JayBeeGooner
Active Member
I never implied he was trolling, but it's tough not to comment when someone from White Rock BC(he posted his location on other boards) is constantly criticising a city thousands of km from his location.
|
|
|
New Transit Funding Sources
- Thread starter denfromoakvillemilton
- Start date
ssiguy2
Senior Member
I was born and raised in the great South West {London} and went to university in Ottawa and Toronto and I go to Toronto every couple of years so I know the city well. Truth be told, of Canadian cities over one million, Toronto is my favorite.
It's just such a shame to go back to Toronto and know that short of the Stubway the transit system is exactly the same as it was when I left. Being a Vancouverite thru these years you see what a city can do when it decides to not only make transit a priority but when the citizens are willing to put their money where their mouths are. When they do and don't submit to every NIMBY in the district the result is a ever growing mass/rapid transit system and skyrocketing ridership levels with complete fare integration and a region that thinks regionally as opposed to turf wars.
Winnipeg just opened it's impressive but small BRT system and the citizens of Winnipeg put more of their own money into the line than Toronto has for it's TC plans yet Toronto is considerably wealthier and of course has 4.5 times the population.
The politicians of all political stripes in Toronto in the last 40 years have shown themselves to be gutless wonders by not bringing this issue to the forfront and telling Torontonians the clear truth......if you are not willing to pay you get nothing in return. This is why I have little faith in the new revenue tools that will be released because reports, which Toronto excels at, are the easy part. Toronto's ability to create reports and put forth "bold new plans" are the stuff that legends are made of.
Toronto politicians have made a living out of bitching at Ottawa and Queen's Park as it makes for good politics and re-election campaigns but gets Torontonians, quite literally, no where. The only way out of this politcal incompetence and bureaucratic inertia is to hold a BINDING plebisite.
The plebisite must show exactly what will be taxed, what the improvements will mean for their particular areas, and have FIRM timetables and budgets as Metrolinx and the TTC have a horrid record on both and Torontonians have no faith in them in either regard.
It's just such a shame to go back to Toronto and know that short of the Stubway the transit system is exactly the same as it was when I left. Being a Vancouverite thru these years you see what a city can do when it decides to not only make transit a priority but when the citizens are willing to put their money where their mouths are. When they do and don't submit to every NIMBY in the district the result is a ever growing mass/rapid transit system and skyrocketing ridership levels with complete fare integration and a region that thinks regionally as opposed to turf wars.
Winnipeg just opened it's impressive but small BRT system and the citizens of Winnipeg put more of their own money into the line than Toronto has for it's TC plans yet Toronto is considerably wealthier and of course has 4.5 times the population.
The politicians of all political stripes in Toronto in the last 40 years have shown themselves to be gutless wonders by not bringing this issue to the forfront and telling Torontonians the clear truth......if you are not willing to pay you get nothing in return. This is why I have little faith in the new revenue tools that will be released because reports, which Toronto excels at, are the easy part. Toronto's ability to create reports and put forth "bold new plans" are the stuff that legends are made of.
Toronto politicians have made a living out of bitching at Ottawa and Queen's Park as it makes for good politics and re-election campaigns but gets Torontonians, quite literally, no where. The only way out of this politcal incompetence and bureaucratic inertia is to hold a BINDING plebisite.
The plebisite must show exactly what will be taxed, what the improvements will mean for their particular areas, and have FIRM timetables and budgets as Metrolinx and the TTC have a horrid record on both and Torontonians have no faith in them in either regard.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Currently, rural ridings get better representation in both Queen's Park and Parliamnet Hill with a smaller population base. Urban ridings have a larger population base, so are less represented. Prince Edward Island is worth 3.5 times that of a member of parliament from Ontario, worse if from Toronto. See this link. That is why urban problems, like transit, is so on the back-burner. Farmers are just not interested in public transit.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
ssiguy:
The citizens of Toronto had voted for a soundbite mayor who had failed utterly in delivering subways without taxation - in spite of warnings that there are no free lunches - what makes you think said citizens will chose wisely now in a plebsite?
And before you quote me the paradise that is Vancouver, please enlighten us the raging debate over the subway to UBC. Or the spat between BC Government and Translink?
AoD
The citizens of Toronto had voted for a soundbite mayor who had failed utterly in delivering subways without taxation - in spite of warnings that there are no free lunches - what makes you think said citizens will chose wisely now in a plebsite?
And before you quote me the paradise that is Vancouver, please enlighten us the raging debate over the subway to UBC. Or the spat between BC Government and Translink?
AoD
Last edited:
doady
Senior Member
Vancouver dumps raw sewage into the ocean, so there is more money leftover for transit expansion there.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
I think that's Victoria.
AoD
AoD
ssiguy2
Senior Member
Who ever said Vancouver was a paradise? I certainly didn't.
The difference between Van/Cal/Edm/WPG/Ott is that they are building their transit systems but don't expect everyone else to cough up the money. As far as Ottawa is concerned, Ottawa ponied up $300 million for TC which is exactly $300 million more than the City of Toronto did. It's not Ottawa's fault that Toronto hasn't got around to spending it yet. How can they possible bitch at Ottawa and plead poverty when they haven't spent the money they were given? Oh, and before you blame that on Ford for cancelling Sheppard LRT, why hasn't the DM to Vic tunnel being constructed as we speak? Both sides agreed on a tunnel thru to atleast Consumers but alas no shovels in the ground.
As far as misrepresentation.......... PEI getting ton of seats for it's population effect everyone in the country not just Toronto. Alberta and BC are also under represented as are all of Ontario's other major cities. Toronto has gotten a massive amount from Queen's Park with no contributions required....Ottawa, Kitchener, and London should be so lucky.
Toronto is getting $8 billion for TC with no contribution required but Toronto only represents one-fifth the population of the province. As far as downloading well that happened to the other large urban centres of Ontario. While welfar payments maybe proportionatley higher in Toronto than elsewhere, try being a small county of under 100k where most of the populace is rural/small town and having all the provincial highways downloaded to local roads meaning the local munipalities have to maintain them. In terms of downloading the highways, Toronto got off easier than anywhere else in the province.
The difference between Van/Cal/Edm/WPG/Ott is that they are building their transit systems but don't expect everyone else to cough up the money. As far as Ottawa is concerned, Ottawa ponied up $300 million for TC which is exactly $300 million more than the City of Toronto did. It's not Ottawa's fault that Toronto hasn't got around to spending it yet. How can they possible bitch at Ottawa and plead poverty when they haven't spent the money they were given? Oh, and before you blame that on Ford for cancelling Sheppard LRT, why hasn't the DM to Vic tunnel being constructed as we speak? Both sides agreed on a tunnel thru to atleast Consumers but alas no shovels in the ground.
As far as misrepresentation.......... PEI getting ton of seats for it's population effect everyone in the country not just Toronto. Alberta and BC are also under represented as are all of Ontario's other major cities. Toronto has gotten a massive amount from Queen's Park with no contributions required....Ottawa, Kitchener, and London should be so lucky.
Toronto is getting $8 billion for TC with no contribution required but Toronto only represents one-fifth the population of the province. As far as downloading well that happened to the other large urban centres of Ontario. While welfar payments maybe proportionatley higher in Toronto than elsewhere, try being a small county of under 100k where most of the populace is rural/small town and having all the provincial highways downloaded to local roads meaning the local munipalities have to maintain them. In terms of downloading the highways, Toronto got off easier than anywhere else in the province.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
You didn't really address my question - the citizens of the city voted for a mayor who claimed they can get something for nothing, why do you think a plebisite will necessarily provide a different outcome? Interesting you mentioned Sheppard - as i recall, major components such as the grade seperation did get completed - surely you understand that infrastructure projects operate on schedules and these are sensitive to disruptions? Actually, better yet, i thought someone claimed the shovels can get in before you have a plan - i didnt see it occuring even in said mayors early tenure.
Not to say that I particularly agree with the city not raising funds of its' own for transit, but given SoGR and other needs of the existing and aging system - without parallel, can you claim, pro rata, that the city puts less by the way of tax revenues, into transit investments in comparison to other jurisdictions? Unless you can offer me an apples to apples comparison, claims of the city not doing its part is rather empty.
Not to say that I particularly agree with the city not raising funds of its' own for transit, but given SoGR and other needs of the existing and aging system - without parallel, can you claim, pro rata, that the city puts less by the way of tax revenues, into transit investments in comparison to other jurisdictions? Unless you can offer me an apples to apples comparison, claims of the city not doing its part is rather empty.
Last edited:
44 North
Senior Member
Two years is a long delay. But I thought construction couldn't start right away because a new procurement process for private contractors had to be restarted (don't ask me why), and this pushed Sheppard's start date to 2016.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Anyways, the thread is about raising new revenue, not for someone telling me that the city is bitching. I sugeest we stick to the former and leave whats already been said in umpteen other threads speaks for itself.
AoD
AoD
44 North
Senior Member
I've mentioned an idea for funding on several newspaper comment boards, resulting in me being ridiculed and chewed-out by both Left and Right. I think the tax is apt, profitable, and fair. And the only loosely comparable idea I've seen in Toronto's transit funding ideas was found on p.85 of Gordon Chong's report.
My idea is a modest payroll/commuter tax on non-resident City employees.
Perhaps the idea could be a tax on all municipal employees, but the key emphasis is putting a significantly higher tax on non-residents. Why only municipal employees (TTC, Fire, EMS, Police City, etc)?
-Because it's doable.
-They receive generous wages.
-A good portion of City employees live outside of TO (perhaps into the 75% range).
-It won't result in businesses fleeing.
This tax idea has several incarnations used/in-use in different cities like Chicago, NYC, Washington, Philadelphia. I like the idea because it puts a cost onto intercity commuters who otherwise wouldn't pay for the infrastructure and services they use...and whom are a fundamental cause of gridlock and transit problems. What's more, a key reason for City employees' high wage is because TO's high cost of living was used as a bargaining point. Well, that point is completely moot when people live outside our borders and contribute nothing to our taxbase.
Some might see this as a Charter challenge because of supposed residency discrimination, but I can't see that being the case. The tax is not a residency requirement, nor does it discriminate on the basis of province of residency. Perhaps at some time the tax can be spread to the private sector as well, but as it stands the only logical start is to place it on municipal employees.
My idea is a modest payroll/commuter tax on non-resident City employees.
Perhaps the idea could be a tax on all municipal employees, but the key emphasis is putting a significantly higher tax on non-residents. Why only municipal employees (TTC, Fire, EMS, Police City, etc)?
-Because it's doable.
-They receive generous wages.
-A good portion of City employees live outside of TO (perhaps into the 75% range).
-It won't result in businesses fleeing.
This tax idea has several incarnations used/in-use in different cities like Chicago, NYC, Washington, Philadelphia. I like the idea because it puts a cost onto intercity commuters who otherwise wouldn't pay for the infrastructure and services they use...and whom are a fundamental cause of gridlock and transit problems. What's more, a key reason for City employees' high wage is because TO's high cost of living was used as a bargaining point. Well, that point is completely moot when people live outside our borders and contribute nothing to our taxbase.
Some might see this as a Charter challenge because of supposed residency discrimination, but I can't see that being the case. The tax is not a residency requirement, nor does it discriminate on the basis of province of residency. Perhaps at some time the tax can be spread to the private sector as well, but as it stands the only logical start is to place it on municipal employees.
Last edited:
Dan416
Senior Member
Oh Jesus Christ, just what we need, another bad idea aimed at punishing 905ers. Good luck with that.
rbt
Senior Member
Agreed.
Cooperate to implement a regional fee (toll, tax, ...). Anyway that it unfolds, Toronto (namely downtown) will benefit the most. Even if 100% of the revenue went into GO service.
A half dozen new downtown office buildings as a result of frequent, high-capacity service on GO Lake Shore (commute/worker mobility is the growth rate limiter at this time) is tens of millions per year in property tax revenue, and likely a bunch more TTC riders too taking the high-margin reverse commute (near zero cost to provide; $3 retail fare).
Last edited:
TOareaFan
Superstar
The Mayor of Oakville speaks up.
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/tra...akville_big_questions_about_the_big_move.html
While seemingly trying to bring all parties together his closing comment is a bit worrisome to me. Throughout the article he is talking about his estimated cost of $1,000 per year of tax on GTA residents and saying it is a lot of money....then he closes with this:
I may be reading him wrong but this sounds like a guy saying, "why should we in Oakville pay $1,000 each when all we need is electrifiction of our GO line and that won't cost that much". So how is that bringing everyone together if, in the end, he is going to measure the overall cost of improved regional transit against what Oakville, alone, gets? Seems like talking out of both sides of his mouth to me.
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/tra...akville_big_questions_about_the_big_move.html
While seemingly trying to bring all parties together his closing comment is a bit worrisome to me. Throughout the article he is talking about his estimated cost of $1,000 per year of tax on GTA residents and saying it is a lot of money....then he closes with this:
I may be reading him wrong but this sounds like a guy saying, "why should we in Oakville pay $1,000 each when all we need is electrifiction of our GO line and that won't cost that much". So how is that bringing everyone together if, in the end, he is going to measure the overall cost of improved regional transit against what Oakville, alone, gets? Seems like talking out of both sides of his mouth to me.
44 North
Senior Member
It's not punishing anybody, it's not a bad idea, nor is it aimed at 905ers. It's just a way for Toronto to gain a needed revenue tool. Nothing more. Other cities do this. It can be worked into the next CBA, and TO would get, I dunno, $30-50M every year. It's a small wage tax, and its main purpose is to recoup the costs of infrastructure and services people aren't paying for. IMO it's a helluva lot better than one-sided ideas like placing tolls on our highways.
I've worked for the City, I read the news, I know how systemic the issue of municipal workers' non-residency is. So what's the point of paying-out exorbitant salaries for no other reason than TO's high cost of living when the majority of our employees don't live here and commute from up to 100km away?
Last edited: