For Sale: One Transit System. Slightly Used. A Faded Beauty and a Handyman’s Special. No reasonable offer refused. Call Honest Rob’s Transit Hotline for details!
Adam Radwanski’s article in this morning’s Globe and Mail triggered a flood of emails between the latté-sipping chattering classes today as journalists, politicians and transit advocates tried to make sense of Mayor Ford’s scheme to upload the TTC, or at least its subway lines, to Queen’s Park. By the end of the day, the McGuinty government had replied “no thanks” to the offer, but the issue will still get lots of debate.
I have to wonder if the Mayor has really thought through what he has proposed. Here are a few small questions.
- The City’s share of the operating and capital deficits for the entire TTC, including Wheel Trans, is over $1-billion. How much of this would the province actually take over? If Toronto wants better service — things like trains every 5 minutes at 1 am on a line carrying almost nobody — would Queen’s Park send us a bill for service in excess of their own standards?
- If Queen’s Park got only the subway system, how would revenue for the TTC as a whole be shared? Would the subway become a separate fare zone with its own GO-like premium fares? Would the revenue split be skewed to make the subway “profitable” even though it depends for its huge demand on the surface feeder network?
- If Toronto wanted a subway on Sheppard, but Queen’s Park thought that an LRT line was all the street really needed, (a) how would the City force Queen’s Park to build it and (b) would Toronto have to pay the difference in construction and operating costs for a subway? Why should provincial planning trump local preferences when this almost never happens in any other sphere of provincial influence worth mentioning?
- If Queen’s Park took over the bus and streetcar services, who would riders complain to about overcrowding, service quality, system cutbacks and fares? Would Liberal ridings (at least while they’re in power) get better service than Tory and NDP ridings? If people living in Long Branch elected a new government, would service on the Queen car improve? (They’ve tried everything else.)
- How much will it cost Queen’s Park to buy out objections from Hamilton, Mississauga, Ottawa and every other transit operator about an unfair subsidy by way of a Toronto upload?
Anyone who has dealt with GO Transit on a construction project, or with Metrolinx on transit financing, will know that “transparency” is not their watchword, information is difficult to come by, and future planning consists of whatever is announced in the provincial budget. Don’t look for a politician because the board is a collection of untouchable agents of the private sector bringing their expertise to bear, don’t ya know, but certainly not interacting with the public on a day-to-day basis.
Radwanski reports that Queen’s Park wants ownership of lines it pays for to stay on its books. At first, this looks like little more than accounting dodge — a way to show an asset to balance of the debt floated to build, say, a new subway. However, a book asset’s real value is that it can be sold. Remember Highway 407? What would prevent Metrolinx from selling the Sheppard line to a private owner with no control over what the new proprietor might charge us for the use of “their” subway? Would fares go through the roof just like highway tolls?
Selling or uploading the TTC is a hare-brained idea that does nothing to address the basic transit problems both Toronto and the GTA face. Transit is a big, expensive business, and somebody has to pay for it. Cook the books all you like, there is only one rider, one taxpayer, one citizenry stuck with the bills at the end of the day.
Debating who might “own” the transit system diverts attention from vital transit advocacy. Mayor Ford and Premier McGuinty should concentrate on transit plans and strategies that are achievable, and convince voters of the need for good transit funding, even if this means new sources of revenue.
Steve Munro 
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again; modern fiscal conservatism has devolved into nothing more than a “make daddy (Province/Feds/China) pay for it” mindset.
LikeLike
Weird. Guess Ford is realizing he won’t be able to do what he said he would during the election so he’s looking for a way out and hoping we won’t notice.
LikeLike
The TTC is the only major transit operation in North America where higher government does not provide an operating subsidy.
We don’t really need Queen’s Park to decide where bus stops should be located. What we do need is a dedicated, dependable revenue source.
LikeLike
What you fail to mention is that the City cannot afford to properly fund and operate the TTC anymore — and the key word here is *anymore*. It’s a money-pit that’s bankrupting the City. The province does have the resources, and could also absorb and merge the neighbouring transit systems and GO into one GTTC — creating that regional system that everybody talks about.
It’s very easy for you to sit back and advocate advocate advocate, but governments are not solely in the business of funding transit, and they don’t have unlimited money.
Steve: I don’t fully understand your comment. Are you implying that spending on the scale Ontario has proposed via Metrolinx, let alone the additional spending that taking over local systems would entail, is beyond their capability?
As for Toronto’s situation, part of the problem is that everyone wants transit but they also want tax cuts.
LikeLike
“If Queen’s Park took over the bus and streetcar services, who would riders complain to about overcrowding, service quality, system cutbacks and fares? “
Same as we do now – to you. ‘Cause nobody else seems to care.
As to electing a new govt: even having a councillor on the TTC commission didn’t have much effect on service levels at the other end of the 501. TTC service levels seem to be “what the market will bear” regardless of what political affiliation a ward or representative has.
LikeLike
Nick – what you’re saying doesn’t make sense. Downloading came from a neo-conservative ideologue. And now when Rob Ford (an alleged neo-Con/Tea Party enthusiast) asks Queen’s Park to Upload the costs he’s……making daddy pay for it???
Rob Ford isn’t an ideologue. He’s a populist. He is asking the Province to “share the load” which sounds like a socialist trait – doesn’t it? As Steve rightly notes, there is only one taxpayer – so who foots the bill is essentially irrelevant because the source of their income is always the same. It’s the taxpayer.
The Miller/Lastman years were marked by the city going cap in hand to the Province & Feds looking for a handout every year so I see what Ford is trying to accomplish here – but as Steve repeatedly points out, it’s not going to work with a “subways only” plan.
It has to [apply to] the ENTIRE network at which point Metrolinx (via the Province) can do things such as integrate fares (G0, Via, TTC) into Presto and make needed changes such as introducing distance based fares (Fare Zones like London) and make it a true regional system. But I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for that either.
Steve: When people who now travel from the outer parts of the 416 find out how much distance based fares will cost them to get downtown, they will not be pleased. Zone fares were eliminated precisely because suburban voters objected to funding the TTC but getting second class service and higher fares.
LikeLike
This is fresh thinking. Something rare in politics and particularly rare for the TTC which is a hidebound organization that will not change. It is time to remove the monopoly the TTC has enjoyed for too long. If Metrolinx owns the subway lines they can tender out its operation. Nothing like competition to get a monopoly to pay attention. A new contractor will have an incentive to find savings. Bids could come from TTC, GO, VIA, Bombardier, Veolia, Miway who knows?
LikeLike
YES, YES and YES! This is a great idea and should be done! It’s obvious that your city just cannot afford to fund future TTC growth out of city revenues. The states fund transit in Australia, all-round cuts due to budgetary problems are unheard of here. Our Brisbane City Council has also proposed to do a similar thing- give up the entire bus network to the state because it is growing to big and many services now operate beyond city council boundaries.
Yes, but it is also true that this could be the greatest opportunity to turn the TTC fortunes around and have an excellent, well funded integrated system. Merging the TTC with MetroLinx will promote integration and regional planning can all be done on the same page. The claim that it is money losing is a bit unfair- most transit systems wold wide are not profitable (in part due to policy reasons that favour the car), and the TTC is one of the most efficient- 70% farebox ratio! Australian systems are the exact opposite- ~ 70% subsidy.
The entire thing could be uploaded to MetroLinx- with the City of Toronto paying a contribution, and perhaps a greater proportion of the cost for things like Wheel-Trans.
Ontario might have a larger tax base, and therefore a better credit rating and thus a greater capacity to pay and borrow for long term capital works than the City of Toronto might. The basic transit problems could be argued as being a lack of funding because Toronto is growing so big, that the City Council just cannot keep up with it.
You may disagree, but in my humble opinion, this is a fantastic opportunity and it should be grabbed!
Steve: Your position is sound, in theory. However, in fact, we have a provincial government that is trying to avoid spending money even faster than the municipal one. It doesn’t matter what their tax base might be, they don’t want to spend. Also, spending a lot of money on Toronto is not politically popular in the rest of the province. Finally, you have the advantage of distance in not knowing that Metrolinx has no capability of running an organization the size of the TTC.
LikeLike
Why not just give up the Sheppard Subway only… That alone would save the TTC a tonne in capital costs. Then being under a different operator, we can automate all the stations (all automatic entrances), automate the trains, reduce off peak frequency to every 7-8 minutes (and every 10 minutes after 11pm) and hope that the government can also make the line lose less money in operating costs.
With ZERO Employees running the entire line, I’m pretty sure that the operating costs of that line will drop a few million…
TTC will continue to own the YUS, BD, and SRT and make its handsome profits
LikeLike
Uploading the TTC to Metrolinx really has nothing to do at all with funding arrangements for running the system. The provincial government could easily mandate that the city pay the province an amount equivalent to the city’s current operating and capital subsidy, sort of like the school portion of property taxes, or like how the province mandates that cities run certain social services funded by municipal tax dollars. On the other hand, the province could increase funding without uploading the TTC by establishing a provincial operating subsidy for Ontario transit systems. The goal of uploading the TTC to Metrolinx is to increase fare and service integration between transit systems, it will not help improve transit by itself without increased provincial funding.
LikeLike
Uploading the TTC is a hare-brained scheme and I’m glad the Province seems reluctant. Without a commitment to new sources of revenue it will not solve the underlying issue of a chronic lack of funding. For once I am firmly in the camp of the Toronto business lobby – the Toronto Board of Trade’s Move Ahead report systematically reviews different ways to raise money and invest it in the region’s transportation system, including costs of implementation. Road tolls and gas taxes make the list. Bank executives and management consultants advocating for road tolls? Go figure. This is one of the most underrated reports out there amid the myriad of studies, plans, and general consultant gimcrackery.
To those who think the province could somehow run the TTC better, or would spend more money on it, let’s take a step back and remember that the 416 has only 22 out of 107 seats at Queen’s Park. So, when money is tight, do you want voters in North Bay, Windsor, and Prince Edward County to elect a government with a mandate to cut transit at King & Spadina? You’d be amazed how everyone inside the TTC’s catchment area suddenly becomes a latté-sipping elite in the eyes of everyone else. In my personal opinion the amount of political power provincial governments wield, at least relative to cities, is a frustrating anachronism. At Confederation we were a rural, agrarian society. Now we are one of the most urbanized countries in the world, but politically we treat our cities pejoratively – we essentially we don’t let them raise money beyond property taxes even though they drive the country’s economy. The Vehicle Registration Tax, garbage fees, etc. may seem annoying but they are the current stopgap solution to this imbalance. Even the bag 5 cent bag tax skirted the line of what we are allowed to do (even though collecting waste is a municipal responsibility.)
LikeLike
Joseph C said “With ZERO Employees running the entire line, I’m pretty sure that the operating costs of that line will drop a few million…”
You couldn’t use T1’s with ATC without spending a fortune to have it installed.
One thing that I’ve noticed about the TR’s is that they are clearly NOT designed to be run with 0 staff. Recall, there isn’t even a way for passengers to stop the train without speaking to an operator in a cab! Additionally… they built in video cameras so the operators could monitor the train, as well as the voice system that connects passengers to the operator. 1 operator rather than 2 maybe, but not 0
LikeLike
I can’t believe any of these commentators here think this is a reasonable proposal. If you think the relatively minor cuts that Ford introduced are outrageous, wait until his brother-in-arms Tim Hudak is through with the system in his war on the poor … um, I mean the deficit. The Republican Study Group, which is made up of most of the Republicans in the House of Representatives, is pushing to end all mass transit subsidies. Does that sound familiar, circa 1996? Then wait for the turf battles between Toronto and the regions whenever routes get cut in one area to move resources to another.
To JW, I would say it is not so much about “making daddy pay” as “passing the buck on things conservatives don’t care about”. Harris et al. did not care about transit, so they eliminated funding. Ford does not care about transit, so he wants someone else to take responsibility for it. The more spending and responsibility he can cut, the more he can avoid being held liable for the outcome.
LikeLike
I find it curious that this proposal has only now come to light (I first read the G&M article yesterday morning, interestingly while on GO), though I think this is not the first time this has been suggested. There was certainly nothing mentioned by any of the mayoral candidates during the lengthy campaign. I can see why Ford and his allies on council would consider it, as the TTC is a huge part of the budget and such a transfer would go a long way to accomplishing his aim to reduce the City’s spending, not mention the monkey of labour relations now on someone elses back. Interestingly I see to recall Vancouver’s transit system was called BC Transit the one and only time I visited that city in 1996 – was it in fact in the hands of the Province? Certainly given that transit use in the GTA is increasingly regional with many trips across municipal boundaries, there is some sense in a regional authority to fund and manage it, though alas Metrolinx is not yet at a stage where that seems possible. I can see why the Provincial government would have little interest in taking over the TTC, let alone provide more funding for it – there is little if any political capital.
As for there being only one transit rider and one taxpayer, that is true, but of late the idiology seems to be that if service those taxes fund are local in nature, then only those local taxpayers should pay for it or it should be paid for by those who actually use it (i.e user fees).
Realistically, not just the TTC but all GTA transit system would likely have to be transferred (to Metrolinx I would assume) for such a scheme to work.
LikeLike
Answering to Ray Kennedy:
If they contract out the subways, can we do the same with the Gardiner and the DVP and the 401 through the 416 and Yonge Street and the Allen and Bloor? Oh, and then we could privatize Dufferin south of Steeles and Kingston Road and Queen West and Dupont and Bathurst (maybe York Region would want that) and Birchmount and Albion and that little road outside of a certain label company in Rexdale?
Collectively we spend a ton of money to run those and I’m sure private enterprise could find efficiencies (streetlights after 10 on roads barely used – come on!!! – people get by in the countryside without streetlights apart from major intersections – why can’t city folks?) somewhere and, create revenues…imagine that there is this whole gigantic enterprise and there are no revenues being generated, apart from a few measly signs. Right now the road system is run as a monopoly and there is nothing like competition to get a monopoly thinking.
And then next…the police. Its obvious there could be efficiencies found there and that monopoly isn’t able or willing to find them. I’m sure Intelligarde would love to bid on Parkdale and maybe York Region Cops would want Rexdale and maybe Malvern would be bid on by Durham.
Obviously, I’m tongue in cheek. But, the only reason we don’t consider privitising certain services is we don’t currently see how we are paying for them. And that is a political decision.
If we want a decent transit system, we will have to pay for it, through both the fare box and through tax support. The farebox alone will not support a decent system, and will not create a system accessible to those who our city has planned to marginalise in the inner suburbs. Until we in this city realise that taxes are necessary to live in this large place where efficiencies are difficult, we will not get a decent transit system.
LikeLike
As much as I agree with your concerns, and your opinion that Rob Ford has not thought this through – I have to say, that the TTC needs to undergo massive change and re-structuring in order to be an organization that is well managed and accountable to the people. I don’t know if transferring to MetroLinks can achieve this but all I know is that in its current state it is horribly managed with little public oversight. Maybe having a provincial management takeover will give it the shake up it so desperately needs and deserves.
Steve: I agree that there is a deeply-rooted problem with the culture embedded in the TTC that so fundamentally seeks to find external causes or blame for its failings, and treats passengers as folks who need re-education about how to use the transit system and what we should expect from it. Metrolinx? GO Transit doesn’t exactly have a sterling record itself, although it at least recognizes the need to try harder. GO also has a comparatively easy system to run.
The TTC is vastly larger than GO/Metrolinx, and any “takeover” would really be a marriage of a mouse and an elephant, and a large proportion of the TTC staff and management would survive the changeover. Just this morning, the Metrolinx Board was positively tingling with the thought that an electrified system will handle 4 million more riders. That’s less than one percent of the TTC’s annual demand.
The policy level, where directions and budget decisions affecting the quality of a rider’s daily experience are made, would be in the hands of a board with no operational experience in running a large transit system and no political desire to entertain complaints from the public.
LikeLike
I have read Steve Munro’s blog and other sites and yes their are positives and negatives to either option of uploading it to the province or by keeping it under the tax umbrella of the municipality of Toronto. I am fairly new here to Toronto, recently move here indirectly from Vancouver, but all I can say is that their are an awful lot of plans floating about, but very little being done. The old saying says ‘if it ain’t broke don’t fix it’- well I think the opposite is true as well- that is if it is broke- fix it. Uploading it to the province does have negatives but what we are doing (or aren’t doing as a city and the whole region for that matter) is just as bad. Maybe if the province gets the TTC, possibly a more steady stream of revenue is going to start flowing. The TTC needs lots of investment in its existing system and all the expansion plans I have ‘read’ about. The municipality of TO is not going to increase its tax base unless a million more condo’s come on line somewhere to pay more taxes into the existing revenue pool. We have to find more sources of revenue somehow and maybe it has to be done provincially.
LikeLike
The way I look at it, uploading the TTC is a bad thing. I mean if the government needs to make cuts the TTC will be adversely affected.. can you imagine the government needing to make cuts and being in possession of Toronto’s transit system.
You think the service cuts are bad now, try waiting to see what would happen if the province makes cuts to the TTC.
I can see the province doing the following if they upload the TTC.
— Ax the sheppard subway
— cut ALL underperforming routes
— limit subway hours of operation on the spadina line like they did to the university line in the 1960s and 70s.
— EL system running throughout downtown
— repeat of the ICTS fiasco that resulted in the SRT.
LikeLike
I agree with most people’s conclusion that a Provincially-run/owned transit system would not be beneficial to Torontonians, but I would like to ask Steve (and others) under what circumstances a regional transit system would make sense?
It seems like there are examples out there (SEPTA, MTBA, Translink in BC). Do they not work well? Are there conditions that they operate under that makes them better than Metrolinx here?
Steve: There are some who would argue that Translink in BC leaves a lot to be desired given the way the board and its mandate have been modified by the provincial government. SEPTA (Philadelphia) is perennially broke due to funding problems. MBTA (Boston) works because the region is balkanized with about 80 separate cities and towns making up the metropolis. In all of these cases, good or bad, there is a higher level of government funding than in Toronto.
That’s the nub of the problem. Who pays?
LikeLike
Steve….I think you may have misspoke or misheard re your reply to Nichole (11:03 am Jan 26). The way I heard it, the Metrolinx board was tingling with the thought that The Big Move will have to handle a population increase of 4 Million in the GTHA in 25 years. According to The Big Move, annual ridership (GTHA wide) will increase by over 700 Million rides/yr if the RTP is implemented (to 1270 Million). At that point, I’m guessing that TTC would represent perhaps 50%.
Steve: I’m not sure if the board was exact about the source of the sensation. Note that the GO improvements are only part of the 700m total, and a lot of the ridership growth in TBM comes on the TTC network.
LikeLike
For a guy who hates public transit, Ford has spent a lot of time focusing on the TTC. He won’t be satisfied until he dismantles the entire system. After, two months in office look at all the chaos he has caused.
Transit City is off the table except for the Eglinton line and we still aren’t too sure on what the details of that are. With a stop placed on Transit City construction what will happen to the Scarborough RT? Will it just be closed in 2015 with nothing to replace it? I highly doubt Ford’s proposed Gravy Train subway to Scarborough Town Centre will be built.
He campaigned on getting rid of the streetcar network but thankfully he soon backtracked. But nobody knows if he will want to revisit the idea in the future. Now we have him pondering if he can unload the TTC on the Province. Since the Province doesn’t want to take it, I fear he may next try to privatize the transit system or parts of it if he can. On top of that Ford and Stintz are begining the process of dismantling the bus network.
Think about it though. Only two months in office and he’s caused this much chaos for the TTC, a service that hundreds of thousands if not millions of GTA residents rely on on a daily basis. Imagine how bad things will be for public transit in this city after his four years in office are up.
LikeLike
“We have to find more sources of revenue somehow and maybe it has to be done provincially.”
We’ve developed a uniquely Canadian attitude which bashes our cities. The ‘Rest of Canada’ as well as ‘Rest of Ontario’ continually bash Toronto, whining ‘Toronto gets everything’. It’s cheap politics. In other countries in which I’ve lived, principal cities are respected, admired and it’s understood they require regional/provincial/national investment to thrive. As PM, Paul Martin recognized this and proposed ‘Investing in Cities’ which political blowback transformed into ‘Investing in Communities’.
Given the political climate, how shall the province sustainably fund Toronto transit? Can it withstand the inevitable demands from Peel/York/Halton/Durham regions, Hamilton, KW, Ottawa and London which could also benefit from huge investments in transit? We’re afraid to have the discussion about alternate revenue sources. And I’m surprised there’s no call for modernization of the hidebound TTC with its 1950s era uniforms and bizarre management structure (Chief General Manager?).
Steve: The position of CGM was created after a long strike a few decades back when it was clear that the Commissioners, politically, were screwed by their staff who had been negotiating in bad faith. The union won that battle in the press when it became evident what was going on.
The Commission wanted “their man” to run the show, and created a “Chief General Manager” to ride herd on the “General Managers”. However, very quickly, the new CGM, who knew nothing about transit, became a captive of the very organization he was supposed to clean up, and he became part of the problem.
LikeLike
We are suffering from a long bout of collective madness. This crazy idea that our complex society can function even better with ever lower taxes is a mass delusion, and perhaps we have to live through a real breakdown before a political movement arises and people vote for a new direction. Ford’s promises are simply pie in the sky. Cutting taxes and foregoing fare increases simply shows that Toronto voters, through Ford, are not interested in improving transit. After all, Toronto residential property taxes are already lower than in surrounding municipalities. The Provincial Government would be wise to take Ford & company at their word, and instead fund rapid transit in Mississauga, for example, where people appear to be more responsible for their future.
When I compare Toronto with other cities I have spent time in, I can only despair of improvement, unless we very actively organize politically. Historically, progressive movements in Canadian cities have been volatile happenings, breaking up quickly from their centrifugal forces once power is gained. We need a coherent, competent and disciplined movement which can get things done and make them stick, keeping the respect and trust of voters. I’m afraid this may only be possible after a number of years of far-right misrule under Ford, Hudak and Harper.
LikeLike
@Richard White
This may seem insensitive for me to say, but maybe offloading the subway system onto someone else will finally tell riders what the real cost of having a subway is. If money losing bus routes can be so willingly cut, why not white-elephant subways?
LikeLike
If the Province needs to keep the infrastructure on its books – what’s wrong with MetroLinx owning the subway extension and TTC owning the older part of the subway line?
The operator of the subway doesn’t need to own the trackage – it just needs to have rights to run trains on them. Operating agreements can be put in place to provide for running rights, access, maintenance and repair.
i.e. Go Transit owns track east of Toronto and seamlessly runs its trains onto the mainline railway tracks (albeit “simpler” technology).
In Vancouver, TransLink owns the Canada Line infrastructure (InTransitBC owns the vehicles and has rights to run them). There’s a complex agreement in place governing rights and responsibilities. I do find it a bit odd that in Toronto, the business capital of the country, that the transit system doesn’t take advantage of that expertise.
Steve: I think that this whole business about ownership and bookkeeping is a gigantic red herring whose purpose is to make it appear that we can’t come to a sensible, reasonable agreement among the parties.
LikeLike
Either Ford didn’t campaign in good faith, or he’s getting a rude awakening in the mayor’s chair and he’s scrambling to avoid the coming crunch.
As Councillor Gord Perks noted, the Fords, who control the Executive Committee and the Budget Committee, have not found much in the way of gravy to cut. Doug Ford claimed that this was because of the hurry up on the 2011 budget (a move that the Fords brought in and which other, saner councillors warned would cause plenty of confusion) and that we’ll see the gravy magically appear in 2012.
Heh. No. I can see what’s happened. Ford campaigned on the Harris chestnut that there is corruption and fat rife in government, not because it’s true (it isn’t), but because that’s what enough of the frustrated voters wanted to hear. Many voters like the sound of cuts that don’t affect them, and I think they assume that if the Fords whip out things like arts subsidies and councillor expense accounts, the city’s budget will magically shrink and tax cuts will rain down from the sky. The truth of the matter is, government is actually very efficient, and you can’t just cut willy-nilly without very quickly cutting services. And then people start complaining.
Note the public response to the cutting of hours of 48 routes. Add to this cutting of library branch hours and library branches themselves. Then pools. Very quickly, the voters can turn on you.
I don’t know if Ford knew what he was getting into when he campaigned, or if he just has a money management blind spot (not surprisingly, his campaign spent the most money and ended up deepest in debt), but given his actions here, I suspect that he knows he’s getting into trouble. He balanced the budget, cut the vehicle registration tax and kept service cuts lower than they could have been largely by relying on the $300 million budget surplus that David Miller left behind. That’s not sustainable.
And now we find him here sending out trial balloons. Hey, provincial government: care to take the TTC off our hands and saving us over hundreds of millions in operating subsidies? Why would he do that? Could it be because he knows he’s starting out 2012 about $300 million in the hole and he’s discovered that there simply isn’t enough gravy to meet that deficit without engaging in painful cuts that will dramatically affect even the people who voted for him? Could it be that he’s trying to duck responsibility for his own fiscal insensibility?
This has all the air of pigeons coming home to roost. Ford campaigned simplistically on a message that wasn’t true: that government was easy and that much of its cost was the result of “special interests” inflating costs and providing no benefit to the citizens. Worse, he was arrayed with a field that had none of the charisma or the courage to deliver the message that voters needed to hear: that the services that Torontonians need to make their city livable and prosperous costs money. And you can’t expect taxes to go down without engaging in some sacrifice.
LikeLike
@JW: it doesn’t make sense because you were interpreting it literally. “Modern fiscal conservatism” is made up of those who claim to be “fiscally conservative” while pushing aside real fiscal conservatives with the mantra of “Vote for me because I can cut taxes, increase spending and reduce the deficit.” The modern aspect of it is due to these individuals coming out of the woodwork over the past decade and actually getting elected.
The “make daddy pay for it” aspect is meant to be an insult directed at those same individuals due to their tendency to avoid making tough choices with regards to funding or cuts by pawning them off on someone else. (Downloading. Uploading. Debt. Privatize. Etc.) Essentially, it’s meant to associate them with the image of an irresponsible teenager with a credit card. If they make any money, they spend it rather than save it. (Considering surpluses as overcharges rather than opportunities to reduce debt and provide real long term tax relief. Using one off surpluses to justify permanent tax cuts. Etc.) If they don’t make money, they put their spending on the card and make their parents pay the bill rather than not spend anything.
So in this instance, rather than take on the TTC, Mr. Ford is trying to dump the cost of it (beyond the original provincial subsidy pre Harris) on all taxpayers in the province. Hence that’s where the “make daddy pay for it” comes in.
LikeLike
@OgtheDim; Yes, we can contract out the DVP and Gardiner, it’s called “pricing choice” or some such buzz word for toll road! As for contracting out policing, some of that could be done too except for the fact they are good at protecting their turf which results in higher costs. Look how they squawked and took over the Parking Control “Green Hornets” years ago and now they are taking over TTC Security. Next move, the TTC tries to reduce subway train crew from 2 to 1 person. Union cries rider safety will suffer. Cops replace the TTC guard on subway trains!
LikeLike
Kevin, I really hate to say this but the TTC is not the only major transit system in North America not getting a subsidy from a higher level of government. I do believe that MARTA in Atlanta gets no money from any higher level of government either.
Steve: If you look at the MARTA Annual Report you will see that it gets a whopping pile of revenue (about 75%) from sales tax. Fare revenue includes parking fees.
One can argue that a sales tax is not a subsidy from another government, but it is money collected by government and disbursed to the transit system. This is little different from getting pennies on the gas tax, or money from vehicle registrations, or whatever.
LikeLike
Richard said: “Transit City is off the table except for the Eglinton line and we still aren’t too sure on what the details of that are. With a stop placed on Transit City construction what will happen to the Scarborough RT? Will it just be closed in 2015 with nothing to replace it? I highly doubt Ford’s proposed Gravy Train subway to Scarborough Town Centre will be built. ”
The ideal situation would be to keep the existing Scarborough RT line and its proprietary technology (ICTS/ALRT/Skytrain) and just extend it furthest west along Eglinton Avenue as far as Royal York, allowing for full grade-separation but at a smaller pricetag per kilometre than full-blown subways. It’s what Metrolinx had intended to do along that corridor before Miller and Giambrone strong-armed them. Ergo no shutdown of the line, just phasing in of newer vehicles.
The Sheppard extensions are pricy, admittedly, but I just don’t buy into the rhetoric that they’d be underused. And its sole purpose is not just to connect riders to a shopping mall as the media keeps hyperbolizing. Comparing ridership along Sheppard’s measly 5.5 kms to Y-U-S’s and B-D’s respective 32+ kms – with several times as many stops and connections – as evidence that it’s not worthy of further investment is assurd. A fully extended Sheppard Line from Dufferin to McCowan would provide the true form of northern crosstown rapid transit that the proposed Transit City Finch and Sheppard Lines never could have delivered. Even the recent introduction of the 199 Finch-Scarborough Ctr Rocket stands as proof that there is a market for a RAPID transit connection between North York Centre and Scarborough Ctr. This means that even people at say Bridletowne might find it far more convenient to take the Warden bus southbound to Sheppard subway and head across along it than endure the much longer bus commute to Finch Stn.
A long-term strategy beyond the initial extension could be to extend even further west along Sheppard to its end at Weston Rd, across the Humber valley and up Albion Rd to terminate near the Albion Centre and its surrounding high-density Rexdale neighbourhoods. This in my opinion would be far more beneficial to northern Etobicoke residents (and by extension: Malton, Bramalea, Woodbridge and airport-area bound commuters) than a string of meandering LRT lines with too many stations en route to ever claim itself as rapid. Even many Jane-Finch residents would benefit more from a Jane-Sheppard subway stop vs. FWLRT considering that the high-density neighbourhood extends for several blocks south along Jane St as close as Grandravine.
Ford of course is likely not visionary enough to consider any of this, but at least via extending the subway lines further and further out, we’re granting future generations the capability and means with which to build onto something vs. the nothing “stub”way we have today that’ll only appreciate in operating subsidies and construction costs the longer we prolong lengthening it out to the point of profitability/ROI. Hence if shovels are in the ground by 2015 along both corridors (Eglinton-Scarborough and Sheppard), I’ll be pleased.
LikeLike
In response to Mikey: It won’t be possible to run new Mk-II ICTS vehicles on the existing SRT guideway. The curves and tunnels are suitable for Mk-I only, and those cars are no longer in production. The existing line will have to be closed for upgrading, even if ICTS is retained.
I doubt that fully grade-separate ICTS on Eglinton will cost much less than subway. IMO, it is better to either build it as LRT and save on construction costs, or build HRT and secure capacity for more distant future. ICTS means subway-level costs without the matching capacity.
LikeLike
It’s hard to see how the western potential of Sheppard can be realized as Mikey suggests in a way that could finance a subway without closing Downsview Airport (relocating the Bombardier factory to Hamilton or somewhere else with 7,000 feet or more of tarmac and the Museum to the Island Airport) and redeveloping it in concert with Downsview Park.
Since instead Downsview Park is going to be developed piecemeal an LRT conversion and extension seems more and more like the rational option with the LRT undergrounded from the Humber to past the 404. Since this would essentially be a “new” system, Metrolinx could own it with the consequent financial massage for the Province, with the City transferring the existing tunnels and stations and severing the connection at Yonge.
LikeLike
With the GTA providing a large portion of the country’s GDP (as well as the financial backbone of the province), we do require some funding from the Feds and Province to implement a proper regional system not just funding for specific local ideas. Seeing that Queen’s Park recently cut back on it funding for transit (I do remember the discussions here last year), so I doubt Queen’s Park would be willing to take over the TTC – especially when it is nothing more than passing the buck.
The city, instead of find excuses about the costs of transit should instead look at ways to make the system more efficient. That does not mean scrapping “low ridership” routes, but rather looking at ways of making the whole system more efficient.
One idea, why couldn’t the city simply state that the Spadina and Yonge extensions are officially dead until either Queen’s Park/Ottawa and/or York Region picks up the operating costs (or part of them) for the service outside of Toronto’s borders (not to mentioning the capital costs of building the lines.
Steve: The agreement for funding and building the Spadina extension is already in place, and the City is in no position to back out, even if we will be stuck with the cost of operating the line north of Steeles Avenue. As for the Richmond Hill extension, Council is on record saying that before it is built, they want other projects like the DRL to be reviewed as well. The TTC is studying this, but is notoriously opposed to anything beyond expansion of the existing Yonge line. Metrolinx has not yet released a definitive study of the financial worth and operational effects of a Yonge extension, and is aware of the potential add-on costs for expanding capacity further south.
LikeLike
Steve wrote “Would Liberal ridings (at least while they’re in power) get better service than Tory and NDP ridings?”. Tee Hee!! That’s funny!
Having lived in Liberal ridings and the 416 Liberal Party stronghold for decades, I’m not certain I can count many instances EVER where a service was better offered to the city because of that die-hard Liberal voting and support. If there had been, wouldn’t all of Premier Peterson’s era have lead to multiple Network 2011 lines already being in operation, like, by 2011? It’s seemed that the only tangible links between voting Liberal locally and a clear result happen if you’re the MPP for Vaughan, who also happened to be the Finance Minister for a spell…
The parties vying to steal seats within 416 tend to offer better results; the Liberals conversely have continually appeared to take their Toronto seats for granted and rarely implement anything that would be perceived as Toronto-centric — there’s simply no political gain for them to do so. I mean, at one point not so very long ago the Infrastructure Minister — whose own riding had four streetcar lines running through it — hesitated and almost balked at helping buy new vehicles to replace a 30+yr-old streetcar fleet. It’s not asking too much for your downtown MPP to be a big supporter of the mode that ALL of his constituents use, is it?
That said, do under-rewarded Torontonians make it clear at election time that they expected more for their loyalty? And that their loyalty could waver or move elsewhere? Nah. Even I wouldn’t risk the alternative. But thinking that a provincially run service would be better in a riding held by the government is just plain dreaming to me — would that it really were so, no?
LikeLike
Steve said … “I don’t fully understand your comment. Are you implying that spending on the scale Ontario has proposed via Metrolinx, let alone the additional spending that taking over local systems would entail, is beyond their capability?”
It is now beyond the City of Toronto’s capability to properly fund and operate through property taxes. As ridership increases, so does operational subsidy, and soon it will reach critical mass. When the system was relatively new 40 years ago, we simply didn’t have to contend with the kind of tunnel/signal/track/station maintenance and vehicle replacement costs that are on our plate now.
As well, regional integration and schedule coordination won’t happen as long as the TTC remains a separate operational entity. We need one GTA system — one logo and one vehicle paint scheme that takes in GO, TTC, MT, BT, and YRT and rebrands them as one service.
It will eventually happen. Like the other poster said — it’s also an excuse to give the TTC a good shake-up. Don’t forget, the people running the TTC now are not that same folks who ran it in the 1960s and 70s (the ones who actually took PRIDE in the system). I’m sure you remember those days.
Steve: Yes, but this does not change the fact that someone, be it the region or the province, has to pay for all of this, and your comment implied that it was beyond even their capability.
LikeLike
“Steve: I agree that there is a deeply-rooted problem with the culture embedded in the TTC that so fundamentally seeks to find external causes or blame for its failings, and treats passengers as folks who need re-education about how to use the transit system and what we should expect from it. Metrolinx? GO Transit doesn’t exactly have a sterling record itself, although it at least recognizes the need to try harder. GO also has a comparatively easy system to run.
The TTC is vastly larger than GO/Metrolinx, and any “takeover” would really be a marriage of a mouse and an elephant”
Nicole has a valid point. Unfortunately, it sounds like the same argument could also be applied to Metrolinx itself.
Steve, I believe you’re saying that Metrolinx would be overwhelmed, and therefore incapable of taking on the TTC. Perhaps that would be a good thing. Perhaps that might be the catalyst we need to recreate both of them.
The complaints I read about Metrolinx don’t sound substantively different than complaints about the TTC itself. Both sound irretrievably broken: problem-ridden, ineffective, undemocratic and non-transparent.
From the sounds of it, almost anything would be better than what we already have. Or are we all just whiners? Does Metrolinx need reform, or a rebuild? Same question for the TTC.
So what would constitute a good transit body if we were starting from scratch – whether regional or local? What would be the ideal composition? What kind of membership should it ideally have? What type of oversight and checks and balances? Could we formalize and mandate public input and consultation (true consultation, not what currently passes for consultation at the TTC)?
What other ‘effective’ transit bodies (not transit systems, but transit bodies) can you think of that we could we model it after? Sure would be nice to get back to the days when we had the transit system that everyone else emulated.
Steve: This kind of exercise would be difficult at the best of times with a Council and Province supportive of better transit. In an environment where tax cuts are the the top priority, and the chief decision makers are diehard car drivers, we would never see the kind of nuanced improvements that would improve the TTC without destroying the organization. It’s easy to say “fire the bastards”, but much harder to find a new crew who will do a better job.
LikeLike
Yes, but with a farebox ratio of 70%, the TTC is already appears to be very efficient. Doubtless there is fat, but perhaps not as much as is being made out to keep the status quo running (and what about growth and capital works and extensions?) for too much longer.
Cutting services increases waiting time, which increases total perceived cost to the rider, which reduced ridership- this is a downward spiral and is not sustainable.
It’s true that a less random, volatile source of funding needs to be found, and this could be Queen’s Park. But they will want something in return for their money, and that something may be a slice of control over the TTC. After all, what incentive would they have for funding the TTC if they have no say of control over how that money is spent?
At least in Brisbane, the state pays for public transport, but the local councils contribute what they can to keep it running, so everyone is exposed to risk and reward and has a stake and incentive to be interested in the running of the transit system.
LikeLike
This may be a bit off topic but has the TTC ever considered running 4 car trains on Bloor and Yonge in the late evening to save the money of one driver?
Steve: A four car train has a crew of two — just look at any train on Sheppard. Also, the TTC stopped cutting off cars late at night years ago because they needed a small army of yard crews to handle moving the two-car sets into the yards. Finally, once the new TR trains start running on Yonge, cutting them back to 4 cars won’t be an option anyhow.
LikeLike
Michael Forest said: It won’t be possible to run new Mk-II ICTS vehicles on the existing SRT guideway.
I thought Soberman’s report from a few years ago confirmed that Mark IIs could in fact be used after all (even in the Ellesmere tunnel)? If so, that would result in the cheapest option, leaving more money for Ford’s Sheppard subway, and is the most likely scenario we will end up with. True, the SRT wouldn’t be extended, but that doesn’t seem to be a priority for Ford.
Steve: Soberman’s claim was subsequently overturned by the TTC. Also, the curve at Kennedy is too tight for Mark IIs.
LikeLike
The advantage of using MKII ICTS on Eglinton would be from a combination of features associated with the technology – each which can also be applied through HRT or LRT (if the political will is there to do so).
– automation (allows a change in the mode of operation from infrequent long trains to frequent short trains) (this is also dependent on an exclusive RoW)
– frequent short trains allow constuction of smaller stations/shorter platforms and a reduction in capital costs (SkyTrain MKII 2.6m wide trains typically have an 80m platform; I think LRT platforms are planned to be longer than that)
As an aside, you can build less expansive stations whatever the technology. Just have ONE street entrance and emergency exits (like a lot of stations on the Bloor Line) and kill the huge mezzanines. That will help keep costs down.
Steve: Double exits are a fire code requirement. There will be mezzanines in many stations on Eglinton because of their depth. Accessibility will demand elevators and escalators. I am particularly amused by the reference to platform length as the subway advocates have been pushing for the line to be upgradeable to full subway. Oddly enough, I have not heard the same demand of an ICTS line.
LikeLike