thomasbamonte.bsky.social
Chicago. Transportation law, policy, and technology mostly. Senior Advisor, Metropolitan Planning Council. Views my own. One ticket, one timetable, one network....
859 posts
865 followers
1,184 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
The NITA Act legislation, HB 3438, Amendment 003) is found here. www.ilga.gov/legislation/...
comment in response to
post
Goal of these hard-won provisions is ensuring CTA, Metra, Pace management teams are aligned with the NITA management team and the priorities and performance standards set for the region by the NITA Board. If needed, the NITA Board can remove a poor performing ED if a service board fails to do so.
comment in response to
post
Under the NITA Act CTA, Metra, and Pace executive directors will get annual performance reviews by the NITA Board. The Act also has a pathway for the NITA Board to remove executive directors for cause, which includes non-compliance with NITA's service standards, budgets, etc.
comment in response to
post
That changes under the Northern Illinois Transit Authority Act (HB 3438.003) passed by the IL Senate and awaiting action by the IL House. NITA prescribes the duties/responsibilities of the service provider EDs, participates in the selection process, and the NITA Board must approve ED appointments.
comment in response to
post
And, lest you think we're giving CTA a hall pass on incompetence, here's a recent article:
chi.streetsblog.org/2025/06/03/w...
comment in response to
post
Critics of the "both reform and funding" approach to the transit fiscal cliff pursued by CMAP, advocates, key legislators, and others may be proven correct if the IL Senate-approved governance reforms are relitigated by the IL House in the weeks/months ahead. bsky.app/profile/kate...
comment in response to
post
Collar counties are already overrepresented on the RTA--and NITA--boards relative to the three factors that the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning recommends be used in allocating transit board seats--population; ridership; funding contribution--in its PART report commissioned by the ILGA.
comment in response to
post
It is worth noting that a number of state senators who represent the Chicago suburbs voted in favor of the transit bill.
comment in response to
post
Speaker Welch appears sympathetic to these collar county voices:
“I want to make sure the collar counties have some input on that, because it seems like that's where the discomfort is at,” he said. “They need to be at the table in the room and feel comfortable where we land.”
comment in response to
post
Some representatives from the collar counties--with the somewhat surprising strong support from organized labor--have been vociferous that they want more representation for the suburbs and to retain the RTA's current "consensus" model that has proven to undermine RTA's effectiveness.
comment in response to
post
The current supermajority requirement @rtachicago.bsky.social Board gives subregions--City of Chicago; Cook County; five collar counties--veto power. This supermajority requirement has hobbled the RTA from fulfilling its statutory oversight responsibilities. metroplanning.org/poor-prospec...
comment in response to
post
The bill provides that the 20 directors on the board of the regional agency can take action on major items such as NITA's strategic plan by either (i) 12 votes so long as there are two "yes" votes from each of the four appointing authorities, or (ii) 15 votes. This means no bloc has veto power.
comment in response to
post
It is concerning that House Speaker Welch views the composition of the board of the regional agency--Northern Illinois Transit Authority (NITA)--and the supermajority vote requirement for action by the NITA Board as open issues. Opening these heavily negotiated items could delay resolving funding.
comment in response to
post
As noted in the @metroplanning.bsky.social post on service cut scenarios, service cuts likely will involve both route eliminations and service level reductions due to Title VI and other reasons. metroplanning.org/visualizing-...
comment in response to
post
In its initial service cut analysis @rtachicago.bsky.social assumed that CTA, Metra, and Pace would keep all routes going and reduce service levels on them by 40%. But this approach--rather than eliminating least productive routes--inconveniences more people than preserving core route service.
comment in response to
post
In a 40% service cut scenario most if not all of the "half-mile between" routes like Damen and Diversey would go. That's the hard reality. The CTA (and Pace) presumably would try to protect its high ridership routes on the biggest streets--e.g., 79th, Ashland--all else being equal.
comment in response to
post
Senator Craig Wilcox. www.ilga.gov/senate/Senat...
comment in response to
post
Senator Seth Lewis. www.ilga.gov/senate/Senat...
comment in response to
post
Senator Patrick J. Joyce. www.ilga.gov/senate/Senat...
comment in response to
post
Senator Darby A. Hills. www.ilga.gov/senate/Senat...
comment in response to
post
Senator Donald P. DeWitte. www.ilga.gov/senate/Senat...
comment in response to
post
Senator John F. Curran. www.ilga.gov/senate/Senat...
comment in response to
post
Senator Mark L. Walker. www.ilga.gov/senate/Senat...
comment in response to
post
Senator Ram Villivalam. 👏https://www.ilga.gov/senate/Senator.asp?GA=104&MemberID=3345
comment in response to
post
Senator Celina Villanueva. www.ilga.gov/senate/Senat...
comment in response to
post
Senator Karina Villa. www.ilga.gov/senate/Senat...
comment in response to
post
Senator Rachel Ventura. www.ilga.gov/senate/Senat...
comment in response to
post
Senator Mike Simmons. 🚴🏾🚴♂️https://www.ilga.gov/senate/Senator.asp?GA=104&MemberID=3398
comment in response to
post
Senator Willie Preston. www.ilga.gov/senate/Senat...
comment in response to
post
Senator Mike Porfirio. www.ilga.gov/senate/Senat...