This Friday, TCC will be celebrating Park(ing) Day. We have rented out some parking spaces and will be turning them into the smallest, but coolest, park in town for the day. The event is designed to show how much space parking takes up in a city and how that space might otherwise be used. It will also be really fun, so stop by sometime between 9am and 3pm. We'll be on 1st Ave between Seneca and University.
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Park(ing) Day This Friday
This Friday, TCC will be celebrating Park(ing) Day. We have rented out some parking spaces and will be turning them into the smallest, but coolest, park in town for the day. The event is designed to show how much space parking takes up in a city and how that space might otherwise be used. It will also be really fun, so stop by sometime between 9am and 3pm. We'll be on 1st Ave between Seneca and University.
Tacoma Link Commerce Street Station opens on Sept 29th
Sound Transit and the City of Tacoma will welcome light rail passenger service to the new Commerce Street stop in downtown Tacoma tomorrow. The new Tacoma Link station at 11th and Commerce Street marks the sixth stop on the 1.6-mile line that serves as a major connector in downtown Tacoma.
Downtown On the Go will host a dedication ceremony at the new stop on at 2 p.m. on Sept. 29 to celebrate the opening.
The project was paid for and led by the city of Tacoma in coordination with Sound Transit. It includes two 40-foot platforms – one on the west side of Commerce Street for southbound riders and another on the east side for northbound travelers – platform lighting, accessibility ramps, security cameras, and passenger shelters that incorporate etched glass artwork by Tacoma artist Chandler O’Leary. The new station opens at a time when ridership on Tacoma Link is growing, increasing 16 percent in the last year to 3,330 riders a day.
“Our new light rail station will not only give business district transit users greater access to Tacoma Link,” said Mayor Marilyn Strickland, “but also bring residents, commuters, and visitors to more destinations, making it even easier for people to get around downtown.”
Join the celebration on the 29th!
Sunday, September 11, 2011
Portland Transit Authority: TriMet's Troublesome Transit Tax
Most people never really think about how their transit agency gets its revenue. Funding is what primarily determines how much transit service will be available, so it is vitally important to understand these issues. For this installment of Portland Transit Authority, I will focus on the funding structure of TriMet, the Portland region's transit agency. In particular, I will explore how TriMet is very different from most transit agencies and what impact that has on transit service and investment. We will find that the same mechanisms that have helped create a model transit agency may also be unsustainable in the long run.
Most transit agencies receive the bulk of their funding from sales tax, but TriMet instead relies on a payroll tax of 0.6918% on employers in the transit district. Payroll taxes and sales taxes share the unfortunate quality of fluctuating in response to the overall economy, but it is worth parsing out how they are different. Payroll taxes are not as universal, since they only apply to employed people, whereas sales tax is paid by pretty much everyone. Payroll taxes are also obviously dependent on employment, and thus are arguably worse off in the current jobless recovery in which consumer spending is starting to increase but employment has yet to respond. Finally, the payroll tax is somewhat more regressive than a sales tax, assuming that essentials like food are not subject to the sales tax. After all, a person has a fair amount of control over how much sales tax they pay, while the payroll tax is a flat tax on all employees. The counterargument would be that at least unemployed people do not have to pay the tax, but of course the reality is that many gainfully employed people are still deep in poverty.
TriMet's payroll tax is also different from most transit agencies in that the tax rate goes up by a small amount each year automatically. Over the next 12 years the rate will gradually increase from .6918% to .8218%. This system has been a key to TriMet's success in building out its frequent bus network and MAX light rail system, since in normal times they have been able to rely on a steadily increasing stream of revenue over time. The recent drop in employment, however, has exposed some problems inherent in using a revenue source that only gradually increases.
The main problem is a lack of flexibility. While a Washington transit agency like C-Tran has the option to pursue a ballot measure to increase funding in response to the economic downturn, TriMet is stuck with a payroll tax that increases at such a slow rate that it will take an estimated 10 years to restore recently cut service levels. Another problem is that with an aging workforce, overall wage growth will be much lower than projections in the coming decades. With a smaller percentage of the population in the workforce, reliance on a payroll tax may not make much sense anymore.
One other funding tool TriMet has at its disposal is the ability to bond against future payroll tax revenue. This controversial practice basically involves taking away future operating dollars to use for current capital expenses. TriMet has recently borrowed $60 million in this way for the Milwaukie Light Rail project, and is also planning to use debt to purchase new vehicles over the next several years. This is could prove to be an unsustainable practice in the long-term. Without new revenue sources to pay back these bonds, TriMet will be left using operating revenue to service debt instead of investing in service hours. For the time being, debt service consumes about 5% of TriMet's total expenditures, but this will continue to grow as the agency is forced to borrow to pay for needed capital expenses.
To me it is clear that the state of Oregon needs to grant TriMet a new and different taxing authority. Otherwise the agency will continue to go deeper into debt and transit riders will continue to see falling service hours and rising fares. Highway tolls and vehicle license fees are two options often used elsewhere, and have an added benefit of making transit more attractive as an alternative to driving, leading to higher ridership and higher farebox revenues. Tolls in particular help level the playing field by making the marginal cost of driving approach the marginal cost of taking transit.
Another attractive option would be a small sales tax to supplement the payroll tax. Even a 1% sales tax in the TriMet service area would generate substantial revenue without having a substantial negative impact on area retailers. After all, it would still be far less than the 8.2% rate in neighboring Vancouver, WA. The state of Oregon has repeatedly rejected a state sales tax, but perhaps it would be appropriate look at giving cities and regions a local option to tax themselves for better service. Whatever the solution, something needs to change for TriMet to live up to its reputation as one of the nation's best transit agencies.
Most transit agencies receive the bulk of their funding from sales tax, but TriMet instead relies on a payroll tax of 0.6918% on employers in the transit district. Payroll taxes and sales taxes share the unfortunate quality of fluctuating in response to the overall economy, but it is worth parsing out how they are different. Payroll taxes are not as universal, since they only apply to employed people, whereas sales tax is paid by pretty much everyone. Payroll taxes are also obviously dependent on employment, and thus are arguably worse off in the current jobless recovery in which consumer spending is starting to increase but employment has yet to respond. Finally, the payroll tax is somewhat more regressive than a sales tax, assuming that essentials like food are not subject to the sales tax. After all, a person has a fair amount of control over how much sales tax they pay, while the payroll tax is a flat tax on all employees. The counterargument would be that at least unemployed people do not have to pay the tax, but of course the reality is that many gainfully employed people are still deep in poverty.
TriMet's payroll tax is also different from most transit agencies in that the tax rate goes up by a small amount each year automatically. Over the next 12 years the rate will gradually increase from .6918% to .8218%. This system has been a key to TriMet's success in building out its frequent bus network and MAX light rail system, since in normal times they have been able to rely on a steadily increasing stream of revenue over time. The recent drop in employment, however, has exposed some problems inherent in using a revenue source that only gradually increases.
The main problem is a lack of flexibility. While a Washington transit agency like C-Tran has the option to pursue a ballot measure to increase funding in response to the economic downturn, TriMet is stuck with a payroll tax that increases at such a slow rate that it will take an estimated 10 years to restore recently cut service levels. Another problem is that with an aging workforce, overall wage growth will be much lower than projections in the coming decades. With a smaller percentage of the population in the workforce, reliance on a payroll tax may not make much sense anymore.
One other funding tool TriMet has at its disposal is the ability to bond against future payroll tax revenue. This controversial practice basically involves taking away future operating dollars to use for current capital expenses. TriMet has recently borrowed $60 million in this way for the Milwaukie Light Rail project, and is also planning to use debt to purchase new vehicles over the next several years. This is could prove to be an unsustainable practice in the long-term. Without new revenue sources to pay back these bonds, TriMet will be left using operating revenue to service debt instead of investing in service hours. For the time being, debt service consumes about 5% of TriMet's total expenditures, but this will continue to grow as the agency is forced to borrow to pay for needed capital expenses.
To me it is clear that the state of Oregon needs to grant TriMet a new and different taxing authority. Otherwise the agency will continue to go deeper into debt and transit riders will continue to see falling service hours and rising fares. Highway tolls and vehicle license fees are two options often used elsewhere, and have an added benefit of making transit more attractive as an alternative to driving, leading to higher ridership and higher farebox revenues. Tolls in particular help level the playing field by making the marginal cost of driving approach the marginal cost of taking transit.
Another attractive option would be a small sales tax to supplement the payroll tax. Even a 1% sales tax in the TriMet service area would generate substantial revenue without having a substantial negative impact on area retailers. After all, it would still be far less than the 8.2% rate in neighboring Vancouver, WA. The state of Oregon has repeatedly rejected a state sales tax, but perhaps it would be appropriate look at giving cities and regions a local option to tax themselves for better service. Whatever the solution, something needs to change for TriMet to live up to its reputation as one of the nation's best transit agencies.
Thursday, September 8, 2011
You ought to be in pictures!
Calling all photo enthusiasts! TCC invites all budding photographers to submit photos of your favorite transportation-oriented locations for our upcoming annual fundraiser on Sept 22, “What Choices Look Like.”
Got a kickin' sunset shot along the Myrtle Edwards bike path? How about a cityscape shot taken from the light rail? Or, maybe you want to capture your favorite bus line/bus stop, pedestrian crossing, or transit hub. Submissions can be photos of locations with or without people in them, but all submissions must be original work and include a mode of transportation. Please provide a photo caption that describes where the photo was taken, and why it represents "what choices look like."
We'll leave it up to the sound judgment of TCC staff to pick the best photos, so show us what you've got! Several photos will be showcased at “What Choices Look Like,” our highly attended annual fundraiser. (Did you register yet? What better way to spend World Car-free Day on September 22?)
We'll leave it up to the sound judgment of TCC staff to pick the best photos, so show us what you've got! Several photos will be showcased at “What Choices Look Like,” our highly attended annual fundraiser. (Did you register yet? What better way to spend World Car-free Day on September 22?)
Buy your ticket today and get an early bird discount!
Give us your best shot! Send your photo submissions in .jpeg format in the largest file size possible to Jennifer Olegario at jennifer@transportationchoices.org by Tuesday, September 13.
Give us your best shot! Send your photo submissions in .jpeg format in the largest file size possible to Jennifer Olegario at jennifer@transportationchoices.org by Tuesday, September 13.
Transit Oriented Communities Workshop is Tomorrow In Shoreline!
Be there or be left out!
\Transit-oriented communities are all the rage right now in North King County and South Snohomish County. Sound Transit is expanding the Link Light Rail, the City of Shoreline just adopted a “Town Center Plan,” and the City of Bothell has developed a Downtown Revitalization Plan.
So what does this all mean?
To help set the vision for transit-oriented communities and discuss tools for implementation, the organizations Futurewise and Transportation Choices Coalition and the architecture firm GGLO will present an informative workshop and visual exhibit at the Shoreline Public Library on Friday, September 9 from 10:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
“There is a real desire to improve the quality of life in our neighborhoods by providing better access to walking, biking and transit, and more affordable housing options,” said Brock Howell, King County Program Director for Futurewise. “We hope our workshop on transit-oriented communities can help inform these policy discussions.”
The workshop will feature a presentation by representatives from Futurewise and GGLO. Participants will explore a vision for compact urban areas and the protection of our farms, forestlands, and green space, and how to make it happen.
Futurewise launched its Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) Blueprint program to encourage more housing and transportation choices for Washingtonians. The program advances vibrant and healthy neighborhoods through a comprehensive report and action plan, a traveling gallery exhibit, and community meetings across the state to promote growth near transit.
The Blueprint program is anchored by a comprehensive publication Blueprint for Transit Oriented Communities (pdf). It’s an action plan for promoting neighborhoods that give people greater access to housing, jobs, shopping, and recreation without relying on a personal vehicle. Created by GGLO, Futurewise, and Transportation Choices Coalition, the purpose of the Blueprint is to provide guidance and inspiration for the community at large, and also to serve as an advocacy manual for new legislation that will promote exemplary transit oriented communities in cities throughout Washington State.
The publication presents an image-rich vision of TOC, provides research linking TOC patterns to numerous social and environmental benefits, and lays out policy actions from the local to federal level to encourage more TOC patterns.
Alan Grainger, founding principal of GGLO, said, "For this to happen, visionary planning and design must go hand-in-hand with smart policies and attention to the unique qualities of each community."
The workshop is free and open to the public and oriented toward public officials, planners, and informed citizens.
Details:
What: Presentation & Discussion on transit-oriented communities.
Date: Friday, September 9, 2011
Time: 10:30 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.
Location: Shoreline Library
Address: 345 NE 175th, Shoreline WA 98155
RSVP to info@futurewise.org.
More information about transit-oriented communities available at http://futurewise.org/priorities/toc.
Monday, August 29, 2011
Introducing new blog series "The Portland Transit Authority"
Blog Note:
While TCC is a Washington non-profit that works to increase transportation choices for people across the state, we also recognize that we do not live on an island. The impacts of transportation and land-use policy decisions do not end at arbitrary political lines. We cannot advocate for high-speed rail if it doesn't extend into Vancouver, BC and Portland, OR. It is impossible to talk about growth and traffic in Spokane unless you acknowledge a lot of people commute from Idaho to Eastern Washington. In this vein, we are starting a new series on the blog looking specifically at transit issues in Portland titled "Portland Transit Authority". The author is Zef Wagner, a former Seattleite and TCC intern who is living in Portland studying urban and transit planning. His blog series (which we will generally post every other Monday ) will get past the broad statements that transit in Portland is perfect and will dive into transit issues in the Rose City with a level of nerdyness that many of you will enjoy and hopefully with enough explanation that the average reader can understand. So regardless of where you live, we encourage you to join us as every couple of weeks we put our soccer rivalries aside to explore the world of Portland's public transit. Thank you Zef for contributing to the blog and I hope you all enjoy!
We all know Portland has an amazing public transit system, right?:
"US News ranks Portland No. 1 for public transit"
--The Oregonian
"Portland is widely considered one of the nation’s leaders in public transit."
--US News and World Report
"Portland’s transit system is held up nationally as a model network, as it should be."
--Wired Magazine
These breathless exclamations of Portland's transit excellence are commonplace, but many dispute this rosy image:
"Was that u.s. news 10-best transit cities list based on anything?"
--Human Transit
"Bus service hours fell 13.3 percent from October 2008 to October 2010."
--Portland Afoot
"These cuts result in a heavier burden on the growing number of people who depend on public transportation."
--OPAL
"Many TriMet riders have seen their service degrade over the years, despite billions of dollars being spent on new investments."
--Portland Transport
So who is right? Let's take a look.
Portland certainly does have an impressive rail system, with over 50 miles of light rail, a downtown streetcar line, and a commuter rail line carrying people all over the 3-county region. Portland's 11.5% transit mode share, meanwhile, is quite high compared to most other cities of similar size (though notably far below Seattle's 19.5%). TriMet, the sole transit agency for the region, has invested billions of dollars in rail expansion over the last 25 years and has recently started construction on yet another new light rail line. A major streetcar extension is also under construction, with another in the early planning stages.
This flurry of rail expansion contrasts with a series of major bus service cuts over the last several years. Like most public transit agencies, TriMet has seen a decline in projected revenue due to the recession and has cut service accordingly. Both bus and light rail have seen major cuts in frequency, reducing the value of Portland's normally excellent grid-based network, which relies on easy connections between transit lines to function as designed. The cuts have also forced TriMet to redefine their lauded Frequent Service network from its previous level of "every 15 minutes, all day, every day" to "every 15 minutes during morning and afternoon rush hours on weekdays." That's a major shift from a network designed for people using transit for all kinds of trips to one designed mainly for downtown commuters.
The latest blow came late last year when voters rejected a $125 million bond measure meant to replace much of TriMet's aging bus fleet and improve bus stops throughout the region. This rejection may be a sign that TriMet is in the grips of the infamous "transit death spiral," in which service cuts lead to reduced public support of transit, which in turn leads to lack of funding and further service cuts.
Since my recent move from Seattle to Portland I have been fascinated by the contrast between this city's outsized transit reputation and the reality of the actual transit system. Portland is a transit leader in many ways, with its willingness to make major capital investments in both long-distance light-rail and local-circulator streetcar, but like many cities it has been plagued by a lack of operations funding and a loss of public trust.
My goal with this series will be to explore the reality of public transit in Portland and highlight major transit-related projects and issues that Portland is wrestling with during these difficult economic times.
 |
| Buses in need of replacement are a huge part of Trimet's system. Picture Courtesy of oregonlive.com |
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Tacoma Tomorrow: Suburbs Have not Supported Transit in Over 10 Years
Chris Karnes over at Tacoma Tomorrow is diving into a series of posts about past election results for transit in Pierce County and what the agency needs to do in order to be successful going forward.
In his most recent post Chris looks at Pierce Transit election results between 2002 and more recent transit elections (2007, 2008, 2011).
The data is conclusive, Pierce County voters have not changed in the last 10 years: Tacoma, Lakewood, and Downtown Gig Harbor and Puyallup continue to to say yes to to transit, while voters in the suburbs and exurbs continue to say no.
Chris goes on to point out what has changed:
The whole thing is well worth a read. While you are there, make sure to read his earlier post on the 163 transit hostile districts in Pierce County and the need for Pierce Transit to shrink its service and taxing area to be successful in the future.
To add my own two cents, we cannot stay in a world where the urbanized, high-transit use areas of Pierce County have sub-par transit service due to a lack of political will to pay for transit in the exurban and rural areas of the county. In the last 3 years Pierce Transit has cut around 43% of their transit service, which is unacceptable in the short and long-term. Buses stop running at 10pm and high ridership routes like the Route 1 are often overcapacity and delayed (I know this from experience and Piece Transit's data backs this up).
We need great bus service in Pierce County to keep people moving and get our economy back on track. In order to restore bus service Pierce Transit needs to get the rest of its sales tax authority. In order for this to happen they need to cut out the low ridership, high service cost, transit hostile parts of the county. To be clear, a new and improved smaller Pierce Transit would not be "Tacoma Transit" as some have claimed. The Pierce Transit of the future could provide great bus service to places where transit is cost-effective and works (i.e. Tacoma, Lakewood, Puyallup, Sumner, South Hill, Gig Harbor, Dupont, Parkland, Spanaway, and Fife) and at the same time only impose taxes on communities that receive bus service; a win-win scenario for transit supporters and anti-tax exurbanites alike!
In his most recent post Chris looks at Pierce Transit election results between 2002 and more recent transit elections (2007, 2008, 2011).
The data is conclusive, Pierce County voters have not changed in the last 10 years: Tacoma, Lakewood, and Downtown Gig Harbor and Puyallup continue to to say yes to to transit, while voters in the suburbs and exurbs continue to say no.
 | ||
| Results from Pierce Transit Prop 1 - February 2002 |
 | |
| Pierce Transit Prop 1, Feb 2011. Red = Failed Transit votes in 2007, 2008, 2011. |
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?
The whole thing is well worth a read. While you are there, make sure to read his earlier post on the 163 transit hostile districts in Pierce County and the need for Pierce Transit to shrink its service and taxing area to be successful in the future.
To add my own two cents, we cannot stay in a world where the urbanized, high-transit use areas of Pierce County have sub-par transit service due to a lack of political will to pay for transit in the exurban and rural areas of the county. In the last 3 years Pierce Transit has cut around 43% of their transit service, which is unacceptable in the short and long-term. Buses stop running at 10pm and high ridership routes like the Route 1 are often overcapacity and delayed (I know this from experience and Piece Transit's data backs this up).
We need great bus service in Pierce County to keep people moving and get our economy back on track. In order to restore bus service Pierce Transit needs to get the rest of its sales tax authority. In order for this to happen they need to cut out the low ridership, high service cost, transit hostile parts of the county. To be clear, a new and improved smaller Pierce Transit would not be "Tacoma Transit" as some have claimed. The Pierce Transit of the future could provide great bus service to places where transit is cost-effective and works (i.e. Tacoma, Lakewood, Puyallup, Sumner, South Hill, Gig Harbor, Dupont, Parkland, Spanaway, and Fife) and at the same time only impose taxes on communities that receive bus service; a win-win scenario for transit supporters and anti-tax exurbanites alike!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
