Last week, I highlighted Governor Inslee’s appointment of Hester Serebrin, an employee of the political advocacy group Transportation Choices Coalition (TCC), to the Washington State Transportation Commission (WSTC).  

The WSTC develops policy as it relates to the entire transportation system throughout the state, and is leading the charge in testing the feasibility of the controversial mileage tax.

The TCC, headlined with the slogan, “Transit for all,” is the same aggressive political advocacy group that received public money to push for Sound Transit’s regressive taxes on working families and the driving public. This is also the same group that, alongside Sound Transit, got into hot water for the illegal use of private ORCA cardholder emails for campaign purposes.

This week, the TCC released their 2017 Legislative Agenda and confirmed my concerns about the conflict between the spirit of the WSTC and the goals of Ms. Serebrin.

Among the policy recommendations listed by the TCC is support for the WSTC’s pilot program to develop a mileage tax. The TCC's legislative agenda states:

“A well-designed pay-as-you-drive system will provide the level and flexibility of revenues to ensure our transportation system is well maintained and that Washington can pursue a wide variety of transportation solutions.”

In other words, they support the mileage tax as it could allow for diversion of mileage tax revenue to non-highway purposes – or transit – if it’s not protected by the 18^th Amendment.

The public has many valid concerns about the replacement of our state’s gas tax with a mileage tax, which I’ll cover more extensively in an upcoming study. One of those concerns is that mileage tax revenue, unlike the gas tax, would not be protected by the 18^th Amendment and would become a “flexible” revenue source for the state, which the TCC appears to support.

Public transportation is important, especially in dense urban areas, but it is not a highway purpose as indicated by the 18^th Amendment and should not be funded with vehicle-related taxes and fees paid by drivers.  Any new transportation revenue source created by the state would have to be used to pay for existing obligations or to strategically expand and maximize highway capacity to directly benefit the payer.

The TCC’s support of “flexible” use of revenues shouldered by drivers for a “variety of transportation solutions” is a glaring red flag; the agenda Ms. Serebrin represents as a long-time TCC employee does not help the WSTC with their promotion of the mileage tax as a true gas tax replacement, rather than a supplement or general revenue source susceptible to government abuse.

Any advocacy for a mileage tax without 18^th Amendment protection is like a public agency claiming, “This is exactly the same with the same purpose, but we’ll be doing something totally different with the money. Other than that, it is identical.” Public trust is eroded when we are presented with this rhetoric.  

This is all the more reason for lawmakers to reconsider Ms. Serebrin’s appointment to this important commission.