1. What is RTID?
The Puget Sound Regional Transportation Investment District (RTID) — consisting of King, Pierce and Snohomish counties — was created in March 2002, when the Legislature approved a measure that allows regions within the state to work together to solve their own transportation problems through local funding.

2. Who makes up the RTID Board?
The RTID Board is made up of council members from all three participating counties. Three council members from King County and two members from both Pierce and Snohomish counties serve on the Executive Board, which meets monthly to develop a regional investment plan that addresses the individual needs of the partner counties and the region’s requirements to move people and freight.

The group that will place a financing plan before voters is the 26-member Planning Committee. It is composed of all 25 county council members from King, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties and the state Secretary of Transportation, serving as the non-voting chair.

3. Didn’t the state already increase the gas tax to pay for transportation improvements? Why do we need another package?
Earlier this year, the state Legislature passed a 10-year, $4.2 billion transportation tax package — which includes a nickel-a-gallon tax increase. The new gas tax will replace revenue the state lost for highway construction when the motor vehicle excise tax was repealed in 2000. But, the overall transportation needs are much greater than that.

The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) is focusing the gas-tax money on problems statewide. It is not enough money to address the severe and expensive problems in the Puget Sound region, such as replacing the Alaskan Way Viaduct and the State Route 520 Bridge.

Elected officials in King, Pierce and Snohomish counties created the RTID to carry out a tri-county plan to solve some of the most pressing problems here at home — problems the statewide gas tax investment could never hope to solve.

4. What is in the current package of proposed RTID projects?
Each county has drafted a list of projects within its boundaries. Currently, the King County Department of Transportation (KCDOT) has approximately 50 projects listed that total approximately $9 billion. Some projects on KCDOT's list are very expensive, such as replacing the Alaskan Way Viaduct and the 520 Bridge, widening Interstate 405, and extending State Route 509. There are also smaller, more local projects such as improving intersections on arterials in the suburban cities.

One version of a detailed list for King County can be found on the state’s RTID Web site. (external link)

5. How was the current package put together?
The RTID Executive Board began the discussion with a list of projects proposed by the county executives of King, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties. Then, the Executive Board members worked with residents, local jurisdictions, and transportation agencies to refine the list.

Right now, the board is working with a tentative project list that has a total cost of more than $14 billion. The investment would be equitably split between the counties based on the amount of funds generated within each county. The RTID legislation specifically requires that each county receive a proportionate share of tax revenue generated within that county. The split between counties will depend on which set of taxes and fees are designated for the RTID package, since each source has a different yield per county.

6. Why is there an impasse?
Road and transit advocates have not been able to reach consensus on a balanced package of improvements in King County that maximizes the movement of people and freight in addition to automobiles.

Also, residents and the business community are saying the $14 billion list is simply too big, given the soft regional economy and number of households struggling to make ends meet.

While the Executive Board’s efforts have contributed greatly to the debate over the types of investments that should be made, it has become clear in recent weeks that there is a stalemate rather than consensus on a viable transportation package.

7. What kinds of projects are eligible for RTID funding?
The state law says the district must spend its money mostly on projects associated with major state highways, or what it calls a “Highway of Statewide Significance” (HSS). Other eligible projects include: HOV lanes; flyover ramps; park-and-ride lots; bus pullouts; vanpools; improvements to city streets and county roads that provide significant congestion relief; plus signalization, ramp metering, and other transportation system management improvements. High capacity transit projects, such as light rail, can also be included if Sound Transit agrees to a joint ballot.

8. Can RTID funding be used for the light rail project?
Existing law allows for a joint ballot requiring a single vote to approve both RTID and Sound Transit projects. A joint ballot would have to be first approved by both the RTID Planning Committee and the Sound Transit Board of Directors. Other Sound Transit projects to improve regional bus service can qualify directly for RTID funding without a joint ballot.

The RTID Executive Board would like to see the state law changed to permit light rail extensions in King County without a joint ballot.

9. Where will RTID funding come from?
The RTID legislation allows for a mix of funding sources. The Executive Board is currently considering a combination of local sales tax, vehicle licensing fees, and vehicle excise taxes. The board is also considering tolls on major roads in King County and a regional gas tax. All of the funding options assume a 10-year construction period (2005-2015) supported by the sale of bonds to be paid off by collections from the RTID taxes and fees. Except for tolls, all would be assessed at the same rate in each county. By law, revenues raised in one county cannot be spent in another.

10. Why is King County suggesting a smaller RTID package?
The first and most important concern is that the current $14 billion-plus package being proposed for the region is simply too big, given the availability of current revenues and the amount of money that could realistically be raised in the short term. And, it would be asking a lot of local residents who are struggling to make ends meet.

Also, many of the projects in the larger RTID list are not ready for construction, and the voters will not see progress on them for years. It might be better to come back to the voters for additional taxing authority when these projects are further along in the development process.

Last year, voters rejected Referendum 51, a smaller statewide transportation package. Voters are unlikely to approve an RTID at the levels currently being discussed, even if the improvements contained in the package are good and valuable additions to the transportation network.

11. What is in King County’s revised package?
KCDOT staff worked to compile a more-affordable package that had the right mix of projects to deliver the most benefit. Taking a phased approach, King County’s $6.5 billion proposal targets the region’s most urgent projects that can ready to go within the next 10 years. Highlights of the smaller package include:

• Replacing the SR 520 Evergreen Point Bridge and portions of the Alaskan Way Viaduct;
• Relieving congestion on key highways that carry large amounts of people and freight, such as Interstate 405, Interstate 5, State Route 509 and State Route 167;
• Extending Link Light Rail to Northgate from downtown Seattle;
• Constructing two-way transit lanes on Interstate 90;
• Adding capacity through HOV and transit lanes throughout the system; and
• Constructing dozens of freight, transit, road and signalization improvements throughout the county.

12. Why is $6.5 billion better than $9 billion, if it funds fewer projects?
Knowing that it wanted to make the package more affordable, the King County Department of Transportation (KCDOT) looked for an objective way to evaluate the project list. KCDOT staff compiled a list of criteria and principles focused on elements such as safety and preservation of existing roads, freight mobility, and projects that have the greatest potential for moving the most people and goods. The smaller package reflects a careful examination of what each project will deliver that is achievable and a wise investment.

13. What methodology did King County do to measure the effectiveness of each project on its list?
KCDOT staff reviewed each of the projects on King County’s list to evaluate how they will:

• Move people and goods;
• Preserve the current transportation infrastructure;
• Expand the current system;
• Make the current system more efficient; and
• Support growth in the urban areas.

This technical review process compared the current list of proposed RTID projects against a rational set of principles and criteria. The King County Department of Transportation has extensive experience in doing this kind of review, because it is one of the only agencies in the nation that delivers a combination of road, transit and aviation services.

14. What works best to reduce traffic congestion – more roads or more transit?
The best transportation systems are ones that combine an integrated network of different approaches, such as highways, transit, ferries, and programs that support daily travel needs like vanpools and car sharing. Roads are needed not just to move individual cars, but also for freight mobility and to link communities. Transit can increase the capacity on those roads by putting more people in fewer vehicles. And, improvements for pedestrians and cyclists increase access and mobility.

15. Do taxpayers get any say in this?
Yes, voters must approve the RTID plan. The legislation requires a simple majority on a single ballot measure that approves the plan, establishes the district, and approves the taxes and fees. The RTID board hopes to adopt a draft package of projects and taxes this fall and place it on the ballot in 2004, either in September or November.

16. If voters approve the RTID tax proposal in 2004, when would construction start on the first projects?
Both versions of the package contain a mix of short-term and long-range projects. Like the state’s nickel-gas-tax package, some projects could start within months; others would require more time for planning and design.

Updated: Sept. 24, 2003