PST hike of 0.5% proposed for Metro Vancouver transit referendum

[Liquid_o2]

Good read on the man leading the charge for the "No" side.

What Drives TransLink's Biggest Hater? | The Tyee

[6o4__boi]

^ here's a tl;dr

another smear campaign...
another article that pretty much says, fuck you, we have $10M dollars and we can hire as many fucking writers and write as much fucking shit about you as possible

god, yes - side assholes are so fucking annoying at every fucking level.
shut the fuck up

you already have the whole fucking region covered in your bullfucking shit.


here's a newsflash, no matter how much you try to say this isn't about translink, the fact of the matter is that it is.
no matter how much you try to say you're the underdog, ad funding, sponsors etc. say otherwise.
so fuck you
fuck you with sexual harrasment on top
and oh, fuck you.

I've never wanted to sign no on a slip of paper so bad.

(and no liquid i'm not talkin about you...just the yes side in general)

/rant.

[Tone Loc]

Originally Posted by 6o4__boi

^ here's a tl;dr

another smear campaign...
another article that pretty much says, fuck you, we have $10M dollars and we can hire as many fucking writers and write as much fucking shit about you as possible

god, yes - side assholes are so fucking annoying at every fucking level.
shut the fuck up

you already have the whole fucking region covered in your bullfucking shit.

This. You'd think that if Translink/the mayors council needed more money, they wouldn't spend $7,000,000+ on advertising for the Yes side.

Ironically, there isn't much attention/funding being drawn on the "No" side, yet most people I asked at work, school etc. are all voting No. Seems to me that the side that is trying to convince the hardest is doing it for a reason...

Originally Posted by multicartual

Bike lanes are awesome and once you start riding your bike regularly on sunny days while stoned they become godly. You can socialize with other bike riders, get exercise, de-stress...

Bike lanes rule!!!

You just illustrated my point perfectly. I do ride my bike pretty often, in the summer which is pretty much the only season you can ride daily without running the risk of getting completely soaked. Whereas buses and trains work 365 days out of the year and can be used by active AND non-active people alike. I also don't have to buy specific gear for riding the bus. Seems to me the choice is pretty obvious in terms of number of people using the service, year-round practicality, and road space usage.

[westopher]

I just wish that they would understand the transit/roadwork infrastructure system in Vancouver needs a massive reform. Reform it, restructure translink with some accountability for their spending, cut some of the grossly inflated salaries for their police service, CEO's, ridiculous double time bonuses for people who (oh the humanity......) work on sundays, and then come ask me for more tax money. I gladly pay taxes for successful use of my money that actually will show tangible benefit.

[Liquid_o2]

I don't think anyone is calling the Yes side the underdog, but when you look at referendums in general, it is a lot easier to say no than yes.

The big thing is, that as much as you say this is about Translink, it isn't. The Provincial government is the one who has decided that the 0.5% tax increase is the way to go, they just don't want to be the one to shove it down the public's throat. Why aren't there other options on this ballot aside from the tax increase? They don't care if it passes or not.

Everyone thinks Translink's un-elected board of directors should be dissolved? Minister of Transportation Kevin Falcon dissolved the previous elected board of directors made up on mayors and city councilors in 2008. Reports have been conducted since then, relaying that an un-elected Translink board is an anomaly in public transportation across the world, and should revert back to an elected board with greater accountability to the voting public. Restore elected control of TransLink, review urges - Surrey Leader

Everyone trashes TransLink about the faregates right? Well TransLink never wanted them. Here is an article from all the way back in 2007 SkyTrain fare gates earlier dismissed as too costly
The article states that up until 2005, Translink's previously elected board of directors overwhelmingly rejected faregates of any kind. It wasn't until the Minister of Transportation, Kevin Falcon went on a trip to Europe and decided that he wanted Faregates at all stations. The article above, almost a decade old now, predicts that it would be a financial mess. So they hired Cubic Transportation Systems out of San Diego which is supposedly the best in the world to install and manage the whole system. They did London so Vancouver should be easy right? Cubic promised TransLink a tapout function on buses, even though Cubic had never installed such a system before. Well who's fault is it? If you hired the best contractor for your house and he promised something that he couldn't ultimately deliver, what are you going to do?

People can bitch and complain all they want about TransLink, and sometimes it is justified, but a lot of the time it isn't. A lot of the time it is ignorance, and rather than doing their own critical thinking, they can listen to a guy working out of his basement in Langley who is a part time journalist and part time minister who thinks he knows whats best for the general public.

Frustrated about TransLink? This isn't a vote about TransLink, it's about whether you want to see transportation upgrades to bridges, Skytrain, Seabus, buses, etc. If you are really frustrated about TransLink, you would take it out on the Liberals at the next election and vote for someone else. That would be sending a message. Or just egg Kevin Falcons house.

[westopher]

I don't know how anyone can say its not about transilink. Is it only about translink? No, but they are going to control the money that ends up in their hands from the tax, therefore it is very very very very very much about translink.

[6o4__boi]

Originally Posted by westopher

I just wish that they would understand the transit/roadwork infrastructure system in Vancouver needs a massive reform. Reform it, restructure translink with some accountability for their spending, cut some of the grossly inflated salaries for their police service, CEO's, ridiculous double time bonuses for people who (oh the humanity......) work on sundays, and then come ask me for more tax money. I gladly pay taxes for successful use of my money that actually will show tangible benefit.

pretty much.
it's probably never going to happen because idiots run the show.

had they made some changes, done the audits and created more transparency THEN asked for money, i might not be happy but i would support it. Why didn't this happen again? Why is it that they're only promising this when there's money at stake?

The other way around is pretty retarded. Using up $10M of taxpayers dollars then proceeding to essentially assault the public and the no side at every possible angle? That's downright scumbaggery.

[inv4zn]

Originally Posted by Liquid_o2

I don't think anyone is calling the Yes side the underdog, but when you look at referendums in general, it is a lot easier to say no than yes.

The big thing is, that as much as you say this is about Translink, it isn't. The Provincial government is the one who has decided that the 0.5% tax increase is the way to go, they just don't want to be the one to shove it down the public's throat. Why aren't there other options on this ballot aside from the tax increase? They don't care if it passes or not.

Everyone thinks Translink's un-elected board of directors should be dissolved? Minister of Transportation Kevin Falcon dissolved the previous elected board of directors made up on mayors and city councilors in 2008. Reports have been conducted since then, relaying that an un-elected Translink board is an anomaly in public transportation across the world, and should revert back to an elected board with greater accountability to the voting public. Restore elected control of TransLink, review urges - Surrey Leader

Everyone trashes TransLink about the faregates right? Well TransLink never wanted them. Here is an article from all the way back in 2007 SkyTrain fare gates earlier dismissed as too costly
The article states that up until 2005, Translink's previously elected board of directors overwhelmingly rejected faregates of any kind. It wasn't until the Minister of Transportation, Kevin Falcon went on a trip to Europe and decided that he wanted Faregates at all stations. The article above, almost a decade old now, predicts that it would be a financial mess. So they hired Cubic Transportation Systems out of San Diego which is supposedly the best in the world to install and manage the whole system. They did London so Vancouver should be easy right? Cubic promised TransLink a tapout function on buses, even though Cubic had never installed such a system before. Well who's fault is it? If you hired the best contractor for your house and he promised something that he couldn't ultimately deliver, what are you going to do?

People can bitch and complain all they want about TransLink, and sometimes it is justified, but a lot of the time it isn't. A lot of the time it is ignorance, and rather than doing their own critical thinking, they can listen to a guy working out of his basement in Langley who is a part time journalist and part time minister who thinks he knows whats best for the general public.

Frustrated about TransLink? This isn't a vote about TransLink, it's about whether you want to see transportation upgrades to bridges, Skytrain, Seabus, buses, etc. If you are really frustrated about TransLink, you would take it out on the Liberals at the next election and vote for someone else. That would be sending a message. Or just egg Kevin Falcons house.

This response is almost CiC-like, it's mind boggling. And it's the same argument that the majority of the Yes side makes.

Let's use a parable.

There is a small village, with only one pub. The owner of the pub, is also the town drunk. He uses all his profit from his pub, to drink himself silly, buy exorbitant items, etc.

Spoiler!

This owner is Translink.

Suddenly, the National Pub Association comes to him, and says he must put new fancy neon signs up on his bar, and that he must also make the bathroom wheelchair accessible, even though there is nobody in this village with a wheelchair.

Spoiler!

The Association is the government, and the mandated upgrades are the various upgrades mandated by the government, which may or may not be useful/necessary.

So the owner of the pub, in need of more money due to years of poor spending, decides to ask the town if it's ok for him to raise prices on his drinks. To make sure the town votes yes, he hides the fact that he's spending alot of money uselessly, pays his buddies to make them convince people to vote yes, and hires a man to manage his pub, while staying on as advisor.

So, because the Question reads: "Do you support paying more for drinks in order to make your drinking experience more pleasant", does that mean the question is not about the pub owner?

I've never once seen the Yes side be able to rebuttal this argument.
The No-Side is not opposed to improvement, and recognizes they're necessary. But fuck us all if we pay more to Translink.

Simply put, 50% of this shitty situation is due to poor governance, while the other 50% is due to Translink.

IF they were to fix up their half of the problems, then tell us "hey, we've made a conscientious effort to fix things, but we still need help. Can we raise your taxes?" - the public's perception will be very different.

But instead, it's "Hey we need more money because we just do, and if you can ignore the fact that we already receive a lot of it but are spending it unwisely, because the gov't this and that, and if you don't, your future will be ruined for decades. Yeah ok.

[itachi1314]

I just received the ballot/vote package in the mail.

My first reaction is, why do you need 3 envelopes to do this, which hits home the point of wasting resources.

One envelope for the ballot which goes into a second envelope that you sign, which all goes into an envelope that you mail.

Why can't it just be the ballot printed with the black privacy thing on the back with your contact and your signature, and your vote in the front ALL IN ON ENVELOPE !!!!! Instead of 3 envelopes.

There needs to be governance to the spending, instead of asking for more money.

-Kc

[Liquid_o2]

Audit's are continually done. KPMG conducted an audit several years ago and found efficiences, TransLink implemented them which cut $50 million off the budget.

And again I'm going to make my point, sending a message to TransLink that you don't like their governance structure by voting No in this plebiscite will do more harm than good. This quote is from the Globe and Mail last week,

This week, Transportation Minister Todd Stone told reporters the B.C. Liberal government won’t consider any changes to TransLink even though allegations the agency is not prudent with public dollars have emerged as a key issue in the campaign.

On Wednesday, Mr. Stone’s office made it clear reforming TransLink governance is off the table – not just during the plebiscite voting period between March and May, but beyond that.

Oh and the $7 million used to "assault" the public? Also from the Province.

Take your anger our on the Liberal government if that's how you feel by contacting your MLA and voting in the next election, but right now it is completely misdirected, and our entire region is going to suffer from it.

[carisear]

^^ because I'm assuming privacy is of the utmost importance (which I agree with for voting). 1 person checks signatures, removes the envelope and then passes it on to a different person, who can't see how that person voted. 3 envelopes is perfectly acceptable to me.

[GLOW]

when i filled mine out i was thinking: yo dawg i heard you like envelopes.

[meme405]

Originally Posted by Liquid_o2

I don't think anyone is calling the Yes side the underdog, but when you look at referendums in general, it is a lot easier to say no than yes.

The big thing is, that as much as you say this is about Translink, it isn't. The Provincial government is the one who has decided that the 0.5% tax increase is the way to go, they just don't want to be the one to shove it down the public's throat. Why aren't there other options on this ballot aside from the tax increase? They don't care if it passes or not.

Everyone thinks Translink's un-elected board of directors should be dissolved? Minister of Transportation Kevin Falcon dissolved the previous elected board of directors made up on mayors and city councilors in 2008. Reports have been conducted since then, relaying that an un-elected Translink board is an anomaly in public transportation across the world, and should revert back to an elected board with greater accountability to the voting public. Restore elected control of TransLink, review urges - Surrey Leader

Everyone trashes TransLink about the faregates right? Well TransLink never wanted them. Here is an article from all the way back in 2007 SkyTrain fare gates earlier dismissed as too costly
The article states that up until 2005, Translink's previously elected board of directors overwhelmingly rejected faregates of any kind. It wasn't until the Minister of Transportation, Kevin Falcon went on a trip to Europe and decided that he wanted Faregates at all stations. The article above, almost a decade old now, predicts that it would be a financial mess. So they hired Cubic Transportation Systems out of San Diego which is supposedly the best in the world to install and manage the whole system. They did London so Vancouver should be easy right? Cubic promised TransLink a tapout function on buses, even though Cubic had never installed such a system before. Well who's fault is it? If you hired the best contractor for your house and he promised something that he couldn't ultimately deliver, what are you going to do?

People can bitch and complain all they want about TransLink, and sometimes it is justified, but a lot of the time it isn't. A lot of the time it is ignorance, and rather than doing their own critical thinking, they can listen to a guy working out of his basement in Langley who is a part time journalist and part time minister who thinks he knows whats best for the general public.

Frustrated about TransLink? This isn't a vote about TransLink, it's about whether you want to see transportation upgrades to bridges, Skytrain, Seabus, buses, etc. If you are really frustrated about TransLink, you would take it out on the Liberals at the next election and vote for someone else. That would be sending a message. Or just egg Kevin Falcons house.

Actually your entire understanding of the faregates is wrong. I explained this earlier on, but you either missed it, or are just continuing to spread lies.

Kevin Falcon DID in fact recommend faregates, and the report you reference where translink dismissed them is true, what you neglect to understand is that, as soon as the government said they would pony up all the money for the upgrade translink said "FUCK YEAH, FAREGATES FUCKING EVERYWHERE".

Kevin Falcon's recommendation was for Faregates to only be implemented on skytrains, because those are unmonitored, whereas pretty much everyone who gets on a bus has to pay, otherwise the fucking bus driver can just say "wtf you didn't pay". Kevin Falcons recommendation went one step further, he told translink to begin by implementing the system ONLY on the canada line, which was at that time still in the preliminary phases. Then once they knew the system worked they would expand it onto the rest of the system. SNC actually had parts of the system designed for faregates, that's why canada line implementation was the logical first step to get the system up and running.

It was translink who decided that they would build everything and implement it all across the entire system, because that way the government pays for it all. And ultimately it was the decision that made the faregates such a retarded and doomed effort, because putting the thing on busses is near impossible logistically. Especially given the stupid zone structure they wish to maintain.

So actually even though the faregates were the brain child of the Kevin Falcon, the retarded mess they have become is all translinks fault.

[CRS]

I'm still upset that Kevin Falcon is not the premier but Christy Clarke is.

Man, what the fuck guys, what were you thinking?

[Liquid_o2]

Originally Posted by meme405

Actually your entire understanding of the faregates is wrong. I explained this earlier on, but you either missed it, or are just continuing to spread lies.

Kevin Falcon DID in fact recommend faregates, and the report you reference where translink dismissed them is true, what you neglect to understand is that, as soon as the government said they would pony up all the money for the upgrade translink said "FUCK YEAH, FAREGATES FUCKING EVERYWHERE".

Kevin Falcon's recommendation was for Faregates to only be implemented on skytrains, because those are unmonitored, whereas pretty much everyone who gets on a bus has to pay, otherwise the fucking bus driver can just say "wtf you didn't pay". Kevin Falcons recommendation went one step further, he told translink to begin by implementing the system ONLY on the canada line, which was at that time still in the preliminary phases. Then once they knew the system worked they would expand it onto the rest of the system. SNC actually had parts of the system designed for faregates, that's why canada line implementation was the logical first step to get the system up and running.

It was translink who decided that they would build everything and implement it all across the entire system, because that way the government pays for it all. And ultimately it was the decision that made the faregates such a retarded and doomed effort, because putting the thing on busses is near impossible logistically. Especially given the stupid zone structure they wish to maintain.

So actually even though the faregates were the brain child of the Kevin Falcon, the retarded mess they have become is all translinks fault.

How can you install a card based system on only part of your transit network? So there will be electronic readers at Skytrain and Canada Line stations, but not on buses? If you are using your Compass Card at a Skytrain Line, and then get onto a bus, but they still have the farebox, how does the bus driver know you paid? You obviously want to install a system all at once so you have seamless connectivity between the different modes. If TransLink implemented the system how you have said, there would be even a bigger public outcry than there is now. And that's the problem, it is easy to criticize from your computer rather than looking at the bigger long-term picture.

And you are backing up my point perfectly, the government ponied up the money for the upgrade. If you are running a company and have to build something, and the government gives you money to perform the entire job at all once, you aren't going to take it? Please.

[a00755836]

just voted. put in an envelope, in an envelope, in an envelope. so much work! lol. jk

[Alby]

Originally Posted by meme405

Actually your entire understanding of the faregates is wrong. I explained this earlier on, but you either missed it, or are just continuing to spread lies.

Kevin Falcon DID in fact recommend faregates, and the report you reference where translink dismissed them is true, what you neglect to understand is that, as soon as the government said they would pony up all the money for the upgrade translink said "FUCK YEAH, FAREGATES FUCKING EVERYWHERE".

Kevin Falcon's recommendation was for Faregates to only be implemented on skytrains, because those are unmonitored, whereas pretty much everyone who gets on a bus has to pay, otherwise the fucking bus driver can just say "wtf you didn't pay". Kevin Falcons recommendation went one step further, he told translink to begin by implementing the system ONLY on the canada line, which was at that time still in the preliminary phases. Then once they knew the system worked they would expand it onto the rest of the system. SNC actually had parts of the system designed for faregates, that's why canada line implementation was the logical first step to get the system up and running.

It was translink who decided that they would build everything and implement it all across the entire system, because that way the government pays for it all. And ultimately it was the decision that made the faregates such a retarded and doomed effort, because putting the thing on busses is near impossible logistically. Especially given the stupid zone structure they wish to maintain.

So actually even though the faregates were the brain child of the Kevin Falcon, the retarded mess they have become is all translinks fault.

actually that's not totally true. skytrains CAN be monitored by the existing skytrain attendant staff. they can check your fare. however, if they are there to do their job is a totally completely different story. they are never there when you need them.

secondly, anyone can walk on a bus right now without paying and the bus driver, by the book, can't do nothing to make you pay the fare. all they can do is inform you the fare is so and so. it is based on a honor system.

[meme405]

Originally Posted by Liquid_o2

How can you install a card based system on only part of your transit network? So there will be electronic readers at Skytrain and Canada Line stations, but not on buses? If you are using your Compass Card at a Skytrain Line, and then get onto a bus, but they still have the farebox, how does the bus driver know you paid? You obviously want to install a system all at once so you have seamless connectivity between the different modes. If TransLink implemented the system how you have said, there would be even a bigger public outcry than there is now. And that's the problem, it is easy to criticize from your computer rather than looking at the bigger long-term picture.

And you are backing up my point perfectly, the government ponied up the money for the upgrade. If you are running a company and have to build something, and the government gives you money to perform the entire job at all once, you aren't going to take it? Please.

Ever been to a small city called New York? Our existing system worked perfectly fine, all they had to do was put in gates and make them fare card activated. In fact I have an original report from just after the Olympics were awarded to Vancouver from SNC which proposes almost exactly this idea. So you telling me I don't know is purely just you posting crap, and hoping I back down.

I'm not the one who doesn't get this, I've been a part of many projects involved with retrofitting new tech with old tech. Just last week we completed commissioning a project where we installed a state of the art Semi-Autogenous Grinding Mill, in a 45 year old facility. Guess what we completed the work on budget and on time. In my line of work when I miss a schedule, it's not just whatever as the case is with translink, it's real fucking money, my client would have to shut down their plant, and lose on hundreds of thousands of dollars every hour that facility doesn't run.

Meanwhile Translink blows their fucking budget by triple, and their schedule by what will end up being years, and they have the audacity to try and come get more money from me, in order to continue funding wild escapades of ill-conceived, and poorly planned ideas?



Translink thought they had this idea that along with cubic they could devise a system, a "Better system", it would be "revolutionary", "top of line", "high tech". Instead it's shit, and this is the last straw for many people, we're done funding bullshit, someone needs to put a proper plan together, so that we actually start seeing value for all these projects we are funding, otherwise we're just going to keep pissing away money on crap. The people at translink right now have zero support, because they are either too dumb to figure out what they are doing, or too lazy/un-motivated, either way they shouldn't be managing a booth at the nightmarket, let alone our transit system.

And are you seriously criticizing the government for paying for an upgrade? Of course I don't blame translink for taking the money, but I do blame them for failing to meet their schedule, and blowing triple the budget on this crap.

EDIT:

Originally Posted by Alby

actually that's not totally true. skytrains CAN be monitored by the existing skytrain attendant staff. they can check your fare. however, if they are there to do their job is a totally completely different story. they are never there when you need them.

secondly, anyone can walk on a bus right now without paying and the bus driver, by the book, can't do nothing to make you pay the fare. all they can do is inform you the fare is so and so. it is based on a honor system.

Valid points, not saying I am for faregates, but their reasoning behind using them at skytrains is still stronger than buses. More people evade fares on Skytrain, since most reasonable people don't just get on a bus and walk past the driver without paying.

[Mr.HappySilp]

Originally Posted by Alby

actually that's not totally true. skytrains CAN be monitored by the existing skytrain attendant staff. they can check your fare. however, if they are there to do their job is a totally completely different story. they are never there when you need them.

secondly, anyone can walk on a bus right now without paying and the bus driver, by the book, can't do nothing to make you pay the fare. all they can do is inform you the fare is so and so. it is based on a honor system.

Actually they don't even tell ppl about the fare. All they do is hit a button when someone don't pay. It counts how many ppl didn't pay that day on that bus and that's it.

[Alby]

would be interesting to know in the long run if staffed stations to check fares would save them more money than implementing the faregates

[meme405]

Originally Posted by Alby

would be interesting to know in the long run if staffed stations to check fares would save them more money than implementing the faregates

I think the amortized cost of the faregates would have already been bust, or very close to break even. That's before translink botched it up and made them like 3 times more expensive than the original plan.

And atleast with the staffed stations you create some jobs, and you have someone helpful at the stations who does more than just stand there with their thumb up their ass, they can answer questions and what not.

The faregates would generate maybe 5% of the jobs as staffing the station, just because we need maintenance people, to fix the things when some bum gets pissed off and kicks one.

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by itachi1314

I just received the ballot/vote package in the mail.

My first reaction is, why do you need 3 envelopes to do this, which hits home the point of wasting resources.

One envelope for the ballot which goes into a second envelope that you sign, which all goes into an envelope that you mail.

Why can't it just be the ballot printed with the black privacy thing on the back with your contact and your signature, and your vote in the front ALL IN ON ENVELOPE !!!!! Instead of 3 envelopes.

There needs to be governance to the spending, instead of asking for more money.

-Kc

This is standard for mail-in ballots; the HST ballots were the same. This is Elections B.C., nothing to do with TransLink.

But don't let that stop you from blaming it on TransLink; misplaced blame is SOP with the NO camp.

[tool001]

I wonder if it comes down to a "no". How will they get more funding, just because they want and can . Property taxes...more fuel surcharge...by taxing how much you drive...!?

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by Liquid_o2

If you hired the best contractor for your house and he promised something that he couldn't ultimately deliver, what are you going to do?

[godwin]

Because automatic envelope opening and scanning is cheap and easily accessible.

First enveope is for mailing. (count by region)
Second is for voter verification (Canada Post OCR). (voter verification/audit)
Third one is secrecy.

Basically you only need 2 human involved in the workflow. You don't really expect them to open each envelope by hand right?

Originally Posted by itachi1314

I just received the ballot/vote package in the mail.

My first reaction is, why do you need 3 envelopes to do this, which hits home the point of wasting resources.

One envelope for the ballot which goes into a second envelope that you sign, which all goes into an envelope that you mail.

Why can't it just be the ballot printed with the black privacy thing on the back with your contact and your signature, and your vote in the front ALL IN ON ENVELOPE !!!!! Instead of 3 envelopes.

There needs to be governance to the spending, instead of asking for more money.

-Kc