DRAFT – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION OR PUBLICATION.

EMBARGOED UNTIL 12:00 P.M. ON THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 2024.

Executive Summary
Northeastern Illinois’ mass transit agencies—CTA, Metra and Pace, which are overseen by the
Regional Transportation Authority (RTA)—face a looming fiscal crisis. The transit agencies face
an estimated $730 million deficit beginning in 2026 after federal pandemic relief funds are
depleted. This represents approximately 20% of the system’s operating budget and will
continue to grow unless it is addressed. The revenue decline is largely due to reductions in
farebox revenue as ridership has failed to return to pre-COVID 19 pandemic levels. Ridership is
projected to increase to 349 million trips in 2024, but this is just 62% of the ridership level of
562 million in 2019.

The current state of mass transit in Illinois impels a change to the governance structure that
oversees the delivery of public transit services in the Chicago metropolitan region to improve
service delivery and efficiency. Additional funding from the State of Illinois will be critical to
resolving the crisis, but financial support must be linked with structural reforms that would
provide a more centralized, efficient governance system that focuses on regional challenges
and leverages regional opportunities. A more efficiently run regional transit system is also
essential to creating pathways to opportunity and advancing equity goals for historically
disinvested and disadvantaged communities.

The Civic Federation calls on Governor Pritzker, the Illinois General Assembly, the RTA and the
service boards to take this once-in-a-generation opportunity to fully restructure its major mass
regional transit system. Providing additional funding without first reforming the governance
structure of the transit agencies would only lead to the continuation of flawed, inefficient transit
services.

As a solution, the Civic Federation supports the integration of the three transit agencies with
the Regional Transportation Authority into a single regional transit agency. This was one of two
governance reform options presented in the Plan of Action for Regional Transit (PART), released
in December 2023 by the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP), the official regional
transportation and land use planning agency for the seven counties of northeastern Illinois. It
was produced in response to the Illinois General Assembly calling on CMAP to develop
recommendations for solutions to the fiscal crisis and operational and governance challenges
facing the region’s mass transit agencies.

In addition to identifying funding options, the PART report presented several options for
governance reform, recognizing the critical connection between how transit agencies are
governed and transit system outcomes. Two of the proposed options would create true
structural and operational reform: 1) consolidation of the transit service boards into a
centralized regional transit agency; and 2) maintaining the service boards to manage day to day
operations, service decisions and local planning efforts, to be overseen by a regional
coordinating agency that would develop region-wide policies, allocate funding and coordinate
mobility planning. Both options would grant significantly greater power and authority to the
Regional Transportation Authority (RTA), the existing government agency created by the State
of Illinois to coordinate the operations of Chicago’s multiple transit providers, than it currently

1
 DRAFT – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION OR PUBLICATION.
EMBARGOED UNTIL 12:00 P.M. ON THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 2024.

holds. However, the Civic Federation regards one of those two options —consolidation—as a
comprehensive solution capable of addressing many of the existing operational inefficiencies
while also solving for the calcified cultures, politics and bureaucratic competition dragging
down our troubled system.

The two transit governance reform options recommended in the PART report would grant
significantly greater power and authority to the transit oversight agency than the current RTA
possesses. They would both require significant legislative changes to the existing RTA and
Metropolitan Transit Authority Acts, which would be politically challenging. Both options, but
centralization especially, would lead to a more effective utilization of transit resources, greater
service coordination and improved customer service. The advantages of improved operational
efficiency on a regional basis, rather than the current limited parochial basis, would outweigh
the costs.

This report outlines existing obstacles faced by the Regional Transportation Authority and the
benefits and challenges associated with each of the two reform options described in the PART
report. In this moment of looming fiscal crisis and operational deficiency within our mass
transit systems, the Civic Federation urges seizing the opportunity for true transformation and
adopting centralized transit governance reform.

Challenges with Current Transit Governance System

There are several major problems with the current fragmented mass transit governance system
in northeastern Illinois:

 The current system has failed to implement a regional vision or coordinated service
implementation plans, instead prioritizing the narrow interests of the individual service
boards. This is true even though the services offered by all three service boards
complement and mutually reinforce one another.
 The distribution of transit funds is based on outdated formulas that fail to account for
changes in transit utilization and has contributed to a zero-sum competition for resources
among the service boards.
 The current governance structure with its multiple service boards, overlapping
representation and divergent missions has led to a lack of accountability and transparency
in decision making.
 The role of the State of Illinois in the Chicago metropolitan area’s mass transit planning,
operations and funding is very limited even though the State provides significant funding
and service coordination with the transit agencies. This is in sharp contrast to other states
where the state owns and operates transit infrastructure. The key reason for this limited
approach is the longstanding Chicago versus downstate political divide in Illinois.
 The current system has failed to implement potential cost saving opportunities through
coordinated purchasing and unified back-office services such as human resources, lobbying,
auditing and related functions. Consolidating the four separate governments could save as
much as $200 to $250 million in annual savings, according to the consulting firm Slalom.

2
 DRAFT – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION OR PUBLICATION.
EMBARGOED UNTIL 12:00 P.M. ON THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 2024.

Benefits and Challenges with the Two Transit Governance Reform Options
As outlined in the PART report, the first governance reform option, a centralized regional transit
agency, would be a major shift from the current decentralized model and could be politically
difficult to implement. It could provide the following benefits:

 More effective implementation of regional strategies, priorities and goals;

 Less siloed decision making;
 Better regional mobility with system-wide service planning and operating;
 Less duplication or disconnection in service; and
 Significant long-term cost savings.

However, there are a number of challenges that this approach would face:

 Merging existing service boards and their operating systems may take some time;
 The front-end transaction costs of merging the three service boards could be significant;
 There is uncertainty about the fiscal and operational impacts of merging pension systems,
labor agreements and outstanding debt; and
 Assessing potential costs or savings would require further analysis and significant
stakeholder engagement to ensure success.

The second governance reform option in the PART report, a regional coordinating agency,
would be a less comprehensive reform of the current governance system. It could provide the
following benefits:

 Providing substantial accountability and oversight to the service boards;

 Ensuring that local input and institutional knowledge would be retained by maintaining the
three service boards;
 Maintaining valuable relationships with stakeholders and expertise about planning and
operating different forms of transit;
 Guaranteeing that professional assets in the current system would continue to benefit the
region.

However, this option would also face a number of challenges that could impact the
effectiveness of regional coordination:

 Needed reforms could face implementation barriers if the regional entity lacks sufficient
authority and resources;
 Adjustments to voting structures, appointing authorities and clearly defined allocations of
which responsibilities rest with which entity would need to be defined;
 Existing contracts would likely need to be revised related to new responsibilities for the
coordinated agency; and
 Historic political tensions could continue to divide stakeholders and impede progress.

3
 DRAFT – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION OR PUBLICATION.
EMBARGOED UNTIL 12:00 P.M. ON THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 2024.

Current Governance of the Regional Transportation Authority (RTA)

The Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) is the agency that oversees public transit in the
Chicagoland region of northeastern Illinois. The RTA is a unit of local government of the State of
Illinois created in 1974 by referendum in the six most populous counties of the northeastern
Illinois region: Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry and Will counties. Initially the RTA had an
oversight role over CTA and suburban transit and operated contracts with private commuter
rail and suburban bus systems, but the CTA retained operations of City rail and buses.
However, in 1983, in response to a financial crisis faced by the RTA and its service boards, the
Illinois legislature reorganized the RTA as a planning, funding and oversight entity. The State
also provided significant state financial assistance and mandated a supermajority voting
requirement for the RTA Board for decisions. The reorganization split operating responsibilities
among three service boards, each of which was given an independent board of directors:

 The Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) provides bus and rail service to the City of Chicago
and 35 surrounding suburbs within Cook County.
 The Commuter Rail Division, or Metra, provides rail transit service to the six-county
area, with most transit riders residing in the suburban metropolitan area and
commuting into the City of Chicago.
 The Suburban Bus Division, or Pace, provides bus services to suburban communities
and some limited service within the City of Chicago. It also provides paratransit services
in the region.

In 2008, a series of reforms approved by the Illinois General Assembly gave the RTA new
enhanced authority for strategic planning, performance management and capital
programming. CTA, Metra and Pace budgets and long-term financial plans are supposed to be
consistent with the RTA’s regional transit plan’s goals and objectives. The RTA was supposed to
guide regional transit planning through its strategic plan. But this has not occurred to the
degree envisioned by the legislation.

In 2013 Senate Bill 1594 proposed a merger of the Regional Transportation Authority and the
Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP). The intention was to eliminate duplicative
administrative functions and ensure better coordination of regional transportation planning
and operations. The effort was not successful.

Overall, the RTA has a dual function as both a regional transit organization and a metropolitan
planning organization. As a regional planning organization, it controls the distribution of
funding for its constituent service boards. Research by the Eno Center for Transportation has
concluded that the RTA has little power to enforce planning or funding decisions. Thus, it is not
powerful enough to successfully develop and pursue regional goals.

The RTA Board’s planning, funding and oversight responsibilities include:

 Adopting an annual budget, a two-year financial plan and a five-year capital plan;
 Allocating funds to the three service boards and monitoring their performance;

4
 DRAFT – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION OR PUBLICATION.
EMBARGOED UNTIL 12:00 P.M. ON THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 2024.

 Developing system-wide plans and service standards;

 Coordinating service among rail, bus and paratransit modes of transportation; and
 Ensuring compliance with federal and state regulations.

The service boards manage operations in their respective jurisdictions. The table below shows
the number of Chicago area transit board members per agency and their method of
appointment. There are four boards with a combined total of 47 members appointed by 12
elected officials.

CURRENT CHICAGO AREA REGIONAL TRANSIT GOVERNANCE

Agency Board Size Appointment
RTA 16 5 - Mayor of Chicago
4 - Suburban members of Cook County Board
1 - President of Cook County Board
5 - Chairman of Each Collar County
Chair elected from outside the Board by at least 11 of the 15
appointed members, with at least 2 affirmative votes from Collar
County directors
CTA 7 4 - Mayor of Chicago
3 - Governor of Illinois
Metra 11 6 - County Board Executives
4 - Suburban Members of Cook County Board
1 - Mayor of Chicago
Chair elected by vote of the Board
Pace 13 6 - Suburban Members of Cook County Board
5 - Chair of Each Collar County
1 - Commissioner of the Mayor's Office for People with Disabilities
for the City of Chicago
1- Chair (appointed by majority of Collar County Chairs + suburban
Cook County Board members)

Governance Challenges
Governance of the Chicago metropolitan region transit system has a direct impact on how the
system establishes operational priorities and funding strategies. The Eno Center’s 2014 analysis
of the Chicago region’s transportation system concluded that the fragmented transit
governance structure in the Chicago region was inefficient and that this inefficiency has led to
suboptimal performance outcomes.

The 2023 PART report identifies five challenges currently facing the Chicago region’s transit
system governance. They are summarized below.

5
 DRAFT – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION OR PUBLICATION.
EMBARGOED UNTIL 12:00 P.M. ON THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 2024.

Decision making: While there has been progress over time in fostering regional coordination
among the service boards, efforts have fallen short. Decisions continue to be made and
priorities set in a decentralized way. They lack a coordinated region-wide vision and a plan for
implementation. For example, decisions regarding the long-term policy goal of regional fare
integration are siloed. The goal of a seamless, coordinated regional fare system remains
elusive, even though that is a service that is standard in most other transit systems in the U.S.
and around the world.

Funding allocation: The current statutory required funding allocation for transit operations is
rigid and based on long established, outdated formulas that do not necessarily reflect actual or
emerging needs of customers and the systems or changes in transit usage. The funding
structure incentivizes silos and competition among the service boards.

Service coordination: Each of the three service boards has a very different mission, service
area and constituency. They independently make decisions about how to operate.
Consequently, the boards focus on meeting each system’s goals without considering regional
impacts. There is a decided lack of focus on region-wide coordination of service.

Accountability: It is difficult to ensure accountability to the public because of the complex,

decentralized nature of transit governance, the difference in missions of each transit agency
and the overlapping jurisdictions of the service boards. It is not always clear which agency has
the ability or authority to plan or implement transit investments.

State and Regional Roles: The State of Illinois provides significant funding to the regional
transit boards. The success of mass transit is critical to the entire Illinois economy. The State
owns many of the roads on which buses run and multiple transit rail lines operate alongside
State operated expressways. Yet, the role of the State of Illinois in the Chicago metropolitan
area mass transit planning, operations and funding is very limited. This has inhibited the ability
to coordinate planning, seek more efficient mobility outcomes and consider more effective
resource options and distribution. This is in sharp contrast to other states where the state owns
and operates transit infrastructure. The key reason for this limited approach is the longstanding
Chicago versus downstate political divide in Illinois.

Options for Transit Governance Reform

As noted above, the PART report includes two recommendations for reforming the Regional
Transportation Authority’s governance structure: a centralized regional transit agency and a
regional coordinating agency. Both options would grant significantly greater power and
authority to the oversight agency than the current RTA possesses.

Both approaches would require significant legislative changes to the existing RTA and
Metropolitan Transit Authority Acts. This includes changes to existing funding formulas,
ensuring that the regional entity has adequate authority and resources to effectively implement

6
 DRAFT – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION OR PUBLICATION.
EMBARGOED UNTIL 12:00 P.M. ON THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 2024.

regionally based approaches to transit service delivery, as well as revisions to rules and
procedures for the regional board and either advisory committees or service boards that would
emphasize regional priorities over parochial interests.

The PART report emphasizes that the State of Illinois should base reform of the current
governance system on the following priorities:

 Implement a more centralized, regional approach to coordinating and implementing transit

functions.

 Provide the regional agency with the authority and resources to successfully implement its
responsibilities, including greater review authority over systemwide budgeting.

 Prioritize regional goals and decision making rather than rigid statutory funding formulas.

 Once ongoing baseline operational and capital investment needs have been met, the
regional agency should be allowed greater discretion over how additional funds are
allocated to advance regional goals.

 Provide a greater role for the State of Illinois in regional transit decision making and funding
as in other states.

 Integrate more regional perspectives in the selection of board members.

 Ensure that board members reflect the service area’s population, ridership and funding
sources. Board appointees should have diversity in expertise, geographic representation
and involvement with the transit system.

 Provide opportunities for local input, including ongoing communication with local
governments to ascertain their issues and needs.

 Reform board appointment and voting structures to overcome parochialism and advance
region-wide priorities.

Option 1: Integrated Agency Option

This proposal would create a centralized regional transit agency. The regional entity would
manage all system-wide administrative functions such as human resource management,
selection of executive staff, communications, procurement, pensions and labor negotiations. In
addition, the regional entity would manage several transit functions, including: systemwide fare
policy, funding allocation as well as capital and service planning. The operating units (called
service committees in the chart below) would be responsible for day-to-day operations.

7
 DRAFT – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION OR PUBLICATION.
EMBARGOED UNTIL 12:00 P.M. ON THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 2024.

8
 DRAFT – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION OR PUBLICATION.
EMBARGOED UNTIL 12:00 P.M. ON THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 2024.

The table below summarizes the benefits of an integrated regional transit system as well as
concerns with implementing that approach.

A centralized transit agency could:

 Make possible the effective implementation of regional strategies, goals and priorities by
centralizing decision-making.
 Prevent progress from being delayed or blocked by parochial interests and siloed decision-
making.
 Promote greater regional mobility by coordinating service planning and operating across
the entire transit network in northeastern Illinois rather than having service being
administered by separate entities.
 Reduce duplication of effort or service disconnections by centralizing administration of
service planning and operations.
 Generate long-term cost savings by consolidating procurement and office space and
optimizing service planning and operating.

However, there are several issues that would have to be addressed with a consolidated
governance approach.

 It would take years to merge the existing service boards and create a unified administrative
structure. Effectively consolidating three entities with different cultures, histories,
stakeholders and processes would be challenging.
 The upfront cost of creating an integrated transit governance structure could be significant.
 There would be significant uncertainty about the fiscal and operational impacts of
consolidating the transit system’s outstanding debt, pensions, labor negotiations and other
contracts. These would need to be analyzed to mitigate risk and deal with potential
unintended consequences.
 Successfully addressing issues related to evaluating costs or benefits of consolidation would
require additional analysis and significant stakeholder engagement.

9
 DRAFT – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION OR PUBLICATION.
EMBARGOED UNTIL 12:00 P.M. ON THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 2024.

BENEFITS AND CONCERNS WITH INTEGRATION AGENCY OPTION

Benefits of Option One Concerns with Option One
More effective implementation
Merging existing service boards
of regional strategies, priorities
would take years
and goals
Up-front merger costs could be
Less siloed decision making
significant
Uncertainty about fiscal and
Better regional mobility with operational impacts of merging
system-wide service planning pension systems, labor
and operating agreements and outstanding
debt
Assessing potential costs or
Less duplication or disconnection savings will require further
in service analysis and significant
stakeholder engagement
Long Term Cost Savings
Source: Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning. Plan of Action for Regional Transit p.
108.

Option 2: Empowered Coordinating Agency

A second option would create a regional coordinating agency that would have greater authority
and resources than the current RTA board to develop region-wide policies, allocate funding and
coordinate mobility planning. Specifically, the coordinating agency would be responsible for:

 Fare Policy: Setting fare and transfer policies, choosing payment technologies and
establishing fare revenue distribution policies.

 Financial Stewardship: Overseeing financial functions, setting and evaluating operational

efficiency standards and progress on system-wide goals.

 Regional Service Planning: Coordinating the region’s bus, rail and paratransit service
planning.

 Funding Allocation: Collecting system-generated revenues and state or federal funding

and allocating discretionary funds to meet regional priorities and goals.

The three service governing boards would be maintained, but their responsibilities would
change as certain authority would shift to the coordinating agency, as outlined above. They
would be in charge of day-to-day transit operations, service decisions and local planning efforts.

10
 DRAFT – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION OR PUBLICATION.
EMBARGOED UNTIL 12:00 P.M. ON THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 2024.

The agencies would continue to select their executives; manage human resources; administer
pension, budget and procurement functions; and negotiate collective bargaining agreements.

The next table summarizes the benefits of an integrated regional transit system and concerns
with implementing that approach.

An empowered regional coordinating transit agency approach could:

 Provide substantial accountability and oversight to the service boards.

 Ensure local input and retain institutional knowledge by maintaining the service boards.
 Sustain valuable relationships the service boards currently have with stakeholders and
expertise about planning and operating different forms of transit.
 Ensure that professional assets embedded in the service boards continue to benefit the
region.

11
 DRAFT – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION OR PUBLICATION.
EMBARGOED UNTIL 12:00 P.M. ON THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 2024.

However, the PART reform outlines concerns with the regional coordination approach:

 Needed reforms could face implementation barriers if the regional entity lacks sufficient
authorities and financial, personnel and technological resources. State mandates for
regional transit will fall short if the implementers are not empowered to enact reform.
 Adjustments to voting structures, appointing authorities and clearly defined allocations of
which responsibilities rest with which entity may be necessary.
 Existing contracts may need to be evaluated and revised to meet the new responsibilities of
the coordinated regional transit agency.
 Historic tensions may continue to divide stakeholders and impede progress. Dynamics
between multiple boards may continue to challenge regional decision-making and funding
allocation. Consequently, governance reform must be inclusive of perspectives from a wide
range of stakeholders and efforts should be made to prevent silos on governing boards.

BENEFITS AND CONCERNS WITH EMPOWERED COORDINATED

AGENCY OPTION
Benefits of Option Two Concerns with Option Two
Needed reforms could face
Could provide substantial
implementation barriers if the
accountability and oversight to the
regional entity lacks sufficient
service boards
authorities and resources
Adjustments to voting structures,
Maintaining the service boards would appointing authorities and clearly
ensure local input and maintain defined allocations of which
institutional knowledge responsibilities rest with which entity
may be necessary
Service boards have valuable Existing contracts may need to be
relationships with stakeholders and revised related to new
expertise about planning and
responsibilities for the coordinated
operating different forms of transit
agency

Maintaining their current structure Historic tensions may continue to

may ensure that these professional divide stakeholders and impede
assets continue to benefit the region. progress

Source: Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning. Plan of Action for Regional Transit p.
109.

12
 DRAFT – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION OR PUBLICATION.
EMBARGOED UNTIL 12:00 P.M. ON THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 2024.

Conclusion
Failure to provide financial assistance to sustain Metra, the Chicago Transit Authority and Pace
could lead to deep, irreversible service cuts that would have a major negative impact on the
Chicagoland regional economy, with potentially debilitating effect on historically disinvested
communities for whom public transit is most critical to economic opportunity. However,
providing more funding without significant governance reform would fail to address
longstanding operational and accountability problems that have plagued the transit system
since its inception. Citizens want and deserve guarantees that funding increases for
government programs will lead to better service outcomes. They want assurances that money
is going to be spent efficiently and effectively. In the case of mass transit, this will require
substantial reform of the current siloed governance and decision-making process that
prioritizes the individual priorities of service boards, or transit providers, over regional
priorities.

As the financial cliff faced by Northeastern Illinois’ mass transit agencies grows closer, it is
imperative the General Assembly consider not just funding solutions but also necessary
governance reforms to ensure Illinois’ transit systems operate with optimum service delivery,
efficiency and effective use of taxpayer dollars. The Civic Federation urges the General
Assembly to adopt substantive governance reforms that would consolidate the Regional
Transportation Authority and service boards into a single centralized regional transit agency.
Funding allocations to the service boards meant to alleviate financial shortfalls created by the
forthcoming fiscal cliff should not be provided by the State without a centralized plan for transit
governance. We encourage the state to consider what optimal transit operations might look like
in Northeastern Illinois and make decisions now that will both be financially prudent and bring
improved mass transit service to the region and its residents for generations to come.

13