A city report shows rapid transit would pay for itself in seven years, but staff in the mayor's office believe the study is deeply flawed, according to a confidential memo leaked to the Free Press
Mayor Sam Katz agreed yesterday to relase the 40-page cost-benefit analysis, which was completed two weeks ago.
It suggests Winnipeggers would reap $2.14 for every dollar invested in rapid transit. The benefits come in the form of shorter commute times, lower emissions and cheaper vehicle operation costs. The study didn't consider spin-off economic development such as new houses or shops that could spring up near the bus corridor.
But a confidential document prepared for the mayor and his cabinet attempts to poke holes in the cost-benefit analysis.
It says the benefits, such as increased ridership and shorter commutes, are subjective estimates that can't be verified, and much of the data used in the study was provided by Winnipeg Transit and wasn't independently verified.
The memo, dated yesterday, says the study doesn't take into account the city's ability to pay for the rest of the $400-million system, and notes Ottawa and the province have so far chipped in only nine per cent of the total cost.
The memo also says the true cost of rapid transit has been low-balled, echoing Katz's comments earlier this summer.
The $50 million set aside by the three levels of government in March doesn't cover the cost of high-speed, hybrid buses, which would cost an additional $25 million.
The consulting firm that wrote the report, Metropolitan Knowledge International (MKI), is also suspect because its parent company, McCormick Rankin Corporation (MRC), designs and manages big capital projects such as rapid transit.
Officials from MKI said the company is independent, though one of its three shareholders is MRC. MKI has no interest, financial or otherwise, in MRC, and it's extremely unlikely MRC would reap the benefit if Winnipeg goes ahead with a rapid transit system.
Transit boss Rick Borland said he met with the mayor and his cabinet yesterday and heard none of the concerns expressed in the memo. He had not seen the memo and was reluctant to comment on it, but he said many of the criticisms suggest a flawed understanding of the cost-benefit study.
Borland said the cost-benefit analysis was done for Transport Canada, following its model and using all of the assumptions it demands.
maryagnes.welch@freepress.mb.ca