GTHA Regional Transit Amalgamation Discussion: Superlinx/Subway Upload

[nfitz]

Here's a preview: It means taking political control of the subways, while still saddling Torontonians with the operational costs.

But it also takes Toronto off the hook for capital costs.of expansion. Which is part of the reason the Liberals proposed uploading the subway in the first place.

 

[asher__jo]

But it also takes Toronto off the hook for capital costs.of expansion. Which is part of the reason the Liberals proposed uploading the subway in the first place.

...capital costs are large, but operational costs can be nearly as large. I'm very nervous about the upload, the MTA being good example of being screwed when NY state took ownership of the system.

 

[11th]

...capital costs are large, but operational costs can be nearly as large. I'm very nervous about the upload, the MTA being good example of being screwed when NY state took ownership of the system.

Projects take years and decade to complete. Operational budget can be dealt with in a stroke of a pen.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

...capital costs are large, but operational costs can be nearly as large. I'm very nervous about the upload, the MTA being good example of being screwed when NY state took ownership of the system.

Meh, Toronto only pays 25% of operating costs anyway. I'm not saying they won't get screwed but it's not like they've put their money where their mouths are and now it's all getting taken away.

 

[nfitz]

...capital costs are large, but operational costs can be nearly as large. I'm very nervous about the upload, the MTA being good example of being screwed when NY state took ownership of the system.

That's because the state controls (and funds) operations. My understanding is that the province is looking to upload the infrastructure, not the operations.

The end result (operationally) would be similar to Line 5 and Line 6.

 

[crs1026]

There is a huge, huge, huge risk that fiscal indifference at the provincial level would lead to the existing subway being subjected to deferred maintenance and/or lack of capital improvement. Imagine if TTC wanted to add the next generation of Presto or Wifi or cellphone technology, and the Province wasn't willing to spend money on all the related station work.
Add up all the renovation work we've seen in the last decade just to get what we have today....and much of it still not really restored to completion - missing ceilings and wall patching needed in many spots..
Much of this work is capital intensive and would need approval from the owner. TTC as tenant would not be able to commission and fund that work on its own.... any more than an apartment tenant can decide to rewire their apartment and put in a more modern electrical panel. At best, there will be a whole added level of bureaucracy where TTC would submit its proposals and some group at Queens Park would review and decide what to approve. (Where's the economy and reduced red tape in that, Mr Ford?)
Toronto Council and TTC have been slow enough to spend this kind of money over the past couple decades, preferring to pennypinch the subway.... and look at what that has got us. Imagine how bad it will be when accountability is removed another level.... "Nah, you don't need that.... ask again in a couple years".
I see nothing but bad news for SOGR if the Province gets involved in ownership.

- Paul

 

[jaybe]

Ontario Transportation Minister Jeff Yurek responds to council decision on the upload: "The City is not good at planning, building or maintaining subways. I am happy to hear that the City has agreed to meet with the Province to discuss and exchange information on the TTC subway"

For all of their shortcomings, the TTC has been running, arguably, the most underfunded transit system in North America. Yurek's comment smacks of hubris and makes me nervous about the future.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

For all of their shortcomings, the TTC has been running, arguably, the most underfunded transit system in North America. Yurek's comment smacks of hubris and makes me nervous about the future.

I never understand why some people wear this as badge of honour: "For 25 years, the City of Toronto's government has chosen to barely fund the operations of its transit system. Fares have consistently risen well above the rate of inflation, the Metropass [RIP] multiplier is ridiculously high and, despite that, people ride the system in droves. This is proof no other government should be put in charge of it or could do better."

I don't trust Yurek and Ford to run a bumper card ride but the idea Toronto has been doing a bang-up job on its own, thank you very much, doesn't really ring true to me either. It's embarrassing all around, IMHO.

 

[crs1026]

I never understand why some people wear this as badge of honour: "For 25 years, the City of Toronto's government has chosen to barely fund the operations of its transit system. Fares have consistently risen well above the rate of inflation, the Metropass [RIP] multiplier is ridiculously high and, despite that, people ride the system in droves. This is proof no other government should be put in charge of it or could do better."

I don't trust Yurek and Ford to run a bumper card ride but the idea Toronto has been doing a bang-up job on its own, thank you very much, doesn't really ring true to me either. It's embarrassing all around, IMHO.

So true. The issue isn’t whether Toronto’s transit planning needs improvement - it’s what measures will improve it.

The solution ought to be to make transit planning non-partisan (or at least move it out of a toxically partisan zone), run the process based on facts and analysis, depoliticise the role of staff, increase transparency, increase accountability, create long term plans that outlive individual terms of office.

Does any of that sound like Doug Ford’s forte?

- Paul

 

[steveintoronto]

So true. The issue isn’t whether Toronto’s transit planning needs improvement - it’s what measures will improve it.

The solution ought to be to make transit planning non-partisan (or at least move it out of a toxically partisan zone), run the process based on facts and analysis, depoliticise the role of staff, increase transparency, increase accountability, create long term plans that outlive individual terms of office.

Does any of that sound like Doug Ford’s forte?

- Paul

I'm actually in favour of the subway and other existing or potential cross boundary routes being uploaded to a greater whole. But not by this present QP regime.

Ben Spurr made an interesting point in the TorStar a few days back, one I've been making (it applies to Rail Deck Park and other issues, some Waterfront projects come to mind, the Don Mouth diversion especially) and this is a trump card the Feds have to play. It appears numerous times in Supreme Court rulings, where this has not only been upheld as unalienable, but used to rule on issues involving the City, Province and the Railways (The Esplanade rulings, for instance):

Council powerless to stop provincial takeover of TTC subway system, confidential city report says
By BEN SPURR Transportation Reporter
Tues., Dec. 11, 2018
[...]
Only the federal government could put a check on provincial authority over the subway system, according to the opinion.

Under the Constitution Act, the federal government could theoretically claim jurisdiction over the subway system by declaring it to be a public work for “the general advantage of Canada.”

Historically, the federal government has most frequently used this power to assume control over railways.

“The Toronto subway system could be seen to be analogous to a railway due to its importance in keeping the country’s largest economic region running,” the report states.

However, the city would have no ability to compel Ottawa to step in, and the Canadian government assuming jurisdiction of the subway would likely subject it to federal regulations, a change that would have uncertain implications for the transit system.
[...]

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...way-system-confidential-city-report-says.html

I know that certain Federal Cabinet Ministers are aware of this 'device'...Spurr picked this up from someone in the know, which is encouraging, because nothing is stopping the TTC from...ummm...making itself 'available' to becoming federally regulated, at least as far as the heavy rail aspect is concerned. City of Ottawa is already there, albeit via the National Capital Act.

Would the Feds want to risk an all out war with the Province on this? Maybe...

 

[asher__jo]

For all of their shortcomings, the TTC has been running, arguably, the most underfunded transit system in North America. Yurek's comment smacks of hubris and makes me nervous about the future.

Agreed, Yurek is just taking cheap shots.

 

[asher__jo]

I'm actually in favour of the subway and other existing or potential cross boundary routes being uploaded to a greater whole. But not by this present QP regime.

Ben Spurr made an interesting point in the TorStar a few days back, one I've been making (it applies to Rail Deck Park and other issues, some Waterfront projects come to mind, the Don Mouth diversion especially) and this is a trump card the Feds have to play. It appears numerous times in Supreme Court rulings, where this has not only been upheld as unalienable, but used to rule on issues involving the City, Province and the Railways (The Esplanade rulings, for instance):

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...way-system-confidential-city-report-says.html

I know that certain Federal Cabinet Ministers are aware of this 'device'...Spurr picked this up from someone in the know, which is encouraging, because nothing is stopping the TTC from...ummm...making itself 'available' to becoming federally regulated, at least as far as the heavy rail aspect is concerned. City of Ottawa is already there, albeit via the National Capital Act.

Would the Feds want to risk an all out war with the Province on this? Maybe...

Yes, being Federally regulated is a very compelling option. And uploading is great, but lack of TTC representation on Metrolinx board not so much.

 

[steveintoronto]

Due to length, I've posted this as a separate addendum to my prior post:

Section 92(10) of the Constitution Act, 1867
[...]
Declaratory power under section 92(10)(c)
In general terms, works declared by the Parliament of Canada to be "for the general Advantage of Canada" or "for the Advantage of Two or more of the Provinces" tend to be part of the national infrastructure.
Whenever parliament invokes the power, it gains not only jurisdiction over the work but also any necessarily incidental operations. In Ontario Hydro v. Ontario (1993), such a declaration had been made with respect to Ontario Hydro's nuclear plant. The Supreme Court held that that declaration gave Parliament the authority to regulate the work "as a going concern" which included jurisdiction over workers at the plant and their labour unions.
The declaration must be made by the passing of legislation, but in addition to declaring specific works, whole classes of work can be defined as being "for the general advantage of Canada" by default; the Atomic Energy Control Act, for example, deemed all nuclear power plants to fall into this category. From 1867 to 1961 there were 470 uses of the declaratory power, of which 84% related to railways.
As of 2006, the declaratory power has been invoked at least 422 times,[6] but not since 1961,[7] and of which 64% was related to railways.[...]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_92(10)_of_the_Constitution_Act,_1867

The "Declaratory Power" in the Canadian Constitution

Claude Bélanger,
Department of History,
Marianopolis College

The Parliament of Canada is empowered by virtue s. 91 (29) to enact legislation in relation to "Such Classes of Subjects as are expressly excepted in the Enumeration of the Classes of Subjects by this Act assigned exclusively to the Legislatures of the Provinces." A close examination of s. 92 reveals that the scope of s.91(29) is limited to the exceptions listed in s.92 (1) (Lieutenant-Governor) and s.92 ( 10 a, b, c). Under s. 92 (10 c) the Parliament of Canada is empowered to legislate on "Such works as, although wholly situated within the Province, are before or after their Execution declared by the Parliament of Canada to be for the general Advantage of Canada or for the Advantage of Two or more of the provinces." Such is the declaratory power of the Parliament of Canada; to a large extent, one could easily argue that the declaratory power enables Parliament to reapportion the distribution of legislative power in the Constitution Act, 1867 as there are, really few limitations imposed on the exercise of that power by Parliament. It alone is the judge as to whether or not a "work" is of "a general advantage (to) Canada." The role of the courts is limited to determining whether or not the Parliament of Canada is dealing with a "work" in the sense used in s.92 (l0c).
[...]

http://faculty.marianopolis.edu/c.belanger/quebechistory/federal/declare.htm

What's intriguing about this is if the Feds don't instigate it themselves, but municipal or private orgs *ask* for this status! This subject will be raised again shortly, I'm sure...

but lack of TTC representation on Metrolinx board not so much.

Toronto and the TTC aren't going to be getting any anyway...

Remember! The SCC has already enshrined aspects of this re: City of Toronto in a number of rulings used as precedents to this day.

Example: "the general advantage of Canada" appears four times as that exact phrase, and other times as an analog in this important SCC ruling: (this is the abbreviated one of extracts, the original full one, about a hundred pages, has many more)
Supreme Court of Canada

Grand Trunk Railway Co. v. City of Toronto, (1910) 42 S.C.R. 613

Date: 1910-02-15
https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/9855/index.do

Bear in mind that the TTC subway uses the corridors ruled on in this and other cases, and as such (edit: arguably), is covered under the Constitution.

 

[steveintoronto]

Here's further evidence of the Feds 'taking over' jurisdiction "for the general advantage of Canada", one of a number of instances of late:

Ottawa to let cities, local groups apply directly to Health Canada for supervised drug consumption sites Subscriber content
New arrangement would allow harm-reduction proponents to cut through red tape recently put in place by the Ford government in Ontario

 

[rbt]

But it also takes Toronto off the hook for capital costs.of expansion.

Maybe. I expect some part of that capital cost to be converted into a lease/rent of some type.

The $500M over 10 years Ford pledged during the election toward subway capital won't cover much of the unfunded backlog; won't even buy new trains for Line 2.