Transit Legislative Update: "Get in the Zone"

The Washington State Senate Transportation Committee heard testimony yesterday on SB 5793, which would allow for the creation of "enhanced public transportation zones" (described in the last post).  Briefly, this zone would allow remaining sales tax authority Pierce Transit has (up to an additional 0.3%), to be levied within a smaller area than the entire taxing district.  If such tax authority were approved by the voters, riders would see additional service hours (or offset cuts) only within that zone.  The additional revenue would remain in place for five years before requiring reauthorization. The video below starts with the hearing of the bill.

Sen. Jeannie Darnielle, Tacoma (D-27)

At the hearing, Senator Jeannie Darnielle (D-27), the bill's sponsor in the Senate, spoke eloquently about the impact of transit cuts on people who are very low income and those with disabilities.  She drew a parallel between this bill and a previous bill passed by the legislature that enabled the City of Tacoma to enact a 0.1% sales tax for mental health services when the Pierce County Council snubbed using such authority for that purpose.  

The Senator highlighted the fact that such a zone would target areas for service that have higher low income and minority populations, to serve those in the most need.  She held up a map that showed high levels of need, high ridership, and high voter support - notably the 27th and 29th legislative districts.  For those outside of Pierce County, Districts 27 and 29 are mostly Tacoma proper with some unincorporated Pierce County.  "If this is approved, we'll see a restoration of service [in the zone]," she said.

Ten people testified in total (all in favor), including Tacoma Councilmember and Pierce Transit Board Member Lauren Walker, Tacoma Councilmember Ryan Mello, Pierce Transit CEO Lynne Griffith, Gig Harbor Councilmember Derek Young, and Tacoma Area Coalition for Individuals with Disabilities Executive Director and fellow CTAG member Ken Gibson.  Counsel for Pierce Transit indicated that one reason why this legislation is being pursued besides Tacoma TBD funding is that "transit needs transcend city borders."  Eleven others who did not speak signed in, an additional ten in favor, with Mike Ennis from the Association of Washington Business being opposed.

Ryan Mello talked a lot about the returns for transit in the last two elections, citing a 56% passage rate in Tacoma proper for Prop 1 as well as one precinct that voted over 85% in favor in Tacoma.  Mr. Mello also drew the connection between economic justice and transit service, "This allows workers to keep more disposable income in their pocket."

Derek Young highlighted how this bill would enable "local control" of tax authority, and even though Gig Harbor and other small cities may not participate, he still supports this bill as a member of the Pierce Transit Board.

Lawmakers had several comments about the legislation - including the perennial concern about sales taxes being raised from individuals who live outside the district but shop at the Tacoma Mall for example.  It's a misdirected attack at the transit agency for attempting to use the only large scale financing tool available at its disposal.  Other comments included the need to put this measure in cost-savings versus private medical transport costs that would fall on families and the State.

No hearing on the companion bill has been set in the House.

Pierce Transit wants to create an Enhanced Transit Zone

Pierce Transit needs your testimony on Monday.

At the last Pierce Transit CTAG meeting, staff provided an update on bills in the legislature affecting the agency.  The report by staff indicated that Pierce Transit has a bill in the legislature (HB 1898) that is being sponsored by Jake Fey (D-27) in the House of Representatives.  A companion bill in the Senate (SB 5793) is being sponsored by Jeannie Darneille (D-27).

The bill would allow Pierce Transit to create an enhanced transit area and to propose to the voters up to a 0.3% sales tax to fund transit service within that area.  At present, there are no bills that would provide for "rescue funds" for Pierce Transit, allowing the preservation of transit service slated to be cut on September 29th.

What I have to caution folks about this bill is that it will not prevent any further cuts.  It provides another opportunity to go to the voters using sales tax authority that has a better chance of success than past attempts.  This bill does not provide any other taxing sources, and it may take a year or more to implement.  Additionally, the opt-out provision in the bill may mean that Tacoma may end up being the only City to buy-in to the idea.  Because of these issues, I maintain that using the Tacoma's Transportation Benefit District authority temporarily is the best way to handle the immediate crisis - however, this bill, if it passes, could be a good medium-term proposal.  It has a hearing in the Senate on Monday - details for that are below - and you are encouraged to attend and give testimony.

Here are some key provisions of SB 5793:

This bill and accompanying purposed substitute language will allow PTBA Boards to create an Enhanced Public Transportation Zone (EPTZ) within the current PTBA boundaries.

1. EPTZ cannot be greater than 49% of the PTBA population.
2. Intended to benefit underserved communities. 
3. EPTZ can be part or all of a jurisdiction, must follow precinct lines.
4. Allows jurisdictions included in the EPTZ to opt-out before it submitted to the County Auditor for election.
5. The taxing authority would be the remaining sales and use tax PTBA’s have available. 
6. Revenue generated in the EPTZ can only be spent in the EPTZ.
7. Must be voter approved.
8. Must be renewed every five years.
9. Six months prior to going to the voters, the PTBA must set "baseline" service and convey what enhanced service will be provided.

PUBLIC HEARING - WA STATE SENATE

The Senate Transportation Committee will be holding a hearing on SB 5793 on Monday, February 25, 2013 at 1:30pm located in the J.A Cherberg Bldg.

You are welcome to attend and testify at this public hearing, or contact your local legislator if you are not able to attend.  No hearing has been scheduled for the House companion bill yet.

Has $29m gone missing from Tacoma Link?

From motion M2012-13 of the Sound Transit capital committee passed on March 8, 2012, regarding Tacoma Link.

After attending Transportation Lobby Day (which is worth at least five posts on it's own), I had the chance to make it to the Tacoma Link Alternatives Analysis open house at Tacoma Dome Station. I noticed a lot of comments on B1 (6th Avenue), so I had a fellow transit advocate snap me a photo (below). The comments are great, if you have a minute to look them over - after you read the next bit.

There is one glaring inconsistency in Sound Transit's literature on the amount of the capital contribution that voters approved in 2008. In all ST documents until recently, the capital contribution for Tacoma Link expansion was slated at $79m in 2011 dollars. We've been talking about it since the measure passed in 2008. Now, Sound Transit is saying that contribution is only $50m.

Does ST expect us to not notice
a $29m change in commitment?

Even a highly involved transit advocate like Seattle Subway's Ben Schiendelman was surprised to see this on the front page of the handouts we were given as we walked in the front door. He asked a staff person a question about it and wasn't able to get an answer he was satisfied with. He replied, "I'll have to talk with some [ST] board members about it." Where that money went is anybody's guess at this point. I have not been able to get a clear answer out of anyone - not staff, not even ST Board Members. No one appears to have authorized a budget reduction, especially not one amounting to roughly 37% of what Sound Transit promised Tacoma.

What I have to stress to people is if the cost of the project is larger than both Sound Transit's contribution and any federal grant that we get, Tacoma will have to pick up the difference. Raising $20m from an LID might be feasible, but $50m would be really pushing the limits of what you could raise.

Tacoma shows the love for B1 - North End Central

Comments made on B1 - North End Central (Photo by Ben S.)

Comments on Corridor B1 from the 2/12/2013 Tacoma Link Expansion open house

• This route would serve Stadium + would maybe help reduce parking problems around the school and maybe encourage highschoolers to rely more on public transportation, which we could all use.
• I like that this route connects the link to sixth ave because of the number of businesses there
• * This is the best option *
• This option would continue to benefit UWT and also encourage ridership for high school students.  In addition, it would also complement the growing 6th Ave district.
• 6th Ave - best choice - lots of redevelopment potential for TOD - serves exist schools & hospitals - can eventually be extended to TCC
• My vote is this one, I have followed rail development for years.  Am impressed with this planning process.  North End Central makes the most sense to me.
• Establishing transit on roads that are already major arteries for transportation makes the most sense.  Developing the most important arteries first is also sensible, so sixth ave seems the best place to start.  Either there or the east side route.
• Build me.
• This option serves a business district can serve a college can interconnect to transit to residential areas that were built around streetcars
• This route best serves objectives to continue development of downtown businesses & vibrant 6th ave district. Route also encourages college & high school demographic ridership.  Roads are already in place, & route could later be modified to include TCC and/or MLK.
• This makes most sense :)
• This route would eliminate the use of my vehicle 5x per week in my commute to work!
• None of these benefit the North End.
• By far the best option.
• Great option for Hilltop/Central residents to get to downtown or TDome station - avoids a req to shift from bus* to LRT to connect to sounder! And expandable to TCC in the future (hopefully)!
• *with current/future reduction sin service hours on Pierce T, along 6th and S. 12th!
• Best option to increase ridership1
• 3rd best after E-1 & E-2 - Agreed!
• This is my favored option: I live in Old Town and would love the connection to the Dome Station & airport transportation, etc. But more than anything I just want the link to go up hiill.  Even just up to MLK Jr would open up the whole hilltop area and have a dramatic impact on downtown.  Thanks!
• Best option by far
• Mobility benefits are most pronounced with this alignment it would take 1hr 32min to walk from Tacoma Dome to 6th and Union.  It would take much less time w/Link.
• Brilliant idea!  It covers a lot of territory and is very convenient to access

Pierce Transit saving 25,000 service hours for Weekend Service

Service cuts in September may be down to 300,000 service hours.

Monday, at Pierce Transit’s monthly board meeting, staff will be presenting a measure that could save 25,000 service hours from the chopping block when service scheduled to be cut in September.  This is just one example of Pierce Transit working creatively to try to serve the interests of the riders during this period of scarce resources.

Specifically, staff is proposing to delay capital expenditures for replacement bus coaches and eliminating capital improvements in the out years to the maintenance facility.  The savings of both of these actions amount to $19.5 million.  In addition to another ~$5m in the form of anticipated grants - the amended service plan would reduce service cuts from 34% to only a 28% reduction - from 418,000 service hours to roughly 300,000 service hours.

There is some risk inherent in extending the life of vehicles (from 14-16 years) and forgoing various capital measures in favor of service hours.  However, given the current state that local transit is in, helping to temporarily fill a deficit and retain some weekend service is good news for riders.  It is possible that additional funds from the Federal Transit Administration might be available for retaining good state of repair, meaning the long term impact of this shuffling of resources might not be so bad after all. Bottom line is that this change will allow a very limited restoration of weekend service and is a step in the right direction.

I don’t have details on which routes will receive service on the weekend, but we do have information from the resolution fact sheet on the recommended allocation of these services from staff, which is based on riders per hour of the routes.

If you’re interested, here are the details of recommended option for allocation of these service hours from staff:

• Saturday span of service from approximately 8:30 AM  – 6:30 PM.  Service is based on current passenger per hour figures and not all routes will operate on Saturday.  Frequency of service will be between 30 to 90 minutes, depending on demand and will vary by route.
• Sunday span of service from approximately 9:00 AM  – 5:00 PM.  Service is based on current passenger per hour figures and not all routes will operate on Sunday.  Frequency of service will be between 30 to 120 minutes, depending on demand and will vary by route.