*** For additional information, contact: Daryl Dela Cruz, Campaign Manager Email us at: info@skytrainforsurrey.org or call at (604) 329-3529

Better Surrey Rapid Transit skytrainforsurrey.org

PAGE 1 OF 2

IMMEDIATE RELEASE 10th September, 2015 – Surrey, BC

LRT funding standstill caused by City of Surrey

The City of Surrey should be held responsible for an ongoing 2-year standstill on acquiring federal funding for a proposed LRT system.

Liberal Party candidate Sukh Dhaliwal, in a promise to bring Light Rail to Surrey, has attempted to blame Conservative government for a standstill in Surrey’s application for P3 Canada funding. However, the City of Surrey’s own report, dated June 11, states that the reason LRT funding has not been approved by P3 Canada is because a business case has not been submitted.

“The Liberal Party of Canada’s commitment is a blind electioneering attempt that misunderstands that LRT is not a sustainable choice for Surrey, and that is the real reason there’s no LRT funding progress,” says Daryl Dela Cruz, leader and campaign manager at SkyTrain for Surrey.

The City’s report notes that “The screened-in status obligates the preparation a P3 Business Case to advance funding negotiations”. The City has not provided any Business Case to P3 Canada and may not be able to do so, as a previous TransLink joint-study suggested that a ground-level Light Rail system would have a negative business case with a benefit-cost ratio of just 0.69:1.

Ground-level Light Rail Transit will offer minimal benefits to transit riders , while simultaneously causing congestion due to the closure of traffic lanes on 104th Ave. The first phase of the proposed LRT is only a 1 minute improvement over existing B-Line express buses, which use dedicated lanes on King George Blvd. A recent "economic study” released by the city to defend LRT failed to assess and consider transportation outcomes.

SkyTrain for Surrey has been relentless in raising LRT issues like these and advocating for the only solution that is viable and will truly make a difference: an extension of existing SkyTrain and new Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). SkyTrain and BRT would offer faster, safer and more reliable service; twice the overall travel time savings; and the creation of 2x the amount of new transit trips.

Better Surrey Rapid Transit skytrainforsurrey.org

PAGE 2 OF 2

APPENDIX: A P3 doesn’t work for LRT in Surrey

The Surrey LRT system will not recover its operating costs. Under a Canada Line Design-Build-Finance-

Maintain-Operate P3 model, it will cost the city nearly $100 million per year to finance LRT.

This is because the fare revenue projected over 30 years creates a $720 million shortfall over the 30-year

lifecycle. It will require a subsidy of $22 million per year on opening day ($28 million per year by 2041) to

operate the LRT. 1 This is on top of the $60 million per year for capital financing that Mayor Linda

Hepner declared to the Globe and Mail, plus additional costs added to concession payments so that the

private operator makes a profit. With a P3, the annual cost to finance LRT will be nearly $100 million.

The Canada Line, which carries 122,000 daily boardings2, required 100,000 (5200 passenger boardings per

km) to cover its annual operating costs.3 Surrey’s LRT will carry only 2970 riders/km on opening day.4

#1: SRTAA PAGE 369; Undiscounted value; measured over 30 years, with costs increasing to 2041 on year 2041. #2: ProTransBC (operator) website - http://www.protransbc.com/service-performance/. #3: TransLink media release – Addressing Canada Line capacity questions. #4: See SRTAA PAGE 301 for ridership estimates (divided by track lengths listed on SRTAA P. 347)

The Canada Line is a successful P3 because its ridership and fare revenue exceeded projections.

The private partner’s capital investment in the project is returned as a profit through the performance

payments made during operation. If fare revenue from ridership meets or exceeds the costs, financing

proceeds as planned and excess operating revenue is returned to the taxpayer. If the fare revenue does not

exceed the costs, that represents significant additional costs to taxpayers.