12-05-2017, 10:28 AM
(12-05-2017, 10:09 AM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: The recipients of those funds budgeted $X for cycling infrastructure as part of normal annual capital expenditures. The province gave them some amount $Y for those projects. The recipients are now spending the same $X on cycling infrastructure, but will take the $Y they received and apply it to something non-cycling-related. I mean, technically they will say that they are now spending $(X-Y) in combination with the province's $Y to create $X of cycling infrastructure, but the $Y will wind up as a net addition elsewhere in the budget, either lowering roadwork maintenance backlogs, or going towards tax increase reductions.
This is probably true in some cases, but in others, our city being a prime example, there was no money budgeted for those projects or it was budgeted very far in the future so we will get more infra sooner here.