sales tax Archives - Transportation For America

Local communities in Utah and beyond will decide their transportation funding fate this November

As November approaches, voters in a majority of Utah’s counties will be weighing a decision to approve a 0.25-cent increase in their counties’ sales tax to fund transportation projects in those counties. This is just one of many notable ballot measures for transportation on the horizon for this fall and next year.

Utah Light Rail 1 Utah’s legislature acted earlier this year to increase the state’s gas tax, tie it to inflation, and provide individual counties with the ability to go to the ballot to increase sales taxes to fund additional local transportation priorities. As of this writing, 17 out of 29 Utah counties have decided to put those measures on their ballots.

The state hadn’t increased its gas tax — the most significant funding source for the state’s roads and bridges — since 1997. Gas tax revenue in Utah, however, is constitutionally limited only to road projects, which requires other source of funding for transit and other important local transportation projects. Utah legislators addressed that concern with a bipartisan compromise to let local voters decide whether or not to raise sales taxes, which are entirely flexible and can be spent on nearly any local transportation need.

With the elections a little over a month away, a statewide advocacy group affiliated with the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce has embarked upon a massive education campaign to educate voters about the benefits of raising new local money for transportation. The group, called Utahns for Responsible Transportation, is launching ads on TV, radio, and the internet, as well as in newspapers and on billboards. The group is also calling and mailing voters directly.

State leaders expect the state’s population to double by 2050, flooding the state’s most populous areas with new residents. This makes sound transportation investments of all types across the board – light rail, commuter rail, bike trails and new, safe pedestrian infrastructure – even more imperative as Utah’s cities add new residents and keep their economies chugging along.

In Salt Lake City’s core counties — including Salt Lake County, Weber County, Davis County, and Utah County — if the ballot measure is successful, a portion of the revenue will go to UTA, the regional transit system that runs light rail, buses and commuter rail in those counties, in addition to funding other local priority projects of any type.

Several others worth watching

Utah isn’t the only place where local voters will be deciding whether or not to tax themselves to raise new money to invest in transportation.There are several significant issues being decided in the Pacific Northwest this year and next.

Sound Transit’s LINK light rail on the Seattle-SeaTac line.

This November, Seattle voters will decide on a $900 million levy to fund five new bus rapid transit lines and complete streets projects throughout the city. In November 2016, residents in the three counties of the Seattle metro area will decide whether to allocate $16 billion dollars to Sound Transit for an extensive expansion of the region’s light rail network.

Just north of Seattle proper, on November 3^rd, Snohomish County voters will decide on a 0.3 percent sales tax increase for Community Transit to improve service frequency, add commuter service to Seattle and the University of Washington, and add new bus routes, among other things.

In Oregon, voters in the Salem-Keizer Transit District are voting in November on a new payroll tax, the proceeds of which will be used to restore bus service on nights and weekends for service between Salem and Keizer.

Outside of the northwest, voters in Indianapolis counties will decide in November 2016 whether to increase local income tax rates to fund an ambitious transit expansion throughout the city and into surrounding counties, focusing first on new bus rapid transit lines.

We’ll be watching the results of these ballot initiatives closely, so stay tuned for updates. We’re beginning to collect a list of other notable measures worth watching, so if there’s one you know of that we should keep our eyes on, let us know in the comments.

Phoenix voters approve a plan to raise money for transportation; vastly expand the city’s light rail and bus networks

On Tuesday night, voters in Phoenix, AZ, approved a slight increase in the sales tax to help fund a 35-year, $31.5 billion package to greatly improve and expand Phoenix’s light rail and bus systems, as well as other transportation improvements. The vote is further evidence that voters are willing to tax themselves for transportation — especially when they know what they’re getting.

* Final results won’t be in for a few days but at a 55-45 margin in reported results so far, advocates are claiming victory. -Ed.

The measure on yesterday’s ballot, Proposition 104, will raise $17.3 billion by nearly doubling the current 0.4 percent sales tax that’s currently devoted to transportation, increasing it by 0.3 percent on purchases in the city and devoting those extra dollars to transportation.

The city will use the bulk of the new revenue, plus other money from grants and transit fares, to improve and expand bus service and expand the city’s new light rail system. The plan also includes money for improving streets, sidewalks and bike lanes. The anticipated funding breaks down like this:

55% ($17.5 billion) will go to improve bus service, including $2.9 billion to increase frequency of current service and and $1.9 billion for new bus service.
28% ($8.9 billion) to expanding light rail or high-capacity transit—allowing for 42 new miles of light rail, tripling the current system length.
7% ($2.2 billion) will go toward existing light rail service
7% ($2.4 billion) for city streets, sidewalks, and bike lanes, which includes a plan to add over 1,000 miles of new bike lanes.

Expanding the city’s transit system (and new light rail service) was a core part of incumbent Mayor Greg Stanton’s campaign platform — who also won re-election yesterday. Mayor Stanton has repeatedly stated his belief that a robust transit system was essential for Phoenix’s long-term economic prospects.

“(It will be) getting people to educational opportunities, getting them to jobs, creating economic development opportunities. Bar none, it’s going to be awesome,” Stanton told KTAR news this week.

MovePHX , a local transportation advocacy group that also ran the campaign for Proposition 104, presented a compelling vision to the voters that transit is essential for moving citizens around more effectively and efficiently and for helping the region cope with expected population growth. With a specific plan in place for how and where to invest the money, the voters agreed that a more robust transit system is needed for the city to grow to its full potential.

Phoenix’s light rail system, which began running December 27, 2008, has had over 14.2 million riders so far in [fiscal year] 2015, and the service has been successful in attracting companies to the city that want to be close to reliable transit service to better serve their workers. Companies – like State Farm insurance – have moved to downtown Phoenix in search of a good spot near Phoenix’s light rail system to attract younger workers that like having a convenient transit options.

Votes like Phoenix’s are further evidence that city and state residents are willing to pay for transportation-related projects when they know what they’re getting. Ballot measures for transportation pass about 70 percent of the time, and success (or failure) often correlates with how specific (or vague) the proposal is.

Voters in Seattle and Utah will be going to the ballots over the next few years to vote on similar transportation plans. Seattle-area voters will decide in 2016 whether or not to approve a $15 billion package that will allow the region’s Sound Transit agency to expand light rail there. In Utah, voters (in 12 counties so far) will be deciding this November whether to increase countywide sales taxes to raise new money that can be invested in almost any local need, whether roads, transit, or safer, complete streets.

More and more cities (and states) are seizing the opportunity to raise new money to invest in their ambitious transportation plans crafted to help them stay competitive in the future. Former NYC DOT head Janette Sadik-Khan had a succinct takeaway about the Phoenix vote on Twitter this morning:

PHX passes transit tax. More proof there’s no red/blue divide-just cities that move forward while others fall behind http://t.co/xAPrZcLuRT

— Janette Sadik-Khan (@JSadikKhan) August 26, 2015

Utah makes a bipartisan move to increase state and local transportation funding to help meet the demands of high population growth

Earlier this spring Utah became the third state in 2015 to pass a comprehensive transportation funding bill, raising the state’s gas tax and tying it to inflation. Unlike most other states acting this year, Utah raised revenues to invest in a variety of modes and also provided individual counties with the ability to go to the ballot to seek a voter-approved sales tax to fund additional local transportation priorities.

Fueled by the highest birthrate in the country, Utah’s population is expected to double by 2060. The state’s existing transportation funding sources — unchanged since 1997 and losing value against inflation — would not be sufficient to meet the demands posed by the rapidly growing population. Working proactively, the Utah Legislature and stakeholders worked together to raise new funding for transportation and ensure that the state stays ahead of the population boom.

TRAX Red Line to Daybreak at Fort Douglas Station. Flick photo by vxla. https://www.flickr.com/photos/vxla/

What does the new funding package do?

The new law, passed in March 2015, will generate approximately $74 million annually by replacing the cents-per-gallon gas tax with a new percentage tax indexed to future inflation. The bill also enables counties to raise local option sales taxes, which, if adopted by every county, would generate $124 million in new annual revenue specifically for local needs.

In specific terms, the bill replaces Utah’s current fixed 24.5 cents-per-gallon rate with a new rate of 12 percent of the statewide wholesale gasoline price, beginning January 1st, 2016, and indexes that rate to inflation. The bill also specifies that the tax can’t dip below the equivalent of 29.4 cents per gallon (i.e. a floor mechanism) or climb above 40 cents per gallon (i.e. a cap mechanism). Additionally, diesel, natural gas and hydrogen will see an incremental rise in their taxes until they reach 16.5 cents per gallon (an eight-cent increase for diesel and natural gas).

Importantly, the bill also enables all Utah counties to ask voters to approve a 0.25 percent local sales tax, the proceeds from which can be used to fund almost any locally-identified transportation need, whether roads, transit, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure or other related projects. Revenues from these county sales taxes would be split between the county (20 percent), cities (40 percent), and a county’s transit agency (40 percent). If a transit service area doesn’t exist in the county, the money is split between the county (60 percent) and cities (40 percent).

Due to a constitutional restriction, all state gas tax revenue generated in Utah may only be used on roads, so this new optional sales tax gives counties and local governments a new mechanism to raise funds for their pressing needs, whatever they may be. While the state will see a much-needed revenue increase that can be invested in the state’s Unified Transportation Plan, the local option sales tax is a very important provision that could give localities of all sizes extremely flexible resources to meet their pressing local needs.

Lynn Pace, Vice President of Utah League of Cities and Towns

“There was a major push to say that we need a more multimodal transportation system,” said Lynn Pace, vice president of the Utah League of Cities and Towns. “We needed more flexibility, and that pushed people towards the [local option] sales tax because it was flexible, more flexible than the gas tax.”

Political compromises on the way to passage

At the end of 2014’s legislative session, a transportation bill that, much like this year’s bill, would have allowed counties to impose a voter-approved quarter-cent sales tax to fund transportation was defeated. There were other funding bills that died, including one that would have increased the gas tax by 7.5 cents per gallon and another that would have reduced the gas tax from 24.5 to 14 cents per gallon while adding a 3.69 percent fuel tax. In the end, there wasn’t adequate consensus between legislators to get a bill done in 2014.

This year was different, however.

The 2015 session started with an effort to raise or otherwise reform Utah’s gas tax. The Speaker of the House, Rep. Greg Hughes (R-Draper), wanted to drop the per-gallon flat tax and change it to a percentage tax so that the tax rose and fell with gas prices. Senate President Wayne Niederhauser (R-Sandy), however, felt that tying the gas tax to fluctuating gas prices was too risky. Prices could rise and fall dramatically, he said, subjecting Utah drivers to suddenly higher gas prices (or declining revenues coming to the state with low prices). To eliminate the uncertainty, Niederhauser wanted a straight increase in the gas tax.

Hughes however, didn’t believe that representatives in the House would pass a tax increase, fearing political fallout. Pegging the tax rate to gas prices would allow the state to eventually see revenues increase as gas prices rise without the political risk of imposing taxes immediately. In the end, the bill indexes the gas tax rate to inflation, but with a floor and ceiling put in place to counter destabilizing fluctuations in the gas price.

The importance of including the local option sales tax

Legislators had a similar back-and-forth on the bill’s other major revenue-raising provision: the local option sales tax.

Rep. Johnny Anderson (R-Taylorsville), the sponsor of this provision, wanted to ensure that money from the sales tax went to transit before it went to roads. Rep. Jim Dunnigan (R-Taylorsville), however, wanted to put that decision in the hands of the voters and local elected officials.

As legislators moved towards the end of the session, the House and Senate passed different versions of the transportation bill. The Senate opposed allowing counties to impose a voter-approved sales tax, but the House insisted. Eventually, the chambers came to an agreement, provided that local option sales tax revenues could go to not just transit but all forms of transportation, from roads to transit, bike and pedestrian infrastructure.

Staying on message

The 2014 debate on transportation funding by Utah legislators laid some of the important groundwork for this year’s success. But this time, several ingredients (and some notable changes) came together this year to help convince formerly skeptical legislators to vote yes.

The bill’s supporters — which included the Wasatch Front Regional Council, the Utah League of Cities and Towns, and the Utah Transportation Coalition, among others — were able to present a compelling and winning message about why Utah needed to raise additional dollars to invest in the transportation system. They talked about the critical economic development connection, as well as accommodating and moving more people and goods within the booming state over the next 25 years. Supporters educated both the public and legislators about why Utah’s communities need to be able to raise funds for and invest in multimodal transportation projects.

In a conservative state like Utah, supporters found that economic arguments worked best for convincing legislators and the public that transportation is a worthwhile investment. Their argument was two-pronged: first, a state with a good transportation network can more easily attract businesses, which need solid transportation infrastructure to attract talent, get their employees to work, and ship their goods, and, second, that waiting to repair critical transportation infrastructure will make maintenance cost more in the long run.

Read T4America’s separate 2014 profile of Utah’s “Can-Do” transportation ambitions.

With stories of partisan gridlock making headlines every day, Utah stands out as a model of collaborative planning for a better future. State leaders and citizens have managed to stare down a recession while making transportation investments that accommodate projected population growth and bolster the economy and quality of life.

Click through to read the full story.

To make sure that the message really resonated, supporters made sure that they were all singing from the same sheet.

The Utah Transportation Coalition — a group that includes the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce and the Utah League of Cities and Towns — conducted two years of studies to find the facts they needed for their education campaign.

“What we did differently this year versus last year — in years past — is that we worked together, we were all in lockstep together, we knew our message, stayed on message,” said Abby Albrecht, Director of the Utah Transportation Coalition. “We worked really hard to be the voice in the community and in the legislature about transportation, why it was so important for our economy, for our quality of life, to our healthcare.”

A clear, unified plan for future investment

That singular message is captured in Utah’s Unified Transportation Plan, a statewide transportation plan synthesized from several regional plans and plans from the state DOT and the Utah Transit Authority. The unified statewide plan prioritizes those needs and outlines the $11.3 billion most critical projects to fund.

Having a statewide plan in which everyone could see their needs reflected helped everyone feel that the entire state was working together to develop a holistic vision for the future instead of a bunch of regions competing against each other for the same funds. That unity of purpose across the state helped bring legislators on board.

“Every legislator has skin in the game at that point,” saidMichael (Merrill) Parker, Director of Public Policy at the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce. “It’s not urban versus rural, or region versus region; every legislator is in the same camp trying to solve one problem, not their local district’s problem.”

With a clear vision in hand, supporters worked hard to spread that message.

“There was a [unified] plan in place, an agreed-upon plan in place, saying, ‘This is what needs to be done, we all agreed that this is the plan, and here are the gaps in funding,’” said Pace, from the Utah League of Cities and Towns. “So, it put us in the position to say, ‘We all agreed what needs to be done. Utah’s population is going to double in the next 30 years, we need funding to implement the plan, to help make it happen.’”

All of that education paid off.

The law passed the House on March 9th and in the Senate on March 12th. Governor Gary Herbert signed the law on March 27th. This provides counties the ability to place local sales tax referendums on the ballot as early as November 2015.

On to the ballot box

Supporters cheered the bill’s passage in March, but there are still important hurdles to clear to reach the bill’s full potential. The bill could raise an additional $124 million annually for transportation if adopted by all Utah counties. Groups like the Salt Lake Chamber and Utah Transportation Coalition are embarking on public education campaigns in the counties that are placing local sales tax questions on their November ballots.

110 of Utah’s 244 cities have passed resolutions urging their county governments to put the proposition on November ballots, and as of August 24th, 12 of Utah’s 29 counties have taken action to do exactly that. That list of 12 counties includes Salt Lake County, the state’s most populous county, and where, according to the Salt Lake Tribune, elected officials in all 16 cities supported the county’s action in August 2015 to place the initiative on this November’s ballot.

Salt Lake County Mayor Ben McAdams

The mayor of that county, Salt Lake County Mayor Ben McAdams, knows how important investing in Utah’s transportation is, especially since his region is the most populated in the state:

“We want to have a visionary approach to transport, where we look into the future and forecast what our region is going to look like. We know that a transit-oriented future will improve quality of life, save tax dollars, and really help us develop the kind of community we want to live in. That all takes forethought and planning.”

This year’s move by the legislature was a triumph of bipartisan cooperation and compromise, undergirded by the clear vision for investment that local leaders and civic groups have bought into. As a result of their successful work, the state will see an increase in transportation funding in 2015, but we’ll be watching especially closely this November as Utah counties join countless others in deciding measures at the ballot to also raise new local money for transportation.

Need a quick summary of Utah’s transportation law? You can read it here.

Want more information on states moving to raise new transportation revenues at the state or local level? Don’t miss our page of resources chronicling the active and enacted plans since 2012.

Leaders say St. Petersburg transit measure key to economic success

Voters in Pinellas County, Florida, which includes St. Petersburg and borders Tampa, have the chance to approve a one percent sales tax next week that will raise $130 million per year. The money will kickstart a 24-mile light rail system, improve and expand their bus system by 65 percent, build bus rapid transit lines, and increase important regional connections.

Passage would be a major step forward for St. Petersburg and the Tampa Bay region, coming four years after a similar measure in neighboring Hillsborough County narrowly failed.

The plan, known as Greenlight Pinellas, would make a key change to the county’s current funding mechanism for their bus system, erasing the transit millage on property taxes and replacing it with a one percent sales tax. That’s a key change, as it shifts the burden of paying for transit from property owners only, to one that’s shared by the large numbers of tourists and visitors visiting the region. As much as a third of the revenue would eventually come from tourists, according to Greenlight.

The Tampa Tribune endorsed the measure, especially the aspect to shift the funding burden away from solely Pinellas property owners. “Tourism is at record levels as the recession fades. It’s time the county adopted a comprehensive mass transit vision reflecting that dynamic growth.”

The plan would almost immediately improve bus service and increase frequency, and will eventually expand service by about 65 percent, adding new weekend and night service, as well as more frequent service to job centers like Tampa International Airport and downtown St. Pete and Tampa to better connect employees to jobs.

Rapid bus and BRT service will be added on six of the busiest, most productive corridors, and work will begin on a 24-mile light rail line that runs across the county, from Clearwater in the northwest, to downtown St. Pete in the southeast. (Pinellas will still have to assemble other local, state and federal funding to complete the $1.6 billion rail project, but importantly, this measure would also raise enough money to cover the operations of that line once it is up and running.)

The business community has been full-throated in its support of the measure. As of October 10^th, supporters had raised over $1 million to support the campaign. The Tampa Bay Partnership, the St. Petersburg Chamber of Commerce, Sykes Enterprises, Bright House Networks, TransAmerica Insurance and Derby Lane, the Tampa Bay Rays and Lightning, and numerous other local small businesses are supporting the measure.

Michael Kalt, a senior vice president with the Tampa Bay Rays baseball team, told Greenlight that, “Transit is really the linchpin to economic success and improving the quality of life in any major metropolitan area.”

The Tampa Bay Times supported the measure in a strong op-ed. “Tampa Bay is the largest metropolitan area without a viable transportation system that includes bus service and some form of rail.” This project, if approved, will be the first step in “correcting a weakness” of the Tampa Bay region, the editorial continued. Their columnist Joe Henderson also argues for the passage asking his readers, ”How much longer does it take you to get from Point A to B now than it did five years ago? You think an extra penny in sales tax is expensive? Try measuring the loss when businesses take their new jobs elsewhere because of the congestion.”

The project has major political support in addition to the private support, with endorsements from the mayors of the four largest cities and Representative Kathy Castor (D-FL), who said, “This is an active community; this is a community on the go, but we need better transportation options.” Encouraging her constituents to vote yes, she said, “When you do that, you will be making an investment in yourself.”

The organized opposition, No Tax for Tracks, worries about the burden of increasing the sales tax one cent, bringing it to a total of eight percent. They are also concerned about low ridership, though Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority has reported record boardings the last few years on its buses.

Perhaps no one will be watching this measure more closely than their counterparts across Tampa Bay.

It’s no coincidence that some of the strongest support has been coming from leaders there in Tampa and Hillsborough County: They have high hopes for a referendum of their own to expand existing transit service, build new light rail and some new regional connections, especially after seeing a measure fail four years ago. This new light rail line from Clearwater to downtown St. Petersburg could be the beginning of so much more.

“Perhaps, the rail line represents what could be the start of a regional system across the Howard Frankland Bridge that might one day link the airport, the University of South Florida, the commercial hubs in Gateway, West Shore and downtown Tampa,” said the Times editorial.

Stay tuned next week to hear the results of the voting.

—

Pinellas County is one of a handful of state and local measures to raise revenue to invest transportation. For more information on the measures we’re keeping a close eye on next week, make sure to check out our full Transportation Vote 2014 page.

To better serve the states and localities that are currently campaigning (or hope to campaign) for smart transportation investments, we are hosting the Capital Ideas Conference in Denver on November 13-14^th. There’s still time to register, so learn more today.

If you want to know more about ballot measures related specifically to transit, turn to the Center for Transportation Excellence, who tracks all of those measures and aggregates numbers on results nationwide on an ongoing basis.

In 2013, 20-plus states took up transportation funding: Here’s the final tally

Welcome to 2014! With a large number of state legislatures convening as the new year gets underway, it’s worth a look back at an important trend from 2013: States stepping forward to raise additional money for transportation. With federal funding remaining flat in 2012′s transportation bill (MAP-21) and after years of deferred action during the long recession, a large number of states, metro areas and local communities moved to supplement federal dollars with new revenues of their own.

In April, we reported that 19 states were looking at ways to increase their own funding for transportation. Some needed the funds just to make ends meet after years of flat or declining state revenues, while others also were looking for funds to match those available from MAP-21 new and updated loan and grant programs (like TIFIA or TIGER).

Here’s how they fared:

Key Successes

We covered Maryland’s ambitious plan on this blog, as well as Massachusetts.

Both of those states’ plans indexed the state gas tax to keep pace with inflation — something the federal gas tax, unchanged since 1993 — does not do. In Maryland, the state also added a sales tax on gasoline, while in Massachusetts, the package included an increase in cigarette taxes and certain business taxes. The good news was that in making the changes, both states recognized the importance of all modes of transportation and the revenues will fund important transit and road projects around the states.

In Virginia, Governor McDonnell began the debate with a proposal to abolish the per-gallon gasoline tax entirely and replace it with sales and wholesale taxes on fuel. That brought together legislators from both parties, who developed an innovative package of revenue increases to put transportation funding on a long-term, stable footing.

New legislation raised vehicle fees, along with local taxes in two of the states’ most heavily populated areas, Northern Virginia (near Washington, DC) and Hampton Roads (near Norfolk/Virginia Beach on the coast). Recognizing that businesses, residents, and visitors to Virginia depend on many types of transportation to move around the state, the new law directs funding to all modes of surface transportation, including transit, passenger rail, roads, and bridges. The package is projected to have more than $9.5 billion in economic impact in the state. As the Gov. McDonnell said in signing the bill: “This legislation will ensure that Virginia’s economy can grow in the years ahead, and that businesses will have the infrastructure they need to create the good-paying jobs Virginians deserve.”

Most recently, legislators in Pennsylvania reached agreement on a package of tax and fee changes that will raise $2.3 billion annually for the state’s transportation infrastructure – $1.65 billion for roads and bridges and $475 million for transit. The debate went down to the wire with agreement finally reached in a special legislative session just before Thanksgiving, allowing the governor to sign the bill on a cold day in late November.

AP photo by Nabil Mark – Gov. Tom Corbett, center, signs into law a bill that will provide $2.3 billion a year for improvements to Pennsylvania’s highways, bridges and mass-transit systems.

The PA legislation eliminates the retail tax on gasoline and a state cap on gas tax paid at the wholesale level and raises various vehicles and driver fees over the next five years. The new funding will help to advance projects like the rehabilitation of the structurally deficient Liberty Bridge in Pittsburgh and of outdated equipment used by SEPTA.

Not all states that raised money recognized the value of investing across the board in all types of transportation to keep their economies moving. Ohio, Wyoming, and Vermont enacted tax increases intended for highway projects only. In Wisconsin, new bonding authority was enacted, with bond funds directed almost entirely to highways.

One positive outcome in Wisconsin: While the governor had proposed kicking transit out of the state transportation fund (similar to what the House of Representatives proposed in 2012), the legislature rejected that proposal and instead transferred general fund money into the fund (much as the federal government has done for its highway trust fund) to keep funding public transportation.

Try again next year!

Some states explicitly punted the issue to next year by creating commissions to report back to the legislature on transportation revenue options.

In Indiana, where a bill had been moving forward to allow the central Indiana region (which includes Indianapolis) to raise their own regional taxes to pay for transit, legislators instead commissioned a study on how to fund transit in the region. In November, the transit study commission voted in favor of allowing counties in the Indianapolis region to impose an income tax or business tax increase, if approved by a voter referendum, to fund regional transit. Reports like these help reinforce the notion — which we agree with — that regions should always have the ability, especially with the blessing of voters, to raise their own revenues to invest in regional transportation needs. We will definitely be keeping Indiana on our “watch list” for 2014.

Another state to watch in 2014 is Washington, where legislators negotiated on transportation funding through mid-December before calling it quits for the year. They promise to resume when the next legislative session begins in January. The current discussion is about increasing the state gas tax, with legislators debating items such as stormwater treatment, how to use the sales taxes collected from transportation projects, and funding for public transportation.

The need is urgent in Washington. Without any increase in state revenue, for example, the bus systems in the Seattle region are facing severe cuts in service that employers and employees depend on, along with fare increases.

A state we also hope will try again is Missouri, where a plan to raise $7.9 billion over 10 years through a penny sales tax passed both the Missouri House and Senate, but was then filibustered at the 11th hour when the Senate took up the package for a final vote. The fact that it was a sales tax was notable because in Missouri, as in many other states, while gas taxes are limited to only funding highway projects, a sales tax can be used for any mode of transportation, giving the state much more flexibility to invest.

Looking back

This movement we saw in 2013 is just the beginning. More and more states are increasingly looking for ways to bring more of their own dollars to the table, as well as making plans to invest in a range of transportation options. For a complete list see our state funding tracker.

The folks on the ground in these towns, cities, and metro areas know how important transportation is to their economic success. And keeping those local economies humming is key to our national economic prosperity.

Other states – and the federal government – need to take a page from their playbook and find a way to invest more money in transportation – it’s vital for our economy. One good place to start the discussion would be with our proposal to raise more revenue for transportation for the price of a weekly coffee and doughnut per commuter.

St. Louis County approves half-cent sales tax for public transit

Light-rail system in St. Louis (Photo courtesy of Matthew Black

Americans are continuing to open their wallets and vote with their feet in support of increased transportation options, despite a tough economic climate. On Tuesday, a half-cent sales tax to fund the Metro transit system in St. Louis County in Missouri was approved by a decisive 63 percent of the vote. The increased revenue from Proposition A will allow officials to restore previously eliminated bus lines and expand the system into more far-reaching suburbs. The measure will also restore lost Call-A-Ride service, a door-to-door van for older and disabled riders.

According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch:

If the measure failed, service would have been scaled back to about half the level it was before Metro’s first round of service cutbacks in March 2009. Metro suspended bus service to 2,300 of the 9,000 bus stops and bus shelters in the Missouri half of the transit system.

MetroLink trains ran less often on both sides of the Mississippi River during times when commuters needed them the most: rush hour. Federal stimulus money helped restore some of that lost service in August, but that money soon will run out.

Although public transportation will not be on truly secure funding until Congress approves and President Obama signs a new and forward-looking transportation bill, it is terrific to see communities like St. Louis step up and refuse to wait. For now, St. Louis County has a reliable local funding stream for its transit system and the ability to plan for overdue expansion. The margin of victory conveys strong and bipartisan support for Metro in St. Louis County, which has a much more moderate electorate than the city proper.

The election excited the student body at Washington University, which is located in St. Louis. The campus chancellor, Mark Wrighton, served as co-chair of the Proposition A campaign. Many students volunteered for the campaign and 20,000 alumni living in St. Louis County received letters of support.

The campaign also relied on Congressman William Lacy Clay, who represents much of the city of St. Louis, and an ad hoc committee of black clergy were also involved.

John Nations, the Republican mayor of suburban Chesterfield, made an astute point about how a vote for Proposition A was also a vote for jobs. He told the Post-Dispatch: “there was a cost to voting no. If it was voted down, people lose their jobs at Metro. People are going to lose their jobs because they can’t access them.”

St. Louis County voted yes to jobs and yes to transit.