community-based, non-corporate, participatory media
A Model for Pittsburgh Transit Resistance?
by Daniil Kharms
Wednesday, Jan. 05, 2005 at 12:13 PM
This is the latest report on how Chicagoans are dealing with transit difficulties.
Midwest Unrest is pleased to declare a partial victory, just one day after our call for a fare strike had begun. The CTA had been threatening the implementation of their "Doomsday" (aka "Gridlock") budget, beginning January 2nd 2005. It would have included a 20% cut to services and the termination of 1250 jobs. After repeated delays, a final decision to pass the budget was to be made at their monthly board meeting on December 16th 2004. Earlier this fall, the CTA passed a proposal to double paratransit fares for the disabled.
The CTA has continually blamed their budget crisis on a lack of funding from the state. Midwest Unrest, among other groups in town, have instead been holding the CTA responsible. The CTA's priorities are those of business and of the Chicago political machine, not of the working class people who ride it every day. It continues to spend millions from its "capital funds" on things like a new office building, and the new "Circle Line". This at the same time that it is proposing massive service cuts and layoffs because of a lack of "operational funds". When the Regional Transportation Authority suggested that he should use capital funds to cover the deficit in the operational budget, CTA President Frank Kruesi replied "You cannot count on transferring capital money to operating accounts when the state is not taking action to assure the capital money will be there". This does not mean that he cannot relocate capital funds to maintain the current level of service; it means that he is making a clear choice to prioritize capital projects over regular, much-needed, service.
After months of organizing with CTA workers and riders all over the Chicagoland area, December 15th kicked off our campaign of organized fare evasion. The idea was to not pay and not collect fares, in order to put economic pressure on the CTA. Thousands of people rode the bus and "L" for free on just the first day, demanding that the CTA scrap all service cuts, job terminations and fare hikes.
Then at Thursday's board meeting, one day after the fare strike began, the CTA delayed the service cuts and job terminations for another 6 months, when they will be reviewed again. This was at the request of state legislators who have suggested that money will now be made available during the spring session. Furthermore, the decision to double paratransit fares in January, which had already been passed and had been part of both the "Gridlock" and "Regional Mobility" budgets, was reversed.
While the battle is not over, we are very encouraged by these decisions. We have won an extra six months of employment, the current transit service and the current paratransit fares. This is also another six months to organize. In this effort we will not forget how the lobbying campaign, backed by the CTA's front group Keep Chicagoland Moving, received no response from state legislators. We will remember that it was only once the many groups and individuals in town who held the CTA responsible, organized together, uniting workers and riders, and committed to hitting the CTA where it hurts, that mayor Daley suddenly struck some sort of deal with legislators in Springfield. Our efforts over the next six months will continue along these lines.
***This is not just an issue for Chicago residents. Public transit is being slashed and restructured in many cities in the US and around the world. The strategies of the transit bureaucrats mirror each other: playing transit riders and workers off against each other, redirecting questions about transit funding away from the transit agencies themselves and onto the state level, diverting the anger against the service cuts and job losses into lobbying and election campaigns. Just as their strategies are replicated in different cities across the globe, we hope that ours can be too. We would like to exchange ideas and experiences with people who have done or are interested in doing similar direct action campaigns around public transit. We also would love to hear from people who live in Chicago and want to get involved.
http://www.midwestunrest.net/farestrike/
urghhh.
by viva anarchista
Thursday, Jan. 06, 2005 at 11:13 AM
midwest unrest.
no offense, but how about you stick to chicago, we're doing just fine here.
the tactics that you imply may be a model are completely inappropriate and counter-productive to the survival of transit in pittsburgh. i'm not familiar with your local situation so i can't say whether your fair strike was what produced the delay in cuts there, but I find it a suspect claim. the fact you did a fair strike does not necessarily mean it was the reason for the delay in cuts. regardless, what exactly is it that you think a fair strike here would accomplish?
maybe you can contrast what's happened in chicago with here.
Pittsburgh
for 3 years local activists have worked under a democratic umbrella group called save our transit, made up of regular bus riders with the support of long-time progressives and anarchists. this group that formulates its strategy is folks who depend on transit to survive, who work at mcdonalds, who are differently abled, who believe in public services, who fight the war, etc, it's a diverse group with no political agenda beyond transit. during that 3 year time they have engaged in a brutally long fight to keep cuts from happening and to once and for all force the state to provide a dedicated and reliable source of funding for public transit. Literally thousands upon thousands of post-cards have been sent, tons of petitions, there have been I'd say at least 20 protests and street threatre esq actions, as well as maybe 5 lobbying trips. Members have disrupted board meetings, marched in the streets, developed relationships with the bus drivers and union. Last year pittsburgh faced the complete elimination of all night bus service after 9pm as well as the elimination of weekend bus service. Activists efforts suceeded in stoping those cuts for a year by getting 10million flexed from highway funds. For years transit has been underfunded here, we have no sufficent funding source and our city is currently being run by an oversight board appointed by the state. No federal dollars go towards operating expenses, and NONE of the money that port-authority uses for capital projects (light rail building projects, etc) can legally be used for operating expenses, because they have seperate funding sources. The port-authority board illegally operated at deficiet this year to forestall cuts, there have been state audits of the port-authority that show it is not mismanaged, and they have consistently stood up when the wages of the bus drivers were under attack.
In short, the local port-authority has literally no options to avoid cuts if the state doesn't increase funding, if you think otherwise I'd love to hear what you're ideas are. To do anything like a "fair strike" here would be political and economic suicide that would hasten the demise and privitization of service.
pitt neighbor
by daniil
Thursday, Jan. 06, 2005 at 9:40 PM
I am not , by the way, involved with midwest unrest. I am a midwest native who moved near to Pittsburgh a couple of years ago. I have been following the pitt transit suff via your indymedia for a while now, (as well as the chicago situation,) and believe that there are many similarities in the two cities' situations. I believe that really the main difference is in the way that you describe the transit folks in pitt, (as having made every possible concession for their riders and workers,) and the way that midwest unrest describes the CTA officials, (as having spent irresponsibly.)
Bottom line, for both cities it ultimately comes down to the state legislature to save their transit. The difference is, the day after a coalition of Chicago transit riders and Chicago transit workers cooperated in a fare strike, the state found the money to at least temporarily withold the more than 1200 layoffs, service cuts, and fare hikes. Despite the impressive gains made by grassroots organizers in Pittsburgh, this hasn't happened here.
I haven't been in Pittsburgh attending meetings about how to resolve transit for years, but I don't think that that means this article I posted is an invalid idea. I don't have the connection to Pittsburgh to be closely involved in something like this, but I think that the fact that it MAY HAVE WORKED for Chicago is enough to consider looking into it further. Don't just reject it because you don't understand how it could help, try to figure out if it could or not, contact midwestunrest if you have questions. COMMUNICATION IS CRITICAL. I understand that this may not be the answer. But at this point it doesn't seem like Pittsburghers have a whole lot of options, and eliminating this as a possibility without trying to find out more can only continue to limit yuor options.
different tactics
by stephen donahue
Friday, Jan. 07, 2005 at 5:14 AM
The tactics employed in each situation need to be carefully considered. If some of us had not been raising hell for the past three years with the PA General Assembly there would have been massive public transit cuts in place already. In 2003 the state (PA) suddenly came up with $10 million for public transit after rallies, marches and trips to bother the idiots in Harrisburg. This year the Gov. just dropped some crumbs.
You must look at who the players are. You must taylor tactics to the local situation. Daniil, do you know who the enemies to public transit in this region are? The Allegheny Institute and other free market driven neo-liberal fuck wads are the ones out to destroy "PUBLIC" transit here. Go to their latest policy paper and read for yourself their recommendation that the Port Authority be forced to contract out certain routes.
Given the relentless drive in Pennsylvania to destroy every public entity, bust every union (see US Air, City of PGH...)
we have kept our eyes focused on the enemy of public transit -- the policy makers.
Now that is not to say that Port Authority bosses don't give the enemy plenty of ammo. I have always held that on the day, if it ever comes, that real live dedicated funding comes to the Port Authority then we start focusing tactics on them -- the bosses that is.
It has seemed to us that tactics like a boycott of the Port Authority or a fare strike would only give the Allegheny Institute and the other neo-liberals more ammo as well to push for privatization.
I am glad that the Chicago tactics worked there. (I would bet that they worked when used in conjunction with other tactics as well.) But they might not have the same results here. Maybe there are not forces lined up in Chicago fighting like hell to privatize the system. Maybe RTA big shots are themselves flirting with the privatizers. I don't know.
If the Port Authority big shots ever hint that they are willing to look at contracting out routes, busting the union...(and they will) then I would be more than ready to change tactics but until then we have focused at Save Our Transit on state policy makers.
We have also worked like hell to get people to use public transit not boycott it. Let's be real, the private automobile is the greatest enemy. I hate cars.
sorry for the long post.
Thanks for the civil discussion
by daniil
Friday, Jan. 07, 2005 at 8:25 AM
I believe that you're right about the bosses at CTA being maybe more corrupt than those in Pittsburgh. However, I would like to emphasize again that in both situations it is ultimately the state government who is needed to give the funding. In Chicago, the fare strike was a part of what eventually put enough pressure on the state to do this. I agree also on the importance of a diversity of tactics. Chicago has several groups who have been dedicated to giving the people a voice in the transit system, midwest unrest is among the more radical of these. Maybe even if Save Our Transit decided that a fare strike was an effective tactic it could still be better for another group to organize something like this in order to preserve Save Our Transit's image, or maybe it would only augment their seriousness.
I wasn't trying to imply that this was the answer, but that it had probably been a part of the reason Chicagoans won some concessions and for that reason was worth studying. Chicago has a long history of activism in the transit system, and while I agree that their approaches are not necessarily applicable everywhere, they are worthy of consideration. I cannot pretend to know enough about all of the situations in either city, but was hoping that by posting this article it would open up the possibility of communication for Pittsburghers who want to save their transit with those in other cities who are doing the same thing, as this isn't a problem isolated to Pittsburgh or Chicago, it's happening all over the country. (Maybe this communication is already an integral part of Pittsburghers efforts to save their transit, if so, I'm sorry for wasting their time, and I wish you luck.) If this is not the case, I urge you to do so, as there is strength in numbers. The fact that this is a nation wide problem calls for a broader organized resistance.
I would like to clarify, (although it may not be necessary,) a fare strike does not involve people stopping using buses, it involves them stopping paying for the use. The drivers do not enforce payment of fares and the riders do not pay. I think that one of the reasons that it worked in Chicago was that it included everyone involved in the transit system BUT the bosses, the legislature had to stop it from continuing and gaining more strength because it was rooted in an honest inclusive peoples movement that removes the power of the rulers and corporations.
also
by daniil
Friday, Jan. 07, 2005 at 8:34 AM
I think that it is important to realize that there were individuals and groups involved in protecting Chicago's transit who were opposed to the idea of a fare strike. There was at least a decent amount of debate about the effectiveness of the idea, and midwest unrest was the only group who publicly advocated the strike. The union publicly advised all of their workers to follow standard procedures, (though from some of the posts I can assure you this was not the case.) The fact that midwest unrest decided to go ahead with organizing the strike and the fact that the very next day the CTA announced the delay of the restructuring is why I see hope in their story.
from chicago
by midwest unrester
Monday, Jan. 10, 2005 at 7:02 AM
midwest_unrest@riseup.net 773-250-7060
Hey, just came across these posts while doing some research. As a member of Midwest Unrest I’d like to clarify a few things. There are some really creepy similarities between the situations in Illinois and Pennsylvania. The doomsday budgets (including elimination of complete routes, night and weekend service, over a thousand layoffs, doubling of paratransit fares), the front groups set up by transit agencies, the hearings throughout the month of October, the bus trip to the capitals in November and the delays of any final decisions till December are all parallel. There has clearly been coordination on some level between transit agencies in the two states.
The reason most groups in Chicago (yes, far more than just Midwest Unrest) have been skeptical of the CTA’s cry of unfair funding formula is that we went through the same situation in 1997. Back then service was cut by 10% and when more than enough to restore it was donated by the state, the money disappeared before that could happen. Seven years of protests at the CTA, city hall and the CTA president’s house were basically ignored. So it’s strange to suddenly have the CTA trying to rally us all together to fight for more funding. This has led people to look at where money is being spent. And what do you know, plans exist to build a $2 billion “Circle Line”, and to run express trains to the airport. Already the Circle Line plans have been criticized for their role in gentrifying latino neighborhoods. While it would definitely make some riders’ commutes shorter, both plans are clearly about making the transit system cater to businessmen and tourists—at the expense of the everyday riders who depend on public transit.
The argument “viva anarchista” brought up that there is a difference between capital and operating budgets has been brought up many times here too around these issues. It is often argued that it would be illegal to transfer capital funds to operating expenses. We find this a convenient excuse which does even seem to be true. The transfer of these funds was in fact the RTA’s (the body funding the 3 transit agencies in the area) suggestion to the CTA. The CTA’s only response was that they didn’t want to do so without a guarantee that money would be donated to replace the capital funds. This is a clear choice on behalf of the CTA to prioritize capital spending projects. Another argument against transferring the funds is that it would be “illogical” to waste money on operating expenses at the loss of opportunities for new infrastructure. The logic of spending $2 billion to build a line if there is no operating budget to run trains on it once it is built is beyond us. Knowing the corruption here though, it seems likely that once current routes are eliminated and new lines are built, money will suddenly appear again for the operating budget.
I bring this up not because I know of any such projects in Pittsburgh but because I am really curious as to whether or not anyone there does. Almost parallel situations happened in both Atlanta and Indianapolis in April 2004. Both cities lost huge chunks of their transit. In Atlanta the cuts happened mostly in poor neighborhoods, at the same time as fancy train stations were built in the richer suburbs, I believe connected to shopping malls, complete with art sculptures and classical music being piped in. We are disturbed by this trend throughout the country, of not just slashing public transit but restructuring it to cater to business interests. Our campaign held the CTA responsible because whether or not they had enough money, they were making clear, destructive choices in how they spent it and what they cut. I have heard similar criticisms of SEPTA in philly. Again though, it is hard to do a lot of research from a distance. We therefore would like to be in touch with transit groups in other cities and not just “stick to Chicago”. The more we share our situations and experiences together, and support each other, the better chance we have of fighting for public transit for all.
Nice job crashing the state legislator party and good luck resisting the service cuts in your town.
www.midwestunrest.net/farestrike
apology
by viva anarchista
Monday, Jan. 10, 2005 at 10:10 AM
sorry my i made my original criticism in a poor way.
its just tough to watch whats been happening for the last couple years with the lack of activist support and then have people who dont seem like they've been involved locally post things so seemingly inappropriate to the situation. i agree that groups need to link up and share info on the struggle. my reactionaryism was solely a result of feeling this was yet another incident, of which i've seen many, where more radical than thou folks who don't know what the situation is will go fuck man if you just did this easy solution that said fuck the man it would all be fixed.
solidarity to you all.
privatize public transit
by stephen donahue
Tuesday, Jan. 11, 2005 at 8:36 AM
Good to hear from Chicago.
es we have been told for years that there is something like a force field between capitol money and operating money. Yes, the Port Authority has been moving ahead with capitol projects even as opereating funds were not forthcoming.
We asked, why is it that the feds and the state give so much for capitol projects but get stingy when it comes to operatiing money? (Feds don't even give anyhting anymore for operations) Of course we know that lots of big fat cats make billions off of capitol projects but nobody gets rish driving a bus.
The issue fo capitol v operations is about to resolve itself anyhow as the feds are withdrawing capitol grants when it begins to seem as if a given transit entity won't have the money to operate new capitol additions. Also many capitol projects here were begun 10 or more years ago. One however, a plan to send light rail under the Allegheny River will be resisted until the present operating funding crisis is resolved -- if it ever is.
The thing i would like to know from Chicago folks is just how strong is the pressure to privatize the CTA? We have not attacked the Port Authority mostly because the neo-liberals have been doing that for years. We don't want to give them any comfort. Check out the position papers for the Allegheny Institute -- a right wing think tank -- for an example.
Right now the wages earned by bus drivers & mechanics are actually being defended by Port Authority white shirts. (That won't last as 2005 is contract time)
The City of Pittsburgh is presently being run by a state appointed oversight board. This year they have privatized the city mechanics, EMS and have begun the process of privatizing our city refuse workers. More structual adjustments and "efficiencies" are in the works for us.
Now state lawmakers are saying that the [structural] "adjustments" put on our city offer a good example of how to deal with public transit. This is no surprise. Here in PA our #1 enemy resides unbder the capitol dome in Harrisburg. They hate all things urban, including our public transit which they resent paying taxes to help support.
Given all this we have gone after the state policy makers rather than Port Authority white shirts. We have thought about actions such a a fare strike and sit in at Port Authority offices but have always put them off as we think that given the situation here they would add fire to the right wing campaign to destroy public trasnit once and for all.
Save Our Transit has never considered its "position" in the community or what people think about us when making these decisions. Our tactics are based only on an analysis of the situation here in PA and whether or not any given tactic will do what we want it to do -- "increase state funding for public transit operations." We have kept our mission limited to the quote above so as to avoid too much in-fighting amoungst ourselves. You know what a hard headed we lot bus riders are. We have been successful in keeping the wolves from devouring us though they are always at the door.
Save Our Transit is made up entirely of bus/trolley riders. Most of us have no cars. It is very hard to see this demise of what we need to get by. It makes us cry. WE also organized as an ad hoc group. Oh yea, it might seem funny but we also started meeting because we thought that the official rider's group -Allegheny Co. Transit Council --was a dupe of Port Authority management. A charge that some would make agaisnt us i guess, but we ain't we just want to go after the king pins fucking us over.
The state is about to do another audit of the Port Authority and SEPTA (Southeast PA Transit Authority). I expect that they will go after management big time and they will also go after the union's health care, demand wage concessions and lay offs. (This year is contract time for the Local.) I would not be surprised to see the state mandate the letting out of certain bus routes to private concerns.
I got a bushel of tomatoes for any privatized bus. I will walk everywhere before i ride on a privatized system. I can hardly stand Greyhound.
Let me finish by quoting from our local corporate rag the Post-Gazette. This is from an editorial they wrote just last week about public transit. "part of the reason for the operating deficits is overly generous wages and benefits..." "There is public frustration with the cost of government -- an environment where unions seek more and managers not as zealous about cost cuttingas in the private sector are too compliant."
thanks
sd
![[masthead]](/images/masthead_140.png)