to play ball.

So you have to clamp down, and while mass transit is vital, keeping trains and buses running every ten minutes at all hours of the day (or whatever, you get my drift) is not absolutely vital. Some of the core services, such as fire, police, emergency health, sewers, water, etc--those areas are, and cannot be touched unless you want to see an end to civilized life. But some cuts to mass transit in an established city like Chicago that already has backup safety mechanisms in place (>70% car ownership, bike lanes, large taxicab industry, car-sharing, more housing within walking distance of downtown jobs than ever, etc) aren't unreasonable, considering that rush hour and midday service will be mostly intact, and the fact that this is the worse economic downturn in generations.

Not to be insensitive, but this is just how things will need to roll for a while. The unions didn't play ball and now over 1,000 of them will be in the soup lines. I'm glad somebody is finally popping their little bubble of invincibility..

umm.. how is it bs? There are other cities out there, not many, maybe 1, 2 or 3 - aint that sad, that can offer the lifestyle I want. Maybe that is indeed why so many flock to NYC.

So lets say I stay in Chicago and get a car. Now what? As you know Chicago, i'll explain my life; it is basically along the Redline from the South Loop to Evanston. School, work and friends. Where am I going to park wherever I go or where I live? The part of Chicago I live my life in is at that uncomfortable stage where owning a car is a huge hassle and expense.

So a place like Seattle for example, yes I would need a car but that city can accomodate a car much better than Chicago or take NYC, I certainly don't need a car there. Both those cities are desirable examples of places to move to. While Seattle may not be exactly what I want in an urban city is still is a pleasing place to live for me and dealing with a car there is simple in comparison to Chicago.


While you can say, move to another neighborhood in Chicago that is more spacious, why? I can't go into those areas I like, work or school, easily with a car.

So who ever's fault this crisis may be, whether it be the City/State or Unions it doesn't matter to me as the end result I don't like. Btw. I tend to side against the Unions in this one. Also what happens in Sept. with round two of cuts?

^ I'm not telling you you're wrong about being upset. I just want you to keep in mind that periodic service cuts are a reality when it comes to mass transit in America--everywhere. Including New York.

oh I know that. But realize a service cut in NYC still leaves quite the desirable service especially in comparison and also like I said other cities that indeed do have an excellent quality of life like Seattle can accomodate a car much much easier than Chicago. Chicago is in that position for much of the city where good public transit is necessary. Its not like Lakeview is the only densley populated neighborhood, an island, those Lakefront and adjacent neighborhoods have a population of Seattle in a not many square miles. Bad public transit in these neighborhoods is not an option.

^ Really? Try making it out to Costco or Ikea in Queens or to any number of destinations in the outer boroughs, without a car. Keep in mind that these are dense neighborhoods that have, from my anecdotal experience, even less off street parking than Chicago's do.

And that is before the pending service cuts.

If your work, school, and friends are all arrayed along the Red Line, then what's the problem? None of the rail lines or bus lines will shut down (except the redundant express buses). Frequencies will decrease and the trains will get a bit more crowded. Fortunately, the Brown Line just got a huge capacity upgrade to 8 cars, so even with less frequency, it should be able to absorb all the traffic.

I really wish, though, that CTA had a definite plan to reinstate all the service that is getting cut if/when funding becomes available. In the future, the CTA may have more money, but they may redirect it to other stuff, leaving us with a less-than-optimal transit system.

Once you have demonstrated that people will cope with a less frequent transit system, it's not a huge stretch to assume that you can keep the system that way and realize long-term savings. Unfortunately, the service cuts will undoubtedly lead to much lower ridership, but the effect may be delayed, since it takes awhile for people to change their habits.

^ you know, a 20% reduction in bus service is huge no matter how you cut it. What's the problem? Seriously! You are aware there is another round of cuts coming up later this year. Once the cuts go into effect rioership will drop and it will be impossible to get the service back up to where it is now with lower ridership.

Is this really the direction Chicago is going to take? This part of the country is a hard sell and Chicago is a beacon in this region. Why drop Chicago?

Transit in Chicago is going to go to essentially a commuter service and the easy convenience of getting around at most hours will be gone. The bus is necessary for me to get around too.

and urban politician where is Cosco or Ikea in Chicago?

You are comparing the outer areas of NY to the most urban areas of Chicago. But you can find your bubble in NY and be well connected with other areas via transit.

But whatever. These upcoming cuts in Chicago are ridiculous. We are talking a 20% reduction in bus service and a 10% reduction in train service.

I really hope the unions give in. The time has come for municipal workers to realize they have a golden pension and healthcare plan and other benefits that hardly anyone has anymore. And the people, the general public, who are paying for these benefits are the ones without these pay/benefits. It's like the opposite of Robin Hood.

I had an interesting thought... what if the CTA chairman was chosen in a popular election, instead of by mayoral appointment?

It would definitely spur people to think more about transit as an ongoing project that needs constant tweaking and improvement, like the rest of government, and not as a static part of the background. Obviously, anybody campaigning for the director of the CTA can't be anti-transit (although he might advocate for a leaner, higher-quality system). The candidates would have to propose definite things they would do to improve the CTA, and then follow through on at least some of them if they want to stay in power.

It's most certainly a moot point, since Daley would be loath to give up this small tidbit of power he maintains over the CTA... although he would still appoint part of the RTA board.

Re: the union negotiations... I'm sure that, at this point, the union realizes that forgoing the pay increase is preferable to the massive layoffs. How could they not? There's probably something we're not hearing here... perhaps the CTA management is simply trying to screw the unions over, at the expense of the city's transit quality.

^ The CTA announces service enhancements and new service all the time. I'm no expert, but following the news for the past 7-8 years I often read articles about the CTA initiating or improving service where it wasn't there before. I just don't buy the 'slippery slope downward spiral' panic that you all have.

Yeah, but those new services are usually backed up with a study, and then a trial period, and then evaluation before they become part of the established network. I'd hate for CTA to spend millions of taxpayer dollars to "study" the reinstatement of services that worked before.

Of course, this could also have an upside in that under-performing or unnecessary routes may be slashed, making the CTA leaner and meane

Chicago's glacial pace when it comes to New Starts projects means that redundant studies are done frequently, because the real world doesn't wait around for endless red tape, and on-the-ground conditions change. Often, without the proposed transit services in place, those conditions change for the worse, and we get more suburban schlock where dense urban developments could be springing up. The city is now trying to do a SECOND alternatives analysis for the Carroll Ave project, and I've heard that an EIS for the Orange Line to Midway existed back when the Orange Line was built in 1984, but now the CTA has to study the concept yet again. Of course, we all know that new development along the Carroll Ave corridor has been quite urban and transit-friendly (EnV, 353 N Clark, Trump, et al) so I fully expect the new study to be more optimistic about the ridership on the proposed line.

Honestly, the cuts are probably best for the CTA in the long run. Even if the union gave up the pay raises and added furlow days, the math still doesn't work; which means service cuts would still be needed in the future to balance the budget, unless we see a good uptick in retail sales and a rebound of home sales to pay into the pensions, but 2010 looks to be a rough year for the economy as well and by extension, rough for CTAs subsidies.

Cut the fat out of the system, yes it sucks for everyone, but service can be added back when more money begins flowing in and service enhancements can be targeted where needed. Plus, the layoffs of 1100 employees sends a strong message to the union that they can't continue to play chicken and expect things to work out all hunky dory for them every time. I'm sorry by the 90% of the CTA workforce is unionized and only the union employees have had job security, no furlow days and guaranteed pay raises for 3 years in a row, when everyone else is getting reduced pay (through mandatory furlows) or losing their job entirely.

Everyone has to make a sacrifice right now, especially with public service jobs funded with public money.

Its not just CTA, as stated by TUP, this is occurring with transit systems nationwide, in fact many other systems have already reduced service. This is just part of living in auto-centric America where transit is usually an after thought. Really envying London's 3 minute Sunday morning headways right now.


That is not a Chicago thing, its the FTA and we have to play by their rules. FTA New Starts always take a long time, some other cities entered into design-build contracts which expedited the late stages of the project, but the full-funding grant agreements generally take just as long anywhere else. Sure a EIS for the Orange Line may have been completed in the '80s, but that was 20+ years ago, and things change including the route of the current LPA, thus requiring a new EIS to be completed. Its the fed's rules and we have to play ball to apply for that money.

Has popular election of the Water Reclamation District board led to an informed discussion of various pollution control technologies or district tax levies—or anything, other than what political dynasty or machine is sponsoring a particular candidate, or whether her surname is Greek or not? Letting the mayor wear the jacket for CTA performance is probably the best way to keep the pressure on, and keep a strong manager—if not a transportation pro—in the job.

Besides, you might be quite surprised and disappointed to learn how many residents of the CTA service area find the CTA utterly irrelevant to their daily lives.

Well, they'll still be eligible to collect their $385/week in unemployment for the next year and a half while they do nothing and have "Cadillac" health insurance subsidized at 65% via COBRA, but otherwise yeah, soup lines.

Not sure to what extent it's "definite" - but generally the first service that will be added back with any found money is the span of service (late night and early mornings on those 41 bus routes). There will probably be some corridors where the frequency reductions are so bad as to make the route an utter disaster of high-crowding and unreliability (I anticipate this on Western and Ashland), meaning these "key" routes would almost surely be the first to see restored frequency once the worst of the span reductions are dealt with.

On rail, I'm not sure. The rail system could probably already have easily absorbed a 5% reduction in service hours that should have happened a year ago (would have made the current hole that much smaller), not sure how the 9% reduction will impact things. There is no span reduction on rail, only frequency reductions. Off-peak rail loading standards are already very generous, with frequencies set to basically guarantee a seat if you want it - if the rumored public launch of train tracker occurs (sorry I have no more information on this) the reductions in frequency could really be quite manageable.

Part of the hang up, I think, is in the trend in employee pension contributions. Even though entirely justified by the numbers and rationality, there is an emotional reaction wherein the employees feel like an entitlement is being pulled from them. Basically, prior to 2008, employee payroll contribution for retirement (pension + health care) was 3%. The 2008 sales tax deal raised the employee pension contribution to 6%, and added an aditional 3% contribution to a "Health Care Trust" to support retiree health care expenses. Part of the 2008 deal also specified that if the pension fund falls below 60% funding of all liabilities, employee contributions would have to increase to make up the shortfall. Well, 2009 happened - so employee contributions had to increase from 6% to about 8.5%, or a 2.5% reduction in take home pay. From the worker standpoint, they view this as a 2.5% paycut, even though of course its not, since part of their "pay" is the pension benefit they will receive. But nonetheless, the average bus driver feels like the 3.5% raise in 2010 was basically making up for that increase int he pension contribution, so if they forgo that raise it is effectively a "pay cut." Granted, non-union employees not only didnt have a say in the matter and got no 2010 raise, but also had the mandatory furloughs that cut annual pay by 6-8% depending on salary.

Anyway, when the union talks about having made concessions already, this is what they refer to - finally paying a fair share of the actuarial value of the very generous retirement benefit - a benefit that was reduced from bananas-insane generous (formerly, retire at 55 with full pension and health care for life, now retire at 62 with 90% health care). These concessions in terms of the pension and health care payroll deductions represented a sizable chunk of their take home pay - so the 3.5% 2010 raise felt like a long time coming, barely canceling out the additional 2.5% being deducted for the pension plan anyhow, even though one rationally could explain that the added contributions were actually beneficial by fixing the health of the pension plan.

That said, public sympathy falls off when the unions start campaigning for tax increases on the public to maintain union retirement benefits at no expense to union members. Those concessions in reducing the retirement benefit and increasing the employee contribution were the only reason a funding deal finally got done in 2008.

Would a Chicago with a never ending CTA doomsday offer you the lifestyle you want? A CTA that plays chicken with its citizens on an annual basis?

Look. Neither the state nor the city were going to bail out the CTA again. In such situations, the service should and must be cut. I'd much rather have a CTA that trims its fat of 1000+ workers and tells its constituents that if they want more government service, they have to pay for it, than a CTA that makes a homeless beggar look respectable. That's how government functioned for most of the 20th century and most of our city services were built on that premise. Once people once again realize that there is direct correlation between amount of money spent and amount of service, the system will fix itself. Of course it will require re-educating an entire generation who can barely remember that Reagan raised payroll taxes to maintain social security.

Well I know there is a Costco at Fullerton and Clyborn, about 2 or 3 miles out from downtown... The only Ikea in the area is way out in Schaumburg if I remember correctly. Why you would go to Ikea using public transit is beyond me though... "Lemme just take the subway to Ikea and pick up a bedroom set, I can just drag it home with me..."

In NYC, Asia, and Europe, such urban big box stores make it a cinch to make delivery arrangements. Limited examples exist elsewhere, such as the Best Buy on Clark south of Diversey here.

Even with one's 8-seater Urban Assault Vehicle, of course, sometimes one goes all the way to Schaumburg and still has to arrange for delivery of oversized items.

Actually it is mroe like Diversey / Damen / CLybourn...it is north of the river.....fullerton and elston are south of the river....but not too far off.

Like Viva said the big boxes deliver....here in RP the grocery stores deliver

IKEA is actually not much of a challenge. Blue Line to Rosemont; Pace bus 606 gets you to Woodfield 30 minutes later. From there, take Schaumburg's free trolley (or walk) to IKEA. Delivery service is available (but not terribly cheap).

yup thats exactly what I want.

Yea, that's "not much of a challenge".... right.

Unless you have our license revoked and you REALLY need some Swedish-designed knick-knacks, I can't imagine a situation where you would rather take public transit than drive to IKEA.

The time value of money alone justifies getting a shared car for a few hours, not to mention the convenience of not having to hold your purchases across a train and two buses - and that's only if you live along the Blue Line.

I'm pretty sure that was MrD's trademark cracked-dry wit, but it's tough to tell.

Am I the only one not overly concerned about the service cuts? Remember when the Brown Line capacity project started (Jan '07, I think?) and it was supposed to double commute times for over a year? I don't recall much of a difference in service or commute time on my Damen-to-Grand, Brown/Red Line commute, other than Belmont being a little more chaotic. It's too bad, but life goes on.

10% less service on the L is not going to chase me away from this city. (I don't take too many buses, so no comment on the 20% cuts)

about this Ikea thing. Of course I would use Zip car or something. All I was doing was responding to the NYC answer I got.

I just did some math and something doesn't add up. If the CTA's budget shortfall is 95 million for this year alone and the CTA has 11,000 union member employees that would come to 8636 dollars per employee. So a lack of a 3% raise this year will save 95 million dollars? That would mean the average union salary is 285,000 a year before the 3% raise.

A 3% raise on a salary of 285,000/year for 11,000 union members of the CTA comes to 95 million a year.

So what is actually the story?

Actually, I wasn't cracking wise about IKEA. Most of you would have predicted that it would take two hours on a bus from Rosemont to Schaumburg, winding slowly through Elk Grove and Rolling Meadows. A half-hour trip doesn't seem all that daunting.

I'm not complaining about it. If I was a transit-dependent living in, say, Garfield Park, a 90-minute commute is pretty long, but reasonable enough that the jobs in Schaumburg are a feasible option. If I lived in Avondale, even better. But transit isn't a reasonable option for shopping trips, unless you're getting something really unique that can only be found in Schaumburg... and there's not much in Schaumburg that can't be found in the city.

On a tangent... Pace already operates express service to Bolingbrook. I wonder if it would be worth it for Pace to detour that route up to Boughton Road to allow for an IKEA/Promenade Bolingbrook stop? If there's really a demand for Ikea among city-dwellers, then this seems like the most expedient way to provide transit service there. The Kennedy has much worse traffic than the Stevenson, so I imagine that Bolingbrook could be reached more quickly than Schaumburg. (It's also a concentration of employment...)

Giving back the 3.5% raise would only save something around $30-35 million - which makes more sense with the labor cost of a union employee's wages + benefits, with benefits being upwards of 50% of wages.

The rest could be made up via some combination of furloughs, which would still involve some level of service cuts since if a driver isn't working he can't drive a bus. There could be substantial savings if the contract allowed for more part-time shifts and split shifts (i.e. 8 hours a day but split into 4-hour shifts covering each peak period), but those would probably be the second to last thing the union would ever give up, the last being the seniority system.

The reductions on the rail system will not be too severe. Reductions on bus will hit some places very hard, particuarly in the reduction of the service span, e.g. the 70 Division current runs until 1:30 am but will now end at 10:30 pm. The frequency hit will be substantial but generally manageable, but the span reductions mean tacking on extra 1/2 mile or mile walk to get to a bus that's still running. Those with some money to spare will cope by taking taxis a little more often.

In the CTA's defense, they have actually come to the table and shown that they can control (non-labor) costs. I can't say the same for the city or the state...and quite frankly, the state's answer to transit funding is a fucking insult.

Despite this article's title, all hope isn't yet lost..
 

CTA cuts start Sunday after last-minute talks fail

February 5, 2010 10:31 PM | 21 Comments | UPDATED STORY

CTA service cuts are set to begin Sunday after a last-minute negotiation session called Friday by Mayor Richard Daley failed to bring a resolution.

As feared by public transit commuters, bus service will be cut by almost one-fifth, and train operations will undergo a 9 percent reduction. About 1,100 CTA employees will be laid off.

"There wasn't really any new" proposals discussed during a meeting led by the mayor, said Terry Peterson, CTA board chairman. "But I think the reality of 1,000 people not being at work might have helped drive home the message that this is real."

The cost-cutting moves mark the first major service cuts since 1998.

CTA riders will feel the full impact of the cuts starting with Monday morning's rush period. There will be fewer trains and buses, and they will be more crowded. Hours of service also will be slashed.

Even when a deal is reached between CTA management and the transit agency's labor unions to come up with more than $95 million in savings to close the budget shortfall, it could take a week or longer to reassign laid-off employees and get buses and trains back on normal schedules, officials said.

CTA officials and union leaders pledged to begin fresh talks after meeting in Daley's City Hall office Friday afternoon for several hours.

Until the mayor summoned both sides to the negotiating table, CTA officials and union leaders had argued mainly over the legality of the CTA's layoff list. Union leaders said management officials ignored their proposals to cut costs, while CTA executives countered that the union never offered an idea.

The reality of service cuts and the accompanying layoffs taking place in the middle of winter -- and the resulting public anger -- may be enough to spur new initiatives or some acceptance by the unions of what the CTA put on the table.

The transit agency laid out a menu of options to help eliminate what originally was a $300 million budget deficit for 2010. They included deferring union wage increases that are covered under the current contract, requiring employees to take a certain number of unpaid days off, and cost savings in health care and other areas.

Daley's message to union leaders was that it was critical to avoid laying off workers when the economy is weak, Peterson said.

Less than two hours before the meeting, union leaders offered the first details on a proposal they floated a week ago to save $90.6 million.

Talks will now begin from scratch, said Darrell Jefferson, president of the CTA bus drivers union.

He said Daley mostly served to facilitate the talks and did not offer a plan. Daley mostly helped thaw the icy relations between the sides, he said, and that helped clear the air so substantive talks could begin.

Robert Kelly, president of the CTA rail workers union, said he hoped the job and service cuts could be reversed "in seven to 10 days.''

He also wondered why Daley did not get involved sooner.

"I don't think you should wait until the eleventh hour,'' Kelly said.

Normally support the Union (not some of the things they stand for and their inability to provide any customer service...union, public, government should actually work more like checks and balances for the good of the whole system, but they don't), but it was the wrong time for the Union to put it's foot down.

CTA didn't do a doom and gloom this time around. There was the agreement with Quinn CTA went to the table with the unions, who didn't budge and we have this weekend. Hardly any news on this till this week and it only kept coming up because all of a sudden the Union wanted to stop playing chicken. Am happy CTA took a stance against the unbending Union.

Also, CTA, the updates have been wonderful on the buses. I am very very impressed. For several weeks now each bus has had announcement
"specific" to that bus route about how things would be changing. Foster even announced new beginning and ending schedule times. Great work! Finally CTA is talking to us the riders.

Yeah, I don't know about Ikea, but I've made it to Woodfield Mall from Clark/Lake at rush hour in 75 minutes before via CTA and Pace.

This is the sort of thing that Unions just don't even get. The Public sees this and thinks, "Why should the unions wait for Daley to get involved?" Kelly comes across as some whiny child, unable to act like a mature, responsible adult, waiting for the grown ups to plan his life for him. What a pathetic man he must be to blame the lack of progress on the mayor. I also really resent that the Unions claim to have offered $90 million in savings, but $70 million of it isn't even this year when the dollars are actually needed. PR spin at its cynical worst. I won't judge the unions as a whole, but this Kelly fellow is leading them over a cliff.

Wilson Yard - Target update
 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/26396462/T...n-July-25-2010

• Possible walkway connecting the store to the CTA station
• Quote:

  The community has sent some letters to Target corporate asking about sponsoring the Wilson El stop (rehab of the station) - is that something that could be possible? That is something that the corporate office would look at. Jeff [DeMoss, District Team Leader] is willing to talk to anyone that has ideas and explore it.

Metra to bus transfer project on Congress, article below:

http://www.suntimes.com/news/cityhal...alsh08.article

Connected firm wins Metra-bus contract
TIED TO DALEYS | Walsh to build transfer facility

BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter fspielman@suntimes.com

A clout-heavy company with two generations of ties to the Daley family has been awarded a $3.3 million contract to build a "transfer center" meant to make it easier for commuters at Metra's LaSalle Street station to switch to CTA buses.

Walsh Construction will convert a surface parking lot at the southeast corner of Congress and Financial Place into a bus turnaround, with covered shelters, a lighted, landscaped plaza, and an elevator and staircase to the Metra station.

Metra passengers will be able to board CTA buses in one place, instead of walking to bus stops on Jackson, Van Buren, LaSalle or Harrison. The project will feature two new, dedicated CTA bus lanes on Financial Place.

Financial Place will be converted from a two-way street into a northbound one-way street between Harrison and Congress. Non-bus traffic will still have one northbound lane.

The LaSalle Street station serves Metra's Rock Island line, which goes to Joliet.

"It's intended to improve the connection between Metra and CTA," said Transportation Department spokesman Brian Steele, adding that Walsh was the low bidder.

Company chairman Matthew Walsh's father grew up with Mayor Daley's father, the late Mayor Richard J. Daley. Before Richard M. Daley stopped accepting campaign contributions from city contractors in the wake of the Hired Truck scandal, the Walsh family had been a reliable contributor.

Walsh Construction rescued Millennium Park from cost overruns and oversaw the $200 million reconstruction of Wacker Drive.

Since 1996, Walsh has been awarded $735.3 million in city contracts -- $260.9 million in just the last four years, according to the Department of Procurement Services.

Last year, Walsh got a $79 million contract to build the third and final runway in Phase One of Daley's massive O'Hare Airport expansion.

Five years ago, Walsh provided a landing for ousted city Buildings Commissioner Stan Kaderbek, who worked with Walsh as the city's chief bridge engineer during the Wacker Drive project.

http://i.ebayimg.com/23/!BlPFfBw!Wk~...9(92!~~_12.JPG
suntimesarchives

..

This is a great pic.

The CTA Tattler broke down the CTA's and union's proposals for plugging the budget whole yesterday.

http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/cta-...vice-cuts.html

He boiled it down to these two tables:

Sorry for the crap formatting (follow the link to see it better...and to read his, IMO, spot on reaction to the proposals).

But as you can see from the table, the CTA is only claiming $20 million in savings from cutting the raise alone. The rest is healthcare changes, furloughs, holiday pay cuts, freebee cuts, etc.

^thanks

and am I reading this right? Really? just wow.

Eliminate pay guarantee for show-up $3.0

Crazy, right?

And the union's proposal is even crazier. No wonder they didn't let the CTA or the public see it before service cuts took place. It is a hard proposal to take seriously...