On October 15, 2025, the Illinois House Executive Committee held a hearing focused on public transit funding and governance reform. The discussion drew speakers from across the state and underscored the urgency of finding a sustainable path forward—especially as transit systems face looming fiscal stress. Participants included the RTA, CMAP, ATU Local 241, Environmental Law and Policy Center, and transit agency representatives.
Fiscal Pressures on Transit
Several key themes emerged throughout the hearing relevant to county officials:
The Chicago-area transit agencies (CTA, Metra, Pace, and the RTA) are confronting a “fiscal cliff” starting in 2026, when federal COVID relief funds and other temporary support mechanisms will vanish.
New revenue estimates from the RTA place the 2026 shortfall at about $200 million, significantly lower than earlier projections of $771 million. To address the gap, the transit agencies have proposed fare increases (e.g. a $0.25 increase to base fares) as part of their 2026 operating budgets. However, many witnesses cautioned that fare hikes alone will not be sufficient to preserve service levels or meet capital, operating, and modernization needs.
Governance Reform: Consolidation and Accountability
A major area of focus at the hearing was how to reshape governance structures so transit agencies can better align with regional priorities.
One leading proposal would merge existing agencies under a newly named body, the Northern Illinois Transit Authority (NITA), to assume control of fare-setting, service coordination, and oversight functions. Under that model, board seats would be allocated among the governor, the City of Chicago, Cook County, and each of the collar counties (DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, and Will). Suburban and regional stakeholders expressed strong concern over representation and decision-making authority—arguing that governance changes must protect against Chicago-dominated control of new revenue streams.
Some speakers urged consideration of more modest reforms rather than wholesale consolidation, such as strengthening the RTA’s coordinating role while preserving local governance structures.
Legacy financial obligations—such as pension liabilities for CTA—were also a major point of contention. Several witnesses said these costs should not be shifted indiscriminately to other systems or governments.
Downstate Transit and Broader Equity Concerns
While much of the attention centered on the Chicago region, testimony at the hearing emphasized that transit challenges are statewide. Downstate transit systems face their own funding squeezes: their reliance on shrinking sales tax bases and rising service costs make them vulnerable if state support is reduced. Witnesses stressed that any new revenue or governance scheme should ensure that downstate operators are not left with limited resources or inferior service. Community groups and labor coalitions have called on the General Assembly to include rural and small-urban transit in any reform package and guard against widening service disparities.
Choices Before the General Assembly
The hearing illuminated the difficult trade-offs awaiting lawmakers. Some of the key issues they must resolve include:
Revenue Sources
Multiple suggestions were floated, including a package of fees or taxes (e.g. delivery surcharge, rideshare fee, real estate transfer tax) that could collectively generate the $1.5 billion annually often cited in reform proposals. Yet concerns remain about the political acceptability of new statewide levies and their economic impacts, especially in less affluent counties.
Representation and Control
How board seats are allocated and the balance between urban, suburban, and rural interests will be critical to ensuring fair influence over decisions, including how new revenue is spent.
Phasing and Transition
Reform advocates have highlighted that a multi-year rollout is necessary: stabilizing current operations, piloting integrated fare and service programs, then scaling more systemic changes.
Safeguards for Smaller Systems
It will be important to build into any legislation protections—such as minimum funding guarantees or proportional allocations—so that smaller transit systems do not suffer under a new statewide or regional governance regime.
What County Officials Should Watch
For ISACo’s members—county executives, board members, and transit partners—several takeaways from the hearing are worth noting:
Counties that lie within the Chicago region or its collar counties will have direct interests in how governance reform is structured, especially around board representation.
Counties outside the metropolitan area should be proactive in ensuring rural or downstate transit systems are included in reforms and not overshadowed by large-system priorities.
Any new revenue model should be evaluated for local economic impacts, fairness, and long-term sustainability.
As legislation moves forward, counties will want to monitor transition plans, implementation timelines, and how resource allocations are phased in.
It is critical to engage with legislators now, to shape reforms in ways that respect local accountability and service needs.
The October 15 hearing made clear that the status quo is unsustainable, and that structural and funding transformations are on the horizon. For counties statewide, these decisions present both risks and opportunities—how the General Assembly crafts policy will matter deeply to local mobility, economic development, and quality of life.