33 Comments - Challengerrt - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 12:29 pm: I’m sorry but as far as I am concerned, they should all use Amtrak or State Cars just like every other state employee that travels, it doesn’t matter to me that they have been elected they are still “supposed” to be working for the citizens of the State of Illinois. The State of Illinois should not use planes unless in case of an emergency! - Precinct Captain - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 12:34 pm: Cut ‘em for legislators but not for agency heads? - SICK OF IT - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 12:34 pm: Agree with Challengerrt…….the cost of airplane fuel is an expense we can do without in the state of Illinois. When I visit Chicago I use Amtrak or fly….so can they…. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 12:41 pm: the entitled class. Make them pay the difference between car mileage $ and cost of flight. Then see how many are in such a rush (to do nothing) - chi - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 12:47 pm: Budget is fixed! Gov Bruce is starting a carpool group leaving from Winnetka and all of our shutdown worries are assuaged. Thank you Gov Bruce. - Arguenda - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 12:52 pm: Or… Move the government back to Springfield, which ain’t as sexy but sure would save travel costs and price per square office foot…. - Stones - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 12:55 pm: Not surprising in light of yesterday’s news regarding the Governors aides being banned from the floor. When do these silly games end? - Qui Tam - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:00 pm: “they should all use Amtrak or State Cars just like every other state employee that travels,” When I worked for the state, it was cost justifiable for employees to use the state plane (or commercial) for a morning hearing or meeting if it saved the cost of a hotel night. Does the state get Chicago hotels that cheap now? - Team Sleep - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:00 pm: One of the things mentioned during the 10th Street Corridor and high-speed rail project discussions was that it would allow state and federal officials to travel from Chicago to Springfield without needing to use a state plane or chartered flight. Why fly and pay the steeper costs when you can get to Springfield cheaply via train in less than two hours while also getting work done? Uber and Lyft drivers could take the officials from the Corridor to their hotels and it would all be seamless. As long as state plans are up and running, though, people will abuse them. - Liberty - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:03 pm: More campaign rhetoric that doesn’t translate into reality. People seem to think Rauner was going to bring some type of penny pinching hyper management to clean up the waste. - Norseman - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:05 pm: Given that the shuttle runs from Chicago to Springfield, it would take GOP members a lot of time to drive in or train in to catch it. Thus it makes more sense for them to drive. - He Makes Ryan Look Like a Saint - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:16 pm: Let them drive and stay in the same fleabag hotels they make other employees stay in. They have not raised the hotel allowance downstate for years. You should see some of the places we have to stay in. - Arthur Andersen - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:17 pm: The list of times “an agency head needs emergency access to one of the State’s far-flung facilities” would be an interesting read. Qui Tam, there are a bunch of State workers and retirees on here. I don’t recall that particular rule. Did you work in an agency not covered by the Gov’s Travel Control Board? - Out Here In The Middle - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:21 pm: Sell the planes. If anyone wants to fly to Chicago they can call United. The additional traffic might even encourage someone to offer a flight to MDW. - Ahoy! - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:29 pm: The State should look to cost cutting measures that utilize commercial or charter aircraft to reduce these costs. It wouldn’t be that hard since I’m going to go on a limb and guess that the vast majority of these flights are Springfield to Chicago and vise-versa. - Anyone Remember - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:30 pm: “House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, who had taken the plan nine times … .” Taken the ‘plan’ … Freudian slip? - Southwest - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:33 pm: Why no layoffs? - Team Sleep - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:45 pm: AA - maybe if there’s a prison riot?! Other than that and (obviously) a natural disaster that IEMA needs to address, what else? Your point got my noodle going, and I can’t really think of anything else. - Arthur Andersen - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:00 pm: TS-I think we have a couple helicopters for that iirc. I’ve lost track, but does the ISP still have its own air fleet? - sideline watcher - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:04 pm: This is stupid. It’s a shuttle. And mileage reimbursement for people who live 3 or more hours away is way more expensive than a seat on a shuttle. It’s way more economical to operate our own shuttle than it is to go private. It’s red meat. Nothing more. - Anon221 - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:12 pm: Rauner, ” Let ‘em ride Harleys.” http://gatewayharley.blog.com/motorcycle-fuel-economy/ - facts are stubborn things - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:12 pm: once you decide to have a flight department, most of your costs are fixed other then for fuel and maintenance does go up a bit but not that much. If you have planes just for emergencies then you might as well use them to drive down the cost per hour. Now, one can certainly argue about whether the state should have a flight department and how large etc. but to ground them does not save that much money….you still have the cost of the personal, buildings etc. You also still need to keep flight crews current and perform certain maintenance that is calendar driven. The state had a flight department well before shuttles were put into use. The shuttles started in the early 80’s to create efficiency because there were so many special flights being made and of course travel costs don’t go away just because you stop flying. Not arguing for a flight department or not, but important to realize that if you have one, then shuttles can be an efficient use of the equipment…once and if you have it. - facts are stubborn things - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:15 pm: I think there are no layoffs because if you are ending the shuttles but still wanting the flight department to be ready for other flights you need pilots and mechanics. Not saying what is right, but just pointing out you nee them ready if you plan on the need to possible use them. - facts are stubborn things - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:18 pm: Rauner says he wants to run state government like a business. Well many companies have a flight department because it is very efficient for the executives…time is money etc. ADM, State Farm Country Financial, Caterpillars, John Deer just to name a few all have flight departments. - facts are stubborn things - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:22 pm: Sorry for the multiple posts, but also wanted to point out that the flight department is much smaller then it use to be years ago. The state use to run 4 helicopters around the state for EMS services using 12 pilots. Also, the flight department that now operates the remaining 3 king airs (one was cut) use to have 18 pilots and is now down to 5. Perhaps it should go to zero pilots and zero planes but it has shrunk mightily over the years. The hours of use are down substantially from years past as well. This has served to greatly drive up the per hour cost of the airplanes…again most of the costs are fixed so if you are going to have them you might as well use them. - Demoralized - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:27 pm: Oh for pete’s sake. Some of you need to stop whining about people using the state plane. I would rather people get where they need to go quickly as opposed to spending hours in the car. - Chicago Cynic - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 4:24 pm: So let’s make sure I understand this. The fleet is grounded but we’re still paying all salaries associated with the fleet, plus all regular maintenance costs, etc. So the pilots are essentially getting unlimited paid vacation and the only ACTUAL savings from this gimmick is no fuel or other operating costs for the planes? BRILLIANT! - Cassandra - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 4:46 pm: I’d rather they didn’t go at all. Have they heard of Skype? Videoconferencing? How much of this travel is really necessary, anyway. But-if you are going to have a “flight department” you need a basic number of staff for coverage, including pilots, and 5 pilots doesn’t seem unreasonable, when you have to cover days off, sick leave, holidays, vacation and so on. I think people are always surprised at how much services like this cost, even when well run. - MyTwoCents - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 4:57 pm: Has there ever been a report that analyzed Illinois’ use of aviation (IDOT & ISP) versus other comparable states? It seems like instead of just having decisions based on ideology there should be a thorough analysis of what works and what doesn’t work to guide what happens with the planes. - Merit Comp No More - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 7:53 pm: The Auditor General did an interesting management audit of the IDOT aeronautics operation in 2007. At the time, I remember comparing the actual costs of operating the fleet (it was larger then) with the Amtrak subsidy and thinking the money spent could have funded another daily train to Springfield from Chicago. Dibs on the naming rights for that train! http://www.auditor.illinois.gov/audit-reports/performance-special-multi/performance-audits/fy06-idot-aero-mgmt-full.pdf - Demoralized - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 8:16 pm: Cassandra: Contrary to your technology centered world where technology is the answer to everything, there is work that needs to be done in multiple places, including face to face meetings. I doubt you’ll be happy until robots are running the world the way you talk all the time. Give it a rest already. - Spectre - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 10:38 pm: To “Chicago cynic”, I don’t know what you do for a living, but how would you like it if I were calling for you to be laid off for reasons beyond your control? A relative of mine is one of the five pilots that you want to see lose their jobs. I have met every one of them and they are all very highly qualified professional pilots who have all “paid their dues” to get where they are today. And, as a matter of fact, every one of those pilots are military veterans along with most of the maintenance staff. Everybody is always talking about jobs for veterans, so let’s not be so quick to railroad these guys out of jobs for political reasons. There is another side to the story, the positive aspects of having a flight department (that has been around for decades by the way) that reporters are too lazy to tell. They’re too interested in going for the low hanging fruit, the sensational story about how the state’s “elite” are wasting tax payer’s money flying around the state and getting the general public all wrapped around the axle with half-truths and misinformation about the flight department. My cousin is not having an “unlimited paid vacation” as you say. He and all of his fellow co-workers are worried about losing the jobs they worked hard for, and so would you if you were in their shoes. You should have your facts straight before you open your mouth. I was pleasantly surprised by the postitive comments on here. Obviously from some level headed people who realize the importance of a flight department in a state the size of Illinois. - Forgottonia Republic - Thursday, Jul 2, 15 @ 9:28 am: As a citizen and taxpayer, I want my governor — and to some extent, other top leaders — to spend their time working at full efficiency, not sitting in a car. Compared to how much I have at stake based on the governor’s efforts, my share of the cost of the plane is very cheap. (And I’m saying this as someone who voted against the current governor.) Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.