An Open Letter to Vancouver City Council Re: Changing TransLink Governance
Considering I’m involved quite a bit in the transit activist space and somewhat now in the housing space, I’m concerned for TransLink. The same TransLink that is nothing short of an inspiration to me and host of the very successful 2019 Rail~Volution Conference has a model governance structure and for two well intentioned Vancouver City Councilors to propose changing that governance model… SMH.
So below is my open letter to the Vancouver, BC City Council:
=============
9 February 2022
RE: Local Elected Representation on the TransLink Board (Member’s Motion B.2)
Dear Vancouver, BC City Council;
Joe A. Kunzler here, one of the American fans of TransLink reaching out. I understand from DailyHive.com that quote, “Green Party councillor Pete Fry and COPE councillor Jean Swanson want the governance structure of TransLink’s board of directors reconfigured to allow for a majority of its members to be comprised of locally elected officials — mayors and councillors of municipal governments across Metro Vancouver.” Respectfully I do not believe this is best for transit governance or for working to bring housing and transit together and that if you decide to alternative go to directly electing the TransLink board some serious factors need to be considered before going to the BC Government with a dysfunctional three Ministers responsible for TransLink.
First, as a regional transit advocate, I have dealt with many transit boards. The best boards are the Mayor’s Council, the TransLink Board and the SF BART Board. All three have folks who care about transit and have a positive attitude. There is no thunder and lightning like back home on the Skagit Transit Board comprised of county and city officials who occasionally have to deal with one city’s rep who wants to seemingly defund major projects to make political points. This is exactly what I want TransLink to avoid thank you.
Say what you want about the new BC Liberal Leader Kevin Falcon and I have a lot to say; but the current governance structure for TransLink is a good governance model balancing local democracy where each regional Mayor is elected to be on a council to handle system planning plus representing riders, and a Board of mostly business community professionals managing the details and hiring or firing the CEO and receiving updates from plus holding accountable department heads for deliverables. Basically, good governance that took TransLink from the troubles of the 2010s that culminated in a failed referendum to winning hosting Rail~Volution 2019 as the international leading transit conference and the 2019 Outstanding Public Transportation System Achievement Award by the American Public Transportation Association. Oh and Minister Bowinn Ma leading a rescue of TransLink from a Covid19-induced death spiral in 2020 and the World Cup of Transit Maps by your next Park Board member Jada N. Stevens. Why would you want to change TransLink’s current governance when TransLink is the best transit?
Oh because two Councilors are unhappy with how TransLink is helping with climate change. No thanks for insulting my climate heroes Minister Bowinn Ma, Sarah Ross, and Jada Stevens — the latter two I believe are Vancouver, BC city residents. Shameful and sad at the same time that two rad climate heroes of mine have to worry about their own city government.
Speaking of climate heroes, I listened to Councilor Boyle on the Below the Radar Podcast, Episode 159. I get she’s frustrated at the, and I quote, “The things we need in order to lead on climate, we aren’t getting the tools and supports that would allow us to really make the difference that we need to make at the speed and scale that’s needed.” I get that and I suspect some of that is frustration the dream team of Minister Bowinn Ma+Minister Rob Fleming+Mayor Brad West+Joe Kunzler+Kris Sims stopping mobility pricing indefinitely. I also would point out to Councilor Boyle that a) I testified in support of charging for parking and b) The Vancouver City Council voted it down so the problem on holding climate action back is also partially inside Vancouver City Governance too. That said, the Sarah Ross Bus Priority Lane Network is something I am nothing short of inspired by and I appreciate much Councilor Boyle’s advocacy for a bigger, sweeter bus priority lane network. It is also my understanding that all but one municipality of the Mayor’s Council is very grateful of Sarah Ross and her team’s efforts on this.
Under those circumstances, why change now? I do not think the case is clear for reducing the role of the TransLink Board vis a vis the Mayor’s Council. Some are saying the councilors pushing this want more resources for Vancouver municipally versus the other municipalities. This I object to as transit must be regional and work well with housing to help address the clear climate emergency that TransLink is doing so well at. So why change now?
Let me put matters this way — Bay Area Rapid Transit and hereafter BART for brevity — only went to a directly elected Board after severe financial troubles in the 1970s. BART is only a good board now because pro-transit forces leaned into electing transit directors in the 2010s who wanted to focus on maintenance plus staff retention. Also the fact that big money is not significant is helpful.
If a Councilor decided to go towards having a Board directly elected, I would hope that my Canadian pals would consider the horrendous damage that Citizen’s United and the resulting deregulation of campaign finance has done to my nation’s politics. More polarization, more dark money influencing populist movements — like what your national capital Ottawa is experiencing to my utmost condemnation and Vancouver almost did if not for brave citizens plus first responders, and worse. I urge you to consider the consequences of having a directly elected board inaccessible to most transit advocates or to advocacy that comes from a place of moneyed interests. I suspect one of those consequences is fixating on rail and corridors over currently ensuring wholistic equitable access to quality transit.
On the other hand, having only EMTOTs and other well… Bowinnized folks overly enthusiastic about transit directly elected on the Board is going to lead to outcomes trading experience for enthusiasm like:
· Wanting Bowinn Ma or Sarah Ross as CEO
· Going after “the next shiny new object” like automated cars & ride-hailing without heeding seasoned transit planner geniuses like… Sarah Ross
· Pressure to deliver projects within 3–6 years and shortchange planning plus permitting which may endanger megaprojects’ success
· Less resistance to political tides
I’m not too sure you want to change TransLink governance structure for this either.
That said, if I may get a word in edgewise: TransLink needs ONE Minister Responsible. I ask for a Deputy Premier Bowinn Ma, Minister Responsible for TransLink. Understand and respect if you say no.
In conclusion, I ask: Why change now? To quote Minister Bowinn Ma, “A government serves people, and when a government delivers services, they deliver them to real people — people who live, who laugh, who cry, who suffer, who yell out in pain, who love and are loved.” I ask that as you look at this motion you frame your decisions in that space. The current TransLink governance structure centers real people and has been internationally validated as such between an APTA 2019 award plus hosting Rail~Volution, and therefore I urge great caution and deep deliberation before changing that structure please.
Thank you and GO TRANSLINK;
=============
I believe the letter speaks for itself.