Put a single entity in charge of region’s transit, road planning
Published 9:00 pm Saturday, January 14, 2006
Yes, a majority of Snohomish County voters agreed not to repeal the gas tax hike approved by lawmakers last year. Still, many of them might be surprised – even angry – to learn that as soon as November, they could be asked to tax themselves even more for roads and transit. In separate votes, no less.
There is no question that the two most recent increases in the gas tax – the nickel hike passed in 2003 and last year’s 9.5-cent increase, to be phased in over four years – only begin to address the major maintenance, safety and expansion needs the central Puget Sound region’s transportation system faces.
Road construction and more transit options are both part of the solution. They’re also part of the same big picture, even though their governance suggests otherwise. Sound Transit and the Regional Transportation Investment District (the latter has been working for three years on a regionally funded plan for highways) are separate entities. It’s a left-hand, right-hand setup that depends on the abilities and priorities of whoever is in charge at the time to ensure coordination. Current leadership is highly capable, but it might not always be so.
For Snohomish, King and Pierce counties to effectively address their major transportation challenges, that governance structure needs to change. A single organization with taxing and planning authority for regional transportation would ensure better coordination between highway and transit solutions, and provide one, easy-to-understand point of accountability – a crucial issue for voters, who won’t approve new taxes if they’re not convinced the money will be well-spent.
It’s an idea that’s gaining traction in Olympia. A bill to move toward creating such a council was introduced last week by House Transportation Committee Chairman Ed Murray (D-Seattle) and one is expected this week from his Senate counterpart, Mary Margaret Haugen (D-Camano Island). The idea also has the active support of former U.S. Sen. Slade Gorton and other Republicans. It’s an idea whose time has come.
Haugen would like to see a commission appointed to hash out the details of a new regional transportation authority and present a proposal to the Legislature as early as next year. That gives the matter appropriate urgency without rushing a half-baked plan through this year’s short session. Whatever the timing, any proposal should go before regional voters for final approval.
Plenty of details would have to be worked out, such as:
* Boundaries. Sound Transit and RTID district lines currently aren’t uniform. Sound Transit covers only the most urbanized areas of the three counties. Those lines likely would have to expand to include Snohomish County’s most pressing road needs, like U.S. 2, Highway 9 and Highway 522.
* Power sharing. Snohomish and Pierce counties would need tools to ensure that their larger neighbor, King County, can’t dominate transportation planning.
* Makeup of the regional council. Would members be directly elected? Appointed? How many would there be? Should county executives be permanent members?
There will be other tough questions as well, but none that are insurmountable.
If nothing is done, voters in Puget Sound figure to face a new tax and project request from Sound Transit this year or next. An RTID request for roads, rounding out some of the projects funded by the gas-tax increase and adding more, could also appear, at the same time or later.
Will separate measures strike the right balance between roads and transit? Will they reflect the different needs of different counties? Will they pass?
Having one entity steering regional transportation planning offers better hope for voter buy-in by better ensuring well-coordinated, integrated plans that take both highways and mass transit into account. Lawmakers should shift this idea into high gear.
