You have to read this and apply it to your area before it makes sense. With the passing of the " Mom & Pop " neighborhood gas station and the growth of the mega gas stations that have become centralized on traffic patterns and commuters. Now see if you can figure who is pushing this bill which has huge windfalls for some and the shaft for others.



To: All Members of Senate Transportation

Re: "Unintended Consequences" within SB 6582


Last week we shared with all of you via email our concerns over the negative impacts on our members whom operate retail motor fuel outlets if SB 6582 contains a local option fuel tax for individual cities. The economic hardships and the political battles that would undoubtedly break out if a city proposed passing such a tax is what we call an "unintended consequence". There's more unintended consequences and we believe topping the list will be major disappointment for those supporting this bill.

Gas stations would collect the local option tax. The identity with the most gas stations selling the higher volume would pull in a major share of the potential revenue within a county. Has anyone found a source that can show how many stations are located within the boundaries of a city or town and how are outside in the county? Take Grays Harbor where where the AUTO office is located as an example. The overwhelming majority of the stations are located inside the cities and towns. Only a handful of smaller volume sites are located outside in the county.

Let's say Aberdeen, Elma, and Montesano were to pass a city option. We estimate the county with its extensive road network would have a potential remaining for less than $50,000 per year at the maximum rate. Then again, if one traverses the major population center you will see where the overwhelming number of stations are in Aberdeen leaving Hoquaim and Cosmopolis holding nearly an empty bag for potential as well. Even if all three passed the same identical tax rate, we estimate Aberdeen would capture up to five times the revenue as Hoquaim and Cosmopolis combined.

Oakville with its one small station might hope to bring in around $15,000 per year if the rate was set at the maximum of 3 cents. Perhaps nearby Rochester might avoid being stuck the same way by annexing out to Grand Mound in an attempt to steal those stations on the new I-5 interchange away from Thurston County, a trend that could catch on and create turf wars between other cities and counties in the state. Under this proposal, its not the miles of roads and streets or transportation needs that are considered, but rather the number of driveways off streets and roads leading into service stations that establishes the potential transportation revenue available to a city or county.

While we suspect they are unaware of it, we believe this bill contains far more unintended consequences than benefits for many of our cities and counties. We suggest that its time to follow the money by asking the question...."How many driveways into filling stations are there inside each city and how many are outside in the county? If those numbers are attained, we believe the math will show that this bill is not the solution anticipated by its proponents. Just as it will do to the dealers, the city option tax will create artificial winners and losers and likely spread disharmony between the cities and counties due to the unfair tax treatment that is "sleeping" within this bill.

Spreading disharmony between the cities and the counties?

Now how could that be a factor to consider? You must have forgotten what State this is? Ugh.