Local transportation funding options in cities
The state’s transportation system is a decentralized network managed by many different jurisdictions including cities, counties, the state, and tribal nations.
City streets accommodate 26% of statewide vehicle miles traveled. And cities are responsible for transportation assets that include 25,000 lane miles of streets, sidewalks, bicycle infrastructure, some state highways, transportation infrastructure, utilities, and the natural environment.
However, cities across the state are experiencing the consequences of structural budget deficit—the price of goods and services to maintain and preserve existing infrastructure is becoming more costly, while city transportation revenue is capped at a growth factor less than the rate of inflation.
Despite these conditions, cities are stepping up to the plate to fund their transportation systems and enhance residents’ connectivity to public goods.
But they’re doing it in ways that make sense for their community and local economy.
Below, city snapshots show variations between cities across the state. They highlight the unique challenges and approaches that cities are taking to address transportation funding.
Blaine, WA
The City of Blaine is located near the Canada-United States border. Because of this proximity, the city experiences significant transportation impacts due to regular border crossings. And, when fuel costs in one area are significantly higher than nearby jurisdictions, drivers could choose to fill their tanks across the border.
In 1991, the Legislature approved the use of a border area fuel tax, allowing cities in border areas to use the revenue from the one cent per gallon fuel tax to support critical street maintenance and construction.
Noticing the impacts on its local transportation systems, Blaine weighed their options and adopted a border area fuel tax. This allowed the city to address border traffic impacts on local streets, while also ensuring drivers still fill their tanks within city limits.
Funding source: Border area fuel tax
Total revenue per year:
2017: $168,506
2018: $201,158
2019: $170,777
2020: $53,962
2021 projected: $24,000
Walla Walla
The City of Walla Walla uses similar local revenue options to support their city transportation projects. Given the seasonal influx of tourism in the city, they identified a revenue option tied to the sale of goods and services as the most viable local option.
In 2011, voters approved a 0.2% sales tax increase as part of a ten-year Transportation Benefit District. Walla Walla is poised to reauthorize the Transportation Benefit District in 2021.
Funding source: 0.2% sales tax TBD
Funding established 2011
Total revenue per year:
2017: $1,447,828
2018: $1,775,295
2019: $1,541,107
2020: $1,511,738
Eatonville
The Town of Eatonville has a high traffic volume associated with hikers traveling to Gifford-Pinchot National Forest and agricultural vehicles moving crops during the harvest season, which causes extreme wear and tear on the town's roadways.
To pay for basic maintenance and preservation of their streets, the town’s voters approved a $20 vehicle license fee. This allows the town to preserve their transportation infrastructure system for all road users—be it hikers, farmers, pedestrians, or others wishing to enjoy the town’s charm and distinctive natural beauty.
Funding source: $20 vehicle license fee
Funding established 2012
Total revenue per year:
2017: $55,371.90
2018: $62,195.67
2019: $63,718.85
2020: $59,865.27
Bainbridge Island
The City of Bainbridge Island sees anywhere between 25,000 and 35,000 tourists per year, and many of these tourists visit the small, vibrant downtown core of the city. Visitors park their cars along downtown streets and commercial lots, but often, parking spills into neighboring residential areas during the city’s peak tourism season.
Given the number of visitors and the impact their travel has on the city’s transportation infrastructure, the city council voted to administer a commercial parking lot tax. Commercial parking lots are subject to the city’s 30 percent parking lot tax and are used strictly for transportation purposes.
In 2019 alone, the city collected more than 1 million dollars in revenue that supports basic transportation maintenance and preservation. This meant funding popular things like sweeping street waste, vegetation control, bike lanes, and sidewalks. These critical components of the city’s transportation infrastructure network ensure that visitors and residents have safe and reliable access to economic opportunities, education, and health care.
Funding source: Commercial parking lot tax
Funding established 2012
Total revenue per year:
2017: $919,373
2018: $977,396
2019: $1,003,663
2020: $515,124
Tacoma
These local revenue options support both small and large cities alike—regardless of population, cities are forced to get creative with the tools they have at hand. Like the City of Tacoma—in 2016, voters approved a 1.5% utility tax increase to provide funding for street repair and improvements, including pothole repair, street resurfacing, maintenance and capital improvements for arterials and freight access roads, installation of school crossing beacons, and building missing sidewalks.
Funding source: 1.5% utility tax
Funding established 2016
Total revenue per year:
2017: $8,630,000
2018: $8,675,000
2019: $8,330,000
2020: $9,024,000
Union Gap
Many cities need a dedicated public transit option but often lack funding and infrastructure to do so. The cities of Union Gap and Selah partnered with the City of Yakima’s public transit system for decades before deciding that Yakima’s transit system was structurally unable to meet the transit demands of both their residents. In 2014, Union Gap started the transition to their own public transportation system that would best fit their residents’ needs.
Now, because of a locally adopted 0.2% public transit sales and use tax and a close partnership with the City of Yakima and its local Medstar Transportation company, Union Gap can provide safe, free, and flexible transit services.
Funding source: Public transit sales and use tax
Funding established 2014
Total revenue per year:
2017: $1,152,281
2018: $1,268,149
2019: $1,177,765
2020: $1,078,120
Each of the above cities has demonstrated the effectiveness of local revenue options to fund their transportation systems. City leaders know their communities well and are best suited to identify the revenue options that support local transportation improvements.
However, these local revenue options alone cannot meet the needs of municipal transportation systems. Fully funded grant and loan programs like Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) and the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) provide cities and towns additional resources to respond to the growing needs of their transportation systems.
We ask the Legislature to adopt a new transportation revenue package that emphasizes increased local transportation resources to maintain and protect our aging infrastructure.
Strong cities need:
Flexible and permanent local revenue options that provide critical funding for communities to reinvest in transportation systems.
A new transportation revenue package with stable, long-term funding solutions to address basic maintenance and preservation of city transportation infrastructure.
Significant reinvestment in competitive state grant and loan opportunities, including TIB and FMSIB.
