Waterloo Region Connected

Full Version: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165
LRT construction on Caroline in Uptown is going full steam ahead today; i'm quite surprised as seems pretty rare for a construction project in our Region to work outside of business hours.
Maybe they want something tangible in place before election day.
(10-24-2014, 07:45 PM)mpd618 Wrote: [ -> ]There was never a meaningful referendum question to be asked, as The Record pointed out quite well when the issue was at Regional Council.

The kinds of transit referendums that have been useful are strict yes/no questions about new funding streams. E.g. do you support an extra sales tax of 0.5% to support a long-term transit plan (the details of which are decided separately). Once you get into shades of grey, you're mired in decades of decision-making and building nothing. Except more roads and sprawl, which apparently never need a referendum.

That Record article was pretty dismissive, not to mention insulting. Is it wrong for a politician to say, "You know, this project seems to be out of the scope of what I should be deciding for my constituents, maybe I should seek their direct approval?" Or are the citizens expected to speak up once, at the ballot box, and then shut up between elections? The politicians and staff seemed pretty sure of themselves throughout the consultation process that the majority of the population supported this plan, so what was the risk of putting it to a yes/no vote?  

As for a lack of a meaningful question, why not a referendum that asked the same question that Council was asked earlier this year (That is, "Do you support Stage 1 of the LRT project?")? It would have been simple and straightforward.  If the proponents had made a good enough case, their side would have carried the day.

As for the $1 million projected referendum price tag, since Ken Seiling considers paying $1.3 million to Guelph each year in Green Bin losses to be "In the overall scheme of the regional budget, it's not a huge amount, but it's still a significant amount," holding one, simple, referendum to get confirmation of a nearly $2 billion investment wouldn't bankrupt the public purse.

Or even better, what about a referendum question like, "Do you approve of 0.5% sales tax to improve transportation in our Region over the long-term?" after a few years of consultation to discuss what projects might be eligible for improvements?

I would rather have a decade or two of discussion to get the plan right, rather than pay for mistakes later.  As it is, this plan has been in public consultation for 9 years and, if we're to believe the politicians, been part of Regional planning since 1973. Instead of haveing the courage to pitch a fully-funded, multi-stage plan to the voters, what we'll be left with is a half-built LRT plan with aBRT tacked on for show that has no tangible funding plan for the second LRT phase beyond, "We hope that the higher levels of government will pay for it".

The Swiss seemed to have done something right in Zurich with their S-Bahn system. The system plan was put to referendum three times before the third version was accepted in 1983.  The system is now launching its fourth expansion since 1983. I wonder whether the Region will be ever be able to match that speed for future ION expansion.
So should we just have a cut-off where anything over a $100 million is put to a vote? Vote on every single expensive highway widening and everything else too if it's just about the amount of money. Where's the fully-funded, multi-stage plan for paying for the existing road repair backlog and insatiable appetite for new roads in new suburbs? Why do we need 20 years to hum and haw about building transit? It's not like robot cars are actually going to be a real thing in the next 20 years. The original LRT plan was adjusted to suit public opinion that building the whole thing at once was too expensive so it was tweaked without the need for an actual referendum. It also kind of makes sense to build the ridership in Cambridge like it was built-up in KW with express buses.
I hate when people bring up referendums. They're called elections. We live in a society where we have a REPRESENTATIVE democracy. You pick a person to represent you. Direct democracies have been deemed too inefficient time and time again.
(10-26-2014, 09:08 AM)clasher Wrote: [ -> ]So should we just have a cut-off where anything over a $100 million is put to a vote? Vote on every single expensive highway widening and everything else too if it's just about the amount of money. Where's the fully-funded, multi-stage plan for paying for the existing road repair backlog and insatiable appetite for new roads in new suburbs? Why do we need 20 years to hum and haw about building transit? It's not like robot cars are actually going to be a real thing in the next 20 years. The original LRT plan was adjusted to suit public opinion that building the whole thing at once was too expensive so it was tweaked without the need for an actual referendum. It also kind of makes sense to build the ridership in Cambridge like it was built-up in KW with express buses.

As soon as that became law you can expect that every project would just get cut up into two "separate" projects that stay under the threshold.
(10-26-2014, 10:06 AM)Spokes Wrote: [ -> ]I hate when people bring up referendums.  They're called elections.  We live in a society where we have a REPRESENTATIVE democracy.  You pick a person to represent you.  Direct democracies have been deemed too inefficient time and time again.

Exactly. I hated the referendum on fluoridation since I have absolutely no clue if fluoride in water is good or not, nor do I have the time to educate myself. I would trust city councilors to engage with experts in the field, reach a well reasoned conclusion and I'm happy to go along with it.
You're not the only one with no clue about fluoridation - just look at all the folks in Waterloo who voted against continuing it!
Not that I agree a referendum was warranted or that alternatives like BRT would actually be cheaper in the long run, but consider...

Even if we all agree that a referendum on the LRT was warranted in the last election it's too late to have one in this election because even if the LRT is rejected by a wide margin and the region wants to back out it will cost more in cancellation charges than could have been saved by going with the alternatives.
Governance by referendum is a disaster wherever it has been used.

Example 1: Education funding in the U.S. held at the city/town level has given them the most bizarre and failing system in the world and IMO the worst education in the western world.

Example 2: California has referendums on the most ridiculous issues  at every level of governance and they have micro-management referendums on how many dollars can or will be spent on budgets and projects. ( their voting level is not much better than Ontario or Kitchener or Cambridge) California has gone from a progressive state to a state paralyzed at every level by referendums on every subject.

There are many, many more examples.

Canada/Ontario/Waterloo Region/Kitchener/Waterloo/Wilmot/Cambridge needs to learn from the efforts to paralyze governance called referendums rather than empower our elected officials to govern on our behalf which is what our non-republic, democratic process is founded upon.
(10-26-2014, 01:41 AM)nms Wrote: [ -> ]That Record article was pretty dismissive, not to mention insulting. Is it wrong for a politician to say, "You know, this project seems to be out of the scope of what I should be deciding for my constituents, maybe I should seek their direct approval?" Or are the citizens expected to speak up once, at the ballot box, and then shut up between elections? The politicians and staff seemed pretty sure of themselves throughout the consultation process that the majority of the population supported this plan, so what was the risk of putting it to a yes/no vote?  

As for a lack of a meaningful question, why not a referendum that asked the same question that Council was asked earlier this year (That is, "Do you support Stage 1 of the LRT project?")? It would have been simple and straightforward.  If the proponents had made a good enough case, their side would have carried the day.

And if the answer was "no", there would have been no clear direction on what the government is supposed to do. That's the problem. Then the council would have to figure out if they should do a different route, a different technology, no rapid transit at all, invest in lots of new roads instead, etc. Keep in mind that the LRT is primarily a mechanism to achieve the Regional Official Plan's intensification goals - and it's unclear that those goals can be achieved without higher-order transit along the central corridor. Or should the Official Plan also be up for a referendum?


(10-26-2014, 01:41 AM)nms Wrote: [ -> ]Or even better, what about a referendum question like, "Do you approve of 0.5% sales tax to improve transportation in our Region over the long-term?" after a few years of consultation to discuss what projects might be eligible for improvements?

I would rather have a decade or two of discussion to get the plan right, rather than pay for mistakes later.  As it is, this plan has been in public consultation for 9 years and, if we're to believe the politicians, been part of Regional planning since 1973. Instead of haveing the courage to pitch a fully-funded, multi-stage plan to the voters, what we'll be left with is a half-built LRT plan with aBRT tacked on for show that has no tangible funding plan for the second LRT phase beyond, "We hope that the higher levels of government will pay for it".

The Region doesn't have the power to levy a sales tax, so it would be a completely arbitrary decision to say that this project needs a referendum for its property tax impact, whereas other regional infrastructure doesn't and (apparently) neither does the alternative of building lots more roads to support sprawl.

The best way to get a "full" system is to start with a system that works, attracts new development, grows ridership, and which proves public demand. After that you have a much easier time building extensions. As for funding for the line all the way to Cambridge, asking for that much funding from the upper levels of government at once would have very likely resulted in zero funding. In fact, I suspect those conversations happened during the years of planning for the system.
As the dust settles on election night, I'm glad that there is enough turnover around the Council table to keep things fresh. It's unfortunate that elements of the election campaign turned so ugly.

To answer a few of the comments above, yes, I still think that a referendum on projects that will fundamentally change the way we live is perfectly valid. Typically elections serve as a stand-in for a referendum: vote for me and I'll do X, if you don't like it vote for the other candidate. If a few of the candidates in the 2010 election had been a little more honest about how they would vote on the LRT rather than splitting hairs, there may have been different results then. Instead, we ended up with scare tactics this time about what might be lost if we didn't continue to pursue the LRT path.

On a funding note, when will we have a politician at any level (federal, provincial or locally) admit that we have deferred maintenance for too long on our infrastructure projects and unless taxes are raised, things are going to get worse. The LRT will likely remain in tip-top shape since we have guaranteed payments and guaranteed service standards, but what else will continue to be punted down the line to keep taxes low?

Don't expect the tax conversation to get easier either. As the baby boomers head for retirement, I expect that we'll hear more stories about seniors on fixed incomes being unable to afford any tax increases.

We'll have to wait and see which "I told you so"s come true after 2017.
(10-27-2014, 11:50 PM)nms Wrote: [ -> ]To answer a few of the comments above, yes, I still think that a referendum on projects that will fundamentally change the way we live is perfectly valid.

Change will happen, referendum or not. The choices were gridlock with loud buses going by on King every three minutes or an LRT that is so quiet in most places it requires chimes to announce itself to pedestrian traffic.

Is that the type of question one asks in a referendum? of course not.
(10-27-2014, 11:50 PM)nms Wrote: [ -> ]On a funding note, when will we have a politician at any level (federal, provincial or locally) admit that we have deferred maintenance for too long on our infrastructure projects and unless taxes are raised, things are going to get worse.

Don't know about you, but I see all the municipalities talking about "infrastructure deficit", and adopting asset management programs. Waterloo Region specifically has been spending hundreds of millions of dollars on renovating some of its biggest infrastructure - the wastewaster treatment system.

As a reminder, LRT and intensification helps local municipalities reduce the growth of new infrastructure so we are not facing as bad of a problem in 50 years as we have now with infrastructure renewal.
By the way, the anti-LRT candidate in Hamilton was also defeated, with pro-LRT candidates receiving twice as many votes. It seems that most people do get it, with the exception of a few "get off my lawn types".
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165