Managing, Planning & Funding Transportation

Introduction

Surface transportation in a major metropolitan region such as Central Puget Sound works best if it is planned, managed and funded as a unified system. With population expected to grow as much as 50 percent by 2040, and with continuing development occurring in the outer and inner rings of the region, it will be become more and more challenging to ensure mobility while protecting quality of life. Major investments will have to be made, and their combined effect must be substantial. Presently, Central Puget Sound is handling major surface transportation projects on a piecemeal basis. This does not preclude making some progress, but means that parts of the whole are developed without an overarching regional transportation strategy. This piecemeal approach makes it more difficult to ensure coordination among major projects and long-term cost-effectiveness.

Managing Surface Transportation

A study commission created by the legislature and chaired by ex-Western Wireless CEO John Stanton and former Seattle Mayor Norm Rice, in its December 2006 final report to legislators and Governor Chris Gregoire, urged creation of a comprehensive regional transportation commission to plan, prioritize and fund projects in the region, with voter approval of funding. No legislation has yet been passed to create such a body. Another approach, which has subsequently attracted interest in the state legislature, is creation in major metro regions of a regional transportation corridor authority. Such an authority would emphasize peak-hour road pricing through time-variable electronic tolling; high capacity transit expansion; trip reduction incentives; performance measures and benchmarks; and, voter approval of funding.

At present, the state plays a major role in road and bridge projects, evolving tolling policy, and the state car ferry system. Sound Transit operates express buses across three counties, commuter rail and a starter light rail system that in November 2008 won voter approval for expansion north, south and east over at least the next decade. In addition, a range of county transit agencies and local governments are involved in Puget Sound regional surface transportation.

More

Planning Surface Transportation

Future planning for Puget Sound regional surface transportation will have to respond to several emerging realities. Even with eventual development of a partial regional light rail spine, bus and marine transit, and commuter rail will need to be further developed and funded, too. Yet at the same time transit use is increasing, transit funding tied to sales taxes is declining due to the economic downturn. Even with an economic recovery anticipated at some point, this suggests the need for other, less volatile transit funding sources over the long term. Also worth a closer look are beefier transit fare hikes to offset operating deficits, and a greater reliance on performance-based measures to choose optimal transit service offerings.

Another reality is the unfolding movement toward time-variable electronic tolling. It is already underway on State Route 167 in a pilot project and is expected to be implemented to help fund replacement of the earthquake- and windstorm-prone State Route 520 floating bridge across Lake Washington between Seattle and Eastside job centers. At the same time the SR 520 bridge is tolled, so too may be the parallel I-90 floating bridge. The region should embrace electronic time variable tolling in major corridors to meet pressing repair, safety, transit and peak-hour traffic management needs. These include the I-405/SR 167 corridor, the I-5/SR 99 corridor, the SR 520/I-90 corridor, and the US 2 corridor.

More

Funding Surface Transportation

Although time-variable electronic tolling will help greatly in managing peak-hour traffic flows and will raise revenues to help pay for major projects, it is by no means a fiscal silver bullet for surface transportation.

A variety of other tools will need to be employed.

Current state law allows the formation of transportation benefit districts (TBDs) which may with voter approval enact a license fee surcharge of up to $100 per vehicle; a sales tax increase of .02 percent; and fees for commercial and industrial building construction. TBDs can also enact a license fee of up to $20 per vehicle without voter approval. State law also allows formation of local improvement districts, in which expected increases in property values can be used to help fund transportation improvements.

There's another, even more controversial option which over the long-term is likely to become part of the surface transportation funding mix. Like other states which have already initiated deliberations, Washington may eventually consider the feasibility of a vehicle-miles-traveled tax, or VMT tax. Because of the increasing fuel efficiency of vehicles today, and increasing costs of transportation projects, the by-the-gallon gas tax is losing its buying power. Large increases in the gas tax are considered unlikely by elected officials. While the VMT tax option raises some privacy concerns, these can be addressed by strictly controlling the sharing and use of motorist information. On-board devices such as GPS systems would track the amount of mileage traveled, and where. VMT taxes would work best if discounts were offered for off-peak travel, and for travel on less-congested roads. A Puget Sound Regional Council user study has already tested the concept, as has a pilot program in Oregon. The Washington State Transportation Commission has recommended further investigation of a West Coast VMT pilot project spanning several states.

Another surface transportation funding strategy is to involve public employee union pension funds and building trade union pension funds in direct investment in revenue-producing transportation facilities or services. A growing number of such pension funds have already invested in transportation and other public infrastructure projects that provide a steady long-term revenue stream matching the long-term obligations of the pension funds to their members. The Washington State Investment Board, which oversees more than $50 billion in state employee pension fund holdings, has expressed interest in investing up to five percent of its portfolio in infrastructure.

More