Skip to content

Transportation 2015: Growing beyond our fears

March 8, 2015

trollyseattle

For four years the battle has raged in Olympia about how to pass a comprehensive transportation package that invests in our state’s public infrastructure, enables our global economy and meets the needs of rural towns, suburban communities and big cities.  For four years the dialogue has been framed more by anti-tax rhetoric and proprietary regional interests than aspirational ideas of long-term statewide growth.  For four years the debate has become smaller and smaller, more defensive, less courageous and strategic.  For the first time in an era of divided government, a convoluted bill to raise the gas tax stumbled from the Republican-controlled Senate to the House with a meek but bipartisan 27-22 vote.

The business community, Seattle Times and other proponents are–understandably–so relieved to see any progress on a transportation package that it becomes easy to brush past the lack of intellectual rigor of the plan itself.

Most in Olympia are committed to a bold, modern 21st Century transportation investment plan.  Yet the Senate’s transportation package is inadequate not merely because of the gaping holes in the integrity of the bill itself (the numbers don’t balance–there’s hundreds of millions of spending on projects that aren’t actually funded) but because of the smallness of the approach.

Washington’s public infrastructure and transportation network is at a crossroad between mediocrity and greatness.  We will attract hundreds of thousands of new residents in the coming years.  We will continue to grow.  Our cities will continue to struggle with density, our suburbs will continue to struggle to mix job opportunities with affordable housing, our rural communities will continue to struggle with limited economic opportunities.

On the spending side, the ragged idea that gasoline taxes are exclusively for roads, highways and concrete and not meaningful investment in transit is so impotent it’s embarrassing for us as a state.  State dollars exclusively for highways and concrete and local dollars exclusively for transit brings all sides down to the common denominator of self-serving, narrow interests.  The lack of transportation connectedness–integrated transportation network of rural, suburban, city, industrial needs–is where the lack of imagination is weak.

On the revenue side, the idea that gasoline taxes continue to be the best form of taxation is itself so outdated it’s hard to imagine a less creative approach. The plan proposes $15 billion in road, bridge, construction and maintenance investments spread strategically across the state to garner votes.  The full range of transit requests add another $15 billion or so–virtually every penny from regressive and economically inefficient tax sources.

So let’s ask:  If you had the opportunity to invest $30 billion in taxpayer dollars to build a modern, 21st Century transportation system to meet the needs of our growing state is this how you would raise it and invest it?

Not a chance.

The existing philosophical construct perpetuates the ridiculous notion that transit investments are separate–the responsibility of local taxpayers to fund on top of their gas taxes by a vote of the people.  Sound Transit 3, a vital link to the future, is granted $11 billion in incremental taxing authority in a cobbled construct of sales, property and motor vehicle taxes.  Kitsap County is asking for authority to raise their sales tax by 0.3% to construct a passenger-only ferry to cut the commute time from Bremerton to Seattle to 35 minutes (talk about economic development).  Snohomish County requests the opportunity to add 0.3% sales tax to fund their Community Transit for buses.

Yes, I’m a regionalist, urbanist, modernist, density-supporting advocate to the core, but I’m no less committed to a strategic framework that works for all statewide on the revenue and spending side of the equation.

The package ignores the painfully obvious:  Our transportation revenue sources are dying and it’s time to build a more responsible way to fund our entire transportation system.  The weakest link in the current transportation package isn’t poison pills, it is the lack of imagination in how to pay for transportation for the next generation of our state.  The lack of transparency and oversight of how transportation dollars are spent is also a legitimate concern from all sides.  That means everything from the deep-bore tunnel to the massive 167 project and other mega-projects on the table. The public has a right to be skeptical on all sides, and the Legislature’s package must rebuild trust not detract from it.

Let’s invest in the Metropolitan Revolution for our urban region and authentic economic development for our rural communities by building a stronger network of interconnectedness.  Silos of road projects dolled out by legislative district is hardly a visionary strategy.

To pay for it, we should seriously consider in this package some new financing approaches that are more economically efficient.  Let’s include the idea of a well crafted vehicle miles travelled program (not GPS-based but rather total annual mileage reporting). We should seriously consider a more comprehensive, regional network of tolls to pay for maintenance and operations of our roads.  We should seriously consider an incremental Puget Sound-regional gasoline tax that’s free of the 18th Amendment constraints to help fund trains, buses and other transit options.  We should consider the idea of strong public and private sector partnerships.  We should seriously consider a payroll tax on large employers to help fund targeted investments in transit so the companies’ own employees can get to and from work more efficiently–with the investments supported by business.  And we should seriously consider the idea of a carbon-pricing program where polluters pay–or at least receive less of a subsidy from taxpayers– to help fund our statewide transportation system into the next generation.

A transportation package that perpetuates status quo design of transportation financing and spending serves no one effectively.  Without an integrated investment approach that tackles rural, suburban and urban needs–and a creative approach to new, market-oriented and user-based ways of financing transportation–it’s just a glorified list of pork projects with the middle class getting handed the bill.  That may garner a handful of votes in the Legislature but it’s unlikely to work well for seven million people of Washington.

We are so much more as a state than what we’ve become.

Your partner in service,

Reuven.

Advertisements
14 Comments leave one →
  1. March 10, 2015 7:13 am

    In short, the Senate bill is not only flawed for the many reasons already stated but also in its limited vision. Is the Legislature capable of producing such a visionary overhaul? Is it possible to develop enough support through an initiative process?

  2. M Donohue permalink
    March 10, 2015 5:04 pm

    Sorry Reuven, I cannot disagree with you more. The gas tax should continue to be for roads, not a fund to be raided in order to pay the way for people who work in downtown Seattle to use mass transit. It is quite unfair to expect people living in Tonasket to pay for bus rides and urban transit trains (which are not cost effective anyway) so that those people who do utilize mass transit won’t have to pay for the services they want and use. If indeed mass transit is to everyone’s benefit then such an argument should stand on its own merit … with its own separate tax.

  3. Brian Bradford permalink
    March 12, 2015 11:07 pm

    Here’s the problem… You single out Puget Sound as being the only region that needs transit investment.

  4. March 20, 2015 11:57 am

    I have read so many articles or reviews regarding the blogger lovers except this post is actually a fastidious post, keep it up.

  5. March 23, 2015 4:31 pm

    I was more than happy to uncover this website.
    I need to to thank you for ones time for this fantastic read!!
    I definitely liked every part of it and i also have you book marked to look at
    new information on your blog.

  6. March 27, 2015 12:48 am

    “Excellent blog you have got here.. It’s difficult to find
    quality writing like yours these days. I seriously appreciate people like you!
    Take care!!”

    Halloween SMS

  7. April 1, 2015 8:45 am

    Hi,

    I like it,.I dig from a long time and it reduce my eye strain.Development of transportation
    is most important for peoples.I thankful for this post.

  8. April 6, 2015 7:25 am

    RC – “Most in Olympia are committed to a bold, modern 21st Century transportation investment plan.”

    MS – Whoa – how can you say that? “Most” means a clear majority. “Most” can make a plan and make it happen. “Most” could partner with Oregon to replace the bridge across the Columbia – including light rail. That’s not the legislature we’ve been watching.

    RC – Washington’s public infrastructure and transportation network is at a crossroad between mediocrity and greatness.

    MS – Between mediocrity and decently-maintained maybe. I haven’t seen any signs of “greatness” at all. That would be a whole different discussion than the one we’re having.

    RC – Yes, I’m a regionalist, urbanist, modernist, density-supporting advocate to the core, but I’m no less committed to a strategic framework that works for all statewide on the revenue and spending side of the equation.

    MS – So let’s take your take on a strategic framework. Maybe what we need is to re-evaluate the relationship of the State to the Regions to the Cities and Towns to the Agricultural Heartland. There have been a lot of thinkers promoting the idea that Regional Governance would put the planning and responsibilities where they really belong – for both the areas of growth and the engines of prosperity. This would require two politically difficult transitions: the state, counties and cities giving up some power to the regional government, and the formation of regional governing bodies willing to operate collaboratively in a dynamic and demanding environment. It’s hard to visualize getting there from our present morass. And whereas some would characterize regional governance as a “breakthrough”, it seems to me to be more relevant as powerfully “appropriate”.

    RC – it’s time to build a more responsible way to fund our entire transportation system, including such projects as the SR deep bore tunnel.

    MS – Just think – had we had a Puget Sound Regional Government in place, there could have been a real debate about the deep bore tunnel on both the strategy and financing. It seems reasonable to me that the Seattle region will be a major beneficiary and should assume a greater responsibility for the tunnel – but that includes greater control over the budget and strategy. As long as the state (and many of its eastern WA transit resisters) holds all the reins, a real negotiation is not possible.

    RC – And we should seriously consider the idea of a carbon-pricing program where polluters pay–or at least receive less of a subsidy from taxpayers– to help fund our statewide transportation system into the next generation.

    MS – The one variation I would add to this is the acknowledgement that we ALL are polluters when we drive. If we see pollution as something to be taxed – and thus theoretically reduced or paid for – then taxing automobile use as part of the carbon-pricing package is only fair. I also think it would be more attractive to push this as much as a short-term health issue as a long-term environmental concern (though obviously they both matter).

    RC – A transportation package that perpetuates status quo design of transportation financing and spending serves no one effectively.

    MS – We’ll never get there without governance reform. As long as we in Seattle resent sending tax dollars to eastern WA for underutilized highway projects and eastern WA prevents sensible metropolitan transit investments, we’re at a stalemate (witness the last few sessions of state legislative progress). We’re so much more as a series of regions than our state will let us become.

    Thanks for your thoughtful approach and your willingness to share the stage.

    Mark Spitzer

  9. July 22, 2015 10:20 am

    I’ll right away snatch your rss as I can not in finding your e-mail subscription hyperlink or newsletter
    service. Do you have any? Please let me know so that I could subscribe.
    Thanks.

  10. August 2, 2015 5:14 am

    News letters are also great advertising tools for the school and help welcome parents into becoming more involved
    in the school.

  11. August 10, 2015 3:14 pm

    Its very useful for me from your hub.

  12. August 10, 2015 7:33 pm

    If some one desires expert view regarding blogging and site-building afterward i advise him/her
    to pay a quick visit this weblog, Keep up the good job.

  13. August 14, 2015 5:42 am

    you’re truly a excellent webmaster. The web site loading speed is
    amazing. It seems that you are doing any unique trick.
    In addition, The contents are masterpiece.
    you’ve done a magnificent task on this matter!

  14. August 15, 2015 5:54 am

    It’s truly very complex in this full of activity life to listen news on Television, therefore I only use the web
    for that reason, and take the most recent news.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: