innsertnamehere
Superstar
they implemented the $15 billion plan instead..
|
|
|
2014 Municipal Election: Toronto Transit Plans
- Thread starter denfromoakvillemilton
- Start date
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2008
- Messages
- 7,410
- Reaction score
- 1,438
- Location
- Downtown Toronto, Ontario
We are going to have to wait on that. And frankly 15 billion is not enough, which is why we need the revenue tools.
ssiguy2
Senior Member
The municipal leaders are gutless wonders and don't want to introduce revenue tools but would rather Queen's Park do it so they can take the political heat.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Like when Queens Park downloaded to the municipalities so that the province's books would look better?
rbt
Senior Member
Nobody promised to implement revenue tools as part of their election campaign. Quite the opposite in fact.
I can honestly see municipalities start to implement revenue tools when they see that the $15 billion for the GTHA from the Province won't be enough. About half of that is going to GO, which means that most municipalities are going to get one project from this round of funding, at best. If Mississauga wants the Dundas BRT, if Toronto wants the East Bayfront LRT, if York Region wants the Yonge extension, etc, they'll have to come primarily from municipal funding sources.
Personally, I think the Province should adopt a funding model for local rapid transit projects: Figure out funding percentages half based on share of the total population and half based on total share of the transit ridership. You then end up with a pie chart, and then you can attach whatever dollar figure you want as the total dollar amount to be doled out based on those percentages. If the project you want fits within your percentage, great. If it doesn't, the municipality needs to cover the difference.
If you're satisfied with the transit improvements you're getting on the Province's dime, then stick with what you're getting. If you want more though, it should come out of your own pocket.
PS: Obviously this whole setup excludes GO improvements, since that's at a regional level, and funded directly by Metrolinx.
Personally, I think the Province should adopt a funding model for local rapid transit projects: Figure out funding percentages half based on share of the total population and half based on total share of the transit ridership. You then end up with a pie chart, and then you can attach whatever dollar figure you want as the total dollar amount to be doled out based on those percentages. If the project you want fits within your percentage, great. If it doesn't, the municipality needs to cover the difference.
If you're satisfied with the transit improvements you're getting on the Province's dime, then stick with what you're getting. If you want more though, it should come out of your own pocket.
PS: Obviously this whole setup excludes GO improvements, since that's at a regional level, and funded directly by Metrolinx.
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2008
- Messages
- 7,410
- Reaction score
- 1,438
- Location
- Downtown Toronto, Ontario
W. K. Lis
Superstar
The province should base its operation subsidy on the municipality with the best fare box recovery ratio, and help all the municipalities using that rate. The best municipality would be, surprise, Toronto.
If the province used the municipality with the worst ratio, then the TTC's fares would be free. Not going to happen in that scenario.
If the province used the municipality with the worst ratio, then the TTC's fares would be free. Not going to happen in that scenario.
Last edited:
More subways can be funded with municipal money, be careful.
If the municipality finds a way to pay for them, then that's up to them. If the subway isn't justified by the projected ridership, then at least it's only municipal taxpayers getting screwed, not everyone across the Province. If the Provincial funding formula dictates that that municipality gets $1 billion over the next 10 years, which would be enough to build 1 LRT, and the municipality decides they want to build a subway along that same corridor instead, and they find a way to cover the difference, then that's their choice.
aquateam
Active Member
Or, instead of saying we'll match X% whatever operating subsidy you give, they could give a subsidy based on ridership, say $0.20/ride. To prevent municipalities from inflating their figures (the TTC, for instance, has only the roughest estimate of how many riders it carries) and to push Presto, they could make it $0.20/ride recorded by Presto in the previous year.
That way it would be the same across municipalities, so you can't claim favouritism for Toronto (although they would receive the bulk of the subsidies, having much greater ridership.
Although because the subsidy would be per ride, not per distance, it would favour short trips over long trips, which is the reverse of the kind of subsidy that the TTC gives with its flat fare structure.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Shows that Toronto and the TTC is already efficient. There are those who complaint that the TTC fares are high compared with other jurisdictions, but fail to look at how low the TTC is subsidized in comparison.
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2008
- Messages
- 7,410
- Reaction score
- 1,438
- Location
- Downtown Toronto, Ontario
I could not agree more. I would be all for subways if Toronto would pay for them.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
What about the riders who live outside of Toronto and use the TTC? The taxpayers who live in Toronto end up subsidizing their rides. If the province subsidizes then everyone shares, which includes the taxpayers in Toronto.
If it extends beyond municipal borders that's one thing, but remember, there was going to be a transit solution on that corridor anyway. The City just chose to Cadillac it, and they picked up the difference in cost. The Cadillacing was a TO Council decision, so the 905er using it had no input into that decision in the first place. The selection of that corridor as needing a transit solution was probably done by Metrolinx, which they would have been covered under.
Here's an example: If Metrolinx was prepared to build a BRT along Ellesmere in Toronto connecting to the Durham Highway 2 BRT, and TO Council decided to make that a subway to UTSC instead, is that the fault of the Durham rider? Why should they have to pay more because TO Council (which they have no impact on) decide to upscale something that didn't need to be upscaled? The solution went beyond what Metrolinx said was required and was willing to pay for using Provincial dollars. The funding delta then falls on the City and ITS taxpayers, not the taxpayers of surrounding municipalities.
canarob
Senior Member
Markham politicians have been promoting something similar to Smart Track far before Tory. The eastern section is pretty much Jim Jones' terribly named"I-METRO-E" from 2012: http://www2.markham.ca/markham/ccbs...t Services/pl120501/I-METRO April 12,2012.pdf and http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ady-exists-markham-councillor/article4108236/
Anyhow, my point is just that elected politicians in Markham have been pushing for something like this, which really isn't that much different than what Tory has done beyond the obvious difference in size and transit ridership between the two municipalities.