News   Nov 27, 2024
Towers to be Introduced to Longo's Site at 7 and Woodbine in Markham
 199     1 
News   Nov 27, 2024
Masterplanned Community in Markham Would Replace Big Box Centre
 273     0 
News   Nov 27, 2024
Menkes Welcomes First Occupants to Festival at Assembly Park in Vaughan
 678     0 

GTHA Regional Transit Amalgamation Discussion: Superlinx/Subway Upload

Well that would put a dent in the provincial budget...

"The Ford campaign claimed that a takeover would cost $160 million per year. Recent estimates from the TTC set a much higher annual value: over $1 billion."

NOW column by Steve Munro here.
 
I am a fan of bringing all transit that the GO train touches into one large authority. Set up fare zones. Make one fare across it all.

Ah, but each city wants their own way.
 
The Globe comes out strongly against the subway plan: article-globe-editorial-the-ford-government-uploads-torontos-subway-and

The political opposition to this seems to be mounting. I've yet to see any of the major papers come out in support of the plan.

The PC government really had to tread lightly here. If this subway upload does go through, and anything catastrophic were to happen to the subway system while they're in government, Ford and his government are going to be crucified. And I'd wager the probability of that is quite high, given that the government has displayed a stunning lack of understanding of the responsibilities in maintaining a subway system. And of course, Metrolinx, who has zero experience operating or maintaining a metro system, is going to be thrown straight into maintaining the third largest metro system in the continent.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
The political opposition to this seems to be mounting. I've yet to see any of the major papers come out in support of the plan.
Click to expand...

Well, the Sun's been in support :)
I think there's plenty of reason to be wary but that actually coming out firmly against it when you don't know what the proposal constitutes isn't really providing a fair analysis to readers. Most of the strongest arguments I've seen against the upload revolve around things the province is likely to do (underfund what the City needs, turn it into a landgrab etc.). Those are all fair concerns given who is running the show - and I agree it will all come down to money - but I still find these kinds of articles to be premature:

"The TTC needs more money and autonomy, and less politics," sez the Globe.
And who says leaving it under control of Toronto City Council accomplishes any one of those 3 things? Here's today at city council, for example, failing on 2 of those counts...
174396


I'm not saying the upload will be great, I'm just saying what until you hear what's in the proposal before slamming it.
 
Allandale25 said:
Well that would put a dent in the provincial budget...

"The Ford campaign claimed that a takeover would cost $160 million per year. Recent estimates from the TTC set a much higher annual value: over $1 billion."

NOW column by Steve Munro here.
Click to expand...

Steve Munro knows better than this. He is smart enough to understand the different accounting for the operational vs capital budgets. He also knows this is not "creative accounting" but real accounting that is required (and the auditor general would make them do).

He also assumes that the province will pay for all of the upgrades and expect nothing from the city. The rest of Ontario will be up in arms if that happens.

He has a political viewpoint and is using his expertise to become an advocate. At some point people will know him for the later and ignore the former.
 
muller877 said:
Steve Munro knows better than this. He is smart enough to understand the different accounting for the operational vs capital budgets. He also knows this is not "creative accounting" but real accounting that is required (and the auditor general would make them do).
...
He has a political viewpoint and is using his expertise to become an advocate. At some point people will know him for the later and ignore the former.
Click to expand...

Yup.
I've said this before but it's worth saying again, when people are treating his word as gospel. He is a smart guy and we are lucky to have him (and he's apparently lucky to have LOTS of free time on his hands!) but he is not remotely infallible. He has plenty of personal hangups and biasses and generally thinks he knows better than everyone, but especially the people on Toronto City Council and ESPECIALLY the folks at Metrolinx.

So, the number is somewhere between $160M and $1b+? Another way to say that is that no one really knows. The province is lowballing it for their obvious reasons and the City is sky-balling it, just like they're talking about how impossibly complex it is to separate the subway, for equally obvious reasons.

He (probably correctly) points out that the province's preferred option is likely pre-determined but his opinion on any upload is just as pre-determined. He has undeniable expertise/knowledge but, as far as I know has never worked in the field but he has always been and will always be an advocate for his POV and not a neutral arbiter of transit expertise. For that, look to Ed Levy and others.
 
muller877 said:
Steve Munro knows better than this. He is smart enough to understand the different accounting for the operational vs capital budgets. He also knows this is not "creative accounting" but real accounting that is required (and the auditor general would make them do).
Click to expand...
Hang on ... read what the Tories promised. It says "Costing to be amortized over life of subway projects once operational, plus $160 million per year for existing assets". At the time right-wing media referred to this as "an estimated $160-million annually for major capital maintenance on the subway network, taking an obligation off city books".

How does this sound like operational rather than capital?

muller877 said:
He also assumes that the province will pay for all of the upgrades and expect nothing from the city. The rest of Ontario will be up in arms if that happens.
Click to expand...
They might be - but that's part of the whole point of the exercise "taking an obligation off city books"

muller877 said:
He has a political viewpoint and is using his expertise to become an advocate. At some point people will know him for the later and ignore the former.
Click to expand...
I think other commentators here might have bias too. (I've been speaking favourably about this plan personally ... though I think the province has underestimated the cost involved, hasn't thought things through, and this would delay the closing of Line 3 ... if this doesn't become yet another broken promise).

TJ O'Pootertoot said:
... he's apparently lucky to have LOTS of free time on his hands
Click to expand...
That sounds odd ... what do you mean? He's in his 70s ... not sure why he wouldn't have any more time than someone of that age.

micheal_can said:
Well, for starters, the people who know exactly what my profile picture represents. (hint, dougie promised to bring it back....)
Click to expand...
Surely you never believed him did you? He's all about efficiencies. I don't think the cost/benefit ratio on that project will be particularly good ... might even result in a singularity :)
 
muller877 said:
Steve Munro knows better than this. He is smart enough to understand the different accounting for the operational vs capital budgets. He also knows this is not "creative accounting" but real accounting that is required (and the auditor general would make them do).

He also assumes that the province will pay for all of the upgrades and expect nothing from the city. The rest of Ontario will be up in arms if that happens.

He has a political viewpoint and is using his expertise to become an advocate. At some point people will know him for the later and ignore the former.
Click to expand...

I'm not a huge fan of Steve's opinions on other matters but I don't see the issues you state. It's hardly biased of an article or all that politically skewed, and more or less on point. Actually seems pretty tame of an op ed by normal newspaper standards, let alone a publication like NOW. I'd say it's on par with the Spacing and Globe pieces I see no one attempted to attack.

TJ O'Pootertoot said:
Yup.
I've said this before but it's worth saying again, when people are treating his word as gospel. He is a smart guy and we are lucky to have him (and he's apparently lucky to have LOTS of free time on his hands!) but he is not remotely infallible. He has plenty of personal hangups and biasses and generally thinks he knows better than everyone, but especially the people on Toronto City Council and ESPECIALLY the folks at Metrolinx.

So, the number is somewhere between $160M and $1b+? Another way to say that is that no one really knows. The province is lowballing it for their obvious reasons and the City is sky-balling it, just like they're talking about how impossibly complex it is to separate the subway, for equally obvious reasons.

He (probably correctly) points out that the province's preferred option is likely pre-determined but his opinion on any upload is just as pre-determined. He has undeniable expertise/knowledge but, as far as I know has never worked in the field but he has always been and will always be an advocate for his POV and not a neutral arbiter of transit expertise. For that, look to Ed Levy and others.
Click to expand...

Now screaming about an author's spare time. That's clearly normal lol.
 
The Downside Of The Upload

A critical point. The critical problem with the system is money, not governance. If there were enough funding to go around to build necessary projects and maintain existing infrastructure, nobody would be calling for an upload. Uploading the subway will not make the fundamental money issue go away.

We likely wouldn’t be having this subway tug-of-war today if our leaders had had the courage to introduce revenue tools in previous and current administrations. During the early 2010s, transit advocates called on the provincial government to do the right thing and introduce dedicated taxes, fees or levies to build regional transit. We missed many opportunities to do what sensible governments do to deliver rapid transit, which is to introduce revenue tools, for example a dedicated fuel tax in Montreal, Vancouver and recommended by the Anne Golden transit panel or a dedicated sales tax introduced in the States of Pennsylvania and Utah, and the regions of Denver and Los Angeles.
Click to expand...

She also had some comments on The Agenda regarding the upload:

The Agenda: The Better Way to Run the TTC

Recently I attended a talk by the Deputy Mayor of New York City, Alicia Glen, who described the dire impacts to her city after the State-run MTA took over its subways in the late 1960s. The upload of NYC’s subway system deteriorated service, choked investment and allowed trains and stations to become dilapidated, as the State government steered money away from local transit needs, “starving New York’s subway.”

In Baltimore, where state control of the city’s transit has led to similar neglect, a consortium of regional leaders now are working to put control of transit back into the hands of the local government, along with more funding. Their rationale: The State’s interests are not those of the city’s. Recently, scarce MTA transit funds were used by the State government bail-out ski resorts instead of fixing transit.

These are alarming precedents demonstrate the impact of harvesting assets or revenue from the city to subsidize investment in the region. It’s very likely the monetization from Toronto’s subways, which have been heavily paid for by Toronto taxpayers and commuters for decades, will be spread around the region while starving the centre.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top