[sixrings]

we threw transitcity away. it wasnt perfect but shovels were in the ground. sometimes something is better then nothing. the nba players should be taking something rather then getting nothing. we should have taken something. i blame rob ford for being pro car in places he will never drive.

 

[GraphicMatt]

I don't think it needs to be that complicated. Metrolinx is supposed to be the mechanism that ensures transit projects see continuity between governments. Enshrine them with powers that makes it tough for legislators to change their 25-year-plan. Develop a governance model that balances democracy with effective planning. Develop revenue sources (road tolls, parking taxes, etc.) that go direct to Metrolinx and bypass general revenues.

Metrolinx is a good idea. It's too bad they've had so many growing pains and proven themselves toothless.

 

[Tulse]

Enshrine them with powers that makes it tough for legislators to change their 25-year-plan.

I'm not sure how that is possible -- whatever power any legislature can grant them can be undone just as easily by a future legislature. There isn't any mechanism I know that would allow a legislature to make any setup binding on future governments.

 

[gweed123]

I don't think it needs to be that complicated. Metrolinx is supposed to be the mechanism that ensures transit projects see continuity between governments. Enshrine them with powers that makes it tough for legislators to change their 25-year-plan. Develop a governance model that balances democracy with effective planning. Develop revenue sources (road tolls, parking taxes, etc.) that go direct to Metrolinx and bypass general revenues.

Metrolinx is a good idea. It's too bad they've had so many growing pains and proven themselves toothless.

I agree with this completely. To expand on it a bit further, in order to truly be a regional transit authority, it needs a few more things:

1) Complete control over the prioritization and design of the transit projects (i.e. butt out TTC, you've proven you're not really up to the task).

2) Some degree of political independence, to the point that another Provincial government *cough*Hudak*cough* couldn't come in and dismantle them with one foul swoop.

3) Some degree of independent revenue generation (road tolls, gas tax, etc). Basically enough external revenue that they can survive getting all Provincial funding cut off for a few years and still be able to proceed with ~30% of the projects they still have on the books (again, I'm thinking a return to a Harris-like era).

 

[rbt]

2) Some degree of political independence, to the point that another Provincial government *cough*Hudak*cough* couldn't come in and dismantle them with one foul swoop.

So, you basically need the feds to put Metrolinx into the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms OR for the entire province to be strongly in favour of the program (I.e. like Toronto Waterfront vs Ford).

 

[gweed123]

So, you basically need the feds to put Metrolinx into the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms OR for the entire province to be strongly in favour of the program (I.e. like Toronto Waterfront vs Ford).

They could follow a similar structure to Waterfront Toronto. Have the Feds, the Province, and the Municipalities involved. I envision Metrolinx much like a corporation, where certain levels of government control a certain percentage of it. The Province would have a 40% stake (their the ones fronting most of the money anyway), the Feds would have a 20% stake (occasionally giving funding for certain projects, but mainly just for balance of power), and the municipalities in the GTHA would split the remaining 40%. That basically means that no single government entity has majority control over Metrolinx, and thus it cannot be abolished without the approval of more than one level of government.

It's by no means bulletproof, but it adds an extra layer of security.

Although with this model, it is reasonable to expect that no more than 40% of the funding for infrastructure projects will come directly from Provincial coffers. This is where road tolling and gas taxes come in. 40% stake, 40% of capital funding seems like a pretty good deal from the Province to me. The remaining 60% would be a mix of federal funding, Metrolinx-generated revenue (user fees and/or taxes), and municipal capital investment.

 

[44 North]

Metrolinx is supposed to be the mechanism that ensures transit projects see continuity between governments

Good pithy statement. I'm liking these ideas about giving Metrolinx greater control. I'm liking them a lot. You guys sound like you know the logistics for a good working plan.

One hypothetical situation though: what if they have too much control/governance? For example, Metrolinx deciding Toronto should be rid of streetcars. They'd obviously encounter strong local opposition. Who then would be the arbiter in such a situation if this pseudo-corporation had equal or greater control concerning transit matters?

 

[Dan416]

The only real problem is that we live in a democracy, and Toronto itself is divided on what it wants/needs. As much as everyone here may agree on the DRL, how many average Joes have even heard of the DRL?

 

[gweed123]

The only real problem is that we live in a democracy, and Toronto itself is divided on what it wants/needs. As much as everyone here may agree on the DRL, how many average Joes have even heard of the DRL?

That's true, but the DRL is probably the easiest transit project to sell Toronto on. Everyone knows that Bloor-Yonge is a cluster**k every AM and PM rush hour. Make the case that it'll make that better, and you'll have many people sold. The problem is there hasn't been any type of ad campaign supporting the DRL. It's only the really "transit is evil and we should build more roads" and "the government shouldn't be spending money on anything" crowds that would ever really oppose the DRL.

People may be divided on which suburban projects should get the green light first, but I haven't encountered any "we don't need that now" resistance when explaining to average joe's what the DRL is. I'm sure for many people on here they've had similar experiences.

 

[44 North]

It seems your views have been clouded.

Many of the major newspaper's comment boards contain a staunch, anti-downtown attitude from posters. This was more apparent around election time, but is still rampant on The Sun. Make any mention of a Downtown Relief Line, and you're bound to get called out as a latte-sipping, elitist Lefty. People (and suburban Ford supporters) don't seem to grasp that the line's true benefit is for people traveling from outside the core.

 

[agoraflaneur]

Many of the major newspaper's comment boards contain a staunch, anti-downtown attitude from posters. This was more apparent around election time, but is still rampant on The Sun. Make any mention of a Downtown Relief Line, and you're bound to get called out as a latte-sipping, elitist Lefty. People (and suburban Ford supporters) don't seem to grasp that the line's true benefit is for people traveling from outside the core.

Good point. Perhaps we should rebrand this as a "Yonge Relief Line" or a "Yonge-Bloor Relief Line"?

OR

"Suburb transportation Congestion Relief Project" THAT will get some support!

 

[11th]

It seems your views have been clouded.

Many of the major newspaper's comment boards contain a staunch, anti-downtown attitude from posters. This was more apparent around election time, but is still rampant on The Sun. Make any mention of a Downtown Relief Line, and you're bound to get called out as a latte-sipping, elitist Lefty. People (and suburban Ford supporters) don't seem to grasp that the line's true benefit is for people traveling from outside the core.

The benefit of the DRL to people travelling from outside the core would be to allow them to get off the train at stations south of Bloor, or south of Eglinton if/when the DRL reaches Eglinton. They (people outside the core) can still get a seat, or get onto the train, with or without the DRL. But I do support the DRL, in that it provides rapid transit service to more area of downtown.

 

[GenerationW]

As long as the sway of suburban voters exists, the TTC will never be able to get its shit together.

I'm a suburbanite in favour of the DRL, but as long as downtown councilors don't care about it, it's hard to make the case that anyone else should.

But please, continue blaming the evil suburbs.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

I'm a suburbanite in favour of the DRL, but as long as downtown councilors don't care about it, it's hard to make the case that anyone else should.

But please, continue blaming the evil suburbs.

You are in the minority.

 

[JoeParez]

I'm a suburbanite in favour of the DRL, but as long as downtown councilors don't care about it, it's hard to make the case that anyone else should.

But please, continue blaming the evil suburbs.

Seconded.