A Transportation Benefit District for Tacoma?
A resolution passed at this week’s City Council meeting setting next Tuesday, November 13, as the date for a second public hearing on the formation of a Transportation Benefit District for the City of Tacoma “to fund and make improvements to the City’s transportation system.”
Also on the City Council agenda for next week is the first reading of the ordinance that would establish that transportation benefit district. The ordinance request asks that the ordinance be considered on an emergency basis: getting its first reading immediately after the public hearing, with a second reading the following week. If the ordinance passes on this timeline, it would go into effect November 22 26.
the City wishes to establish a TBD within its boundaries in an effort to preserve and maintain transportation infrastructure, improve public safety, and implement projects identified in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan, the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as in the City’s Six-Year Comprehensive Transportation Improvement Program,
At the first public hearing for the TBD earlier this year, the issue didn’t get much comment – just one speaker in favor of the idea.
The wording of the ordinance describes the purpose of the TBD as the “maintenance and preservation of existing transportation improvements; [and] providing for additional transportation improvements…” TBDs have independent taxing authority, including the authority to impose property taxes and impact fees in a designated area. Tacoma is looking at car tabs …
With the vote on Prop 1 still hanging in the balance, and a budget proposing significant cuts to the city’s streets maintenance, getting around Tacoma could be getting harder.
So … ?
Filed under: Transportation, City Projects, City Government, Transportation Benefit District, Roads, Transportation Planning
8 comments
F fred davie November 9, 2012
We already have an over sufficient number of taxing authorities and an over sufficient level of property taxes and impact fees.
What Tacoma REALLY needs is a “balanced budget benefit district.”
T tacoma_1 November 10, 2012
I’m more than willing to pay higher car tab fees for a TBD.
Matter of fact. Since Tacoma voters are supporting prop 1 and Puyallup voters are the ones raining on the parade, that it would be irresponsible for our City Council to ignore the will of the voters and let our city transit system whither and die, while stranding our citizens.
J John November 10, 2012
The TBD resolution seems rather vague, but Tacoma_1 brings up a great point. While Tacoma is pretty progessive on a lot of issues, the rest of the county seems to lean considerably further to the right. I’m guessing that towns like Buckley, Roy, and Carbonado weren’t really in support of Prop 1, not only because the proposition doesn’t really provide too much of a service for the citizens of said communities, but also because they seem to vote primarily against issues that take anything out of their wallets. Is it time to look at ‘Tacoma/Lakewood Transit’ instead of ‘Pierce Transit’? Should the decision making process be placed in the hands of those who actually use the service?
J Janet Higbee November 11, 2012
Some of this transportation funding will fund infrastructure for “active” transportation, in other words, for pedestrians and cyclists. If we want quality, healthy and joyful lives for ourselves and our children, we need to create “complete” streets, These types of streets offer safe routes for walkers and bikers. The car tabs fees will help with this. I know that Bike/Pedestrian Action Committee intends that some of the funds contribute to active transportation projects.
Cars cost a lot! They create potholes and the need to pave more and more since the Puget Sound area is growing in population. Drivers must pay for the roads that their habits require! A way to save LOTS of money is to drive less. Not driving one to four days a week would more than make up the twenty dollar tabs fee.
D David Emery November 11, 2012
If I understand the basic premise, the authority wants to charge a car tab for the funding of plans currently articulated in the “City’s Capital Improvement Plan, the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as in the City’s Six-Year Comprehensive Transportation Improvement Program”. Consider this: A 396M proposed spending plan, which recognizes a 382M in revenues and 445M in expenses which leaves a 63m gap. Mostly as a result of EE pay raises and benefit cost increases.
So, I enjoy cycling as much as anyone, but to create additional revenues earmarked for additional expenses, no matter how seemingly useful and life-fulfilling, is simply irresponsible. Balance the budget like any healthy minded family or business would be required to do instead of creating new ways to spend money that we don’t have. It’s not a matter of “progressive” Vs “right leaning”. Budgeting 101…don’t spend what you don’t have…even if you need to make sacrifices.
N Naomi November 12, 2012
I’m seriously in favor of just having Tacoma Transit, as we need it and want it, while the rest of Pierce County can do without if they want to continuously vote against funding. I’m not a fan of increased taxes (either sales or car tab) but am willing to pay either because I know so many people rely on the bus for their only form of transportation.
F fred davie November 12, 2012
“I’m seriously in favor of just having Tacoma Transit, as we need it and want it, while the rest of Pierce County can do without if they want to continuously vote against funding.” Naomi
Nobody voted against funding a transit system. Folks voted against raising the level of funding. That’s a big distinction. I think most people were saying they can’t afford higher taxation. That’s a reasonable objection to the Prop. 1 tax increase.
J Jim C November 13, 2012
This is an unbelievable proposal at a time when the city is trying to find money to fund basic sanitation and emergency services. I voted for Prop 1 and am disappointed it was voted down, but am starting to feel that the city council wants to create a “special district” for everything that doesn’t pencil out in reality and enough is enough. Are the street planters on Pac Ave going to start riding out on EMS calls?