The Official Transit Thread

[Denguin]

So... with the new UPass system, in which you will get monthly passes issued every month, I'm guessing you don't get to use your UPass in the summer months (if you're not at school)?

[ronthecivil]

The provincial take on fuel taxes is almost the same as the provincial spend on maintaining roads. That is what that document says. There is some surplus, but it's not like it pays for half of healthcare.

As I said previously, the carbon tax was accompanied by offsetting reductions in income taxes, so those are general expense items right off the bat. It also supposedly goes towards reducing the environmental costs of burning fuels, a cost which isn't associated with maintaining roads in the budget, but appears to be a real cost associated with cars.

So yeah, that $730 million is just on transportation maintenance, and doesn't necessarily represent the true cost (environmental included) of having cars.

So far as I can understand, the port mann project is being funded by the province. Thus, all of the $3.3 billion or whatever it will cost is coming from income and sales taxes as well as tolls. Fuel taxes won't be helping much on that one. Besides, fuel taxes for someone who doesn't ever use the bridge (people not in the GVRD, people who live close to work etc) are going to pay for it in your argument. Why should their money be going to pay $3.3 billion for a bridge that they don't benefit from?

I'm arguing for a mixed funding program similar to how translink operates. Part comes from a tax that hits pretty much everyone (because everyone benefits somewhat from it), and part comes from a usage fee (fares or tolls) which goes to make those who use it more pay more for it.

Well the province is fronting the money but they will also gain the toll revenue. The project was actually put out as a P3 model where in exchange for funding the construction costs a third party financier was to receive the toll revenue. This was all done based on a toll scheme where they would get a nice return for their investment. However, right about the time they floated this out there was nicely timed with that big credit crunch so as good a deal as it was for some third party there just wasn't enough credit around that someone was willing to finance it especialy when you wouldn't see a dime for about five years.

This is about as good a bad news thing that can happen. The province instead of scrapping it just put the 3.3 billion onto the provincial debt. Now that sounds bad but two summers from now the government is going to start collecting 3 dollars every time someone crosses that bridge and at the end of the day it will be more than enough to not only pay off the capital investement but also turn in a tidy profit.

And all this relies on rather nominal growth for the bridge. If you suscribe to a "if you build it they will come" model and the bridge actually gets busy it will be a golden cash cow for the province.

----------------------------------------

As for the rest you can justify the carbon tax all you want but at the end of the day it's taking money from drivers and jamming it into general revenue. It's not like they take those billions and actually spend it on reducing greenhouse emmissions, they simply subsidise income taxes that would normally go to general revenue.

And of course even all the gas taxes wouldn't be able to fund the black hole that is healthcare. Being a black hole it needs many, many taxes to fund it. Like half of all them put together.......

And all of this doesn't include the federal exise tax which would bring the feds about a billion a year as well. How much of that goes into improving the road/transit network? A pittance.

And I am not arguing that you couldn't have a mixed funding formula including tolls (I would sneak them in as part of improvements if only for demand management reasons) I am simply arguing that a lot of people would point out that we could be funding all the things (gateway excepted but like a good exception it is self funding through it's toll) that are being asked for, both road and rail, with the existing gas taxes.

If you put translink in charge of the entire road and highway network and they got to keep all the gas taxes collected in the lower mainland there would be enough to have a gold standard transit system AND and ever expanding sktryain network AND a ton of improvements to roads and bridges with nominal tolls to supplement projects at best. A simple tax shift, no tax hike required!

(Even then the feds are still getting five percent HST on the fuel so it's not like the go bankrupt).

[Common sense]

So... with the new UPass system, in which you will get monthly passes issued every month, I'm guessing you don't get to use your UPass in the summer months (if you're not at school)?

if you're not at school in summer, you won't be issued a UPass - this was true even before the switch.

[Denguin]

if you're not at school in summer, you won't be issued a UPass - this was true even before the switch.

But if you were in school during the winter, your UPass would be valid until Aug 31 of that year, from what I understand.

[Common sense]

But if you were in school during the winter, your UPass would be valid until Aug 31 of that year, from what I understand.

Nope - for the trimester system, it runs 9/1 to 12/31, 1/1 to 4/30, and 5/1 to 8/31.

[ahzdeen]

But if you were in school during the winter, your UPass would be valid until Aug 31 of that year, from what I understand.

What a lot of people did was register for summer courses, then after the U-pass arrived, they dropped all their classes.

[Miss Korea Bob.Loblaw]

What a lot of people did was register for summer courses, then after the U-pass arrived, they dropped all their classes.

What if I take intersessions?

[ahzdeen]

What if I take intersessions?

The new u-pass system means you have to get a new one every month. So you may be able to scam 1 month out of it, but not the whole summer anymore. Technically, you're only supposed to be using the U-pass during the months you are registered for classes.

I think in the old system, if you started class later on in summer, that's when the u-pass was mailed to you, and it would be good until the end of summer.

[Denguin]

Nope - for the trimester system, it runs 9/1 to 12/31, 1/1 to 4/30, and 5/1 to 8/31.

Yeah I see that now. Don't know how I mistook that... I have bad reading skills I guess...

[inane]

First half of 2011 sees record breaking transit usage--higher than during the Olympics.

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Record+number+riders+TransLink+2011/5285944/story.html

[aGENT]

First half of 2011 sees record breaking transit usage--higher than during the Olympics.

http://www.vancouver...5944/story.html

Yet they still have no money...? That tells me two things:

One - Riders are not paying enough.

Two - They're poorly managed.

[ronthecivil]

Yet they still have no money...? That tells me two things:

One - Riders are not paying enough.

Two - They're poorly managed.

Don't forget three - they are simply seeing the results of a growing population. One could easily determine that car, cycling, walking, or just about any mode of travel you can think of will have seen an increase.

[Columbo]

Technically, you're only supposed to be using the U-pass during the months you are registered for classes.

I've always found this to be ridiculous. I never took summer classes so every summer I was stuck paying about $450 over 4 months for bus passes. What do they think, that poor students suddenly become wealthy during the summer? I needed the money I was earning to save for next year's tuition. If the goal of the UPass is to help students and to foster an appreciation for transit, why shouldn't it apply year-round?

[Columbo]

Yet they still have no money...? That tells me two things:

One - Riders are not paying enough.

Two - They're poorly managed.

Three - They have enormous operating costs, not to mention the loans plus interest they have to repay for major infrastructure projects such as the Canada line.

[aGENT]

Three - They have enormous operating costs, not to mention the loans plus interest they have to repay for major infrastructure projects such as the Canada line.

Yes but they knew about those. Hence one would have to assume they budgeted for them. They seem "surprised" by this increase which should be equal to bonus money they weren't expecting to have beyond their original budget...yet they still somehow have no money....?

[Columbo]

Yes but they knew about those. Hence one would have to assume they budgeted for them. They seem "surprised" by this increase which should be equal to bonus money they weren't expecting to have beyond their original budget...yet they still somehow have no money....?

At this point, any extra money they find will just delay cuts to service that they say may soon have to take place. I think the same thing happened last quarter, which is so far great news.

Yeah they budgeted for the Canada Line and for general operating costs, but they didn't anticipate just how high gas prices would go, which takes a huge toll. And the Canada Line was way over budget because of things largely out of their control, such as a huge increase in the cost of concrete and other building materials. It's hard to anticipate everything. I think they always knew that they'd need a new source of revenue to keep things going (ie gas tax), and I think they're still counting on it.

But yeah any new money is great, and it'll help to keep them afloat. Before I blame them, I'd look at other city issues - like the urban sprawl south of the Fraser that makes Translink run empty buses to underpopulated areas at a huge loss, etc.

[ronthecivil]

I've always found this to be ridiculous. I never took summer classes so every summer I was stuck paying about $450 over 4 months for bus passes. What do they think, that poor students suddenly become wealthy during the summer? I needed the money I was earning to save for next year's tuition. If the goal of the UPass is to help students and to foster an appreciation for transit, why shouldn't it apply year-round?

Translink barely has enough money to support the UPass system the way it is, that's why!

Be happy you get cheap transit three quarters of the year. When I went to school I didn't get a discount at all and yet I survived.

[Columbo]

Translink barely has enough money to support the UPass system the way it is, that's why!

Be happy you get cheap transit three quarters of the year. When I went to school I didn't get a discount at all and yet I survived.

The UPass is an investment for Translink, they're creating a generation of students that will hopefully use transit for life. I see no problem with them giving students a pass for 3 or 4 summers in their short education careers to bolster that invention. The return would be huge.

Plus I happened to buy passes in the summer, but a lot of students either scam the system or just don't bus regularly in the summer. So giving these students UPasses doesn't represent any lost income, because these people weren't bringing in money for them in the first place. Plus like I said, it'll foster a greater appreciation for transit in a group of people that hopefully has decades of transit use ahead of them.

[ronthecivil]

The UPass is an investment for Translink, they're creating a generation of students that will hopefully use transit for life. I see no problem with them giving students a pass for 3 or 4 summers in their short education careers to bolster that invention. The return would be huge.

Plus I happened to buy passes in the summer, but a lot of students either scam the system or just don't bus regularly in the summer. So giving these students UPasses doesn't represent any lost income, because these people weren't bringing in money for them in the first place. Plus like I said, it'll foster a greater appreciation for transit in a group of people that hopefully has decades of transit use ahead of them.

That's a pretty dubious investment especially given that most bus routes operate at a loss. I suppose it's an improvement from the even bigger loss of when the UPass is in session.

But that aside why should people that don't even live in the region in the summer have to subsidise people that do? It's bad enough that people that actually get the benefit of the program are those that live far off campus and commute there. If we really wanted to encourage something sustainable we would build more studant housing on campus and the studants could live where they "work".

I am actually curious as to how much the UPass program costs translink and perhaps we should be looking to cancelling it instead of simply resorting to the old "toss more money at the problem". The transporation world doesn't resolve around studants!

[nitronuts]

Yet they still have no money...? That tells me two things:

One - Riders are not paying enough.

Two - They're poorly managed.

Riders are paying some of the highest fares in Canada, so I wouldn't say they aren't paying enough. I wouldn't want them to hike the fares again, there have been far too many in recent years.

I'm gonna say more of the latter.