what a bunch of pussies.

@1, 2

Pretty much. Yup.

How does one "compromise" on something as simple as this?

Thanks for taking one for the team, Goldy. Five hours in council chambers sounds like the fifth circle of hell to me.

Yeah, that whopping $20 car tab fee is just going to wipe out the savings of car owners. How dare we ask them for it! Never mind thousands of people are going to have to start driving to work thus choking the roads and creating more gridlock.

Oh, I forgot. Those same people have a solution for that, too. Build more/bigger freeways. Oh, wait, that costs money, too?

Damn.

Then there are the thousands of people who can't drive who won't be able to get the bus they need to get to work on time, or at all, also. Wonder what the solution is for that.

$20 fee for ongoing support of buses due to continual budget screw ups. DELAYED

6 BILLION dollar tunnel, MUST MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT DELAY!

priorities, they are broken

So do the council members who oppose the $20 fee have....some other plan in mind...? Or is it just "Oh well! We'll have fewer buses. Cope."

If $25 million covers a year, $800,000 is about 10 days of bus service. NOT a drop in the bucket.

@9, why would they care? I mean their republican suburban voters probably don't ride the bus much nor buy the arguments that it reduced traffic on the roads. The people who ride the bus in their districts probably vote democratic anyway. No real gain for supporting the fee but a fair bit of downside from raising taxes.

This is why it is dumbass to have the County run the buses. Sound Transit should handle the commuter routes from park and rides and Seattle should run it's own intra-city bus system.

@11, I don't think it argues against who runs Metro so much as the way the King County Council is elected - by district, rather than at large.

@1,2,

No. I actually LIKE pussies. Pussies are warm, welcoming, responsive and useful.

None of those things are true about the members of our County Council.

@12 But then that would likely fuck over the suburbs. I'd rather do it the way say San Francisco does where the City is its own county. That way each can do whats best for it.

Plus the leg will always force bullshit county wide votes on shit like this and that would be so much easier if it was just Seattle.

Sooo, procedurally and strategically, can someone tell me what this means? Who initiated the delay in vote? How is this item NOT going to ballot...is there really some hope that enough unspoken councilmembers will get on board to approve this? Are there groups already preparing for worst-case and mobilizing for autumn canvassing? I'd appreciate any info.

@16, Procedurally, putting it on the ballot now requires the same six votes as councilmanic approval. But apparently, enough R's have assured the D's that they would vote to put it on the ballot, and the D's take them at their word.

In the meanwhile, the D's have another couple weeks to pick up a vote. In exchange for what, I don't know.

Taking the Rs at their word--what can possibly go wrong there?

The Rs need cover in their districts so they can blame the voters for yanking those buses away by not voting for them. The Rs would prefer not to vote Yes for anything and I think they intend not to, ever again, except for each other in their elections.

BUT WHAT ABOUT THE PEOPLE? WHAT ABOUT THE PEEEEEE-PLE? WE NEED A VOTE!!

Its incredibly easy to say "20$ isnt that much.", if you dont actually own or drive a car.

While it doesnt seem like much, its the extra 100$ drivers will get slammed with later on, thats probably making this 20$ fee seem like a tipping point.

Its very tragic that during all these discussions, that was the only thing on the table to resolve the budget problem. Never mind getting rid of the ride free zone, or pushing a tad harder on delinquent fares or raising the fare a quarter, or requiring cyclists to register and get a license. Theres probably a dozen other things we could do, but instead, people are focusing on the easy target, raise the car tabs without a public vote, because if its put up to a vote, it will probably lose.

King County Councilmembers-

What the hell is wrong with you people? You are the worst representatives because you are purely self-serving. Do your fucking job and strike a deal; this is absolutely ridiculous.

Sincerely,
Jenny from the Block

@21, You're talking out of your ass. Since sales tax revenue collapsed a few years ago (through no fault of Metro) it's achieved $135 million a year in cost savings and higher fares. Indeed, fares haven't just gone up a quarter, but an entire dollar over three years. That's an 80 percent increase, about $500 a year for a daily commuter. And you're complaining about an extra $20 a year on your car tab?

@21 As a part-time bus rider and part-time driver, I think you're being a huge wimp about this. I'm already paying a lot more for my bus pass thanks to raised fares, same as every other bus rider. Even then, my driver side is fine with paying the extra $20 to keep fewer cars on the road - not every transit user is anti-car, a hell of a lot of us are car owners as well, and will be forced to choke your roads every day if service is cut/reduced.

I agree with Kinison. Why should people who own cars have to subsidize people who ride the bus. Why not ask the bus riders to pay $20 more dollars a year by increasing bus fees to maintain the current level of service the riders feel they need? Please stop threatening me with congestion predictions if I don't pay $20.00, because all the bus riders are going to take to the highways in their cars if we don't charge car owners $20.00 per year. When you do that you assume that I drive my car during peak times, and that all bus riders will take to their cars and not carpool, when we all know that your thinking is flawed. You don't want to put this to a public vote because you know that car owners aren't going to voluntarily tax themselves so that you can continue to ride the bus at greatly subsidized rates. You should have voted to keep the tax on candy, or maybe for the income tax, but don't be looking at me to help you ride the bus. I see lots of buses on the road with a very few passengers on board, and continuing to run those routes isn't cost effective. I'm sorry if you're going to be inconvenienced because you live on a route that isn't utilized very much, but that's the way the cookie crumbles when the public is demanding a lean, mean governmental machine. Let's run Metro like a private business you say? Well, if we do that, we would close it down because it loses money because the riders aren't asked to pay the true operational costs of the company. I'll sit back now and wait for the flames to start coming my way.

I agree with 21. Why should people who own cars have to subsidize people who ride the bus. Why not ask the bus riders to pay $20 more dollars a year by increasing bus fees to maintain the current level of service the riders feel they need? Please stop threatening me with congestion predictions if I don't pay $20.00, because all the bus riders are going to take to the highways in their cars if we don't charge car owners $20.00 per year. When you do that you assume that I drive my car during peak times, and that all bus riders will take to their cars and not carpool, when we all know that your thinking is flawed. You don't want to put this to a public vote because you know that car owners aren't going to voluntarily tax themselves so that you can continue to ride the bus at greatly subsidized rates. You should have voted to keep the tax on candy, or maybe for the income tax, but don't be looking at me to help you ride the bus. I see lots of buses on the road with a very few passengers on board, and continuing to run those routes isn't cost effective. I'm sorry if you're going to be inconvenienced because you live on a route that isn't utilized very much, but that's the way the cookie crumbles when the public is demanding a lean, mean governmental machine. Let's run Metro like a private business you say? Well, if we do that, we would close it down because it loses money because the riders aren't asked to pay the true operational costs of the company. And if the City of Seattle raises car fees by another $100.00. get I'll sit back now and wait for the flames to start coming my way.

@23

Maybe he isn't. I am. I don't ride the bus. I've ridden precisely one route in over 2 decades living in the Peoples Democratic Republic of King County. The busses I see on the road are uniformly empty except for an hour or so in the morning and the evening. They just expensively drive around with an overpaid driver to no purpose for 22 hours in the 24.

Want to get to work or shopping or your favority gay bar? Fine. Buy a car or walk or buy a bike or get a cab. Call a friend with a car. Buy into Flexcar or whatever its called. But here's the thing- it isn't the problem of drivers, who already pay for the roads in their taxes.

@24

As with all the cries for higher taxes liberals love so dearly, there is a solution-

YOU pay higher taxes. Mail Metro a check for $20 or whatever you feel you owe. Mail the state of Washington a check for whatever you feel you owe them. Mail a check to the federal government to assuage your guilt for managing to make a decent life for yourself despite liberal mismanagement of the national tax structure.

But leave me out of it. Government is necessary at some level, sure. But it's a necessary evil, to be limited as much as possible if only to ensure our continued liberty.

@28: Less government does not necessarily mean increased liberty. Unless you mean liberty to be attacked by the random lunatic, liberty to contract cholera, liberty to be poisoned by industrial pollution. There's a reason we've put more government into place since the late 1800s. It's because we want liberty from a whole bunch of bad stuff that only government can fix.

You try building a railroad, a natural gas pipeline or a cable TV system without having the government on your side condemning property, and then explain how less government is better.

@23 "You're talking out of your ass. Since sales tax revenue collapsed a few years ago " ... " And you're complaining about an extra $20 a year on your car tab? "

Then raise the sales tax. Those fare increases were due to the rising cost of gasoline, which most car owners had to deal with as well. Its not like bus users are alone in getting jacked at the pump.

I dont own a car, never have. 20$ is nothing to me, but its going to sting a bit to normal car drivers, especially when the car tab gets jacked another 100$ by the state.

@24 "will be forced to choke your roads every day if service is cut/reduced"

Threats are useless unless you intended to make good on them. So let metro cut services by 17%, if the mass transit armageddon doesnt happen, then I guess it was BS all along. However if it does create massive backups, then people will then agree to pay the fee.

If you think 20$ is a fair price, or isnt a big deal, then you wont have a problem if cyclists are forced to pay the same fee. After all, its only fair.

Any car driver who bitches about "subsidizing" bus riders. STFU. OK? Just STFU. Gas taxes and MVET make up about the same amount of transportation budget (road maintenance and construction) as farebox collection on a transit system.

I drive to work every single day even though I have an employer provided bus pass. I DO NOT EVEN think I'm subsidizing some bus riders commute. Nobody can bitch about "pay your fair share" UNTIL YOU DO IT YOURSELF.

@28 If the Council passes the fee, I will gladly pay it. If it comes up for a public vote, I will gladly vote for it.

@30 I will personally make good on it if service is cut, because it will cut both the route that I use to commute and routes that I use for personal travel in-city. Your "let things go to shit and then we can change if they do" argument is stupid. Do you really believe that prevention is not a valid reason to do something? (And by the way, when did I say anything about bicycles?)

@31. What would you call a $20.00 tax on cars imposed because bus riders don't want Metro to cut services? I call it a subsidy for Metro bus riders. If a business isn't profitable then qwe need to do something. Raise the cost to ride the bus? Reduce the number of bus routes, maybe only keeping the ones that are profitable? 21, don't you think that people should pay more for bus service if they use it? I can't wait for all the current Metro riders to hit the I-5 freeway to mess up my commute when the $20.00 car tab fee fails at the ballot box. The threats are empty since all the riders don't drive cars, and since I don't have a job right now, I don't commute. I must be rich though because I have a car! Stop trying to spend my money for something that I won't use!

Hey Mare, guess what? Chicken butt!

The bus isn't a business. Neither is the road outside your house. Neither one was paid for directly by the people who use it. The gas taxes you pay, and the MVET for the car you drive, they only paid about 20-30% of the cost of building it and maintaining it.

So sure, $20 additional MVET is a subsidy for bus riders. But so are general taxes, property taxes, sales, and any number of other taxes, fees, tolls, and what have yous that bus riders pay - they go to subsidize the road in front of your house. So STFU, unless your block forms a LID and takes over all maintenance for your street. Everybody's transportation is subsidized. GET OVER IT.

@34. Thank uyou for recognizing that a $20 car tab tax is a subsidy for bus riders. Am I to be grateful for the bus riders who pay for the street in front of my home? Their fares don't even cover the costs of operating the bus system, let alone paying for my street. Don't look to me to help bail Metro out by punishing me because I own a car. You can send your $20.00 to Metro if you feel responsible to maintain Metro's current level of service. I think Metro's p[erations should be reviewed as if it were a business. Cut the waste or raise the cost of ridership. It's really pretty simple. Oh, and by the way, please don't tell me to STFU anymore either. That is a very rude thing to say, even if it is the only way you can express your frustration at having your viewpoint challenged.

I'm rude because you are intellectually challenged.

Bus riders, via their property taxes, sales taxes, and other assorted taxes, paid for your street. Subsidizing you. You refuse to recognize their contribution to YOUR lifestyle, then demand not to contribute to theirs.

If you demand the bus service be run like a business, so should your street. You should start paying tolls the moment you leave your driveway. So the operation of the street can be audited for financial effectiveness, just like you demand for the bus.

@17 Thanks Goldy. I really hope that the councilmembers take a good, hard look at what cutting mass transit services means for people who would otherwise not be able to work at a job because commuting by car does not work logistically/financially for them. I work in private consulting, and nearly everyone I work with commutes by bus from Seattle, Auburn, Bothell, etc. to Bellevue, and all of our routes would be affected by this cut. Bigger businesses look for mass transit centers to site their offices. Where are the new Microsoft campuses located in Bellevue? Next to the Bellevue Transit Center on NE 6th St and 108th Ave. If you google the Transit Center, you will find at least a dozen larger, uber-income generating businesses within a 0.25 radius of this site.

It boggles my mind that certain councilmembers, who last time I checked were pro-business, are not considering that private industries can't stay competitive when the commute becomes prohibitive to good employees who are willing to live in lower-expense communities (*particularly* if they are trying to raise families) and commute to financial hubs like Bellevue or Seattle via mass transit. You want your workers to be competitive? You make sure they can get to work by bus so they don't have to pay astronomical gas/maintenance/parking fees.

Infrastructure does not turn a profit. It is never intended to be profitable. It enables commerce in other ways. ALL transportation infrastructure is overhead, and ALL of it is subsidized.

With today's "I got mine, Jack" mindset, there is no way in hell we could ever build the transcontinental rail system (that we're now letting rot) or the interstate highway system (which is crumbling into dust). Demanding that your tax dollars go only to support the pieces of the infrastructure you personally use is a recipe for disaster. Bridges need maintenance. Buses need to be replaced. Train tracks have to be repaired and signals maintained. NONE of it is self-supporting. We all subsidize one another's transportation needs. Even those who never leave their mother's basement have transportation needs - those Doritos and Mountain Dews come from somewhere else, via rail, via truck. Via public transportation infrastructure.

The problem is, we artificially separate mass transit - buses, rail, etc. - from the roads and highways, so we create this artificial dichotomy. Buses and highways are BOTH public transportation.