The Transit Plebiscite is an important issue, and voting is going on right now:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/voting-begins-in-metro-vancouver-transit-referendum-1.2996055
Official site:
http://www.elections.bc.ca/plebiscite/
What are your thoughts on it?
hell YES, i just wish translink was smarter with money. so many bad decisions, but that is typical of any government agency as well. as long as it is making progress i cant really see why not.
there are so many yellow envelopes at the post office, im hoping they are yesses. the are also a lot of unopened return ones too. would be funny if NO voters thought not voting meant NO, hehe.
: warrior27 March 25, 2015, 10:54:47 -06:00
hell YES, i just wish translink was smarter with money.
Hell NO, and you just outlined a big reason why I feel this way: Translink is just so darned stupid with (our) money; I do not want to give them more.
Oh, the piggies will find another way to keep the golden trough filled, don't you worry ... and it will likely be on the backs of evil motorists, should the votes tally to the 'no' side (which would mean I am possibly shooting myself in the face by voting 'no'; the irony is not lost on me).
and you are absolutely right in your assessment. so much disappointment. there just never seems to be a winning situation when people have to deal with their own government. i wish V was here to make it all better :)
: warrior27 March 26, 2015, 12:19:02 -06:00
...there just never seems to be a winning situation when people have to deal with their own government.
Another problem I have with the process, and the entity at large: aside from the double-dipping mayors on the Translink board, they are not elected officials; they are appointees.
The only oversight exercised over Translink is that wielded by the transportation minister (those who put them into power in the first place).
If the HST fiasco added ammunition to the downfall of the last government, hopefully this will add fuel to the tire fire that is the current regime.
I'm not really sure how to think about it. While it would be nice to see better improved transit (I feel improved public transit at affordable costs is the way to see more cars off the road) It needs to be spent smartly. Translink has revenue it's not accessing, the skytrain is the best example. On the skytrain, there's no one checking to see if you have a ticket (there's guards but they mostly just chat amongst themselves), there's really nothing stopping you from going on the skytrain and using it.
I do also feel like instead of more busses running the same routes, they should have buses going to different places.
Here in Abbotsford, they're releasing a bus from Langley to Abbotsford to Chilliwhack, which I feel is probably going to earn them some extra cash because it means better transportation.
*end rambling
I've been told by countless parties that TransLink won't actually have the money in hand to spend on whatever bs they see fit. Something about the gov having a hold of it and able to actually put it towards what it is ment for.
I'm not really smart nor to I have the attention span to sit down and read both sides and make an informed decision.
I do however find it interesting that David Suzuki has made an option on the matter.
http://www.davidsuzuki.org/blogs/climate-blog/2015/03/top-five-reasons-to-vote-yes-in-the-transit-referendum-even-if-you-dont-like-tra/
That being said, I'm still on the fence about the issue.
: SharpCoyote March 26, 2015, 12:15:01 -06:00
Hell NO, and you just outlined a big reason why I feel this way: Translink is just so darned stupid with (our) money; I do not want to give them more.
Oh, the piggies will find another way to keep the golden trough filled, don't you worry ... and it will likely be on the backs of evil motorists, should the votes tally to the 'no' side (which would mean I am possibly shooting myself in the face by voting 'no'; the irony is not lost on me).
Something many are forgetting. With .05% extra sales tax, many small businesses in Langley will got out of business. Why? Because people will travel further to save the tax. With no customers they can't pay rent so they close.
Say NO to translink.
I think what you're all forgetting is that. TransLink is NOT government, not even a crown Corp, it's as eperate company now. That's our big problem. While legeslation can control translink in sor far as municipal operation is concerned, it can't control it's internal affairs. Translink shareholders, board members, and CEO's have been funneling away the companies funds with their own paycheques and contracts to buddy corps. They now come to us and ask for no money? HE'LL NO. The only way to fix transit is to put it back in completely public hands, or at least have complete public oversight and transparency of internal affairs. Giving them more cash will only perpetuate our problem.
I do want to clarify that I do. Support transit, and would be happy to pay for projects and increased tax should. The company be turned over to the public with the proper oversight.
I'm all for translink and all the convenience of the skytrain and buses for those who do not own a vehicle. But over the years a lot of money has gone missing and the service has not gotten any better. If the Taxes get raised Tokar brings a really good point. people love saving that buck, and if the taxes go up then the location of the cheaper stuff moves on, and thus bringing its customers further away from those so called new BCtranslink features.
That's why im voting no, i rely on the transit as a big part to get to my job yet i do not trust them one bit with anything. could be im stuck on the 4billion that went missing, or all the suicidal jumpers over the years : l until transit can fix the money missing and the security my vote will always be a no.
i have a few more things that could also be said as to why im voting no but those are the main ones.
*hangs head in shame* if only i had all these good incites before. you have all had such good opinions and points of view. i should have waited and really thought things over before i jumped on the hype train. we had until may, lol. anyways, there are still so many envelopes coming in every day so i am hoping all of those are making informed decisions. i of all people should know that when someone pressures you, it is most likely because they know if you have time to think about it, you will make the right choice instead or "their" choice. the suzuki thing was very interesting though, but still so many other reasons to consider, the foremost to me being about transparency. lets hope this helps others as well to see the things i did not, and that we can hopefully do something in the long run about translink and what they do with our money.
as for public and private. when they are public they tend to be transparent but the government is certainly not the most efficient business and we all know that. it is usually when they privatize things that they become more efficient because then it is a business and business dont like to waste money. the toss up then becomes the transparency again. north america is particularly bad with this stuff... oh, i can feel a rant coming on so i will just stop there with that subject.
i really just want progress, but it seems to never be a win-win situation. such a shame. working at the post office, i see the stereotype people have about canada post, and it hurts to see that. people dont seem to be informed about that company at all. i always just hear complaints but no advice, or advice that is plausible and not based on assumptions. if anyone is interested in that topic, feel free to ask. it is actually a good contrast to translink and how people see things differently from what they really are.
has anyone been getting calls about voting? why are they coming from the states. they want us to pledge our votes and our money but they are going to outsource the survey call, to america of all places? i was not impressed.
: tokar March 28, 2015, 07:25:53 -06:00
Something many are forgetting. With .05% extra sales tax, many small businesses in Langley will got out of business. Why? Because people will travel further to save the tax. With no customers they can't pay rent so they close.
Say NO to translink.
You know, Tokes, I am amazed there are any gas stations left in Langley east of 232nd. when all people have to do is drive, what, another 15 minutes to be outside the GVRD to skip about 13-15 cents / litre of GVRD absurdity taxes. This will only get worse with a further tax bump included.
: Teagir April 22, 2015, 09:18:15 -06:00
has anyone been getting calls about voting? why are they coming from the states. they want us to pledge our votes and our money but they are going to outsource the survey call, to america of all places? i was not impressed.
I haven't. The most I get is chased down by the people with their smiling faces and their clipboards at bus loops asking me to vote yes. lol
: Pharaoh March 31, 2015, 10:18:33 -06:00
I'm all for translink and all the convenience of the skytrain and buses for those who do not own a vehicle. But over the years a lot of money has gone missing and the service has not gotten any better. If the Taxes get raised Tokar brings a really good point. people love saving that buck, and if the taxes go up then the location of the cheaper stuff moves on, and thus bringing its customers further away from those so called new BCtranslink features.
That's why im voting no, i rely on the transit as a big part to get to my job yet i do not trust them one bit with anything. could be im stuck on the 4billion that went missing, or all the suicidal jumpers over the years : l until transit can fix the money missing and the security my vote will always be a no.
i have a few more things that could also be said as to why im voting no but those are the main ones.
I have to agree there, and I drive. I am all for seeing improvements to our transit system, but I cannot justify giving them more money with how money is already managed there. Iv seen way too much wasted already. Another issue I have is raising the provincial sales tax, just for this. That's a pretty heavy duty change to make there. Its going to cost everyone more, including those who financially struggle (your increasing sales tax, no one is exempt from this...).
Think about this and then go vote NO!
Regardless of the result they will still do all those improvements anyway. The world WILL NOT END if the NO side wins!
The amount of money and effort spent pushing for support of the YES side along with the "kittens and rainbows" messaging means there is something really wrong to find if you dig into the details enough.
A NO side win will just mean they have to find a different funding mechanism. Then again, because it is NON-BINDING, they might still go ahead with the tax anyway and then have to face angry voters. The main reason why it is being done as a plebiscite is so that if the YES side wins they can insulate themselves by BLAMING the voters when everyone finds out how much they are getting gouged when it is implemented. I suspect that the implementation of a new tax would be delayed until after an election.
They should instead do small increase in local taxes from more than just one source (gas taxes, property taxes, fare increases). Also they can reduce costs by increasing the service life of transit vehicles a bit instead of rushing to buy lots of new ones.
Voting NO does not mean you are voting against the proposed "improvements", it only means you are saying NO to a new tax!
Even though transit fares are relatively cheap, it does cost you a lot more than you think! >:(
I voted No. Yaaaaaaaaaaaay
I voted no because with the fare increases it is now cheaper for me to drive across the city than it is to take the bus or sky train. The increase in the fare should have supported everything. They also made some stupid points to the tax increase, such as it will go to fund the petello bridge being rebuilt; they're just going to put a toll on the bridge like all the others so why should we pay more in taxes for it too?
Yesterday after hearing that they need to upgrade that rubbish bridge, I am even more glad I voted NO. Completely poor planning on their part, as that thing should have been replaced by now. If it was planned properly and completed today, we wouldn't be needing to waste $100 million extra on upgrading an old bridge... that is slated for replacement soon.