Raise the Hammer

it's official. Hamilton's political nonsense flows much deeper than the mayor's office. I stupidly thought that getting a mayor in there not paid off by anyone would bring real change. Obviously he has no more control over the deadbeats that run the hall than you or I. If they insist on this area rating system, I'm sure the 40% of downtown residents who don't own a car would love to opt out of Hamilton's never-ending spending spree on roads and highways. Let's make area rating fair for everyone, not just the suburban rich. I really don't know what else to say. Is it 2007 or 1960??
Gazing out my window at York Blvd brings my answer - 1960.

Congratulations Indeed. OTher cities are growing ridership by 3% a year and we're kicking people off as fast as we can. Yay smog!

I'm mpretty sure we can guess the jackals that voted for the fare hike. My money is on Ferguson, Mitchell, Pearson, Collins, Jackson, Clark, McCarthy, Powers, and maybe Pasuta. Between not wanting their constituents to pay their share of the cost of transit and having a good old fashioned hate-on for the public weal, they'd love nothing more than to wrap downtown in a hefty bag and truck it to a landfill in Michigan.

I hope you've got your nose filters in place, Maria and Dave and Lloyd. You're going to need them when you come downtown for summer council sessions.

This council is so pathetic.

Its official: only four months into a four year term, we have a lame-duck, do-nothing council. Is it too much to ask that the people running a city should have the first. Freaking. Clue. About how a city works? Well is it?

This is absolutely unacceptable. There was no support for this hike among Hamiltonians. I read through the It's Your Future survey results and I was amazed by the number of people who mentioned public transit as a top priority for the city. Not just public transit: AFFORDABLE, efficient public transit.

I think it is important that we get the names of the councilors who voted in favour of the hike (rather than guess, although I'm interested to see how nobrainer's prediction turns out). These councilors have already, by their actions, shown they aren't accountable to what Hamiltonians want. But I'd like to hear them try and justify themselves anyways.

There is no doubt that public transit is one of Hamilton's biggest challenges. There is no doubt that excellent, affordable public transit is a hallmark of every successful city. And that means that this decision, which city planners admit will diminish ridership, makes this a sad day for Hamilton.

I usually have no use for the grandstanding behaviour of Councilor Merulla, but today I'm proud to hear that he fought hard for Hamilton's economy, environment, seniors, students, workers and businesses that rely on public transit everyday. More on his fiesty behaviour can be read on

www.hallmarks.thespec.com

wow...I'm surprised at that list. not sure what happened to McHattie and Bratina. they could have tipped it the other way.

The area assessment rating was to appease the suburban vote when Hamilton couldn't get together with the other small towns and forge a future together, so the solution was imposed.

Instead of huge economies of scale savings as the legislation foretold we continue have these bone-headed NIMBY ideological decisions made by certain councilors to "look good" for their constituency's instead of the whole cloth, the fabric of our community.

It's as self-serving as it get's for Hamilton Councilors, unto each his own.

And abolishing this lop-sided accounting of the tax rolls is the right time now that property assessments by MPAC and the Province are suspended.

That way the ones not paying their fair share will only have to make up the shortfall ($5 million) in "social services" for this year and inject some capital expenditures into our flagging public transportation services.

A one-time adjustment like the LSR of amalgamation dulled by Dalton McGuinty freezing our property taxes. And if he is ousted in October, John Tory will cap assessment at no more than 5% per year while reforming MPAC.

So if area rating was abolished tomorrow, under-taxed suburban Hamiltonians will not be hit with outragious property tax bills while at the same time paying their fair share equally, like the rest of us that have been doing by subsidizing their area rating since Amalgamation.

Time to even the playing field, once and for all. Our future depends on it.

Holy shit, I just felt the world lurch on its axis - I actually agree with Markwhittle on this!

I think I do too, although I don't understand half of it. he's right though - area rating has to go. it's ridiculous.

I can't believe Bratina and McHattie voted for the increase. I thought they 'got it'!

There's more guys.

Hamilton has the same set of "new" taxing powers that the City of Toronto has.

Why aren't they using then to raise their own loot instead of begging the Provice for more of their cut.After all, there is only one tax-payer.

I have an idea. Since council's afraid to take on area-rating, let's start area-rating roads too! I live downtown and don't expect to use the RHVE, so they can area rate that. Let people in Glanbrook and the Crick pay for it. It's only fair, right?

I don't want to read one more word about what an enlightened guy the Mayor is. He's a spineless hypocrite. Supports airport expansion and increased transit fares -thanks Fred

King James - Mayor Fred's pretty wimpy, but how does he support airport expansion? When Hemson made their crap presentation to council on opening up the airport lands, he wouldn't accept their recommendations and ordered staff to go back and come up with some alternate scenarios.

I think we need to look at the bigger picture here folks. Transit is not a low income transportation program, it is a piece of infrastructure needed by any modern city, and as such it needs to be properly maintained. The city has delayed increasing fares for many years now by using gas tax money. This is not what the gas tax was for - it was for expanding transit systems. What is the use of keeping fares low if, at the end of the day, there are more and more people left standing at bus stops because there isn't enough buses to meet demand. Even after this increase, Hamilton has, and will continue to have, one of the lowest fares in the country.

As an aside, if you have guys like Eisenberger, McHattie, and Bratina, all voting for the fare increase, and Merulla, Collins, and Morelli voting against, there is more to this issue than a simple yes or no proposition.

Good point holdon, but transit in Hamilton is structurally underfunded. Jacking up fares when they already pay for 57% of the total cost (in most cities it's around 50%) is dumping too much of the burden on riders. Especially when people living in rich suburbs don't pay anything at all towards supporting transit. That's crap, and as the article states hamilton is the ONLY city to do this.

There was a great article on RTH a week or two ago about how to pay for better transit service without gouging the poor. Damn spam filter won't let me post the link but if you go into the address bar and change the blog_id from 547 to 531 it's there.

Expanding-

The motion to acquire new lands for the airport was defeat at council (or committee?) but Eisenberger voted in favour. He's trying to endear himself to the same people he promised to stand up to.

I don't have a problem with fare increase, I get a receipt for it and I can take it off my income tax in which I'll get a refund on. I'm on disability and it's a non-issue

Other cities that have crappier bus service than Hamilton charge more for the service - so what's the problem?

I agree with holdon. Guys like Bratina and McHattie wouldn't make such a choice lightly. I would like to know their thinking before making too many assumptions about their characters, or supposed 'agendas'. Also, I don't think it's fair to call Eisenberger a wimp just because he's not a frothing lunatic like Merulla. Frankly, Merulla's behaviour would have been out of line in a bar, let alone council chambers. Name calling and threats are the rhetorical tools of the witless. I fail to see how his behaviour does any good for the disenfranchised constituents he claims to serve.

Marlene - if the feds really wanted to help transit, they would have given the money right to the transit authorities to lower fares. Giving you a tax credit is nice, but it's vote buying, not good policy. If you're too poor, you don't even qualify for the tax credit!

Highwater - just because Merulla's an asshat at council doesn't mean it's wrong to agree with him on the fares. He's right - the increase is going to hurt his constituents, and I sure hope Bratina changes his mind since his constituents are in the same boat.

There's a whole bunch of territory between Merulla going grand mal seizure and Fred going catatonic that I wish these damn councillors would visit some time. Hamilton politics sucks.

Thanks for that Adrian and Ryan.

Nobrainer, I wasn't questioning Merulla's position, just his behaviour. His heart may be in the right place, but his behaviour undermines his credibility and sows division, which hurts his ability to work on behalf of his constituents. You're right that there's a healthy middle ground somewhere, maybe it moved to Toronto.

Just read the blog on Bratina's vote. It's a perfect example of how Merulla's behaviour harmed his constituents. Of course it wasn't rational of Bratina to base his vote on Merulla's behaviour, but then people don't always react rationally to being verbally abused. Which is why, if you truly want to serve your constituents, it's a good idea to be sane.

Thanks king james. I didn't know that. WHere oh where is Dave Braden when you need him?

Highwater, you're right. Merulla's temper tantrum did no good at all. Instead of helping his case it actually took attention away from transit and focused it on beautifully-coiffed HIM. Anyway, with his support for Red Hill and that bloody box store at center mall, Merulla doesn't actually seem to know what the hell he's doing. He may be left-wing but he sure aint progressive.

I am truly embarassed by city council. I cannot beleive that these people draw salaries for this kind of conduct and behaviour.

Shame

NoBrainer

How do you figure that the poor won't qualify for the transit tax break?

I think being able to claim the price of a transit pass on my income tax is a perk to riding transit. I buy the pass for either $65 or $70 - I get a receipt and I submit the passes and the receipts together when I do my income tax. That amount is deducted from whatever other "high" income I have. I consider myself poor since I'm on disability pension and able to pay for the transit because ODSP covers most of it.

The only thing poorer than ODSP is Ontario Works or being downright homeless and sleeping on sidewalk grates. The latter rarely takes the bus because they have no income and OW also covers bus passes or bus tickets.

I'm not sure how you figure that the poor doesn't qualify for a tax break. I think that's some political party's rhetoric that has no factual basis. Have you done your income taxes yet and tried to use the reduction?

It's a non-refundable tax credit. That means it gets deducted from whatever tax you have to pay, but if you don't have to pay any tax, you can't get it as a refund (i.e. you can't get it at all).