The budget’s proposed transit fare increases will hurt the youngest and oldest riders. That’s short-sighted when there are other solutions available.
Wednesday’s draft budget wasn’t too surprising, with Mayor Mark Sutcliffe by and large sticking to his election-campaign promise to keep property tax increases as low as possible — in this case 3.9 per cent, up from the 2.5 per cent he managed for each of the last two years.
About one-quarter of the proposed increase for 2025 comes from an eight per cent jump in the transit levy, as the city wrestles with a public transit problem that is a financial and operational nightmare — a sinkhole for both taxpayers’ dollars and their dreams of reliable, affordable transit.
Yet despite an increase in spending of $88 million, to almost $856 million, the proposed transit budget will specifically hurt the young, in whom we should be instilling a public transit culture, and older people, many of whom may not be able to afford or comfortably absorb the coming fare hikes.
Just as an example, if the budget is approved as is, 11- and 12-year-olds will no longer ride the rails for free; a $2 fare will be imposed.
This is disappointing. According to Simon Fraser University’s 2021 Youth and Public Transit study, which examined a decade’s worth of research and data, the cost of transit is routinely cited as a key barrier to young people’s use of public transportation. Other studies cited in the report, although not all, suggest that youths who use public transit are more likely than those who don’t to continue taking it into adulthood.
The budget is no kinder to seniors, who will be tagged an extra 30 cents per journey, a 10-per-cent jump, with single-ride fares expected to rise from $2.90 to $3.20.
And those purchasing monthly seniors’ passes will be even harder hit, with a proposed hike that more than doubles the cost — from $49 to $108.
Evening Update
Raising fares before providing reliable service isn’t going to increase ridership among these groups.
Sutcliffe said that this “adjustment” to fare discounts was made to “bring them in line with those in other cities.” But if being in line with other cities is so important, why are Ottawa’s regular transit fares already higher than those in Toronto, Montreal, Calgary, Edmonton and Vancouver, a gap that will only further widen if these increases come to pass?
Sutcliffe has also swatted away suggestions that the city raise taxes higher, as Toronto and other municipalities have recently done.
The mayor has other options.
A 200+ page report released this year, titled “This is the End of the Line: Reconstructing Transit Operating Funding in Canada,” looked at public transit in eight Canadian cities, including Ottawa, and recommended solutions to help ease the trials of each. For Ottawa, it suggested a vehicle levy, whereby an extra fee is charged by the province on vehicle registration and renewal, then directed to the city. This would not only encourage public transit use and active transportation, but also help the city reach its green goals.
“However,” the report notes, “Vehicle Levies would come with considerable political risk in Ottawa as they require enabling legislation from the Province, which recently removed vehicle registration fees.”
It’s unfortunate that Sutcliffe is averse to political risk. So is Premier Doug Ford, particularly with a potential spring provincial election approaching. But it’s still an interesting idea.
A vehicle levy or other creative measure would ease some pressure on the 2025 transit budget, which contains the supposition that the feds and province will kick in $36 million just because it’s the right thing to do, and that ridership will account for $63 million more in fares next year than is expected this year. Even with increased fares, that’s a lot of seniors’ passes.
Instead, we’ll could all be left at the platform — particularly younger and older travellers — waiting for a phantom train.
