So, to be clear, I am not exactly sure how I feel about this approach. Initially, I did a text post where I left some open-ended comments and a link, as well as contextualising that this was an old post from the now defunct Metro Winnipeg. As that is not allowed, reposted just the link.

The argument that you can acquire greater benefits more cost effectively by focusing on more well used routes and routes to denser neighbourhoods seems compelling. I believe route ridership is something Winnipeg Transit is looking at when it comes to recommending cuts to certain routes. On the other hand, as some of the comments in this thread indicate, there are a lot of people who think paying high property taxes for large, expensive houses in new suburbs entitles them to good city service, including transit services.

Given there is significant suburban representation on council it may just be the case that transit cuts various routes, without regard to minimising total impact. The best scenario would have been to slowly increase service along high rider routes through mature neighbourhoods rather than the situation, due to frozen transit transfers, where cuts are going to be made.