City Hall
Council Members: Today's Metro Announcement Won't Change Our Positions on License Fee
Six of nine city council members, contacted by phone this afternoon, said today's announcement that the King County Council will pass a $20, two-year fee to preserve Metro transit service will not change their personal views on the appropriate size and makeup of a potential citywide license fee, which would require voter approval.
I called council members on the theory that they might support a larger fee now, given that the city fee will no longer be at risk of competing with the $20 county fee. Nope: Supporters of the highest fee ($80 for 12 years) still support that level, and supporters of the likelier mid-range fee ($60 for eight or ten years, depending on the council member) have not changed their positions. In the words of council member Sally Clark, "I'm ecstatically happy about what Metro's going to do---and I'm still at $60."
Council member Nick Licata said he would "support $80 but would go with $60"; council transportation chair Tom Rasmussen said he is "concerned that if we go to the polls with $80 we won't be able to pass it ... because of the downturn in the economy"; council member Mike O'Brien said he still wanted to see an $80, 12-year plan; council member Bruce Harrell said he was "fully prepared to put $80 on the ballot" but still needed to be convinced that it would pass; and council member Tim Burgess said the 10-year, $60 fee still "seems like a reasonable thing to do."
However, council members did say they were intrigued by one aspect of the county's plan: Providing some kind of rebate, either in the form of bus tickets or as a discount on electricity, to low-income Seattle residents who own cars and have to pay the license fee.
"People who make [less than 150 percent of the poverty level and own cars]---they didn't make a choice to own a car, but they live or work in places or at times where they can't use transit," O'Brien says. "For someone who relies on a car, giving them a bus pass may be a little insensitive. It's kind of a typical thing that I, as a Sierra Club guy would do: 'Oh, we'll give you a bus pass; that'll make your life better.' Using City Light as a vehicle might make more sense, because everyone has a City Light account." The city, O'Brien suggests, could provide a rebate equivalent to the amount of the license fee to customers who are eligible for City Light's rate assistance program.
Rasmussen, too, suggested some kind of City Light rebate program; however, Harrell, who heads up the council's energy committee, wasn't sure a rebate would be legal.
I called council members on the theory that they might support a larger fee now, given that the city fee will no longer be at risk of competing with the $20 county fee. Nope: Supporters of the highest fee ($80 for 12 years) still support that level, and supporters of the likelier mid-range fee ($60 for eight or ten years, depending on the council member) have not changed their positions. In the words of council member Sally Clark, "I'm ecstatically happy about what Metro's going to do---and I'm still at $60."
Council member Nick Licata said he would "support $80 but would go with $60"; council transportation chair Tom Rasmussen said he is "concerned that if we go to the polls with $80 we won't be able to pass it ... because of the downturn in the economy"; council member Mike O'Brien said he still wanted to see an $80, 12-year plan; council member Bruce Harrell said he was "fully prepared to put $80 on the ballot" but still needed to be convinced that it would pass; and council member Tim Burgess said the 10-year, $60 fee still "seems like a reasonable thing to do."
However, council members did say they were intrigued by one aspect of the county's plan: Providing some kind of rebate, either in the form of bus tickets or as a discount on electricity, to low-income Seattle residents who own cars and have to pay the license fee.
"People who make [less than 150 percent of the poverty level and own cars]---they didn't make a choice to own a car, but they live or work in places or at times where they can't use transit," O'Brien says. "For someone who relies on a car, giving them a bus pass may be a little insensitive. It's kind of a typical thing that I, as a Sierra Club guy would do: 'Oh, we'll give you a bus pass; that'll make your life better.' Using City Light as a vehicle might make more sense, because everyone has a City Light account." The city, O'Brien suggests, could provide a rebate equivalent to the amount of the license fee to customers who are eligible for City Light's rate assistance program.
Rasmussen, too, suggested some kind of City Light rebate program; however, Harrell, who heads up the council's energy committee, wasn't sure a rebate would be legal.
