|
| quote: | Originally posted by smuncky
seems like jay wants to ignore this. any other ford supports want to explain this to me? |
some more in today's Star:
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/tor...etropasses?bn=1
| quote: | NOTE: A previously published version of this column stated that one free Metropass goes to the chief executive of Metrolinx, the regional transit authority. In fact, neither the CEO or chair of Metrolinx received a free pass. This pass went to a Metrolinx board member. This pass has now been cancelled at Metrolinx’s request.
Contrary to popular perception, mayoral contender Rob Ford often gets his numbers right. The problem is that he doesn’t tell voters the whole story.
Take the eye-popping 21,000 free Metropasses he cites as proof taxpayers’ dollars are being wasted. Ford says the Transit Commission doles them out to the mayor, city councillors, municipal employees and other favoured individuals.
He is right. There really are that many — 21,882 to be precise.
But axing these “perks” won’t save the city millions of dollars, as he claims. Here is why:
• More than half of the passes — 13,000 — are provided to TTC workers so they can do their jobs. Cleaners use them to move from station to station. Repair crews use them to get to trouble spots. Bus drivers use them to get back from the suburbs at the end of their shift.
Eliminate these Metropasses and the TTC would have to compensate its employees for paying out of their own pockets to perform their duties.
• Another 4,700 passes go to TTC pensioners with at least 10 years service. Depriving retirees of this benefit would violate the arbitrated settlement imposed on the transit authority and the Amalgamated Transit Union last year.
• The next largest chunk — 3,700 — goes to the Canadian National Institute for the Blind (CNIB) to provide to its clients. Most Torontonians wouldn’t consider these “perks.”
• A significant number — 400 — are temporarily issued to contractors working for the TTC: engineers, draftsmen, construction workers, elevator installers and the like. Without passes, they’d have to pay the normal fare, then file expense claims.
• A small number of free passes — 45 — go to the mayor and city council. They’re considered a taxable benefit.
• Eighteen Metropasses are provided to war amputees.
• Another 18 go to the members of the city’s advisory committee on accessible transit, a group of individuals with various disabilities that identifies barriers in the system and gaps in the TTC’s services.
• And one goes to a board member of Metrolinx, the regional transit authority.
All told, these Metropasses are worth $31.8 million. But anyone who believes Ford could recoup that amount — or close to it — is in for a disappointment.
He might be able to force the TTC to stop providing passes to its employees, but the commission would still have to cover their work-related expenses.
He could compel the transit authority to break faith with pensioners, but that would trigger a host of grievances, resulting in slow and unreliable service.
He could cancel his own and his fellow politicians’ Metropasses if he had sufficient support on city council. But that would yield just $65,000.
And if he were callous enough, he could abrogate TTC’s long-standing arrangements with the CNIB and the War Amps.
There may well be too many free transit passes in circulation. But scrapping them won’t be easy or cheap.
Most of Ford’s retrenchment plans fade under scrutiny.
Chopping city council from 44 to 22 members would save $15 million a year on paper. In reality, those gains wouldn’t come in Ford’s four-year mayoral term. Assuming he could persuade 22 councillors to axe their jobs and win provincial approval, the payback would come after the 2014 municipal election.
Eliminating councillors’ freebies — zoo passes, Exhibition passes, golfing passes and parking passes — might feel good. But it wouldn’t put much cash in city coffers.
Ford’s proposals to cut the municipal payroll through attrition and trim operating costs are too vague to judge.
He is right that Toronto is living beyond its means. He is right that some city officials have an infuriating sense of entitlement. And he is right that voters are fed up.
But he doesn’t appear to have a workable solution. |
|
