The results of Metro Vancouver’s Transportation and Transit Plebiscite
The results of Metro Vancouver’s Transportation and Transit Plebiscite
https://youtu.be/2-5UXvTnsq8
Elections BC announced the results of the Metro Vancouver Transportation and Transit Plebiscite today.
The results were that voters were not in favour of the 0.5% sales tax increase to fund transit expansion and increased service in the region.
While the outcome isn’t what we hoped for, we respect the decision of voters.
We will be live streaming a press conference with interim CEO Doug Allen on Periscope for Twitter (@TransLinkBC) at 12pm today from Waterfront station. Tune in and join the conversation.
Here is a statement from Doug Allen.
Today, Elections BC reported that 61.68% of voters rejected a 0.5% PST increase to fund the transportation improvements outlined in the Mayors’ Plan.
We are disappointed, but we respect the decision of voters and the fact that a majority do not support the proposed tax as the way to meet the transportation needs of a growing population.
The Premier decided to hold a plebiscite on funding to meet the transportation needs of Metro Vancouver.
And the Mayors responded by creating a well thought-out investment plan for better transit and transportation.
They did a great job of explaining the plan to citizens and defending the need for a tax in order to fund it.
The people of this region were asked to make a two-part decision: 1) Does the 10-year plan make sense; and 2) is the half-a-percent sales tax warranted?
In talking to hundreds of people over the course of the plebiscite, what we heard — especially from the younger generation — was support for:
- More public transit
- The good service we provide
- The plan put forward by the Mayors
But convincing people to vote for a tax increase is a tough sell, even when it will pay for much-needed transit and transportation improvements.
Our region expects to welcome over one million new residents over the next 30 years. A “no” vote doesn’t change the fact that our current transportation system will be challenged by this growth.
With no new funding, we will have no capacity to expand the transit system or provide increased service. Costs and customer demand will rise at a time when funding is essentially frozen. As a result, current service levels may be affected and we could face tough decisions in the weeks and months ahead.
Respected independent experts and analysts repeatedly point to TransLink’s record of cost efficiency and sound financial management. We will continue to earn that reputation by cutting costs and maximizing revenue opportunities wherever we can.
The need for funding has not gone away and we expect that the search for an acceptable source of regional funding will continue.
In the months ahead, we will work with the Province, the Mayors’ Council, our customers and the public to find a way to fund much-needed transit for our rapidly growing region.
Our commitment to running a safe and reliable transit and transportation system remains as strong as ever.
Although it ended with a no outcome, the plebiscite started a good debate across the region on the importance of transit. That debate will continue.
Thank you to everyone who participated.
Sincerely,
Doug Allen
Interim CEO, TransLink
You can view the press conference from noon today at Waterfront station here:
Author: Adrienne Coling
I’m not surprised about the answer. I expected this answer as I hear a lot about the no side in the media.
They should ask Christie to stop flying around and using her credit card so much and then fund transit with the savings
The issue was not with the plan or the direction charted for transit. I know virtually no one who disagreed with the vision. The issue was in execution. Most do not see Translink as part of the solution. Having a guy who makes $35,000 per month talk about financial challenges just doesn’t cut it. Nor does 6 boards of directors. Nor the endless compass and fare gate disaster. Remove Translink from the equation and I am positive the vote would have been overwhelmingly yes.
what darcy said AND the relentless robo calls from Robertson. You were elected to govern, govern.
Nobody was against paying taxes for more service. We’re the ones that use it daily. If you guys had just made some sincere changes to combat the rampant corruption and inefficiency we ALL knew about and had a problem with, I bet you it would have been a landslide in favour of yes.
This is NOT about the money. This is about our relationship with you as the caretaker of that money.
I agree with Darcy and vancouverite. Today I took transit. I entered a bus at the Seabus station – the door was open, and no driver anywhere to be seen. I watched as the bus filled to standing-room only, and still no driver to check fares. I have travelled to 8 different countries this year and used the transit in several of those. Drivers (behind plexiglas) take money, give you change (like in the old days here!), and if you didn’t have the money, you didn’t get on the bus. Not a difficult concept. If I don’t have the money for a coffee, Starbucks doesn’t give me one just because I exist. Why do the busses have to be any different?
Hi all, Thanks for your comments and being part of the discussion.
We respect that a majority of citizens do not support the proposed tax as the way to meet the transportation needs of a growing population but the need for funding has not gone away. So we will continue to search for an acceptable source of regional funding.
With no increase to our funding base we will have to find even more savings than the near $240 million since 2012 and will immediately undertake a review of all services to determine how we can further reduce costs so we can keep the system in a state of good repair while providing a base level of service.
John, I’m sorry you felt the calls were excessive. As this was a campaign run by the mayors’ council, I would direct your issue to them.
Traveller, would you be able to report this to customer relations? (604.953.3040 Monday to Friday 8 a.m. – 8 p.m.)
I’m not sure why that would have happened. I completely agree, people absolutely need to pay the fare.
TransLink is a company of over 6,700 employees who work hard every day to make sure we all can get where we are going safely, efficiently and swiftly. I definitely hear your concerns and are happy to take questions if you continue to have them.
“Respected independent experts and analysts repeatedly point to TransLink’s record of cost efficiency and sound financial management. We will continue to earn that reputation by cutting costs and maximizing revenue opportunities wherever we can.”
That is a joke. I did not vote no because I don’t want to spend the money on improving transit. I voted no because of the lack of confidence in Translink to spend the money on actual infrastructure instead of lining their own pockets.
Hi Gena, I understand what you’re saying but the question of TransLink wasn’t on the ballot.
It was in favour, or not, of 0.5% PST increase to fund public transit. The voters have spoken and that way of funding is not going forward.
I am glad to see the funding was not approved, not because we did not require it for future growth, it comes down to people not trusting TRANSLINK with the funds they already receive, However I wonder if TRANSLINK would be open to an independent audit of their organization? And actually Trim the Fat from the Top down. Sadly I feel it is doubtful that TRANSLINK would allow it. And the people have spoken.
Traveller didn’t like it when the driver left the doors open at the terminus while he had to leave the bus, (probably to use the washroom). I would ask anyone who thinks this is wrong whether you prefer the doors to remain closed to the gathering crowd waiting for an already late bus to leave, and you like the added delays that accumulate when boarding must wait. Whether to allow boarding at a busy terminus before the driver can be back should be a judgement call by the driver, not a rigid Coast Mountain policy. An attempt to implement this policy in North Van at the quay was dropped because of customer complaints. More passengers are happy about being allowed on, especially if it’s cold and wet, than are angry about people’s proof of payment nor being inspected. People who are determined to ride free are going to do so regardless of whether the driver is in their seat.
I think it becomes common for a driver to left the doors open at the terminal station. I do agree with Fn0. when it is too cold, or hot, customers can get on the bus first; however, the bus driver should be responsible to check the fare of each passenger on-board when the driver gets on the bus.
Just like 99 B-Line, passengers can get on the bus from the middle and back door, and it is impossible for a driver to check their fares. We can only assume that they have already bought a ticket.
To me, the actual problem is that the ticket machine on the bus is out of order. I take up to three bus a day, and I could find two of the bus’s fare machine were out of order.
Regarding to Adrienne Coling reply, I do not understand why you suggest Traveller to report to customer relations. That practices have become a common practice for most of the bus at the terminal station. If that is important to Translink, then how does translink ensure that all passengers who get on the 99 B-Line actually paid for the fare or passengers who actually pay their fare when they are on skystrain? Or how much revenue are lost when the fare machine is not in service?
Hi there,
My understanding from Traveller was that they witnessed several riders not paying their fare. Perhaps I misunderstood. However, if this is indeed the case and an ongoing issue, it should be reported. Operators are of course entitled to breaks but riders always need to have their validated fare lest they get ticketed. Even when I get on a bus without an operator present, I pay the fare because it is required and I don’t want a ticket! Transit security on buses, SkyTrain attendants and Transit Police across the system check daily. Transit Police will issue a hefty fine for not having the correct validated fare. Just as with the 99 b-line, operators cannot necessarily physically see the fare but riders are no less required to have it.
Here is an article that speaks about fare evasions in our system:
http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/2015/05/04/translink-fare-evasion-infractions-jump-22
John: Thanks for the comment. TransLink has gone through a number of audits over the years including this one in 2012 – http://buzzer.translink.ca/2012/10/the-provincial-audit-of-translink/ It’s good to remember that TransLink is a public organization, with a board of governors appointed by the Province of BC which includes two mayors from Metro Vancouver as well as the Mayors Council on Transportation. Major decisions are made by the board not “TransLink” per say. Here’s more about TransLink’s governance – http://www.translink.ca/en/About-Us/Governance-and-Board.aspx
Nobody wants a tax. Doesn’t matter what it’s for, if you ask the people, the majority will not support a new tax. It was a losing question to start with and a complete irresponsible waste of money by our Premier. So now the question is to the Premier and Transportation Minister – now what? Doing nothing is not an option. Without investment, the economy of the Lower Mainland and BC will suffer. Time for the Premier to step up and show some leadership for a change.
Everyone is talking about this vote saying that TransLink should have been removed from the plan – it was, if you actually read the ballot. The plan was to vote for the tax increase to fund the Mayors’ council plans, not to simply hand over the money to TransLink. We are constantly asking for more oversight for TransLink but when we actually were given the chance, 62% of us voted against the actual thing we wanted. It’s unfortunate that the citizens of Metro Vancouver are not informed or smart enough to figure that out.
This whole plebiscite thing has made me realize how self-entitled people in Metro Vancouver are. Translink is an amazing organization and we get excellent value for our money. The THREE audits in the last FIVE years have shown that Translink manages our money excellently. And the per rider subsidy is one of the lowest in North American. Jordan Bateman did an excellent job of smearing Translink and convincing everyone that this was about an overpriced poodle and overpaid executives (While we pay less per capita for our executives than Toronto!). Neither of these would pay for single bus route!
And no one stopped for a second to realize this wasn’t even a vote about Translink! This was about an excellent set of transportation priorities put together by our Mayors and a funding mechanism to implement them. They fact that they all agreed to the plan is like getting the planets to align. I doubt we will every have the chance like this again and for another 5 years our roads, busses and trains will continue to burst at the seams.
We’ve royally screwed up.
I would like to see Transit Security issuing more fare evasion fines on buses. I see soooo many people intentionally evade the fare. Translink must lose a lot of money due to fare evasion.
Hey, where did comment likes go? I like Jordan’s comment.
Hi Kyle: Thanks for the comment. We’ve experimented with the “like” function over the years. We find that they get gamed quickly and have little value in the end. That doesn’t mean we can’t add them again.
Hi all,
Starting today, June 6, 2016, Customer Relations (CR) and Customer Information (CI – the folks on Twitter!) are merging into one call centre.
This means when you call 604-953-3333 you will still get transit information, but you can also leave feedback at this number as well.
Thanks!