Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, July 6, 2011
Transportation The Budget Looms
Posted by Grant Brissey on Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 6:57 AM
Here's the service alert I received from One Bus Away this morning while checking times for route 66, which is almost always packed, no matter what time in the morning I take it. The link. The public hearings:
Attend the next public hearing:
July 6 at 6:00 p.m.
Kirkland City Council Chambers
123 Fifth Avenue
Kirkland, WA 98033
July 12 at 6:00 p.m.
King County Council Chambers
516 Third Avenue, 10th Floor
Seattle, WA 98104
July 21 at 6:00 p.m.
Burien City Council Chambers
400 S.W. 152nd Street
Burien, WA 98166
2
Has anybody done any investigation into how the Metro spends their money? Especially regarding salaries, administrative costs and such?
3
Bus fares won't go up again. It's either cuts or convice drivers to cough up another $20 a year. Check out the link in the post.
Good on One Bus Away for keeping us riders aware of what those cuts will mean for our commute. I hope Seattle is generous enough to pay an extra $20 buck, my route is slated for changes too.
Good on One Bus Away for keeping us riders aware of what those cuts will mean for our commute. I hope Seattle is generous enough to pay an extra $20 buck, my route is slated for changes too.
5
Okay, no one's cutting the 8. It might get some trips cut. Here's a list Metro has put out looking at service revisions:
http://metro.kingcounty.gov/am/future/PD…
http://metro.kingcounty.gov/am/future/PD…
6
Right, I misread Grant's picture. It did have a different message. But I already spend enough time waiting for the perpetually late 8 as it is.
7
I've been to Sound Transit and KC Metro hearings. Watching a front-loading washing machine is a more productive use of your time. They don't change -anything-.
9
@8 You are assuming bus riders have that option, and many of them don't. The result will be people on the margins losing the jobs they can only get to via public transit. They won't be buying cars, or even riding the bus anymore.
10
If we're getting another $20 tacked on to car tabs instead of raising fares -- which is complete shite, considering that cars just got jacked for having to pay tolls on the 520 -- I want some answers on how Metro is spending their money. How much money would we save by trimming the admin costs? Or, by having the buses end their route where they're supposed to start their route?
11
@10 - So you favor a 'use-based' approach for transportation funding?
Using Seattle as an example, there are about 350,000 registered vehicles in the city with a total transportation budget of ~$306,000,000 for 2011. Subtracting out the sidewalk repair, pedestrian, and bike money (about $30 million give or take) and gas tax contribution in there ($13 million), that gives you a budget of around $263 million.
That equates to a 'use-fee' of about $751 per year per vehicle.
Using Seattle as an example, there are about 350,000 registered vehicles in the city with a total transportation budget of ~$306,000,000 for 2011. Subtracting out the sidewalk repair, pedestrian, and bike money (about $30 million give or take) and gas tax contribution in there ($13 million), that gives you a budget of around $263 million.
That equates to a 'use-fee' of about $751 per year per vehicle.
12
@9 I'm assuming that a fraction of bus riders own cars and will start driving them to work and back as their usual bus routes are reduced or eliminated.
13
@10 - kc metro has already done a great deal in upping efficiencies over the past few years. That's the only reason why legislators are even listening to this request of a car tab.
check out this show with Dow Constantine on kuow, they talk a lot about the car tab fee, and some other things too: http://kuow.org/program.php?id=23731
check out this show with Dow Constantine on kuow, they talk a lot about the car tab fee, and some other things too: http://kuow.org/program.php?id=23731
14
@11 What's your point?
The tolls on 520 are:
$3.50/day at Rush Hour;
$7/day;
$35/week for commuters;
$1750/year (at 50 weeks worked per year).
But, you probably think that's a fair "use-based" approach towards transportation.
In my opinion, I'd totally be willing to pay an extra $20 car tab if 520 drivers didn't just get slammed with huge tolls. But, many around here are "share and share alike...but only if it benefits transit."
The tolls on 520 are:
$3.50/day at Rush Hour;
$7/day;
$35/week for commuters;
$1750/year (at 50 weeks worked per year).
But, you probably think that's a fair "use-based" approach towards transportation.
In my opinion, I'd totally be willing to pay an extra $20 car tab if 520 drivers didn't just get slammed with huge tolls. But, many around here are "share and share alike...but only if it benefits transit."
17
@14 & 15 -
Numbers:
Seattle Transpo Budget
Registered vehicles: From City Council briefing on car tab revenues (no link handy)
Point: A small % of vehicle costs are directly recovered from users. Your willingness to pay $20/year in tabs for something that is valued at $1750/year is an apt illustration of the level of subsidy that car owners have become accustomed to.
Numbers:
Seattle Transpo Budget
Registered vehicles: From City Council briefing on car tab revenues (no link handy)
Point: A small % of vehicle costs are directly recovered from users. Your willingness to pay $20/year in tabs for something that is valued at $1750/year is an apt illustration of the level of subsidy that car owners have become accustomed to.
20
If you work downtown and ride the bus, but have access to a car, an extra twenty bucks for the year is a much better deal than driving downtown and parking - that can run anywhere between $15 and $30 dollars per day.
Even if you drive to work every day currently, the extra cars would put pressure on the existing garages, which would result in higher parking rates.
Put the damn charge on already. Stop whining about taxes. After all, metro was a much better system before Eyeman came along with his ridiculous car tab nonsense.
Even if you drive to work every day currently, the extra cars would put pressure on the existing garages, which would result in higher parking rates.
Put the damn charge on already. Stop whining about taxes. After all, metro was a much better system before Eyeman came along with his ridiculous car tab nonsense.
21
You should also take out another $50m for the First Hill Streetcar. $213 million
And, how about subtracting out parking costs? That's another $42.5 millions...so we're down to $170m. Licenses and permits - 12 million. $158million that comes from other, not directly vehicular, taxes.
Now...since, we're doing math here...how much of Metro's budget does not come from rider fares?
And, how about subtracting out parking costs? That's another $42.5 millions...so we're down to $170m. Licenses and permits - 12 million. $158million that comes from other, not directly vehicular, taxes.
Now...since, we're doing math here...how much of Metro's budget does not come from rider fares?
22
I get that there's a crisis. Just stop the fucking exclamation point flashing after I've read the message. Make it stop dammit! All the flashing exclamation point does it to be fucking annoying after you've read the message. I can't do a damn thing about the problem. Thanks for letting us know. Now cut it the hell out!
23
@21 OOO, I got this one.
Only 23.6% of Metro's budget comes from Bus and Access fares.
Or,
$419 million of KC Metro's budget comes from other sources.
Only 23.6% of Metro's budget comes from Bus and Access fares.
Or,
$419 million of KC Metro's budget comes from other sources.
24
My point is, Action Slacks, that Seattle drivers just got royally FUCKED by transit lovers and Washington for the 520 bridge.
And, they're going to get a bit of salt in the wound because Metro can't make ends meet by having to pay increasing tabs. So, the argument is now down to "Let the drivers pay for it. They can afford it because they have a car!"
And, they're going to get a bit of salt in the wound because Metro can't make ends meet by having to pay increasing tabs. So, the argument is now down to "Let the drivers pay for it. They can afford it because they have a car!"
25
Hey Misanthrope--bus fares have already been raised 80% in the last four years. And Metro just finished a complete audit of their practices and has cut jobs, tightened driver schedules and much more. Their real deficit due to lower sales taxes is about $200 million a year. Cost savings and fare increases have narrowed that to about $60 million a year.
Hernandez @ 8, 12--In fact, 95% of Metro riders own cars and many will return to them crashing our roads system as you stated.
Misanthrope--you act like cars and transit don't work together. They are all part of the system that keeps us moving. Did you see the congestion that happened last week because of 15,000 people at Key Arena for the motivational speakers? Get used to at least that many additional cars on the road, EVERY DAY.
Hernandez @ 8, 12--In fact, 95% of Metro riders own cars and many will return to them crashing our roads system as you stated.
Misanthrope--you act like cars and transit don't work together. They are all part of the system that keeps us moving. Did you see the congestion that happened last week because of 15,000 people at Key Arena for the motivational speakers? Get used to at least that many additional cars on the road, EVERY DAY.
26
Westside -- My point is NOT that cars and transit don't work together. My point is that people on this blog have made it a transit vs driver issue (including the writers of this blog).
They believe that tolling on the 520 at that rate is OK because only drivers use the bridge, while raising fares is BAD because transit benefits everybody.
They believe that passing the buck for transit to everybody else is GOOD, but passing the buck for transportation is BAD.
I'm all for playing scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours. But, this whole "Help me, fuck you" business is totally shitty.
They believe that tolling on the 520 at that rate is OK because only drivers use the bridge, while raising fares is BAD because transit benefits everybody.
They believe that passing the buck for transit to everybody else is GOOD, but passing the buck for transportation is BAD.
I'm all for playing scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours. But, this whole "Help me, fuck you" business is totally shitty.
27
@10 - The majority of Metro’s funding comes from sales tax, and we know what’s happened to that funding source in recent years. In order to minimize service reductions, we’ve taken steps such as cutting staff, cancelling bus buys, tapping reserves, and making some reductions in bus service to achieve more efficiency.
Metro has also adopted efficiencies recommended in a performance audit that will yield ongoing savings of about $20 million annually. Metro has also raised fares by 80 percent in the past four years.
These actions are generating nearly $400 million to narrow the budget gap for the years 2009-2011 and will generate about $143 million annually in future years.
You can find out more about Metro’s budget and steps taken to manage its shortfall at http://metro.kingcounty.gov/am/budget/
Rochelle Ogershok
King County Dept. of Transportation
Metro has also adopted efficiencies recommended in a performance audit that will yield ongoing savings of about $20 million annually. Metro has also raised fares by 80 percent in the past four years.
These actions are generating nearly $400 million to narrow the budget gap for the years 2009-2011 and will generate about $143 million annually in future years.
You can find out more about Metro’s budget and steps taken to manage its shortfall at http://metro.kingcounty.gov/am/budget/
Rochelle Ogershok
King County Dept. of Transportation
28
@24 -
It is good to see that you agree that vehicle use is very subsidised. Paraphrasing Churchill, "we've agreed on what you are, now we are just haggling over price..."
And for what it is worth, transit did not fondle, grope, suck, or fuck the costs for the 520 project. Chalk that one up to WSDOT engineering. You are paying for about 30' of shoulders and buffer across the lake due to WDSOT's stupid approach to 'safety' and standards implementation. All for a project that will reduce travel times by less than 5 minutes in 15 years.
It is good to see that you agree that vehicle use is very subsidised. Paraphrasing Churchill, "we've agreed on what you are, now we are just haggling over price..."
And for what it is worth, transit did not fondle, grope, suck, or fuck the costs for the 520 project. Chalk that one up to WSDOT engineering. You are paying for about 30' of shoulders and buffer across the lake due to WDSOT's stupid approach to 'safety' and standards implementation. All for a project that will reduce travel times by less than 5 minutes in 15 years.
29
@28 Actually, transit supporters did fuck the costs of the 520 project. There were several bills trying to get the costs of the 520 bridge as part of a general tax that also included light rail, but got shot down on several occasions. See 2007's Road and Transit bill, and Sierra Club's impact on the opposition of such measures.
So, um, yeah...transit supporters fucked drivers, and now want our help.
So, um, yeah...transit supporters fucked drivers, and now want our help.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
The Sunday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-WY) Says Members of His Party Have Rocks for Brains by Charles Mudede
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (29) RSS