Trains.com

Chicago's Metra is out of money

5125 views
14 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Antioch, IL
  • 4,370 posts
Chicago's Metra is out of money
Posted by greyhounds on Sunday, July 31, 2011 8:46 PM

Looks like a couple Illinois senators just woke up.  I hope they enjoyed their naps.

http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20110730/news/707309906/

What irritates this particular Illinois resident (no longer by choice) is that Governor Quinn and his fellow travelers keep promoting new services while they can't operate or maintain what they've got now.  There ain't no money fairy that's gonna' show up with extra cash.  They did increase the state income tax and they still can't pay the bills.

Quinn and his ilk are throwing money down a hole bringing the Chicago-St.Louis line up to 109 MPH in spots.  Metra and the CTA are far more important than running three (that's right, three) intercity trains per each way day at 109 MPH on certain segments of a rail line.

Quinn also gave away $1.2 million to study 220 MPH trains between Urbana-Champagn and Chicago.  I could have saved them that $1.2 million.  There aren't enough people in the market to support such a train.  But the state government will waste money on that useless study instead of buying brake shoes.  They''re a bunch of criminals.

 

 

"By many measures, the U.S. freight rail system is the safest, most efficient and cost effective in the world." - Federal Railroad Administration, October, 2009. I'm just your average, everyday, uncivilized howling "anti-government" critic of mass government expenditures for "High Speed Rail" in the US. And I'm gosh darn proud of that.
  • Member since
    March 2010
  • From: Fort Hood, TX
  • 28 posts
Posted by Burgard540 on Monday, August 1, 2011 3:10 AM

As someone who used to live in the Chicago Metro area (now in the Army), this doesn't surprise me in the least.  First, figure in massive corruption at many levels of management.  Second, add in the stupidity of of these "studies" for high speed rail (something I'm not against in theory), which are probably used to line someone's pockets (refering to point one).  Third, what are effects of the (probably bloated) executive and union salaries & benefits.  Throw in unsustainable pension plans too.  It's just a reflection of the broken financial state of Illinois as a whole.

Regarding high speed rail between Chicago and Urbana-Champaign, the 220mph service just doesn't make sense any which way.  Having attended University of Illinois there, the drive is only about 2.75 hours to drive the 145 miles to the Chicago area.  Having taken the Amtrak ride from Chicago to Urbana-Champaign, I do believe there is the possibility of expanding the ridership for the student population.  But 220 mph?

In the article - "He also said the biggest problem for riders is trying to coordinate travel across the three systems, especially for people who do not ride transit regularly." 

I'll attest to this statement.  While finishing up my degree at UIC downtown, I gave up on public transit since it was a pain to use and drove (although driving on the Eisenhower (290) was a pain too).  Leave the suburb house to at 0500 and drive, walk, or ride a bike to the Metra station, pay the $1 fee for parking if applicable; pay the $95 monthly unlimited ride Metra train and catch the 0526 UP-W train to Ogilvie station downtown arriving at 0610 or so; then catch the CTA "L" or PACE bus to UIC campus; and lastly walk the few blocks to the gym for morning PT, hopefully arriving by 0650.

I chose to drive.


"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be." Thomas Jefferson

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • 1,123 posts
Posted by HarveyK400 on Wednesday, August 10, 2011 4:45 PM

I found your remarks to be particularly offensive and misinformed.

First you demean our State Senators who took a responsible action to find out the whys and were rightly upset that advance notice was not given before the story was broken to the media - after all, the State is the major stakeholder in Metra funding and should be kept abreast of developments.  Metra admitted these were mistakes and took steps to avoid future incidents.

Second, the decision was made for the 110 mph level of investment, understanding that the money is about five times more than for implementing service to either Davenport or Moline.  Part of this was done to demonstrate, for better or worse, what faster train service could bring in more ridership.  It's premature to disparage this investment where such improvements have generally succeeded in the NEC and abroad.  The funding also brings crossing safety upgrades. 

The critical part I see is the ability for the morning train from Chicago at 7 am to reach Springfield before 10 am, in time for legislative hearings, and to arrive before noon luncheons in Saint Louis.  Similar timings arriving in Chicago also are needed.  

Currently there are 5 daily round trips, not 3; and that is expected to rise eventually to 15 with new equipment; and California experience shows some pretty astounding growth with increased frequencies.

Third, the State study for 220-mph CHI-STL service responds to the feasibility study done for the Midwest High Speed Rail Assn.  More than Champaign and the U of I is involved - there are Kankakee, Decatur (home of ADM), and Springfield which surpass the populations of the Joliet, Bloomington-Normal, and Springfield routing.  No one has considered the benefit to existing Carbondale - New Orleans services or expansion over routes to Paducah, Memphis, and Nashville.  Indianapolis would be possible; but political and economic ties would keep trains on the Indiana side from Northwest Indiana. 

The IC was better-engineered than even the Pennsylvania Railroad's New York - Washington line, with 50-min. curves that a Cascade Talgo could take at 140 mph with 4.25-in cant and segregated traffic on the grade-separated line from Chicago to University Park, IL.  As much as 150-mph seems practical with non-electric traction, mixed traffic on extensive sections of additional grade separation, and infrequent 125-mph curve restrictions with 2.25-in cant.  Just a possibility....

I'm happy to see the hsr CN route proposal because a new $40-million(?) direct connection from Chicago Union Station to the Air Line and CN would allow extending some Metra O'Hare, MDN, NCS, and MDW trains to McCormick Place as well to provide transfers with the ED.  These trains would use the current run-through tracks at Union Station.  Another scheme is afoot for a $4-billion West Loop Transportation Center that would cost one hundred times more than the Air Line connection.  There are ways to waste money; and there are ways to really waste money like the still-born $250-million CTA Loop Airport Terminal.

 

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • 1,123 posts
Posted by HarveyK400 on Wednesday, August 10, 2011 5:04 PM

I should add that there are reasons for Metra and the RTA "running out of money."

  • The State is 8 mos behind in passing through sales tax revenues; and the RTA reached its short-term borrowing limit in covering those slow payments.
  • The dedicated regional sales tax revenues have fallen behind projections by ~$20-m due to the economic downturn.
  • The price of Metra diesel went over budget by another ~$20-m last year, and is expected to be another $40-80-m more over previous years given the uncertainty in the market.  Metra also contracts for fuel for UP and BNSF commuter services because of taxes in Illinois.
  • Member since
    July 2002
  • From: A State of Humidity
  • 2,441 posts
Posted by wallyworld on Wednesday, November 9, 2011 8:40 AM

Politicians managing mass transit systems.in bankrupt states that are designed to operate at a loss that are operationally run by bureaucrats.  As far as the ongoing effect..no surprises expected or observed. Great equation for success. Any alternatives? No. The automobile has to literally run out of gas for change. Even then that is a Pollyanna scrim inasmuch that in of itself does not transform ineptitude. Maybe if we have to park our cars the private carriers will jump back in although we will have to walk miles to a station. I think not. Plan-less plans, smoke and mirrors until the axis collapses.  The situation will just by probability alone will bungle along by happenstance until it rolls off a cliff. No one will notice as there will be too many cars falling to keep track of them. And so it goes. The illusion that a proposition that cannot pay its own costs has a zero chance of success. The only reason they exist is because we need them and probably more so in the future, so they take from Bob's taxes to indirectly subsidize anything with wheels or wings. Costs naturally increase and so compound the issues. Urban planning is happenstance and remains auto dependent by design and at the same time no one comments that this in of itself both keeps the auto industry afloat in a world of increased productivity that requires substantially less folks who are now out of work. The numbers of those living in poverty has jumped upward. The point of all this is that we as an aggregate sum think are so clever, we torpedoed our own boat while having grandiose delusions that mismanage critical issues.

This is a local issue that is national. Back to basics. How do we define success? We currently define it by increasing productivity to increase profit margins that the employed  subsidize  in a market economy, which, in turn, creates unemployment. The thinking that not so long ago was that we all enjoy work-less work, by making money simply sitting at a computer processing information. Delusional?

I think we need to step back from the cliff and walk away from the bar and wake up and recognize the whole equation does not compute. That does not mean we have instant answers but it is a starting point. Do we hear politicians talk out  loud about this? No. Business as unusual from those who rig this game..Recognizing what the problems are is half of the solution before the wheels fall off. We are nowhere near having a national dialog. Folks are too busy running in place to keep this "productivity" afloat. And so it goes.

Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 24,994 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, November 9, 2011 4:47 PM

Just remember that the US has the best government (at the local, state & national levels) money can buy!

It is bought & sold daily!

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Wednesday, November 9, 2011 6:04 PM

Let me leave everyone with a quote from the late, great Chicago columnist Mike Royko.  Royko said the key to the Richard Daly machine's success was the following:  Deliver the services you're SUPPOSED to deliver:  police, firefighting, garbage collection, and all the other services people expect from government in the most efficient manner possible, without fail, and the people will let you get away with anything.  Apparantly the current generation of Illinois pols can't figure that one out. 

  • Member since
    July 2002
  • From: A State of Humidity
  • 2,441 posts
Posted by wallyworld on Friday, November 11, 2011 8:06 PM

 

 

"CHICAGO — Metra’s board approved raising fares on the agency’s trains an average of 25 percent starting in February 2012, the Chicago Sun-Times has reported. Officials at the agency had pushed for the hike in an effort to fill a $53.6 million budget shortfall.
 
Fare hikes will vary based on where passengers are traveling, but the hike on a monthly pass is instructive: It’ll rise from $63.45 to $85.50. The trips from Chicago to the farthest-out suburbs will rise from $8.50 one way to $9.25.
 
The board’s approval clears the way for other changes as well. One-way tickets will now be valid for 14 days instead of a full year. And the 10-ride discount took a hit, effectively 10 rides for the price of nine instead of the current 10 rides for the price of eight."

A real incentive to leave the car at home..right? Wasn't that the purpose of this exercise?  Nothing like an instantaneous 25% increase along with devaluing the flexibility of the term of a ticket's validity. I infer from this that the erasure of the one year term means more hikes are forthcoming in 2012.My family is up there,. I had enough and moved to NC. My family isnt expecting any instantaneous income increase. Outside of a joke 2 or 3% COLA.. Wages are flat for what the last five years? .   Car pooling could be cheaper? Maybe one of our Chicago correspondents can provide what  this hike means in relation to the cost of driving versus the cost of Metra commutes. As a former Illinois resident for many years..I just can't believe the shakedowns of the taxpayers who pay for this already at one of the nations highest rates and then get a 25% hit. as a side dish they did not order. What terrific local fiscal management skills. Home of governors who serve time.New meaning to Pay to play. Rail agencies who presidents jump in front of their own trains when caught robbing them blind.  Ward healers come in all shapes...Maybe the McClory bike path should have a toll too. Oops don't want to give them any ideas.Go carts anyone?

Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Sunday, November 13, 2011 5:59 PM

The monthly passes are to increase an average of 29.4% on Feb. 1, which means the current monthly from Naperville to Union Station would go from $128.24 to about $166.00.   In a typical month, traveling 20 times, a Metra commuter would have to pay $40 per month for parking near the station, so a total just over $200/month, a lot of money.  However, if one were to drive (not counting wear and tear on the car), the mileage (31 miles one way) for those 20 days would be about 1200 miles, which just for fuel would cost (@ 30 mpg) about $140 @ $3.50/gal. and could easily be more if your mileage is less.  Add to that $16.00 for tolls on I-Pass, $32.00 if not.  And then there is parking in the Loop, averaging about $350/month. 

Bottom line:  Metra would cost ~$206.00 per month.  Auto, at least $522 per month, maybe more.  Car pooling would cut the expense, of course, but would involve a lot of planning and probably increase the mileage.  And driving takes longer than taking the train.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    July 2002
  • From: A State of Humidity
  • 2,441 posts
Posted by wallyworld on Sunday, November 13, 2011 6:56 PM

schlimm

The monthly passes are to increase an average of 29.4% on Feb. 1, which means the current monthly from Naperville to Union Station would go from $128.24 to about $166.00.   In a typical month, traveling 20 times, a Metra commuter would have to pay $40 per month for parking near the station, so a total just over $200/month, a lot of money.  However, if one were to drive (not counting wear and tear on the car), the mileage (31 miles one way) for those 20 days would be about 1200 miles, which just for fuel would cost (@ 30 mpg) about $140 @ $3.50/gal. and could easily be more if your mileage is less.  Add to that $16.00 for tolls on I-Pass, $32.00 if not.  And then there is parking in the Loop, averaging about $350/month. 

Bottom line:  Metra would cost ~$206.00 per month.  Auto, at least $522 per month, maybe more.  Car pooling would cut the expense, of course, but would involve a lot of planning and probably increase the mileage.  And driving takes longer than taking the train.

What would be interesting is to track that comparison over a ten year period, from lets say 2002 as a cost of living and then compare this to the averaged increase in wage, and then to the value of a dollar.Just taking your example over one year, that means simply going to the job by automobile costs well over $6,000 to be deducted from income, that  is taxed, at roughly 20%. I might be a Pollyanna, but the value of a dollar appears to be , if this trend continues,, practically ,as they said in post WW1 Germany a situation where it cost the equivalent of a $100.00 for a loaf of bread. $6,000.00 to go to work. I am not paranoiac either but it seems the recipe for a perfect storm in terms of the X factor, the cost of a barrel oil. No doubt commuting by public transit at this point is less expensive.  However another factor you mentioned is that to take the train, you take the car, what is that cost added to the cost of the ticket, parking etc.? I knew many commuters back in the day, who would take the car to take the train to take a bus. I was lucky, the walk from Union was four-five blocks.to the office.

 

 

Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Sunday, November 13, 2011 10:21 PM

The cost to drive to the suburban station could be calculated, though it would be small change.  Also, it would be highly variable with distance from home to the station (1-5 miles?).   I assumed that the commuter would walk, as most do,  from Union Station or Ogilvie to their office, unless it was north of the river on N. Michigan.  I also didn't include, as a cost of driving, the stress of rush hour ++ twice a day on the Ike, Edens, Kennedy or Stevenson. 

The problem with Metra has been not raising fares yearly in smaller increments of ~5%, so that when they finally do after 4-5 years, there is this big jump (average of 25%).  Supposedly they will review, i.e., raise fares yearly in the future.  

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,854 posts
Chicago's Metra is out of money
Posted by blue streak 1 on Monday, November 14, 2011 7:05 PM

Someone who has the information and mileage it would be very informative to calculate for each of the commuter rail lines the per mile charge on each route. Maybe some routes for same agency would be different ? This would include each of the different fares. ( ie single ., multi trip, monthly passes etc ).  We should expect a slightly higher per mile cost in major markets ( NJ, NY ) vs lower cost locations  ( MIA - tri rail )

  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Antioch, IL
  • 4,370 posts
Posted by greyhounds on Wednesday, November 23, 2011 1:36 AM

HarveyK400

I should add that there are reasons for Metra and the RTA "running out of money."

  • The State is 8 mos behind in passing through sales tax revenues; and the RTA reached its short-term borrowing limit in covering those slow payments.
  • The dedicated regional sales tax revenues have fallen behind projections by ~$20-m due to the economic downturn.
  • The price of Metra diesel went over budget by another ~$20-m last year, and is expected to be another $40-80-m more over previous years given the uncertainty in the market.  Metra also contracts for fuel for UP and BNSF commuter services because of taxes in Illinois.

Thank you for correctly pointing out that we can't pay for what we have now.  Adding more stuff we can't pay for makes no sense at all.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-edit-rail-1118-jm-20111118,0,661018.story

 

"By many measures, the U.S. freight rail system is the safest, most efficient and cost effective in the world." - Federal Railroad Administration, October, 2009. I'm just your average, everyday, uncivilized howling "anti-government" critic of mass government expenditures for "High Speed Rail" in the US. And I'm gosh darn proud of that.
  • Member since
    October 2006
  • 1,123 posts
Posted by HarveyK400 on Wednesday, November 23, 2011 3:04 AM

greyhounds

Thank you for correctly pointing out that we can't pay for what we have now.  Adding more stuff we can't pay for makes no sense at all.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-edit-rail-1118-jm-20111118,0,661018.story

California High Speed Rail that you reference is quite a different mess of fish than the Metra budget, or even Illinois intercity and high speed rail passenger services.  The proposed Metra fare increase should be more than enough to build and deplete a surplus without needing a another major fare increase for a few years.  I and others would question the wisdom of this strategy decision.  

Another problem I see is that the Metra fares will be so much higher than for CTA that Metra ridership and the viability of the service will suffer.  I'll repeat that, to my knowledge, a cost analysis hasn't been done for Metra and CTA in 40 years.  The last one by IDOT showed then-IC pre-Highliner and CTA rail costs per seat to be similar.  I am concerned that an artificial fare differential threatens the loss of service and an otherwise viable and valuable asset if fare coordination or purchase of service is not implemented.

My earlier contention was that there are opportunities for low-cost high-impact rail improvements that we certainly can afford that would boost ridership and reduce per passenger support levels.  We can be smarter than the bad proposals that have come out.  For suburban rail in particular, the apparent high cost of needed infrastructure pales in comparison to providing comparable highway capacity. Furthermore, intercity service can dovetail suburban service and infrastructure. 

  • Member since
    July 2002
  • From: A State of Humidity
  • 2,441 posts
Posted by wallyworld on Wednesday, November 23, 2011 1:42 PM

To me they have similar themes and differing specifics. One is mismanagement and the other is spending funds in a bankrupt state on what are discretionary projects. Not complicated although they would make us think it's beyond our comprehension in terms of their expertise. Whether it is the CTA, Metra or the RTA ( three management organizations-three bureaucracies ) cannot seem to match their expenditures to income. Period. The assumption is to keep increasing costs so their funding levels are not reduced. If they saved a million, their funding would be cut a million..that is the waking nightmare of bureaucrats. This is not private industry..it is a game where someone else buys the poker chips..

What is frustrating is that both local and federal governments in their "management" of passenger rail cannot seem to chew gum and walk at the same time. They pick the worst possible economic conditions to expand services out of the public till after sitting on their hands for decades when it would have been less costly to do so decades ago, and it was not as if they did not know.The auto lobbies kept them in check.   The only reason this is being done is strictly political as well as their abeyance to the auto lobbyists,  which is the worst possible reason I can imagine. All of this is being undertaken as a pork barrel food fest based on  a nebulous model of "economic development" and even dimmer projection of "job creation"..to...to do what?!..Spend two billion to create ten cents of jobs that are short term, one of a kind projects? A high speed train to take theoretical gamblers and tourists who, in reality,  have no discretionary funds to spend toward what?!.. A tourist trap when they cant put food on the table? What is the freight on board?!..Poker chips? Fool's gold?

Las Vegas is a one trick pony in the middle of a wasteland.It has perennial water issues, the highest foreclosure rate in the nation and one of the higher unemployment rates. So speeding up "tourists" upon what is essentially a gimmick ( in this case) is going to turn the tide? Who dreams this nonsense up?

Arghhh...heres a prediction

1. It will be built with enormous cost over runs.

2. It will never break even let alone pay it's own financing and make a profit.

3. The states will go further into the drain by heavy subsidies that never go away.

The bridge to nowhere now has been "paved "with rails.

Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy