I found this Op-Ed piece about the CU-MTD on Friday’s News-Gazette Online. I didn’t see it in the printed News-Gazette and thought it was worth commentary. It is an accurate assessment of the future appointment of Tom Berns.
Back to the future for transit district
Friday February 15, 2008It looks like more of the same at the Champaign-Urbana MTD.
Those who find the relationship between the management and board of the Champaign-Urbana Mass Transit District entirely too cozy won't take comfort in the latest appointment to the MTD's board of directors.
Former state Rep. Tom Berns, who served on the MTD's board from 1976 to 1986, is returning to fill the spot being vacated by the independent-minded Paul Lucas. Following nomination by Champaign County Board chairman C. Pius Weibel, Berns' appointment was approved last week by the board's appointments committee and will voted on by the full board Feb. 21. Berns was the only applicant.
Given all the controversy surrounding previous appointments, Weibel said he "thought some more people might apply." Two years ago, there were six candidates for two vacancies, with longtime MTD board member George Friedman's effort to win another term rejected.
So despite the controversy and pending litigation over the MTD's unpopular territorial expansion, either the critics don't care or they've given up trying to influence appointments. Given the depth of hostility, it's more likely the MTD's critics have given up on winning appointments of those skeptical of management. In the breakdown between MTD skeptics and cheerleaders, Berns would have to fall in the latter camp. Frankly, it's no surprise because people willing to serve believe in the importance of public transportation.
But the MTD's board has been legitimately criticized for extending Managing Director Bill Volk a double-digit employment contract and overseeing a generous pay package and an even more generous pension. As for policy issues, board members generated considerable ill will when they fell into line behind the MTD's forced expansion of its borders despite incredible hostility from residents who want neither the service nor the taxes that go with it.
Given his professional and personal relationships with MTD managers, it's hard to believe Berns will bring any change to the board's governance. But he should be encouraged to be skeptical. No management deserves a blank check from its overseers.
The MTD continues to be the one governmental body that somehow eludes the same scrutiny as other bodies like the Champaign and Urbana City Councils and the County Board. For example, the last MTD budget lists:
Dues and Subscriptions $ 48,000
Travel and Meetings $ 40,000
Public Information $ 125,000
Other Miscellaneous $ 48,000
These are just a few line items that seem excessive year after year (the salaries and benefits for the top administration is another attention-grabber). The only trustee that ever questioned the budget, Paul Lucas, has just retired. “No management deserves a blank check from its overseers” (N-G). Once appointed by the County Board, MTD continues to rubber stamp the management and its checkbook. I wish I was more optimistic that the needed changes might happen.
Self inflicted wounds all around on this topic. MTD's ham-handed attempt to expand it's service area is matched in kind by the righteous attempt to set up a competing transit district. Then the new district raises taxes to fund itself while delivering nothing. Meanwhile someone thinks it would be a good idea to charge the MTD for all the horrible damage they cause on the roadways in Savoy. Great idea. Now let's see. How about the garbage trucks, UPS, Fed EX, US Postal Service, Mayflower, fuel tankers? Gosh, we could raise a lot of tax money doing that. Or the affected parties would quit driving into or through Savoy.
So while everyone is having a great time debating the topic who is doing anything to advance the notion of mass transportation? Do we really want everyone to have to drive a personal vehicle back and forth between Savoy and their place of employment every day? Are we really saying only rich people can live in Savoy? So what happens if gas suddenly went to $12 per gallon for some reason? Do we still want to play this silly game with mass transit?
Seems like it's time for folks to take a deep breath, back up a couple steps and start this dance all over again.
It appears that the management of the MTD has figured out a way to make a lot more money by bypassing the regular business model. First some background. I grew up in Urbana and now I reside in Champaign. I used the MTD when I was growing up to go to school and I continue to use the MTD to go to and from work today. The difference between then and now is like night and day.
In a regular business model, if the MTD needed to increase revenue, they would need to respond to the needs of the riders to increase the number of butts in seats. Routes without riders would be replaced by routes with riders. The more people who ride the bus would equal increased fares in the fare box. That is not the case with the MTD. Becasue of the contracts with the U of I and Unit 4, the MTD is paid regardless of the number of riders. Where is the incentive to be responsive to the needs of the riders? Twenty years ago, 90% of riders put a fare in the fare box when boarding. The other 10% had passes, which were purchased from the MTD. Today, 90% show an I-card or, in the case of the Unit 4 school children, nothing, when boarding the bus. In addition to getting paid if the number of riders is zero or 1 million, the MTD also benefits from reduced costs by not having to process collected fares. Think about it on a smaller scale. If you drove a cab and were guaranteed payment regardless of the number of fares you picked up each day, would you be motivated to find new customers or respond to your current customer's needs? On top of that, if you could fill out some paper work and require payment from those who would not use your service and let a government body collect and process those payments for you, you would probably do that as well. In the end you have increased your revenue without having to respond to your riders or make any changes to day to day operations.
Congratulations to Volk and Costello for figuring out how to get rich by fleecing the taxpayers of C-U!
Are we really saying only rich people can live in Savoy?
I live across the street from Head Start in Savoy. Check my house out.
Everytime the issue of how MTD spends money without checks and balances comes up, the shills try to divert attention away. Sorry, discussing tax dollars and how much money Bill Volk gets (and will get upon retirement) is not silly.
As far as starting a dance again, I'd be glad for the press to do more investigative dances with the MTD. A couple years ago the County Board had front page headlines over NACo conference costs. The Champaign City Council got flak for tram trips. Where is the MTD scrutiny?
The MTD should not get a pass, as some would have us believe, because they provide a needed service. That is dangerous thinking and leads to blank check spending. Taxpayers have very little oversight with this taxing body. This thread points out that that oversight will still be lacking.
I want to know how they justify $48,000 in other miscellaneous expenses--what in the world does that cover, and why isn't the Board at least questioning that? And $40,000 for publications seems high as well.
Sorry, $48,000 seems high for publcations.
The MTD taking taxpayers for a "ride" since 1970!!
Do we really want everyone to have to drive a personal vehicle back and forth between Savoy and their place of employment every day?
Yes, this is surely a big problem and must be stopped at all costs. To think that people in Savoy should have the ability to choose their means of transportation is outrageous. And let's not stop there. Let's look at those rich people in Mahomet and St. Joe. How dare they come into the Emerald City without getting on a bus first (and spending hours in transfers). Geez.
Do we still want to play this silly game with mass transit?
Uh? The notion that this poster thinks that oversight of our money is a game shows his mentality.
A couple of comments added to what I have posted on this topic previously.
It is my understanding people in the newly annexed subdivisons of SW Champaign were not allowed to apply since they are in two mass transit districts. Could that be a reason the applications were low or was it because the CC Board did not activity solicite canidates for fear they would get some from the very under represented West Champaign area?
"MTD's ham-handed attempt to expand it's service area is matched in kind by the righteous attempt to set up a competing transit district. Then the new district raises taxes to fund itself while delivering nothing." The CSMTD raised taxes to fight the law suit filed by the CU MTD and NOW the City of Champaign. I salute their 'righteous attempt' and the difficulties they face planning transportation for their district when they were formed formed into a lawsuit brought by two mega million dollar governmental bodies, one elected and one appointed.
"Meanwhile someone thinks it would be a good idea to charge the MTD for all the horrible damage they cause on the roadways in Savoy." Actually this is a marvelous idea for the MTD to take responsibility for their buses, especially when their buses go outside the city limits into areas not in their district or on roads and parkways not designed for their length or weight.
"Seems like it's time for folks to take a deep breath, back up a couple steps and start this dance all over again." It's not time to dance, its time for the CU MTD to fund their activities soley with user fees & federal/state grants like most transit systems in this country.
If you want to dance, Frustrated Observer, I' m sure our governor will let you cut in on his current dance with the Feds.
Is that just the cost of the magazine, or benefits that come with it?
Please, comment responsibly. I do agree that $ 48,000 is an incredible amount each year for dues and subcriptions. That's a lot of reading material to pour over.
Subscriptions like "Trolleys and how to snooker the public to get one of your own."
On February 18th, 2008 at 08:39 AM, Frustrated Observer said:
How about the garbage trucks, UPS, Fed EX, US Postal Service, Mayflower, fuel tankers? Gosh, we could raise a lot of tax money doing that. Or the affected parties would quit driving into or through Savoy.
All of the trucks mentioned except the USPS trucks are already paying to use the roads with some of the highest license fees in the Country, MTD on the other hand is a tax parasite. Volk and His crew are not really concerned with what anybody thinks of them, they have Unit 4 and the U of I in their back pocket.
Say Joan, since you feel free to throw stones as the CUMTD, how about if you tell us where on the Village of Savoy website we can find your budget? I see the CUMTD has their budget posted but I cannot find yours.
Also, for all the snarky commentary and hollering about lack of accountability from the posters to this blog I have to wonder why Berns was the only applicant for the currently open Republican spot on the CUMTD Board. This reminds me of people who yell about how bad the government is run but never vote. Where is the follow through from this group? I also think it is pretty tacky of you to caste aspirations on the character of Tom Berns. For shame.
It also strikes me as bizarre that the NG thinks that those appointed to the board to run an organization should be hostile toward the mission of that organization. Why would you appoint someone who does not believe in public transit to the transit agency board? That would be like appointing someone to the park board who does not believe in parks. Maybe they are taking a page out of the playbook of the Bush administration.
Not only does CU-MTD not pay registration fees (about $1300/year for a bus in IL right now - to pay for roads, bridges, etc. - things which MTD destroys), they also do not pay motor fuel taxes.
The funny thing is, commercial bus companies and school bus companies do. So private enterprise pays a big penalty when trying to provide scheduled transportation services.
Weird, huh?
Anon 5:46,
Wow, you just don't get it at all. Your solution is never criticize or challenge a taxing body for their spending policies. It's the same old shill diversions. The MTD board should be pro-transportation. They should also be pro-taxpayer!
caste aspirations
umm, do you mean cast aspersions? Tom is a great guy. But he should know going into this that there is a certain mistrust and skepticism about the MTD and we don't need another lemming. We need watchdogs.
Could you direct me to the Savoy budget please? I would like to see if there is room for improvement in your taxing body's performance. Maybe then when you defend your expenditures you will enjoy the label of shill.
So now Tom is a lemming. Nice.
Could you direct me to the Savoy budget please.
Good suggestion. Savoy residents should be able to see our budget.
Let me clarify. We don't need lemmings. My hope is that Tom won't be one of them. Time will tell.
And just to set the record straight, I am criticized plenty of times. I assume Tom can also handle some criticism too. Or are MTD board members immune from criticism like the rest of the MTD administration?
Oddly, I do not believe anyone said that public officials should be free from criticism. However, there is constructive criticism and then there is unconstructive criticism. I have some difficulty understanding how your criticism is meant to be constructive. It appears primarily intended to create animosity and to attack the local transit district. I have had to opportunity to use the buses here and in many other places I have lived. This district is by far the best run most efficient system I have had the opportunity to use. You do not use the buses and seem mostly interested in using the district to gain publicity and inflict damage. Maybe I am wrong and you are really intending to help the CUMTD become a better organization. If so, perhaps you could explain how your commentary is meant to be helpful. And why would you presume that Tom would behave as a lemming? Is there any evidence in his past service that would suggest that he is a rubber stamp?
" Or are MTD board members immune from criticism like the rest of the MTD administration?"
I would certainly hope so. All politicians, elected or appointed, should be immune from criticism.
They should listen to the people, but should be absolutely immune to criticism. The same goes for an administraton in any organization, public or private, that are employees of the policy makers.
That's Poli Sci 101
Say what you will, but the MTD was voted in with over 75% of the vote because the private entity that preceded it (Champaign-Urbana City Lines) was doing such a crappy job. Just check out the Courier for fall 1970 for the details (I happened to be reading old issues of the Courier for other reasons and came upon it, it may have had other coverage elsewhere).
As for publications, is that separate from the paper bus schedules printed up every year that you can get on the buses and at the transit station? What about the paper maps and schedules posted at the stops, behind plastic? That stuff isn't free to print, but perhaps it falls under some other budget item?
As a rider for the past 15 years (since moving to town) I've been pretty pleased with the various improvements. It's nice not having to wait at Hill and Neil, outside, to transfer downtown, and it's nice having the signs showing the actual time to the bus arrival at the larger stops, too. It's nice having bike racks on the front of the buses, and extra late night hours.
"It appears primarily intended to create animosity and to attack the local transit district. I have had to opportunity to use the buses here and in many other places I have lived. This district is by far the best run most efficient system I have had the opportunity to use. You do not use the buses and seem mostly interested in using the district to gain publicity and inflict damage."
Spoken like true shill-talking points. Do you realize that she is quoting the News-Gazette and sharing their concerns? The News-Gazette hasn't exactly been overly aggressive in digging into the MTD budget or being overly critical. And why is it out of bounds to question (inflict damage, as you defensively say) excessive line items? Beware the tax spenders that don't think anybody is watching them! And the salaries of the MTD and Volk's golden parachute are common knowledge and coffee shop talk.
On February 18th, 2008 at 02:31 PM, Joan Dykstra said:
$ 48,000 is an incredible amount each year for dues and subcriptions.
That's a lot of reading material to pour over.
It sure is. What are your pouring**?
Why, in just 125 years or so the bus boys could save enough
on comic books and trade publications to
pay for a new clock tower,
a mighty 130 footer
visible all the way down Cunningham from I-74.
**do you mean "pore"?
EW-that was the bestest post you ever had.
People that live in grass houses shouldn't throw bones.
Or that just some heuristic maxim I just made up.
"It's nice not having to wait at Hill and Neil, outside, to transfer downtown, and it's nice having the signs showing the actual time to the bus arrival at the larger stops, too. It's nice having bike racks on the front of the buses, and extra late night hours."
It is quite obvious you do not get out to the west side of Champaign by bus. Try it and give an evaluation of your experience at the County Fair exchange. I believe you will find it quite difficult to use the word nice when describing the wait, times or extra late night hours.
You're right, I rarely, if ever, have any reason to go to the west side of Champaign. I do believe I was in Tokyo more recently than I was in the west side of Champaign.
If it needs improvement, I would be happy to lend my voice to it, though. I do wonder if some of the arguing about the MTD here and elsewhere is giving an impression that folks out there don't care about improved bus service, but I have no idea.
Undoubtedly in your opinion those of us who actually ride the bus and really like the service must all be shills. I wonder what you should label folks who never use a service but feel they have the "correct" and "righteous" perspective on that service and that anyone who disagrees with them is a shill? It is an interesting question. The folks I encounter who make large statements about the transit service and how bad it is and how awful the administration is are never folks who use the buses regularly. Those who do use the buses know that the system operates on time, the buses are clean and in good repair, the drivers are helpful and courteus (with rare exceptions), the technology such as the Stopwatch is very progressive, and that we have better transit service here than just about anywhere in the country if you consider the small size of our community and how much service we have available.
Of course, no organization is perfect, but that is not what I read on here. What I read here is usually intended to suggest that we should either cut the transit service way back or get rid of it altogether and that they do not believe that very many of our citizens use the service. In fact, thousands of people use the service and think it is very good. So, I ask again, why do people who do not use the buses feel that anyone who disagrees with their usually very off target criticism is a shill? I do not call you names when I disagree with you.
What I read here is usually intended to suggest that we should either cut the transit service way back or get rid of it altogether and that they do not believe that very many of our citizens use the service.
I am sure you do read some of that - but that is not the main gripe of many posters here. The problem is the CUMTD is unaccountable, and just does what they want despite the protests of residents. Stopping forced annexations and expansions would not cut back current services at all.
I don't ride the bus, but I understand the need for that service. Having said that, I question how the MTD carries out its mission to provide that service and whether they actually provide service that is needed, or whether they create that need. When I attended the University, students who had cars parked in remote lots for the week and walked to class. Rarely did anyone ride the bus, at least from class to class on campus. My impression is that students now hop on the bus to ride a block or two, and that every time that happens, the MTD counts that person as a rider, creating large numbers of riders and a need for more money. If I'm incorrect on that point, I'm happy to be corrected. You may also recall that Bill Volk went on record one year indicating that they were going to collect the maximum taxes that they could, not because they needed them, but because they were afraid that the STate was going to limit them in the future. I have little sympathy for that position.
In terms of the Country Fair area, I drive by that fairly frequently and agree with the poster who said you cannot use the word "nice" to describe that bus experience--the shelters do not appear to be particulalry well maintained or lit.
In fact, thousands of people use the service and think it is very good.
For the millionth time, those people that use and enjoy the service so much should pay for it. If the MTD would get off the backs of homeowners (many of whom struggle to pay their excessive property tax bills), they would not always be mired in controversy. I would bet I pay more in property taxes to support the CUMTD than most individuals pay in fares to ride it. The MTD already receives my tax dollars through Federal and state grants.
The MTD does have very nice and up to date equipment, but the homeowners pay dearly for that equipment with the tax levy.
If you remove the student ridership, what is the cost subsidy on each rider on this system compared to other systems? It is really not fair to count each student who rides 2-3 blocks with those who use the system to get to work, but the MTD will not break out those ridership figures. I strongly suspect that the MTD is not very efficient compared to other systems, but would sure like to see the figures. Would be a great story to examine the efficiency of this system compared to others.
Do they really need to use tax dollars to advertise their service and how great the system is all the time? After all, they have little competition as a government agency and I really could do with less advertising and a lower tax rate.
And should they really be contributing to the various charities using tax dollars. The purpose of the MTD is to provide transportation service and they are not a social service agency and yet they levy taxes while their various charitiable contributions. Most people can decide if they want to contribute to these charities without the MTD taxing us so the MTD can make the contributions.
Well, if we are going to talk about people paying for what they use let us talk about the real costs of driving a car alone to work, shop, etc.
Your current driving patterns cost more than you pay in taxes. If the actual costs of driving a car were to be taxed to pay for what it really costs it would result in a fuel tax that would range between $8-$10/per gallon. Right now the local governments are forcing the rest of us to subsidize your driving patterns by requiring developers to put in large amounts of free parking and build roads; we pay sales taxes to build, maintain and clear the roads;we pay police to spend a lot of their time to try and get you to drive safely and correctly (with 40,000 people a year dying mostly from bad driving behavior); we pay for fire and ambulance services to take all the bodies to the hospital; we pay for expensive storm water retention facilities to hold all the run-off created from all the parking lots and roads for your car; etc., etc. So, if you are willing to pay directly for your transportation choices I will pay mine. I will be paying a lot less because I bike, walk, and use the buses. Buses do not require huge parking lots or more and more lanes of roadway. Buses can carry dozens of people while your car is carrying one person and taking up a lot of road space. Stop and think about how much fuel, metal, space, etc. you take up in your car by yourself. We have thousands of folks riding the buses and it costs less to transport people that way. Anyone with a rudimentary grasp of math can figure it out.
I also chose to live in Urbana so I could make those transportation choices. If you look at the cost of transportation for people who choose to live in the core of Champaign and Urbana they spend on average $3,000 to $5,000 less annually out of pocket than folks who live on the fringe or in outlying communities.. Still the fringe dwellers are still not paying the real costs of their choices in housing and transportation. The rest of us are subsidizing you.
Now, let us add in the costs to the entire community if the handicapped, elderly, poor, kids who cannot drive and others who depend on the transit service to get to work , to the doctor, to shop, to school, etc. are now without their access to transit. BTW, the primary mode of travel on the UIUC campus is walking not riding the bus. If you look at the data you will see that the students are not using the buses because they are lazy. They use the buses to get to their jobs off campus, they use the buses to get the the mall, the movie, to get home from the bars, etc. I have seen buses with standing room only unloading at the Beverley. And, yes, they use the buses to get around campus. In fact, the level of transit service on campus was increased to improve safety because students walking long distances at night were being assualted. They are not assualted while on the bus. Imagine if the students were driving after the bars close. I challenge you to spend one night between 2-3 a.m. on Green Street and then tell me we should reduce bus service. If you saw the total chaos that breaks out when the bars close and could picture what would happen if all those students were driving you might get a clue.
This does not even begin to discuss your contribution to global warming by driving everywhere.
I would like to have the anti-transit folks on this blog pay for their transportation choices too. Fair is fair. I am heavily subsidizing your choices. If the community is going to help pay for you to drive your car then I think we need to be fair and help pay for those who cannot or choose not to drive. In many places now they are going to toll roads to pay for new roadways. Maybe we should do that here. For all you folks out in the fringe if you want your two-lane asphalt road improved, if you want expensive traffic signals put in, if you want your roads maintained we will be happy to do it - but you pay for it.
I guess some of you folks forgot that the City of Champaign asked the MTD to annex those areas. In fact, they have an agreement that MTD will annex new areas annexed into the city just like the park district. The city has figured out it saves them money if people ride the bus instead of driving.
The transit system's efficiency has been calculated and compared to other agencies as shown in the reports posted on the miPLAN website. This is some of what it says:
CUMTD fixed route City and Campus routes are highly productive fixed route services.
Combined the system operated...76 peak buses and generated an average of almost 37,220 average daily boardings with a productivity of 52.8 passengers per revenue hour. This is explemplary productivity for any transit system.
In comparing CUMTD to five other areas with similar residential population and major university enrollment untilizing National Transit Database information, CUMTD has and average of 55.8 annual boardings per capita, almost double the peer average of 28 boardings per capita.
The high daily ridership and high productivity on the CUMTD system is particularly pronounced since the system is designed to avoid transfers.
If you want to look at the data yourselves just go to www.ihavemiplan.com/results/index.html
Americans know basically nothing about mass transit. They want their cars, they want their freedom to go where they want
when they want to go. There is relatively speaking no one riding the bus and the buses are not user friendly.
If you want to see a bus system, visit Beijing and see how it is done.
Anonymous--how are they calculating 52.8 passengers per revenue hour? If that includes counting the student who hopped on for class at one block, got off a block later and then back on that block as two passengers, I don't think you can say they're very efficient. Please note that they're talking about boardings per capita. If the same passenger gets on 50 times per day, you really can't say it's an efficient system (and yes, I know 50 is an exaggeration--I just used that figure as an example).
"Still the fringe dwellers are still not paying the real costs of their choices in housing and transportation. The rest of us are subsidizing you."--------This is not a true statement.
I live on the "fringe" by where I work, also on the "fringe". No buses to and from my work place although I have been annexed into the MTD. Unfortunately there are also no gas stations or food stores out here either so I buy my gas and some food in the city. Therefore my property taxes and my purchases are subsidizing those not living on the "fringe". Although in good & warmer weather, I do short you some free money because I ride my bike to and from work and grow a lot of my own food.
They calculate the number of passengers per revenue hour using automatic people counters just the same way that all transit systems that use automatic counters do. The same is true for counting auto trips. If you drive around the block 5 times while they have an automatic counter on the street they count every trip. That is the methodology and the question was regarding the efficiency of the local transit district compared to others. Compared to others it has "exemplary productivity". You can argue with the particulars if you like, but those are the facts.
I don't think that a study commissioned by the city, MTD, and the partner members saying the MTD is exemplary is necessarily unbiased. However, I did go back and look at it.Over 50% of boardings on a daily basis occur in campus. The real question is whether that 50% would be lower if the students weren't compelled to subsidize MTD through contracts with the University. Would students just walk to class like they've done in the past if the MTD didn't have unlimited service on campus due to these agreements? And if that's the case, then isn't the MTD really creating a demand for its services rather than the other way around?
"no one riding the bus" I guess the several thousand people who ride the bus daily here don't know a thing about transit. I am sure that Beijing is a lovely place as long as you do not mind totalitarian governments and a serious reduction in standard of living.
BTW, news flash: oil prices broke the $100/barrel today. Get your wallet ready all your auto loving folks.
The students are not compelled to pay the fees for the bus service. They vote every three years to pay the fees. The last time they voted they asked for expanded service and increased the amount they pay for the service. As was stated previously, one of the reasons the service on campus was expanded was to increase safety. Perhaps safety is of no concern to you, but it is to the students, their parents, the administration, and law enforcement.
Fringe-dwellers do not pay their way. The folks living in the core subsidize the new development. We pay for the expansion of the sewer system to service your low density single family neighborhood, we pay for the new fire station to help put out the fires in your neighborhood (the city had to sell the last location and buy another one farther out to reduce the response time), we pay for busing your kids to schools, we pay for expanding law enforcement to protect your neighborhoods, etc. Single family neighborhoods never pay in taxes the amount it takes for cities to service them especially if it is low density like what we get here. Commercial, industrial, and agricultural land uses pay for themselves, low density residential does not. It never has and it never will. Just ask Savoy. They just had to pass a tax increase to service their new development, most of it low density single family, and they had to begin charging sewer connnection fees.
I grow some of my own food, I can also walk to the grocery store instead of driving, I can walk to the doctor, my kids can walk to school and I can get to work by cycling. You make more trips per day than I do in a car because you have to. Fringe dwellers drive more and put more wear on our roads, emit more exhaust fumes, and cost us more than core dwellers.
It always seems to come down to an argument from the urban dwellers that those rich slobs "out there" are leeeches", sucking off the urban dwellers for everything. It never seems to matter how many times it is mentioned that all of us form a city. The urban bias is amazing.
Also, the point of this thread is not that mass transit isn't a part of a city; rather shouldn't the board be wise and cautious spenders of taxes? Who can argue with that? I don't want a bunch of yes men and women. When any staff sees that they can get away with spending more and more, guess what? They will. It's human nature and typical government at work. Take Congress for example.
Joan brings up (and the editorial) a much needed admonition: don't overspend our money!
I grow some of my own food, I can also walk to the grocery store instead of driving, I can walk to the doctor, my kids can walk to school and I can get to work by cycling.
Congrats - do you want a prize?
Anoymous poster 6:22 your statement is still mostly untrue. Urban populations cannot sustain themselves in the United States. Cities cannot sustain themselves, they depend upon upon growth. Low density urban dwellings, typical in the cities of Champaign and Urbana are no more cost effective that low density 'fringe" dwellings. Your statements do not fit the situation being faced by the members of the MTD, the voters of CU or the students part year residencies. The one true statement is about Commercial, industrial & agricultural land uses as they pay for all the other uses, including high density housing. Any what is even better they do not vote.
God, that's like four posts by MTD employees in a row, around "On February 19th, 2008 at 01:32 PM, Anonymous". It would be nice if MTD posters would be honest and idenfity themselves.
Boardings per hour = totally useless. If 52 passengers each ride three blocks in an hour, that's only 150 passenger-blocks in an hour, or about 15 passenger miles!
"God, that's like four posts by MTD employees in a row, around "On February 19th, 2008 at 01:32 PM, Anonymous". It would be nice if MTD posters would be honest and idenfity themselves."
You have no idea if those comments are from MTD employees or not.
And the MTD is supported by more people than just its employees.
"then isn't the MTD really creating a demand for its services rather than the other way around?"
CONGRATULATIONS - YOU HAVE UNEARTHED THE ESSENCE OF MTD!
THE MTD EXISTS TO OBTAIN MTD FUNDING. FUNDING DEPENDS ON RIDERSHIP. MTD DIRECTS ITS EFFORTS TO BUYING RIDERS TO SECURE FUTURE FUNDING.
I agree with anon 8:49. It is obvious that MTD administration is posting. No one else would have the information like that. That's fine, I appreciate their information. But it's clear Joan puts herself out there, getting criticism, but MTD hides.
Let's see the IP addresses then. If they're in sol-tec cblocks, they're MTD.
"It is obvious that MTD administration is posting. No one else would have the information like that."
Boggle.
This is getting ridiculous.
Some people act as if only CUMTD's management and employees are supportive of CUMTD, or know anything about it or mass transit in general.
If you polled the residents of Champaign and Urbana on thier views of CUMTD, the responses would be overwhelmingly positive. CUMTD has its problems, and I don't support either its property tax or "annexation without persuasion or consultation" policy, but the District does its core functions (mass transit between both downtowns and campus) very well.
Mass transit issues here are not black-and-white. Not everyone who is concerned about annexations is opposed to all mass transit in CU. Not everyone who likes CUMTD's service is an employee or wants to annex all of central Illinois.
Please give it a rest - both sides - and try to have a reasonable discussion of the issues. In this case, the issue is whether the CUMTD Board is independent enough. Please try to discuss without resorting to namecalling or other banalities.
Thanks.
"Let's see the IP addresses then. If they're in sol-tec cblocks, they're MTD."
Absolutey not.
For one thing, it's a pain-in-the-rear to look them up in Drupal's logs.
For another, it's none of your business.
For yet another, I don't care about your IP address nor theirs - I care about the arguments. It seems that you have no argument, and so are left to clutch at the weak straw that all those who support CUMTD must be employed by it.
The librarian is being a real nag today.
"I guess some of you folks forgot that the City of Champaign asked the MTD to annex those areas. In fact, they have an agreement that MTD will annex new areas annexed into the city just like the park district. The city has figured out it saves them money if people ride the bus instead of driving."
I guess you must either not realize that the MTD is not annexing new areas that are annexed into the city just like the park district (the park district, and other entities, are part of pre-annexation agreements--legal contracts that are consented to an executed by people acting of their own free will) or you are intentionally repeating the MTD's false claims. Undemocratic, forced-annexation is still heavy-handed and arrogant (and unconstitutional?) whether or not a municipality asks you to do it.
Scott is correct. Also, neither the MTD's timing of the "forced"annexations nor their boundry lines align with any cities. There are no pre-annexaton agreements between the people/developers & the MTD. If you review the annexations by the MTD, you will find no requests for annexation, you will find no clear majority wishing to be annex recorded at the public hearings, you will find no legal contracts with the subdivision developers saying the MTD will provide service but you will find a very deceitful small group of appointed and hired individuals working together in a very undemocratic fashion to extract as much tax money as possible under the vail of providing a much needed "public service". My condolences to Tom Burns in his discoveries of what has happened since he served previously.
Tapley weighs in? He's not even from here, he's from Indiana.
It's like Mayor Daley telling us what we should do in Central Illinois.
Or like Matt V still suggesting what we should do even though he has moved on to another place.
Goodbye Scott, take care of Indiana, you aren't from here anymore.
Your opinion is worth the same as anyone else who "cut and run" away.
So I guess the above poster values Joan's perspective and opinion because she lives here? Good to know.
As an former eleceted official in Illinois you would think that Mr. Tapley would have known the law. In Illinois park districts are automatically included in annexations that cities undertake. It has nothing to do with pre-annexation agreements. The annexation agreements in this area are based on access to the sanitary sewer. If you want your subdivision to have sewer service you have to sign a pre-annexation agreement that you will be annexed into the city, and hence the park district, and you agree to this without exception. There are a number of folks in the SW area of Champaign that apparently did not read their annexation agreements prior to signing all their closing papers when they bought their houses and they did not realize they were going to be paying city and park district taxes. Now they know. The MTD tax rate is low compared to the taxes for the city, the schools, and the parks.
Maybe Mr. Tapley forgot.
"There are a number of folks in the SW area of Champaign that apparently did not read their annexation agreements prior to signing all their closing papers when they bought their houses and they did not realize they were going to be paying city and park district taxes."
I haven't heard anyone in SW Champaign complain about being surprised to be annexed into the City or Park District.
Maybe Anonymous 8:34 should do a little research before he/she posts as MTD's in Illinois are not automaticly included in annexations.
"I haven't heard anyone in SW Champaign complain about being surprised to be annexed into the City or Park District."
It wasn't a suprise, but it wasn't a great experience either. The taxes went up by several thousand dollars a year and service quality decreased. It takes about 2 days to get plowed now, but the county always got us first thing in the morning. I think most of us would rather have stayed in the unincorporated township instead.
Anon 11:31-Cosign
but the county always got us first thing in the morning. I think most of us would rather have stayed in the unincorporated township instead.
Either the City of Champaign plowed your streets or it was Champaign Township. The county maintains county roads, and county roads are not located within your subdivision. If you are going to com[plain about your government, at least learn the correct one to complain about. :-)
Dear Oilyman:
I am not confused about MTD annexations. Nowhere was it stated that transit has the same legal arrangements as the city and the parks. It was a clarification of the status of the parks. They are automatically annexed in with the city. However, the City of Champaign did ask the MTD to annex those areas. All the hollering has been directed at the MTD, but the city asked for the annexations. Maybe the MTD could have managed the annexations differently, but they were following through on intergovernmental agreements with the city.
If you do not believe that some folks in SW Champaign were surprised about being annexed you should ask the city attorney for Champaign. There were plenty of folks who were annexed kicking and screaming even though they signed the papers at their closing. Some of them may have even attempted to defy the annexation by filing law suits. They would lose, but that has not stopped a lot of folks.
OK, some of you probably know the answer to this and I just wasn't understanding it. When the city of Champaign annexes property, is it automatically in an agreement that the MTD is part of the annexation? Does the MTD have to take separate action?
Thanks.
"When the city of Champaign annexes property, is it automatically in an agreement that the MTD is part of the annexation?"
No. The cities (Champaign and Urbana) have asked CUMTD to annex everything within city limits.
"Does the MTD have to take separate action?"
Yes. That's the controversy. CUMTD has attempted to annex areas that are now within Champaign, but those neighborhoods didn't want CUMTD service, and so took steps to form a new mass transit district as they were being annexed by CUMTD. By law, these areas cannot be in both Districts at once. The courts are being asked to settle whether those areas have been annexed into CUMTD, or whether they are part of this new district.
Savoy is a seperate issue. Part of Savoy is already in CUMTD, but part is not. When CUMTD announced their intention to annex the rest of Savoy, the Savoy Village Board took steps to form their own district to block CUMTD's annexation. Both have since backed off, and are negotiating.
Anonymous 12:56 still seems to be confused by the MTD's annexations. As IP has pointed out there is a general request from the cities of Champaign & Urbana for the CUMTD to annex everything within their city limits. However regarding the annexations in SW Champaign, the CUMTD annexations took place prior to the City of Champaign's annexation as they were trying to beat out the formation of the CSMTD but the judge ruled against that tactic.
Also of note is the CUMTD's annexations included both land and subdivisions that was never annexed by the City of Champaign. Therefore when you say "All the hollering has been directed at the MTD, but the city asked for the annexations." it is untrue or the annexed areas by the CUMTD and the City of Champaign would be identical.
And when you state "If you want your subdivision to have sewer service you have to sign a pre-annexation agreement that you will be annexed into the city, and hence the park district, and you agree to this without exception." This is only true of late as there are areas served by the U-C Sanitary District which have not been annexed into a city.
You are incorrect Oil Man. The CUMTD did not annex any of the areas in the City of Champaign prior to their having been annexed into the city itself. The primary organizers for the SWCMTD live in the city limits of Champaign . Also, the LRTP for the entire urbanized area called for the CUMTD to annex all of the area within the urbanized area boundaries and this includes unincorporated areas surrounded by the cities. The LRTP can be found at: www.ccrpc.org/planning/transportation/transportation.php BTW, Savoy voted for this plan with complete awareness that the annexation of the rest of Savoy was called for in the plan. The LRTP is the plan that is required by the federal government in order for the area to get any of the federal transportation dollars for road building. The feds expect that the plans will be implemented so you do not include items that you do not intend to implement. That includes annexing the entire land area within the urbanized area boundaries.
Also, the park district is not automatically annexed in when the city does an annexation. The park district has 45 days in which to vote to annex the new areas into their district.
I welcome Scott Tapley's comments. If he is still paying real estate taxes in Champaign he should be more than welcome to comment on this siutation.
Not only that, but Scott Tapley invested a lot of time and energy at the local level in government. He is knowledgable about MTD issues (although you may disagree with his opinion) and shouldn't be discounted. Others who have moved away still comment here and it's often valuable insight.
From 1 anonymous to the "incorrect" Anonymous who keeps posting-----You are the one who is ill informed and have been in most of your posts. The CUMTD annexation took place prior to the city's annexation. As was posted earlier, took in land still not annexed by the City of Champaign. Being one of the primary organizers for the CSMTD myself, I can say with knowledge none of us lived within the city limits of Champaign during the organization (petition drive) that lead to the vote and district formation. In fact two of the current Board members of our new district still do not live in the City of Champaign. As for your reference to the CCRPC, you should be aware they have not allowed the CSMTD to be a member nor have they allowed the new transit district to comment on their "Staley Road Corridor" study which takes in the Champaign Southwest Mass Transit District. As a taxpayer, I find it irresponsible of this public supported commission not to engage all the stakeholders if their primary purpose is to perform regional planning for the future of Champaign County.
Maybe if CSWMTD actually offered transit services and contributed to CUUATS like all the other members do you would be members. You are not going to get special treatment. Operating a transit system just might be harder than you think.
You have members of the CSWMTD who live outside of the City of Champaign because the district incoporates a much larger area than the CUMTD annexed. The only areas that CUMTD annexed that were not in the City of Champaign were Lincolnshire Fields and one other unincorporated subdivision. CUMTD did not annex any areas that were later annexed into the City of Champaign. You can look at the legal documents to see this. You can also look at the two areas on a map in the Champaign Moving Forward Transportation Master Plan on page 16 www.champaignmovingforward.compdf/DRAFTChampaignTransportationPlan_November_2007_LowRes.pdf
This document also states: "Another, more major issue in limiting transit service within the region is the recent formation of a new transit district in west Champaign. This district has been formed with no intention of providing service, but rather to block the CUMTD from annexing additional land. Nationally, the trend has been to consolidate transit services not create new ones. Creatng smaller districts precludes residents and businesses from easily connecting with a greater transit system, which serves a much wider region."
I have posted links to documentation to substantiate things I have posted. If I am wrong maybe you can post links to prove that I am wrong and you are correct.
Good to see the Anonymous posters cancelling each other out. It saves time.
This is for the anons that seem to know a lot about about the CU-MTD. I have a question: Is the Urbana Wal Mart technically in the CU MTD or is it just outside the boundary? And do they pay taxes to MTD?
Thanks.
Clearly the Wal-Mart is outside of the CUMTD boundaries since the annexation agreement passed almost unanimously by Savoy last night included annexing the Wal-Mart. The CUMTD still has to hold public hearings, if I understand all of this correctly, before the area is annexed and then the Wal-Mart would be paying taxes to the district. I know right now there are people who work at that Wal-Mart that have to take the bus to the airport and walk back because the CUMTD cannot provide service outside of its district and the Wal-Mart has not been in the district. Certainly the students take the bus to the Urbana or Champaign Wal-Marts to do their shopping so the one in Savoy has lost sales due to lack of transit access. I have seen dozens of students getting of the bus on N. Prospect to shop.
"Clearly the Wal-Mart is outside of the CUMTD boundaries since the annexation agreement passed almost unanimously by Savoy last night included annexing the Wal-Mart."
They were asking about the Urbana Wal-mart.
I know right now there are people who work at that Wal-Mart that have to take the bus to the airport and walk back because the CUMTD cannot provide service outside of its district and the Wal-Mart has not been in the district.
That has to be one of the most ridiculous anecdotal arguments for the need to extend MTD service I've head yet.
I think this got lost in the shuffle and know someone will be able to answer it:
This is for the anons that seem to know a lot about about the CU-MTD. I have a question: Is the Urbana Wal Mart technically in the CU MTD boundary or is it just outside the boundary? And do they pay taxes to MTD?
Thanks.
The Urbana Wal Mart is in the CU MTD. If you are in the CU MTD and pay property taxes you pay taxes to the district.
If you were working and Wal-Mart in Savoy and had to walk, where there is not sidewalk BTW, along the side of the highway because the bus cannot stop outside of its district it might not seem so ridiculous.
I work in Tolono and I'm really upset that I can't get to work on the MTD.
How about it? Please come to Pesotum, MTD, so all my neighbors can pay higher taxes and me and the one other person who lives here can ride the bus to Champaign, too? Could you please have it run hourly, so I can go to work whenever I want?