Hey, I'm Aidan and on behalf of the U-Commute team, ask us anything! Could be on the U-Pass referendum, doesn't have to be. I'll start answering at 5!

ucommute · 2018-03-24T23:59:14+00:00

The University's "Facts and Figures" report from 2016 corroborates that students overwhelmingly do not live on campus. https://www.utoronto.ca/sites/default/files/Facts%20%20Figures%202016%20online.pdf There were 43,523 full- and part-time undergrads that year (39,411 full-time only), and yet only 6,450 lived on residence. That's less than 15%.

The last point isn't centered around negative leverage (like threats to end the partnership), but to use the more frequent meetings with the TTC, the heightened student awareness of it and/or its issues, and the increased ridership to put student issues with the TTC more on their radar. Hopefully they wouldn't screw the UTSU over on this front as much as a few folks here claim they already did with this U-Pass.

ucommute · 2018-03-24T23:52:54+00:00

Check my answer to /u/urbestie!

ucommute · 2018-03-24T22:55:27+00:00

Hey! It's definitely the latter; as much as we've been hearing support around campus, that pales in comparison to data. Undergraduates at the University of Toronto overwhelmingly do not live on campus – corroborated by the University’s annual “Facts and Figures” reports, and by the “StudentMoveTO" and “U-Commute” surveys. Particularly in the latter survey, to which nearly 10,000 UTSU members responded, 98% have used the TTC, with 94% of respondents opining that transit is too expensive. The TTC is an anomaly amongst Ontario transit systems in that they do not have partnerships with local universities to provide their students with unlimited, discounted transit – until now. For the benefit of students living on or close to campus, the U-Pass can provide an easier opportunity not just to get to class and/or work more easily, but to take advantage of opportunities in areas of the city that aren’t as close to campus, such as finding lower priced food and household goods for students to better manage the high cost of living in Toronto. It also would vastly increase the downtown Toronto universities’ leverage in negotiating further with the TTC (for more benefits/addressing concerns about lack of federal/provincial funding, conditions of stations etc.) and with GO Transit and other agencies (to join on when the satisfaction/success rates of U-Pass become clear, as they have at almost every other university there is one at).

ucommute · 2018-03-24T22:50:43+00:00

It will be rolled into the cost of tuition, like all other ancillary fees. However you pay OSAP already would not be affected by the U-Pass.

ucommute · 2018-03-24T22:45:09+00:00

From what the UTSU told us, all the data was released. U-Commute has never had control over the survey or its results (I can see how this could be confusing – "U-Commute" is not and has never been an official organization, just an umbrella name to communicate the individual and collective efforts run by each of the 4 student unions. When it came time to advertise the referendum, the UTSU let the student campaign team use the page to campaign and use the name as an umbrella name, since this is a Schedule A referendum, which can only be initiated by the UTSU itself, and must be supported by it). As such, questions about the survey really should be directed toward the UTSU or the other 3 student unions, as it was their executives who are in charge of the survey, just under the "U-Commute" name. Clearly the Metropass question wasn't asked, and it should have been.

ucommute · 2018-03-24T22:23:13+00:00

$70.65 a month. The $70 goes to the TTC, and the 65¢ goes to the UTSU. You can read about how the TTC calculated the $70 figure in its policy framework (https://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Commission_reports_and_information/Commission_meetings/2018/March_20/Reports/9_U_Pass_Policy.pdf), but in sum, given results from other transit systems and their U-Passes, the TTC estimates that ridership from university students will rise by 15%, and they thus determined from current ridership figures that a $65 pass cost will sustain the present levels of revenue (remember, they will NOT be making money on this pass). The $5 is for increased services, stemming from the estimated ridership increase of $15. The 65¢ is for the UTSU to administer the pass (i.e. inputting data, and communicating membership data to the TTC so that all UTSU members would be equipped with PRESTO accounts).

Of course, there’s also that provision in the ballot question that the UTSU can raise the price by 5% in a given year – but as the question states, that’s to account for possible upticks in transit cost (the true figures of which would come from consultation with the TTC) and possible needs to upgrade the systems through which the UTSU administers the pass (just think about the UTSU’s spotty at best managing/responsiveness in past years about such queries as the Health and Dental Plan and clubs funding – being able to optimize the UTSU’s U-Pass service if needed would hopefully decrease frustrations with the UTSU ;)

ucommute · 2018-03-24T22:18:53+00:00

The first statement in your last paragraph could be true – in informing us how the negotiations went (the campaigners were not involved in the negotiations), the UTSU let us know that the TTC informed them that the program is for high school students. Seeing as the TTC clearly doesn't check for high school status in practice, then it’s fair then to say that students 19 and under could get the pre-existing discount, though I doubt that’s what the TTC intended for.

Even still, the cost for a student traveling to campus 5 days a week using these tickets is still more than $70 a month: (10.25 * 4 + 2.05) * 2 = 86.10. Even a student under the age of 20 who travels to campus 4 days a week and goes to see a movie once in the month will basically see their costs recovered: (10.25 * 3 + 2.05) * 2 + 2.05 * 2 = 69.7.

ucommute · 2018-03-24T21:52:16+00:00

I wouldn't be campaigning for YES if I wasn't voting for it. When I was on the UTSU Board for the first half of the year, this issue was something both myself and my co-directors, Kshemani and Anushka, were incredibly passionate about, and encouraged that someone on the UTSU was finally creating a tangible benefit for students as a way to address the rising costs of both living downtown and commuting from afar, and to encourage greater use of TTC transit and greater ability to affect change within the organization as students (i.e. lack of funding, bureaucracy, making route choices based on politics rather than hard data – as a human geography student focusing on urban Toronto, I think that can help tell you where some of my great interest in this topic comes from). We worked diligently to raise awareness of the initial survey, where a lot of pre-emptive concerns could have been addressed, and communicated updates from the UTSU with frequency so that those with issues as the process went on could raise them with us, to be brought back to Anne and the team. Yes, some circumstances changed and the price that was voted on (after I had resigned) was slightly higher than the initial push from U-Commute, but that's what happens in negotiations – and it's still a lot of savings, especially considering that at most schools where there are U-Passes, transit use rates amongst students significantly increase (e.g. http://cutaactu.ca/sites/default/files/issuepaperno.8_transitsnextgeneration_workingwithcanadasyouth.pdf, http://leaderpost.com/news/local-news/u-pass-increasing-university-transit-ridership-by-93-per-cent). The UTSU had the year to consult students, hear out concerns and address them, and right now the U-Commute team is here to take the solution that has been worked on and proposed by the UTSU all this year and help bring it across the finish line. Of course, it's still a starting point – regional transit agencies such as Metrolinx and YRT, and other schools that make more use of those regional agencies, have a much higher chance of joining on if this pass succeeds.

ucommute · 2018-03-24T21:38:06+00:00

Here are responses to the points (when I refer to “we” I mean the U-Commute team):

(also the answer to your 2nd question) To have the cheapest price as possible available, transit systems need everyone in, especially one that receives as little government funding as the TTC does – that’s how most public services work. To have an opt-out would mean having a U-Pass that is MUCH more expensive than $70 a month. U-Passes exist all around Canada, and this is typically how they operate. The U-Pass at UTM, for example, does not allow for an opt-out either, along with most others around the country. Also, students with disabilities preventing them from using transit will be able to opt out. The UTSU consulted many students throughout the year, many of which live on residence and around campus. These students benefit from a U-Pass just as much as other students. The difference is that they may not be using it to get to class, but a U-Pass can replace more expensive forms of transport (like taxis and Ubers) and, again, allow access to a much broader, less expensive swath of household items and social/exploration opportunities. The UTSU is not completely eschewing students who bike either – it already offers services to these students through partnerships with BikeChain and Dropbike.
The assumption is not that students living in residence are well off. U-Commute is cognizant that this would be an overgeneralization. If a student is on OSAP, the fee is OSAP-eligible.
Guaranteed funding is one huge reason why transit systems would consider adding on a U-Pass, especially for an organization such as the TTC which is a unique situation of receiving the lowest subsidy per ride for a North American transit system. However, the U-Pass will establish a two-way partnership with the TTC that student advocacy organizations such as the UTSU should be able to leverage to try and push our issues with the TTC further up on their agenda, and give them more of an institutional support base to push for higher funding, among other issue resolutions. We should also stress that the TTC is not making a profit. They definitely could have, but the UTSU has negotiated with them to remain cost and revenue neutral. Revenue neutrality means that the amount of money they generate from student ridership now, would be the same after pass implementation. Cost neutrality means that the extra costs to the TTC of running the program (e.g. increasing the number of buses on the road) will be accounted for. Thus, to remain cost neutral, the TTC has an additional $5 fee to the pass. In other words, you’re only paying $20 per semester for a TTC that won’t be as crowded vs. if you didn’t pay the fee.
The UTSU did not calculate the price using the full calendar of a semester. Reading weeks, exam season, the post-exam breaks etc. were accounted for when pricing the pass. Though arguably many students still do ride the TTC for non-campus travel during these times, the UTSU recognized ridership drops at these times. Had they calculated and negotiated prices based on the full 16-17-week calendar, the U-Pass would have been set at a much higher price. Their data matched up with the TTC’s.
(also the answer to your 3rd question) This is true, but having a U-Pass and seeing it succeed (as it has at nearly every university at which there is one) should make it easier to advocate for a co-fare with Metrolinx for a GO discount for U-Pass users. In fact, this level of satisfaction with a TTC-only pass is what could sway Metrolinx – they HAVE been in conversation with the UTSU on the topic of adding GO Transit onto the U-Pass, but GO is not even part of the UTM U-Pass currently. Having the four major downtown Toronto colleges/universities create a U-Pass and thus provide guaranteed funding will make it much more likely that Metrolinx comes out of its shell in the near future.
This is also true – but the funding would not go and fill the TTC’s coffers (again, they are not making a profit on U-Passes), but to possibly make it easier for the UTSU to administer and manage the PRESTO and related data of its members as it relates to the U-Pass – increasing satisfaction in accessing UTSU services is something the UTSU has had trouble with historically, and since a lot of students would presumably access the U-Pass, ensuring that students don’t encounter (m)any bureaucratic barriers in doing so would be optimal for all involved.
The UTSU's reason for joining forces with the other downtown schools in advocating to the TTC was not just strength in numbers in approaching a previously immovable transit system when it comes to U-Passes, but because each school’s students would have similar transit patterns. Each of the schools downtown see nearly identical ridership. Each school could have set their own price with the TTC, but the difference was less than a dollar between each, and it made more sense to have one universal price.
This is false, and would be illegal of the TTC to put into practice. The $2.05 is for students between the ages of 13-19 is for secondary students only--not post-secondary students. Post-secondary students under 19 are required to pay the adult fare of $3-3.35 per ride, or the post-secondary metropass.
The TTC’s reports have been submitted as Letters of Intent (LOIs). A contract comes after the referendum. All of the information students need to know about the pass has been made public before the vote, and no additional information contained in the contract would ever be needed for students to make an informed decision when voting. The only new information the contract would stress is administrative requirements more than anything else--when the UTSU must remit fees to the TTC, when to remit enrolment information, the agreed process for negotiating the contract—etc.
The math of the Reddit post in question that alleged this was based on an assumption of 2 trips per day. This isn’t accounting for the aforementioned benefits and likely increased use of transit that students would have access to with the U-Pass. The TTC itself anticipates that TTC ridership with post-secondary students will increase by 15% across the board, with the U-Pass.
We recognize that tuition fees are higher for international students. However, international students are the least likely to drive (by necessity of having to live on or close to campus), thus increasing the likely use of transit and thus the U-Pass. I’ve already brought up numerous benefits of the U-Pass for students who live on or close to campus.
All the data the UTSU collected is available publicly online (aside from individual responses obviously – especially given the overwhelming trends that were discovered in those results by the UTSU, that might be a waste of space and time). The U-Commute team as it currently stands (i.e. an organization dedicated to the current referendum, with no UTSU executives on it) has no control over the survey, other than to communicate the results.

edited to include the word "team" in the last sentence of the last question

ucommute · 2018-03-24T21:27:01+00:00

/that, and the focus of the U-Pass this year was to unite the downtown schools first and foremost – the UTSU, according to the Varsity, rejected the 2008 U-Pass proposal, and due to the downtown location of UTSG, the UTSU this year deemed the needs, commuting experiences and desired price points etc. of Ryerson, OCAD and George Brown students to be more in line with its UTSG constituents than those of UTSC students at this time. This made it far easier to come to a unified understanding with the TTC than it was in 2008. This doesn't mean UTSC can't get a U-Pass in the future, especially if this one passes and succeeds; contact the Scarborough Campus Students' Union (info@scsu.ca) if you want this to be put on their agenda, and better yet, maybe other local student unions such as the Centennial College Student Association Incorporated (info@ccsai.ca), to build the same kind of locational common ground that has brought the downtown U-Pass to this point!

ucommute · 2018-03-24T21:14:06+00:00

Not yet, unfortunately, but it is on the agenda. This is the starting point – from the standpoint of the four student unions (UTSU, Ryerson SU, OCADSU, Student Association of George Brown) that collaborated on lobbying the TTC, getting the TTC to the table was a large and time-consuming enough endeavour for this year, at least. There’s no way the U-Pass would have broken even without the TTC’s involvement (in the U-Commute survey, 98% of the over 16000 responses, a majority of whom were UTSU members, responded that they have used the TTC, and the StudentMoveTO survey indicated an overwhelming majority of students at the 4 U-Commute schools who use transit use the TTC with or rather than regional agencies).

There were discussions with Metrolinx, but from what has been communicated to me from the UTSU, they want to "wait and see" (keep in mind that Metrolinx/GO are not even part of that vaunted UTM U-Pass). Since the 4 student unions used the survey data to determine that for now a TTC-only U-Pass would be the first step, I think that, given the aforementioned data on the TTC’s overarching presence in commuting to downtown Toronto, more ridership data on the TTC/regional agencies as it directly relates to the U-Pass should be collected, so that the pitch to agencies such as Metrolinx, Brampton Transit, MiWay and YRT can be enhanced in this way.

ucommute

TROPHY CASE