As local news blog PubliCola noted this morning, Seattle City Council member Mike O'Brien has a post on his council blog about why he supports sending voters an $80 fee for car tabs that would help fund transit and road work. O'Brien defends the high price tag, acknowledging that it's a regressive tax:

VLF-pie-chart-11.jpg
[R]oughly 18% of households (or about 48,000 households) in Seattle live below 150% of the federal poverty level (150% FPL is $33,525 for a family of four). Among those households, 40% do not own a vehicle and will not be burdened by the increased fee—in fact they are more likely to rely on public transportation and walking to get around and will benefit from the investments we make with additional revenue.

For the other 60% of households below $150% FPL who do own cars, they are likely spending significant portions of their income to own and operate their car. These households will feel the burden of the increased fee, and we need to look for ways to mitigate these impacts, but smart investments can transit use more accessible and, over time, could allow low-income households to reduce the amount of income they spend on their vehicle.

The council members remain divided over just how much the car tabs should cost, according to staff at City Hall this afternoon. The Citizens Transportation Advisory Committee III originally recommended $80, which O'Brien is expected to roll out as a formal proposal in a few minutes before the Seattle Transportation Benefit District (STBD). His proposal would run for 12 years with an expected annual revenue of $27.2 million. That would be segmented into 29 percent for road preservation and safety improvements, 20 percent for bicycle and pedestrian improvements, and 51 percent to fund transit.

On the other end of the spectrum, Council Member Godden would charge a car-tab fee of only half that—$40 per year—and it would run for only eight years. Three-quarters of the money would fund roads, while the scant remainder would get cut into other improvements, which runs counter to the STBD's implicit purpose of increasing mobility for people who aren't necessarily drivers.

In the middle, council members Tom Rasmussen and Sally Clark hope they have hit the sweet spot of $60, which would divide money much like O'Brien's proposal, but generating 25 less percent money. This one would run for eight years. Because the terms all cut off after a dozen years or less, none of these allow for bonding, which Mayor Mike McGinn has favored as a means to pay for more expensive projects.

The STBD meeting will appear live here after the full council meeting is over. The council members aren't expected to take a final vote until next Monday or Tuesday.