^I'm intrigued by your idea concept.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwadswor
Wasn't that sort of his point? The fact that keeping the streets clear is considered a basic city service but keeping transit running isn't considered a basic city service represents a bias/subsidy of cars.
|
No, because CTA is not owned by the City of Chicago, but streets are. The city has an obligation to maintain them, and the citizenry gets really pissed when they are not cleared in the winter. Last winter would be a prime example, as Mayor Daley ordered the department of Streets and Sanitation to not clear most streets during snowfall, but wait until the storm has passed in order to save money for the bleak budget outlook in 2009. People went ballistic, I remember watching a 1+ hour bitch fest on CLTV in which people called in to just complain about difficulties in getting around. And as mentioned, if the traffic can't move on snow clogged streets; neither can buses which provide 2/3 of the transit trips.
Yes, running transit is essential to keeping the city moving; but its under the purview of CTA, not City of Chicago. However, the city does provide some subsidy to the agency:
-$3 million per year in operational funds
-~$22 million per year in security services provided by the Chicago Police Department.
-Chicago Department of Transportation is rebuilding all subway stations in the state street subway, and is spending $67 million on the rebuild of Grand/State. CDOT is responsible for stations on the Milwaukee-Dearborn-Congress subway on the blue line and downtown stations on the elevated structure.
-TIF money has been used and is being sought for capitol improvements on the system. The new station at Morgan/Lake was supposed to use them before grant money was found. The new ties and running rail on the Lake and Wabash legs of the Loop were partially funded by the Central Loop TIF.
-The city's Real Estate Transfer tax funnels money into the CTA pension fund.
Could more money flow from the city towards CTA?
Generally, I would like to see that happen. More TIF funds should be used for capitol improvements, but I don't know if they can be legally used to subsidize operations. I honestly do not know of any other revenue sources that the city could use to fund operational expenses of the CTA in a time when the city is facing a massive deficit and is cutting back its own services.
Has Mayor Daley traditionally been a bit too quiet on transit issues? Generally, yes; and I understand the animosity towards him because of that. In the past though he has stood up for the agency in the midnight hour of budget crises.
I myself have been car free four nearly four years, and have been a daily transit user for 8 years. I rely on this service like many other people for every trip I make that cannot be completed on foot or bike.
Generally, every transit agency in the nation is feeling the same pressure in this recession, and have had funding issues before the economy went off a cliff. Phoenix and Pittsburgh for example have made massive system wide cuts. Granted, Chicago is much greater caliber of a city then those two, but we have been doing pretty well in not slashing service. And the service reductions proposed really aren't too bad at all. Yes, it sucks that we have to make any reductions at all, but this will be tolerable to the majority of the population. And quite frankly, in the long run it will save the agency some money by running fuller buses in the off-peak, maintaining a pension fund for fewer employees, and maintaining one less bus garage. The Archer Garage is quite large could be sold to a developer or a business.