|
|
|
New Transit Funding Sources
- Thread starter denfromoakvillemilton
- Start date
TOareaFan
Superstar
Anyone attend the transit panel's first public consultation in Vaughan on Monday night?
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
TOareafan:
I don't know about you, but clearly successive governments hasn't been accountable about that, has it?
AoD
I don't know about you, but clearly successive governments hasn't been accountable about that, has it?
AoD
TOareaFan
Superstar
not sure what you are asking me.
TJ O'Pootertoot
Senior Member
I did. Anne Golden, Paul Bedford and several other board members were there. Royson James was supposed to do a Q&A with Golden but didn't show and several of us mentioned it would have been a bigger crowd if they'd had it in a more central (and transit-oriented!) location.
Short story was that it was interesting and I believe that the people on the panel are committed to getting this done. How it will play out politically, who knows...
The format was basically a couple of roundtable discussions based on the questions you can see in their online survey so I'd encourage anyone on this board to take the time to fill it out. http://transitpanel.ca/have-your-say
TOareaFan
Superstar
Well it was just the first of 4...they are spread out around the GTA (Vaughan on Monday, tonight in Toronto, November 13 in Mississauga and November 14 in Pickering)
I am trying hard to get over the offense I take to the panel even existing and their expansion of their own mandate to beyond the investment strategy....agree, not sure how it all plays out.
Thanks...format was what I was gonna ask next....wasn't sure what format they were taking.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
Looks like the liberals are starting to release tid-bits of their budget, including an independent fund to ensure infrastructure revenue from the taxes is spent on, well, infrastructure:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ontarios-economic-plan-to-shift-focus-from-austerity-to-spending-and-growth/article15303331/
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ontarios-economic-plan-to-shift-focus-from-austerity-to-spending-and-growth/article15303331/
rbt
Senior Member
I like that. It might even be enough to earn a donation this year.
Design+Build's are popular politically because they're damn hard to cancel by the next government. Funds in a trust account also makes projects hard to cancel but still allows flexibility to make modifications when a design flaw is discovered.
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
rbt:
The latter is what they used to lock in the Spadina subway funding I believe.
AoD
The latter is what they used to lock in the Spadina subway funding I believe.
AoD
Yup, Ottawa is using that for it's LRT. By doing a fixed-price contract like that, it also insulates the government from any cost overruns. Unfortunately though, those contracts aren't signed until only a couple months before construction is to start.
But yes, by tendering the entire project in one big contract, it makes it a lot harder to cancel.
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
TTC fares heading north by a nickel
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/transportation/2013/11/13/ttc_fares_heading_north_by_a_nickel.html
.....
The TTC is proposing to hike fares by more than a nickel in the new year, to raise an extra $36.5 million toward the costs of operating the system. The nickel increase on the price of a token would be applied proportionally to other fares, including the Metropass.
In addition, a staff report that will go before the board next week recommends one of the following options:
A 25-cent increase on the $3 cash fare, which is used by about 10 per cent of riders. Or an additional increase in the Metropass, used by about half of riders, so that its cost is the equivalent of 49.5 tokens rather than today’s 48.5.
Although the price of a Metropass has increased with inflation since 2010, the effective cost per ride has actually dropped because pass users are riding an average of 74 times on their passes rather than 70, says the report. The 5-cent recommended fare rise for 2014 would take the cost of the adult Metropass to $131 a month from the current $128.50. If the board decides to add a trip to the pass formula, it will be $133.50. In 2010, a Metropass cost $121. With the available federal tax credit, “(the Metropass) is still a pretty good deal, but it’s not sustainable,†said TTC spokesman Brad Ross.
.....
2014 - 2023 TTC Capital Budget Report PDF: http://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Com.../November_18/Reports/2014_2023_TTC_CAPITA.pdf
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/transportation/2013/11/13/ttc_fares_heading_north_by_a_nickel.html
.....
The TTC is proposing to hike fares by more than a nickel in the new year, to raise an extra $36.5 million toward the costs of operating the system. The nickel increase on the price of a token would be applied proportionally to other fares, including the Metropass.
In addition, a staff report that will go before the board next week recommends one of the following options:
A 25-cent increase on the $3 cash fare, which is used by about 10 per cent of riders. Or an additional increase in the Metropass, used by about half of riders, so that its cost is the equivalent of 49.5 tokens rather than today’s 48.5.
Although the price of a Metropass has increased with inflation since 2010, the effective cost per ride has actually dropped because pass users are riding an average of 74 times on their passes rather than 70, says the report. The 5-cent recommended fare rise for 2014 would take the cost of the adult Metropass to $131 a month from the current $128.50. If the board decides to add a trip to the pass formula, it will be $133.50. In 2010, a Metropass cost $121. With the available federal tax credit, “(the Metropass) is still a pretty good deal, but it’s not sustainable,†said TTC spokesman Brad Ross.
.....
2014 - 2023 TTC Capital Budget Report PDF: http://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Com.../November_18/Reports/2014_2023_TTC_CAPITA.pdf
Last edited:
Johnny Au
Senior Member
There are many people who use a Metropass to take extremely short trips as well (such as no more than five surface vehicle stops or entering the subway and getting off at the next station).
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Guilty as charged
In the summer I'll almost always walk, but in the winter I'll hop on the Yonge Subway with my Metropass from Dundas to King.
TOareaFan
Superstar
Guilty as charged
In the summer I'll almost always walk, but in the winter I'll hop on the Yonge Subway with my Metropass from Dundas to King.
And the problem with this is?
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
Great Mass Transit Doesn't Have to Cost a Fortune
Read More: http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/11/12/hong_kong_mtr_costs_great_transit_at_low_cost.html
.....
MTR does things other than Hong Kong transportation operations, but their Hong Kong transportation division spent 7.82 billion Hong Kong dollars in 2012. By contrast, the Washington Metrpolitan Area Transit Authority had $2.13 billion in 2012 operating expenses. At the current exchange rate of 7.75 Hong Kong dollars per U.S. dollar, that means MTR is spending less than one-half of what WMATA spends.
- Now, of course there's nothing wrong, per se, with spending a lot of money on your city's transportation system in order to obtain better transportation. But if you compare the level of service MTR delivers to Hong Kong with what WMATA delivers for D.C., I think you'd find it hard to make the case that what we're getting is twice as good. MTR has excellent train frequencies, about the same number of train stations, and over five times as many riders as WMATA. The only downside is that MTR's operating hours are a bit more restrictive than WMATA's. Beyond that, they're spending less money and delivering a better service—a valuable reminder that cost effectiveness counts for something.
- I've heard it said by U.S.-based transit activists that the success of MTR in providing a high level of service without ongoing operating subsidies is attributable to the fact that the company is also a substantial real estate developer and landlord around rail stations. It's true that they do those things, but it's simply not the case that landlording is subsidizing the transportation operations—the transportation is profitable on its own terms.
- Conversely, I've heard it said by U.S.-based conservatives that the success of MTR is due to it being a private for-profit firm rather than a government agency. But while it's true that MTR is company listed on the Hang Seng Stock Exchange, it's also true that over 70 percent of the shares in the company are still held by the Hong Kong government.
- MTR is cost-effective because the Hong Kong government demands cost-effective transit. Conversely, I bet MTR isn't nearly as good a place to work as WMATA or other American transit agencies for rank-and-file employees. But whatever the case may be about this, whatever MTR is doing with its workforce isn't undermining its ability to hire enough people to run an effective transit system.
.....
Read More: http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/11/12/hong_kong_mtr_costs_great_transit_at_low_cost.html
.....
MTR does things other than Hong Kong transportation operations, but their Hong Kong transportation division spent 7.82 billion Hong Kong dollars in 2012. By contrast, the Washington Metrpolitan Area Transit Authority had $2.13 billion in 2012 operating expenses. At the current exchange rate of 7.75 Hong Kong dollars per U.S. dollar, that means MTR is spending less than one-half of what WMATA spends.
- Now, of course there's nothing wrong, per se, with spending a lot of money on your city's transportation system in order to obtain better transportation. But if you compare the level of service MTR delivers to Hong Kong with what WMATA delivers for D.C., I think you'd find it hard to make the case that what we're getting is twice as good. MTR has excellent train frequencies, about the same number of train stations, and over five times as many riders as WMATA. The only downside is that MTR's operating hours are a bit more restrictive than WMATA's. Beyond that, they're spending less money and delivering a better service—a valuable reminder that cost effectiveness counts for something.
- I've heard it said by U.S.-based transit activists that the success of MTR in providing a high level of service without ongoing operating subsidies is attributable to the fact that the company is also a substantial real estate developer and landlord around rail stations. It's true that they do those things, but it's simply not the case that landlording is subsidizing the transportation operations—the transportation is profitable on its own terms.
- Conversely, I've heard it said by U.S.-based conservatives that the success of MTR is due to it being a private for-profit firm rather than a government agency. But while it's true that MTR is company listed on the Hang Seng Stock Exchange, it's also true that over 70 percent of the shares in the company are still held by the Hong Kong government.
- MTR is cost-effective because the Hong Kong government demands cost-effective transit. Conversely, I bet MTR isn't nearly as good a place to work as WMATA or other American transit agencies for rank-and-file employees. But whatever the case may be about this, whatever MTR is doing with its workforce isn't undermining its ability to hire enough people to run an effective transit system.
.....