Nothing Is Free: Kingston’s “Fare-Free” Transit Fantasy Is a Permanent Tax on Permanent Residents

 January 22, 2026

There is no such thing as free public transit. There never has been. What is being marketed to Kingston residents as “fare-free” transit is, in reality, a permanent and expanding tax transfer from homeowners, renters, and local businesses to selected user groups, many of whom are not permanent residents of the city.

The City of Kingston already subsidizes transit heavily. In 2025, transit operating costs sit at approximately $35.8 million, while fares recover only about $10.7 million, or roughly 30% of costs. The remaining $19 million is already paid by taxpayers through property taxes and provincial transfer. Kingston residents are not debating whether to subsidize transit, they already do. The debate is whether to eliminate fares entirely and replace them with a permanent tax increase.

Eliminating fares does not eliminate costs. It eliminates accountability.

The Real Price Tag of “Free”

According to the city’s own financial projections, going fare-free would remove $10.7 million in annual fare revenue. Higher ridership would then drive operating costs up by an estimated 10–30%, pushing the net annual shortfall to $12–18 million every single year, indefinitely.

With Kingston’s total tax levy at approximately $289.5 million, covering even a mid-range $15 million gap would require a 5% tax increase. For the average household, that translates to $100–150 more per year and for many, more once inflation and service expansion are factored in.

And that’s before overcrowding, security costs, fleet expansion, or capital strain are considered.

Students Already Pay Far Less and Not Year-Round

Proponents of fare-free transit frequently point to student ridership, but omit a critical fact: students already receive deeply discounted transit and only pay for part of the year.

For the 2025–26 academic year:

• Queen’s University students pay $165 per year
• St. Lawrence College students pay about $190 per year

These fees buy unlimited transit access, but only while students are enrolled typically 5 to 6 months of actual residency in Kingston.

By contrast, permanent Kingston residents pay full fares 12 months a year, regardless of income, residency duration, or usage. A working adult purchasing a monthly pass pays $83 per month, or nearly $500 for six months, more than double what most students contribute for the same period.

This is not a minor imbalance. It is a structural subsidy from permanent residents to temporary populations.

The Ridership Myth

Advocates often claim fare-free systems produce 20–60% ridership increases. That argument does not hold in Kingston.

Why? Because Kingston already has:

• Free transit for children under 14
• Free high-school passes
• Subsidized low-income passes
• Deeply discounted university and college bulk programs

The “low-hanging fruit” has already been picked. Even city modeling shows that eliminating fares would not produce transformative gains without significant new service expansion, which itself drives costs higher.

A City Already Facing a Transit Shortfall

Kingston Transit is already short $600,000 in projected revenue for 2025, largely due to declining international student enrollment. Despite this, the operating budget was increased to $19.6 million, routes were expanded, and provincial gas-tax reserves were tapped to keep pilots afloat.

In other words, the system is not over-funded. It is already fragile.

Moving to a fare-free model at this moment is not progressive, it is fiscally reckless.

Who Really Pays

When fares disappear, costs do not. They simply migrate:

• Into higher property taxes
• Into business levies
• Into hidden charges embedded elsewhere in the budget

Homeowners cannot opt out. Renters pay through higher rents. Small businesses absorb higher fixed costs. And once fares are gone, they never return.

Temporary users come and go. Permanent residents stay, and pay.

A Smarter Path Forward

Kingston’s targeted programs work precisely because they are limited, measured, and funded:

• Youth and high-school passes deliver strong social returns
• Low-income programs improve access without blowing the budget
• Student bulk agreements are transparent and contractual

Expanding these programs where evidence supports them is responsible governance. Eliminating fares entirely is not.

Conclusion

“Free transit” is a slogan, not a solution. In Kingston, it would mean higher taxes, reduced transparency, and permanent cost transfers onto those who already pay the most.

Nothing is free. Someone always pays.

The only honest question is: who, and for how long?

And in Kingston’s case, the answer is clear: Permanent residents would pay, forever.

Let me be clear: removing fares does not make transit free, it makes it unaccountable. It shifts permanent, escalating costs onto homeowners, renters, and local businesses who already subsidize the system, while many beneficiaries contribute little, temporarily, or not at all. Once fares are eliminated, they will never return, but the taxes will.

Council is not voting on generosity today; it is voting on whether to impose a permanent tax increase disguised as compassion. Kingston residents deserve honesty, not slogans, because in public finance, nothing is free, and pretending otherwise is not leadership.