[TOareaFan]

Can we turn down the hysterics? I agree with Doady, and what he is saying is not that hard, Toronto needs to get going or get lost. The fighting has to stop. I hope they have a contingency play for eglinton to the airport and the DRL in this. In this money raising plan.


Toronto needs to eat these taxes as much as anyone else.

You do see the irony in the juxtaposition of the two bolded parts....right?

Aside from that it is not just Toronto that is questioning/dragging on the new revenue tools.

http://www.bramptonguardian.com/new...ennell-opposed-to-new-taxes-fees-for-big-move

http://www.bramptonguardian.com/new...ton-wants-province-to-pay-the-bill-for-growth

If the Province moves ahead with taxes to pay for transit, it means Halton residents will be "sending the equivalent of $150 million per year for 15-plus years before the region sees any transit upgrades from Metrolinx," said Milton Councillor Colin Best.

Here is a NP column showing the position of a few mayors....not a lot of agreement.

http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/po...to-proposed-transit-revenue-tools-for-the-gta

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

You do see the irony in the juxtaposition of the two bolded parts....right?

Aside from that it is not just Toronto that is questioning/dragging on the new revenue tools.

http://www.bramptonguardian.com/new...ennell-opposed-to-new-taxes-fees-for-big-move

http://www.bramptonguardian.com/new...ton-wants-province-to-pay-the-bill-for-growth



Here is a NP column showing the position of a few mayors....not a lot of agreement.

http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/po...to-proposed-transit-revenue-tools-for-the-gta

Yes, I do. Brampton wants the train and Richmond Hill wants the subway. You were right before. This is all about who gets what. The province already has laid out the now, 15, and 25 year plans.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Can someone please explain the logic of having 905 transit taxes stay in 905?

Do 905 folks even know that their area code covers a vast area from Oshawa to Hamilton and down to Niagara?

I have family in Fort Erie and their number is a 905 code. I think they'd laugh that for some reason Oshawa residents would contribute to their transit, but not 416.

 

[historydude2012]

Well Twitterverse just reported Councillor Crawford had a mea culpa and will now support adding the funding debate to the city council agenda, after voting against it at the Exec meeting.

AoD

As a Guildwood resident myself for the last 20+ years its nice to see some sensibility on this issue. I only wish my own representative Paul Ainslie had this kind of sense, but he is too busy dreaming of subways to Ajax and the Toronto Zoo for that matter (yes, in the past he has shown support for this).

Ideally of course I would love for the provincial government to find ways to cut costs and use that money to fund transit entirely, but thats never going to happen regardless of the party in power provincially. We might get one nice underutilised subway but then nothing for another 15-20 years. To me it seems like rather than funding transit appropriately in this city based on density and usage patterns that exist today (and that are expected within say 10-15 years), politics gets in the way and we end up building subways (or at least wanting to build them) to...well nowhere. Then when someone has the audacity to propose something that isn't subways those areas that are getting something other than subways are being treated as "second class citizens".

I'd also like it if during these transit discussions on council if our mayor would look at a map and realise just on physical size alone all of "Old Toronto" (basically for the sake of ease lets say this comprises of our downtown) could be fit into the area that used to comprise of "Scarborough" roughly twice.

But what has clearly progressed into a rant on my part aside, like I wrote its nice to see another "Scarborough" councillor (not sure on the positions of Berardinetti, Cho, or Glenn De Baeremaeker though I imagine they would be inclined to do this as well) at least willing to address the issue of how do we fund transit instead of well, not addressing it (like Ford).

 

[SunriseChampion]

Rants seldom do make sense.
Drivers should pay directly for maintenance of roads is what I wanted to say.
Maybe I'm the wrong driver to advocate for road tolls as every week I look forward to parking my truck after work on a Friday and not having to be bothered by it 'til Monday morn.
I'd hate to be attached at the hip to a car.

 

[spider]

Local Transit is of interest and utility to locals only by definition. I have family all over Ontario, some in Toronto, some in smaller towns and cities and some in areas of the province where transit is a curiosity that appears in the news from away but has no meaning to them because local transit simply doesn't exist in their world.

The newspaper and TV coverage given to Transit problems in Toronto may as well be reportage from Bangladesh as far as they are concerned, they don't perceive a connection between their everyday life and a society dependant on streetcars and subways let alone an obligation to support such by paying an additional gas tax (Toronto tax) to support them. I have trouble arguing against their position.

Toronto has a Transit problem that needs massive injections of money to make it go away, that money must come from the residents/taxpayers of Toronto especially when you consider that Toronto municipal taxes have been so low for so long that we can't plead that we can't afford it.

GO trains and busses are of mutual utility to the residents of Ontario at large, they shouldn't be factored into Toronto Transit affairs.

Here is a proposal. Forget all the “revenue tools”, place a 10% tax increase on the Toronto municipal tax bill dedicated to TTC expansion. Those taxpayers who can't afford it may apply for a tax deferment that is attached to their property payable on transfer of ownership of the deed.

TTC fares are raised to $4.00 cash only except Toronto taxpayers may apply for discounted fares (tokens, passes) that are not available to non 416 TTC riders.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

spider:

There is merit in the argument that the majority of additional transit funding should come from the region itself. That said, using this perspective, couldn't one argue that, given the depressed state of the economy in regions outside of the GTA and other selected areas, that the services such as health, education and social services are subsidized Toronto taxpayers, and these services are of limited utility to Torontonians? In fact, a case in point would be the significantly higher education taxes paid for by Toronto residents. Quid pro quo, as they say.

GO trains and busses are of mutual utility to the residents of Ontario at large, they shouldn't be factored into Toronto Transit affairs.

That's funny, how are the majority of GO train and buses riders not a Toronto transit affair, considering where the trips begins and end?

AoD

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Local Transit is of interest and utility to locals only by definition. I have family all over Ontario, some in Toronto, some in smaller towns and cities and some in areas of the province where transit is a curiosity that appears in the news from away but has no meaning to them because local transit simply doesn't exist in their world.

The newspaper and TV coverage given to Transit problems in Toronto may as well be reportage from Bangladesh as far as they are concerned, they don't perceive a connection between their everyday life and a society dependant on streetcars and subways let alone an obligation to support such by paying an additional gas tax (Toronto tax) to support them. I have trouble arguing against their position.

Toronto has a Transit problem that needs massive injections of money to make it go away, that money must come from the residents/taxpayers of Toronto especially when you consider that Toronto municipal taxes have been so low for so long that we can't plead that we can't afford it.

GO trains and busses are of mutual utility to the residents of Ontario at large, they shouldn't be factored into Toronto Transit affairs.

Here is a proposal. Forget all the “revenue tools”, place a 10% tax increase on the Toronto municipal tax bill dedicated to TTC expansion. Those taxpayers who can't afford it may apply for a tax deferment that is attached to their property payable on transfer of ownership of the deed.

TTC fares are raised to $4.00 cash only except Toronto taxpayers may apply for discounted fares (tokens, passes) that are not available to non 416 TTC riders.

This sets a very dangerous precedent. Do I, as a taxpayer, now get to demand that my tax dollars don't get to go to the healthcare of Northern Ontario residents. Or even that it doesn't go to repairing a particular stretch of road within my own city that I never use.

The way I see it, either we all should pay for it or none of us pay. Public transit benefits everyone. Including those who will never see a bus in their life.

 

[calimehtar]

It's true, taxes are typically raised from the province (or country) as a whole and spent where they are needed, and transit isn't *such* a special case that it should be an exception to this. However this is political and politics are rarely fair. Having a dedicated tax not only is a good way to make transit spending palatable for provincial voters who won't pay for it, and probably resent Toronto as a rule. It is also a reasonable defence against the Harris problem where one government sees building transit infrastructure as a priority and then it is replaced by a government with a rural base that is demanding cuts on spending. If your rural voters aren't paying for it, then it doesn't need to be cut.

So the 'new revenue tools' seem like a reasonable compromise, although unfortunately not a silver bullet since there's plenty of dissent already.

I think that allocating some of this money for road improvements is intended to sweeten it for areas like Ajax and Oshawa which will benefit only a little bit from improvements to Go and not at all from improvements to the TTC. With any luck the provincial government will take their feedback and do the right thing, whatever that is, regardless.

 

[spider]

This sets a very dangerous precedent. Do I, as a taxpayer, now get to demand that my tax dollars don't get to go to the healthcare of Northern Ontario residents.

Would you prefer to buy health insurance for a trip to Barrie?

The way I see it, either we all should pay for it or none of us pay. Public transit benefits everyone. Including those who will never see a bus in their life

Health care, Education and Social services provided by the Provincial government don't start or stop at municipal boundaries, local transit does and for that reason should be financed by the people who use it.

I imagine a very low percentage of GO rider trips originate and end inside Toronto's boundaries as if the service were an extension of the TTC.

 

[Rainforest]

It's true, taxes are typically raised from the province (or country) as a whole and spent where they are needed, and transit isn't *such* a special case that it should be an exception to this. However this is political and politics are rarely fair. Having a dedicated tax not only is a good way to make transit spending palatable for provincial voters who won't pay for it, and probably resent Toronto as a rule. It is also a reasonable defence against the Harris problem where one government sees building transit infrastructure as a priority and then it is replaced by a government with a rural base that is demanding cuts on spending. If your rural voters aren't paying for it, then it doesn't need to be cut.

So the 'new revenue tools' seem like a reasonable compromise, although unfortunately not a silver bullet since there's plenty of dissent already.

I think that allocating some of this money for road improvements is intended to sweeten it for areas like Ajax and Oshawa which will benefit only a little bit from improvements to Go and not at all from improvements to the TTC. With any luck the provincial government will take their feedback and do the right thing, whatever that is, regardless.

Agreed entirely; you have made a very accurate description of the situation.

If we want any transit expansion achieved at all, we should rely primarily on regional taxes and fees. It is hard enough to get the majority support for new taxes at the regional level; support from the whole province is not attainable any time soon.

 

[11th]

Health care, Education and Social services provided by the Provincial government don't start or stop at municipal boundaries, local transit does and for that reason should be financed by the people who use it.

I thought even some outside of the GTA would agree to the notion that "if GTA prospers, Ontario benefits" .

 

[Rainforest]

I thought even some outside of the GTA would agree to the notion that "if GTA prospers, Ontario benefits" .

While this is technically true, such a notion is impossible to sell in rural Ontario ridings. Hell freezes over before those voters agree to tax themselves more to help Torontonians pay for transit expansion.

 

[TOareaFan]

Right now there is a 14.7 cent provincial gas tax on every litre of gas sold in the province.......add to that a new 5.3 cent "municipal" gas tax.....collected province wide by the province.......the province distributes the new taxes to the municipality based on municipality collected (so a visitor from London filling his car in Toronto is contributing to Toronto's pool of funds and vice versa ).....make the gas companies do the accounting on where it was collected.......municipalities within Metrolinx' area of influence don't see the money......it goes to ML.......areas outside of that area get the money for transit or roads in their municipality......if there is a small city with no road or transit needs (do they exist?) they can make the case that they can use the money to lower their property taxes......then no one outside of the GTA is paying for our stuff but there is also no incentive to fill up where the new tax does not apply.

Only in the GTA will there be the debate about where the money should be spent relative to where it was collected.

 

[W. K. Lis]

If one owns an automobile in downtown Toronto, one would most likely use it less. Yet, according to this old story about car insurance (see this link), owning a car in an old Toronto address (using the postal code) will cost more in insurance than one outside of Toronto.

You would think that using the car less should result in lower insurance for that car, using the postal code as a guide.

I just wonder if the 905 drivers who have collisions inside Toronto are the ones who jack up the insurance costs for the 416 drivers. And get away with it, since they drive more. Maybe it is because there is less car ownership, hence the higher the insurance rates?

Maybe the province should add a fee based on where the postal code of where they are most likely to use their car more. That fee should then go towards transit improvements, and for 911 and EMS services. The more transit improvements in a postal code, the less the fee.