Mayors recommend gas levy to pay for Evergreen Line

[hk20000]

Originally Posted by Eff-1

no you can't. increasing supply means nothing when there is no increased demand to meet it.

it's so stupid when people here always compare vancouver to massive asian cities with massive populations (or even any other north american city like toronto or NYC)

I mean we are going to bombard you in the face even in places where non transit users are forced to see ads, and then supplement the running cost on it.

If this was ran with Asian mentality I'm sure those pillars that run along Lansdowne Mall will be rented out for ads and those ugly faces (which the city has TO PAY TO KEEP will be removed)

The under rail belly that overlaps Lougheed will be rented out to BMW and Audi for their billboard ads.

Buses will be loaded with TVs that run ads and infomercials 24/7

The dark underground section of canada line that isn't already filled with ad will be filled with those "running ads" popular in China metro right now.

YouTube - ‪Beijing Metro‬‏

there are way to many missed opportunities out there if Translink is to whore itself out.

[minoru_tanaka]

Originally Posted by Tapioca

If Translink were to become a for-profit corporation, then entire municipalities in the GVRD would have no transit. It might be fine for you because you choose to drive, but others wouldn't be so lucky.

The TTC has a history of running without government subsidies
Toronto Transit Commission - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Right now they're just subsidized by the city. But it is public transit so translink by definition it will need to be subsidized. I think people are just saying translink has taken it too far. Even the people that live there are unwilling to pay for it.

Originally Posted by Tapioca

Well, what I'm saying is that you can't have your cake and eat it too.

Sorry I'm not reading into any of the posts here, that are in opposition to the tax hike, that they want the Evergreen Line. So who was that comment directed at?

[kayceeee]

Some want Evergreen Line funded by gambling revenue - News1130

VANCOUVER (NEWS1130) - The decision to use a gas tax to fund the Evergreen Line is already so unpopular, some are suggesting gambling revenue be used to fund transit expansion instead.

The BC government already gets a big chunk of revenue from casinos, and lottery money goes to help charity and amateur sports. Some say that money could fund projects like the Evergreen Line, without hurting the taxpayer.

Douglas tells News1130 says it makes sense, especially because most drivers don't use public transit. "I think it's a very logical suggestion, I do."

BCAA agrees this latest gas tax is not a great idea, because British Columbians already pay the highest tax on gas in all of Canada.

The regional increase pf two cents per litre is expected to take effect next April

[dachinesedude]

i think the advertisment thing works

many Asian cities have ads plastered all over the train stations; the walls, beside the escalators, right across the platform, everywhere!

hard not to compare to HK or sth, cuz their system is like perfect...its friggin awesome

its not sure much that the tax is paying for the line, its more like they wanna make driving more expensive so that more people will take transit, its aint gonna happen tho!

[Mr.HappySilp]

^^ well that works in Hk becasue 95% of the population takes the bus so having ads in those places work. However I doubt it will work.

[drunkrussian]

they need to stop adding to gss prices and just tax me using another medium. i dunno why they cant just leave gas alone already >:-(
Posted via RS Mobile

[Eff-1]

Originally Posted by hk20000

I mean we are going to bombard you in the face even in places where non transit users are forced to see ads, and then supplement the running cost on it.

If this was ran with Asian mentality I'm sure those pillars that run along Lansdowne Mall will be rented out for ads and those ugly faces (which the city has TO PAY TO KEEP will be removed)

The under rail belly that overlaps Lougheed will be rented out to BMW and Audi for their billboard ads.

Buses will be loaded with TVs that run ads and infomercials 24/7

The dark underground section of canada line that isn't already filled with ad will be filled with those "running ads" popular in China metro right now.
YouTube - ‪Beijing Metro‬‏

there are way to many missed opportunities out there if Translink is to whore itself out.

vancouver doesn't have the network of advertisers to support your unrealistic plan.

[spideyv2]

Originally Posted by Tapioca

Another thread on public transit and another bunch of misinformed posts.

Users should pay! Fuck Translink! Fuck the hippies! Fuck this, fuck that.

I have two cars and one sucks gas like there's no tomorrow. But you know what? I'm willing to pay more in gas taxes to fund this expansion. Driving and owning a car is a privilege, not a right. And you should pay for that privilege. I think many of you need some perspective. Public transit is good for the movement of goods and people. It's good for the economy. It's a sound investment that pays dividends for generations. Where would we be without the Expo Line? Hell, even the Canada Line (despite the shitty technology) is full most of the day. Build it and people will ride it.

I'm one of the lucky ones who works downtown and lives within a 5 minute walk of the Millenium Line, so Skytrain is absolutely wonderful for me and my needs. To those people who think Skytrain breaks down all of the time: you're idiots. It doesn't break down all of the time - it's fast and very reliable. I use it 10 times a week for 50 weeks a year. I maybe face 1 or 2 delays every couple of months and usually, they're resolved within minutes.

Why do you own 2 cars when you live 5 minutes away from a skytrain station..yet alone work in downtown? Judging by your post, you make a good amount of money.

What about broke students who own a car? I know driving is a privilege and all that shit but what the fuck? It still doesn't make sense to me how people who drive cars have to help fund public transit. That's like raising bus fair in order to lower insurance or gas prices, fucking stupid.

[RFlush]

I bet the people here that are complaining about having to pay for public transport when they drive are the same people who complain tuition fees should be lowered and subsidized through taxes.

oh the irony lol

[Tapioca]

Originally Posted by jayare604

Why do you own 2 cars when you live 5 minutes away from a skytrain station..yet alone work in downtown? Judging by your post, you make a good amount of money.

What about broke students who own a car? I know driving is a privilege and all that shit but what the fuck? It still doesn't make sense to me how people who drive cars have to help fund public transit. That's like raising bus fair in order to lower insurance or gas prices, fucking stupid.

I don't make a lot of money; I consider my income very average for someone with my age, experience, and education (in fact, I work 2 jobs just to have spending money.) When you step out into the real world, I wouldn't be surprised if you made more than me once you hit my age and experience.

If you're a broke student, you shouldn't have a car. You should be taking transit to school. I know I did when I was a "starving" university student.

Sorry I'm not reading into any of the posts here, that are in opposition to the tax hike, that they want the Evergreen Line. So who was that comment directed at?

My comment was directed to people who claim that they don't use transit because the service sucks. To me, it's inferred that if transit was better (e.g. the Skytrain never broke down, trains out to Langley, the tri-Cities, etc.), then they could support giving Translink more money. There's a lot Translink could do to improve service and appease the public, but as I've expressed in many other threads on RS about public transit, it's frustrating to hear the same unwarranted and uninformed criticisms.

[spideyv2]

Originally Posted by Tapioca

I don't make a lot of money; I consider my income very average for someone with my age, experience, and education (in fact, I work 2 jobs just to have spending money.) When you step out into the real world, I wouldn't be surprised if you made more than me once you hit my age and experience.

If you're a broke student, you shouldn't have a car. You should be taking transit to school. I know I did when I was a "starving" university student.



My comment was directed to people who claim that they don't use transit because the service sucks. To me, it's inferred that if transit was better (e.g. the Skytrain never broke down, trains out to Langley, the tri-Cities, etc.), then they could support giving Translink more money. There's a lot Translink could do to improve service and appease the public, but as I've expressed in many other threads on RS about public transit, it's frustrating to hear the same unwarranted and uninformed criticisms.

Btw, it's not just me that complain about the unnecessary inflation of gas prices. My dad and a lot of older people I know also don't agree with it either.

[Lamboda]

I used to think like that too "translink is bad they take so much of our money to pay for buses and skytrains and I don't see the result". However, I recently had someone inform me that translink not only maintains those, but our roads here too. When I heard about this I became more understanding. It does cost a lot of money to build a road here in vancity. Wages are high and materials are expensive. I know our roads are not in the best condition but hey, we have roads.

That said, I do dislike the fact that they are adding a tax to our gasoline but I understand that it is necessary to upkeep and invest in future projects. It's what creates jobs. My extra 'payment' of the tax helps pay for another brother or sister's transit time or their wage. Hey, it's the little things in life that matter right?

As I do dislike translink's directors taking some of the profit but who would be there to run translink? Not everyone could fill that role not everyone could lead.

For those eco-friendly guys who hate on motorists, stop eating meat. Cows emit more carbon dioxide gas than cars do. But I'm gonna enjoy it while it lasts I love driving and love eating meat.

[TypeRNammer]

Maintaining roads? What about Rupert and Kingsway??

[goo3]

Originally Posted by minoru_tanaka

The TTC has a history of running without government subsidies
Toronto Transit Commission - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Right now they're just subsidized by the city. But it is public transit so translink by definition it will need to be subsidized. I think people are just saying translink has taken it too far. Even the people that live there are unwilling to pay for it.

Historically, the TTC recovered its operating costs from the fare box. This was especially true during the Great Depression and The Second World War, when it accumulated the considerable wealth which allowed it to expand widely after the war. It was not until the late 1950s that the newly formed Metro government was forced to provide operational subsidies, required primarily due to the TTC being required to provide bus service to the low-density suburbs in Metro Toronto.[citation needed]

That's the reason public transit loses money. Selling ads, adding gates, or cutting salaries aren't gonna make a dent. Does HK have low-density suburbs? Does Manhattan? Hell, I wouldn't call DT Vancouver high density. There is your problem.

[minoru_tanaka]

Originally Posted by goo3

That's the reason public transit loses money. Selling ads, adding gates, or cutting salaries aren't gonna make a dent. Does HK have low-density suburbs? Does Manhattan? Hell, I wouldn't call DT Vancouver high density. There is your problem.

They do have low density areas. But you know what? They don't build subways to there. It's not a problem the Translink loses money but how work they put into trying to lose money.

If I want to go to PNE, UBC, all those offices in richmond before Westminster hwy, there's no skytrain. From downtown I think I can get to Surrey and back before I can get to UBC. Well soon I can do the same for Coquitlam. Our densest neighborhood is the West End, well there's no skytrain there. Not only do we not have service to our densest, closest area but we build skytrain to far away sparsely populated areas.

Doesn't it make sense that if you want to live far away, well it'll take you a long time to get downtown? It's ridiculous that the ppl who moved far away from the city expect ppl in the city to pay for their transportation back into the city.

In downtown Seattle the bus is free. People who commute in pay for that. We've gotta be the only city that does this backwards.

[Mananetwork]

Why can't companies like Translink using their own fucking money! They aren't a charity, they make a lot of money! 85% of it going to the board of course

[melloman]

Originally Posted by Lamboda

However, I recently had someone inform me that translink not only maintains those, but our roads here too.

Mind telling me where Translink has put money into roads??

The only reason I think it's absurd that Translink is trying to put on a gas levy for funding is they already tax us enough. They have that plan still in mind of doing away with insurance, and insurance will be charged on how much you drive. (Again a stupid fucking idea to get more money in their pockets)

Tapioca: You do a lot of research on Translink or something? The "fat cats" there get bonuses and raises every year. No matter if Translink has an annual profit or not. They still make more money. And you say there's a small amount of them, sure. 20-30 people all making 6 figures+ is small, but giving them all bonuses for doing the same shit each year isn't very fair to the taxpayer.
Just wondering where your getting all your information from.. Mind clueing us in?

[Tapioca]

Originally Posted by melloman

Tapioca: You do a lot of research on Translink or something? The "fat cats" there get bonuses and raises every year. No matter if Translink has an annual profit or not. They still make more money. And you say there's a small amount of them, sure. 20-30 people all making 6 figures+ is small, but giving them all bonuses for doing the same shit each year isn't very fair to the taxpayer.
Just wondering where your getting all your information from.. Mind clueing us in?

I don't do any research into Translink specifically, but I'm a public sector employee myself so I think I know a little bit about how public organizations work.

I'm not management myself and I don't agree with the Translink board giving themselves bonuses for their lack of performance. But, what frustrates me is that people keep looking at their salaries and become fixated on them when really, they're a small portion of overall salaries. I have an idea of what management at public sector organizations make and it's not a half-million dollars per year (with the exception of that guy at BC Ferries.) If you're a head of a department, you make at most, 200K a year. Say you have 20 of these guys (which is probably overkill at an organization like Translink) - that amounts to $4 million a year? $4 million sounds like a lot of money to you, but it's really a small amount when you look at an overall budget.

I'm an average mid-level schmuck in my organization and from my previous posts, you should have an idea of what I make. This is what I imagine the average schmuck within the Translink bureaucracy makes. The salaries I posted about bus drivers have been disclosed by the Vancouver Sun/Province, etc. multiple times over the past decade.

I'm sure people will dismiss me because I'm part of the system, but I think my perspective on the public sector holds more weight than what has been offered in this thread so far.

[melloman]

Fair enough. I'm not here to hate on people specifically, just Translinks organization in general. If turn-styles were brought in 10 years ago. I figure the Portmann Bridge could've been 100% paid for by Translink. With the millions in lost revenue from people riding Skytrains for free, it's ridiculous.

It is nice to see them finally getting to putting turn-styles into the old expo and millenium lines, yet why didn't they just start up the Canada Line with turn-styles? I understand the aspect of it being uilt last-minute and for the Olympics but still.. Bad organization.

It's jsut fustrating that motorists are being attacked the most, where most taxes should go to people using the services. Just my 0.02 cents.

[tool001]

translink employees get about 17 days off on top of vacation days -


if they are going to put a tax on gas, added property tax, to expand infra - then be it, but i dont want to be paying bounuses / paid 17 flex days/ perks???? .


just sayin.

[CP.AR]

Originally Posted by Tapioca

Gawd, I feel like banging my head against the wall when people compare apples to oranges.

You know why the MTR is such an awesome system? Because everyone in HK lives in dinky apartments. The MTR is also in the real estate business. Translink owns very little real estate. Even if Translink did, the NIMBYs would cry foul if Translink, an evil Crown and faceless entity, started developing land around their stations to fund expansions.

In North America, everyone wants to live in 3000 square foot homes. Everyone is lazy and everyone wants a car. Gas is cheap and so is insurance. People want rapid transit in very low density neighbourhoods. Does that make any sense financially?

true, but it's also because they shoot for profit by minimizing their costs and managing their system effectively. Oh yeah, actually making sure people pay for their ride helps too.

What I'm trying to say is that though sure the population density is different, but it's the way that the corporation is run that makes the biggest difference. You mention real estate - yes it's a huge factor in MTR's books, and they develop around the stations to make sure people make use of the transit system (look at LOHAS Park, where MTR split the Tseung Kwun O line just to dedicate a station to them).

Remember the naming of "Aberdeen" station when they built the Canada Line? Oh god was it embarassing to see different malls call out to corruption and bribery.

Perhaps we should take Translink out of public hands and privatize it so they can stop reaching into our pockets whenever they run out of cash, and find some other investment opportunities to bring their books out of the deep.

[gars]

Originally Posted by Captain Picard

Perhaps we should take Translink out of public hands and privatize it so they can stop reaching into our pockets whenever they run out of cash, and find some other investment opportunities to bring their books out of the deep.

What happens if it fails? What happens if it goes bankrupt and folds? It would destroy the city. I'm not willing to take that risk.

[Tapioca]

Originally Posted by melloman

Fair enough. I'm not here to hate on people specifically, just Translinks organization in general. If turn-styles were brought in 10 years ago. I figure the Portmann Bridge could've been 100% paid for by Translink. With the millions in lost revenue from people riding Skytrains for free, it's ridiculous.

It is nice to see them finally getting to putting turn-styles into the old expo and millenium lines, yet why didn't they just start up the Canada Line with turn-styles? I understand the aspect of it being uilt last-minute and for the Olympics but still.. Bad organization.

It's jsut fustrating that motorists are being attacked the most, where most taxes should go to people using the services. Just my 0.02 cents.

When Skytrain was built in the 80s, fare evasion was risk-managed. Turnstiles were and still are expensive and it was decided that the amount of fare evasion wouldn't be equal to the cost of installing turnstiles. People think that fare evasion is rampant, but no one actually knows. I understand that PriceWaterHouse did a study back in 2006 and they concluded that fare evasion amounts to less than 5% of overall riders. Here's some food for thought: it's going to cost over $40 million to install turnstiles.

An extra 2 cents per litre doesn't amount to much over a year - it's really an extra 1-2 bucks max per tank. If you fill up once a week, it's basically an extra 50-100 bucks. With any public program, you could argue that only users should cover the costs; to me, that's a shaky argument.

translink employees get about 17 days off on top of vacation days -


if they are going to put a tax on gas, added property tax, to expand infra - then be it, but i dont want to be paying bounuses / paid 17 flex days/ perks???? .

No public organization pays bonuses to the rank and file who form the large majority of employees. For the record, I get all of 2 flex days per year. And perks? The only perk I get is to accumulate Aeroplan points when I travel. Where are you getting this information from?

What I'm trying to say is that though sure the population density is different, but it's the way that the corporation is run that makes the biggest difference. You mention real estate - yes it's a huge factor in MTR's books, and they develop around the stations to make sure people make use of the transit system (look at LOHAS Park, where MTR split the Tseung Kwun O line just to dedicate a station to them).

Perhaps we should take Translink out of public hands and privatize it so they can stop reaching into our pockets whenever they run out of cash, and find some other investment opportunities to bring their books out of the deep.

The MTR ran deficits for years; it didn't become self-sufficient overnight. And I'm sure Hong Kong's laissez-faire attitude to zoning allows them to build without impunity.

If Translink were able to get into the real estate business, there would be much opposition. I'll cite a recent example: the City of Vancouver wanted to approve permits for a few high rises around the Marine Drive station, but opposition was in full force from residents in the area. Translink would need to build a lot of high rises in order to make itself fully self-sufficient and you can bet that NIMBYs would be out in full force.

A perfect example of what privatization would look like is the Canada Line. The project was put out for tender and look at the results: cut-and-cover construction which resulted in a class-action lawsuit, inferior rail technology, underbuilt stations, and a terrible service agreement which prevents Translink from asking the private operator to put more trains in service to meet temporary demands unless supplemental fees are paid.

[RFlush]

For fuck sakes, stop comparing the MTR to Translink.

Also, gas prices are MUCH higher in HK than it is in Vancouver, do you want to pay that price too? What about paying HK prices of parking in Vancouver?

The reason why Translink can't profit is due to low riders. People in Vancouver all enjoy driving and all want cars. I bet many of you who live within a 5 min walk from a skytrain station will STILL drive to their destination even if there is a skytrain station there as well. People feel entitled to drive and want to drive. No one wants to go on a date and use the skytrain, but people in HK do it all the time. The average person in HK can't afford a car, while in Vancouver practically everyone has one. No one in Vancouver is willing to give up driving even if Translink is free, people will still drive.

[Culverin]

Do you know how much we (the public) still owe for the millenium line and the canada line? I heard it was like close to $600 million?