[kettal]

When strictly talking finances, the city should be careful about over taxing motorists...

If 75% of drivers switched to transit, each and every street would still have to be plowed, highways would still have to be maintained, and roads resurfaced and repaired every year - they'd now be pounded by bus tires instead. Meanwhile, the operating budget of the TTC would balloon, the capital budget would go through the roof due to mandatory subway construction, and hundreds of millions of dollars would be lost from fewer street parking permits, less Green P parking revenues, and fewer people paying the Miller license renewal tax. Again, thinking only in terms of cash flow, each driver lost to the TTC ironically puts the city more and more in the red.

Next you're going to tell me we need more smokers so they can pay cigarette taxes, right?

 

[SunriseChampion]

Revenue from municipal parking income.
Road tolls. Especially for the Gardiner and DVP.
I drive to work everyday because I have to. Don't look at me like that. I really have to. Construction tradesman. I'm all for tolls if they go to transit because I understand the importance of a good transit system. I do think though that, if anything like that were implemented, commercial vehicles should be tolled at a discounted rate. There really isn't anything I can do but drive. We carpool already so that's a moot point.
I don't mind the taxing of parking spots as has been mentioned either.

 

[kettal]

Construction tradesman. I'm all for tolls if they go to transit because I understand the importance of a good transit system. I do think though that, if anything like that were implemented, commercial vehicles should be tolled at a discounted rate. There really isn't anything I can do but drive. We carpool already so that's a moot point.

You can just be happy that you get to work quicker now that fewer suit-and-briefcase types are clogging up the road.

 

[salvius]

Next you're going to tell me we need more smokers so they can pay cigarette taxes, right?

Motorists pay a good chunk of change and more than their fair share for infrastructure improvement. I know it's not a popular thing to say, but it is true. I'm not sure why drivers need to take a further hit to subsadise TTC users.

The province should provide a 50% operating subsidy to TTC, taken from general taxation revenues, and the other half should come from the fare box.

 

[kettal]

Motorists pay a good chunk of change and more than their fair share for infrastructure improvement. I know it's not a popular thing to say, but it is true. I'm not sure why drivers need to take a further hit to subsadise TTC users.

You're acting like "motorists" is a different species of human than TTC user.

TTC undeniably improves the state of the roads and driving. Remember when the TTC went on a week-long strike? How would you like to drive in that traffic every day?

We all pay for the infrastructure whether we have a car or not. If you're trying to claim that the gas tax covers the cost of roads, and then some, you are wrong. It mainly comes from property taxes which is paid by everyone. Roads are incredibly expensive.

 

[kEiThZ]

I'd be okay with a sales tax increase of 1 or even 2 points to bring us back to where we were with the 7% GST, but such a policy is electoral suicide.

Such taxes would be supported if there was a perception that it was actually improving city services. From the perspective of most suburban 416 residents, the various Miller fees have been cash grabs...because very few of those residents have seen any discernible difference in services. If you told the public that the money was not going into general revenue but would be used strictly to fund transit, I think residents would support it.

 

[salvius]

You're acting like "motorists" is a different species of human than TTC user.

Not in the least, though many motorists likely do not use the TTC. It's impossible for a considerable number of people.

TTC undeniably improves the state of the roads and driving. Remember when the TTC went on a week-long strike? How would you like to drive in that traffic every day?

I would not. TTC, however, receives a fairly direct subsidy from drivers currently in addition to the generalised property tax pool.

We all pay for the infrastructure whether we have a car or not. If you're trying to claim that the gas tax covers the cost of roads, and then some, you are wrong. It mainly comes from property taxes which is paid by everyone. Roads are incredibly expensive.

Gas taxes fund all provincial road improvements and considerably more ('more' depending on year and gas $$$) and even some public transit, and the rest goes into general government coffers. In 2009, MTO's budget is 1.3 billion capital and 800 million operating, give or take (this includes, for the record, subsidies for GO, so not just roads and highways). I would imagine the gas tax collection will be relatively stable, though lower than last year, so probably ~3 billion.

Blame the province (and feds could do a bit more too!) for not passing that onto the municipalities for road infrastructure and counting it as general revenue instead. That would proportionally bring in several hundred million to Toronto. Nevertheless, we cannot forget that provincial grants and subsidies cover 25% of the overall Toronto budget AND that there is a PT contribution from the federal Gas Tax Fund (~160 million this year). Top all that off with ~20 million from the Green P.

Should be quite good to satisfy the ~150 million road budget - we can throw in related infrastructure repair and make it ~200 million. In fact, the gas tax funds could start covering off the road deficit in Toronto, but that revenue is going elsewhere, for all sorts of reasons.

So yes, I am saying that motorists do cover the costs (and more!) and in addition subsidise the TTC already, some of it directly and some of it not.

 

[EnviroTO]

Bake sale.

 

[Darwinkgo]

How about counting maintenance as an operational expense and then setting fairs to cover 50% of operational expenses. Then, Metropasses (or new smart cards) could be made non-transferable and have a photo on them, and when they take the photo they verify whether your a Toronto resident or not and you pay for your monthly pass or credits at differential rates depending on whether you contribute to the civic tax base. Non residents pay the equivalent of 100% farebox recovery, whereas Toronto residents pay 50%.

Hotels would be able to sell or include resident priced day passes for their guests, and the convention centre would offer every convention attendee a similar pass.

 

[kettal]

Gas taxes fund all provincial road improvements and considerably more ('more' depending on year and gas $$$) and even some public transit, and the rest goes into general government coffers. In 2009, MTO's budget is 1.3 billion capital and 800 million operating, give or take (this includes, for the record, subsidies for GO, so not just roads and highways). I would imagine the gas tax collection will be relatively stable, though lower than last year, so probably ~3 billion.

Blame the province (and feds could do a bit more too!) for not passing that onto the municipalities for road infrastructure and counting it as general revenue instead. That would proportionally bring in several hundred million to Toronto. Nevertheless, we cannot forget that provincial grants and subsidies cover 25% of the overall Toronto budget AND that there is a PT contribution from the federal Gas Tax Fund (~160 million this year). Top all that off with ~20 million from the Green P.

Should be quite good to satisfy the ~150 million road budget - we can throw in related infrastructure repair and make it ~200 million. In fact, the gas tax funds could start covering off the road deficit in Toronto, but that revenue is going elsewhere, for all sorts of reasons.

So yes, I am saying that motorists do cover the costs (and more!) and in addition subsidise the TTC already, some of it directly and some of it not.

The MTO budget you use obviously excludes the capital costs of infrastructure.

Are you forgetting that Highway 407 cost over $100 billion in land acquisitions to contstruct?

So if we presume that 407 was the only road in the province (it's not), that would take 33 years of ALL gas tax revenue to build that one road.

(apologies for using the 407 despite it being a private operation, but I don't have the details for 401, 400, or whatever other highway. We can presume the costs were similar. If it makes you happier, feel free to deduct $3.1 B from the $100 B to take into account the sale of the highway.)

 

[scarberiankhatru]

The 407's land did not cost $100B.

 

[golodhendil]

I have always felt that TTC/Metrolinx should get involved in selling/developing land above their yards and stations, so that the sales and development profits can be added into the transit authority's budget. Do you think this model will ever fly in Toronto/Canada? It has been wildly successful for transport companies in East Asia (even though they turn a profit even from operation alone, development profits most certainly add to their coffers), and the MBTA in Boston also has a real estate branch to develop TOD on land owned by the agency.

 

[DavidH]

The 407's land did not cost $100B.

The claim seems to be straight off of wikipedia. Following the reference there, the ultimate source was a comment by the Member for Quinte on October 21 1998 during the debates on selling it off. His exact words were:

How many dollars do we have invested in the 407 at the present time? As of March 31, the taxpayers of Ontario have somewhere around $104 billion.

Later:

I think this business plan clearly - and I've been assured by the minister that of this $104 billion or $107 billion that we have invested in this thing so far...

I see no rebuttal of the amount by anyone else in the debate, but that number still seems grossly inflated

 

[TOareaFan]

The 407's land did not cost $100B.

not even close!......surely!

 

[rbt]

not even close!......surely!

Hansard documents indicate $100B is short by 4 to 7% of actual land purchase cost.

The little bit of work to build the highway itself would bring the total to $110Billion, and we have no idea whether those are inflation adjusted numbers or not. If they're not inflation adjusted to the time of the statement, then the actual capital cost today would be closer to $250B to buy land and build the exact same thing in that location.