Proposed 2007 Budget

Last week CTA President Frank Kruesi proposed a 2007 CTA budget based on the Regional Transportation Authority's funding marks. The CTA board met today to begin our discussions about that proposal. This is the beginning of a dialogue with this board, the public, the Cook County Board, and many other stakeholders. I encourage anyone who is interested in CTA to read the budget and to ask questions. The board will hear public comment in at a hearing at CTA headquarters on November 8^th at 6:00 pm. I also encourage people to submit comments in writing to our board office, via our email address, CTAboard@transitchicago.com, or here on the blog. There are always changes to the budget based on this dialogue, and I assure everyone that we take it very seriously.

I should note that this year our budget is very much in line with the RTA and its campaign, “Moving Beyond Congestion.” Today at the City Club RTA Chairman Jim Reilly spoke powerfully about the importance of transit to our region's economy and to our historic role as a national transportation hub. I can assure you that Metra, Pace, CTA, and RTA are on the same page (PDF) with regard to the importance of 2007 as a crossroads for transit funding.

Subway tunnel connections and airport service

Recent media stories have described a consultant’s report to CTA that discusses possible dedicated or “premium” rail service from downtown to O’Hare and Midway. It would be a mistake for anyone to jump to the conclusion that CTA has approved or rejected any of the information in this or any other consultant’s report. Our board doesn’t work that way, nor does any other organization I have been associated with.

I would support premium rail service only if it brought significant new operating dollars, capital funding, or other efficiencies to CTA. It is precisely because there is a real potential for those benefits that the concept is worth exploring. We need as much operating and capital funding as we can get for our current customers.

I should note that I’m not at all interested in non-express “direct” service absent a viable plan to do real express service. I have no intention of recommending that CTA buy expensive upscale railcars just to wait behind regular Blue and Orange Line trains.

CTA is part of a public-private partnership with the developer of the city block bordered by State, Washington, Dearborn, and Randolph. When this joint development agreement was presented to the board more than two years ago, I was careful to make clear the following points:

• The most compelling reason to proceed with the project is the opportunity to connect the Blue and Red subway tunnels. There are significant operational and security benefits to connecting the subways, and this location is most cost-efficient place to do so – it is the only remaining vacant property where the two tunnels are so close together. There is no downtown connection between the Blue Line and our other rail lines. In emergencies, a subway connection will give us the flexibility to maintain and restore service to more of our customers.
• By pursuing this connection as a public-private partnership, CTA is reducing overall costs and using non-CTA funds to build a CTA facility. Total costs are lower because we are building concurrently with the big hole in the ground that the developer was going to dig anyway. And CTA is paying just 3/5^ths of those reduced costs. At an estimated $213 million for the total project, the cost for this station compares favorably to other urban transit hubs.
• The joint development agreement does NOT require CTA to provide express or any other form of premium rail service.
• The opportunity to provide some form of express rail service is a real option that adds to the value of the project for CTA. For example, if the consultant is correct that the fares charged for a dedicated airport service would exceed the operating costs, then those profits could be used to support existing operations (CTA fares currently cover roughly 50% of operating costs; sales taxes cover the rest). Similar private transportation concessions around the world have generated major infusions of private capital. If there is any way to leverage the assets we already have (the best rail connections to two airports of any city in North America) to help address our $5.8 billion unfunded capital need, I want to pursue it.

At the end of the day, the reason for CTA to connect the Blue and Red Lines is for operational reasons. The reason to explore dedicated airport service is to enhance our existing service. It should surprise nobody reading this blog that I am not happy with our current funding or our current service. The two are linked, and both need to improve.