We'll start with the subway map first. We can put up info about the BRT networks later.
Yeah, I think that's definitely the most important thing to do. If you can't figure out a good timeline or what routes should be LRT, BRT or regular bus service, just stick with the original plan; campaigning for more subways to be included in plans and for proper RT infrastructure to get built with current funding instead of Transit City.
I think that giving a general message like that could easily beat out a proper plan with BRT, LRT, etc on it. It shows that you're not trying to take control of others, including politicians and citizens, and are instead campaigning for the government to make a better plan.
It'll also seem a lot simpler if we just show "these are the subways we should be having" instead of "these subways, these BRTs which will be running in this fashion, as well as these LRTs, and these souped up bus routes." It also gives you a lot more to focus on. You'll be able to zero in on subways vs. transit city. Comparing to how subways and LRTs are built in other cities, looking at growth and density along the big corridors (Sheppard, STC, Eglinton & Don Mills,) and looking at costs and building techniques. A simple point is that the more stuff you propose, the more it's going to take to explain things. Stick to the point, and people get the message; Transit City won't be sufficient for the future and we should be investing in subway.
EDIT: What I did there is a great example of what
not to do. Just stick with the main point, and don't go off on long tangents about what your specialized opinion on everything is. Keep yourself on a short leash, and keep to the main idea, making sure people know everything about subways so they can urge their representatives and friends/family to take action in terms of subways and more responsible transit planning.