By Erica C. Barnett
On this week’s third (!) edition of Seattle Nice, we have a short but (I think) informative show about Mayor Katie Wilson’s proposal to double a sales tax that funds extra Metro bus service and other transit improvements in Seattle. The tax, current 0.15 percent (or 15 cents on every $100 purchase) would double under Wilson’s plan to 0.3 percent, bringing Seattle’s sales tax one step closer to 11 percent (we’re already the highest in the nation).
Sales taxes are among the most regressive types of tax, because they gobble up a much larger percentage of your income if you’re poor than if you’re rich. Nonetheless, Wilson is pitching the increase as a matter of affordability, since lower-income people are more likely to need reliable, frequent transit service. The increase will add about $29 a year to a typical Seattle resident’s sales tax burden.
(As an aside, I would really love it if transit advocates would stop explaining why transit is a good thing like people aren’t familiar with the concept of “bus.” Every pitch for new spending on transit, for some reason, has to involve a long explanation of the noble people who rely on buses and why they use them—e.g. “the nurse who just wants to get home after 12 hours on the night shift, the single mother who needs to pick up her kids from school, the teacher who needs to be there on time for her kids…” People know what buses are and what they do!)
As we discussed, the city does have another option for funding local transit: A vehicle license fee of up to $60. License fees, too, are regressive, and I made a misstatement on the podcast by conflating flat license fees with more progressive motor vehicle excise taxes, which cost more for more expensive cars.
At a council committee meeting to discuss the proposal this week, Wilson’s senior transportation advisor, former Transportation Choices Coalition director Alex Hudson, said a a $50 license fee would “only bring in an additional 15% more revenue each year and “nearly double that amount of the annual cost for households with only one vehicle, and triple or double the cost to households with two or more vehicles.”
PubliCola is supported entirely by readers like you.
CLICK BELOW to become a one-time or monthly contributor.
Given that the sales tax is supposed to bring in $138 million a year, another $20 million for transit actually seems worth considering, especially since license fees and vehicle taxes represent some of the only revenue sources in which drivers subsidize people who don’t own cars. (Usually, it’s the other way around.)
Last week, Wilson said she decided not to propose the license fee because it was “controversial,” which is more of a (questionable) political call than a policy one. Hearing Wilson’s office argue against a license fee because it would over-burden car owners (especially those with two, three, or seven cars!) was a bit jarring, especially coming at the very beginning of negotiations with the council over what the final ballot measure will look like.
The council will have the opportunity to amend the measure over the coming weeks. At Thursday’s meeting, Councilmember Debora Juarez said she was “offended” by references to “underserved communities” and people of color, who she accused the mayor’s office of using as “props.” She also said she was “not happy with the legislation and I think it needs a lot of work,” then said the mayor’s office was “not living in the real world” because “some people have to drive a car.” Helpful feedback, I’m sure!
