Congestion Pricing in Ottawa

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by acottawa

A freeloader charge for exurban/Quebec residents would be better than drawing an arbitrary circle around downtown, IMHO. They could charge people who enter the city before 9:00 am.

So basically a cordon charge around the city border?

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

So basically a cordon charge around the city border?

Wouldn't the province have to agree to this? A charge on Island Park Wellington and King Edward could discourage Gatineau drivers and be an easy sell politically but can't see it happening.

[HillStreetBlues]

I'm really impressed that Ottawa's council is forward-thinking enough to consider congestion pricing. I think it would be a sensible revenue tool worth considering in a number of Ontario cities.

Unfortunately, what are the odds that the provincial government would allow it? They denied Toronto's bid to toll the Gardiner, and that had strong support of citizens.

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by HillStreetBlues

I'm really impressed that Ottawa's council is forward-thinking enough to consider congestion pricing. I think it would be a sensible revenue tool worth considering in a number of Ontario cities.

Unfortunately, what are the odds that the provincial government would allow it? They denied Toronto's bid to toll the Gardiner, and that had strong support of citizens.

There's also the added issue of the province owning and operating Highway 417 (something I gather some Ottawa residents are not aware of). Even if the province allowed Toronto to put tolls on the Gardiner or DVP, the City of Ottawa can't put tolls on a highway they don't own, and I can't see the province putting tolls on it either (except for HOT lanes).

[HighwayStar]

Originally Posted by HillStreetBlues

I'm really impressed that Ottawa's council is forward-thinking enough to consider congestion pricing. I think it would be a sensible revenue tool worth considering in a number of Ontario cities.

Unfortunately, what are the odds that the provincial government would allow it? They denied Toronto's bid to toll the Gardiner, and that had strong support of citizens.

"Sensible Revenue Tool" == "new Tax".

The Ontario/Ottawa governments need to look at their own expenditures before adding yet another tax. Where does it end?

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by HighwayStar

Where does it end?

The Bolshevik revolution?

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

So basically a cordon charge around the city border?

People inside the city are already paying for the roads and most of the cost of transit through their property taxes (or their landlord's property
taxes). People outside the city are attracted by lower property taxes - this would even out the decision of where to live.

[Aylmer]

I'm not following your reasoning:

Originally Posted by acottawa

People inside the city are already paying for the roads and most of the cost of transit through their property taxes (or their landlord's property
taxes). People outside the city are attracted by lower property taxes - this would even out the decision of where to live.

Ok, so $80/month max would be enough to convince people to live inside Ottawa instead of moving out to Cumberland...

Originally Posted by acottawa

If someone is willing to drop $200-300 a month on parking (plus gas, plus higher insurance premiums) then they're probably pretty motivated to drive and it is hard to see another $80 (in practice probably less because of vacations, holidays, etc.) demotivating them.

... but not enough to dissuade people to drive downtown...

Originally Posted by acottawa

And a congestion charge would not just hit employees, but clients, customers, visitors, etc. making it hard for lots of different types of downtown employers to be viable.

... but definitely enough to scare every shop, office and activity from downtown?

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

There's also the added issue of the province owning and operating Highway 417

I was thinking the same thing. A municipal cordon probably couldn't be applied to those travelling on the Queensway (or any of the federal parkways), but it could be applied at the entrances and exits.

One of the issues with zone cordoning is how do you differentiate between those who drive into the core and park (and are thus not taking up road space for most of the time) from those (like taxis and couriers) who spend the whole day driving inside the cordon zone (and possibly never even paying the fee if they don't leave the zone).

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by HighwayStar

"Sensible Revenue Tool" == "new Tax".

The Ontario/Ottawa governments need to look at their own expenditures before adding yet another tax. Where does it end?

I dunno, maybe with public services and infrastructure being adequately funded?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Wouldn't the province have to agree to this? A charge on Island Park Wellington and King Edward could discourage Gatineau drivers and be an easy sell politically but can't see it happening.

An easy political sell only within Ottawa's city limits. Politics don't exist in a vacuum, especially not when you're the capital of the country. Such a measure would be a complete non-starter.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

I'm not following your reasoning:




Ok, so $80/month max would be enough to convince people to live inside Ottawa instead of moving out to Cumberland...



... but not enough to dissuade people to drive downtown...



... but definitely enough to scare every shop, office and activity from downtown?

I would hypothesize that there are different price elasticity on those things.

Someone who moves to Kemptville (with the intention of commuting to Ottawa) cares a lot about cost and not so much about time.

Someone who is already dropping $200/month on parking doesn't care about cost as much.

Either way, the system would be fairer because it would make users who are using Ottawa roads but currently contributing nothing to Ottawa roads (because they pay property taxes in Gatineau or the exurbs) pay some of the cost without making Ottawa residents pay for everything.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

As for people who live in towns outside the city, well, most of the ones in the east and the north have peak period transit links into the city, and there's park and rides. In any case, I have very little sympathy for anyone who lives in Kemptville or Casselman who is hit by a congestion charge.. we shouldn't be rewarding exurban lifestyles. You want to live outside the city, then pay to get in.

They're a a lot of families there (more-so east and south-east) that can't afford to live in the big city. Nothing wrong with wanting a good-sized home and a backyard for your kids.

[Acajack]

Thinking about this more broadly, I am not sure if it's really a good idea for a central city to "take the gloves off" in this way and "declare war" (so to speak) on its outlying areas.

If you look at some places in North America where there is an antagonistic relationship between the core city and outlying municipalities, it's often produced undesirable outcomes for the core city. (European cities - including those with congestion charges of various types - are structured somewhat differently. So the outcomes are also different.)

As it stands now, certainly on the Ontario side (and even to some degree on the Quebec side), people outside the city limits still view Ottawa as *their* city, and consider what's good for Ottawa to be good for them most of the time.

If something like this were to be imposed at the Ottawa city line, that might change very quickly.

Especially when one considers that Ottawa (either as a municipality or as an urban core) isn't hurting at all right now.

It would appear mean-spirited.

[Acajack]

And if some type of charge were imposed at the interprovincial border, it's not impossible that the feds might step in. Think about that one.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

They're a a lot of families there (more-so east and south-east) that can't afford to live in the big city. Nothing wrong with wanting a good-sized home and a backyard for your kids.

There is nothing wrong with that. But it creates costs for the City of Ottawa (congestion, wear and tear on Ottawa roads, increased demand for transit, space at park and rides, etc), for which property taxes are the primary source of revenue. It would be different if Ottawa were allowed to levy gas taxes for example, then a lot of out-of-town commuters would be buying gas in Ottawa and helping to pay for the roads.

To get a library card you are required to be an Ottawa resident or Ottawa taxpayer, and the library eats up a much smaller portion of the Ottawa budget than roads and transit.

[J.OT13]

On the other hand, Ottawa gets all of the municipal tax dollars from the millions of square feet of office and retail space that the little towns and communities (and to a extent Gatineau) don't get. That's just how it works in every single metropolitan area in the world; you have a big central city that, although has to subsidize certain infrastructure like roads and transit for the suburbs outside the city limits, makes up for it by racking in the millions in extra revenue it gets from having the space for the hundreds of thousands of jobs in the region.

[HillStreetBlues]

Originally Posted by HighwayStar

"Sensible Revenue Tool" == "new Tax".

The Ontario/Ottawa governments need to look at their own expenditures before adding yet another tax. Where does it end?

This is a municipal issue, though, not provincial or federal. Municipalities in Ontario are extremely constrained in how they can collect revenue (yes, the different taxes they can levy). Much more so than in other parts of the country and other parts of the world.

Municipalities have huge infrastructure deficits- hundreds of billions of dollars worth of deferred maintenance of critical infrastructure, for which there is no funding. Ottawa specifically maintains more road per resident than almost any other municipality in the province. When those maintenance shortfalls have to be addressed, it will make even less sense for those huge bills to be paid through a funding mechanism (property taxes) with no relationship with actual use of the infrastructure.

Congestion pricing and road charges (I know those are not strictly speaking the same thing) are only some of the revenue tools municipalities will probably have to use in the future. Things like frontage fees (those are not uncommon elsewhere in Canada) will need to happen, too. Municipalities cover a lot of costs; it doesn't make sense for them to have only one type of tax at their disposal.

[HighwayStar]

Originally Posted by HillStreetBlues

This is a municipal issue, though, not provincial or federal. Municipalities in Ontario are extremely constrained in how they can collect revenue (yes, the different taxes they can levy). Much more so than in other parts of the country and other parts of the world.

Municipalities have huge infrastructure deficits- hundreds of billions of dollars worth of deferred maintenance of critical infrastructure, for which there is no funding. Ottawa specifically maintains more road per resident than almost any other municipality in the province. When those maintenance shortfalls have to be addressed, it will make even less sense for those huge bills to be paid through a funding mechanism (property taxes) with no relationship with actual use of the infrastructure.

Congestion pricing and road charges (I know those are not strictly speaking the same thing) are only some of the revenue tools municipalities will probably have to use in the future. Things like frontage fees (those are not uncommon elsewhere in Canada) will need to happen, too. Municipalities cover a lot of costs; it doesn't make sense for them to have only one type of tax at their disposal.

I don't dispute the city is very constrained in how it derives income. Personally, I'd prefer if they could add a 1% sales tax (and have it blended into the HST or something like that)... lots of cities (especially in the US) operate that way.

However.. you've missed my point entirely. Taxes are increasing faster than inflation from many angles... Mr Watson has said "I see nothing wrong with 2% per year"... Thats only the start... combine that with water/sewer and other city fee increases. Now the Ontario government is effectively adding Hydro to our tax bill. Add in the "Carbon Tax"... which is really just another "revenue tool" by stealth.

The majority of Public Service employees (all levels of government) are paid somewhat similar to their private sector counterparts. Combine that with benefits (*especially* pensions), "sick" days, etc, and we have a situation where the Public Sector folks will have a *much* greater income over their lives than their Private Sector counterparts.

Heaven help us when the Pension funds start to run dry... if the private sector folks are expected to pony up for that, they'll be taxed out of existence.

Point is... governments are constantly looking for new "revenue tools".. without examining their own expenditures. PS "expenditure obligations" would be a good place to start.

[HillStreetBlues]

I agree: I think a really good case could be made for allowing Ontario municipalities to levy a sales tax. Congestion pricing has the added benefit that it both raises revenue to pay for infrastructure and services, but also promotes efficient use of the infrastructure.

That tax increases are outpacing inflation I think is a result of taxes and fees failing to truly cover costs in the past. Certainly that's the case with your example of water and sewer charges: maintenance has been pushed back to keep charges artificially low in the past, and now the bill has finally caught up to us. These costs have to be covered. It was a false economy to put off needed maintenance, and eventually it just becomes impossible to do it while still enjoying the performance we expect from this infrastructure.