News

Last week, following the filing of new mass transit governance reform proposals, SB 2111 / HB 3438, the Chamber sent a letter to legislative leaders who have worked closely on this issue. Provided below is an excerpt of the letter and some of the Chamber concerns with the legislation as currently drafted.

The work that has been undertaken in the Illinois Senate and Illinois House on this topic, led by transit champions including Chairman Villivalam, Leader Delgado, Leader Buckner, and many others, is something to truly be applauded. The Illinois Chamber of Commerce, representing over 3,000 businesses of every size, industry, and corner of the State, has been a collaborative partner at every step of the way. Now, as we get closer to a conclusion on a mass transit omnibus bill, we want to say: this proposal is a step in the right direction, but we urge our legislative leaders to continue pushing for real, lasting reforms

Specifically, we have the following concerns as it relates to the proposal:

• NITA:The new NITA board gives taxpayers, at least on paper, some reason to see the potential for change. It is difficult to see how some of the new powers, Board-eligibility requirements, and other organizational improvements will truly lead to the accountability and results riders deserve. Concerns have been raised concerning the new governance structure and makeup of the new Board.

• Cost Savings and Efficiencies:One of the most meaningful messages we have heard from members and legislative leaders is that reform would lead to looking at cost savings and efficiencies. While we understand many of those duties will be up for a new Board to focus on, what, legislatively, is this proposal looking to guarantee that the new Boards will enact real efficiencies, remove duplicative functions, and embrace a shared sacrifice mentality so that it is not just taxpayers that are on the hook for the new funding needed. Moreover, what funding level will be needed to support the changes under the current proposal? And what are the total cost savings that the new Authority will utilize.

• Public Safety:The proposal does not truly offer a concrete solution on public safety; there are created new Offices, task forces, and even a Transit Ambassador program. However, we fail to see any significant investment being made to immediately address the far reaching concerns related to public safety faced by everyday riders related to real or perceived concerns with criminal activity, homelessness issues, and safety and security. • Oversight: The additional authority granted to the Illinois Auditor General and creation of a Chief Internal Auditor are steps in the right direction; however, it is unclear if the new oversight powers will be able to have the sufficient “teeth” to compel results and take corrective action.

• Accountability:What are the legislative measures and tools available for the new Authority to have true independent oversight both externally and internally? Again, the new proposal, we believe, does not allow for sufficient correction action.

• Technology:Technology is an essential component to making sure that the rider experience is improved; the bill does not legislate any real focus on making the boards embrace technological advancements to help address many of the very issues that are currently found across the systems: public safety, reliability, and accessibility. Adoption of a useful, integrated web-based app is helpful, but it is also something that should have been built and enabled years ago.

• Procurement: The modest changes to simplifying and enhancing procurement policies are a positive step, however, what are we doing to truly streamline, expedite, and improve the procurement process. Moreover, while there is some language that seeks to leverage the private sector, we do not believe innovative tools, such as P3s, to ensure improved service delivery are adequately considered.

• Intergovernmental Coordination and Collaboration: One of the biggest hurdles that our members see in governance is lack of coordination between levels of government. While we see a benefit to taking a collaborative approach to coordination on roadway planning, this approach should be more widely implemented.