[spider]

The city owns the TTC! Yet it is subsidized. Except that the fare is a user fee to use the TTC. No drivers pay a user fee for using the city roads, whether it be gas, hybrid, or electric.

A/ Simply raise the fare to cover the real cost of running the TTC and no subsidy would be necessary.
B/ Drivers don't pay a user fee but then neither do cyclists or pedestrians not to mention the TTC.
C/ The City also owns water mains and sewers, their cost is presumably recovered by fees charged to property owners, no subsidy involved.

What was your problem again?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

A/ Simply raise the fare to cover the real cost of running the TTC and no subsidy would be necessary

Think congestion is bad now? Do this and watch how much worse it becomes overnight.

 

[rbt]

Think congestion is bad now? Do this and watch how much worse it becomes overnight.

Take both TTC and Toronto Works off of property tax revenues.

Now, give both TTC and Toronto Works 50% of the roadway space (on a 4 lane street, TTC gets 2 lanes and works gets 2).

Give them the ability to raise their own funds through tolling and other fees for using their piece of the roadway. TTC may choose to use their lanes as dedicated to transit or choose to share, or opt to remove transit entirely from a street and lease the lanes to works exclusively (University might get this treatment).


I don't know how things would turn out but it would be one hell of an experiment.

 

[CDL.TO]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...-transit-in-toronto-hamilton/article11458558/

Ontario budget to include funding to expand public transit in Toronto, Hamilton

 

[drum118]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...-transit-in-toronto-hamilton/article11458558/

Ontario budget to include funding to expand public transit in Toronto, Hamilton

Looks like the government is not going to wait for the June 1st report from Metrolinx.

If Transit riders are to pay the full cost of operating transit, car drivers better prepared for a huge hike in cost of driving on the roads.

Anyone having an accident causing transit to be delay let alone other drivers, they pickup up the full cost of riders time been delay by this accident. In some cases a fleet of cabs are call to the site to transfer the riders to where they are going with the full cost of the ride being past on the the driver that cause the accident in the first place. A few bills will put the driver in the poor house in no time at all.

Cars (Traffic) cause 35% reduction in running time for a transit vehicle to the point transit has to put out extra vehicles to take up the 35% slack that reduce the cost ratio of the route.

Removing transit from a street because of traffic and force riders to walk long distance is shear nonsenses. It show how much drivers think of themselves and don't care a rat ass about cycles or pedestrians.

 

[rbt]

"Ontario budget to include funding to expand public transit in Toronto, Hamilton"

Looks like the government is not going to wait for the June 1st report from Metrolinx.

I'm pretty sure that statement is referring to 30 minute service on the Lake Shore line and already committed capital funding.

 

[CDL.TO]

I'm pretty sure that statement is referring to 30 minute service on the Lake Shore line and already committed capital funding.

Did you read the article?

 

[W. K. Lis]

A/ Simply raise the fare to cover the real cost of running the TTC and no subsidy would be necessary.
B/ Drivers don't pay a user fee but then neither do cyclists or pedestrians not to mention the TTC.
C/ The City also owns water mains and sewers, their cost is presumably recovered by fees charged to property owners, no subsidy involved.

What was your problem again?

The HST (13%) goes into general revenue. The Ontario gas tax is 14.7¢ per litre, which has not increased due to inflation for years.

Electric vehicles don't pay a gas tax, of course, and hybrids use less gasoline, so pay less for using provincial highways.

 

[rbt]

Did you read the article?

Sure did, including all the quotes about provinding more detail on how funding might come about.

Budget will contain actual dollars for 30 minute service and committed capital items.

It will also contain either money for making a decision (referendum dollars) OR structural changes to Metrolinx so they can borrow money and increase taxes (laundry list of items similar to City of Toronto Act; Metrolinx will still need to pick which to actually use and at what rate).

I do not believe the premier will announce actual new taxation (rate and date) with this budget as that would make her personally responsible and she has been trying really hard to state that it's up to Metrolinx.

On May 3rd, Metrolinx will not have an additional revenue stream setup but they may have pitchforks at their front door. I would be very pleased, and likely to send the Liberals a donation, if I am wrong.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Sure did, including all the quotes about provinding more detail on how funding might come about.

Budget will contain actual dollars for 30 minute service and committed capital items.

It will also contain either money for making a decision (referendum dollars) OR structural changes to Metrolinx so they can borrow money and increase taxes (laundry list of items similar to City of Toronto Act; Metrolinx will still need to pick which to actually use and at what rate).

I do not believe the premier will announce actual new taxation (rate and date) with this budget as that would make her personally responsible and she has been trying really hard to state that it's up to Metrolinx.

On May 3rd, Metrolinx will not have an additional revenue stream setup but they may have pitchforks at their front door. I would be very pleased, and likely to send the Liberals a donation, if I am wrong.

For clarification, it is expected that Metrolinx will implement new funding tools once the Province gives them the authority to implement any funding tools they deem necessary?

 

[nfitz]

I do not believe the premier will announce actual new taxation (rate and date) with this budget as that would make her personally responsible and she has been trying really hard to state that it's up to Metrolinx.

I'd tend to agree with you.

On the other hand, if they go with a separate process for this, they'd need to get that through Queens Park. If they included it in the budget, and they are cutting a deal with the NDP (which looks very likely, given the Finance Minister's comments about this not just being a Liberal budge), they might be better to get this through the legislature now, and selling it to the NDP as the trade-off for something.

The budget might be a very pragmatic way to implement this without having a huge drama.

 

[TOareaFan]

Looks like the government is not going to wait for the June 1st report from Metrolinx.

If Transit riders are to pay the full cost of operating transit, car drivers better prepared for a huge hike in cost of driving on the roads.

Anyone having an accident causing transit to be delay let alone other drivers, they pickup up the full cost of riders time been delay by this accident. In some cases a fleet of cabs are call to the site to transfer the riders to where they are going with the full cost of the ride being past on the the driver that cause the accident in the first place. A few bills will put the driver in the poor house in no time at all.

Cars (Traffic) cause 35% reduction in running time for a transit vehicle to the point transit has to put out extra vehicles to take up the 35% slack that reduce the cost ratio of the route.

Removing transit from a street because of traffic and force riders to walk long distance is shear nonsenses. It show how much drivers think of themselves and don't care a rat ass about cycles or pedestrians.

First bolded part.....is that anyone's goal? Putting people in the poor house? Really?

Second bolded part....drivers are getting in accidents intentionally to inconvenience cyclists and pedestrians? Really?

 

[rbt]

For clarification, it is expected that Metrolinx will implement new funding tools once the Province gives them the authority to implement any funding tools they deem necessary?

Maybe. If I was Wynne I would require a majority of regional governments (Peel, York, Durham, Hamilton, and Toronto) to ratify a 20 year Metrolinx taxation/spending proposal. This would be the check & balance preventing Metrolinx from going crazy with spending and takes the problem and blame off the provinces plate while getting the job done.

If this is the framework being put into place, we're still over a year away from Metrolinx having an independent revenue stream but it will be extremely difficult for the conservatives to rollback once it is in place.

Wynne can take the credit if it works and blame the municipalities if it doesn't.

The budget might be a very pragmatic way to implement this without having a huge drama.

One thing we learned from the federal Conservatives is that you can change absolutely anything as a part of the budget including things with zero financial impact. In fact, the more you shove into the budget, the easier it is to slip things through unnoticed.

Kibitzing with Metrolinx's working structure as part of the budget is wise from a political standpoint and the timing is right.

 

[innsertnamehere]

I think he is referencing the constant complaining about bicycles despite them having equal rights to the road as drivers.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

In the meantime:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ting-new-levies-on-motorists/article11464302/

http://www.thestar.com/news/city_ha...i_and_revenue_tools_for_transit_building.html

Quotes from the Globe article:

“I personally won’t be supporting it. I know a couple of my executive members aren’t going to support it. … It very well could get filed,” he said.
...
Councillor David Shiner, a member of the mayor’s executive, said he, too, does not support the new revenue tools. He said the provincial government already has the money to build transit.
“Stop telling people in this city, in this province, you have to pay more and more and more. People are fed up,” he said, adding he does not want to send the issue on to council.
...
But Councillor Michael Thompson, who’s also a member of executive and chair of the economic development committee, said he’s not ruling the new revenue tools out.
“We have to have a real intelligent discussion around that. None of us is in favour of more taxing and charging and what have you. But I think that there are some things in that we’re going to have to seriously look at in terms of implementing,” he said.

AoD