1. Lessons From Washington State: Whatcom Transportation Authority (WTA) & Skagit Transit (SKAT) Tactics & Strategies for Organizing Successful Ballot Measure Campaigns

3. Transportation Choices Coalition at work! Bus service is an important transportation choice in communities -- rural and urban -- across Washington. Transportation Choices Coalition has been out working with citizens in local communities, providing critical campaign support to help pass ballot measures to save and expand bus service.

4. Attacks on Transit In 1999 voters passed Initiative 695 Cut the tax on car tabs, an important source of revenue for bus service. I-695 was found to violate the state constitution, but Washington lawmakers decided to eliminate the tax anyway, due to strong support from voters The law resulted in 40% cut in revenues for bus service statewide. Some transit agencies lost as much as half their funding!

5. In 2000 the legislature enabled local areas to raise their sales tax by up to.9% to make up for the lost revenue. 12 of the 14 Transit Agencies in Washington that have gone to the Ballot have won!

6. Skagit Transit provides transit service throughout most of Skagit County with 10 fixed- route buses and 8 Dial-A-Ride routes.

7. In September 2002, voters in Skagit county would decide if they wanted to pay an addition 0.2% sales tax to support SKAT transit service. Without this increase in sales tax, SKAT would have to cut service by 53 %. If the measure passed, SKAT will be able to maintain existing services while returning to the levels of service before the cuts brought on by the passage of I-695.

8. Richard Werbel’s Mineta Institute Study suggests that there are a list of about 17 key factors that forecast the success or failure of a transit ballot measure.

9. Traffic Congestion Crisis:Y Sponsorship by Business Community: N Sponsorship by Key Elected Officials:N Fundraising over $1million:N ($12,000) Recent Initiative Experience:N Support from Environmental Groups:Y Multiple Transit Modes:N Highway Funding:N Benefits Distributed Throughout the Area:Y Sunset Provision:N Lack of Problems with Existing Transit SystemN Extensive Stakeholder Participation in Development of the PackageN General ElectionN Consultant with Initiative Campaign ExperienceN Combination Direct Mail & TV AdsN Lack of Effective OppositionN # of Negative Factors:13

10. Successes A Strong Grassroots campaign with a planned GOTV (get out the vote) effort Skagit Transit Citizen’s Advisory Committee (15) Phone banks, door belling, literature drops, flyering at bus stops, gathered endorsements, letters to the editor, sign-waving Riders & Employers that benefited directly from the service spoke at community events

11. Failures oLack of vocal board support oLittle public participation in the measures development o“Just let us keep what we have” messaging oFailure to address the perception that the community could be served without the fixed routes oFailure to neutralize a well-funded, vocal, opposition oSpent down reserves after the passage on I-695 On September 17, Skagit Transit lost the election.

12. In 2002, they carried 2,675,000 passengers (a more than 5% increase over 2001) They rank among the top three most productive transit agencies in Washington State (and have for the past five years) based on the average number of passengers they carry per hour. Whatcom Transportation Authority (Bellingham, Washington)

13. Initiative 695 resulted in a 50% cut in public transportation funding in Whatcom County. WTA had been able to maintain services by drawing down reserve funds. The only way to avoid service cuts was to replace the funding with local taxes.

14. In early summer 2001 the WTA board conducted an extensive community outreach effort to discuss this dilemma with the community. Over 2000 persons participated in community meetings, surveys and key leader meetings. Resoundingly those who responded indicated that public transportation is important to the community and that the WTA board should seek replacement of the lost funding. On March 12, 2002 WTA asked for a 3/10 of 1% sales tax increase.

15. Traffic Congestion Crisis:Y Sponsorship by Business Community: Y Sponsorship by Key Elected Officials:Y Fundraising over $1 million:N ($30,000) Recent Initiative Experience:N Support from Environmental Groups:Y Multiple Transit Modes:N Highway Funding:N Benefits Distributed Throughout the Area:Y Sunset Provision:N Lack of Problems with Existing Transit SystemY Extensive Stakeholder Participation in Development of the PackageY General ElectionN Consultant with Initiative Campaign ExperienceY Combination Direct Mail & TV AdsY Lack of Effective OppositionY # of Negative Factors:6

16. Successes Phone banks, door belling, literature drops, flyering at bus stops, gathered endorsements, letters to the editor, sign- waving Get the public’s opinion early on (before you announce your tax increase) Using the talents of the Board wisely (for fundraising, outreach, & earned media A Strong Grassroots campaign with a planned GOTV (get out the vote) effort by the ATU On March 12, 2002 WTA won their sales tax increase.