VOTE NO to Tran$Link tax

[vancouverman]

I'm with my old friend vancouverman on this one...NO.

Long time my friend ... long time.....

I disagree and say YES. I agree that the agreement and management of Translink is inefficient and a morass, but we actually have one of the most efficient public transport systems in the world.

ohh, in the WORLD??? and how do you know it??? from the Translink website of course.
How often do you travel outside BC... not to mention Canada?
Europe has some good examples how things can work.... Asia too.

Vancouver is not even CLOSE to a good transit system, and with the way it is going, no amount of money we put into it will change this....
We need to change how it is managed FIRST!

 

[wilde]

Montreal has the best transit system (as well as NHL team) in Canada.

 

[SirJimmy]

I tried public transit. Hated it and returned to driving. The environmentalist/idealist in me wants to use transit; but driving is cheaper, faster, more convenient and definitely a more pleasurable experience.

Make transit more appealing and maybe more people would use it (and pay full fare):

- have free or near free parking close to skytrain stations. Portland does this. Even some BART stations in the SFO area have cheap parking right at the station.
- provide free wifi at all major bus loops and skytrain stations. Maybe even on the trains themselves. Ask Shaw or Telus or whoever to provide this in exchange for advertising space.
- provide more covered bus stops. It rains a lot in the Lower Mainland (Translink can form a committee of middle managers and conduct multiple studies to verify this). Why spend north of $100K on each fancy glass/stainless steel bus stop on Granville when those of us in the suburbs have to stand in the rain waiting for a late bus? Build us some el-cheapo covered stops already.
- collaborate with ICBC to provide weekend only insurance? I pay ICBC about $5/day to insure my car. If I take transit to work 5 days per week, then $25/week is essentially wasted if I do not drive after work. Why not just drive to work?
- Go after fare evaders. I do not care if this endeavor is profitable or not.
- require bus drivers to be more courteous to passengers. A number of times I have waited to board a bus (along with a large number of other passengers standing in line) as the bus driver kept the bus parked about 10 meters away. While we were outside standing in the cold rain and wind, he sipped his coffee in a heated/lit bus with the engine on (this went on for about 15 minutes). It was only about 2 minutes before the scheduled departure that he pulls up and lets us in. Go ahead and have your coffee break, but let us on the bus. Or turn off the engine and stop wasting fuel that we paid for.

I don't care if congestion increases over the next 10 years, driving will still be better than taking transit. Ask the people in New Westminster how the billion dollar investment in the Port Mann has affected congestion in New West.

 

[badbadboy]

Examples of excellent transit systems I have used that all had some sort of ticketing management gates:

London UK

Sidney Australia

Chicago

NYC and its Burroughs

Hong Kong

Montreal (yes Wilde is correct on one point)

All have large masses of people to move and all have a huge Police presence.

Regardless, how difficult could it be to install gates that let you in once your paid ticket is scanned? Enough of the BS excuses and posting how many mllions of $ unpaid fares we have every year.

 

[Cock Throppled]

Translnk already takes in $800 million a year in taxes. This new.5% will add another $250 million - a 30% increase in their budget.

But, under the taxation system in place their revenue will continue to grow even without the new tax. This never seems to get mentioned.

Further - the two biggest projects - the tunnel on Broadway and the Patullo Bridge will eat up most of the money. Most of the proposals in the plan can go forward without the new tax.

The Yes side is also lying about 1 million people coming in the next 20 years. Where did that number com from? Stats BC estimate 300,000 people.

 

[yazoo]

I'll be voting yes. I hate the waste on two ceo s and sky high labour costs, but this is Vancouver...

I also hate the Compass fiasco. Someones making money at all these cost overruns.

But all of these things are details. I buy into the message that our population is increasing by a million people and we need roads and infrastructure to support it so that we are not all choking in traffic happy about how we showed translink what we thought of them.

I want new roads and bridges and a Broadway subway.

 

[mercyshooter]

Examples of excellent transit systems I have used that all had some sort of ticketing management gates:

London UK

Sidney Australia

Chicago

NYC and its Burroughs

Hong Kong

Montreal (yes Wilde is correct on one point)

All have large masses of people to move and all have a huge Police presence.

Regardless, how difficult could it be to install gates that let you in once your paid ticket is scanned? Enough of the BS excuses and posting how many mllions of $ unpaid fares we have every year.

too bad that the labour cost in here is too high to hire competitive and smart software developers graduates! this means we are losing talents!

 

[hornygandalf]

ohh, in the WORLD??? and how do you know it??? from the Translink website of course.
How often do you travel outside BC... not to mention Canada?
Europe has some good examples how things can work.... Asia too.

Vancouver is not even CLOSE to a good transit system, and with the way it is going, no amount of money we put into it will change this....
We need to change how it is managed FIRST!

As someone who has notched up somewhere in excess of 700,000 air miles, lived in a number of countries and visited countless more, many on a budget as a student or (as now) underpaid and precariously-employed instructor, I have considerable experience with public transit systems. I agree that there are many systems that are good, but there are also many that aren't, particularly south of the boarder, along with Australia and New Zealand. And in many places, you are paying more than Vancouver for a poorer service.
Hong Kong is cheaper and probably better. And with the years I lived in Hong Kong, along with my travels by public transport around Europe, I still think that Vancouver does pretty well. Is the governance system screwed up. Absolutely. But despite that, Vancouver does pretty well.

 

[1nitestan]

1) FF to 2:11:15 for an anlysis of Trnslinks effectiveness. Pretty much crushes Jordan Batemen's NO side campaign, which can be found here: http://www.notranslinktax.ca/betterplan. The more I research this issue, the more the NO side sounds like Tea Party crackpots.

http://www.cbc.ca/player/Shows/ID/2659265312/

2) A well written case for Yes

http://foodforthoughtbookclub.com/2015/03/10/vancouvers-rob-ford-moment/

3) If you're bent out of shape about salaries...think again. As for continuing to pay the ex-CEO.... Well, there's a little thing called the Employment Standards Act that says you have to pay out an employee if you terminate him with out notice. This applies to fry cooks as well as CEO's

http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2015/02/no-transit-tax-myths-lies-translink/

 

[italian233]

Voting No, why would I agree to be taxed more with no guarantee that transit and infrastructure will improve. So many mistakes by Translink has wasted money, from the Compass card and all the skytrain problems. The costs keep on going up without any better service.

http://www.biv.com/article/2015/3/compass-card-costs-climbing/

 

[nd1]

I'm Voting NO! NO! NO!!

That real estate prices have gone up quite dramatically in Metro-Vancouver -- and will likely to continue so -- is hardly even news. As a result, the various municipalities have seen and will continue to see rather sizable increases in revenues, as they are based on property value. What have they been doing with the money? Why will they need more taxes on top of that to build roads and fund public transit? Why can't they just contribute part of these increases to this "fund kept independent of (rotten) TransLink?"

Having an audit committee led by Mr. Pattison is but a smokescreen. Audit is done AFTER THE FACT -- once the money has already been spent, all the auditing won't get it back. Instead, more good money is usually thrown after bad ones. Budget-overages are only discovered after the hole has been dug, the structure half-built, a contract with a heavy fine to pay to break being entered, and so on and so forth -- in other words, you have almost no choice but to spend more money to finish it. And TransLink is proven to be quite adept at doing just that.

I have a car but mostly ride the transit. Inasmuch as I hate the ridiculous congestion and want things to be better, I am not convinced that a YES vote will actually get us there. Unless some very fundamental changes happen at all levels (provincial, TransLink and municipal), a YES vote will only bring us the same status quo, only a more expensive one.

 

[hornygandalf]

I have a car but mostly ride the transit. Inasmuch as I hate the ridiculous congestion and want things to be better, I am not convinced that a YES vote will actually get us there. Unless some very fundamental changes happen at all levels (provincial, TransLink and municipal), a YES vote will only bring us the same status quo, only a more expensive one.

Whereas a NO will ensure that things get worse. Kinda a no-win situation, but I would prefer the status quo as a worse-case scenario with the possibility of improvements, over the guarantee that things will get worse, with more congestion on both the roads and transit. A NO vote doesn't mean there will be a solution over the governance problem.

 

[nd1]

Whereas a NO will ensure that things get worse. Kinda a no-win situation, but I would prefer the status quo as a worse-case scenario with the possibility of improvements, over the guarantee that things will get worse, with more congestion on both the roads and transit. A NO vote doesn't mean there will be a solution over the governance problem.

After the NO vote, things will only get worse if the province and the mayors sit on their hands and take no alternatives, thus putting their own political future at risk as well. But, as has been pointed out, there are many alternatives that they could and should pursue.

And as for governance being one of the root problems, once they succeed in getting the funding, what incentive is there for it to be reformed at all? On the contrary, now that they know by virtue of the referendum how much we really hate it, perhaps they will find a solution. Just the prospect of the NO-vote winning has already make them bring out Mr. Pattison, albeit a smokescreen; just think how more serious their response will have to be if they ever want to crawl back and beg for more money after the NO vote.

Politicians are like dogs -- no, they ARE dogs -- woe be to owners who reward bad behaviors!

 

[adventurer32]

258 dollars per year I will pay translink that's one less time I get to visit a k girl and one less time I get to visit aunty cherry. Just ain't no fucking way literally.

 

[badbadboy]

By the looks of polling the No side is ahead.

What has been at the back of my mind is the board which is comprised of Mayors is they could get an alternative funding. They could get the tax rates increased from Home Ownership taxes at the municipal level. I'm not sure if they can arbitrarily change the rate or if they have to apply to the BC Govt.

One way or another The Mayors will get their funding IMHO.

As a home owner and one who has invested in property this is not good news. It makes being part of the Yes side a bit more appealing because it shares the pain with everyone in every wage category throughout the province. Home owners will most likely take the hit if the No Side wins.

 

[Cock Throppled]

Anyone who thinks there is no Plan B, or nothing will get done if there is a No vote is an idiot buying into the Yes fear tactics, or someone too naive to understand this tax is but a small amount of the over-all financing.

 

[badbadboy]

By the looks of polling the No side is ahead.

What has been at the back of my mind is the board which is comprised of Mayors is they could get an alternative funding. They could get the tax rates increased from Home Ownership taxes at the municipal level. I'm not sure if they can arbitrarily change the rate or if they have to apply to the BC Govt.

One way or another The Mayors will get their funding IMHO.

As a home owner and one who has invested in property this is not good news. It makes being part of the Yes side a bit more appealing because it shares the pain with everyone in every wage category throughout the province. Home owners will most likely take the hit if the No Side wins.

Anyone who thinks there is no Plan B, or nothing will get done if there is a No vote is an idiot buying into the Yes fear tactics, or someone too naive to understand this tax is but a small amount of the over-all financing.

This was openly discussed on various radio programs from the beginning of the year. Once the referendum was issued the question cropped up "what if everyone says no" and I think it was Malcolm Brody ?? who said they could discuss the increase in property tax with the Gov't to assist with the funding required should the referendum be defeated.

It's not idiocy as you state, its a open discussion about how the transportation systems could be funded. I have made myself clear that I am against this sales tax increase because of the ineptness of the Translink board and other reasons. I am not buying into any fear mongering only relating what I heard on the radio from one of the board. I think the Yes side seems to have an ace up their sleeve should the No side wins and that means an increase in the farming rate for property taxes.

 

[apl16]

The fact that they have no alternative plans shows how little vision and poor they are managed. The do this or the sky will fall attitude will never get me on board. Fear to manipulate the masses. Poopheads!!!

 

[rick hunter]

Everyone complains that Translink is wasteful yet the NO side website examples are pretty poor. If that is the best they can come up with then that's pretty telling. There was a audit 2 years from the government that said Translink was run mostly efficient.

Could it be more efficient? Sure but you can say that more most companies and organizations. Why doesn't White Rock join Surrey? It has a grand total of 20,000 residents. Why is there 2 councils for North Vancouver?

Why doesn't Jordan Bateman complain about skytrain anymore? He called it the Cadillac system of transport but you don't hear him say anything about it now. Hmm... maybe because it works pretty well. People were complaining that the Canada Line was too much money and the projected ridership levels were too ambitious but you don't hear anybody bitch about it now.

 

[canuck33660]

“At this point in time, the province has no plans to make any further improvements to governance at TransLink. This particular issue, we believe, is a red herring in this campaign and we believe it’s a distraction,” Mr. Stone told reporters during a news conference in Stanley Park."

Cannot tell whether Todd Stone is crazy like a fox or a total moron. I'm leaning towards the latter but the Provincial government is sure playing this perfectly.

Why isn't their feet held to the fire. Isn't transportation a Provincial issue?

Full disclosure I am firmly on the "NO" side.

The governance of Translink is not a red herring as Stone and other on the "YES" side keep on pointing out.

Last weekend at my poker night 6 out of 8 were firmly on the "NO" side. One was firmly on the "YES" side.

The other "YES" voter said while he was tending to vote "YES" he was "holding his nose" to do so.

So we asked him why and he stated that he is supportive of funding for transit BUT totally disagrees with the governance of Translink and fears that a "YES" vote would enshrine that governance model for a long time.

I just wonder how many other "YES" side voters are of the same mind.

Whereas for the other six "NO" voters we are aware that this is not a vote about governance BUT we firmly just want to tell all the politicians to go "FUCK THEMSELVES" and we are finding any little way we can to do so.

I have told my mayor just how fucking mad I am over this shit. Unfortunately typical of ALL politicians they do not give a FUCK what we think except at election time.

And to Rick Hunter who wants an example of how wasteful Translink is look at the introduction of COMPASS. This is not new fucking technology Hong Kong has the Octopus system with 10 times the population using it. Its been over two years and the system is not live because it cannot handle the volume?????????????????

Look at the transit police. A friend of mine at poker is a cop and his guys have to get involved at any issues near a skytrain station because the transit cops can't handle it. He says they are basically guys that are either retired ex RCMP or guys that couldn't get into other municipal forces.