Survey Response: Chris Carter, Candidate for Councillor, Ward 4

Question 1:

What role can transit play in reducing traffic congestion and mitigating increasing expenditures on road maintenance?

Transit is one of the most cost-effective tools we have for managing congestion and reducing the long-term burden on road infrastructure. Every commuter who shifts from a private vehicle to a bus reduces wear on our roads and contributes to fewer bottlenecks at peak hours. The math is straightforward: moving more people in fewer vehicles is both fiscally and operationally smarter. For Burlington to continue growing, we cannot simply keep widening roads. A well-designed, well-funded transit system is a genuine alternative to that cycle of reactive and increasingly expensive road maintenance. I see transit not as a social service, but as essential infrastructure.

Question 2:

In your opinion, what can be done to improve specialized transit for disabled riders and would you be in favour of raising the budget for this increasingly important service?

Specialized transit for disabled riders is not optional. It is a fundamental obligation to the members of our community who depend on it to access employment, medical appointments, education and daily life. In my view, this service has historically been underfunded relative to its importance. I would support a review of current capacity, wait times and service coverage for specialized transit, and would advocate for increased budget allocation where the evidence demonstrates unmet need. Accessibility is not a line item to be minimized. It is a measure of the kind of city we are.

Question 3:

Burlington’s and Halton’s Official Plans call for transit’s share of all trips to rise to 20% (from the current figure of about 4%) by 2031. Do you support this objective?

I support the intent of this objective. Getting transit’s modal share from approximately 4% to 20% in a short window is ambitious, and I want to be straightforward: achieving that will require significant investment in service frequency, route coverage and rider experience. I believe the target is the right direction. Whether 2031 is a realistic deadline given current infrastructure and resources is a legitimate question, but I would rather have an ambitious target driving the right decisions than a modest one that perpetuates the status quo.

Question 4:

With record ridership and increasing demand, are you in favour of supporting continued expansion of Burlington’s transit system?

Yes. Record ridership is a signal that demand exists and that residents are willing to use transit when it serves them well. That momentum should be built upon, not stalled. Expansion needs to be strategic, connecting the destinations people actually need to reach, at times they actually need to travel. I support continued investment in routes, frequency, vehicles and the infrastructure that makes transit reliable and accessible. Growth in Burlington must be paired with growth in transit capacity.

Question 5:

Have you ever used Burlington Transit? Would you be willing to give it a try?

Yes, I have used Burlington Transit. I understand firsthand that route coverage and frequency are meaningful barriers for many residents, and that improving the rider experience is central to increasing ridership. I am very willing to continue using it and to make a point of doing so.

Question 6:

The Ontario Legislature recently passed Bill 98, the Building Homes and Improving Transportation Infrastructure Act, 2026, which gives the provincial Minister of Transportation the power to override municipal transit authorities and set routes and fares for municipal transit systems. We at BFAST have the following concerns about this legislation:

1. It could disrupt current arrangements between transit systems in Burlington, Oakville and Hamilton that provide connections between these cities. 
2. The Minister could divert Burlington Transit resources to provide service along the planned bus rapid transit corridor on Highway 5 (Dundas St.), which was supposed to have been undertaken by GO Transit. This would, in effect, download more fiscal responsibility from the province to local governments.
3. Certain initiatives by Burlington Transit, such as free fares for seniors and students, could be eliminated. 

Please comment on this legislation and what measures you would undertake or support to ensure transit service levels in Burlington would not be degraded.

The concerns BFAST has raised are well-founded and deserve serious attention.

Provincial override of municipal transit authorities creates real risks. The cross-boundary service arrangements between Burlington, Oakville and Hamilton represent years of coordination that serve riders well. Provincial interference in routes and fares could disrupt those connections without any accountability to local residents.

The suggestion that Burlington Transit could be directed to serve the Highway 5 BRT corridor, effectively downloading a provincial obligation onto the local tax base, is exactly the kind of fiscal offloading that municipalities must push back on. Regional transit investments that serve regional purposes should be funded regionally, not at the expense of local service budgets.

Programs like free fares for seniors and students reflect Burlington’s values and serve populations who are most dependent on transit. I would oppose any provincial action that eliminates those programs.

If elected, I would work with Halton Region and other affected municipalities to advocate clearly to the province that local transit decisions must remain responsive to local riders. Oversight should not become top-down control that ignores the needs of the communities being served.

Question 7:

Over the past months, a plan has been promoted wherein a private company would provide on-demand transit service to potentially replace certain routes operated by Burlington Transit. Among BFAST’s concerns with this plan are:

1. Over-reliance on one private company to provide a service that could not be easily replaced if the provider were to fail.
2. Cost escalation and more traffic on our roads as mini-buses replaced current vehicles and more drivers were needed to move the same number of passengers.
3. Diversion of already-constrained Burlington Transit budget to a private, for-profit company, resulting in lower levels of service.

We would appreciate your comments on on-demand transit in general and the idea of diverting public budgets to private corporations.

Innovation in transit delivery is worth exploring, but not at the expense of reliability, accountability or equitable access.

The concerns BFAST raises about over-reliance on a single private provider are legitimate. Public transit is an essential service. If a private operator fails or exits the market, there is no easy fallback. Burlington residents should not be in a position where their access to the transit system depends on the financial health of a for-profit company.

On-demand models may have a role in lower-density areas where fixed routes are difficult to sustain. But that role should be carefully defined, cost-compared against conventional service, and subject to clear performance and accountability standards before any budget is redirected.

I am not opposed to creative service delivery. I am opposed to privatization that reduces transparency, introduces risk, and channels public dollars into private profits without demonstrable benefit to riders and taxpayers. Any pilot program in Burlington should be structured so the city retains control of service standards and can transition back to public operation if the arrangement underperforms.