by Katie Wilson

On Tuesday, January 10, Governor Gregoire released a 10-year transportation revenue proposal (posted on the Seattle Transit Blog here). Less than 5% of the package is dedicated to transit – not nearly enough, although this should come as no surprise to anyone. Two items bear directly on local public transit:

1. “Grant funding for transit to mitigate potential service cuts to passengers that would affect their ability to get to work, school and other destinations – $150 million”

Direct state funding for public transit is sorely needed; unfortunately this $150 million in grant money is a one-time (not an annual) deal, and would presumably be spread across the state, so the amount that would reach Metro over the next ten years is likely to be rather small.

2. “Either allow local governments the option, through councilmatic [sic] approval, to impose a 1 percent increase in the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax, with proceeds to be dedicated to local road and transit needs, or allow transportation benefit districts the option, through councilmatic approval, to adopt up to a $40 vehicle license fee for local road and transit needs.”

A 1% MVET increase isn’t a great funding tool, but at least it would be more progressive than a flat car tab fee – a welcome reminiscence of the days before Eyman’s Initiative 695. But Martin H. Duke’s post on the Seattle Transit Blog suggests that in King County that 1% would end up going “to address traffic diversion from the tunnel.” And if the $40 VLF were approved, even much of that would likely be consumed at the city level, rather than being funneled to King County Metro.

Which leaves us with… not much.

As politically impossible as it seems right now, it’s worth thinking about some more progressive funding measures we might demand of the state once we have built up the people-power to do so effectively. The Economic Opportunity Institute’s fact sheet, “$2 billion in progressive annual revenue for Washington,” contains several transit-related items. For instance, a state-wide 10% luxury tax on motor vehicles, vessels, and aircraft valued over $50,000 would raise $70 million annually; and repealing the sales tax exemption on trade-ins would raise $114 million. EOI has this to say about trade-ins:

“Trade-ins – When someone trades in a car (or boat or appliance) while purchasing a new one from a dealer, no sales tax is charged on the value of the trade-in. In private party sales of used cars, the purchaser pays sales tax on the purchase price when registering the vehicle. Typically, sellers get a better price by selling a used vehicle themselves, so trading-in is primarily a convenience, and especially benefits those who frequently buy a new car. Eliminating this exemption would primarily affect upper income people. Because a portion of sales tax goes to local governments, eliminating the exemption would provide $35 million in additional revenue to local governments.”

Of course, there’s also no good reason why transit funding should come only from transit-related taxes.

by Nat Latos and Katie Wilson

On December 29 the Seattle Times featured an article entitled “Seattle looks to clean up Third Avenue transit corridor,” describing some of the obstacles facing the city’s plans to improve this section of downtown. Unfortunately, author Lynn Thompson both displays the Times’ usual editorial prejudice against poor people and fails to address the fundamental issues at play.

Violence is the article’s narrative thread, and the most apparent conclusion is that clearly we need more police. In describing the scene at Third and Pine the author says commuters encounter “a gantlet of open-air drug deals, the homeless, the mentally ill and crowds of loitering street kids.” The implication is that the homeless, mentally ill, and “street kids” don’t have as much a right as anyone else to be in the downtown core. More to the point, even though she aptly points out that the city and state are both broke she fails to appreciate that many people literally have nowhere else to be. As services are cut, those who are left behind cannot simply be pushed out of sight and should not be criminalized. While violence is unacceptable, to lump all poor people and ill people in to the same group as felons and thugs is irresponsible journalism. The latent assumption is that downtown exists for businesses, consumers, and tourists – not for all of us.

There is no doubt that the Third Avenue transit corridor is badly in need of physical improvements. But the suggestion of Jon Scholes, vice president for the Downtown Seattle Association, that the city should be solely on the hook for the cost of making this a “nice” (read gentrified) place is not only fanciful (the city is still broke) but ignores that many businesses directly benefit from the corridor. Simply taking the city to task for something it can’t do is not the answer. To make Third Avenue safer (more and better lighting) and to improve the experience of transit riders (better bus shelters, more seating, landscaping), one way or another the downtown businesses and property owners will have to pull their weight in funding them.

Otherwise, it will be business as usual and everyone will continue to wonder why no one in the city will address the Third Avenue problem.

The first project of the Transit Riders Union is a survey of Metro bus riders. This survey is a two-way conversation: we’re asking riders to share with us their ideas about how public transit can be improved, and we’re sharing some information too. The responses we collect will help us to figure out what issues are most important to riders, and what the TRU should be fighting for in the future.

After a lot of planning and a few trial runs, the survey is ready to go!! And now we need your help. The more responses we can collect, the better. Here’s how you can get involved:

1. Volunteer with our street team. We have three regular surveying sessions every week in downtown Seattle: Tuesdays at 5pm, Thursdays at noon, and Saturdays at 2pm. We’ll meet on the second floor of the City Center Building at 5th and Pike, at the seating area overlooking Pike at the top of the escalator. At least one TRU organizer will be there a quarter hour before the appointed starting time, sporting a bright gold shirt. We’ll give you the run-down on what the survey is all about, and then we’ll hit the bus stops as a group – you can observe someone else conducting the survey until you feel comfortable doing it yourself.

2. Conduct the survey on your own, on the bus and at your bus stops. You can find printable PDFs of our survey questions and response charts here. Contact Katie, the survey project coordinator, at katie@transitriders.org, to arrange data collection.

3. Take our survey on-line! You can find it on the survey page in the projects section.

4. Help us analyze the results of the survey, and to plan and develop future surveys – including one for bus drivers. If you’re interested, email Katie at katie@transitriders.org.

by Katie Wilson

It costs over half a billion dollars to keep the King County Metro bus system running for a full year. Where does all this money come from?

Bus fares make up a smaller portion of Metro’s budget than you might think – less than 25%. Revenue from advertising and other miscellaneous sources contributes another 15%. But the most important source of funding by far is sales tax, which accounts for over 60% of Metro’s operating budget. In King County a sales tax of 0.9% goes directly to Metro – that’s just about a penny on every dollar you spend. So you are paying for the bus not only when you pay your fare, but every time you buy a pair of shoes or a bar of soap.[ref]From King County’s web site: “King County residents currently pay a 9.5 percent sales tax. The state keeps 6.5 percent, 1.8 percent goes to Metro Transit and Sound Transit, 0.1 percent is set aside for mental health services and substance abuse treatment, and the remaining 1.1 percent is split between cities and the County.”  More detailed information on Metro’s operating budget and capital funding can be found on their website.[/ref]

It makes sense that a social good, like public transit, should be funded through taxation. But what kind of taxation? Who is bearing the brunt of the cost? This makes a big difference.

Read more

Hello Transit Riders,

Last month, Rodney Rutherford, who generously granted the previous transitriders.org website to the new Seattle Transit Riders Union, sent out a questionnaire to electoral candidates. All candidates for legislative and executive positions in King County (and all cities therein) were asked to respond to questions affecting transit riders. Their responses are posted at https://go.transitriders.org/election2011. The elections are coming up on November 8th, so if you want to know the candidates’ positions on transit issues, here’s your chance to find out!

Welcome, transit riders of Seattle and the Puget Sound! This is the website of the newly-formed Transit Riders Union.

The idea of starting a Transit Riders Union grew out of the fight against bus service cuts earlier this year. King County Metro’s main source of revenue – sales tax – has taken a sharp dive since the recession began, and by spring 2011 Metro was facing the prospect of 17% cuts. Dozens of bus routes were slated to be eliminated. Some effective propaganda by Metro, combined with the organizing efforts of a wide variety of community groups, helped to raise a huge public outcry. Thousands of people attended public hearings and signed petitions, demanding that this vital public service be preserved.

But were the bus riders of King County really standing up, were they really being heard?

Read more