Filed Thursday, September 6. 2007
The Metra, Pace and CTA in Illinois need to be closely reviewed before getting more money from state funding. When it comes to wanting more money for operations, the three mass transit providers in the region are always putting out their hands. Do they really use more funding wisely? If you’re a rider of any of these three service providers, how would you rate them?
According to Crain’s Chicago Business this week, the Illinois House of Representatives failed to pass the funding increase for mass transit: The vote on the funding plan was 61 to 48. It needed 71 votes to pass. The plan called for increasing [Illinois] sales taxes in Cook County and the five surrounding “collar” counties. It also would have raised a real estate tax in Chicago. Raise county sales taxes? Perhaps riders themselves need to pay more for the services they use. No one subsidizes commuters who have to drive to work and their costs have gone up significantly with gas prices. If fares have to go up, welcome to the reality of today’s economy. That is what some are saying: “I have to drive to work every day. There is no Metra train or Pace bus I can take. Where is my gas subsidy?” Others who use Metra say its rail services are deteriorating. They say there are late trains and frequent “mystery” outages. They say there are signaling problems and other “track” issues on some of the lines. More express trains are needed as more people are coming in from far suburbs. What about schedules and stops that reflect a regional economy from 30 years ago? Having every train stop in Franklin Park, Ill. where Motorola had a manufacturing plant for Quasar TVs that they sold to Matsushita in 1974 makes no sense. At one time, there may have been many rail commuters getting off at that stop because it was a major employer. That plant has been defunct for about 20 years. When are they going to change the schedule and get rid of that stop for just about every train? These types of scheduling issues lead to questions like: Do any of the well-paid executives and directors of Metra even know about the problems and attempt to address them? Do any of them even ride the trains to see if daily service has any quality issues for riders? Where is Pace? With buses running with one or two passengers on suburban routes, it’s time to take a more realistic view of mass transportation and come to the politically accurate conclusion that these routes are never close to break even let alone self-sufficient. Perhaps the money spent on Pace bus routes could go to improve the flow of traffic of cars and trucks. Instead of throwing more money at buses that clog up already heavy traffic patterns with empty seats, why not look at synchronizing traffic signals? Some would argue that disbanding some of the unprofitable transit routes is going against being ecologically aware. What are all the costs involved with running empty buses? You have the cost of the driver, the support staff, the insurance and maintenance, the parts and tires, the fuel and more. Of course, there’s also the cost of the bus. Real Infrastructure Improvements Are Needed Let’s take the money that would be wasted on some areas of mass transit and put it to better use by improving traffic patterns and signals on major surface roads. This way, you don’t have rush-hour traffic driving down main arteries. This forces people to stop every two blocks because traffic engineers haven’t figured out how to time lights so traffic flows and doesn’t stop and start. Lights should have intelligent timing and sequencers in them. Putting some money into computerized traffic signals would save thousands of gallons of fuel per year. With thousands of vehicles having to idle less often, it would be the equivalent of bringing up fuel efficiency without changing out any cars or trucks. More people would benefit from better road infrastructure that has computerized traffic flow than from unused bus routes. While it might be politically correct to support the concept of mass transit, it’s more politically accurate to understand where the real driving behavior, address some pragmatic improvements and question the waste of resources. Let’s start working on improving the realities of regional transportation. That’s easier than trying to think we’re going to get everyone to buy a hybrid car or ride the bus. That’s a fantasy. Bus routes that don’t have ridership should be eliminated. That money should be put to better use in transportation areas. No money available in the budget? Consider these cuts more of a realistic budget instead of constantly increasing money that’s not being put to good use. Eliminate waste and you will automatically improve the infrastructure. This will also free up funds or help to eliminate the need to increase taxes. Carlinism: Infrastructure needs to be modified to fit the needs of today and tomorrow. Not modified
|