[JasonParis]

It's looking rosy for transit riders
Improved service -- as long as union talks go according to plan
By BRIAN GRAY, SUN MEDIA

Riding the rocket could be an even better way with funding for service improvements announced in yesterday's city budget proposal -- but looming bargaining with the TTC union could put the brakes on the plan.

Bus riders will be the biggest winners beginning next month, TTC Chief General Manager Gary Webster said.

"Starting in February, I think the public's going to see significant increases in service," Webster said. "They're going to see less crowding because there's going to be the right amount of service on the routes."

Service will also be able to increase as ridership increases, he said.

City Manager Shirley Hoy said the cost of a new contract with the union representing TTC employees this spring was factored into the budget but wouldn't reveal the figure.

If the new contract costs more than predicted, the additional cash will have to come from elsewhere in the TTC budget, she said.

The budget also allows for the $1 million needed for the introduction of 100 new buses into the TTC's fleet in November -- more than a year after they were slated to hit the streets. That doesn't include the cost of buying the buses or staff to operate them.

The city will also spend $2.6 million this year ensuring all city bus routes run weekdays from 6 a.m. to 1 a.m.

Webster said that is "very exciting" for current Toronto transit riders and those looking to use the system.

"I think what we're going to see is people are going to be attracted to transit because they know they're going to get home at night on transit," he said.

As for the 10-month wait for the new buses and the increased off-peak service, Joe Pennachetti, the city's chief financial planner, said that was as early as the money would allow.

"Ideally the commission would have liked to have started that earlier," Pennachetti said. "The problem is in order to fit in within our financial parameters, the best we can do is start it up in November."

 

[TrickyRicky]

The emphasis on the 3.75% property tax increase is a diversion from the fact that the big tax burden is shifted to home buyers through the ridiculously high land transfer tax. The emphasis on pointing out the larger tax increases in the suburbs is a psychological tactic to take the edge off the increase by appealing to people's sense of schadenfreund. Again I'm glad there is at least some baseline of reasonability in the cities finances but this is no great occasion to celebrate as the Mayor proposes.

I also was interested in the home price increases published. MPAC assessments have been frozen since 2005 but will re-set in 2009. These re-set assessements make any tax increase value irrelevent by comparison. Take the downtown west neighbourhood with the real estate designation c-2. Prices have appreciated by 49 percent since 2005 in this district. Forget the 3.75% tax increase, taxes will increase by hundreds and even thousands of dollars per household in 2009. In this sense the burden is progressive because it takes from affluent and soon to be affluent areas in the inner city to subsidize the inner suburbs. Except people live where they live, so this re-distribution accelerates the homogenization of neighbourhoods accelerating the division of the city along income and wealth lines.

 

[allabootmatt]

But your two complaints are contradictory; the LTT reduces the property tax burden, as you say. So in the context of MPAC going up, isn't it better that taxation be done on the basis of actual market value, rather than the (often wild) assessors' judgments? And further, done at the point where someone is already spending a lot of money to buy a home, rather than just trying to meet annual expenses?

 

[unimaginative2]

For the average homebuyer, the added LTT can just be paid off in their mortgage as an repeated expense just like a comparable increase in property tax. The only people who will potentially have to swallow the tax are speculators, and I see nothing wrong with taking a tiny bit of the froth out of an overheated market.

The only problem with it I can see is that it's hardly a recession-proof tax. In a housing market crash, the city's budget could take a big hit.

 

[TrickyRicky]

allabootmatt,

Good point although it assumes that the land transfer tax if not implemented would directly be translated into a general property tax increase. This would never occur for political reasons. On the issues of LTT easing the burden of increase on pre-existing home owners, true but my point with regard to the 2009 property tax re-assessments is if you live in most of the old city of Toronto mill rate increases have a much smaller impact on your bottom line than 2009 assessment re-alignment. If say your are paying $4000 in property tax a 3.75% mill rate increase will be $150, but if your assessment increases by 30 percent above the city-wide average your tax increase will be $1200. It will be interesting to see how this plays out next year.

 

[JasonParis]

New money
JENNIFER LEWINGTON
February 6, 2008

City staff introduce a balanced budget this year for the first time since amalgamation. Some of the new revenue sources that are balancing the proposed 2008 operating budget:

$188-million From the province: $149-million for transit and $39-million from the phased-in upload of the Ontario Drug Benefit and the Ontario Disability Support Payment

$175-million New taxes on property sales and personal vehicle registration

$101-million Property tax increase: 3.75 per cent for homeowners and 1.25 per cent for business

$58-million Internal savings

$38-million Water rate increase: separate from the main city budget, council earlier approved a 9-per-cent rate increase

$17-million Garbage levy: new consumption-based fees to take effect later this year

$15.4-million Fee increases for city services, including:

$3.7-million in increases for recreation program fees

$2-million from a proposed rise in fees for ice rinks, sports fields, pools.