By Donald P. DeWitte
Published March 9, 2026
After two years of public hearings and multiple reform proposals, Springfield Democrats rammed through a sweeping public transit bill in the early hours of Oct. 31, 2025. The controversial measure to address Chicago’s failing transit system was called at 4 a.m., sparking criticism over both the timing and the substance of the legislation.
John Pletz’s Feb 23, article, “A Historic Chance to Reinvent Transit,” offered a thoughtful and comprehensive perspective on the challenges facing our region’s transit system. I appreciate his analysis and the attention he brought to the complexity of this issue. However, one significant consequence for suburban transit riders was largely overlooked: the unnecessary and consequential change to the voting structure that consolidates power in the hands of partisan Democrats.
When conversations began two years ago about reforming our public transit system, Senate Republicans, in support of our suburban mayors and municipalities, maintained that reforms must include a reorganized governance structure that was fair, equitable, and gave the collar counties an equal voice in transit decisions. We have never wavered on this priority because mayors in DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, and Will counties made clear they did not want to be steamrolled by decisions driven by political leaders from Cook County and the City of Chicago. From the beginning, my concern was that a bailout and eventual takeover by Chicago Democrats and their political allies in Cook County was the ultimate goal. Unfortunately, those concerns have now been realized.
The revised governance structure places control of all future transit decisions in the hands of Chicago, Cook County, and Gov. JB Pritzker’s office. The new Northern Illinois Transit Authority (NITA) board will consist of 20 members: five appointed by Pritzker, five by Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, five by Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle, and one appointment from each of the five collar counties in the transit region.
Most concerning is the change in voting thresholds. Under the new transit law, 15 of the 20 board members can approve any and all actions of the board. That means the governor, the mayor of Chicago, and the Cook County Board president, through their combined appointments, can completely control board decision-making. The five collar county members, representing a suburban population equal to, if not larger than, the City of Chicago, can be overridden on every major issue.
For decades, the Regional Transportation Authority operated under a voting structure that forced collaboration and deliberative debate, and blocked any attempt at a power grab. With those voting guardrails now abandoned, the city of Chicago, Cook County, and the governor will be able to dictate suburban bus and rail service levels, fare structures, and even divert RTA/NITA revenues whenever and wherever they like.
There was no operational crisis or governance breakdown that required eliminating those voting safeguards. The prior system ensured balance and prevented domination by any single political bloc. The only practical effect of changing the voting threshold is to consolidate power and control.
Make no mistake. The new structure effectively stacks the deck politically. When one party holds overwhelming appointment authority, true regional independence and bipartisan collaboration will be far less likely. If collaboration and regional equity were truly the goal, those long-standing voting protections would have remained in place.
The legislature had an opportunity to reform the RTA, along with Metra, Pace, and the Chicago Transit Authority, in a way that provided equity in board membership, fairness in voting, and sustainable funding solutions to address the fiscal cliff while transforming our transit system into a safe, coordinated, world-class network. Instead, control of the new NITA Board was centralized, leaving suburbanites on the outside looking in.
Chicago and Cook County have long struggled with fiscal mismanagement, chronic budget shortfalls, and structural financial challenges. That track record does not inspire confidence, nor has it earned the level of trust that should accompany this degree of concentrated authority. Power without accountability is not reform. It is an unnecessary risk that could lead to devastating results.