[Dan416]

I blame Provincial politics more than politics down at City Hall. Believe it or not City Council isn't completely incompetent on transit issues. The great subway vs. LRT debate of yesteryear demonstrated that Council can indeed come to a logical and informed decision on transit issues even when under huge political pressure. I have near full faith in Council to make the proper decisions on transit issues such as the DRL.

What Toronto needs to do is implement a series of permanent, Toronto exclusive transit funding tools. That way the City of Toronto alone will control its transit destiny. No longer depending on Ontario for transit. If this happened, there would be near zero threat of projects like the FWLRT and SELRT being canceled, even if Ford were to win reelection.

Things like FWLRT and SELRT are hardly priorities. That's part of the problem with the transit planning so far. So much focus on projects that are way too low on a list of priorities. Much more important are things that will actually help getting around the city: the DRL and turning GO into an S-bahn. All else is a distraction.

 

[calimehtar]

the interesting thing about the whole revenue tools debate is that most or all of them would be raised in the area that the money will be spent. I wonder if that idea could be finessed in order to push legislation through. if there were city by city or even ward by ward referendums, i suspect they would pass in the old city of Toronto. plans could then be revised so that only projects entirely within that area are built.

 

[gweed123]

the interesting thing about the whole revenue tools debate is that most or all of them would be raised in the area that the money will be spent. I wonder if that idea could be finessed in order to push legislation through. if there were city by city or even ward by ward referendums, i suspect they would pass in the old city of Toronto. plans could then be revised so that only projects entirely within that area are built.

Some of the revenue tools can be done city-by-city (or even ward-by-ward), but some of them (like a 1% Sales Tax) require regional implementation.

I did do some math a while ago with the 1% Sales Tax, to see what the funding breakdown would be per region (Toronto, Durham, York, Peel, Halton, Hamilton, GO) if the funds were divided up 50% by ridership, and 50% by population. The result was a pretty equal distribution that was able to pay for a lot of the projects those regions had wanted, or at least pay for their priority projects. It was able to pay for the Hamilton B-Line, the Halton BRT, the Hurontario LRT, the DRL and North Yonge (up to Steeles), and the Durham BRT. The only one that really needed outside funding was the Yonge extension in YR, because the cost is so skewed compared to their current population and current ridership. This was all over a 10 year period, FYI.

 

[W. K. Lis]

I blame Provincial politics more than politics down at City Hall. Believe it or not City Council isn't completely incompetent on transit issues. The great subway vs. LRT debate of yesteryear demonstrated that Council can indeed come to a logical and informed decision on transit issues even when under huge political pressure. I have near full faith in Council to make the proper decisions on transit issues such as the DRL.

What Toronto needs to do is implement a series of permanent, Toronto exclusive transit funding tools. That way the City of Toronto alone will control its transit destiny. No longer depending on Ontario for transit. If this happened, there would be near zero threat of projects like the FWLRT and SELRT being canceled, even if Ford were to win reelection.

I agree. Canada and the provinces have had little support for urban areas for public transit compared to other western democracies. Rural areas get better representation based on population for their ridings, so the rural residents get a stronger voice.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I was thinking of Gweed's OAIC (Ontario Auto Insurance Corporation) transit funding idea and I think I've come up with a variation of that idea that is more politically viable and that would have more benefits for Toronto.

I propose having the City of Toronto create its own municipally run auto insurance company. The rates at TAI (Toronto Auto Insurance) would be x% lower than the current market rates. The profits generated from this quazi crown corporation would be applied directly to transit funding within Toronto. What makes this idea better than Gweed's proposal (at least for Toronto) is that there is nothing stopping TAI from operating across Ontario. That means that the huge profits generated across the province would be applied directly and exclusively to transit in Toronto.

On the political side of things, I believe that TAI would be an easier sell to Toronto City Council than OAIC (Ontario Auto Insurance Corporation) would be to the Provincal Legislature. And both left and right leaning councillors would be able to stand behind the idea. The right could frame this as putting money back in the hands of car drivers and the left will be able to celebrate that they now have a series of permanent funding tools. Rob Ford will now also have his Sheppard Subway dream funded. It's a win win situation for all.


Any thoughts on this idea guys?

 

[Johnny Au]

I was thinking of Gweed's OAIC (Ontario Auto Insurance Corporation) transit funding idea and I think I've come up with a variation of that idea that is more politically viable and that would have more benefits for Toronto.

I propose having the City of Toronto create its own municipally run auto insurance company. The rates at TAI (Toronto Auto Insurance) would be x% lower than the current market rates. The profits generated from this quazi crown corporation would be applied directly to transit funding within Toronto. What makes this idea better than Gweed's proposal (at least for Toronto) is that there is nothing stopping TAI from operating across Ontario. That means that the huge profits generated across the province would be applied directly and exclusively to transit in Toronto.

On the political side of things, I believe that TAI would be an easier sell to Toronto City Council than OAIC (Ontario Auto Insurance Corporation) would be to the Provincal Legislature. And both left and right leaning councillors would be able to stand behind the idea. The right could frame this as putting money back in the hands of car drivers and the left will be able to celebrate that they now have a series of permanent funding tools. Rob Ford will now also have his Sheppard Subway dream funded. It's a win win situation for all.


Any thoughts on this idea guys?

I second the motion.

 

[Disparishun]

Things like FWLRT and SELRT are hardly priorities. That's part of the problem with the transit planning so far. So much focus on projects that are way too low on a list of priorities. Much more important are things that will actually help getting around the city: the DRL and turning GO into an S-bahn. All else is a distraction.

+1.

 

[sixrings]

This sounds very similar to Wong-tams bank of Toronto idea from last year. What happened to that plan to raise revenue?

 

[gweed123]

I was thinking of Gweed's OAIC (Ontario Auto Insurance Corporation) transit funding idea and I think I've come up with a variation of that idea that is more politically viable and that would have more benefits for Toronto.

I propose having the City of Toronto create its own municipally run auto insurance company. The rates at TAI (Toronto Auto Insurance) would be x% lower than the current market rates. The profits generated from this quazi crown corporation would be applied directly to transit funding within Toronto. What makes this idea better than Gweed's proposal (at least for Toronto) is that there is nothing stopping TAI from operating across Ontario. That means that the huge profits generated across the province would be applied directly and exclusively to transit in Toronto.

On the political side of things, I believe that TAI would be an easier sell to Toronto City Council than OAIC (Ontario Auto Insurance Corporation) would be to the Provincal Legislature. And both left and right leaning councillors would be able to stand behind the idea. The right could frame this as putting money back in the hands of car drivers and the left will be able to celebrate that they now have a series of permanent funding tools. Rob Ford will now also have his Sheppard Subway dream funded. It's a win win situation for all.


Any thoughts on this idea guys?

Interesting idea, and it would certainly accomplish the same goal. There are definitely advantages and disadvantages to doing the AIC model at the Provincial vs the Municipal level. Of course, doing it Province-wide means more revenue, but it also means that revenue is distributed across the Province. Doing it just in Toronto means the revenue is more targeted, but it also means a smaller market to draw from. It also means that the City of Toronto Act would probably need to be amended to include the AIC, since I don't believe there is a provision for such a thing in the current act (but I could be mistaken, I haven't read the act in a pretty long time, and I wasn't specifically looking for a provision like that when I read it).

Ideally, a good hybrid would be to just include it in the Metrolinx revenue tools, that way it's targeted towards just the GTHA, and the funding would get mixed in with the revenue from all of the other tools. But barring that happening, yes I believe doing it at the TO Council level would be a good option too. I certainly hope that's at least one revenue tool that Ford can get behind. I just hope it's proposed by a moderate (either someone moderately right-leaning or moderately left-leaning). I don't want the ultra-right wingers politically taking credit for something like that, and anything proposed by the left wingers will be automatically rejected by the Fordites, regardless of how good of an idea it is. This idea would certainly make a good plank issue for a centrist mayoral candidate, like Stintz for example.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Of course, doing it Province-wide means more revenue, but it also means that revenue is distributed across the Province. Doing it just in Toronto means the revenue is more targeted, but it also means a smaller market to draw from.

My idea was to actually have TAI operate across Ontario. It mean that the revenue would be exactly the same as your Provincially run version, but all that revenue would be focused in Toronto instead of distributed across Ontario. I'm not sure if there are any laws which would prohibit this.

It also means that the City of Toronto Act would probably need to be amended to include the AIC, since I don't believe there is a provision for such a thing in the current act (but I could be mistaken, I haven't read the act in a pretty long time, and I wasn't specifically looking for a provision like that when I read it).

Haven't read the act either, but I'm not entirely convinced that it would need to be amended. Toronto already owns and operates a few corporations, including Toronto Hydro. Don't see how auto insurance would be any different.

But barring that happening, yes I believe doing it at the TO Council level would be a good option too. I certainly hope that's at least one revenue tool that Ford can get behind. I just hope it's proposed by a moderate (either someone moderately right-leaning or moderately left-leaning).

I plan on forwarding this to some centrist sometime in the future, depending on which direction the current funding debate takes. I would like them to consider some other tools which can generate more than a $1 Billion annually before they look at this, which I estimate would generate only $300 Million annually.

One more thing, TAI dosen't need to only offer auto insurance. It could also branch of into flood and home insurance. I believe the Federal government down in the States already does this.

 

[spider]

Haven't read the act either, but I'm not entirely convinced that it would need to be amended. Toronto already owns and operates a few corporations, including Toronto Hydro. Don't see how auto insurance would be any different.

Toronto Hydro is a monopoly as it should be. Aren't insurance companies regulated by a Provincial or even Federal body?

I don't think you can force anyone to buy insurance from a City owned company, I know I don't want to be at the mercy of the same gaggle of lazy underachievers that abound in the City bureaucracy when I need help or guidance with an auto claim. I doubt if the other insurance companies would be all that eager to co-operate with them either.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Toronto Hydro is a monopoly as it should be. Aren't insurance companies regulated by a Provincial or even Federal body?

I don't think you can force anyone to buy insurance from a City owned company, I know I don't want to be at the mercy of the same gaggle of lazy underachievers that abound in the City bureaucracy when I need help or guidance with an auto claim. I doubt if the other insurance companies would be all that eager to co-operate with them either.

I never suggested forcing people to purchase auto insurance from Toronto. The idea is to have very competitive rates to encourage people to purchase our auto insurance.

 

[gweed123]

My idea was to actually have TAI operate across Ontario. It mean that the revenue would be exactly the same as your Provincially run version, but all that revenue would be focused in Toronto instead of distributed across Ontario. I'm not sure if there are any laws which would prohibit this.

Good from a Toronto perspective, but as someone who lives in Ottawa, I would much rather see my auto insurance money going to projects in Ottawa than projects in Toronto. I'm sure residents of the 905 would have a similar feeling. I think that in general people would be much more inclined to switch to it if they knew the money was going to a project near them, as opposed to building transit exclusively in Toronto. Toronto already gets a disproportionately large percentage of Provincial transit dollars.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Good from a Toronto perspective, but as someone who lives in Ottawa, I would much rather see my auto insurance money going to projects in Ottawa than projects in Toronto. I'm sure residents of the 905 would have a similar feeling. I think that in general people would be much more inclined to switch to it if they knew the money was going to a project near them, as opposed to building transit exclusively in Toronto. Toronto already gets a disproportionately large percentage of Provincial transit dollars.

We share the exact same thoughts. However I figure that people across Ontario would be more than glad enough to join TAI since rates would be lower than the market rates. Most people just want a few more dollars in their pocket.

The biggest resistance to this will be from the Legislature. Some of the MPPs may feel a sense of embarrassment if Toronto were to begin the process of creating an auto insurance company to generate transit funding without their approval. This may very well jumpstart efforts at Queens Park to create a provincial auto insurance corp, similar to what you've proposed.

 

[adeel]

while it sounds good in theory (and if it ends up happening, I hvae no problem taking advantage), i don't see it happening...municipal banks, auto insurance corps...whats next municipal construction companies? Where is the theoretical end?

Isn't there a strong likelihood that a munucipal anything ends up like toronto hydro or any other government department, unionized employees with high wages (not bad in and of itself, but it is if it becomes higher than normal market wages - which gov't union jobs it seems tend to skew towards) where the profit motive ends up being lost or bungled?