Viva La Cola!

Founded in January 2009, PubliCola is a blog about Seattle written by journalists who are dedicated to non-partisan, original daily reporting that prioritizes a balanced approach to news. Started by longtime local editor and award-winning reporter Josh Feit, PubliCola is the first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol.

PubliCola was off and running. In June 2009, PubliCola hired another award-winning journalist, super-sourced Seattle city hall reporter Erica C. Barnett.

People were afraid that blogging would change journalism. Instead, we believe journalism can change blogging. Twenty-first century journalism may look and feel different, and yes Erica isn't afraid to get cranky, but we're committed to making sure online news still delivers independent, reliable, even-keeled coverage. And most of all, we're committed to making sure the coverage sparks honest civic debate.

Bringing you cola for the people, PubliCola is named after Publius Valerius PubliCola, the alias for the authors of the Federalist Papers—the original bloggers.

The first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol and Seattle city hall, PubliCola has been called a “must-read” by the Seattle Post Intelligencer and a hot “New Media Mover and Shaker” by Seattle Magazine—which also cited our own Erica C. Barnett as the city's No. 1 news nerd.

We All Pay For The Roads

This post has been update with paving-expenditure numbers from SDOT.

Whenever a new on-road bike project is proposed, someone inevitably makes the argument that bicyclists don’t truly have a right to the road. Their logic is that road construction is paid for by gas taxes, which are paid by drivers, not cyclists, who get a free ride. This is wrong for a number of reasons.

Most bicyclists also own cars (95 percent of Americans, in fact, are car owners). Moreover, 200 pounds of bike and rider have significantly less impact on roads (and safety, and the environment) than a 2000-pound car (a 12-ton bus has even more impact, of course, but it has capacity to transport significantly more people). But, most importantly, the claim that gas taxes pay for our roads simply isn’t true.

The Seattle Department of Transportation’s 2009 annual report breaks down the agency’s $340.8 million budget by funding source. The gas tax accounts for $13.4 million, or 4 percent of that total. The full budget breakdown (in millions):

Grants & Other: $96.9 (29 percent)
Debt: $77.4 (23 percent)
Bridging the Gap (a property-tax levy passed by voters in 2007): $60.9 (18 percent)
General Fund: $42.3 (12 percent)
Reimbursables: $42 (12 percent)
Gas Tax: $13.4 (4 percent)
Cumulative Reserve Fund: $7.6 (2 percent)

Other than gas taxes, Seattleites contribute most directly to the voter-approved Bridging the Gap levy and the general fund. The voter-approved portion of Bridging the Gap is funded by property taxes (the rest comes from the commercial parking tax), and more than 75 percent of the general fund comes from property, business and occupation, and sales tax—revenue sources that  all city residents pay for in one way or another. The remaining general fund revenue comes from government and private grants, traffic fines, and other fees.

Obviously, SDOT’s budget includes salaries and other spending in addition to road projects. But the budget breakdown nonetheless shows that bicyclists, transit riders, and drivers alike pay nearly equal shares of the city transportation budget (and bicyclists have a smaller impact on road maintenance costs), granting everyone their “right” to space on the road.

UPDATE

The SDOT budget office sent me their 2009 arterial and non-arterial paving expenditures. They spent $29,377,725 for arterial and $261,000 for non-arterial for a total of $29,638,725. The arterial revenue sources breakdown as follows:

Bonds: $14,748,947 (50.20 percent)
Bridging the Gap Property Tax: $9,693,410 (33 percent)
Bridging the Gap Commercial Parking Tax: $4,801,062 (16.34 percent)
Gas Tax: $129,981 (.44 percent)
Grants: $4,325 (.01 percent)

All of SDOT’s non-arterial paving work was 100 percent funded by the gas tax, but non-arterial work only accounts for .9 percent of total paving expenditures for 2009.

The paving numbers reinforce what the budget numbers already showed: everyone is paying for Seattle’s roads.




  • Jay

    Another point that shouldn’t be forgotten is that most of Seattle’s streets were built by real estate developers during the early part of the 20th century, not SDOT. Our street infrastructure was laid down a long time before the automobile became prevalent. In fact, most of the main arterials were built by the streetcar companies!

  • http://bikeseattle.blogspot.com jake

    Great. Now how am I going to feel superior when motoring by the slow bicyclist in front of me?

  • Jakers

    Thanks for the numbers. I will quiet down my anti-cyclist remarks a bit.

    For Erica’s sake, let’s just make sure that bike lanes don’t require wider roads that then result in the removal of any trees.

  • Brent

    One point parking prof Donald Shoup makes: free public parking also uses road space, but is not paid for by gasoline taxes.

  • Lloyd D Brown

    How much of the “grants and other” category is funded from gas tax? While Seattle may only fund a portion of its program from gas taxes, WSDOT’s gets 75 to 80 percent of its revenue from gas taxes. Remember, Seattle’s not an island. Transportation is a network of systems, and – right or wrong – most of those systems are funded by taxes on gasoline.

  • Bleckb

    lLoyd, within the city, assuming all the grants came from gas sales, that brings the portion up to 33 percent, maximum. Drivers are receiving a huge subsidy from the non-motoring public. True, some of those property taxes are paid by people with cars, but the notion that gas taxes pay is pretty well rebutted here, if not refuted. These property taxes for roads are a subsidy by all for the sake a those with cars. That’s as generous as the numbers indicate. The low side is less than one-half a percent within the city. If we want to make the gas tax pay, it seems we have to increase it about 20 times what it is now.

  • Bleckb

    As for WSDOT, if I am reading this form, http://bit.ly/akPp48, right, it seems that roughly $654 million is collected in gas taxes while WSDOT spends $4338 million (is that $4.3 billion?). This is for the 09-11 budget cycle. The rest is largely bonds. If I’m misreading the WSDOT data, let me know. It’s not particularly clear given their terminology.

  • Jakers

    State-wide increase or just in Seattle? Just in Seattle would cause gas sales within the city to drop dramatically without much impact on traffic.

    Drivers (cars, trucks, bus, etc.) could pay the real costs of the road, especially buses that do much more damage and require much more engineering and construction to accommodate. Then everyone that employees these drivers or sells goods transported via road can pay the real costs of transporting goods, services and employees. And finally, consumers can pay more at the register. And before we know it, John Bailo predictions about Seattle will come true!

    But if we are going to do that, let’s not make me subsidize all of those peoples health care while I have to pay the true costs of driving my SOV!

  • Jakers

    Look at the “Total Gas Tax Supported Debt Service” line.

  • guest

    Where’d you pull 75-80% from? According to WSDOT (http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Finance/budget/BudgetPieCharts.htm), gas tax amounts for 28% of its 2009-2011 budget. That is the largest single source, but it’s still less than a third of the budget.

  • Rudidudi

    This analysis has started on exactly the right lines, but it is incomplete. To list “bonds” and “government grants” as revenue sources is a little naïve. Both bonds and government grants are paid for by taxes. What type of taxes? Perhaps some portion comes from gas taxes? Also, the commercial parking tax portion of Briding the Gap funds is obviously paid by car users only. So what is the true fraction of road spending that does not come directly from car users? I would like to have an accurate figure to give others.

  • Rudidudi

    P.S. The comments already posted above suggest that the fraction that does come from gas taxes could be anywhere between 0.44% and 33%. That’s a very wide range.

  • Anonymous

    “I will quiet down my anti-cyclist remarks a bit.”

    Don’t quiet down – just focus on the bozos who endanger themselves and others while acknowledging that most of us don’t ride like that. Check out this clip on YouTube: http://j.mp/ahxXLw There are a lot of comments by fellow cyclists who think this guy belongs in jail.

  • http://rationalitate.blogspot.com Stephen

    I’m not sure about specifics, but also keep in mind that some gas tax revenue is directed to mass transit and other non-road things, so the road users probably actually pay more than the 28% figure suggests. I’m not sure how big the effect is, but I don’t don’t think it’s negligible.

  • Allan

    Cars haven’t weighed 2,000 pounds average since imports in 1955, (www.nhtsa.gov). Compacts are 3-4,500 pounds, Mid-size 4,500-5,500 pounds, and everything else is at the 3 tons and more.

    Would be awesome if we had cars that weighted 2000 pounds! I’d certainly feel alot safer out there riding my bike.

  • kurisu

    “some” is not a number. WSDOT spends very little on transit.

  • Shawnbon206

    That video is a fake though, it’s just a joke. Didn’t happen.

  • Dennis Hamilton

    The rights of bicyclists to use the roads is also apparently a constitutional guarantee.  SCOTUS has had to deal with such cases and, while it is permissible to exclude cyclists (and other non-motorized travelers, such as horses and pedestrians) from limited-access highways, there has to be an alternative surface route.  Like the streets of Seattle.