Sustainability
Fenty budget raids Anacostia fund, breaks Council's word
Mayor Fenty's proposed FY2011 budget reprograms the revenue from the Anacostia cleanup fund, generated by the 5¢ bag fee. The Council should quickly reject this approach.
During the original bag debate, many naysayers said that this was just an attempt to raise some revenue through a hidden "tax." Supporters argued that this wasn't the purpose.
Instead, it aims to create an economic incentive for people to use reusable bags, taking advantage of the very high elasticity of bag demand based on price. And it's successfully reduced bag use by 50-80%.
It also raised $150,000, and the Mayor wants to redirect that money. Tommy Wells has already vowed to fight the effort, and the Council should back him up. Their actions on this matter will determine whether the Council can ever pass behaviorally-targeted fees with a straight face.
Economists often recommend such measures, knowing that people's behavior is far better influenced by prices than by public service announcements or even laws against certain actions. Pollution, in particular, is a classic example of a public good affected by private actions.
If law can turn the externality of pollution into an internalized charge specifically on polluters, we can reduce pollution most effectively. And dedicating the revenue to programs that counter the effects of that pollution ensures that the law addresses the problem directly whether people choose to pay or to change behavior.
The success of such approaches, however, depends on the political will to maintain them. It's always tempting to just use the revenue for other purposes. The Mayor tried to do the same with the performance parking revenue, which has to go to local neighborhoods to get support for the policies in the first place.
Likewise, municipalities across the nation come to depend on traffic camera revenue, which would likewise ideally disappear entirely if people simply followed the laws. Some jurisdictions ended up with big budget holes after enforcement revenue dropped due to compliance, and a few even shortened yellow light cycles to try to catch more drivers. That's the wrong approach.
One solution is to create special authorities to manage the money, limited by statute in how they can spend it and relatively inaccessible to political bodies. But those are complex to set up and administer. The better solution is simply for good elected leaders to recognize that they can't ask voters to support something if they don't keep their word.
The Council should reject the Mayor's attempt to raid the fund and keep its own promise to the people of DC.
Update: Wells Chief of Staff Charles Allen pointed out that because the law set up a special "Fund" for the bag fee revenue, the Mayor had to specifically call out the rearrangement of revenue in the budget and seek an "Intra-District Transfer" to reuse it. That calls attention to the move, making it easier for the Council to refuse.
Comments
- Community stories show the shift to a walkable lifestyle
- Young kids try to assault me while biking
- Focus transportation on downtown or neighborhoods?
- Some are pushing to limit sidewalk cycling
- Metro bag searches aren't always optional
- Where is downtown Prince George's County?
- Endless zoning update delay hurts homeowners







Look up "hypothecated tax" sometime to see why it is a bad idea. Next thing you know, you are going to say the gas tax should just be for roads....
The lovely irony, of course, is the bag fee is generating so little revenue that it might not be worth Fenty's time to take it.
by charlie on Apr 2, 2010 1:05 pm • link • report
by Paul on Apr 2, 2010 1:27 pm • link • report
How many people will say I told you so : every single person that has purchased a bag
by kk on Apr 2, 2010 1:30 pm • link • report
by David C on Apr 2, 2010 1:44 pm • link • report
+1
by Adam L on Apr 2, 2010 1:49 pm • link • report
by KCinDC on Apr 2, 2010 2:47 pm • link • report
And, if all those re-routings are allowed, then isn't the Mayor and the Council "breaking their word" on how those funds would be spent? What makes this specific fund special and not the dozens of other funds that are getting the exact same treatment?
Realistically, the $150k that the Tommy Tax has brought in is really meaningless. Rejecting the re-routing of this money won't have much impact.
Except, that the CFO's revenue estimates for this tax are quite significant over the next several years. Which means that if Tommy wants to keep his bag tax revenue in its current account, he's going to need to find a way to make up the resulting revenue shortfall in the general fund. But to do that, he's going to have to get the support of other council members b/c the bag tax transfer isn't under his committee's jurisdiction.
I chuckle at Wells' sudden realization that, in a major budget crunch as the city finds itself in these days, he's now aware that money is money to the city budget folks. It doesn't matter what special purpose account it lives in. It can be re-routed into the general fund by simply adding a sentence or two to the budget bill. And if it's not re-routed, then it's on Wells to figure out how to plug the resulting budget hole.
Or did you all actually think the Tommy Tax was really about cleaning up the river and not raising revenue?
by Fritz on Apr 2, 2010 3:00 pm • link • report
by Paul on Apr 2, 2010 3:07 pm • link • report
The real saving will come if less plastic bags get into the storm drains and block them up. When it rains, the sewage goes into the Anacostia and the city gets fined. Not sure how that would show up in the budget.
I think David's pursuit of externalities is a bit backwards. It is not about how the money is spent -- if you CLAIM that the fee is for a specific purpose it might be easier to swallow.
After all, we don't elect leaders because they say "we won't do evil." We design system so evil leaders can only do so much damage.....
by charlie on Apr 2, 2010 3:28 pm • link • report
by jcm on Apr 2, 2010 3:33 pm • link • report
OK, I did look it up, and I still think it's a good idea.
by David desJardins on Apr 4, 2010 1:06 am • link • report
by Jacob on Apr 6, 2010 1:51 pm • link • report
Add a Comment