The Editor,
Re. "Gravy train" (Letters, The Tri-City News, March 6).
Letter writer Rick Evon reflects a widespread view that TransLink manages money poorly and that the proposed congestion improvement tax will reward "government unions, mayors and especially TransLink."
The facts paint a different picture. In spite of anecdotes and sound bites about TransLink's problems, Jim Pattison, 19 out of 22 of the region's mayors, MLAs from both sides of the legislature, the premier, the minister of transportation and leading business groups supporting the Yes campaign pay attention to what auditors and credit-rating agencies say, including this from Moody's in November 2014: "The Aa2 rating assigned to TransLink is supported by 'solid governance and management practices' and a 'track record of finding cost efficiencies.'"
The latest (2012) independent audit of TransLink determined it was "not wasteful" and that compensation levels were "reasonable," prompting then-transportation minister Mary Polak to call it "world-class."
Further, it was recently rated the most popular transit agency in North America by a study out of California.
As for the direct beneficiaries of a Yes vote, they are disproportionately low-income people, students, seniors, disabled people and those currently unable to access frequent transit. They are not on any "gravy train" - they don't even have access to a bus.
TransLink needs better governance and certainly could be improved. Unfortunately, a No vote will only guarantee that the region will be denied desperately-needed transportation improvements that will benefit everyone.
Peter Ladner, Vancouver
Editor's note: Mr. Ladner is a board member of the Better Transit and Transportation Coalition.
