The email from Save The CTA...

[Run]

(WHOOPS! WRONG FORUM. FEEL FREE TO MOVE. THANKS)

i'm sure alot of us receive this. but just in case...

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2228/t/160/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=21433

Maybe they will finally end all this crap?

[Chip]

And here's the email I got about it:

It's been a long ride. Today, the Senate and House have finally approved a long-term plan to fund transit.

This bill will help CTA, Metra, and Pace avoid coming fare increases and service cuts, and help to stabilize the three agencies for years to come. After 25 years of waiting, this is it!

However, the Governor must still sign the bill.

Governor Blagojevich has said that, while supportive of transit funding, he will rewrite or "improve" the bill sent to him by the legislature. The Governor does not have the power to just rewrite legislation--what he's talking about is using an "amendatory veto."

An Amendatory Veto suggests changes to the bill. The bill would go back to the House and Senate. The legislature can either vote to accept the Governor's changes, vote to override the changes (with a 3/5 majority), or let the bill die.

An Amendatory Veto would (at least) delay a solution to the transit crisis or (at worst) endanger the solution altogether.


Please call the Governor's office today to tell him to sign HB 656, without an amendatory veto, immediately. Tell him that an amendatory veto is still a veto, not a signature.

Governor Rod Blagojevich
(217) 782-6830

[proxy]

So....um....neither email actually shows you the bill in question.

isn't anybody uncomfortable supporting a bill they've never read?






I just don't trust the CTA, that's all. They hire mean peoples.

[Schoolyj]

The house bill basically wants to pay for the CTA with Chicago area property tax increases, and (I think) some sales tax increases.

The gov. wants to re-allocate gasoline taxes to pay for the CTA.

The house bill is the more long-term solution as it also closes a budget gap, where the gov. just wants to move money around.

IMHO the gov. is wrong on this one.

[rdolan]

Brief Trib article (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-legis_11_webjan11,0,1052116.story?coll=chi_tab01_l ayout)

[Chip]

It can seem easy to say that higher property taxes are a good way to raise the necessary money. However, it needs to be done with care. Higher property taxes slows down the purchase of homes, and when you get down to it, home sales drives the economy.

It's a long explanation and if you really want to know the whole story, ask me some time over a beer. But the point is that raising property taxes too much is a bad thing for Chicago. It makes companies look elsewhere to house their headquarters and it chases people out of the city to other cities, which directly impacts the city(and state) economy.

I'm not saying property taxes shouldn't ever be raised, but if it's enough that it discourages home buying, the net result could be worse for Chicago than finding/raising the money elsewhere.

-Chip

[Thousandth Member]

This is all pretty much mentioned in the Trib's article, but Blago' is holding out for free rides for senior citizens.

The bill already provides a .25% increase in sales tax (1/4 percent) in Cook County and .5% in the 'burbs and gives Blagojevich the option to increase the Real Estate Transfer tax. So it's not exactly raising property taxes.

I'm of two minds about it, but I lean towards this being an absurd move. While it's a nice thought, it's not going to make any real difference what seniors have to pay if there aren't any bus routes for them to ride in two weeks. Also, seniors and the disabled on fixed income can already get reduced transit fares ranging from 60% off the normal rate to free, depending on what sort of income they do have, and what their transit needs are. And while the majority of the RTAs rider pay full-fare rates, the loss of even this small percentage of reduced and/or subsidized fares will just take another chunk out of the RTA's revenue, and we'll find ourselves needing the increase in RET tax instead of it just being an option. And probably back in this same situation again in a few years because the budget forecasts based on this new funding deal don't account for the loss of reduced fares.

Sigh.

[proxy]

yeah, the free rides thing seems to have popped out of nowhere.

and they already have discounted fares.


and also they smell funny and I have to give up my seat to them, and i earned that seat dammit.