Calgary Public Transit II

[5seconds]

Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby

It's probably not the only reason, but an annual pass is essentially printing a thousand dollar bill, with the security and counterfeit measures implied. It's hard-ish to fence transit passes, I'm guessing, so the level of printing technology CT uses is enough to discourage counterfeiting; with an annual pass, it would be a much more attractive target. And if someone lost their wallet, 🞵🞵🞵🞵 goes $1K.

I think the electronic version would be easier to manage. If an electronic year pass was lost or stolen, it could be deactivated and a new one re-issued (with administration fees of course.). If the pass is issued with photo ID, I wouldn't see a problem.

[Aegis]

Used the C-train a few times recently (I'm not a regular rider), and I gotta say, I really like the modern c-train cars. I like the seating arrangement whereby the seats are long and continuous row along the wall of the train. Much more efficient than the "2 rows of 2 seat arrangement", I think.

[5seconds]

Not sure if it has been posted, but there is a little more info on the Connect card on the CT website, including a timeline of the rollout (fully operational by June 2012)

http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/connect.html

[Radley77]

Originally Posted by srperrycgy

As of the 1st, the Senior Annual Transit Pass will increase to $55/year.
The Low-Income Senior Annual Pass will remain at $15/year.

I did some research and found that the Calgary Transit rate is the lowest in the country:

Vancouver $558/yr (Low-Income Pass available at $45/yr)
Edmonton $156/yr (Low-Income Pass available at $121.50/yr)
Saskatoon $268.75/yr
Regina $202.00/yr
Winnipeg $462.00/yr
Ottawa $444.00/yr (Some Senior Free Fare Days)
Hamilton $205/yr (Free over 80)
Toronto $1248/yr
Montreal $525/yr
Quebec City $847.80/yr
Saint John $600/yr
Halifax $624/yr
St. John's $540/yr

Just putting the data out there. Discuss.

Somewhat related: one of the things that is unfair to seniors is that usually property taxes are rising at faster than the rate of inflation. IMO, seniors are pay much more than their fair share of growth through property taxes. Not that fair to seniors on a fixed income.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by Radley77

Somewhat related: one of the things that is unfair to seniors is that usually property taxes are rising at faster than the rate of inflation. IMO, seniors are pay much more than their fair share of growth through property taxes. Not that fair to seniors on a fixed income.

Property taxes have been rising faster than inflation, but so have property values. If the senior is paying property taxes they also own property, so their asset base rises commensurate with the property tax.

That said seniors who don't own property have a bigger problem, they too have to bear increased property taxes as the landlord passes along the property tax increase through rent increase.

[Rusty van Reddick]

Originally Posted by Cage

That said seniors who don't own property have a bigger problem, they too have to bear increased property taxes as the landlord passes along the property tax increase through rent increase.

So do single moms on AISH, and they have to pay more than 12x what seniors do- regardless of income- even after this increase.

It's a perverse system and one we should all be ashamed of. Especially the wealthy seniors who've taken advantage of it and haven't voiced their disavowal of this unearned, bloated privilege.

[Radley77]

Originally Posted by Rusty van Reddick

So do single moms on AISH, and they have to pay more than 12x what seniors do- regardless of income- even after this increase.

It's a perverse system and one we should all be ashamed of. Especially the wealthy seniors who've taken advantage of it and haven't voiced their disavowal of this unearned, bloated privilege.

I think though that seniors have built and paid for the current public transit should be somewhat limited exposed to hikes in property taxes above the rate of inflation. It may not seem like a lot, but what about seniors who live to 90 or 100. 25+ years of property taxes rate increases and public transit rate increases at a rate greater than inflation seems punitive IMO. Should they be partially paying for all these service improvements for things like GPS on buses, smart card readers, air conditioned units, station upgrades, etc. through higher and higher property taxes???

Both fares and property taxes have been rising at greater than the rate of inflation. Bottom line is I don't think seniors should have to pay for "growth" aspects of property taxes or fare increases.

Seniors is also a fairly big category... there is a big difference between say a senior that just turned 65 and one that is widowed, can't drive any more and turning 95. I don't think it's fair to the elderly to be burdened with the costs of growth.

[MalcolmTucker]

An easy system for senior property tax deferral should be in place all over the province within the year in the form of publicly administered reverse mortgages or some such.

[Aegis]

Originally Posted by Cage

Property taxes have been rising faster than inflation, but so have property values. If the senior is paying property taxes they also own property, so their asset base rises commensurate with the property tax.

That said seniors who don't own property have a bigger problem, they too have to bear increased property taxes as the landlord passes along the property tax increase through rent increase.

The problem in making this comparison is that City expenditure tends to rise at a linear rate and is an annual cash flow, whereas and the returns from owning property are usually highly leveraged (20x for a 1st time homebuyer), non-linear (have volatility) and are not a cash flow.

From your argument it would follow that I should have more money in my wallet because my property value decreased. While it's possible that this could happen, (with a 1 yr lag-time, which is huge for this scenario to play out), it wouldn't matter because the overall property value has decreased and thus I'm worse off.

Because the level property taxation based on City expenditure only, it really has nothing to do with the returns from owning property. The reason why the City prefers an asset-taxation is because it limits any volatility in their revenue (the homeowner has to deal with the volatility, the City does not). In some ways, property tax is a really bizarre way of spreading out the burden for City expenditure. If anything, it just means that the highest valued properties pay more tax, even though they use the same amount of services (alternative systems mean more volatility in revenue, especially in an economic depression)

It would be accurate to say that if a senior owns property, they are paying the equivalent of 12 monthly adult passes to the Finance & Supply department, rather than Calgary Transit. If a senior doesn't own property, then they are likely incurring less of a burden than property owners because the dynamics of the rental market will dictate if the landlord can pass on any theoretical increase in property taxes. Either way, the City gets the money.

Are there any Alderman that have, on record, asked for cheaper monthly adult passes? Or do they all just think that working people can continue to absorb increases in transit fares that far exceed inflation (locally and nationally)?

[Rusty van Reddick]

Originally Posted by Radley77

I think though that seniors have built and paid for the current public transit should be somewhat limited exposed to hikes in property taxes above the rate of inflation. It may not seem like a lot, but what about seniors who live to 90 or 100. 25+ years of property taxes rate increases and public transit rate increases at a rate greater than inflation seems punitive IMO. Should they be partially paying for all these service improvements for things like GPS on buses, smart card readers, air conditioned units, station upgrades, etc. through higher and higher property taxes???

Both fares and property taxes have been rising at greater than the rate of inflation. Bottom line is I don't think seniors should have to pay for "growth" aspects of property taxes or fare increases.

Seniors is also a fairly big category... there is a big difference between say a senior that just turned 65 and one that is widowed, can't drive any more and turning 95. I don't think it's fair to the elderly to be burdened with the costs of growth.

What about the seniors, like my colleague's 90 year old mother who immigrated from the US a few years ago, who have never paid a PENNY in local property taxes?

Young persons are MUCH more likely to be impoverished than are the elderly. The notion that the elderly are (in general) poor, in Canada, is a myth. A $55/yr transit pass for the elderly with zero income tests is perverse. It's EVIL. You can't come up with any logic to support it that's not easily reducible to absurdity. The only justification for it is political.

We're almost all on "fixed incomes" so don't bring up that nonsense, please.

[Radley77]

Originally Posted by Rusty van Reddick

What about the seniors, like my colleague's 90 year old mother who immigrated from the US a few years ago, who have never paid a PENNY in local property taxes?

Young persons are MUCH more likely to be impoverished than are the elderly. The notion that the elderly are (in general) poor, in Canada, is a myth. A $55/yr transit pass for the elderly with zero income tests is perverse. It's EVIL. You can't come up with any logic to support it that's not easily reducible to absurdity. The only justification for it is political.

We're almost all on "fixed incomes" so don't bring up that nonsense, please.

As an example, say one senior who is 75, currently pays $1500/year in property taxes. Inflation and growth go up by 5% for 20 years (when they are 95), versus inflation at 2% for 20 years. At this point the incremental cost of growth in 20 years amounts to $98/month in real dollars.

It's this gap between inflation and growth for property taxes that I think is unfair to seniors. IMO, the extremely discounted transit pass somewhat balances against this (definitely an awkward way to do so though).

[PPAR]

Originally Posted by Radley77

I think though that seniors have built and paid for the current public transit should be somewhat limited exposed to hikes in property taxes above the rate of inflation.

This would be true if Government did not run deficits. What has really happened is they built it and gave the rest of us a mortgage...

[SubwayRev]

Originally Posted by Rusty van Reddick

Young persons are MUCH more likely to be impoverished than are the elderly. The notion that the elderly are (in general) poor, in Canada, is a myth. A $55/yr transit pass for the elderly with zero income tests is perverse. It's EVIL. You can't come up with any logic to support it that's not easily reducible to absurdity. The only justification for it is political.

Couldn't agree more. Transit fares are much more of a financial burden on people in their teens and 20's than people in their 70's and 80's. But, people in their 70's and 80's vote a lot more than people in their teens and 20's. That's why senior fares are reduced, not because of a general need for them to not be burdened by tranist fares.

[mersar]

Seems that most of the NW LRT stations now have the Connect readers installed on the TVM's, Banff Trail, University and Crowfoot all do to my knowledge and I'd suspect the rest do too.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by SubwayRev

Couldn't agree more. Transit fares are much more of a financial burden on people in their teens and 20's than people in their 70's and 80's. But, people in their 70's and 80's vote a lot more than people in their teens and 20's. That's why senior fares are reduced, not because of a general need for them to not be burdened by tranist fares.

There's also a general societal recognition of helping seniors out by making things cheaper for them. They've paid their dues, etc.

It's not like transit passes are the only senior's discounts around. As another example of a heavily publicly subsidized service, go look up how much university education costs once you hit 65 (unless this has changed in recent years, maybe Rusty can correct me here).

Of course, these sorts of things will change greatly in the coming years as our demographics shift. We just can't run society with half the population getting massive discounts while contributing nothing economically. But we have 20 years of Boomer entitlement to wade through first. That's where the voting blocks will come in bigtime.

[Radley77]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

An easy system for senior property tax deferral should be in place all over the province within the year in the form of publicly administered reverse mortgages or some such.

I read a bit more about the property tax deferral program. This is something it seems would improve quality of life for seniors and allow them to hedge against growth pressures in Alberta beyond inflation.

This, then a much more modestly discounted intrapeak seniors pass seems fair to me. Essentially preferentially allowing seniors to travel during 9 AM to 4 PM intrapeak times incurs less costs anyways.

[Ferreth]

Originally Posted by Radley77

I read a bit more about the property tax deferral program. This is something it seems would improve quality of life for seniors and allow them to hedge against growth pressures in Alberta beyond inflation.

This, then a much more modestly discounted intrapeak seniors pass seems fair to me. Essentially preferentially allowing seniors to travel during 9 AM to 4 PM intrapeak times incurs less costs anyways.

It's time CT implements a non-peak discounted pass anyone can buy. I think it would encourage a few more people to travel out of the busy periods.

I also have no problem with a general senior discount - it just doesn't need to be as heavy as it is now. Poor seniors should just be able to ride for free.

[SubwayRev]

Originally Posted by Ferreth

I also have no problem with a general senior discount - it just doesn't need to be as heavy as it is now. Poor seniors should just be able to ride for free.

I think that's a great idea...give the dicount to those that actually need it, not just a reward for having not died. Of course, I'm sure the seniors who don't need a discount, don't buy a bus pass, so it probably all works out in the end.

[fusili]

Alternative routes suggested for north-central LRT proposal

Nose Creek route out of the running

By Jason Markusoff, Calgary Herald January 8, 2012 10:15 PM

Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Altern...roposal/5964921/story.html#ixzz1iwTHLYIi
CALGARY — The north-central leg of Calgary’s LRT is still a long way from reality, but one thing is all but certain: it won’t be a train to nowhere (and nobody).

This spring, transit planners will encourage council to jettison the six-year-old idea of routing the future line through the Nose Creek Valley to the Country Hills area.

“I don’t know if it’s officially dead, but it’s dead,” said Ald. Gian-Carlo Carra, who represents part of that corridor.

Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Altern...roposal/5964921/story.html#ixzz1iwTJprob

Link

[Wooster]

^ Nice quotes.

I guess there's an assumption that you must maintain the same number of vehicle lanes on centre street if it were to run at grade. Perhaps this becomes primarily a transit street and automobile capacities are reduced?

Thoughts?