CTA President Forrest Claypool is trying a different strategy than his immediate predecessor in announcing his proposed operating budget for 2012.
Former President Richard Rodriguez faced very similar circumstance two years ago as he prepared his 2010 budget - crappy economy, sagging tax revenues, a state legislature loathe to lend any more help, and all signs pointing to either fare hikes, service cuts or both.
The key difference in strategies? In 2009 Rodriguez announced fare hikes and service cuts - plus union layoffs - and then pressured the unions for givebacks to avoid all three.
Whereas, Claypool has submitted a budget that includes no fare increases or services, but assumes the union will bend on "antiquated" work rules and wage increases. Of course, Claypool also has the benefit being able to negotiate labor contracts that are expiring this year. Rodriguez could only rely on the union "doing the right thing" for riders and its members.
In the end, I'm dubious Claypool will be able to get all $160 million he says he needs from the union to balance the budget. But, hey, have at it Forrest. I'd like you to prove me wrong.
Filed under: 2012 budget, CTA budget news, CTA in the news
Tags: budget, Chicago Transit Authority, CTA
Claypool "assumes" is the only difference. There is still the threat of fare increases and service cuts if he doesn't get the concessions. Yesterday's discussion highlighted the difficulty in getting them, and I noted a while back the 2006 situation when the arbitrator rejected most of CTA's positions.
However, the budget does partially deal with one difference: the Quinn shell game of the RTA borrowing to freeze CTA and paratransit fares. The CTA budget said that it got that money in 2010 and 2011, but won't forward, cutting out about $83 million a year.
Of course, if one wants to talk ostrich games, that leaves out that the RTA had to borrow that money (apparently the $166 million went entirely to CTA), and it has never been disclosed that the state paid it back, and undoubtedly it hasn't. Thus, RTA won't have as much money to distribute to the service boards, since it will have to pay that back first.