 |
| Results from Pierce Transit Prop 1 - February 2002 |
Picture this for a moment: It's 2002, Tim Eyman's Initiative 695 has passed and been found unconstitutional, but it doesn't matter. The State Legislature in cowardice, eliminates the one progressive tax in Washington State, the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax, and limits car tabs to $30 per year. This cuts transit funding statewide and deepens Pierce Transit's reliance on the sales tax.
38% of Pierce Transit's revenues are now gone. Service has been cut roughly 20% in order to slow the rate at which reserves are drained. Pierce Transit puts together a revenue measure of an additional 0.3% to restore service back to its original trajectory. And what happens?
The suburbs vote it down - namely Buckley, Bonney Lake, Orting, South Hill, and unincorporated mid-county.
At the same time, Tacoma pulls Pierce Transit through, with a margin of 54% yes / 46% no. Skip forward nine years.
Has anything changed since 2002?
 |
| Pierce Transit Prop 1, Feb 2011. Red = Failed Transit votes in 2007, 2008, 2011. Eerily familiar to Feb 2002. |
In the last ten years Pierce County's unincorporated population has mushroomed. In South Hill, the population increased 65.8%. Tacoma's growth rate hasn't kept pace, only increasing a paltry 2.5%. So generally speaking, that's a lot more no votes than Tacoma's urban pro-transit voters can handle.
If voters in the suburbs say get rid of transit funding in 1999 and then reject additional transit funding in 2002, say no again in 2007, no in 2008, and no in 2011, why should we expect a yes under any circumstances?
Posts
Astute analysis Chris, thank you!
ReplyDeleteChris,
ReplyDeleteExcellent points on So Hill, and for another reason to dislike South Hill Puyallup, it's strip malls are ugly too.
With my math, Tacoma's yes votes and Puyallup's no votes end up to be basically a tie. and So. Hill Mall, So. Hill's endless strip malls, and Downtown Puyallup car dealers collect an incredible amount of sales tax. Sales tax that Pierce Transit could sorely use.
To get a positive transit vote that includes Puyallup, PT would have to redraw their service area map very carefully. Doesn't Lakewood normally vote yes on transit? Pretty sure that UP votes no, Fife, Ruston, Fircrest, I don't know. Bonney Lake, Roy, Sumner, etc. etc. are all more expensive than their no votes are worth.
Of course, you are right, if PT drew Puyallup out of their service area, Tacoma would dominate the vote and most transit measures on the ballot would pass easily, but with substantially less tax revenue in the coffers.
There is a balance that needs to be struck between what areas generate revenue and what areas have predominantly no votes. Areas are a home run for cutting if they have no riders, no service, no sales tax revenue, and consistently vote against transit service.
ReplyDeletePuyallup will likely stay because they need service and they couldn't sustain transit service outside the PTBA. Their no votes actually were canceled 2:1 by Tacoma's yes vote margin for Prop 1. When we push harder in a future ballot measure, it'll be even more apparent how much more Tacoma supports transit.
Lakewood has been a mixed bag when it comes to public transit, but they do support buses - generally. They were split almost 50/50 for Prop 1. The real area that just sinks Pierce Transit is unincorporated East County, which had a net of 7000 no votes. The Key Peninsula that had a net of 2300 no votes.
That's a total of 9300 votes. Proposition 1 only lost by 11,700 votes. Dropping those two areas alone would mean that Prop 1 would have a much easier chance of passing. Additionally there's Bonney Lake, Buckley, Orting, Milton and Edgewood that could also be cut with a net improvement of a few hundred votes at least.
I wonder how much of the Key Peninsula gets to vote on Pierce Transit. Such a small portion of Gig Harbor actually receives service. Most of the houses over there are miles away from the bus route. In a way, it's not fair to them to have to pay for a service they can't readily use, and it's not fair to Tacoma that their no votes weigh so heavily on the outcome of transit in Tacoma.
ReplyDeleteMaybe PT could draw the service area map in Gig Harbor to include only the neighborhoods and business districts that are within a reasonable walk to the bus route. That would be the downtown business district and the hospital, but not the sprawling neighborhoods miles away from a route.
By doing that, they could still provide service across the bridge, still get most of the sales tax revenues from KP, and the big bonus would be avoiding alot of no votes for transit.
That's a good point to make. If a precinct of a city is in the service area, then the WHOLE CITY must be in the service area. Gig Harbor is only a small portion of the Key Peninsula. What is odd to me is that we include islands in the Puget Sound within the boundary... we don't serve islands and I don't think that we ever have.
ReplyDeleteRemoving KP would save us a few thousand votes. It's a no-brainer.
I'd vote no if I lived in Longbranch.
ReplyDelete