Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by whatnext

As cyclists like to say when trying to justify why they shouldn't pay licensing fees: I pay taxes for that. Taxes on gas, taxes on purchases, taxes on vehicle maintenance, licensing fees etc etc

Hey, you're either for direct usage charges or you're not. If not, then you must be in favour of funding transit out of general tax revenues, right?

[DKaz]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

The 6 million dollar question really is...

Should public transit, like public roads and public bridges, be considered public infrastructure?

I asked myself that question a few days ago. Buses may be a hard sell due to its high operation costs. I believe Skytrain is already viewed as public infrastructure, we're just paying for the operation costs. I have no problem with that.

[nname]

Originally Posted by DKaz

I asked myself that question a few days ago. Buses may be a hard sell due to its high operation costs. I believe Skytrain is already viewed as public infrastructure, we're just paying for the operation costs. I have no problem with that.

At the current tax rate, TransLink would have more than 300 millions of spare cash every year if it is only paying the operating cost of the transit system, like other agencies across Canada. Note that the repayment of the 750 millions private sector capital contribution is actually considered as operating cost here...

[nname]

Non-profit transit in the works for Aldergrove
Business plan will rely on $2 fares

ALDERGROVE (NEWS1130) - A non-profit group is looking to fill some gaps in Aldergrove transit service. The Aldergrove Trolley Company is now waiting for TransLink's approval.

The plan is to run bus service to the Gloucester Estates Industrial Park, homes along 0 Avenue, downtown Aldergrove, and several malls. Dave Miller with the trolly company says they have a business plan that will rely on $2 fares, as well as donations.

"The industry in Gloucester Estates have said they'd be prepared to provide donations. K-Line Trucking, for one, has indicated they would give us a maintenance contract of up to a $1,000 a year. EV Logistics is a big employer; they've already donated $3,000," claims Miller.

They are looking at using a trolley-style bus with about 30 seats, and he believes it will bring transit to areas that have never seen it before.

"One of the things that the local industry have been telling us is that they can't retain employees because there's no transit service down to the area. So, we intend to try and put a trolley bus system that will bring people from Downtown Aldergrove to Gloucester Estates," says Miller.

He hopes they will be up and running in August. The retired Translink employee tells us they will service the industrial park during rush hours, and shopping centres the rest of the day. He adds they want to augment existing bus service, not compete with it.

Source: http://www.news1130.com/news/local/a...for-aldergrove

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by whatnext

One would think that any tax is the antithesis of Adam Smith's invisible hand. By that criteria, shouldn't transit users be paying the full cost of their trip?

Transit users can pay the full cost of their trip when cars pay the full cost of their trips, bikes pay for their infrastructure, pedestrians pay a toll for sidewalks they walk on, people pay to rent books from libraries, students pay tuition for elementary and highschool, BC Hydro charges you for dams they build, we send bills out for police response, and people pay for their own medical procedures.

Subsidies are a fact of life in things run by the government, they make our society actually work. If people actually wanted to pay for everything they use, then everything would be freemarket. We wouldn't have Translink (or BC Hydro), we would still have the BC Electric Railway.

If you get passed the first few pages of Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith is pretty much a bleeding heart liberal. While he believes in the free market guiding production and wealth, he was also very critical of a total laissez-faire system. He warned that such a system would become a conspiracy by producers to gouge the consumers, to the point where they would interfere in politics and bribe legislators to pass laws that favor them and harm society (and hey, look what happened in the USA). In fact it is pretty much Smith's theories on Division of Labour and the lack thereof in Agriculture that lead to farming subsidies. Smith even writes that new industries should be supported with subsidies while they grow, but that those industries would not want to give up subsidies when they no longer need them (oil industry anyone?).

In the Wealth of Nations, Book V, Adam Smith wrote:

The third and last duty of the sovereign or commonwealth is that of erecting and maintaining those public institutions and those public works, which, though they may be in the highest degree advantageous to a great society, are, however, of such a nature that the profit could never repay the expence to any individual or small number of individuals, and which it therefore cannot be expected that any individual or small number of individuals should erect or maintain. The performance of this duty requires, too, very different degrees of expence in the different periods of society.

That sounds pretty much like what Translink does to me. He also wrote about who should pay for it...

"The rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion" - Adam Smith.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by whatnext

As cyclists like to say when trying to justify why they shouldn't pay licensing fees: I pay taxes for that. Taxes on gas, taxes on purchases, taxes on vehicle maintenance, licensing fees etc etc

Taxes on purchases, vehicle maintenance and licensing fees don't directly pay for road infrastructure.

Gas taxes work because they roughly approximate personal usage.

They're essentially a distance-based toll for a private person driving a private vehicle on a public road.

Publically owned capital is essentially purchased by the people. An equal comparison would be if the fuel/electricity that runs those systems to be paid for by fares. That being said, I don't know if gas taxes FULLY cover all road maintenance.

IT could be argues that as long as we all have more or less equal access to public infrastructure, be it buses, skytrains, roads, bridges, etc. any capital cost should be born by general taxation and not fare revenue. We all own it.

Using this reasoning, at most, fares should cover energy usage, not capital expenditures.

[Mac Write]

At a secret board meeting Translink has decided to axe the TaxiSaver program for the disabled and seniors. This will take effect in July and coupons will not be accepted after June 2013.

What Bull****. I depend on TaxiSavers as the hill from the bus stop to my house is steep and hard for me to walk up. and if it's raining forget it. ALso bus service were I live is 30 minutes daytime hourly after 6:45PM. Translink just says walk the 700m to the station. Uh I can't hence why I am calling to get the time for the bus.

This has produced allot of stress in me since I just found out and now I have to take out of my savings $150 over the next 2 months to purchase the maximum TaxiSavers books allowed per month (2). I am so furious right now!!!

[ryanmaccdn]

Originally Posted by Mac Write

At a secret board meeting Translink has decided to axe the TaxiSaver program for the disabled and seniors. This will take effect in July and coupons will not be accepted after June 2013.

What Bull****. I depend on TaxiSavers as the hill from the bus stop to my house is steep and hard for me to walk up. and if it's raining forget it. ALso bus service were I live is 30 minutes daytime hourly after 6:45PM. Translink just says walk the 700m to the station. Uh I can't hence why I am calling to get the time for the bus.

This has produced allot of stress in me since I just found out and now I have to take out of my savings $150 over the next 2 months to purchase the maximum TaxiSavers books allowed per month (2). I am so furious right now!!!

Move? Just stating the solution you would be faced with in 80% of cities in North America.

[Echowinds]

Originally Posted by Mac Write

At a secret board meeting Translink has decided to axe the TaxiSaver program for the disabled and seniors. This will take effect in July and coupons will not be accepted after June 2013.

What Bull****. I depend on TaxiSavers as the hill from the bus stop to my house is steep and hard for me to walk up. and if it's raining forget it. ALso bus service were I live is 30 minutes daytime hourly after 6:45PM. Translink just says walk the 700m to the station. Uh I can't hence why I am calling to get the time for the bus.

This has produced allot of stress in me since I just found out and now I have to take out of my savings $150 over the next 2 months to purchase the maximum TaxiSavers books allowed per month (2). I am so furious right now!!!

What about HandyDART? Even at half price taxis are still quite expensive, in my opinion, and that's a lot of money sunk into a rather luxury service. Most normal people will not regularly take taxis.

I think it's a good idea to spend the money to improve TransLink's HandyDART program and get more people using it, thus improving efficiency and frequencies. Subsiding taxis isn't a great solution in the long run.

[Mac Write]

For me to use HandyDart would drastically cut my independence. And as I live on disability it's not easy to move. The cut to TaxiSavers will reduce my mobility as I use them allot and gives me major flexibility. HandyDart in the real world you have to book it 3+days in advance and are restricted to your planned times. This means I can't be spontaneous and go out do something and grab the cheap cab home. instead I will have to pay double and…well it's too expensive at that point. Walk in my shoes for a month and then tell me HandyDarts great. It's not. The company who runs HandyDart considers us "Parcels" and not people.

[allan_kuan]

Hmm. I wonder if it'd be better to test out improved HandyDART service before swinging the axe at the TaxiSaver program given the comment above... but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

[easy as pie]

i mean, in theory, the various municipalities could just require taxi-saver as a requirement of taxi service, and absorb the costs that way - i.e. bid for your medallions with the knowledge that a certain percentage of your fares will require you to eat 10 bucks. wouldn't be too difficult - translink continues administering the sale of the coupons to disabled folks, then the drivers submit them to their companies for processing or reimbursement (depending on driver status and company operation organization). with the continuing leaps in the auction value of taxi licenses, i doubt that this would make even the slightest dent in municipal revenues, add 10 cents to the starting rate and we could take it off the translink books.

[Mac Write]

Adding 10 cents to the starting rate would also affect the disabled. TaxiSavers are only issued in $1 increments and if a ride is $5.10 I have to give them $6 in TaxiSavers. They don't and aren't allowed to issue change. Have you ridden the improved HandyDart service? There is no way in hell I can call HandyDart to say I am on the SkyTreain and need a ride from the station in 15 minutes.

[cornholio]

On one hand we have gone the route of making the city accessible to people with limited mobility with elevators, bus lifts, handicap parking, etc. so why not take the extra step which im sure isnt THAT costly while probably having one of the larger positive impacts for disabled people I imagine.

On the other hand its hard for me to put my self in someones shoes who has to rely on this service and its easy for me to say why dont you catch a bus or move? Afteral when I need medication that costs me a few hundred a month and is incredibly important to my quality of life and productivity the province doesn't pay for it either.

Its hard to pick a side...but atleast we should all remember that anyone of us could end up in that position, nne of us know whats waiting around the corner for us and I would hate in retrospect to sound like a hypocrite.

[twoNeurons]

I wonder how much Translink actually saves by doing this? This kind of service is only used by those that really need it most and I doubt it really costs that much to run.

In addition, it's rather efficient use of a resource that is already available... taxis. No capital costs and only part of the fare is paid. There is a relatively low risk of abuse and it helps those that RELY on transit. It sounds like Translink was looking in nooks and crannies and found these taxisavers and said... well, not that many people use this service and it's a little program that not many know about... so why don't we cut it and save a few bucks. To me... I'd rather cut service off-peak service to universities to make up the shortfall caused by this program.

Why not pack those University buses even more. Students are young, full of energy and are a captive audience after all... and those that don't like it can walk, drive or ride a bike.

Or here's another one. Abolish the U-Pass completely and get rid of the 1-zone-at-all-times fare. University is expensive and they're young and resourceful... they can walk.

Or, just get rid of all the discounts for seniors. After all, they're just causing a drain on the system, right?

Seriously speaking, however, when you're cutting a service like this you don't just pounce it on the people who need it. If things like a $0.25 fare increase are discussed years in advance, surely something like this should be announced at LEAST 6 months before it is axed. Very poor execution in bad taste.

[st7860]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

To me... I'd rather cut service off-peak service to universities to make up the shortfall caused by this program.
.

You didn't know that UBC and SFU have lots of market housing?

[Mac Write]

Living on low income/disability, the reality is you get little income and every penny counts. I live on $95/month! I have a lifetime bus-pass, but not through the government but through the Canadian National Institiute for the Blind (C.N.I.B.). I have just got my first job making about $200/month, I now have to spent $50/month to build up a stash of TaxiSavers.

Living on low income and disability. you don't get the choice of where you want to live. I want to live within a block of a Skytrain station, but in reality that is impossible unless I want to pay $1,600+/month rent. It's really too bad the government and the tax payer is so focused on the all mighty car and how it should come first and assume everyone can drive and afford to drive.

[mezzanine]

In all fairness, I would support translink on the taxi-saver decision. Even if/when there is more funding for TL, IMO it should go to building the FTN where it will help disabled and non-disabled alike.

It was started 20 years ago to supplement the HandyDart service, which at that time only ran until 6 p.m.

TransLink spokesman Drew Snider said the door-to-door HandyDart service is more expansive now and operates until midnight, while conventional buses all have lower floors and are more accessible to all types of transit passengers.

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/life/Tra...#ixzz1wDt4q76W

[st7860]

Originally Posted by Mac Write

Living on low income/disability, the reality is you get little income and every penny counts. I live on $95/month! I have a lifetime bus-pass, but not through the government but through the Canadian National Institiute for the Blind (C.N.I.B.). I have just got my first job making about $200/month, I now have to spent $50/month to build up a stash of TaxiSavers.

Living on low income and disability. you don't get the choice of where you want to live. I want to live within a block of a Skytrain station, but in reality that is impossible unless I want to pay $1,600+/month rent. It's really too bad the government and the tax payer is so focused on the all mighty car and how it should come first and assume everyone can drive and afford to drive.

You can rent a room near the CNIB HQ at Joyce station for around $500 to $900/mo depending on whether you want a shared room or not. and in some cases, if you dont mind a 20 year old suite, you can get a private place for $600 per month.

[mezzanine]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Seriously speaking, however, when you're cutting a service like this you don't just pounce it on the people who need it. If things like a $0.25 fare increase are discussed years in advance, surely something like this should be announced at LEAST 6 months before it is axed. Very poor execution in bad taste.

I think they rushed to the decision b/c all their carefully planned funding options dried up in a matter of days.

but you're asking TL to expand is mandate way beyond planning and running a transport network. to account for social justice, it should be separated completely from supplying transit. From Jarrett Walker:

Australian and British transit agencies offer a nice example of how to keep this clear. As in North America, transit in those countries routinely offers discounts to senior citizens and the disabled, because, well, we as a society want to honor those people. Those discounts don't serve any particular transit agency mission, but the society judges them to be important. Fine. So in both Australia and Britain, the cost of those discounts is added up and a central government reimburses the transit agency for that amount, as a "shadow fare." The transit operator can then count all riders as equal, and compete for all riders as being of equal value to it, because it experiences them as all paying the same fare.

That's very clean, because it separates transit's real purpose from a separate (perfectly valid) social agenda, rather than just expecting transit operators to pay the cost of the social agenda. Seniors and disabled persons get their discounts, but the transit operator continues to value their patronage as much as they would value that of a full-fare customer.