GTHA Transit Fare Integration

[W. K. Lis]

Don't forget about the transit tax credit, which (unfortunately) is helpful only if you file income tax. From link:

Electronic payment cards if:

• the card is used to make at least 32 one-way trips over a maximum of 31 consecutive days; and
• the card is issued by a public transit authority that records and provides a receipt for the cost and usage of the card.

The tax credit is 15% of the cost of the transit, but only off federal income tax, not the Ontario income tax.

That 32 one-way trips turns out to be 16 two-way trips in a month.

 

[steveintoronto]

Don't forget about the transit tax credit, which (unfortunately) is helpful only if you file income tax. From link:

And of course, most of the "working poor" come in under the taxable income level, and so a credit is meaningless for them.

 

[TOareaFan]

As your question is expressed, of course they are *no matter how the fare is calculated*. Would the *degree* of impact be lessened with a distance based fare? Of course, if they are taking shorter trips, but it would for any income group, presuming the base fare is lower for their shorter trip than the present fixed fare.

That is precisely the question we were discussing (we being me and someoene else...not me and you)...if they are taking longer commutes on TTC (as I had read some anti-poverty groups claim) then they will be even further hurt by FBD if they are making shorter commutes they will see some relief by FBD"

"Would they still need assistance" is the question.

That may be the question in your mind....but not the one that was being discussed when you started quoting parts of the discussion (still a good question but the fact you are dealing with a different question may explain why it has taken so many posts for us to understand each other).

 

[rbt]

Is FBD going to (if it is introduced) impact people at the lower end of the economic spectrum more than others?

I would expect it to hit immigrants and persons with learning disabilities who have very limited employment opportunities very hard. Other assistance programs (like job search assistance, public housing, etc.) tend to see this group.

The typical Ontario born college graduate with a not helpful degree working at the local Starbucks or strip mall retail won't suffer though despite also being in that Q1/Q2/Q3 group. I expect this situation is a larger %age of the lowest income group.


Of course, my expectations are regularly wrong. That services (retail, etc.) crowd may not even count as low-income because if they still live with their parents might have a very high household income on this chart.


IMO, setting fares should be a completely different process (and even organization) from subsidizing fares. I don't need a discount, but I get one anyway, that should be going to someone who does need it.

 

[steveintoronto]

That is precisely the question we were discussing (we being me and someoene else...not me and you)

Here's what you wrote:

Is that true? Lower income people rely on shorter trips? Everything i read about Toronto commutes indicates that most lower income people are struggling with long commutes because they are forced to live in the outer 416 or further afield for housing cost purposes and then have to commute long distances to the employment centres (primarily downtown).

By your own logic, with 200,000 Torontonians struggling to afford the present flat fare in Toronto, then there must be even more "lower income people" living outside of Toronto and commuting in. By the logic of what you state, since there's more outside of Toronto than the 200,000 in working in Toronto, that makes 400,000 + "lower income" people working in Toronto..."(primarily downtown)". Pretty Third World...

Pardon me for interjecting, but for some odd reason, your logic appears faulty. As you were...

 

[steveintoronto]

I would expect it to hit immigrants and persons with learning disabilities who have very limited employment opportunities very hard. Other assistance programs (like job search assistance, public housing, etc.) tend to see this group.

Considering Toronto has one of the highest fares (methodology pending) in North Am, if not the highest, you make good points.

[...]
But as of this moment adult and senior fares remain frustratingly high compared to most other cities, and as a matter of policy the continued poor value of the TTC's monthly Metropass is disturbing. One could certainly still argue that Toronto riders are doing more than their part, a belief borne out by the TTC's astronomical farebox recovery ratio.

Toronto's transit fares may not be quite as bad as they first seem but they are clearly no bargain -- something to think about that the next time you pass through the turnstiles.[...]

http://www.blogto.com/city/2016/02/how_do_ttc_fares_stack_up_against_other_cities_in_2016/

Methodology and charts at link.

 

[ssiguy2]

What they could do is a fare-by distance/zone hybrid.

The current fare is $3.25 so ideally all local transit systems agree to modify theirs to that base amount.

They could create a fare-by-distance that doesn't get down to every single km but rather "km zones". So, as an example, the base fare was brought in at $2.25 for the first 10km making short trips, which the lower-income people are more reliant upon, then after that it would be an extra $1 for every 10km. They would make it so the fare applies to everything.........GO trains/buses, RER, subway, BRT, streetcars, SRT. It is the best use of labour, rolling stock, and infrastructure, and get's rid of this stupid idea of charging more for one service than another and figuring out what is "rapid" and what isn't. If people have to pay extra for rapid transit expect to see the population demanding a STOP to RT construction and just more slow moving buses.

So your 8km trip on the bus would be $2.25, your streetcar and subway 13km trip would be $3.25, your 23 km trip on bus to RER to SRT would be $4.25, and your 85 km Hamilton LRT to Hamilton GO commuter rail to Kennedy station would be $10.25.

To add further comment.............

Yes, low income people do tend to travel shorter distances and part of this is because many low income people are not in the labour force but make up a good chunk of the transit usage. People with disabilities, retirees, single parents, students {high school and post-secondary} all use transit as their primary mobility. Not longer distance work trips but trips to school, the mall, the grocery store, the doctor's office, or family/friends house.

Another point I wanted to make about my above idea of "fare-by-distance Zones" is that they have the added benefit of the vast majority of passengers knowing what their fare is BEFORE they take their trip. Few have an idea of how many kms their trip is but most can certainly tell you if it's less or more than 10km. It seems like a small issue but it's not really.

Just as the Gardiner, even though only the width of 3 houses, acts as a psychological barrier to the Waterfront, the same is true of strict fare-by-distance. Both in real terms mean next to nothing but have real consequences in behavior. People may need that 2 liter of milk regardless but still check the price before getting it as opposed to finding out at the till, they may want that extra TV channel and money is no object but still want to know the price before they get their bill, and people may have to take the transit but people still want to know how much their trip will cost them before they take the service and not after their Presto card or bank tells them.

With "fare-by-distance Zones" the vast majority will know their fare before they leave and it will help get rid of a lot of headaches when there are problems with Presto. If it stops working or has a glitch it is much less likely to have an impact on your fare regardless because if it charges you for 8km instead of 5 or 27 instead of 21, it wouldn't make any difference. People are also cheap and if done strictly by fare-by-distance and a bus has to detour for 3 blocks adding a km to their trip, many will demand a refund. A larger 10km FBD Zone gets rid of most of the small issues that can create big problems, bad public relations, unnecessary refunds, and a larger bureaucracy of negotiating all these problems.

 

[TOareaFan]

Here's what you wrote:
By your own logic, with 200,000 Torontonians struggling to afford the present flat fare in Toronto, then there must be even more "lower income people" living outside of Toronto and commuting in. By the logic of what you state, since there's more outside of Toronto than the 200,000 in working in Toronto, that makes 400,000 + "lower income" people working in Toronto..."(primarily downtown)". Pretty Third World...

Pardon me for interjecting, but for some odd reason, your logic appears faulty. As you were...

Not sure why you bother quoting me if in your commentary you are going to continue to say I said or suggested things that I didn't....but if that makes you smile, so be it....i done with this discussion.

 

[muller877]

but it neither answers or does not answer the question about whether those 200,000 people living in Toronto and paying extraordinary portion of their income to transit are going to be even further hurt by FBD or not....are their commutes longer, on average, than the TTC users who are better off financially?

Is FBD going to (if it is introduced) impact people at the lower end of the economic spectrum more than others?

There a lots of questions about who should be receiving the funding. If social assistance rates already assume certain costs for transit should they receive a discount? (or alternatively receive the funding and reduce the social assistance rates)

And what level is the cut-off point? The poverty lobbyist groups have a self-serving reason to include as many people as possible. So we need a fair impartial analysis of who should be included.

How about seniors? And the students? Are we cutting them off to help fund this program? (makes sense if a portion of them are wealthy and do not need assistance)

And how many trips should the people on assistance receive? Should they have unlimited access? A certain number per day or month?

All of these are good questions. But we need to first address the 80%+ of people who can afford transit and find the best fare mechanism. The people who need funding should not be the tail that wags the dog. But I do believe that we should find a mechanism to fund them somehow (and eliminating the seniors/student discount at the same time will go a long way to do so).

 

[Momin]

Update on Option 1: http://urbantoronto.ca/news/2017/02/fare-integration-option-1-modifying-status-quo

Update on Options 2 & 3: http://urbantoronto.ca/news/2017/02/fare-integration-options-2-3-zone-and-hybrid-fare-systems

Update on Option 4: http://urbantoronto.ca/news/2017/02/fare-integration-option-4-fare-distance

 

[Palma]

Here's what you wrote:
By your own logic, with 200,000 Torontonians struggling to afford the present flat fare in Toronto, then there must be even more "lower income people" living outside of Toronto and commuting in. By the logic of what you state, since there's more outside of Toronto than the 200,000 in working in Toronto, that makes 400,000 + "lower income" people working in Toronto..."(primarily downtown)". Pretty Third World...

Pardon me for interjecting, but for some odd reason, your logic appears faulty. As you were...

If 200,000 are outside of Toronto how is that Torontos responsibilities? First the issue with No tolls being implemented and so Toronto has to shoulder those 2 roads and now they need to shoulder subsidization of 200,000 people living outside toronto?

 

[rbt]

If 200,000 are outside of Toronto how is that Torontos responsibilities?

It might be Toronto's responsibility if they would use Toronto based business as an employee or customer. Toronto business doesn't have voting rights but they do pay quite a bit of the property tax.

That said, if they're struggling to afford public transit fees, just how much of a contribution to Toronto business can they have?

 

[W. K. Lis]

From link:

You can vote in Toronto’s municipal election if you are:

• a Canadian citizen; and
• at least 18 years old; and
• a resident in the City of Toronto; or
• a non-resident of the City of Toronto, but you or your spouse own or rent property in the City; and
• not prohibited from voting under any law

You may only vote once in the City of Toronto municipal election regardless of how many properties you own or rent within the City. You must vote in the ward where you live.

An owner or tenant of non-residential property, or their spouse, is not eligible to vote for School Board Trustee.


Terms you may need help understanding

• As a resident elector
  • Your residence is where you live. If you live in a municipality, then you are eligible to vote in that municipality's election. You are only allowed to have one residence.
• As a non-resident elector
  • If you live in one municipality, and own or rent property in another municipality, you are eligible to vote in each municipality's election.
• As the spouse of a non-resident elector
  • If your spouse qualifies as a non-resident elector in a municipality, then you can also vote in that municipality's election.

So if you rent a room with a friend or own a property to rent it out, but still live outside of Toronto, you can vote in Toronto elections. That's why they ask for something with your Toronto address on it, like a bill, when you go voting. Even Canadian citizens living outside of Canada can vote, if they own a property in Toronto but don't live in it.

 

[steveintoronto]

If 200,000 are outside of Toronto how is that Torontos responsibilities? First the issue with No tolls being implemented and so Toronto has to shoulder those 2 roads and now they need to shoulder subsidization of 200,000 people living outside toronto?

Indeed, albeit you've lost the lineage of the comment:

TOareaFan said: ↑
Is that true? Lower income people rely on shorter trips? Everything i read about Toronto commutes indicates that most lower income people are struggling with long commutes because they are forced to live in the outer 416 or further afield for housing cost purposes and then have to commute long distances to the employment centres (primarily downtown).

 

[muller877]

If 200,000 are outside of Toronto how is that Torontos responsibilities? First the issue with No tolls being implemented and so Toronto has to shoulder those 2 roads and now they need to shoulder subsidization of 200,000 people living outside toronto?

Then we should feel fortunate. Hamilton has 2 major highways, a lot more truck traffic on them, a lot fewer people and a lower tax base to cover the costs with. Every city bears the cost of local roads and transportation. Stop feeling like we are hard done for. We live in a great city with a huge tax base...it's just misspent by the people on Queen St.

Toronto receives a huge portion of commercial, recreation and retail property taxes in the GTA. With this added revenue comes the cost to transport these people into the city (imagine that we don't get anything for free).

This is why the province has to step in on tolling, controlling NIMBY-ism via the OMB, etc. Our politicians still act as infants and don't understand the big picture. Without the DVP/Gardiner and the subway and GO transit we wouldn't have a financial district that is flourishing, 4 professional sports teams downtown (not in the burbs), etc. And the property taxes that we get from all of it