Increased transit fares centre stage as Whitehorse city council passes $119M operating budget

Whitehorse city council has passed its operating budget that seals in things like increased property taxes.

However, dominating the meeting wasn't really that issue at all. Instead, it was higher transit fares. More specifically, a motion that aspired to soften the financial blow to riders.

All but one councillor — Lenore Morris — voted in favour of the $119-million budget as proposed. It puts money down for, among other things, maintenance of municipal buildings and making the snow and ice program permanent. 

The mayor calls the piece one without "frills," yet the biggest in the city's history, geared toward accelerated population growth. Perhaps the most eye-catching thing about it are property taxes, which are set to increase by 4.62 per cent (about $132 per year per average household). 

The most controversial issue at the council meeting Monday evening? Transit fares. They will increase by 40 per cent on July 1st. On that date, a single bus ride will cost $3.50. Fares haven't changed in 17 years.

Councillor Paolo Gallina said the increase is sure to hurt the pocketbook of riders, especially those with low incomes.

That's why he tabled a motion that proposed dragging out the cost of increased transit fares over two years. Basically, he wanted to split the cost in two — 20 per cent this summer, the remainder the next. 

"A 40 per cent increase all at once will be a significant financial strain on riders," he said. "This approach allows us to be financially responsible while ensuring transit remains accessible."

'We can't do that for our city. That's wrong'

The motion appeared to cause a stir. Many were against it; some apprehensive; and one councillor, Anne Middler, called the motion "compassionate" in the face of an "extreme increase." She voted against it later.

The motion was trounced, with all but Gallina and Morris voting it down.

Mayor Kirk Cameron was by far the most vocal critic. He railed against the idea, saying it would hold the budget "hostage."

To make up the difference, Cameron said the plan would force vital programs and services to be cut. Otherwise, he said it would just make a general mess of things.

"To do it now and to try to shoehorn it into a budget that's 99 per cent there that we had agreed to and now we're sitting here and we're gonna blow it out of the water," Cameron said. "We can't do that for our city. That's wrong."

The budget shortfall would be about $132,000.

Morris backed the motion, confident that money could be found. 

"Through cost savings, or through additional revenue sources to phase in the transit fare increase, and that we owe it to our citizens to look for it, " she said. "I don't think it will be disastrous if the budget is delayed for a few weeks.

"We're not walking off of a cliff."

Councillor Dan Boyd disagreed, saying the motion would have resulted in cuts followed by repercussions.

"The requirement to go through the budget with a fine tooth comb and find bits of money here and there to make up the difference — that is a long tedious exercise that will involve a lot of staff time, and our time. The money isn't just laying there in a bucket."

Boyd added a rider to the motion, in hopes of lowering property taxes by roughly one-third of a percent. Like Gallina's motion, this, too, would have required city administration to go on a money-hunting mission. 

The amendment, like the motion, failed.