GTHA Transit Fare Integration

[ssiguy2]

The huge discrepancy between the subsidies received by the TTC is due to what? Is there a different funding scheme for Toronto than everyone else or are these differences due to the local governments giving more money per-capita to their transit systems?

 

[BMO]

The huge discrepancy between the subsidies received by the TTC is due to what? Is there a different funding scheme for Toronto than everyone else or are these differences due to the local governments giving more money per-capita to their transit systems?

TTC makes about 80% of their operating costs through fares. Compared to York Region which makes about 50% through fares with the highest fare in North America. If it charged the same fares as the TTC is would be making even less return from the fare box. TTC has much higher ridership, better coverage area and better frequencies that allow it to charge less and make more money from the fare box. Unfortunately, suburban transit systems are completely at a loss due to a mixture of land use and sparse ability to serve commuting corridors that have wide catchment areas like Pearson, or large industrial areas like along Highway 7 in Vaughan or Brampton. Suburban municipalities could adopt the exact same fare structure and subsidy policies as Toronto but it wouldn't do anything but deprive these transit agencies because they need larger subsidies just to provide 45 minute headways which is something that would almost be unthinkable in Toronto today. In the suburbs, although it is changing, transit is more of a public service for specific demographic groups.

So to sum it up, yes these municipalities are giving more subsidies per transit rider (but potentially NOT more per capita) than the TTC is. If the TTC received as much of a subsidy per rider as some of these suburban agencies than it could probably even move into doing regular capital transit expansion projects like subway extensions, BRT, LRt, etc.

 

[muller877]

TTC makes about 80% of their operating costs through fares. Compared to York Region which makes about 50% through fares with the highest fare in North America. If it charged the same fares as the TTC is would be making even less return from the fare box. TTC has much higher ridership, better coverage area and better frequencies that allow it to charge less and make more money from the fare box. Unfortunately, suburban transit systems are completely at a loss due to a mixture of land use and sparse ability to serve commuting corridors that have wide catchment areas like Pearson, or large industrial areas like along Highway 7 in Vaughan or Brampton. Suburban municipalities could adopt the exact same fare structure and subsidy policies as Toronto but it wouldn't do anything but deprive these transit agencies because they need larger subsidies just to provide 45 minute headways which is something that would almost be unthinkable in Toronto today. In the suburbs, although it is changing, transit is more of a public service for specific demographic groups.

So to sum it up, yes these municipalities are giving more subsidies per transit rider (but potentially NOT more per capita) than the TTC is. If the TTC received as much of a subsidy per rider as some of these suburban agencies than it could probably even move into doing regular capital transit expansion projects like subway extensions, BRT, LRt, etc.

I'm sure there are some routes of TTC that are being as heavily subsidized as the suburban transit systems. It's all about volume and type of transit.

 

[BMO]

I'm sure there are some routes of TTC that are being as heavily subsidized as the suburban transit systems. It's all about volume and type of transit.

Naturally. Just like how the Yonge Subway is likely subsidizing other routes and successful day bus service is subsidizing overnight buses, etc. In the suburbs, though, routes are much more political and you often get these routes that only carry like 5 people a day and are a huge drain on the entire system but can't be taken away because the issue gets escalated to council and the status quo remains (Look at YRT's Routes 61 or 15 here and then look at their cost per rider here).

 

[Markster]

It's quite frustrating to see the TTC's reaction to fare integration boil down to "But who's going to pay for the double fare?!"

It misses the point entirely.

I understand where the TTC's coming from.
They pay for the lowest subsidy per rider, while simultaneously they pay the highest absolute dollar amount subsidy. The cross-border buses are likely on the lower end of route performance. In the most shallow interpretation of fare integration, cutting out the double fare at Steeles will have an immediate impact on the revenue of those routes, and that will need to be covered somehow.

But this just shines a light on how little the TTC understands, or is willing to understand what fare integration actually is.

This idea that a ride on Markham Rd from Finch to Steeles is 1 token, but a ride on Bathurst from Drewry to Clark clearly must be twice the cost of a ride from Port Union to Rexdale in order to be sustainable needs a serious dose of sober second thought applied.

If the TTC is concerned about their financial stake, then they should frame their objections around that. Demand that any fare integration would not cost Toronto a single cent more in subsidy. Demand that the province give financial support during the transition. Demand that those who will have to pay more and cannot afford it are given the support they need.

Just stop making it about this one arbitrary line in the asphalt.

 

[ssiguy2]

So in other words, on a per-capita basis the 905 governments send more money to their transit system than Toronto does to the TTC?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

It's quite frustrating to see the TTC's reaction to fare integration boil down to "But who's going to pay for the double fare?!"

It misses the point entirely.

I understand where the TTC's coming from.
They pay for the lowest subsidy per rider, while simultaneously they pay the highest absolute dollar amount subsidy. The cross-border buses are likely on the lower end of route performance. In the most shallow interpretation of fare integration, cutting out the double fare at Steeles will have an immediate impact on the revenue of those routes, and that will need to be covered somehow.

But this just shines a light on how little the TTC understands, or is willing to understand what fare integration actually is.

This idea that a ride on Markham Rd from Finch to Steeles is 1 token, but a ride on Bathurst from Drewry to Clark clearly must be twice the cost of a ride from Port Union to Rexdale in order to be sustainable needs a serious dose of sober second thought applied.

If the TTC is concerned about their financial stake, then they should frame their objections around that. Demand that any fare integration would not cost Toronto a single cent more in subsidy. Demand that the province give financial support during the transition. Demand that those who will have to pay more and cannot afford it are given the support they need.

Just stop making it about this one arbitrary line in the asphalt.

The TTC is concerned about losing money because of integration. I agree fully with them. If fare integration will cost the TTC a single dime, then Metrolinx must fully cover the cost. If ML is not wiling to do that, then people crossing Steeles must pay double fare. I don't see why we (Toronto) should be paying to subsidize these users even more. We're already cash strapped as is.

 

[Forgotten]

It's quite frustrating to see the TTC's reaction to fare integration boil down to "But who's going to pay for the double fare?!"

It misses the point entirely.

I understand where the TTC's coming from.
They pay for the lowest subsidy per rider, while simultaneously they pay the highest absolute dollar amount subsidy. The cross-border buses are likely on the lower end of route performance. In the most shallow interpretation of fare integration, cutting out the double fare at Steeles will have an immediate impact on the revenue of those routes, and that will need to be covered somehow.

But this just shines a light on how little the TTC understands, or is willing to understand what fare integration actually is.

This idea that a ride on Markham Rd from Finch to Steeles is 1 token, but a ride on Bathurst from Drewry to Clark clearly must be twice the cost of a ride from Port Union to Rexdale in order to be sustainable needs a serious dose of sober second thought applied.

If the TTC is concerned about their financial stake, then they should frame their objections around that. Demand that any fare integration would not cost Toronto a single cent more in subsidy. Demand that the province give financial support during the transition. Demand that those who will have to pay more and cannot afford it are given the support they need.

Just stop making it about this one arbitrary line in the asphalt.

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what you described so I don't know what you're going on about.

 

[Adjei]

It's quite frustrating to see the TTC's reaction to fare integration boil down to "But who's going to pay for the double fare?!"

It misses the point entirely.

I understand where the TTC's coming from.
They pay for the lowest subsidy per rider, while simultaneously they pay the highest absolute dollar amount subsidy. The cross-border buses are likely on the lower end of route performance. In the most shallow interpretation of fare integration, cutting out the double fare at Steeles will have an immediate impact on the revenue of those routes, and that will need to be covered somehow.

But this just shines a light on how little the TTC understands, or is willing to understand what fare integration actually is.

This idea that a ride on Markham Rd from Finch to Steeles is 1 token, but a ride on Bathurst from Drewry to Clark clearly must be twice the cost of a ride from Port Union to Rexdale in order to be sustainable needs a serious dose of sober second thought applied.

If the TTC is concerned about their financial stake, then they should frame their objections around that. Demand that any fare integration would not cost Toronto a single cent more in subsidy. Demand that the province give financial support during the transition. Demand that those who will have to pay more and cannot afford it are given the support they need.

Just stop making it about this one arbitrary line in the asphalt.

That's the most idiotic thing about traveling in Toronto. Someone who's crossing Steeles and going into a different municipality but travelling a short distance pays more than someone who can be on the bus from and trains from Rexdale all the way to Scarborough. How about someone who is coming from the new Vaughan subway station to York University, will they pay double fare? It's idiotic.

As customers we want to pay to travel across the region especially when we travel into different municipalities. The operators don't want to lose money in the process so it makes things difficult. Metrolinx who are supposed to be dealing with issues like this don't have the balls to deal with the issue of subsidies. It is apparent that this whole scheme needs to be subsidized but Metrolinx wants to bury their head in the sand and talk as if this is supposed to no net cost. We need to have a real proper conversation about this.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

That's the most idiotic thing about traveling in Toronto. Someone who's crossing Steeles and going into a different municipality but travelling a short distance pays more than someone who can be on the bus from and trains from Rexdale all the way to Scarborough. How about someone who is coming from the new Vaughan subway station to York University, will they pay double fare? It's idiotic.

As customers we want to pay to travel across the region especially when we travel into different municipalities. The operators don't want to lose money in the process so it makes things difficult. Metrolinx who are supposed to be dealing with issues like this don't have the balls to deal with the issue of subsidies. It is apparent that this whole scheme needs to be subsidized but Metrolinx wants to bury their head in the sand and talk as if this is supposed to no net cost. We need to have a real proper conversation about this.

The solutions to fare integration are rather simple.

1. Implement fare by distance... No operator wants this.

2. Implement flat fare region wide (municipal sized zones)... Requires subsidizes and Metrolinx doesn't want to provide it.

We're at an impasse. Unless Metrolinx steps up to the plate cash in hand, we won't be getting fare integration. It's this simple.

 

[Markster]

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what you described so I don't know what you're going on about.

That the TTC doesn't even recognize any of the process that's happening. They seem to be blind to any aspect of regional fare integration aside from the double fare. Metrolinx is working on revamping fare structures, and if all the TTC harps on is the double fare, then it is not helpful.

Demanding no financial impact (a reasonable demand!) is different from demanding "someone has to pay for the double fare" (which shows ignorance of the regional nature of the process)

 

[ssiguy2]

Where does Metrolinx get it's funding from?

 

[muller877]

That the TTC doesn't even recognize any of the process that's happening. They seem to be blind to any aspect of regional fare integration aside from the double fare. Metrolinx is working on revamping fare structures, and if all the TTC harps on is the double fare, then it is not helpful.

Demanding no financial impact (a reasonable demand!) is different from demanding "someone has to pay for the double fare" (which shows ignorance of the regional nature of the process)

I think Toronto politicians just don't understand how people use transit.

There are the same number of workers as jobs in Toronto (a city of Toronto report from a couple of years ago). However, this doesn't mean that we all stay in Toronto. There are tens of thousands of workers that take the GO Train or drive or the bus from other municipalities to get to a job in Toronto. Likewise there are the same number mainly driving or taking a bus to get to jobs outside of Toronto.

High-order transit normally subsidizes lower-order transit. There simply aren't enough people that live around a high-order station so they need to bus (or drive) to get there.

That's why GO subsidizes the suburban bus system that delivers the passengers to the train station (who by and large then end up working in downtown Toronto). So GO is helping out the city.

TTC subway subsidizes the TTC bus feeder routes to get to the subway.

The suburbs are left without a subsidy from high-order transit for all the riders they deliver to the TTC at Kipling, Finch, etc. That is why they have to fund their transit more than Toronto.

The same goes with reverse commuters. TTC grabs the lowest cost portion (the subway) and then there is no cross-subsidy to fund the bus component. (or there isn't an option for the commuter because of boundary disputes so they have to clog up the streets with cars)

 

[BMO]

So in other words, on a per-capita basis the 905 governments send more money to their transit system than Toronto does to the TTC?

Not necessarily per-capita, but on a per-rider basis the 905 definitely has to spend more. The sum of it may be less than what Toronto pays simply because on a total basis it has more people riding the system and a bigger population so naturally it's going to be bigger and have more money being spent on it but proportionately it could be smaller than what a Regional municipality has to spend when you break it down by how much of a subsidy is required to provide the service for each transit user.

In 2014 the TTC had a $0.78 subsidy per rider (reference)

Compared to YRT which is apparently $4.49 per rider (reference)

But on a total subsidy basis the total subsidy given to Toronto was: $534m (reference)

YRT's total subsidy was only: $93m (reference)

So Toronto is spending more in total subsidies but on a per capita basis let's take a look:

YRT pop: 1.033 million (2011)

Toronto pop: 2.615 million (2011)

York Region: 93/1.033 = $90 per person

Toronto: 534/2.615 = $204 per person

Thus Toronto spends more per capita, but York Region spends more per transit rider.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Might be an interesting read on A History of Fares on the TTC at this link.

When the Toronto Transportation Commission went into operation in the 1920's, the basic fare jumped from 5¢ to 7¢. This was because there was more coverage happened from nine separate fares to one. To go beyond the city limits would mean a higher fare because of the extended coverage.