Type to search

Saba Long

Transportation tax votes show mixed results in elections across the country

By Saba Long

While the country is consumed with conversations about the demographic divides of the Republican Party and the shellacking the Mitt Romney campaign experienced, a number of transportation referenda have gone seemingly unnoticed.

Transportation investment measures on the Nov. 6 ballot included seven sales tax, five property taxes, one bond and one gas tax, according the Center for Transportation Excellence (CFTE).

Michigan alone had five referenda across the state, all funded via property tax increases ranging from .1 to .6 mills.

Four of the five referenda passed with a lone “loss” — in Walker, Michigan — being a measure supported by an anti-tax group akin to the Fulton County Taxpayers Association. If passed, the measure would have ended the city’s participation with the Rapid — the regional transit authority — without providing an alternate mode of public transportation.

A similar referendum in Sylvania, a suburb of Toledo, Ohio, also failed to generate the necessary votes to remove access to public transportation.

Perhaps the most significant transportation referenda losses were Measure B1 and Measure J, in Alameda and Los Angeles counties.

Measure B, a half-cent sales tax, first passed in 1986. In 2000, an extension through year 2022 was approved to fund new projects and programs.

Measure B1 sought to add a half-penny to Measure B. Leading up to the general election vote, every major project funded by the prior referendum were either under construction or complete. If passed, B1 would have generated $7.8 billion over 30 years, increased para-transit funding, upgraded BART stations, funded “Complete Streets” and improved roads and highways.

Like the Alameda County transportation referendum, Measure J sought to augment an existing half-cent sales tax in Los Angeles.

Approved in 2008, Measure R is set to expire in 2039. Supported by Mayor Antonio Villariagosa and the local business community, Measure J was pitched as a job creation initiative — an estimated 400,000 jobs — to boost the construction industry by accelerating seven transit and eight roads projects already approved in the Measure R vote.

Also, it would have provided an additional $22.1 billion for bus and rail operations from 2039 through 2069. Estimates showed the additional half penny would have cost the average Los Angeles resident about $25 per year.

Measure B1 and Measure J received 65.5 percent and 65 percent of the vote, respectfully. California law requires a supermajority on ballot initiatives, meaning both measures had to receive 66.67 percent of the votes to pass. A representative of CFTE mentioned there is a post-elction grassroots effort underway to lower the super-majority mandate to 55 percent.

In the South, Orange County, North Carolina approved a half penny sales tax to boost Triangle Transit’s service and build a light rail connection from UNC Chapel Hill to downtown Durham.

In 2011, Durham also approved a half -cent sales tax for the same. The onus is now on Wake County to pass a transportation referendum to round out the public support for transit in the Research Triangle.

Voters in Memphis rejected a penny increase to the gas tax to support MATA — the Memphis Area Transit Authority. Receiving only 38 percent of the vote, the ballot initiative was supported by the local Sierra Club, transit unions and the League of Women Voters. Many speculate the failure to get voter approval was due to the short campaign — City Council voted on Aug. 7 to include the measure on the November ballot and the lack of clarity on how the $3.6 million would be spent year over year.

CFTE notes transportation ballot initiatives were a success in 2012, with more than 70 percent favorable. Like the metro Atlanta T-SPLOST vote, opponents cited low transit ridership and too much taxes as a reason to reject the local referendum.

While there still seems to be zero political will to bring up discussions on the Regional Transportation Referendum, it behooves our state and local leaders to pay attention to the successes and failures in cities and regions across the country and to develop a Plan B.

Much like the current situation at our nation’s capital, embarrassing losses have a way of bringing about compromise.

Saba Long

Saba Long is a communications and political professional who lives in downtown Atlanta. She serves as the senior council aide and communications liaison for Post 2 At-Large Atlanta City Councilman Aaron Watson. Most recently, Saba was the press secretary for MAVEN and Untie Atlanta -- the Metro Chamber’s education and advocacy campaigns in supportive of the Atlanta Regional Transportation Referendum. She has consulted with H.E.G. an analytics and evaluation firm where she lent strategic marketing and social media expertise to numerous political campaigns, including that of Fulton County Chairman John Eaves and the 2010 Clayton County transportation referendum. In 2009, Saba served as the deputy campaign manager for the campaign of City Council President Ceasar Mitchell. Previously, Saba was a Junior Account Executive at iFusion Marketing, where she lent fractional marketing strategy to various ATDC technology startups operating out of the Georgia Tech incubator, ATDC. For the past two years, Saba has presented on online marketing and politics to the incoming fellows of the Atlanta chapter of the New Leaders Council.



  1. The Last Democrat in Georgia November 13, 2012 5:45 am

    A good “Plan B” to the miserably failed Regional Transportation Referendum is to ELIMINATE the state gas tax that decreasingly funds our increasingly inadequate road network and the 1% sales tax that decreasingly funds the anchor to our increasingly inadequate and increasingly ineffective mass transit network (MARTA) and REPLACE them with a robust and steathy mix of adequately-priced distance-based user fees (for roads and transit), private financing/investment (for transit) and Tax Increment Financing (property tax revenues from new development that pops up along transit lines).
    Pushing unending tax increases as a way to inadequately fund piecemeal improvements to our ailing transportation network is so 20th Century, especially in an increasingly tax-adverse political environment.
    The future of transportation funding does not lie in increasingly inadequate traditional forms of funding such as sales tax financing.
    The future of transportation funding lies in SELF-FUNDED transportation infrastructure, a form of transportation funding which transportation taxes become completely optional in that only those who use the transportation infrastructure pay for it in lieu of sales taxes in which everyone pays for transportation infrastructure whether they use it or not (a prospect that is clearly not all that politically appealing in a region that has been known to be cool to the idea of tax-funded transportation infrastructure).
    Get over the failed Regional Transportation Referendum approach to transportation funding already as attempting to minimally fund both token and critical transportation “improvements” through the use of voter-approved tax referendums in a politically conservative tax-adverse region and state is completely misguided, totally counterproductive and is a political DEAD-END!Report

  2. harish99pv November 30, 2014 12:19 am

    for sharing a New Way to Detect Packers it may very help full to find the
    movers and packers in current time.


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.