Any day now
you'll find the referendum ballot in your mail box and you'll finally have your
say. Now before you angrily mark a "no" on your ballot, please
reflect on what it is that you're voting on.
I must
admit, I'm just as mad as anyone else who doesn't agree with the way this whole
thing has been set up. But I do feel that the only right thing to do for Metro
Vancouver - including Pitt Meadows and Maple Ridge - is to seriously start
investing in transit, walking and cycling to work towards a better, more
sustainable transportation system that works for all, and a more livable region
for future generations. Therefore I can only vote 'yes', while cursing under my
breath.
There's no
space provided for comments, unfortunately. We're not being asked if we're okay
with the excessive salaries of Translink executives, or if we have a problem
with the governance structure of Translink (set up by the provincial government
by the way).
Maybe you
want to vote 'no' because you feel that there's not enough in it for Maple
Ridge or Pitt Meadows, another very valid concern. Or you just don't trust
Translink to deliver on its promises.
They're not
enquiring if perhaps we're angry about the cost over-runs and continuing delays
of the Compass Card (a system mandated by the provincial government by the
way), or if we're upset at all with the provincial government for putting us in
this position.
There are
many possible reasons why people might consider voting 'no'.
It is
totally understandable that Mayor Read intends to vote 'no'. As a mayor, she
has the responsibility but lacks the authority. The flawed governance structure
of Translink will need to be addressed.
Judging from
the discussions I hear and read, a lot of people don't seem to know what the actual
question is. So here it is once again:
"Do you
support a one half percentage point (0.5%) increase in the provincial sales tax
in Metro Vancouver, dedicated to the Mayors' Transportation and Transit Plan,
with independent audits and public reporting?"
What it basically
comes down to, is that with our vote we will be giving a message as to the
direction that we want the region as a whole to take. How do we want to live?
Consider the
likely consequences of a ‘no’ vote. No level of government would have any
appetite to touch this subject in the next 5 to 10 years at a minimum. The
proposed infrastructure improvements will be put on hold, while more people and
cars move to the region and communities continue to sprawl out adding more traffic
to the already congested arteries. We can continue to complain about the
inefficient bureauracies, and, as some of us would have it, get to kick out a
bunch of inefficient bureaucrats, only to replace them with another bunch of inefficient
bureaucrats. In the end, everyone who moves will lose.
A 'yes' vote
means that we're all going to contribute to the promised improvements by paying
more taxes. More people will be able to choose transit, cycling or walking more
often. It will also mean less congestion than without the improvements.
Everyone who moves will win, but some (sometimes a lot) more than others.
If we vote
yes, Translink promises that we will finally be getting our long awaited B-line
bus in three to five years, and there will be expansion of service to Albion
and Silver Valley. We'll get increased West Coast Express service. Improved
transit will help support and encourage the needed densification in our
downtown and along transportation corridors. Improved transit elsewhere in
Metro Vancouver also helps drivers who need to commute farther afield by
relieving the congestion there.
With a 'yes'
vote, the investments in cycling by Translink are going to increase from the
current $1.55 million (less than $1 per resident, or about 0.1% of Translink's
annual spending) to $12 million a year, which will put the region on track to
implement the Regional Cycling Strategy within the 20-year time frame.
Cycling
improvements in Maple Ridge will consist of various cycling projects listed in
the Maple Ridge Transportation Plan, approved by the previous Council (and
hopefully to be amended by the present one).
What will
be, will be. The BC government has chosen to hold this extremely risky
referendum, downloading the responsibility for what happens on us voters by
giving us a choice of two options neither of which we can agree with.
It is
extremely difficult to ask someone to boil down a complex set of questions to a
simple yes or no answer. Does the good outweigh the bad? Amidst the opposing
voices against Translink and taxation in general, all of which are legitimate,
the transportation vision for the region gets buried. Hopefully, we will
separate the ‘what’ (transportation improvements) from the ‘who’ (Translink
governance). Voting yes would at least settle the ‘what’ so the region can move
forward with the vision while different governments and the voters can then
tackle the issue of Translink governance. Voting no, on the other hand, puts
both the ‘what’ and ‘who’ in a deep freeze, guaranteeing more of the same plus
more congestion to boot.
The lesser
of two evils tells me to hold my nose and vote yes.
By Jackie Chow, member
of the Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows chapter of HUB, with contributions from Ivan
Chow, Chair.
