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.

x close
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.

Task Force Recommends $20B for Transportation

This Washington   December 13, 2011 at 5:02 pm Erica C. Barnett

The Connecting Washington Task Force, a group appointed by Gov. Chris Gregoire to come up with recommendations for a statewide transportation funding package, formally recommended a $20 billion package yesterday, along with a list of potential local funding options that could be funded either by city councils directly or by city voters.

The $20 billion would be focused on maintaining and operating the state and cities’ existing transportation infrastructure, with some new investments in key economic corridors. However, the committee members, who include elected officials, environmental advocates, industry representatives, and appointed officials like state transportation secretary Paula Hammond, did not recommend a specific list of projects. Nor did they make recommendations on how much of the money should be spent on various transportation modes, beyond proposing that the majority of any package go to the state department of transportation (WSDOT), with a slim minority going to transit projects and improvements.

The last time legislators passed a big transportation package, in 2005, conservative radio host John Carlson ran an unsuccessful initiative to repeal it.

The task force left pretty much every possible funding option on the table, and even added a few new options. Among other possibilities, the state-level funding options could include tolling, $100 fees for electric vehicles, additional gas taxes, a statewide motor vehicle excise tax, and a tax on vehicle miles traveled.

At the local level, cities could get a number of new options, including local tolls, a local MVET, a local option fuel tax, or a local property tax.

The consensus on the task force seemed to be that the state legislature should pass legislation funding maintenance and operations needs without a public vote—easier said than done, given that any new taxes require a two-thirds vote (fees require only a simple majority)—and put capital projects on a statewide ballot.

Seattle City Council transportation committee chair Tom Rasmussen, who sits on the task force, said the city would prefer that the state give it as many options to raise transportation revenue without going to the voters as possible—preferably by a simple-majority vote, rather than the two-thirds vote the King County Council needed to pass a $20 vehicle license fee to save Metro earlier this year. “Those of us who represented local jurisdictions strongly emphasized the importance of giving us options and a lot of flexibility,” Rasmussen said this morning.

The task force will issue a full report by the end of the year, and hopes to send a statewide revenue package to voters in November.

 


  • FrequentPoster

    If they want it to fly this time, they’d better be a little more specific.

  • Anonymous

    “However, the committee members, who include elected officials,
    environmental advocates, industry representatives, and appointed
    officials like state transportation secretary Paula Hammond, did not
    recommend a specific list of projects.”

    Deja Vu. Remember Hans ‘Tax and Spend’ Dunshee bonds for jobs bill where he wanted $3 Billion for green projects, but didn’t have a specific list? Again, they want the money before they will tell what they want to spend it on.  What crap.  If there is a $20 transportation need, then you should already have a list.

    And they don’t want to risk a vote of the people.  Hm…  With the WSDOT capital budget at a record $8 Billion, there is no way they will get this sham past the voters.

  • Ben Schiendelman

    A sliver of transit? We’re going to destroy it at the polls.

  • FrequentPoster

    Rasmussen, who sits on the task force, said the city would prefer that
    the state give it as many options to raise transportation revenue
    without going to the voters as possible

    Typical political scumbag. Anything to keep from having to face the people!

  • Look Kids, Big Ben!

    Seattle City Council transportation committee chair Tom Rasmussen, who
    sits on the task force, said the city would prefer that the state give
    it as many options to raise transportation revenue without going to the
    voters as possible
    =
    “They’re on to us!  Quick, push out a lot of taxes (er um, REVENUE), the citizens of Washington state have finally figured us out!”

  • jimu

    So the Governor appoints a TRANSPORTATION task force and they come up with NO specific projects and NO revenue source.

    Please tell me we didn’t actually PAY for this task force, did we?

  • jimu

    This is for all the Tim Eyman haters.

    THANK GOD FOR TIM EYMAN AND THE 2/3rds RULE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    It’s doing exactly what it’s supposed to do!

  • gohuskies

    Ah yes, the classic “If I don’t get everything I want, I’ll throw a tantrum and break other people’s stuff” strategy. I agree with you that we need more transit funding in this state, Ben, but some is better than none.

  • FrequentPoster

    I have to admit that you’ve got a good point.

  • http://profiles.google.com/christopher.stefan Christopher Stefan

    It is all fun and games until a bridge collapsess.

  • http://www.twitter.com/joeszi Joe Szilagyi

    How hard is it to spell out what you want to fund? Jesus Christ. I’m pro transit and even I think they’re being idiots here. This will die at the polls if it’s as vague as what we just voted on.

  • SeattleFail

    Actually its the,  the rest of the state is Seattle’s bitch strategy

  • Verd1n

    Paula Hammond they said?  Is this the same head of WSDOT who failed to carry out the mandates of their own Design Manual, Chapter 310, Value Engineering, for the deep-bored tunnel, who disobeyed Circular Memorandum 3 from OMB for a likewise mandated VE study on projects over $25 million, who gave us three new ferries costing $85 million each when identical ferries at $35 million a copy were delivered to Cape Cod/Martha’s Vinyard, who is giving us 12-foot high concrete walls along SR 520 from I-5 to well past Foster Island, and lids over the Montlake I/C and every other one on the east side, and a tunnel design where it is impossible on the NB lanes in the DBT to off-load wheelchair users?  She is the worst head of WSDOT, ever.

    If you want true reform at WSDOT, get rid of the LTC and make the Transportation Commission an elected 3-person commission with the secretary chosen by the three commissioners to be the secretary of WSDOT.  The elected commission members would come from three regions divided within the state with each region have identical vehicle miles of travel (VMT) and thus have identical gas taxes so each has an equal say in how they are to be spent.

    This would be a good start at reforming a department that so far is run by unions and political hacks of the Clibborn and Rasmusssen variety.

  • Transit Voter

    A gas tax and a tax on vehicle miles traveled? I thought the gas tax already IS a tax on miles traveled — the more miles you drive, the more gas tax you pay, with the added benefit of having drivers of smaller more efficient cars pay somewhat less per mile and the drivers of SUVs and trucks paying more.

    Gas tax sounds pretty fair and equitable right there. Why can’t it get the votes?

  • Bus commuter

    This isn’t about getting “everything” we want. For anyone living in urbanized King County, it’s about getting anything we need. There’s no more room for new roads in the areas where most people live and work.  Transit is the only way to improve mobility within the urban areas of this county.  Pissing away our taxes to subsidize a bunch of highways that will do no one any good.  I’m all for raising gas tax and tolls to take care of the existing system and replace failing bridges, but transit is where we need to invest to create new capacity. 

  • http://profiles.google.com/zef.wagner Zef Wagner

    The gas tax is pretty stupid, actually. A small hybrid and a large SUV do about the same amount of damage to a road and take up roughly the same amount of space. Semi trucks already pay extra through weight fees for the extra damage they do. It makes way more sense to charge per mile, because that represents how much you use the road system. It is weird that we collect the indirectly through a fuel tax. You speak of efficient car owners paying a lower rate as a “benefit,” but studies have shown that people with more fuel-efficient cars simply compensate by driving more miles. We should charge per-mile.

  • andy

    Sometimes true, not always though. There is a cost benefit to permanent projects like this because they often will prevent, or at least greatly delay, further investment in larger projects, like grade-separated rapid transit. Voting against it is not just voting against the specific project but against the small thinking, its just important we gather support for and present what we really want.