CHICAGO: Transit Developments

[spyguy]

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=33446

South Shore rail line to increase service
March 25, 2009

The South Shore commuter rail line in northwestern Indiana plans to add trains to its weekend schedule to ease overcrowding and delays between South Bend and Chicago.

Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District spokesman John Parsons says that currently only 53 percent of weekend trains run on time.

The railroad wants to add cars to trains departing Chicago on weekend mornings and add a train that leaves at 9:15 p.m. A morning express train from South Bend to Chicago is also planned.

[arenn]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Arnold took a lot of trouble to avoid crossing lines, which today might not be so essential. It might make sense to reconsider his threading, so that the BNSF, for instance, would link to the UP North Line rather than doubling back west. Or, since every line basically goes through a throat near Kinzie/Desplaines, a big transfer station there would allow any possible transfer. Of course, my first move would be to put all the Metra lines on half-hour non-rush headways, so the system could work as regional rail rather than commuter rail.

The beauty of through routing is that you could use your subway connections to reduce volume through the A-2 interlocking.

Though I'd probably put the new subway under Chicago rather than Ohio, I still think that would be a useful and farsighted way for us to spend a billion dollars.

It's not just to make for better transfers to CTA; this through-routing allows regional rail lines to do their own downtown distribution so some CTA trips become unnecessary. Such connections have been created in several German cities, notably Munich, by Paris's new RER tunnels, and in Sydney and Melbourne. The only North American example is Philadelphia's mid-80s project to connect the former Pennsylvania and Reading commuter lines with a tunnel under Market Street.

That's it. The beauty is collection and distribution, not through routing per se. If you through route the IC with CNW-N line, you really could create something like the RER route, especially as there is an abandoned express track on the CNW-N routing that could be used. This would also facilitate better Metra-CTA connectivity at key junctions like say Irving Park Rd.

Don't I recall that Illinois Center was designed to accommodate trains to the Chicago River?

The BART system more or less acts like this.

Of course, the RER by itself carries more people than the entire Chicagoland public transit system....

[arenn]

Originally Posted by emathias

I don't have numbers, but I'd guess not a lot.

The real question, though, is how many would if it were an easier option? Not just tickets (which are really not an insurmountable issue right even now), but station location and defined transfer walkways, schedule coordination, etc.

That's my point. If the systems aren't integrated, then fare integration doesn't buy you anything.

[ChicagoChicago]

Can somebody tell me when the Paulina brown line stop is supposed to open? In the past, they’ve announced around 2 weeks out when the stations would reopen. We’re coming up on the 1 year timetable the CTA laid out, but I haven’t heard anything. Other than painting the track beams, the thing is done.

[arenn]

Originally Posted by ChicagoChicago

Can somebody tell me when the Paulina brown line stop is supposed to open? In the past, they’ve announced around 2 weeks out when the stations would reopen. We’re coming up on the 1 year timetable the CTA laid out, but I haven’t heard anything. Other than painting the track beams, the thing is done.

It's a joke. That station has been like 95% complete since December. The media have reported that it will re-open by the end of the month. Right now they are painting the L structure, so hopefully that's the last bit. The for sale sign is already up for the corner lot leftover after construction.

[schwerve]

Originally Posted by ChicagoChicago

Can somebody tell me when the Paulina brown line stop is supposed to open? In the past, they’ve announced around 2 weeks out when the stations would reopen. We’re coming up on the 1 year timetable the CTA laid out, but I haven’t heard anything. Other than painting the track beams, the thing is done.

http://www.ctabrownline.com/

april 3rd

[ChicagoChicago]

Originally Posted by schwerve

http://www.ctabrownline.com/

april 3rd

They must've posted that today... Bastards.

[schwerve]

Originally Posted by ChicagoChicago

They must've posted that today... Bastards.

I think they did, but it has been on the construction schedule for a couple months.

[Taft]

Sound familiar?

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/20...fare-hikes/?hp

M.T.A. Increases Fares and Cuts Services
By WILLIAM NEUMAN AND JENNIFER 8. LEE

Ruby Washington/The New York Times
David S. Mack, vice chairman of the M.T.A. board, and H. Dale Hemmerdinger, the chairman, at Wednesday’s session.
Updated, 11:40 a.m. | The board of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority voted on Wednesday morning to enact a series of fare hikes and service cutbacks needed to keep the transit system from going broke.

The vote was broken largely into three parts: fare hikes, toll increases and service cutbacks. After hearing from the public and the board members, the board approved each by a vote of 12 to 1.

As I've long maintained, Chicago isn't completely unique in its transit funding quagmire. While pols around here like to point the finger at the CTA, other systems in this economic downturn are facing similar situations. Falling state and county revenue are really hitting transit hard right now.

I just wish the Trib would run this under the headline, "Economic downturn effecting transit systems nationwide" rather than, "MTA takes notes from CTA; threatens doomsday."

[arenn]

Aren't the MTA's funding problems the result of massive borrowing without identified revenue to pay it back? IIRC they borrowed something like $50 billion for capital improvements. Laudable to invest, but not without having a plan to fund the debt service.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by Taft

...
I just wish the Trib would run this under the headline, "Economic downturn effecting transit systems nationwide" rather than, "MTA takes notes from CTA; threatens doomsday."

Well, the Trib has repeatedly shown itself to be provincial and myopic in my opinion. And I don't understand why - it's better journalism to put things in proper context for people and when you're in the news business you have so much access to so much news and information that to ignore that and write provincially is a sign of either stupidity (and I dont' think the Trib staff is stupid) or just supreme arrogance (which seems to fit better).

Looking around, no newspaper can afford to be arrogant, and I actually think the Trib has been doing better lately - although it may be too little, too late - I guess we'll know soon enough.

[Abner]

The Trib has pretty thoroughly hung its fortunes on attracting conservatives who fled Chicago for the suburbs decades ago and don't remember exactly why but are sure it had something to do with things being screwed up in city government. (The Trib's poster child for this demographic is of course John Kass.) The paper exists to vilify every person and agency that has little to do with the problems Chicago faces and ignore the ones that do. The CTA is an incredibly easy whipping boy because nobody will stand up for it, and reversing course on the CTA now would be awkward for the paper since they've invested so much credibility in ripping it up, so the Trib can go on pretending that it's Chicago's second biggest scourge... next to pitbulls.

[Attrill]

^^^ I think they also like to generate CTA stories for the Red Eye, since those stories appeal to that rag's readers. The only time I read the Red Eye is when it has an article about the CTA on the front page.

[whyhuhwhy]

Originally Posted by Abner

The Trib has pretty thoroughly hung its fortunes on attracting conservatives who fled Chicago for the suburbs decades ago and don't remember exactly why but are sure it had something to do with things being screwed up in city government. (The Trib's poster child for this demographic is of course John Kass.) The paper exists to vilify every person and agency that has little to do with the problems Chicago faces and ignore the ones that do. The CTA is an incredibly easy whipping boy because nobody will stand up for it, and reversing course on the CTA now would be awkward for the paper since they've invested so much credibility in ripping it up, so the Trib can go on pretending that it's Chicago's second biggest scourge... next to pitbulls.

I'm not sure why we should encourage a system where literally 80% of your fare goes towards people's pensions and not actual infrastructure. The CTA has become a massive 401K and I'm happy the Trib continues to expose that. Not sure why they have to run only positive stories about a system that is totally mismanaged. I mean isn't the whole point to eventually have a world class system here?

[Mr Downtown]

^Well, there's the small problem that the state constitution says that public pension systems can't be abrogated. That's why the teachers unions were so adamant about fighting a con-con last fall.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by whyhuhwhy

I'm not sure why we should encourage a system where literally 80% of your fare goes towards people's pensions and not actual infrastructure. The CTA has become a massive 401K and I'm happy the Trib continues to expose that. Not sure why they have to run only positive stories about a system that is totally mismanaged. I mean isn't the whole point to eventually have a world class system here?

And all of your Chicago property tax levy goes to support pensions and debt service, not wages. So? Pension/retirement benefits are part of the overall compensation offered to an public employee when hired; I'm not sure why the retirement benefits should be considered so distinctly from wages/salaries. Paying into a pension fund is a labor operating expense, too.

...this is not even getting into how most CTA employees saw take-home pay and taxable income decrease over the past several years due to employee benefits contributions more than doubling and the lack of cost-of-living increases due to the repeated doomsdays.

To the extent there is mismanagement/waste/corruption on a large scale ('large scale' meaning significant dollar amounts - a couple cronies at $90k/year, while certainly annoying, hardly bankrupt a public agency with an annual operating budget over $1bn), look to the public pension boards themselves, the management companies they hire, the firms they invest in, and so on.

[Rilestone75]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

And all of your Chicago property tax levy goes to support pensions and debt service, not wages. So? Pension/retirement benefits are part of the overall compensation offered to an public employee when hired; I'm not sure why the retirement benefits should be considered so distinctly from wages/salaries. Paying into a pension fund is a labor operating expense, too.

...this is not even getting into how most CTA employees saw take-home pay and taxable income decrease over the past several years due to employee benefits contributions more than doubling and the lack of cost-of-living increases due to the repeated doomsdays.

To the extent there is mismanagement/waste/corruption on a large scale ('large scale' meaning significant dollar amounts - a couple cronies at $90k/year, while certainly annoying, hardly bankrupt a public agency with an annual operating budget over $1bn), look to the public pension boards themselves, the management companies they hire, the firms they invest in, and so on.

VivaLFuego, this brings up a good point. Can anyone fill us in on the standard number of years the City and/or the CTA require employees to work before being allowed to collect pensions?

I don't know what it is off the top of my head, but if it is like most public entities, I'm sure it is short. Perhaps the answer is extending the number of years. It seems to me that city jobs pay pretty well, compared to the rest of the market, and that one of the benefits of working for the city/cta was that while you did not necessarily make a ton of cash, the trade off was for an early retirement with good pension. If that is the case, then it seems these employees are getting it good from both sides. Right?

I'm not trying to stir up drama here, just trying to make sense of the 80% going to pensions...

[Taft]

Originally Posted by whyhuhwhy

I'm not sure why we should encourage a system where literally 80% of your fare goes towards people's pensions and not actual infrastructure. The CTA has become a massive 401K and I'm happy the Trib continues to expose that. Not sure why they have to run only positive stories about a system that is totally mismanaged. I mean isn't the whole point to eventually have a world class system here?

I'd be with you if the Trib was actually exposing the true cost of the pension system, putting it in context of the entire CTA budget and reporting on the long term costs. They don't. They just complain, call budget shortfalls "doomsdays" and generally provoke the public rather than informing them. Their reporting around transit funding issues is very one dimensional, provocative and biased.

And about those pensions: don't you think that if the CTA/city could, they'd just stop paying into those pension funds? They are a HUGE drain on their budget and I'm sure they'd be glad to use that money for other purposes. Small problem, though: they are legally obligated to keep paying in (as Mr. Downtown pointed out). Until the city, state and unions can work out a feasible long term solution to the pension problem, these issues will persist.

Blaming the CTA for the issue demonstrates a pretty limited understanding of the roots of the problem, IMO.

[ChicagoChicago]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

And all of your Chicago property tax levy goes to support pensions and debt service, not wages. So? Pension/retirement benefits are part of the overall compensation offered to an public employee when hired; I'm not sure why the retirement benefits should be considered so distinctly from wages/salaries. Paying into a pension fund is a labor operating expense, too.

...this is not even getting into how most CTA employees saw take-home pay and taxable income decrease over the past several years due to employee benefits contributions more than doubling and the lack of cost-of-living increases due to the repeated doomsdays.

To the extent there is mismanagement/waste/corruption on a large scale ('large scale' meaning significant dollar amounts - a couple cronies at $90k/year, while certainly annoying, hardly bankrupt a public agency with an annual operating budget over $1bn), look to the public pension boards themselves, the management companies they hire, the firms they invest in, and so on.

The truth is, we don't know how FUBAR the operating budget is, because the CTA isn't required to publish its budget particulars.

[ChicagoChicago]

Originally Posted by Taft

I'd be with you if the Trib was actually exposing the true cost of the pension system, putting it in context of the entire CTA budget and reporting on the long term costs. They don't. They just complain, call budget shortfalls "doomsdays" and generally provoke the public rather than informing them. Their reporting around transit funding issues is very one dimensional, provocative and biased.

And about those pensions: don't you think that if the CTA/city could, they'd just stop paying into those pension funds? They are a HUGE drain on their budget and I'm sure they'd be glad to use that money for other purposes. Small problem, though: they are legally obligated to keep paying in (as Mr. Downtown pointed out). Until the city, state and unions can work out a feasible long term solution to the pension problem, these issues will persist.

Blaming the CTA for the issue demonstrates a pretty limited understanding of the roots of the problem, IMO.

I agree…blaming the CTA for its pension problem is completely shortsighted. We should blame the newspaper instead!!!

Chicago has no history of city employees being in bed with the unions. I doubt they would ever fathom getting kickbacks for making sure the pension programs are fat and happy!

/sarcasm