LRT

Saturday September 17, 2022

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday September 17, 2022

Beyond LRT and How to pay for it and Transit

For the first election in years, “LRT is not the central issue,” said Karl Andrus of the Hamilton Transit Riders’ Union. “I’m elated to see conversations about transit moving beyond just ‘yes or no’ to LRT.”

August 22, 2012

That’s a big change from elections in 2014 and 2018 — both of which featured serious candidates campaigning to kill the 14-kilometre light-rail transit plan for the lower city in favour of building bus rapid transit.

The city’s transit union still wants to make an election issue out of LRT — particularly, over whether the city will operate the train instead of a private consortium like the one running the LRT in Kitchener-Waterloo, said vice-president Rob Doucette. “We want to hear specifically if (candidates) will commit to keep public transit in public hands.”

But unlike in past elections, no major mayoral candidate is openly campaigning against LRT — likely in part due to $3.4-billion in new federal and provincial funding for the project. Major construction is supposed to start by 2024.

That means candidates can “move beyond” the yes or no LRT question to explaining to voters how they would make the entire transit system better for residents, said Andrus.

He said that includes expanding bus service to underserved suburban communities like Binbrook, Waterdown and Stoney Creek — and finally moving ahead on a nearly 15-year-old “BLAST” rapid transit vision for the rest of the city.

May 12, 2012

The grassroots riders’ union argues all those improvements require an overhaul of Hamilton’s “bizarre” system of taxing different areas of the city more or less for transit. That debate over ending so-called “area rating” of transit could prove just as controversial as past LRT battles, Andrus conceded.

“In the mayor’s race, everyone has kind of run away from that issue,” he suggested.

“Area rating” of taxes sounds like a boring bureaucratic argument — but the question of how and who Hamilton taxes for bus service can really fire up political debate (and taxpayer ire).

A short summary of a two-decade argument: When Hamilton amalgamated suburban communities like Ancaster, Binbrook, Waterdown, Dundas and Stoney Creek in 2001, it created different tax rates for transit based on level of service and old geographical boundaries.

Meant as a temporary measure, the geography-based tax rates never disappeared — leaving Hamilton as the only large Ontario city where urban residents pay different rates for transit depending on where they live.

August 14, 2014

So in 2019, for example, the average old-city homeowner paid about $389 a year for transit compared to $184 for the urban parts of Ancaster, $201 for Glanbrook and $137 in Stoney Creek. Rural residents pay no taxes for transit.

Forcing all urban residents across Hamilton to pay the same transit tax rate should result in a tax cut for the old city and a hike of between two and four per cent in former amalgamated communities.

But Andrus suggests the city could skip the old-city tax cut, with extra money raised “plowed directly back into improving transit” in poorly served areas.

Otherwise, he argued the current system makes it difficult to expand transit to where it is needed — and unfair to old-city residents who shoulder the brunt of HSR budget increases.

It’s the kind of conundrum that has split council along urban-suburban lines in the past — with retiring Ancaster councillor Lloyd Ferguson, for example, at one point threatening to withdraw his support for LRT if council changed transit taxes in a way that hurt his ward residents.

Where do the Mayoral candidates stand? Keanin Loomis: Proposes phasing out area-rated transit taxes “over time,” in tandem with plans for expanded service;  Andrea Horwath: Says transit must expand to all suburban communities but says any changes to area-rated taxes must happen in tandem with improved service. Has not suggested a timeline for changes; Bob Bratina: Calls ending area-rated transit a “tax grab” but wants to experiment with alternative transit like on-demand service in suburbs. (The Hamilton Spectator) 

 

Saturday June 11, 2022

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday June 11, 2022

A toast to bad roads and integrity

Today, a little positivity seems in order. And so, two tips of the proverbial chapeau.

February 13, 2015

First, to the Canadian Automobile Association, which just released its annual worst roads in Ontario report. Not because Hamilton gets top billing, as home of the worst road in the province — Barton Street East. And not because the report also has a regional component which tells us the worst roads in Hamilton are Barton East, Aberdeen Avenue, Burlington Street East, Upper James and Rymal Road East.

Anyone who drives the city will confirm that these are among the worst, although there are just so many to choose from.

May 19, 2021

No, we raise a glass to the CAA because its annual report is so useful in many ways. It keeps the state of our roads on the public and government radar. It is holistic in the sense that it doesn’t just ask drivers to vote, it includes pedestrian and cyclists. Too often city streets are judged too much on the whims of motorists, when those arteries are so much more.

The CAA’s report is also a good reality check. You don’t have to look far to find a Hamiltonian who will swear that this city’s roads are simply the worst anywhere. No doubt it seems that way sometimes, but the report’s wide lens confirms that road conditions are terrible in many if not most Ontario cities. Toronto and Prince Edward County are other municipalities that made the worst-of-the-worst list again this year.

March 30, 2022

The truth is that nearly all Ontario cities, especially the older ones like Hamilton, have brutal infrastructure deficits, and roads figure prominently. Municipal governments, ours included, are always running behind trying to keep up. Using the Barton Street example, city hall has plans to spend $7.5 million over the next two years on Barton area streets and sidewalks. By the time that is done, there will be another street on the worst-of list, and more competing demands for money and resource time to fix them.

Not to let city hall off the hook entirely, but it’s worth bearing in mind that our worst roads are often in the industrial heartland of the city, where heavy truck traffic takes its toll more than where traffic is largely residential and commercial. Upper James may be an exception to a point, although it too carries its share of heavy truck traffic across the top of the city to downtown.

A final note: We also love the CAA roads report because it never fails to generate lots of reader comments and letters. We can’t get too many of those, so thanks CAA. See you next year. (Hamilton Spectator Editorial) 

L E T T E R  to the  E D I T O R

Letter to the Editor, The Hamilton Spectator, June 16, 2022

Hamilton’s future

Letter to the Editor, The Hamilton Spectator, June 16, 2022

I am very disappointed in both The Spectator for printing Graeme MacKay’s Saturday editorial cartoon and in Mr. MacKay for creating it. First, to The Spectator — Hamilton is actually part of your newspaper’s name. Too bad you do not accurately promote the city.

But mostly my disappointment is with Mr. MacKay whom I thought would have better knowledge of the LRT project which is such a vital part of Hamilton’s future. I’m pretty sure he actually lives in the area and should be better informed.

The many misinformed who are anti-LRT never did get the fact that a very vital part of the LRT construction is to repair aging infrastructure along the LRT route. These repairs and the LRT project overall will take the city into a much better future. And the monetary value of LRT (business, taxes, etc.) will take care of some potholes, too.

Jane Slote, Hamilton

 

Wednesday May 19, 2021

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday May 19, 2021

Liberal MP Bob Bratina sticks to his guns on LRT

Give Hamilton East-Stoney Creek Liberal MP Bob Bratina this much: When it comes to LRT, at least, he’s a politician of conviction. 

This week Bratina announced he will not seek re-election, because he disagrees with his government’s decision to invest $1.4 billion in light rail transit in Hamilton. 

“I just can’t defend it,” Bratina said in an interview with The Spec’s Matthew Van Dongen this week. “They are saying this is a good project for Hamilton but I know in my heart it is not … I don’t know how I could continue as a member of the governing party.”

In his own party, Bratina’s opinion is an outlier. Infrastructure Minister and Hamilton native Catherine McKenna, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Labour Minister Filomena Tassi, who also represents Hamilton-West-Ancaster-Dundas, all support the project. Tassi reportedly cheered during the announcement.

Hamilton’s other high-profile political voice, Ontario NDP leader Andrea Horwath, and her party, also support LRT. So do other local MPs and MPPs, although it’s not clear where Conservative MP David Sweet stands — he, too, is not running again.

July 22, 2011

No doubt the decision is hard to swallow for Bratina. He has long opposed light rail in this city, and tried to derail it repeatedly when he was on council and then in the mayor’s office. To rub salt in the wound, Bratina says he was not consulted about the agreement between the federal government and the provincial government, and that his concerns about “affordability” were totally ignored.

So be it. Bratina is at least consistent in his opposition, and he cannot be accused of hypocrisy on this file. No doubt the Liberals will find another strong candidate to compete in the riding, and the NDP has also been historically competitive there.

To digress with a bit of political gossip, there is a juicy rumour circulating that Bratina plans another run for mayor in the next municipal election coming in 2022. Bratina won’t rule that out, but says he is focusing on his job as MP for the remainder of his federal term. He referred to the rumour as “speculation.”

The plot, if he does run, looks like this. Anti-LRT Hamilton councillors successfully push for the matter to be deferred to a referendum question on the next ballot, and we could see incumbent Fred Eisenberger running on a pro-LRT ticket while Bratina runs on an anti-LRT platform as Eisenberger challenger Vito Sgro did last election. 

May 29, 2013

It’s good political drama, but unlikely to unfold that way. Bratina may well seek another term as mayor, and he could possibly win. But Ottawa and the provincial government have been clear that this $3.4-billion LRT investment is for LRT only, and they want an answer sooner rather than later so the thousands of jobs generated during construction could serve as a post-pandemic jobs recovery project. That doesn’t work if shovels aren’t in the ground until after the local election in the fall of 2022.

All the smart money says if the project is delayed that long the provincial and federal investment will be off the table. That would mean the end of LRT, and also that local taxpayers would be footing the bill for infrastructure investments (underground services and the like) along what would have been the route.

That won’t stop anti-LRT councillors and others from trying to stall or outright kill the project. Which raises an interesting question: Where is Progressive Conservative MPP Donna Skelly in all this? She has always been strongly anti-LRT, but her government now supports the project. The Spectator reached out to Skelly for comment on the matter, but she has yet to respond. Her response will be interesting. (Hamilton Spectator) 

 

Thursday April 16, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday April 16, 2020

LRT versus BRT showdown coming to Hamilton

Thanks to the provincially appointed transportation task force, it appears we’re heading into a final showdown over whether LRT or BRT is the best rapid transit system for Hamilton.

February 1, 2020

The task force, formed after the Doug Ford government killed the planned LRT project, says the province and its transportation agency Metrolinx should now consider both systems equally and analyze which best deserves the $1 billion in capital funding that was originally earmarked for light rail.

If neither are feasible, the task force suggests plowing the money into two-way, all-day GO rail service to Hamilton.

If nothing else, there’s a kind of poetic if rough justice in all this. 

There’s always been a strong sense among light rail opponents that the bus rapid transit option was previously given short shrift by both Metrolinx and city staff.

Certainly the city’s 2008 rapid transit feasibility study discussed both systems. But Metrolinx’s 2010 case-benefit analysis basically sidelined the BRT option by concluding LRT delivered the highest economic development bang for the buck.

The problem was that a lot of Hamiltonians felt — and still feel — that the pros and cons of both systems were never fairly compared and publicly debated.

That was supposed to happen after the 2014 municipal election. It didn’t. You may recall that back then Fred Eisenberger ran for mayor on a platform that included a promise to create a citizens’ panel to study all rapid transit options and make a recommendation to council.

Coronavirus cartoons

Instead, brief months after he was elected, Eisenberger hotfooted it to Queen’s Park for private meetings with then-premier Kathleen Wynne and transport minister Steven Del Duca, at which he successfully secured provincial dollars for LRT.

In May of 2015, Wynne came to town to announce the province was providing $1 billion in capital funding. Eisenberger’s proposed citizens’ panel was reduced to window dressing. BRT supporters were suddenly marooned.

It’s been anything but smooth sailing for LRT supporters since then, of course. But no matter how controversial the issue, no matter how many stops, starts and delays the project has experienced, LRT has been the only option on the table.

Until Ford came along, that is. 

During the 2018 provincial election, Ford threw things into a tizzy by offering to let Hamilton council spend the $1 billion on other transit and infrastructure projects. It’s often forgotten, but in the heat of that election New Democrat leader and Hamilton MPP Andrea Horwath said an NDP government would also give council the option to spend the money on other transit projects.

Neither the mayor nor council seriously pursued the offer after Ford was elected. A few months later, it was taken out of their hands. The province cancelled the project because of projected cost overruns and then created the task force.

So now BRT is back on the menu as a main course not just a rejected entree.

Briefly, the task force suggests the BRT option could follow both the B-Line corridor from McMaster to Eastgate and the north-south A-Line corridor from the waterfront to the airport. Recommendations include fully dedicated bus lanes and platform boarding.

For LRT, the task force suggests if there is insufficient funding for the Mac to Eastgate route, phasing should be explored, and the province should look to Ottawa and city council for extra funding.

It’s not clear, of course, how the COVID-19 pandemic will impact the recommendation that, regardless which system wins out, the contract should be awarded or construction begin within two years.

It’s also not clear if or how COVID-19 will impact the social patterns and policy assumptions that sustain rapid transit systems.

Frankly, it’s an open question whether urban intensification, highrise living and the growth of public transit will be as appealing in a post-COVID world leery of future virus lockdowns, compared to the lure of backyards and the self-isolation of cars. (Hamilton Spectator) 

 

Saturday February 1, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday February 1, 2020

Hamilton transit task force secrecy is an embarrassment

Hamilton LRT Gallery

Whichever side of the Light Rail Transit debate you stand on, you should not be happy or satisfied by the Ford government’s decision to have its transit task force operate behind closed doors. In secret. With no transparency, and no opportunity for the public (or its proxy, the media) to observe the task force at work.

This task force was thrown together by Transportation Minister Caroline Mulroney after the province abruptly cancelled Hamilton’s long-planned LRT line, right in the middle of construction bidding.

The purpose of the task force appears to be to lend the optics of objectivity to the process. It’s widely recognized that the math used by the province to justify the decision is fake, and any real cost overruns wouldn’t be out of line with overruns on other similar transit projects that are going ahead, while Hamilton’s got summarily cancelled.

It’s more than a bit odd to have a hand-picked group of non-elected citizens put in place to make decisions on the best future options for public transit in the city. Isn’t that what we have a local government for? That government had a position, which was LRT. So what the province is doing now is putting the opinions of its task force above the stated position of the local government. But never mind. Fair enough. If the task force does a credible job, it will be a worthwhile endeavour.

January 12, 2012

But how will anyone know if it does a credible job given that it is operating in secret? This is absolutely no reflection on the members of the task force. They seem earnest and no doubt trying to do the thing in the public interest. The lack of transparency isn’t their fault, but it’s fair to say their work will be judged differently than if it was taking place in relative sunlight.

Part of what rankles here is the justification for the secrecy. To be fair, this is a government that typically wouldn’t offer any justification for its arbitrary decisions, but in this case, at least a civil servant agreed to address the question of why the task force meetings — there have already been two — must be behind closed doors.

The meetings must remain secret, according to the province, to protect ” commercially sensitive” information like cost estimates, procurement matters or past budgets. Also, the province says, the secrecy will give task force members the freedom to have “open discussion” about prospective options so there is not “a public debate on every single project they may be looking at.”

October 7, 2016

Respectfully, that is an absolutely terrible rationale for shutting out the public and media. City councils and committees regularly go in camera to discuss issues that are legally or financially sensitive. There are provisions for that. To suggest that all the deliberations of the task force should be secret for that reason is — sorry to be blunt — silly.

And to allow task force members to speak freely? They can’t do that in a public forum, like city council does? Like the Ontario legislature does? Is the government really saying that only secrecy can allow for forthright discussion and debate? And does consciously setting out to limit “public debate” a good thing? Is that the sort of democracy the Ford government wants for Ontario?

But don’t worry. The agendas for task force meetings will be made public. After the fact. And the things discussed will eventually be summarized for public consumption.

So calm down and don’t fret. The government knows what’s best for you. Just sit back and relax. All will be known in the fullness of time. You can trust Doug Ford and friends, right? (Hamilton Spectator Editorial)