Metro Vancouver Transportation & Transit Plebiscite

[dharper]

What does everyone think about the upcoming Translink referendum question? Of the proposed revenue sources leaked in the media, there seems to be a heavy preference to tax the driving public, to fund their projects. Whether they are for the driver or the transit user.

[SOSS]

Originally Posted by dharper

What does everyone think about the upcoming Translink referendum question? Of the proposed revenue sources leaked in the media, there seems to be a heavy preference to tax the driving public, to fund their projects. Whether they are for the driver or the transit user.

Leaked is another way of saying 'testing the waters'.

Personally I'd like to see road pricing based to kms driven on hwy 1 from Langley (or even further east) to Horshoe Bay and up the 99 to Squamish. Could be a variable rate depending on location and time of day. Ie charging less in District of North Van until upgrades are complete and less per Km on the Sea to Sky since it's likely most travelers will take it the full length. Maybe total cost of under $10 for this entire route. Other routes to consider are 99 south of Vancouver, 91 and SFPR.

Perhaps a new tax on single detached dwellings over $750000 (or some other threshold) to build or renovate (cost of construction, not property). Blaket property taxes can hurt the long term homeowners who are just getting by. Just because their house is worth more doesn't mean they have access to its equity or have increased their personal income.

I don't want to see anything added to transit users. That would just discourage use and put more people in their cars on the road. Also, society has been subsidizing car users for long enough.

[Procrastinational]

Originally Posted by SOSS

Leaked is another way of saying 'testing the waters'.

Personally I'd like to see road pricing based to kms driven on hwy 1 from Langley (or even further east) to Horshoe Bay and up the 99 to Squamish. Could be a variable rate depending on location and time of day. Ie charging less in District of North Van until upgrades are complete and less per Km on the Sea to Sky since it's likely most travelers will take it the full length. Maybe total cost of under $10 for this entire route. Other routes to consider are 99 south of Vancouver, 91 and SFPR.

Perhaps a new tax on single detached dwellings over $750000 (or some other threshold) to build or renovate (cost of construction, not property). Blaket property taxes can hurt the long term homeowners who are just getting by. Just because their house is worth more doesn't mean they have access to its equity or have increased their personal income.

I don't want to see anything added to transit users. That would just discourage use and put more people in their cars on the road. Also, society has been subsidizing car users for long enough.

The downside to funding transit with road pricing is that as transit use goes up, driving, and as a result, funding for transit, goes down.
It would be better to find some self reinforcing funding model for transit, as gas taxes have been for driving (more people drive, more gas tax revenue, more money for roads). That way, transit expansion wouldn't be choked off as ridership increases.

[WarrenC12]

0.5% PST in Metro Vancouver...

Localized Sales Taxes work all over the place. Why not here?

[deasine]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

0.5% PST in Metro Vancouver...

Localized Sales Taxes work all over the place. Why not here?

Expected revenues is often based on the calculation of existing sales data. Despite the low Canadian dollar, there is still an incentive for some to continue south of the border for shopping. A localised sales tax further incentivizes this especially when/if the CAD rises again. There will always be a loss of revenues.

The whole gas tax thing TransLink does realise they are losing money. This is why they want to use a road pricing model so that fewer (notice I said fewer and not no one as enforcing out-of-province users will be very difficult, if it all possible, TransLink does not have the existing legal capacity...) will be able to get away from this. But even then with a road pricing model, ultimately end consumers pay and not companies as they will have the abilities to receive tax benefits but this is another story.

It will be a guaranteed source of income, yes. The calculation of which is difficult to value. Also compounded by the fact that the Metro Vancouver/TransLink model has no legal capacity to do this and will have to seek assistance from the Provincial Gov't, which seems unlikely to do so unless it was voted yes upon, in which this guarantees that the gov't doesn't lose support from Vancouver, therefore ability to maintain seats.

It doesn't help that TransLink is currently in a position where they have lost the trust of the public. I don't believe local media sources would have uncovered these high car allowances and bonuses and salaries if TransLink was in good relations or was profiting. The recent SkyTrain delays have really caused significant problems in terms of PR coupled with the delays in Compass. There have been a lot of misconceptions and allegations of money wasting, some of which aren't true/misinformed, but it doesn't change the fact you have had bad PR.

[st7860]

Thats why its a referendum

[SOSS]

Fuel tax definitely doesn't work. Not just because there is less usage but mostly because of increased efficiency. Hybrid technology has made some serious headway and now pure electric too.

[Gordon]

The reason for the referendum is That the government doesn't want to make what it sees as an unpopular decision and shpw any leadership on this file.

What is the government going to do if the referendum fails?
the will have to do something.

[SOSS]

If the referendum fails, the mayors will be forced to use the only fund creator mode available to them: raise property taxes.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by SOSS

If the referendum fails, the mayors will be forced to use the only fund creator mode available to them: raise property taxes.

IMO...

Regional Sales tax: Won't happen. HST was rejected, so will this
Tolls/Levy on cars: There will be outrage from those who drive and those who are forced to drive because the transit already is substandard.
Carbon tax: Not allowed.
Carbon tax applied only to Greater Vancouver: See Sales tax.

Like the best/worst optimistic situation is that the Mayors get told No, and are then forced to build the parts they want by themselves if they really want it, or wait for a federal or provincial government that puts transit capital projects back on the priority list. We will then see those business cases fall apart as they become more expensive.

[Gordon]

This is why the Referendum is the wrong way to deal with this.

The only logical way of dealing with funding is for all the government to allow Translink to have a set of tools that both sides agree on and get on with a sustainably funded transit system, but I'm not sure the Liberals want this issue to be solved.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Gordon

This is why the Referendum is the wrong way to deal with this.

The only logical way of dealing with funding is for all the government to allow Translink to have a set of tools that both sides agree on and get on with a sustainably funded transit system, but I'm not sure the Liberals want this issue to be solved.

They have the tools, the mayors are just too chickenshit and won't the property tax. They want the province to take the heat for a tax increase. Well, they're all just weeks into a new, longer 4 year term. If the mayors cared so much about transit they would raise it now instead of spending years whining about it and face a certain defeat on a sales tax hike.

[Metro-One]

If they do road pricing, it should only be for full freeway routes (or ALL bridges, but a much more reasonable toll around a dollar).

Again, I really think the SFPR should have been built to full freeway standards but users would have to pay a distance based toll, except for commercial vehicles, which would get a free pass (or a very generous discount).

Also, any new tax should not be a flat tax system. If road pricing is introduced, those with lower incomes should get a tax return.

And yes, both the mayors and the province have been playing a pass the bucket game for taking the blame for increased taxes. Sadly Translink is caught in the middle and taking all the heat.

[cabotp]

It all comes down to the fact that none of the politicians want to put their ass on the line. Hence lets take a vote. If the public says yes well the politicians can't be blamed since the people said yes.

As for possible methods of collecting. Well there is property taxes, sales tax, gas taxes, tolls on bridge, tolls on roads, distance based tolls, vehicle levies, and transit rider fares. I might have missed another type of solution and would love to hear it.

There are pros and cons to each and none of them are perfect for everyone.

I personally feel the best solution is a distance based toll for vehicles and a distance based fare for transit users. This way you are collecting based on how far a physical body moved from point A to B. The more people that use the roads or transit the more revenue is collect. And the reverse is true. You would never see a case where vehicles have gotten more fuel efficient and thus less gas taxes are now being collected. Even if the same number of more vehicles are on the road. Of course the people in the valley would scream bloody murder if this got implemented. But even today with gas taxes and transit fares. They pay more of the longer distances they travel.

The most difficult part is technology wise this is the most difficult to implement.

[jlousa]

As others have pointed out the sales tax and gas taxes have drawbacks, big ones. Property tax is the most difficult to evade and the cheapest to implement, the cities are just chicken to be the ones to implement it. A modest registration fee with property tax increases are probably the way to go, I'm sure whatever we end up with will be considerably worse.

[dharper]

I think they will go for a vehicle levy. Not because it is the most unfair, as for distance driven, but simply because it would be easy to implement.

[Bcasey25raptor]

This is why I hate democracy sometimes.

People are stupid and never look at the future.

[SOSS]

Property taxes don't catch all users. There are people comuting from chilliwack and beyond or Squamish and they would be exempt. Same with vehicle levies unless all provincial vehicles are hit. User pay based in distance makes the most sense. Unfortunate that it is also one of the most challenging to implement. Compass card potentially solves this implimitation for transit users. New toll gantries at all entry and exit points to freeways/express ways would be required for proper road pricing.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by SOSS

Property taxes don't catch all users. There are people comuting from chilliwack and beyond or Squamish and they would be exempt. Same with vehicle levies unless all provincial vehicles are hit. User pay based in distance makes the most sense. Unfortunate that it is also one of the most challenging to implement. Compass card potentially solves this implimitation for transit users. New toll gantries at all entry and exit points to freeways/express ways would be required for proper road pricing.

This is the basic (obvious) problem with each tax category:

Property Tax: Doesn't affect those outside the Translink area, Mayors are chickens to raise it
Vehicle Levy: Doesn't affect those who already use transit and do not own vehicles. People will register their vehicles out in Chilliwack, or some other place that the Levy doesn't apply to, though keep in mind this results in higher insurance costs. (Typically insurance is like "for personal use within 25km" or something)
Tolls and Road pricing: Difficult to pull off without infrastructure. Tolling bridges works with LPR (Licence plate readers), but you're not going to stick one of these at every intersection in Metro Vancouver, but that ~is~ the only way you're going to get everyone. Perhaps it could be combined with 100Mpixel cameras as a safety feature to nab those who run red lights. A FAR FAR cheaper solution involves requring GPS beacons, but that of course means anyone who comes from outside the area isn't paying in to it.
Regional Gas Tax/Carbon Tax/Sales tax increase: Easy to add, but taxes that are added never EVER get removed. That sets bad precedents, and the HST thing pretty much means this won't happen.

Like road tolling really only works by working it into the ICBC insurance system, and that adds another privacy issue as well. At best, putting LPR Toll plaza's at the end points of all the bridges allows a rough "zone" check, as the average person isn't going to go so far out of their way to avoid a toll if all the bridges have tolls. It's also unfair to people who live in Richmond since there would be no way to leave without hitting a poll, though nothing like the toll to leave Vancouver Island on a ferry

A GPS beacon would have to be checked against the vehicles mileage, and that raises liability issues should the vehicle become involved in an accident and the driver had disabled the beacon to cheat Translink.

We may inevitably have GPS beacons for all vehicles as a required security/insurance feature, but so far nobody has the stomach for it.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/car-tr...erns-1.1366687

"The insurance company could say that 'for two years, people have had this in their cars and nothing's gone wrong, let's just make it obligatory," Israel said. "We've seen that happen in other technological scenarios, where it's a pilot project and at first you really are cautious on the privacy side and you put in a lot of protections. You don't make it mandatory but over time it becomes embedded."

But Lindhardsen said they see this device as a "voluntary way" for clients to save money on their insurance and to control their driving habits and that he didn't believe it's been made mandatory in other jurisdictions.

[Gordon]

The mayors also have the Hydro transit levy as a funding tool. That could be raised and it probably wouldn't be a big issue.