A scaledown.ca Interview with Transit Windsor’s, Penny Williams
A while ago I came across a planning document for Transit Windsor. After reading through it a few times I found that I wanted to know a little more about Transit Windsor and how we at scaledown.ca might be able to help them reach their goals. I wrote out some questions and e-mailed them to Transit Windsor. Below are my questions and the responses of Penny Williams, General Manager of Transit Windsor.
Just like last week folks, no opinions or editorializing of Ms. Williams’ responses. What you see is the questions as sent to Transit Windsor and the responses I received. Other than font styles and colours there has been no editing of this interview.
Enjoy.
History of Transit Windsor:
Prior to 1977 public transit was provided by the Sandwich, Windsor and Amherstburg Co. Was the S.W. & A. a private company, publicly owned, regulated? What was the impetus for the city to purchase the S.W. & A.?
[Williams, Penny] My understanding is that SW&A was a private company. While I was not with Transit Windsor when the city took over my understanding is that transit became a priority in Ontario in fact all of Canada and municipalities took control to ensure that public transit was available to the entire community to improve the social and economic needs of the community. To demonstrate their commitment to public transit, the province provided operating and capital subsidy. I don’t know the exact subsidy that was provided at that time but I do know that in the 1990’s the province contributed 20% to operating expenditures and 75% to all capital expenditures related to public transit. During the downloading years, the province eliminated all subsidy and downloaded the cost of transit to the municipalities. This resulted in a deterioration of many transit systems fleet as municipalities struggled to fund the entire cost of transit. Ridership dropped and service was reduced. In the early 2000’s the province once again recognized that their commitment to public transit was essential for the economic, social and environmental well being of communities. They recognized that the cities infrastructure was aging and cities could not sustain public transit alone. The province introduced gas tax funding which equates to 2 cents per litre of gasoline sold in Ontario and this is shared with cities that have public transit based on a formula of ridership and population. In 2008 Windsor received $3.8 M in gas tax funding. The province also re-introduced some capital funding for buses only. The percentages have varied from 24 - 33% and in 2008 we received 33% or about $1.8M for our bus purchases. For the first time ever in 2006 the federal government recognized transit as being a significant issued to the well being of Canada and they provided a federal gas tax to public transit (see Lawrence Cannon’s site). Windsor received $3.7 million for this funding envelope. The federal government is now partnering with all the provinces to provide funding which is then transferred to the projects that the province feels are significant for them. Unfortunately, most of this funding stays in the GTA area.
Transit Ridership Growth and Asset Management Plan 2006
Current Community Conditions
The Plan assumes that the city will continue to expand, especially into the “annexed lands” as new factories create jobs in that area. This document was published in 2006 prior to many of the announced plant closings and job losses. Has Transit Windsor revised this position in the face of a bleaker economic outlook?
[Williams, Penny] Transit Windsor is currently reviewing our routes and service. We will be holding public meetings probably in September to receive comments. The Board of Directors has directed us to provide them with a plan that will improve frequencies, reduce travel time and provide more direct service. We really would appreciate if you could promote this and encourage students to get involved and provide us their comments. It will be on our web site under transit suggestion.
This past spring the City of Windsor updated (is still updating) its Official Plan. Transit Windsor needs more focus on infill development on existing transit routes and changes to parking requirements and fees in the downtown especially. Will Transit Windsor’s needs be addressed in the Updated Official Plan?
[Williams, Penny] Yes, Transit Windsor is being consulted as part of the update to the Official Plan.
Rising fuel and energy costs are impacting government agencies at all levels. It has been reported that Transit Windsor is facing budget challenges as a result of these higher costs. What will Transit Windsor do to offset the shortfall in this year’s budget and what cost savings will be implemented in future budgets?
[Williams, Penny] We are projecting that we will have a shortfall of about $750,000. We are not alone in projecting a fuel deficit as other city departments and agencies that use fuel have the same problem. It is too early to tell about future budgets because we will be providing a plan to improve the system so that it is a viable transportation alternative. WE need to change the travel behaviours of the community, reduce emissions and improve the quality of life for all citizens. Whether the system is improved will ultimately be a decision of council who will have to struggle to balance scarce resources. And improvements will also depend on whether they hear from the community if they think that improving public transit is a priority service that needs to be funded.
Yesterday, Windsor City Council approved the purchase of 18 hybrid buses. The IBI plan indicates that by 2008 Transit Windsor would be considering the purchase of hybrid buses. I presume this is because at the time of writing hybrid technology had not been entirely fleshed out. Also, according to the IBI Plan by 2008 Transit Windsor should have purchased 22 new buses. Since 2006 and prior to yesterday’s council decision how many new buses have been purchased under the IBI Plan?
[Williams, Penny] The 18 hybrid buses were a combination of our 2007, 2008, and 2009 requirements listed in IBI plan and we would have received our allotment for 2006. (currently the lead time for bus orders is about 18 months). You are correct in the statements about hybrid technology was not yet fully tested. Chicago first introduced the technology in 1999 and just started to use them in revenue service 2 years ago. While BC has been using hybrids since 2005, TTC, Kitchner/Waterloo, Ottawa and Hamilton are just starting to purchase/test them now. The technology has also gotten less expensive. The premium for hybrid is now about $180,000 whereas a few years ago it was between $250,000 - $300,000. Batteries which use to cost $60,000 and have a useful life of 4 years now have a useful life of 6 - 8 years and cost $25,000. The hybrid technology can reduce harmful emissions by 60 - 90% over conventional diesel buses.
Transit Funding
Transit Windsor recoups approximately 60% of its costs through fares, charters and contract work for the casino. The balance of funding is provided by the city on a per capita basis and from the senior levels of government through gas tax disbursements. Recent rises in gas prices and future increases have had the effect of lower amounts of gas purchases and more people looking for transportation alternatives. If the revenue collected by gas taxes declines will Transit Windsor be able to offset that with higher fare revenues? Or, will Transit Windsor need to get more funding dollars from the city?
[Williams, Penny] That will be a decision of the Board of Directors and City Council.
Sustainability of Transit Windsor
Under what conditions could Transit Windsor exist as a self sustaining company?
What percentage of ridership would be required? Hours of operation? Number of routes? Types of routes?
[Williams, Penny] No public transit system in Canada is self sustaining. It really is a matter of balance. Based on our current budget and ridership, one way cahs fares would have to increase from $2.45 for an adult to $3.69 per adult (and all other fare media would increase accordingly) and this would only fund operations. Or if fares stayed the same ridership would have to increase from 6.2 M to 9.8M. If you were to try and reduce serivce or change the frequency you loose riders. Generally speaking in the transit industry, our expereience has taught us that a rider will pay a little more for service if it is frequent and reliable but when you start reducing service, the spiral will start, reduce service, loose customers, so you have to reduce service again.
I guess you could only run the routes with a high revenue to cost basis (that would be our main lines) but then what would those living outside this area do. I think it is one of the reasons that city’s took control of transit systems. So transit is available to the entire community. Service isn’t being slashed because it does not break even or show a profit.
Scaledown.ca and Transit
We advocate urban living, which is high population density in and around mixed-use areas. Ideas like transit oriented developments, more infill development, less auto-centric designs are all discussed in our forum. Will light rail ever come (back) to Windsor? Electrification of some or all routes with trolley buses or trams?
[Williams, Penny] As a transit organization we also promote urban living and mixed use areas and this was also promoted in the IBI report. You should also know that the Canadian Urban Transit Association may be a good site for you to visit if you have not seen it yet look for cutaactu.ca. CUTA is a national association that is the voice for public transit in Canada. I just stepped down as Chair of the organization after having the privilege of service as chair for 2 years. CUTA does a lot of advocacy and I believe was instrumental in getting the federal funding for transit and placing it on the federal government’s radar screen.,
(I requested clarification for this last question) We advocate urban living, which is high population density in and around mixed-use areas. Ideas like transit oriented developments, more infill development, less auto-centric designs are all discussed in our forum. Will light rail ever come (back) to Windsor? Electrification of some or all routes with trolley buses or trams?
That would be a decision for the Board of Directors and City Council.
Post Feedback
So long as TW plays the lemming and doesn’t fall out of step behind any other random canadian city, i guess everything is a-ok!
Most all Windsor households have refocused their spending on food and energy and transportation or will be very soon. And these expenses need to be more sustainable one way or another
Great blog James and good questions and a thank you to Penny Williams for answering your questions. She, Williams does seem to have good grasp of what is being done in public transportation around North America.
The only thing that disturbs and scares me is her use of the phrase, “That would be a decision of the Board of Directors and City council.” I find city council not the brightest bunch that we have had over the years, since they take all direction and the orders from the mayor! Public transportation isn’t a big enough monument for Eddie, to Eddie!
Unfortunately the city gives departments certain powers but not full control. That’s probably why we get that answer. Another example of this is the bylaw enforcement…the city doesn’t want to release control of this to anyone else, so most bylaws go unenforced. Whether lack of action is due to strapped staff and resources or sheer ineptitude is another debate.
Very interesting blog James. Great questions and some very good and veiled answers. In general, this blog provides some insight into the way that administrative decisions are being made at the City.
The phrase “That would be a decision of the Board of Directors and City council” also worries me. Without trying to read to much into it, my initial reaction is that some decisions (or recommendations) from senior administration MAY be being put forth with some hesitation and possibly fear.
Especially worrisome is the absolute avoidance of the question centered on light rail transit (LRT) coming back to Windsor. Is it not the job of administration to be proactive and look at all transit options (including potential LRT) and build a case for the proper mode of transit and its implementation to create a more sustainable transit choice into the future and present it to the Board and/or Council?
Maybe we should be pushing for administration to examine the potential for reintroducing the thought of LRT into Windsor. At the very least raising the idea at the public meetings in September.
Something that I find ironic about the Transit Windsor website is the references to Windsor having the first electric trolleys and the first electric trolley buses but these historic innovations were nearly eighty years ago. Since then…..
If you read the IBI report there is an effort to establish BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) lines. I was surprised that Ms. Williams did not mention this possibility. BRT could flesh out the best routes and establish the right-of-ways for electrification and construction of rails.
I like what Windsor’s accronym would be: WART (Windsor Area Rapid Transit)
Seems absolutely fitting!
WART too much.
“Get on the WART”
“WART to work”
“Transit Windsor’s WART is no Blemish”
If they were to expand services the star headline could be “Windsor’s WART Grows”
I can’t say that I am surpised by Ms. Williams avoidance of some of James’ more sensitive questions. As we have found with the Planning Department, it seems as though the staff is well versed in what needs to be done with TW (”I just stepped down as Chair of the organization {Canadian Urban Transit Association - CUTA is a national association that is the voice for public transit in Canada} after having the privilege of service as chair for 2 years.”) yet is beholden to the less-than-knowledgeable - or happy-to-be-ignorant, municipal decision makers.
This tells me that Transit Windsor either needs to be more proactive in educating those decision makers and the general public and continue to lobby for the necessary changes, or some other entity must do it for them.
I believe that this is one of Scaledown’s (and most importantly, it’s readers) most important roles - that of educators and lobbyists.
I still want to know what she thinks (perhaps “off the record”) of LRT.
TW would be correct as per the Municipal Act. Administration is to be directed by council.
Councillor Postma as Chair of TW; could propose and introduce a motion a council to authorise TW to study the feasibility of a Light Rail system - costs/funding sources etc. Of importance - is light rail financially sustainable? If not, what would it take to make it so and what would the impact be upon ridership levels.
A short term solution could be in conjunction with VIA rail in developing a commuter plan to connect municipalities served by VIA in Windsor-Essex. Perhaps it could be as simple as introducing one car every 1/2 hour to hour to connect these communities say from 7 a.m. to 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. to 6 p.m.
A Transit Windsor shuttle bus to downtown terminal could be added at these times with an express route timed to VIA dropoff (Ie a smaller 1A, 1C and Crosstown 2).
I would imagine MP Brian Masse and Joe Comartin would be the ones to discuss such a plan with. Don’t know if possible, just putting an idea out there.
It is the duty of the council representative on the board to take back to council requests of TW for direction.
OR councillors could independently direct TW to undertake the same.
But I agree with Chris - educating our councillors and lobbying them to seriously consider such a regional transit plan is in order.
Great job James!
Administration is definitely to be directed by Council. All that I was getting at (and I’m sure you read this) was that as long as employees within WT are not neglecting their primary responsibilities, there is no harm doing some extra initial research and work and as you said ‘educating our councillors’ as to ALL options and the benefits/costs. Don’t most trend-setting, sustainable cities have proactive administrative staff who bring ideas to their decision makers and educate them?
I’ll add too getting Tecumseh and Lakeshore on board would be imperative.
Penny William’s assertion that no transit system is profitable is correct, but 1) not for long and 2) seems more like an excuse for poor behaviour than a statement of fact. Charlottetowns transit use has grown above expectations and, in speaking with a local councilor, is expected to be PROFITABLE in the next couple of years based on PLANNED projections (not taking into account actual growth!)
Charlottetown has completely outsourced its’ transit system with a requirement for set levels of service. Buses run frequently, albeit in a much more geographically defined area than Windsor, but, given the tax base of PEI, is very much replicable in Windsor.
Maybe looking beyond Ontario (which I heard has recently joined the ranks of the East coast provinces and become “have not” province) is in order!
Thanks to Penny Williams for providing input. TW needs to look at their roots. SW&A ran to Rivard Canard until 1951, Tecumseh until 1956 and Amhurstburg until 1958. I’d guess lots of good jobs, many more people owning cars and cheap gas had something to do with services being cut.
Electric streetcars died in 1939 but I’d bet that had more to do with WW2 and production of stuff going towards the war effort.
The tide is swinging the other way and they should be on top of trends, not behind. I’d rather see tax money spend on a failed experiment than money spent on studies and yakking it to death.
Best,
Barry
Penny Williams stated that they promote URBAN LIVING? That is a laugh!
Then why does she allow the busses to sit on Chatham street idling for 15 minutes plus? Why does she allow them to park on Chatham St. at all? Has anyone seen the amount of oil stains on the street from those leaky busses? If anyone wants I would gladly take a picture and send it to Scaledown.ca. When it rains you can actually see some oil flowing into the drains!
Also it is such an eyesore it makes the area look horrible! Why did they choose such a small site if they can’t fit their busses on their land? Was it another quick “Eddie” response at the last minute? Why did they face the building TOWARDS the proposed urban village instead of towards the parking garage and with it put the bus station more west of the property? Who would want to live across from that?
Also, since the “funky” bus terminal was built we have now lost MORE on street parking because the bus drivers have to make two more turns of the steering wheel, as I have been told. Where do we as residents park now in a city owned lot paying $30+ a month to park? That sure as heck won’t entice people to live downtown.
What a joke!
Regarding the bus terminal - not much we can do about it now - except mitigate its presence.
I’d like to see at the very least a stand of trees (both deciduous (sp) and coniferous) placed between the terminal and the area west.
As well, I too would like to know what the city’s intention is with the rows of buses that park on the street.
Chris I was just showing how easy it is to pretend people care. Actions speak louder than words and Transit Windsor’s actions show just how out of touch some of them are.
This is no fault of Counc. Postma either. She is fighting the good fight with two hands tied behind her back but if Admin and Transit Windsor won’t help her help the community what can she do? That is the biggest issue that Councillors have to deal with on a regular basis…administration.
She’s the Boss, ME - if she can’t be more assertive and, as you said - fight the good fight, then step aside and let some in there who can.
Administration has to listen to our elected councillors. Period.
Chris said; “Administration has to listen to our elected councillors. Period.” That’s an inside joke right, Chris? We all know that the mayor and the administration treat councillors as jokes, a petty nuisance in the grander scheme of things.
I believe it was just a reminder to our citizen readers that our elected officials, via our votes, are the ones who bear the ultimate responsibility for the successes and failures of this administration. If administration seem to have too much power in the day-to-day running of this city, then it’s our job to put that power back where it belongs.
There’s an incredible amount of inertia behind upper-levels of management and their choke-hold on their departments. They’re there a lot longer than most councilors and have built up a much stronger and loyal network within the halls of power because of that time invested.
Yet, ultimately it is up to our councilors to put a stop to any behind-the-scenes politicking and reassert themselves as Grand Puba’s!
I just wish we had more councilors who saw it that way.
Too many Chris’ I have to remember to use my last initial.
ME said:
“This is no fault of Counc. Postma either.”
Well as Chairperson of the Transit Committee, and outspoken critic of transport trucks utilizing Wyandotte Street, one would presume the good councillor would understand the impact of diesel buses idling in residential neighbourhoods.
Even as a councillor, I do not recall one instance whereby the councillor introduced a notice of motion or motion for that matter, requesting mitigation measures for the bus terminal.
Site plan control for Burger King received a tremendous amount of scrutiny; and yet city initiated projects have the appearence of easier development.
THAT is where I fault Councillors and our council representatives on various boards.
You are right Chris S. But the one of the reasons for the ram through of the terminal was because, once again “last minute” Eddie was late to the table and Greyhound was about to walk away from the project entirely. The feds cash had to be used by a specific date to which the deadline was fast approaching.
The way I see it is that it was yet another knee-jerk reaction instead of good planning ahead they waited until the last minute to get things done. Sounds like Greenlink, sounds like thae airport all over again. Talk, talk, talk but at the last minute everyone has to run.
It is truly any wonder Windsorites look at ridiculous “think big” ideas and only get half of what is promised (Candarel, the Plywood Palace, streetscaping)? No wonder the vast majority are cynics.
[...] News » News News A scaledown.ca Interview with Transit Windsor’s, Penny Williams2008-08-27 08:08:33Of over conventional diesel buses. Transit Funding … and have a useful life of [...]