[Traum]

Transit advocates suggest regional sales tax for projects | News1130 (http://www.news1130.com/2013/08/27/transit-advocates-suggest-regional-sales-tax-for-projects/)

The latest pitch for a 0.5 per cent regional sales tax comes from a couple of transit advocates.

Report co-author Paul Hillsdon says the money could help fund a long wish list of projects. “You get the UBC SkyTrain, two light rail lines in Surrey, seven new B-Lines, double the capacity on the Expo Line, and the Burnaby Mountain gondola.”

Hillsdon says the tax would pay for the region’s share of capital and operating costs and allow all of the projects to be built by 2020. He argues it would be the fairest, most comprehensive and realistic solution.

Instead of trying to come up with grand new plans to fxxk us in the a$$ again, how about if we fire those $300k+ top executive ripoffs at Translink and replace them with someone at 1/2 or 1/3 of the wage? And while we're at it, let's stop wasting money on fancy arts at a Skytrain station.

Artwork at Main St Stn will be good for community: TransLink | News1130 (http://www.news1130.com/2013/08/27/artwork-at-main-st-stn-will-be-good-for-community-translink/)

[Lomac]

How about tolling the new South Perimeter Road first?

[Phil@rise]

Translink is so out of touch with their responsibilities its insane.

[StylinRed]

lol of course it could help fund their wish list why would they even mention that?

any tax will help fund their wishlist but the answer to their wishes shouldnt be simply to take more money out of our pockets to fill their wishes and to fill their pay raises and bonuses

[dark0821]

i am literally out of word, usually I try to pick out where the media just tries their best to paint translink in a bad light. But I am speechless, of all the carbon taxes I am paying thru my nose and the occasional $6.50 for a round trip to downtown on the skytrain... this is just getting sad

How can government let Translink continue to slide like this, every 6 month, they want to raise fares, raise gas price taxes and now just straight up sales tax....

....sigh... end rant =P

I still rmbr when it was $1.00 for concession, and $1.50 for 1 zone tickets, and they were 1 hour 45min back then....

[SoulCrusher]

Can't trust the assholes that are running the show.
Posted via RS Mobile

[westopher]

Maybe we should just actually start paying translink tax straight off of our fucking paycheques? It can replace the C.P.P.

[7seven]

And while we're at it, let's stop wasting money on fancy arts at a Skytrain station.


Blows my mind that these idiots want to spend more money on useless art projects when every month they give us a sob story about how short on funding they are. Yea, spending ~$100,000 on that ugly Main St poodle statue really improved transit infrastructure :facepalm:

And pro transit people wonder why most get so angry and are against more funding for transit even though improvements are needed, its because of crap like this, crying broke/not enough funds while throwing hundreds of thousands at pointless art projects and bloated salaries for everyone from bus drivers to management for the shitty job they all do.

[CorneringArtist]

I'm sounding like a broken record when I discuss this with others, but Translink needs to improve service with the incoming revenue they have before asking for more funding. I'm sure they can free up some cash by paying their board directors less money for doing basically nothing. Oh wait, they constantly line their own pockets every year :badpokerface:.

[ziggyx]

:rukidding:Next time I pay 2.75 to take the expo line I'll make sure I stop at main street, get off the skytrain and check out the art exhibit they put up. Better be worth that money.

[murd0c]

I've said it before and I will say it again... Translink can fuck right off those greedy pompous retards.

[smoothie.]

Fuck translink. Turn the skytrain into bike lanes. Make all the buses private, it'll make for an interesting morning commute.
Posted via RS Mobile

[Hehe]

I am lol-ing so hard... Translink has never been profitable. Hell, they don't even have any plan that they ever would be. And yet they have the audacity to ask for all these subsidies. :fuckthatshit:

[lowside67]

I am lol-ing so hard... Translink has never been profitable. Hell, they don't even have any plan that they ever would be. And yet they have the audacity to ask for all these subsidies. :fuckthatshit:
Your econ-fu is pretty weak, you are actually backwards. A crown corporation that is set out to not seek profits MUST receive subsidies on an ongoing basis to continue operations - that's simply common sense.

I think what you actually meant to say is you don't understand why the company would be funded to expand its operations when it isn't profitable on its existing operations. That doesn't really make sense either though - this organization does not intend to set a profit whether it operates one bus line or public transit for the entire province.

Each project should be evaluated on its collective social benefit as the true financial return of any one is in theory negative since it isn't self supporting.

Mark

EDIT - I should also clarify that my correcting hehe doesn't mean I think Translink is fantastic and is doing a great job and deserves a bunch more of my money, just clarifying some seriously incorrect "facts".

[xpl0sive]

Carbon tax, transit tax, now regional sales tax? Are they for real? How much more do they think the people are going to take? I can't believe that people just bend over and pay this shit. Transit system has barely improved in the last 5 years, yet the taxes/fare rates have continued to increase... along with the Translink executive salaries

[MindBomber]

I much preferred the "2012 Translink Updates" thread to the barrage of Translink threads currently; the organization level lead to a much more productive discussion.

[Mr.HappySilp]

Blows my mind that these idiots want to spend more money on useless art projects when every month they give us a sob story about how short on funding they are. Yea, spending ~$100,000 on that ugly Main St poodle statue really improved transit infrastructure :facepalm:

And pro transit people wonder why most get so angry and are against more funding for transit even though improvements are needed, its because of crap like this, crying broke/not enough funds while throwing hundreds of thousands at pointless art projects and bloated salaries for everyone from bus drivers to management for the shitty job they all do.

Well they are planning to spend another 450k on arts
Another $450K prepared for Expo Line art | Vancouver 24 hrs (http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/2013/08/27/another-450k-prepared-for-expo-line-art)

I take the skytrain and get off Main every work day. There is NO NEED FOR FANCY arts there. Just leave it plain. If they want arts to make the station look nice they can easily get some freelancers or even art students form UBC, Emily Carr to do them FOR FREE! I am sure students will line up to do it coz is nice to have that on their resume.........

[Traum]

Well they are planning to spend another 450k on arts
Another $450K prepared for Expo Line art | Vancouver 24 hrs (http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/2013/08/27/another-450k-prepared-for-expo-line-art)

:facepalm:

[Mr.HappySilp]

^^ if you look at it closer the aritle saids "TransLink’s share of the $164-million Expo Line upgrade program, which includes money for public art, is $40 million."

So in total transit plans to throw $40 million for arts to decorate the stations......

[AWDTurboLuvr]

^^ if you look at it closer the aritle saids "TransLink’s share of the $164-million Expo Line upgrade program, which includes money for public art, is $40 million."

So in total transit plans to throw $40 million for arts to decorate the stations......

Poor reading comprehension. The upgrade program includes money for public art, it's not a $164 million art program and TransLink's share is $40m.

[Traum]

^^ I don't think that's how I would read it. Translink isn't throwing $40M on arts. The entire Expo Line upgrade is worth $164M. But Translink is only contributing $40M towards the project. And out of that $40M, they are spending (really, wasting) a bunch of money on arts.

[Traum]

Incidentally, Translink's online customer feedback form is down:

http://www.translink.ca/feedback

Gee... I wonder why it is down right now... :facepalm:

[noclue]

I honestly wouldn't mind if Vancouver followed a system like New York and toll every bridge/tunnel inbound and free exit outbound instead of a general tax for the whole population.

[shenmecar]

Incidentally, Translink's online customer feedback form is down:

http://www.translink.ca/feedback

Gee... I wonder why it is down right now... :facepalm:

some people just can't take criticism
Posted via RS Mobile

[xpl0sive]

^^ I don't think that's how I would read it. Translink isn't throwing $40M on arts. The entire Expo Line upgrade is worth $164M. But Translink is only contributing $40M towards the project. And out of that $40M, they are spending (really, wasting) a bunch of money on arts.

The entire Expo Line Upgrade Project is worth $164M. Translink's share is $40M, which includes arts. Pretty straight forward reading comprehension.

[smarv]

Blows my mind that these idiots want to spend more money on useless art projects when every month they give us a sob story about how short on funding they are. Yea, spending ~$100,000 on that ugly Main St poodle statue really improved transit infrastructure :facepalm:

And pro transit people wonder why most get so angry and are against more funding for transit even though improvements are needed, its because of crap like this, crying broke/not enough funds while throwing hundreds of thousands at pointless art projects and bloated salaries for everyone from bus drivers to management for the shitty job they all do.

I walk by that poodle on a daily bases and every time I look at it makes my blood boil. The worst part about it is the park infront of TD bank, it was built after they built the building, so they built a new building with a nice front space and then a year later the city came and tore it apart to build a stupid orange rack and a hill... for 6 months the whole front of this building and the new businesses there had fencing all around the front. They also spared no expense using holland landscaping, a very pricey company. Shit like that makes me furious.

[Mr.HappySilp]

The entire Expo Line Upgrade Project is worth $164M. Translink's share is $40M, which includes arts. Pretty straight forward reading comprehension.

so how much total does the art collection cost? Why didn't they mention it? Maybe becasue it cost millions and upon millions? If ti is less than a mill I am sure they would have mention it.

Next thing you know tranist will start taxing RS. Make a thread $5, make a post $3 fail/like a post $2.

[falcon]

I read this in the paper yesterday and would acutally be totally for it if it actually meant all the proposed lines would be built.

[falcon]

lol of course it could help fund their wish list why would they even mention that?

any tax will help fund their wishlist but the answer to their wishes shouldnt be simply to take more money out of our pockets to fill their wishes and to fill their pay raises and bonuses

FYI this is not Translink proposing it. It's an independent group which has done a lot of research and written a full and in depth proposal.

[falcon]

Acutually reading all the posts again you all need to read the OP carefully. This is NOT Translink proposing the tax. Really guys, reading comprehension.

[Traum]

Acutually reading all the posts again you all need to read the OP carefully. This is NOT Translink proposing the tax. Really guys, reading comprehension.
I know it's a transit advocate recommending the 0.5% regional tax, but I can't see how that could possibly be a good solution at all. There is so much waste happening left, right, and center at Translink that the real solution should be to trim some major fat from the de facto crown corp first.

[radioman]

Side note
Noticed the first column is up for the evergreen line the other day. :thumbsup:

[Tapioca]

I know it's a transit advocate recommending the 0.5% regional tax, but I can't see how that could possibly be a good solution at all. There is so much waste happening left, right, and center at Translink that the real solution should be to trim some major fat from the de facto crown corp first.

Even if you trim the fat, you still wouldn't get a major project, like a Skytrain extension to UBC built. Get your head of the sand. The only way you get transit funding under control is to cut service and cut staff.

The provincial government which has every political incentive to make Translink a scapegoat for its own failures to properly find a solution to transit funding performed an audit and found nothing glaring with Translink's finances, at least nothing worth causing a political fuss about. Mary Polak, the former transportation minister, said nothing about the audit which means that if the corporate fat was there, it would have been trimmed.

And each time a thread like this comes up, it makes me wonder if people actually spend a few minutes on Wikipedia or on Translink's website to research the organization, how it works, etc. The fact that there are people here stating that Translink is a private company makes me wonder how people actually passed grade school.

[Traum]

Even if you trim the fat, you still wouldn't get a major project, like a Skytrain extension to UBC built. Get your head of the sand. The only way you get transit funding under control is to cut service and cut staff.
I think you should be the one that gets your head out of the sand, Tapioca. Nobody is saying the fat trimming can fund any of the major projects, but given the excessive waste that is happening at Translink, a million or two could still go a long way. This bullshxt art stuff has already amounted to $615k. The top Translink execs make well in excess of $300k/yr -- a salary figure that is higher than Steve Harpy's salary as PM of Canada, and there are several of these people in Translink.

In terms of providing practical services to the general public, it makes no sense to cut staff and services when reduction at the top can bring dramatically more savings.

How many more bus drivers can we hire for $1M? 15 additional drivers, maybe? That should be enough to support an additional bus route if the frequency isn't too high. I'd much rather see that happening than to see the money lining these executives' pockets.

[lowside67]

The amount of non-information in this thread makes me want to punch a baby. If you guys haven't actually read the financial statements of Translink (http://www.translink.ca/en/About-Us/Corporate-Overview/Corporate-Reports/Annual-Report.aspx), then STFU about how it should spend its money. I have, so here's a TLDR:

Translink had revenue of $1.42 billion dollars in FY2012. Translink had expenditures of $1.43 billion dollars in FY2012. They reported a loss of approximately 0.7% on revenues.

Of their $1.43 billion dollars in expenses in FY2012, they spent 4% of it total on administration - including all these "overpaid executives" and every middle-level manager in a company that employs *6,100 PEOPLE*. To put this in perspective, they spent 13% of that total on interest on loans. Translink spent over 3 times as much on paying interest on the money it requires to build the infrastructure that everybody bitches about than every single administration cost to run the whole company.

Translink has approximately 6,100 employees and an annual budget of almost $1.5 billion dollars. You can't just expect that you are going to attract a qualified CEO for $150k a year. CEOs of crown corps like Translink, BC Ferries, BC Lottery Corp, are all capable executives with long careers behind them that have many options, most of which are private companies can not only pay more salary but also cast the executive in much less public light. Lululemon has revenue almost exactly the same at about $1.4 billion per year and has less than half as many people employed - their CEO earns just a little over $3,000,000 per year - about 10 times what Translink's CEO does.

I don't support bullshit artwork by a long shot, it's not in their mandate and shouldn't be a priority. But this thread is so full of people with their heads up their asses it's no wonder that more major decisions are not made by referendum and it's not so hard to see how the HST got repealed in the province.

Mark

[too_slow]

...

Faith in humanity (RS) restored...

[Tapioca]

Translink has approximately 6,100 employees and an annual budget of almost $1.5 billion dollars. You can't just expect that you are going to attract a qualified CEO for $150k a year. CEOs of crown corps like Translink, BC Ferries, BC Lottery Corp, are all capable executives with long careers behind them that have many options, most of which are private companies can not only pay more salary but also cast the executive in much less public light. Lululemon has revenue almost exactly the same at about $1.4 billion per year and has less than half as many people employed - their CEO earns just a little over $3,000,000 per year - about 10 times what Translink's CEO does.


Even if you cut the salaries of the big whigs by half or 2/3s and pay them 80K/year instead of 300K, what would the organization be able to do with that money? Buy a few buses, possibly. But, if you take the average professional RS'er who makes 70K to six figures, why would any smart person here work for an organization that has no sympathy from the public and that is no way glamourous when they could easily fetch that money working for a large private company that has more status, more potential for career growth, bonus structures, etc.?

I personally believe that salaries should be capped at the mid 150K level, but I don't know much about the market for transportation CEOs. For comparison's sake, my partner's CEO makes in the 170K range working for a non-profit. He made millions working for private companies before working for the non-profit.

[SoNaRWaVe]

the amount of money they spend on artwork should be redirected on cleaning up some stations. main street station would be my number 1 pick to clean up. i mean, you have lougheed looking nice and all and i don't recall artwork there.

[Tapioca]

the amount of money they spend on artwork should be redirected on cleaning up some stations. main street station would be my number 1 pick to clean up. i mean, you have lougheed looking nice and all and i don't recall artwork there.

Main St is already undergoing an extensive renovation. Lougheed Mall looks the way that it does (nice by Skytrain station standards) because it's a uniquely designed station. In fact, all of the Millennium Line stations have unique design features because they were built when the socialists (NDP) were in power. The Expo Line and the Canada Line were built according to a single design template for the most part. The Expo Line hasn't aged well, but this is Vancouver where people think cookie cutter Vancouver specials are cutting edge design.

It's hard to justify art because there's no money. On the other hand, when I travel to places like New York, or London, or even Toronto, having something different to look at when riding the rails is pleasant and says a lot about the city and its aspirations.

[xpl0sive]

^^^ except cities like New York and London have fully developed transit systems so they can afford to spend some money on art to make their stations more interesting. Vancouver's transit system is needs to be expanded to actually be large enough to service the population first, then spend money on art and other useless shit

[saucywoman]

The amount of non-information in this thread makes me want to punch a baby. If you guys haven't actually read the financial statements of Translink (http://www.translink.ca/en/About-Us/Corporate-Overview/Corporate-Reports/Annual-Report.aspx), then STFU about how it should spend its money. I have, so here's a TLDR:

Translink had revenue of $1.42 billion dollars in FY2012. Translink had expenditures of $1.43 billion dollars in FY2012. They reported a loss of approximately 0.7% on revenues.

Of their $1.43 billion dollars in expenses in FY2012, they spent 4% of it total on administration - including all these "overpaid executives" and every middle-level manager in a company that employs *6,100 PEOPLE*. To put this in perspective, they spent 13% of that total on interest on loans. Translink spent over 3 times as much on paying interest on the money it requires to build the infrastructure that everybody bitches about than every single administration cost to run the whole company.

Translink has approximately 6,100 employees and an annual budget of almost $1.5 billion dollars. You can't just expect that you are going to attract a qualified CEO for $150k a year. CEOs of crown corps like Translink, BC Ferries, BC Lottery Corp, are all capable executives with long careers behind them that have many options, most of which are private companies can not only pay more salary but also cast the executive in much less public light. Lululemon has revenue almost exactly the same at about $1.4 billion per year and has less than half as many people employed - their CEO earns just a little over $3,000,000 per year - about 10 times what Translink's CEO does.

I don't support bullshit artwork by a long shot, it's not in their mandate and shouldn't be a priority. But this thread is so full of people with their heads up their asses it's no wonder that more major decisions are not made by referendum and it's not so hard to see how the HST got repealed in the province.

Mark

Lululemon can pay whatever they want to their staff; they are not taxing the general population to fund their clothing production.

My problem with translink is all this stupid tax being paid on gas to fund them and they are paying the CEO an insane amount of money and spending money on art for the stations.

If they try and raise taxes I hope people actually start protesting this..

They should put the money they have towards improving actual transportation first before looking at decorating
Posted via RS Mobile

[xpl0sive]

The amount of non-information in this thread makes me want to punch a baby. If you guys haven't actually read the financial statements of Translink (http://www.translink.ca/en/About-Us/Corporate-Overview/Corporate-Reports/Annual-Report.aspx), then STFU about how it should spend its money. I have, so here's a TLDR:

Translink had revenue of $1.42 billion dollars in FY2012. Translink had expenditures of $1.43 billion dollars in FY2012. They reported a loss of approximately 0.7% on revenues.

Of their $1.43 billion dollars in expenses in FY2012, they spent 4% of it total on administration - including all these "overpaid executives" and every middle-level manager in a company that employs *6,100 PEOPLE*. To put this in perspective, they spent 13% of that total on interest on loans. Translink spent over 3 times as much on paying interest on the money it requires to build the infrastructure that everybody bitches about than every single administration cost to run the whole company.

Translink has approximately 6,100 employees and an annual budget of almost $1.5 billion dollars. You can't just expect that you are going to attract a qualified CEO for $150k a year. CEOs of crown corps like Translink, BC Ferries, BC Lottery Corp, are all capable executives with long careers behind them that have many options, most of which are private companies can not only pay more salary but also cast the executive in much less public light. Lululemon has revenue almost exactly the same at about $1.4 billion per year and has less than half as many people employed - their CEO earns just a little over $3,000,000 per year - about 10 times what Translink's CEO does.

I don't support bullshit artwork by a long shot, it's not in their mandate and shouldn't be a priority. But this thread is so full of people with their heads up their asses it's no wonder that more major decisions are not made by referendum and it's not so hard to see how the HST got repealed in the province.

Mark

one thing about crown corporations financial statements, they are very good at hiding profits and making it seem like they are not making any money. Take ICBC's financial statements for example. they also tend to spend more money than they take in... but somehow their executives enjoy great bonuses and large expense accounts. same goes for Translink and other crown corp executives. they pay themselves first, then decide what they can do with the left over money and declare that they can't afford to expand the system and need to raise taxes... i don't know about everyone else, but I'm getting tired of paying through the nose for a system I haven't used since I got my driver's license

[tonyzoomzoom]

at a minimum, translink should be regulated by a body like the Utilities Commission that approve expenditures for BC Hydro, Fortis, etc.

right now, translink spends without any formal oversight.

[SoNaRWaVe]

Main St is already undergoing an extensive renovation. Lougheed Mall looks the way that it does (nice by Skytrain station standards) because it's a uniquely designed station. In fact, all of the Millennium Line stations have unique design features because they were built when the socialists (NDP) were in power. The Expo Line and the Canada Line were built according to a single design template for the most part. The Expo Line hasn't aged well, but this is Vancouver where people think cookie cutter Vancouver specials are cutting edge design.

It's hard to justify art because there's no money. On the other hand, when I travel to places like New York, or London, or even Toronto, having something different to look at when riding the rails is pleasant and says a lot about the city and its aspirations.

I don't think the extensive renovation is going to make the station look any better. Its simply to allow the compass gates to be fitted in. I mean making it clean by actually painting or replacing things that looks like its past it's due dates. A lot of parts of some stations look like its ready to fall apart. If you ever use the elevators in some of these stations, you'll know what I mean. I think the best looking elevators are at waterfront and dunsmir
Posted via RS Mobile

[Tapioca]

^^^ except cities like New York and London have fully developed transit systems so they can afford to spend some money on art to make their stations more interesting. Vancouver's transit system is needs to be expanded to actually be large enough to service the population first, then spend money on art and other useless shit

Expansions require money - money that Translink doesn't have and money we don't want to put in.

Lululemon can pay whatever they want to their staff; they are not taxing the general population to fund their clothing production.

My problem with translink is all this stupid tax being paid on gas to fund them and they are paying the CEO an insane amount of money and spending money on art for the stations.

If they try and raise taxes I hope people actually start protesting this..

They should put the money they have towards improving actual transportation first before looking at decorating
Posted via RS Mobile

The Canada Line cost just under 2 billion beans (using imported and illegal labour to boot). It costs money, a lot of money, to build the improvements people want. They could fire the management and every single employee and cease operations for one year and build one Skytrain extension. Then, they would have to rehire people to run, clean, and manage the system.

one thing about crown corporations financial statements, they are very good at hiding profits and making it seem like they are not making any money. Take ICBC's financial statements for example. they also tend to spend more money than they take in... but somehow their executives enjoy great bonuses and large expense accounts. same goes for Translink and other crown corp executives. they pay themselves first, then decide what they can do with the left over money and declare that they can't afford to expand the system and need to raise taxes... i don't know about everyone else, but I'm getting tired of paying through the nose for a system I haven't used since I got my driver's license

Okay. So you're saying that the audit performed by the province last year was a farce? That everyone - from the province, to the auditors, and everyone else involved - is all in some sort of conspiracy to cover up Crown corporation profits so that a select few can enrich themselves every year?

at a minimum, translink should be regulated by a body like the Utilities Commission that approve expenditures for BC Hydro, Fortis, etc.

right now, translink spends without any formal oversight.

Maybe. But don't forget that Translink was created so that decisions could be made without political oversight. Political decisions tend to be worse because people are generally uninformed about the issues and can't think beyond themselves. Witness the HST referendum.

I don't think the extensive renovation is going to make the station look any better. Its simply to allow the compass gates to be fitted in. I mean making it clean by actually painting or replacing things that looks like its past it's due dates. A lot of parts of some stations look like its ready to fall apart. If you ever use the elevators in some of these stations, you'll know what I mean. I think the best looking elevators are at waterfront and dunsmir
Posted via RS Mobile

Painting requires money. Should Translink hire College Pro Painters to do the job?

[SoNaRWaVe]

Painting does require money. That's why I said in my original post that instead of using money for arts, they should use the arts money for bettering the station. Unless they are restricted to use that budget strictly for arts, then I don't know.
Posted via RS Mobile

[Hehe]

But why does Translink want to expand? GVR doesn't have the population density to support a public transportation system that Translink has envisioned them to be one day.

If they can't make money now, they would lose even more money once all the planned new expansion become operational. The maintenance cost alone would bankrupt the company (considering its capital). It has been on life-support long ago. It only survived due of being a crown corp. But it should find way to be financially responsible rather than always trying to find money money from tax-payers.

[Traum]

But why does Translink want to expand? GVR doesn't have the population density to support a public transportation system that Translink has envisioned them to be one day.

If they can't make money now, they would lose even more money once all the planned new expansion become operational. The maintenance cost alone would bankrupt the company (considering its capital). It has been on life-support long ago. It only survived due of being a crown corp. But it should find way to be financially responsible rather than always trying to find money money from tax-payers.
As far as public transit / infrastructure goes, I'd say Translink definitely has a need to grow. In particular, in Vancouver and Surrey where both the population and density are going up, Translink definitely has some voids to fill. I might even go as far saying that Surrey has a more urgent need than Vancouver to evolve beyond just buses.

I 100% agree that Translink needs to be more financially responsible though. From their front line drivers to their office staff to the executives, it seems to me that their salaries are too high. And of course, their recent spending spree is probably indicative of their usual (lack of) financial responsibilities too.

[SoNaRWaVe]

Although I agree on everyone's input on Translink's spending spree's, I also disagree with everyone's hate on the "high salary" issue. Now, I don't agree/disagree with what their rate of pay is, but the fact is, its a job.

If you had a set of skills, and someone came along and offered a substantial salary increase over your present job or previous job, you would take it. You won't think twice about how that affects the company. Who in the right mind would cut their salary from a company that they do not own, to make the company financially better? I understand that if it was your own company, your own bread and butter, then yes, you would do that.

It's easier for us to bitch about this because we're the ones ending up with the bill on paying for this system (regardless if you use it or not). Now if YOU were the CEO of Translink, it'll be more like milk this shit, fuck those bitches, get paid and :joy:

[alpinestars]

A portion of that $100k is probably kicked-back to someone over at TransLink.

Think about it, how could this statue cost $100k? That's a lot of money. Let's break it down, of course these figures are estimates:

$35,000 price statue (materials, design, freight)(very generous estimate)
$6,000 TransLink internal administration costs/project management
$12,000 materials (foundation, pole, others), labour, equipment rental to install the statue
$1,000 construction permit
$15,000 consulting architectural engineer design
$6,000 geo assessment, post construction safety inspection, certification

That's $75,000 right there. Now if the artist charged $60k for the statue, that's $25,000 in money that could be split up and a portion of it given back to the decision maker at TransLink. "Thanks for hiring us, here's a token of our appreciate *$15k cheque*"

Note: Some other articles quote the cost to be as high as $165,000 for the poodle statue alone

[Tapioca]

But why does Translink want to expand? GVR doesn't have the population density to support a public transportation system that Translink has envisioned them to be one day.

If they can't make money now, they would lose even more money once all the planned new expansion become operational. The maintenance cost alone would bankrupt the company (considering its capital). It has been on life-support long ago. It only survived due of being a crown corp. But it should find way to be financially responsible rather than always trying to find money money from tax-payers.

There are very few transit systems in the world that run a profit. The MTR may because they have a real estate arm which allows them to build transit oriented developments such as malls and condos. But, the nature of public transit is such that it cannot run without some subsidies from the taxpayer.

I think the scope of transit expansion is a legitimate debate, certain more legitimate than just making mountains out of mole hills everytime that something like public art projects come up. Politicians and decision-makers are stuck between a rock and a hard place:

- Cut transit to make it more sustainable in the short term will anger lots of people
- Spending money and raising taxes will also upset people

You can almost see the logic behind a referendum: give people a choice between reduced transit, or more transit and more taxes.
Posted via RS Mobile

[xpl0sive]

I think the scope of transit expansion is a legitimate debate, certain more legitimate than just making mountains out of mole hills everytime that something like public art projects come up. Politicians and decision-makers are stuck between a rock and a hard place:

- Cut transit to make it more sustainable in the short term will anger lots of people
- Spending money and raising taxes will also upset people

You can almost see the logic behind a referendum: give people a choice between reduced transit, or more transit and more taxes.
Posted via RS Mobile

Last time Translink held a public referendum,their new proposed levy's were declined by the public. Since then, Translink has gone about introducing new taxes quietly, because they know if they ask the public for their opinion, the public will not accept them.

"A vehicle levy was proposed as the
primary strategy to fund expansion.
It would require all vehicle owners in
Greater Vancouver to pay a set amount
each year for every automobile they
owned. The average person would have
to pay $75 a year, generating about $95
million in 2002, the first year it was to
be implemented."

"TransLink board approves levy
After a four-hour debate on November
22, the TransLink board narrowly
approved a modified plan where
levy amounts would be based on a
combination of insurance classification,
and the weight of the vehicles. A week
later, the GVRD board also passed
the contentious levy. “When that went
through, it was with a huge sense
of relief,” Puil said. “That was a big
milestone, maybe the biggest.”

"Province quashes levy agreement
It was a sign of what was to come.
Premier Ujjal Dosanjh had already said
he would not support any increase in
taxes. On January 21, Mike Farnworth,
the minister responsible for TransLink,
declared the cabinet would not sign an
order-in-council enabling it to collect
the levy on TransLink’s behalf."

There's a ton of information in the Translink history document posted on their website

http://www.translink.ca/~/media/documents/about_translink/corporate_overview/annual_reports/history/translink%20history%20nov%202008.ashx

[xpl0sive]

Okay. So you're saying that the audit performed by the province last year was a farce? That everyone - from the province, to the auditors, and everyone else involved - is all in some sort of conspiracy to cover up Crown corporation profits so that a select few can enrich themselves every year?


Did you actually read the audit? I know I did. And I'm almost certain that if a similar review was done of Translink, they would find the same issues

Here's a few quick quotes from it for ya...

From 2007 to 2011 ICBC experienced a 32% increase in
management positions across the organization, while union
positions declined by 1%. The total compensation cost for the
management and confidential employees increased 50% during the
last five years, compared to a 9% increase for the bargaining unit
for the same period.

Bonuses paid to management have been generous with easily met
criteria resulting in almost all staff receiving them. In addition to
ICBC management being among the highest paid within the
British Columbia public sector, benefits and perquisites provided to
senior management have generally exceeded the rest of the sector.

These increases in both staffing and compensation levels
continued even after the economic downturn in 2008 when
government implemented stricter cost controls. ICBC should
endeavour to return to levels that are more consistent with 2008 as
part of a general move to control and reduce costs.

A culture of cost-containment and financial discipline has been
lacking in recent years. ICBC’s expense policies are generous
when compared to the BC Public Service with exceptions approved
by senior management.

The corporate budgeting process is decentralized and the
incremental approach to budgeting is not sufficiently challenging
the organization to reduce costs. Over the last five years, operating
cost increases have outpaced inflation. ICBC should regularly
conduct detailed budget reviews to ensure costs are contained and
aligned with government direction.

Link to the audit for those interested

http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/ocg/ias/pdf_docs/ICBC_Review_2012.pdf

[melloman]

I would actually be fine with a GVRD regional sales tax.

Yet I would need some things to be cut out, and clearly defined in writing.
Points:
-Gas taxes be 100% eliminated
-Carbon tax be 100% eliminated
-A STRICT timeline of when the RST will be implemented and removed
-A clause saying there will be no increase, or timeline extension without full public consultation and vote.

Even though this isn't a good way of collecting money, it rapes everyone EVENLY. Putting a tax on all goods would mean everyone gets hit evenly and can't call foul. It will be a regional tax so only the people in the GVRD that would benefit from the services have to pay.

[xpl0sive]

good idea, but when was the last time you heard of a government reducing taxes?

Right now the tax system is opposite. People who drive and don't use the transit system, pay taxes to support the transit system.

They already hit most people "equally" with the property taxes, as there is transit tax built into your property taxes.

[melloman]

^^ Evenly... o.O

-Property tax isn't even, as there are thousands of students, and renters, who don't pay for property tax, yet use our public transit system.

-Gas prices. 29-31% of gas prices, is taxes. Those being GST/PST/Translink tax/Carbon tax.

I just find if we cut out the gas taxes that hit a person who clearly is NOT using public transit, and charge everyone abit more equally. There would be less complaints.

[Tapioca]

Did you actually read the audit? I know I did. And I'm almost certain that if a similar review was done of Translink, they would find the same issues

Here's a few quick quotes from it for ya...

From 2007 to 2011 ICBC experienced a 32% increase in
management positions across the organization, while union
positions declined by 1%. The total compensation cost for the
management and confidential employees increased 50% during the
last five years, compared to a 9% increase for the bargaining unit
for the same period.



Ummm, I wasn't referring to ICBC; I was referring to a Translink audit from 2012. This thread isn't about ICBC; it's about Translink. There was a thread on here about Translink's audit and some of us read the report and performed our own analyses. A few pennies could be scrimped and some more efficiencies could be gained, but there was nothing glaring. The only way you could save any real money is to cut services in a drastic way, or layoff half the staff.

And with respect to your earlier reference to a previous vehicle levy proposal, it never went to a referendum. Your citation highlights that the government at the time nixed the idea.
Posted via RS Mobile

[xpl0sive]

^^ Evenly... o.O

-Property tax isn't even, as there are thousands of students, and renters, who don't pay for property tax, yet use our public transit system.

-Gas prices. 29-31% of gas prices, is taxes. Those being GST/PST/Translink tax/Carbon tax.

I just find if we cut out the gas taxes that hit a person who clearly is NOT using public transit, and charge everyone abit more equally. There would be less complaints.


^^ I agree with you... except there are those who'll say that driving is a luxury and if you want to drive instead of taking transit, then you should have to pay. I didn't realize that buying a vehicle, paying for maintenance, insurance and gas was not enough. Let's tax the shit out of drivers too because it's such a luxury to be able to get from one end of the GVRD to another in less than 3 hours, which is how long it would take on transit.

[Tapioca]

Right now the tax system is opposite. People who drive and don't use the transit system, pay taxes to support the transit system.

They already hit most people "equally" with the property taxes, as there is transit tax built into your property taxes.

Well, the transit system also benefits drivers in that it mitigates further congestion. If there were no transit system, then everyone would hve to drive which would cause more congestion. I know people here love their cars (and I love my Bavarian machine), but we all benefit indirectly from public transit.

People are pissed off because they choose to live in communities where there is inadequate transit service. Then, they blame Translink for not putting B-Line buses at their doorstep. I was raised in a detached home and I understand the benefits of having space, etc. I now live in a condo with a Skytrain station next door. You can be damned sure that accessibility to public transit will factor in heavily to the next home I purchase and I will gladly pay more or sacrifice space to have that access. People need to think about the choices they make. Everything has a cost; there is no free lunch. You choose to buy a house in a new subdivision because you want space, then live with the consequences of that decision.
Posted via RS Mobile

[Hehe]

There are very few transit systems in the world that run a profit. The MTR may because they have a real estate arm which allows them to build transit oriented developments such as malls and condos. But, the nature of public transit is such that it cannot run without some subsidies from the taxpayer.

I think the scope of transit expansion is a legitimate debate, certain more legitimate than just making mountains out of mole hills everytime that something like public art projects come up. Politicians and decision-makers are stuck between a rock and a hard place:

- Cut transit to make it more sustainable in the short term will anger lots of people
- Spending money and raising taxes will also upset people

You can almost see the logic behind a referendum: give people a choice between reduced transit, or more transit and more taxes.
Posted via RS Mobile

I wasn't suggesting Translink to post a profit. But it should plan a way that it would be financially "responsible" in the long run.

Public transit costs money. And government everywhere fund their infrastructure with tax payer's money. However, in Translink's case, they don't make their decision based on feasibility. They just build build and build and when they lose money, they ask tax payer to balance it somehow.

IMHO, Translink should redesign itself completely. Since the population of GVR is so little in an area so big, they should focus on establishing connection hub in each major city in GVR, and then let the private party (either by licensing private buses/shuttles or subsidize them or drive) take care how to get people in each city to the hub.

My argument is not about abandoning public transportation, but rather change the way Translink is doing now for a more efficient and less absurd planning down the road.

[hotjoint]

I honestly wouldn't mind if Vancouver followed a system like New York and toll every bridge/tunnel inbound and free exit outbound instead of a general tax for the whole population.

Totally agree with this and make it cheap like $1.00 since it's every bridge. Make it so it's the same toll across the board so people don't have to go looking for the cheaper bridge and create traffic. If translink could only think like this....

[Tapioca]

Public transit costs money. And government everywhere fund their infrastructure with tax payer's money. However, in Translink's case, they don't make their decision based on feasibility. They just build build and build and when they lose money, they ask tax payer to balance it somehow.

IMHO, Translink should redesign itself completely. Since the population of GVR is so little in an area so big, they should focus on establishing connection hub in each major city in GVR, and then let the private party (either by licensing private buses/shuttles or subsidize them or drive) take care how to get people in each city to the hub.



If you look at GVRD plans from the 70s, the transportation model you talk about was already created. Hubs around Metro Vancouver with a rapid transit backbone serving them. The current Skytrain system reflects these plans from the 70s almost to a T. The only thing that is missing is the Tri-Cities connection which is being built right now. None of the current infrastructure reflects projects that were designed on a whim. These plans have been in place for nearly 50 years.

There are already hubs in the system: downtown Vancouver, Metrotown, Richmond Centre, Brentwood, Surrey Cental, Coquitlam Centre, Phibbs Exchange, Lonsdale Quay, Park Royal, etc. Community shuttles already do the work of private companies as the drivers are non-unionized (they get paid $20/hour with no benefits) and drive smaller buses. The problem is that people don't live and work in the hubs and that people's expectation of what they want out of their transit system is too high given the population and density of Metro Vancouver.
Posted via RS Mobile

[gars]

Totally agree with this and make it cheap like $1.00 since it's every bridge. Make it so it's the same toll across the board so people don't have to go looking for the cheaper bridge and create traffic. If translink could only think like this....

Translink only owns and maintains a few bridges - namely the Knight St Bridge, The Pattullo Bridge, the Westham Island Bridge, and the Golden Ears Bridge. I don't see how they can justify tolling all the bridges in the GVRD.

As well - when the Pattullo bridge finally gets replaced - people are going to bitch at Translink again because there's no way they're going to be able to afford to put in a new bridge without tolls.

[finbar]

0.5% of camel nose under the tent.

[Tapioca]

Another point about tolling is that it probably costs nearly a $1 in overhead and administration to collect tolls. If you go to Manhattan on a bridge, it costs about $8.

Automated technology isn't cheap and the people who administer the tolling system can't be paid less than minimum wage.
Posted via RS Mobile

[Traum]

Another point about tolling is that it probably costs nearly a $1 in overhead and administration to collect tolls. If you go to Manhattan on a bridge, it costs about $8.

Automated technology isn't cheap and the people who administer the tolling system can't be paid less than minimum wage.

With tolling already introduced on the Port Mann, I can't see how the overhead costs could amount to that much if the same system is used. Essentially you just need a one-time installation, some regular maintenance to look after the electronics, and more servers to do the transaction processing. None of those would cost that much.

[Anjew]

i agree that the high salary issue isnt really that much of an issue.. if you want capable executives you need to pay up. However all the penny pinching not too long ago regarding the compass implementation and now this stupid multi million dollar art projects???

[Hehe]

If you look at GVRD plans from the 70s, the transportation model you talk about was already created. Hubs around Metro Vancouver with a rapid transit backbone serving them. The current Skytrain system reflects these plans from the 70s almost to a T. The only thing that is missing is the Tri-Cities connection which is being built right now. None of the current infrastructure reflects projects that were designed on a whim. These plans have been in place for nearly 50 years.


The current plan is have many stations along the way. My idea is basically a very fast system that would jump between city to city (with less than 2 stops in between), and then make it easy for people to get to those hubs (either by private/public shuttle or big parking lot right next to those hubs).

Think it as why the air industry use hub systems: there isn't enough demand in smaller places. Thus, they have local/shorter flights with small planes to major hub airports that would fly big jumbo jets to other hubs.

Because as it stands, Translink system is expensive (both for users and tax payers) yet slow and inefficient.

I used to live right next to a skytrain station when I was in YVR. And I've rarely ever taken it even for work as it's a 1.5 hour commute if I take it to work. Same goes for few friends who live in the same complex and working downtown.

[Anjew]

I used to live right next to a skytrain station when I was in YVR. And I've rarely ever taken it even for work as it's a 1.5 hour commute if I take it to work. Same goes for few friends who live in the same complex and working downtown.

what would take me 25minutes to drive, it would take me an hour and 15 minutes by transit + 10 minute walk. thats with a b-line and the skytrain....not to mention 4 dollars for 2 zone each way.

It is still totally worth it to drive even with gas prices going up. I better shut up or we'd get another gas tax.