TransLink Proposes Tolls on All Metro bridges & New Vehicle Levy

[b5baxter]

Yes, the province need to increase funding. The need to take some of the large amounts that they are wasting on highway expansion and put it towards transit. It is ridiculous to continue to fund projects which will increase ghg emissions, increase health problems and increase sprawl.

We already subsidize private automotive transportation way more than we subsidize transit. And that needs to change.

[GeeCee]

Originally Posted by b5baxter

Yes, the province need to increase funding. The need to take some of the large amounts that they are wasting on highway expansion and put it towards transit. It is ridiculous to continue to fund projects which will increase ghg emissions, increase health problems and increase sprawl.

We already subsidize private automotive transportation way more than we subsidize transit. And that needs to change.

We need both.

[wrenegade]

Translink employees have the highest average number of sick days in the province. How about going back to the union and telling them to cough up some concessions.

In addition to that, raise the gas tax. I don't like it, but it WAY better than tolling existing bridges and/or more property tax increases. If you tolled the Lions Gate without offering improvements people on the North Shore would revolt. We already pay some of the highest property taxes in Metro Vancouver (a large portion of which go to Translink) and get shit transit service in return.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by deasine

We can't fund anything more if we have no money. That's as simple as that. At this point, if the Province can give TransLink more funds, they would do so. The Province is not only in charge of TransLink, but also other ministries. I'm sure we know that Healthcare needs a lot more money. Not everyone can have what they want and now the Province isn't giving out anymore because they themselves are in the red. Then really, TransLink needs to reorganize itself to come up with the funds.

I'm talking less than $1 billion in a $40 billion budget.

And Health care does not need more funding. Health Care is getting out of hand. Fraser health has spent hundreds of millions funding new senior care homes that now sit half empty. Since 2001, the health care budget has increased by 87%, in 2011, it will be double what it was in 2001. You would think this province is full of nothing but sick people who either live at home or in a hospital.

And by diverting funds directly to Translink, the province doesn't need to come up with the $400 million here and $300 million there to partially fund mega projects. That money can go back into general spending to take the place of the 1% (or so) of HST.

It's more of a redistribution of funding. It would provide Translink with guaranteed predictable funds instead of the province dropping random amounts of tax dollars to fund photo ops.

Using the HST would provide Translink with a stable and large budget. 1% of sales tax is a pretty standard funding principle to prop up transit on top of property tax and fares. It keeps spending relative to how the economy is doing. And it doesn't put a huge burden on the cost of living for average people.

If you are worried about the government losing money, then raise the sales tax. HST in most other provinces that have it is 13%. We can raise ours to match and send the increase Translinks way.

I would rather get hit in small, tiny amounts every time I go out and spend money in the city than get hit a annual bill of over a hundred bucks, even if my car is used only to get groceries or my truck is only used a few weeks a year to pull my boat.

A $100 vehicle levy is the same amount of tax as 1% from spending $10,000 in the economy. I would rather spend the money in the economy and get taxed for it than get a bill in the mail.

[mr.x]

^ Even if you do just raise the gas tax, you'd need to go back to the province so that they can amend the funding rules for the new Translink. I believe it's law that if you're going to raise the gas tax, you'll also have to raise property taxes and fares proportionally. Same goes for property taxes and fares. It can't be just one, it has to be all three.

[WBC]

Originally Posted by mr.x

Premier to Translink: Get your house in order before hitting the taxpayer


By Rebecca TeBrake, Vancouver Sun
July 31, 2009 1:01 PM

TransLink must look for in-house savings before passing on transportation costs to taxpayers said Premier Gordon Campbell at a press conference today.

"I think that before people start talking about tax increases, they should start talking about savings in their own organization," said Campbell.

TransLink unveiled a proposal today to collect $450-million in new revenues by putting tolls on bridges and charging drivers a $122-annual road levy on every vehicle they own.

Without another $150 million in new annual revenue, TransLink is projected to go into deficit by 2011 due to the subsidies required by the Golden Ears Bridge and the Canada Line. With an extra $3 million, TransLink said it could expand public transportation in the region.

But TransLink requires legislative authority from the provincial government before it could implement the new charges.

Campbell said the first thing TransLink needs to do is look at their administrative and overhead costs for savings.

He also said the transit authority overstepped their boundaries in planning tax increases.

"What I've heard of the report is that it is outside the framework of their legislation. ...and I think everyone's disappointed they haven't acted within their legislation and they have a responsibility to do that," Campbell said.

TransLink does have the legislative power to collect an extra $275 million a year through property tax increases, the vehicle levy, higher gas taxes and parking tax hikes and it plans to do so by 2016.

The provincial government is currently reviewing TransLink operations and administration to ensure taxpayers are getting enough bang for their bucks.

With files from Kelly Sinoski

rtebrake@vancouversun.com
© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun

Does not this state that they already have the right to do all 3?

[deasine]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

And Health care does not need more funding. Health Care is getting out of hand. Fraser health has spent hundreds of millions funding new senior care homes that now sit half empty. Since 2001, the health care budget has increased by 87%, in 2011, it will be double what it was in 2001. You would think this province is full of nothing but sick people who either live at home or in a hospital.

That's again, another example how authorities aren't spending money properly, but in many instances, like the paramedics strike, healthcare needs more funds if we are continuing that stupid full-public model we are using today.

[flight_from_kamakura]

gordo's playing this one well, he's basically saying "i'm for letting translink be the villain here to get this done", very smart. strange he's jabbering on about overstepping leg though, since he's basically personally responsible for this set. still, i bet those politicians aren't so outraged about the new structure right about now (no hard decisions = no demented protesters camping out george puil-style).

[CC420]

So basically Translink which has no accountability to the taxpayer wants more taxing authority. Does anyone else have a problem with this? Hey I can see how they need more money, but I have a a problem when an unelected group of people can levy a tax on us. Last time I checked that was called, "taxation without representation."

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by CC420

So basically Translink which has no accountability to the taxpayer wants more taxing authority. Does anyone else have a problem with this? Hey I can see how they need more money, but I have a a problem when an unelected group of people can levy a tax on us. Last time I checked that was called, "taxation without representation."

Ignorance.

All new taxes, tax increases, or fare increases by the Translink board must be improved by the Council of Mayors within 90-days (to prevent stalling, like the 3-year Translink RAV debacle). After 90-days, the decision goes to Victoria.

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by deasine

Healthcare needs more funds if we are continuing that stupid full-public model we are using today.

Agreed. If someone wants to pay for their own medical bills, let them. Just so long as they are not taking up space or jumping queues in public hospitals.

[Stingray2004]

Some mutterings today about Translink placing tolls on the Knight Street Bridge. It's too bad that the Knight St. Bridge and Knight Fwy were downloaded to Translink in the late 1990's.

I would have preferred that regional infrastructure remain in the hands of BC MOT myself. And I also agree with BC MoT's policy of only placing tolls on either new or substantially improved highway infrastructure - not older existing infrastructure.

And if a toll was placed upon the Knight St. Bridge by Translink, most will probably shift over to the Oak St. Bridge causing huge congesion problems.

Richmond Councillors Warn of TransLink Potential Plan for Knight Street Bridge toll

RICHMOND (NEWS1130) - City councillors in Richmond are warning people about TransLink's idea to potentially put a toll on the Knight Street Bridge. If true, you might have to dig in a little deeper in the future for the commute to and from Richmond and points south, and it could have a dramatic impact on commuters and businesses.

The Knight Street Bridge, connecting Richmond to Vancouver, is owned and maintained by TransLink and could be a likely target for future 'road pricing' plans. Richmond city councillor Bill McNulty worries it could significantly change traffic patterns across the Lower Mainland. "When you talk about road pricing, you're talking about adding a tax or a toll, and as a result we're very concerned that may be one way of raising money."

A recent report highlighted the need for $130 million per year from existing revenue sources to maintain current service levels. TransLink's Ken Hardie says ideas are still in the discussion stage. "The issue has actually been discussed for a number of months in terms of how we pay for the big expansion that we need in the transit system in the region. The real key at this time is to look at the concept of road pricing and what it actually means, how it could work and where it might be applied."

While he understands the shortfall, McNulty says tolling drivers on existing infrastructure is not an acceptable option.

http://www.news1130.com/more.jsp?con...16_133303_7504

[cabotp]

It is too bad the MoT has a policy of only tolling new or upgraded bridges. As I believe that all bridges should be tolled.

[Gordon]

Besides The Knight & the Pautello (sp) what other bridges does Translink maintain?

The Mayors Caoucil ,who has the final call on funding issues is eleccted.

I think Translink needsto be carefull when it comes to fare increrases because the 3 zone fare is already more expensive than it needs to be.

[cabotp]

The any zone fare is more expensive than it needs to be.

[Gordon]

I think the 1 zone fare is fairly competitive with other cities.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by Gordon

I think the 1 zone fare is fairly competitive with other cities.

It is.

But I think the monthly passes are all screwed up.

In Toronto, on the TTC a ticket is $2.75, good for the whole TTC system. That is comparable in price to our 1 zone but way less if you figure the average ticket sold is probably a 2 zone. But a monthly pass in Toronto is $109! Here a 1 zone is $73. If you again say our average (1 zones + 2 zones + 3 zones / total) is around a 2 zone pass, the 2 zone pass is $99. Cheaper than Toronto.

Using Translink "savings" calculation, of 20 return trips a month (the basic commuting pattern), then in Toronto if you only take the Subway to and from work (20 * 2 * $2.75 = $110) you are saving $1 by getting a monthly pass!!!! In Vancouver you save $27 off average commuting.

In Toronto you can buy 10 tokens at a time, which works out to $2.25/token, so the comparison is then 20*2*$2.25 = $90. So if all you are doing is commuting to and from work in Toronto, then buying a monthly pass is a waste of money as you lose $19 a month (the equivalent of 8.4 tokens). Here, when compared to fare savers, a monthly pass is still worth it by saving $3 off the faresaver price.

In Toronto, the monthly pass is priced for people who use the pass outside of commuting. It is priced for people who use transit often to get around. You buy a monthly pass if you are making a lot of extra trips.

Here, you buy the Monthly pass and save, almost no mater what. You can ride the heck out of our system and you aren't paying for it, in Toronto you do.

In Vancouver, our fares can come down if we started charging way more for monthly passes, which we should. If all you are doing is 20 round trips a month to and from work, then it should be priced so that fare savers are your best option.

Monthly passes should be for people who use the system all the time. It should be priced for condo dwellers who forgo paying for a car because the 1 zone pass takes them anywhere they want (after 6:30), and in a reasonable amount of time because of frequency and service levels in Vancouver proper. It's not balanced. We end up with a system where a large group of riders need to be subsidized by vehicle levies and bridge tolls and high fares on other riders. All so people in Vancouver can get virtually free transit.

[DKaz]

Technically we go to work 21 to 23 days a week, usually 22, except February can be 20 or 21...

1/2/3 zone faresaver = $1.90/$2.85/$3.80... so for someone to commute purely by faresavers would cost them on an average month $83.60/$125.40/$167.20. Not sure if the cost of faresavers is going up in April.

1/2/3 zone passes are $73/$99/$136, although the 1 zone pass is slated to go up to $81 in April. Following that percentage, 2 and 3 zone pass could go up to $110 and $151, which puts it near the cost of travelling on faresavers.

In regards to subsidies, a lot of Vancouver routes are near or over 100% farebox recovery, (meaning they're hardly subsidized or subsidizing other routes), while many suburban routes are lightly to heavily subsidized. How is Vancouver getting virtually free transit? They've just obtained what's called critical mass required to financially self sustain transit.

[Gordon]

Other than Skytrain whose fare box recovery is 108%, I would suspect that the few frequently serviced routes and of course the 99B Line, most of the routes are at least moderately subsidized. The average farebox recovery is 54%

[DKaz]

Hm what were the stats again?