Comments on: Taxing Authority for Transportation Agencies

By: tim

tim — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 12:37:40 +0000

Let this get to the guards that sat by while the 15 yr. old girl got beaten.

[deleted, ad-hominem]

By: Taxing Authority for Transportation Agencies Seattle Transit Blog | Outdoor Ceiling Fans

Sun, 31 May 2009 16:40:01 +0000

[...] Taxing Authority for Transportation Agencies Seattle Transit Blog Posted by root 10 hours ago (http://seattletransitblog.com) Comment edited off topic trolling comments removed rail improvements king street station phase ii rennovation station interior and ceiling replacement work seattle projects alaskan way viaduct tunnel replacement seattle transit blog is powered by wordpres Discuss | Bury | News | Taxing Authority for Transportation Agencies Seattle Transit Blog [...]

By: Taxing Authority for Transportation Agencies Seattle Transit Blog | Outdoor Ceiling Fans

Sun, 31 May 2009 12:23:19 +0000

[...] Taxing Authority for Transportation Agencies Seattle Transit Blog Posted by root 1 hour 59 minutes ago (http://seattletransitblog.com) Comment edited off topic trolling comments removed rail improvements king street station phase ii rennovation station interior and ceiling replacement work seattle projects alaskan way viaduct tunnel replacement seattle transit blog is powered by wordpres Discuss | Bury | News | Taxing Authority for Transportation Agencies Seattle Transit Blog [...]

By: Metro Tax Update - Seattle Transit Blog

Metro Tax Update - Seattle Transit Blog — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 13:55:28 +0000

[...] The bill is titled “Modifying provisions of local option taxes” and specifically increases the taxing authority that King County can dedicate to transit by allowing existing (unused) Ferry District taxing authority to be used for buses and streetcars instead. Andrew discussed the topic here before. [...]

By: Transit Ridership at 52 year high - Seattle Transit Blog

Transit Ridership at 52 year high - Seattle Transit Blog — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 20:39:13 +0000

[...] likely to decline further in 2009. Pierce Transit still has room to increase their sales tax rate, but other agencies in our area don’t. 2009 might be a bleak year for transit [...]

By: Bernie

Bernie — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 01:09:09 +0000

“Regional policy requires that a third of Metro Transit’s operating budget be generated from customers.”

Wow, 35% of the budget from fares. That’s a big percentage. If KC Metro could start doing that there wouldn’t be a shortage. Fares in Minneapolis are comparable to Seattle but they’re covering double the percentage of operating cost.

Transit Fares
Non-Rush Rush
Local Fare $1.75 $2.25
Express Fare $2.25 $3.00

By: A. Filer

A. Filer — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 00:19:07 +0000

I never remembered hearing debates like this when I lived in Minneapolis, so I finally got around to looking up the funding apportionment there: “Metro Transit currently collects roughly 35 percent of its budget from fareboxes, 60 percent comes from state appropriations and motor vehicle sales, and the remainder is from federal and self-generating sources.” [metrotransit.org]. I would imagine the state appropriation there is a lot easier since Minnesota has a (large) income tax. I’d suggest that Washington could use an income tax, but I know better than to bring up that issue.

By: Chris Stefan

Chris Stefan — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:42:23 +0000

Actually the original plan for the ferry system was to replace the ferry runs with toll bridges. Except for Hood Canal that didn’t really happen.

The ferry system is an essential transportation link for many communities.

There are basically 4 different types of ferry users:
Commuters: People who live on one side of a ferry run and work on the other. Most people using the central Puget Sound runs for commuting don’t take their cars across. Some may have a car on both sides, but many only have a car on one end or the other. Many people bike, walk, take transit, or get a ride on one or both ends.
Tourists: People traveling for lesuire, often heading for the Olympics if using the cross-sound runs. Tend to bring a vehicle with them.
Non-commuter Residents: People who live on one side of a ferry run and make trips to the other side for reasons other than employment. Things such as shopping, medical appointments, going to a concert, sports games, etc.
Commercial: non-commuter business traffic. Freight, deliveries, service calls, etc.

By: Bernie

Bernie — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 07:45:36 +0000

Remember that until 1951 the ferries were privately run. From the WSDOT website on WSF history, “When the ferry system was first purchased by the State from the Puget Sound Navigation Company, it was intended to finance itself solely through the fare box (revenues).”

Given the general condemnation of folks on this site for “roads that encourage sprawl” I’m confused as to why the strong support for ferries. Especially since the vast majority of ferry riders either drive on or have beater “ferry cars” parked at one (or both) ends.

By: Chris Stefan

Chris Stefan — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 07:25:14 +0000

I believe Kitsap County has already created a ferry district. However I believe their efforts are directed toward passenger ferries.

The ferry district money wouldn’t be enough to run the WSF auto ferry routes and I’m unclear on what mechanism there would be for the county ferry district to provide a supplement to the WSF runs serving Kitsap County.

In any case even if County ferry districts can give money to WSF for runs serving the district I doubt that will take care of the ferry system’s long-term capital budget shortfall.

The legislature needs to be held accountable for the poor financial state of the ferry system. Especially people like Sen. Haugen, who has been in the Legislature since prior to I-695, has constituents who depend on the ferry system or the economic activity it brings, and has been a member of or the chair of the committee with jurisdiction over WSF.

Sure she talks a good game but what has she done in order to solve the problem of the ferry system literally rusting away?

By: Chris Stefan

Chris Stefan — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 07:12:13 +0000

Fares for the Washington State Ferries have been going up every year since I-695 passed. I believe the fare increases have been the maximum 7% allowed under state law. The overall farebox recovery for the ferry system is already much higher than any other transit system. Maintenance has suffered and the ferries haven’t had a meaningful capital budget since then.

Sure the ferry system can keep raising fares. Some people won’t have a choice but to pay. However once the fares get to be high enough some people will drive around where that is possible (everywhere but Vashon and the San Juans) or cut back on discretionary trips.

Even if ferry fares were high enough to cover 100% of the operating and maintenance costs there is still the need for capital to replace vessels and upgrade terminals.

By: Andrew Smith

Andrew Smith — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 02:41:38 +0000

I think it means that people will move, change work patterns, or carpool if ferry rates are raised.

The WSF will not be able to get more money without the state allowing them to, but local ferry districts are available under state law, so individual counties, eg, Kitsap or Island, could create their own ferry district and raise money via the property tax mentioned in this post.

By: Jessica

Jessica — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 00:17:23 +0000

Count me in as a Yes Vote to use Ferry taxes for transit

By: Lydia

Lydia — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 21:56:18 +0000

There was an article today about the Washington State Ferry system possibly asking for a renewed share of MVET to stay solvent. It quoted a frequent rider from Bainbridge as saying that you can’t raise fares to support the system, because ridership just goes down, making it unsustainable. I don’t expect transit projects to be self-supporting from fares, but is this saying that not that many people really need the ferry (or that living on an island may not be sustainable)? I’m a transit dummy, just asking.

By: Chris Stefan

Chris Stefan — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 21:05:20 +0000

On the other hand the Vancouver, WA yard improvements are important to Amtrak and any potential commuter rail between Clark County and Portland. I’m unclear what the project status or funding is at the moment.

By: Tim Whittome

Tim Whittome — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 21:05:10 +0000

Apologies to reply to my own message, and thank you to those who have pointed out the missing links, but to add to my own list:

Washington State Ferries – Coleman Dock and other ferry terminal expansions/improvements.
Washington State Ferries – Ferry replacement – lots of them.
Washington State Ferries – Adequate funding for Anacortes-Sydney (BC that is and not Australia!).

By: Tim Whittome

Tim Whittome — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 21:01:29 +0000

Thanks Chris – yes, I should have mentioned the WSF plans and plans for the Coleman Dock, Edmonds and other ferry terminals.

By: Tim Whittome

Tim Whittome — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 21:00:35 +0000

Apologies if you think it is a bizarre list, but then most of all this is a bizarre minefield anyways. I acknowledge that most of the projects are in progress but with the state of things right now, can they in fact be completed. I am guessing yes, but with the recent posts on Seattle being short changed etc, I remain concerned.

By: Mike B

Mike B — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 20:46:11 +0000

The Leavenworth Station is fully funded and will be under construction this summer. Vancouvers switching improvements is CN/CP/BNSF/BC’s problem, not WA State tax payers (Let BC pay for it since for the 2010 Olympics as the Cascades will be important for moving people). Point Defiance bypass should be the highest priory since it would drastically improve travel times between Sea and PDX as well as open up freight traffic around Pt Defiance. 2nd should be Sounder stations at/around the Olympic Sculpture Park and Ballard. Huge amount of lost ridership there. That would be a Sound Transit project since the Cascades is an intercity train, not a commuter train.

First Hill Streetcar is a Sound Transit project.

ORCA isn’t just Metro. Hence the name One Regional Card for All.

This list you give is sort of bizarre. Some projects don’t have funding while others are almost done. The ones almost done don’t need to be ranked b/c they’re…almost done.

By: Chris Stefan

Chris Stefan — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 20:44:41 +0000

While you mention the King County passenger ferries, you forgot to mention the Washington State Ferry system. The long term capital needs of WSF need to be addressed. If funding for new vessels is not found service will have to be cut due to a vessel shortage. Terminal improvements at Edmonds and Mukilteo are important for Sounder, ST Express, CT, Amtrak as well as the ferry system. A redeveloped Coleman Dock would help the Seattle Waterfront and provide a true inter modal transportation center.

On to some specific projects:
Rail improvements – Point Defiance bypass (incl. Sounder extension to Lakewood)
I’d rate this an 8. While funding isn’t entirely nailed down there are a number of pots of money that can be used and it seems to be a priority both for Sound Transit and for Amtrak.

Sound Transit projects – Opening Link in July to Tukwila.
Sound Transit projects – Extending Link to SeaTac Airport by December.
Sound Transit projects – Opening the Downtown tunnel all day every day from May onwards.
9.5 – These projects are nearly complete with funding already allocated and the only risk is there might be a slight delay in the opening date which is why it isn’t a 10.

Sound Transit projects – ST2 for one thing.
7 – Funding is in place with a voter mandate. Downrated some due to the long project time lines, potential for political mischief, and unclear impact of the recession on ST2 tax collections. Projects are most likely to be delayed rather than canceled outright.

Road projects – Hood canal bridge replacement.
9 Project is under construction with signed contracts. Any delays will likely be due to construction problems rather than funding.

I can’t really rate any of the rest as I don’t have a feel for funding or the political will/roadblocks associated with the project.