King County officials are planning to ask voters this April to approve a $60 annual car-tab fee and a tenth-of-a-penny sales tax increase for the next decade to prevent catastrophic cuts to Metro bus service and keep local roads whole.
Metro is also planning to raise bus fares by another 25 cents in 2015—the fifth fare hike since 2008—but will soften the economic blow by creating a cheaper fare for low-income riders.
If voters reject the measure to raise Metro revenue, which would cost the average household an estimated $11 a month, the underfunded transit agency will move forward with plans to cut up to 17 percent of its bus service.
What does losing 17 percent of a vital service actually feel like? It’s not just tinkering around the edges. In public schools around the state, for example, students would be out of school for six additional weeks. Libraries that are currently open every day would close for two months straight. A full-time employee who cut his or her hours by 17 percent would get nine extra weeks of vacation.
For King County Metro, it adds up to: More than 70 eliminated routes, 107 changed routes, and more crowded buses on the 33 unchanged routes, plus longer waits at the curb, more transfers, less reliable service, and full buses passing you by in the rain. (West Seattle and southwest King County residents will be hit extra hard after funding for extra buses to cope with downtown tunnel construction runs out in June.)
Oran Viriyincy, flickr
One can debate who would be affected the most. Certainly, low-income and elderly residents who depend on transit to get to doctor’s appointments, buy groceries or visit friends would be at the top of the list. So will downtown employers who depend on service workers who commute from more affordable suburbs. Or anyone who’s trying to get by without a car.
But the fact remains that 87 percent of Metro’s regular riders do have access to a car, and based on human nature, will be more likely to use it if infrequent bus service and longer wait times begin to inconvenience them. And that will make traffic worse for everyone, even drivers who’ve never set foot on a Metro bus.
Oh, and that’s assuming there’s still a road for you to drive on. King County estimates that without a new funding source, 35 bridges are at risk of closing in the next 25 years, and 72 miles of roads are likely to fail without maintenance and construction.
How did we get here?
City and county officials across King County, along with Chamber of Commerce and labor leaders, higher education officials and a coalition of environmental, transportation, and human service non-profits have been begging the Washington state legislature for several years to allow the county to raise local revenue for buses and roads through a motor vehicle excise tax. That would be less regressive than a flat car tab fee and less subject to economic downturns than the sales tax, but requires the state to grant that authority.
In fact, the main reason Metro is so far in the hole is that the agency already relies heavily on the sales tax for its funding, and $1.3 billion dollars in expected revenues evaporated during the last recession. The agency has been able to make up for about $800 million of that by raising fares four times, laying off staff, making the system more efficient, not buying buses, deferring maintenance, and spending reserves. The remaining last resort to bridge that shortfall are the massive service cuts currently on the table.
cjeremyprice,flickr
Similarly, funding that the county uses to maintain roads and bridges has dropped by one-third since 2009 as property values in rural and unincorporated parts of King County have nosedived. The average homeowner in unincorporated King County will pay roughly $80 less in 2013 property taxes for the roads levy than in 2011.
King County Executive Dow Constantine said state legislators have said they want to keep the county at the table and hungry for a funding solution because including it in a statewide package increases the chances of a larger transportation measure’s success. But with those negotiations in Olympia still foundering, and Metro service cuts scheduled to begin this summer, Constantine and a bevy of other officials said Tuesday that it’s time for the county to move forward with options that don’t require the state’s blessing:
We are out of time. We are out of time for a statewide bill that includes a local transportation solution. For five years we’ve lived under the threat of drastic bus cuts at a time when we need more service, not less, and the backlog of maintenance for local roads continues to grow. We waited and we waited and now time is up.
So how can we fix it?
Here are some of details of the plan unveiled Tuesday, which has bipartisan support from King County Council members Larry Phillips, Jane Hague, Joe McDermott and Rod Dembowski. As proposed, voters would be asked to approve a ballot measure in an April 22 special election to:
- Create a King County Transportation District to raise roughly $130 million a year
- Impose a $60 annual vehicle fee (a $40 increase over a temporary $20 fee residents currently pay)
- Increase the sales tax by 0.1% for the next 10 years
- Spend 60% of the revenue ($80 million/year) to preserve Metro bus service
- Distribute 40% of that money ($50 million/year) to King County and local cities for road maintenance, bridge repair, pedestrian and bicycle projects, sidewalks, or intersection improvements
- Cost the average household $8/month in vehicle licensing fees and $3/month in additional sales tax
King County Metro would also change its fare structure on March 1, 2015 and:
- Raise fares by 25 cents per trip to $2.75 for one zone and $3.25 for two zones
- Create a low-income fare of $1.50 for anyone making below 200 percent of the federal poverty level, or about $23,000 in annual income for an individual
The King County Council will begin debating the transportation ballot proposal tomorrow, with opportunities for public input before a late February deadline to send a final measure to a public vote.
David Moore
Much of the wasted money in Sound Transit and the overpriced and underused lite rail could have been used for Metro to keep down fares and keep Seattle people riding the buses. The mega tunnels and stations continue to gobble millions today. Commuter buses have been very successful at keeping suburban cars out of downtown Seattle and reducing commutes by a few miles to the outlying park and rides but took money from local bus service.
Scott Foster
You can count on me to vote no. I have a very old, clean-burning Toyota truck that gets good gas mileage and less than a thousand miles of driving per year. It’s a good piece of equipment, which I expect to keep. Each of my motorcycles gets good gas milage and has minimal impact on the road. Why should I pay four times as much as someone who drives a Denali all day?
Stephen Marcus
Scott –
One reason we want to fully fund Metro is so that the almost 400,000 daily trips taken by Metro riders continue to be taken and not divert to more cars on your road. Aren’t the roads crowded enough already? We’re not going to build our way to a better infrastructure. We have to better utilize what we’ve got. Assuming that a 17% cut in service will result in 17% fewer bus trips and 17% more cars that’s 68,000 more car trips/day. Isn’t it worth $60.00 a year plus a few sales tax dollars to keep those tens of thousands of car trips off your road?
Bundy
“Assuming that a 17% cut in service will result in 17% fewer bus trips and 17% more cars ”
Why would anyone assume that? Community Transit reduced service hours by 37 percent and weekday ridership fell only 6%.
And people who ride the bus would probably try to share rides with other motorists if they chose to take a care instead of the bus. Why would anyone assume former bus riders would drive alone, and not carpool, particularly since there would probably be people taking the same trip who had their bus canceled. Why wouldn’t these people get together and rideshare? If the were motivated to take the bus, they would probably be motivated to form car pools.
Weezy
This quote from Constantine in the piece is misleading:
“For five years we’ve lived under the threat of drastic bus cuts at a time when we need more service, not less.”
In fact less service WAS needed. Metro ridership has been flat for years. It actually is below 2008 levels —
There were 123 million unlinked passenger trips in 2008:
http://www.ntdprogram.gov/ntdprogram/pubs/profiles/2008/agency_profiles/0001.pdf
That number fell, and still has not recovered. There were 119 million unlinked passenger trips in 2012:
http://www.ntdprogram.gov/ntdprogram/pubs/profiles/2012/agency_profiles/0001.pdf
The average household around here pays close to $700 in direct, regressive taxes for transit already. That includes the 1.8% sales taxes Sound Transit and Metro confiscate, plus the Sound Transit car tab tax, plus the Metro sales tax.
No place else in the country imposes taxes targeting individuals and families that are nearly that heavy. In contrast, the best practices for funding buses and trains are what the peers all do: little or no dedicated regressive taxing, modest taxes targeting businesses (the primary beneficiaries of transit), LID revenues, commercial property transfer taxes, fare-revenue backed bonds, federal grants, state grants, diversions of portions of existing municipal revenue streams, taxes on petroleum transfers by those in that industry, etc. No place else uses the sociopathic “hike regressive taxes higher and higher” method the bus and train services provider managers here employ.
Stephen Marcus
Weezy –
Can you sight your sources for your assertion that our financing structure is not aligned with other transit systems in the nation or the world? I want a robust mass transit system and am inclined to vote for this measure just to keep the thing running at current levels, but I am curious how other systems operate. What are there costs relative to ours and what are their sources of revenue. Further source information would be appreciated.
Weezy
Here is some data on the different transit taxing practices around the country:
http://cfo.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ocfo/publication/attachments/Nationwide%20Comparison%202011.pdf
Table 7 shows Seattle’s overall state and local sales taxes second highest in the nation, with transit sales taxes (1.8%) FAR above the rest of the country’s. Add in the Metro property tax and Sound Transit’s car tab tax, and we currently have not only the most regressive transit taxing structure but the highest per-capita amount of transit taxing targeting households.
Not sure why you’d ask about relative costs . . . those are a function of political choices. To the extent the labor and fuel costs are relatively higher here it is because the government heads enacted policies to bring that result about.
No more general taxing for transit here is needed or appropriate. Metro, the transit governments in Pierce and Snohomish counties, and Sound Transit will confiscate something on the order of $1.5 billion in local tax revenue this year alone. All the peers do a great job of providing bus service, and expanding train systems, with far less annual local tax revenue:
– TriMet (Portland) – $233 million;
– DART (Dallas/Fort Worth) – $385 million;
– San Diego Metropolitan Transit System – $100 million; and
– RTID (Denver) – $241 million.
Bear in mind also that families and individuals in greater Portland (for example) pay $0 in direct general taxes each year for transit. A far more modest tax that businesses pay is all that is needed there.
Eldridge
Community Transit cut service hours by 37 percent, and weekday ridership fell only 6 percent! If Metro cut service hours by only 17 percent, which is less than half the cuts CT made, then Metro weekday ridership would probably fall only 3 percent, or less. This is insignificant, since well over 3 percent of weekday Metro trips are discretionary, and not necessary at all. And Metro has already said they would not have to cut nearly 17 percent because sales tax revenues have been increasing significantly recently. Why did you fail to mention that?
Go ahead and cut service, or, alternatively, raise fares a significant amount — not a measly 25 cents. If Metro cuts service hours, productivity will skyrocket, as it did for CT. And that is a good thing.
Obviously, I will note NO and volunteer on the campaign to defeat this unnecessary massive regressive tax increase.
http://www.commtrans.org/newsrelease/1517
“Between 2010 and 2012, Community Transit cut 37 percent of its bus service as it saw sales tax revenues plummet from the recession. Still, average weekday ridership dropped only 6 percent after the cuts.
“Community Transit maintained most of its ridership by strategically cutting unproductive service – early and late-night buses, mid-day trips and low-ridership routes. As a result, productivity on the service that remains has skyrocketed.
• Local bus service within Snohomish County has seen a 31 percent increase in boardings per hour.
• Swiftbus rapid transit service along Highway 99 between Everett and Shoreline has seen a 59 percent increase in boardings per hour.
• Commuter service to Seattle and UW has seen a 70 percent increase in boardings per hour.
“Following its recent service cuts, Community Transit is operating the same number of service hours as it did in the year 2000 when ridership was 7.2 million boardings. In 2012, the agency provided 9.1 million rides, meaning that last year Community Transit carried 26 percent more riders than it did in 2000 with the same level of service.”
KC Metro: are you not as smart as Community Transit?
RW
The impacts to transportation and roads precede the recession. Look at the state initiatives such as:
I-695 Replaced Motor Vehicle Tax with flat fee
I-745 Earmark 90% transportation funds for roads, delete sales tax on road construction.
I-776 Cut local motor vehicle sales tax
They all cut revenue, so will creating another rate tier for low income. How will one prove low income and where will the cut off be? A lot of low income folk simply don’t pay now on the Rapid Ride or Link Rail. Since the shootings, no one is challenging them and it has been a while since I’ve seen a fare cop. They’ve probably been cut along with the buses.
Increase the sales tax, people still consume. Increase the tax on the stadium tickets. Traffic is crazy when there are games.
Frankly I think bikes and cyclists should be licensed and taxed, so we can get better routes for bikes and some structure on road rules.
And adding more safety best practice questions to the drivers exam regarding driving with bikes and yielding.
Weezy
[Amended comment] I disagree with this point. The taxing for transit is FAR higher now than it’s ever been. I-695 was unconstitutional, and the county car tab tax of only $30 that went away after I-776 was more than made up for by the additional sales tax and property tax King County started imposing after 2005. [Deleted portion of comment.]
Serena Larkin
Weezy, personal attacks on our readers, other commenters, and researchers are neither productive nor welcome on this blog. I have edited your comment above to reflect that policy and will monitor your comments going forward to ensure that you do not continue to abuse it.
Stephen Marcus
I may not be wholly comfortable with the funding mechanism but I am for a robust mass transit system. We can’t afford to lose service. In fact I’d like to see Metro expand and provide more frequent service thereby making it more attractive to more potential riders. I think the funding should come from a gas tax – the more your drive the more you subsidize bus riders staying out of your lane – King County doesn’t have that taxing authority without the state’s permission. So we use what we’ve got to keep people riding the buses. Wanna know what 17% more traffic on our already clogged arterials looks like? Vote no for this measure and find out. Then we’ll all complain together about how crowded our roads are (oh wait, we already do that).