north carolina Archives - Transportation For America

Burlington, North Carolina embraces transit in a growing community

Residents in Burlington, NC have greater access to jobs today thanks to a new transit system, which launched in 2016. A far cry from a large, transit-rich city, Burlington is showing how important public transportation can be for smaller communities. Many residents are already pushing for service extensions and longer hours for the fledgling system.

Link Transit’s current route map. (Image: Link Transit)

Share your rural or small city transit story here

Burlington, NC is located roughly halfway between Greensboro and Durham/Chapel Hill just north of Interstate 85 with a population of approximately 52,000. (For comparison, places like Allen, TX and Greeley, CO are home to about twice as many people as Burlington.) But up until 2016 this growing area had only a countywide, on-demand shuttle service operated by Alamance County Transit Authority (ACTA). Reliable, fixed-route transit was nonexistent.

Burlington sits at roughly the center of Alamance County, NC. The county is shaded red. (Image: Google Maps)

As the town and region grew, increasing transportation options to provide better access to jobs and opportunity became more important. “Our citizens are starting to expect it as an option, whether they use it once a week or everyday,” said Mike Nunn, Burlington’s Transportation Director. “We need this as an option in our community.”

“We had a lot of folks who had never been from one side of the community to the other. They hadn’t been to the new retail development because they didn’t have transportation—nor could they get a job in that area because they didn’t have transportation,” Nunn said on a recent T4America’s webinar.

The Burlington-Graham Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), which encompasses all of Alamance County, actually began planning a fixed route service all the way back in 2008. Nunn emphasized that an important piece of the planning effort included educating the public and local elected officials because the community was unfamiliar with the benefits of a fixed-route transit system.

The Burlington Amtrak station. (Image: Ildar Sagdejev, Wikimedia)

In June 2016, LinkTransit began serving Burlington and other nearby cities. The service consists of five color-coded routes connecting in the center of Burlington and extending to neighboring Graham and Gibsonville. LinkTransit connects to intercity express bus service that goes east to Chapel Hill and west to Greensboro, as well as Amtrak service.

LinkTransit links employers to employees

Nicole, a Burlington resident, told local Fox 8 how important the new transit service was for her. She said she couldn’t afford a car and finding reliable transportation to her job at Best Buy was a challenge: “It’s been really tough getting back and forth to work because you never know if someone’s going to pick you up or drop you off,” she said. “So at least now I know I’ve got a concrete way to get to work.”

Though the service currently only operates from 5:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., Monday to Friday, residents are already requesting greater frequency, new stops, and expanded hours to meet non-traditional commute schedules.

“Everyone would like it to run seven days a week already,” said Nunn. “We are sixteen months in, and that is the first thing we hear. And also, for employment, to go to 7:30 or 8:30 at night. That’s a funding issue. That just takes dollars.”

Businesses are also responding. Nunn added that employers are frequently advertising their jobs as “on the green route” or “on the purple route.” LinkTransit already extended a main commuter route, the Orange Line, adding two additional stops near three hotels, a truck stop, and industrial suppliers like Delta Gypsum and Ferguson. Before the route extension, riders would get off at the end of the line and walk more than a half mile and under a highway overpass to reach jobs at these businesses.

Alamance Crossing, Burlington’s second and newest (outdoor) shopping mall, is served by the red route. The Holly Hill Mall is served by the red and blue routes. (Image: A_Moffa, LocalWiki)

The new bus service was a major factor in the decision of PRA Group to open a 500-job call center at Burlington’s Holly Hill Mall in 2017. The debt-buying company, which has more than 5,000 employees in offices in twelve countries, cited public transit access as a major factor in their selection of the mall site, which is strategically located at the transfer stop for the red and blue bus lines.

“Access to a skilled workforce is the number one consideration of companies looking for a new location,” said Peter Bishop, City of Burlington Economic Development Director. “LinkTransit provides a critical piece of infrastructure in our efforts to compete with other communities for new jobs and investment.”

Do you work for an operator of a rural transit system? Are you someone who rides it frequently? We want to hear from you.

Share your rural or small city transit story here

Local leaders build momentum for transit investments in Wake County, NC

Leaders in Wake County, NC – including participants of T4America’s Transportation Innovation Academy co-hosted last year with TransitCenter – are building support for transit ahead of a November ballot referendum.

Earlier this month the Wake County Commission approved a long-term transit plan and put a measure on the November ballot to raise a half-cent sales tax to build out the regional transit network. Planned service, including 20 miles of new bus rapid transit routes and new commuter rail, is expected to quadruple transit ridership in the county in the next ten years.

In his address to a WakeUp Wake County forum earlier this week in Raleigh, U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx pointed out how transit can be a magnet for economic development. Foxx, former mayor of Charlotte, noted how Raleigh’s recent transit expansion helped attract new employers. Playing into the cross-state competition for jobs, he joked, “If I were mayor of Charlotte, I probably would be giving you a different speech. I would probably tell you not to do this so that we could compete with you better.”

Sec. Foxx also warned that the region would be “at the epicenter of a national crisis in mobility” if it does not invest in new transit. Commute times are “gonna get worse if you don’t do something different.”

County Commissioner Matt Calabria, one of the elected leaders who attended the Transportation Innovation Academy, recognized that “traffic is increasing [in Wake County] and we’re going to face challenges associated with growth.” He went on to add that the proposed transit plan “is the best thing we can do to stave off that congestion.”

Sec. Foxx was introduced by U.S. Rep. David Price (D-N.C.-4). Local leaders, including County Commission Chair James West and Vice-Chair Sig Hutchison, Raleigh Mayor Nancy McFarlane, and Cary Town Councilor Jennifer Robinson, all spoke at the event about the new transit vision for the county.

Grassroots support for transit is also rolling in. The new Riders of Wake campaign is collecting first-person accounts from transit riders.

Update: North Carolina legislature adjourns without addressing political meddling in transportation selection process

The NC legislature adjourned their session without addressing a damaging cap on state funds intended for a Triangle area light rail project. Their actions were widely decried in the state and circumvented a new bipartisan state process for evaluating transportation projects on the merits and awarding state funds to the best projects, intended to be free from political meddling.

As we previously reported this week, some unknown North Carolina legislators used the budget process to interfere with the state’s new Strategic Investments Law intended to evaluate and select transportation projects based on the benefits in an attempt to stop a rail transit project that’s already been selected for state funds. The unknown legislators’ action to insert a provision cutting the state commitment to a Durham-Chapel Hill light rail link from $138 million down to $500,000. drew wide condemnation from the state’s Republican governor, members of both parties and even legislators that also don’t like this particular project.

Early this morning, the North Carolina legislature adjourned their session without approving an amendment to remove that cap, leaving the state funds for the project in limbo for now. The House successfully passed an amendment to remove the cap by a large margin, but the Senate did not vote on it and referred it to committee, ending any chance to deal with it until the legislature reconvenes in April 2016, according to the Raleigh News & Observer.

The project is rolling forward for now with it’s environmental impact statement, and the GoTriangle transit agency is optimistic that the cap can be removed in the next session after such a strong showing in the State House.

All of this damages an improved process that was supposed to remove this kind of political maneuvering from deciding which projects are funded and which are not. From McClatchy via Mass Transit Mag:

[Durham Senator Mike] Woodard mentioned how well the Durham-Orange Light Rail line scored with the strategic transportation investments law (STI). The STI created a formula using “data-driven scoring and local input” to help determine what projects would get funding through the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). … “There are certainly Senate members who are not fans of transit,” McKissick said, adding members believe that politics have been put “right in the middle” of the discussion and debate of public transportation. McKissick said funding through STIP was a way to remove politics from the process.

Earlier this week, we included testimony from North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory, who was proudly touting his state’s new process for evaluating transportation projects before the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. His later exchange with Rep. Crawford is worth reading in full:

Representative Crawford: Your State took on a pretty big change in your transportation project selection process. What prompted you to do that? Talk about that a little bit.

Governor McCrory. Well, we were making a lot of decisions on our roadbuilding based upon politics. And as you went down, we did not have the interconnectivity that we should have had. You would go down from the East to the West, North to the South, and we would have highways going from two lanes to four lanes back to two lanes back to eight lanes. And it made no rhyme or reason on why the roads were wide in one area and very narrow in others. And we also saw that it was not an efficient use of limited tax dollars. So in a bipartisan agreement, Republicans and Democrats both agreed to change that formula. …We now base our formula on how we spend money on congestion, on economic opportunity, and on safety, the three major criteria of how we decide to spend the money.

Rep. Crawford: Safe to say that it has been pretty well received by the general public on that transparency and the streamlining the process, taking the politics out?

Gov. McCrory: Absolutely. And I think where I keep bringing up Eisenhower, for each of you, too, is I think as we look for more funding, Mr. Chairman, we need to also show the vision of where we plan to have this interconnectivity from a national perspective, from a regional perspective, from a State perspective, and even, yes, to a local perspective. If we show that, where we are planning to spend that money, and show that we do have a plan and a vision for the next generation and the generation after that, I think people are willing to pay for it. But if we do not have their trust and spend the money as we have always spent it, I do not think we are going to get the trust of the people to increase the amount of funding for transportation.

We’ll keep our eye on this issue over the next year, as will the members of the Raleigh delegation to this year’s Transportation Innovation Academy as they continue advancing plans to bring other new transit service to adjacent Wake County.

Politicians meddling with North Carolina’s shift to a merit-based process for choosing transportation projects

Just two years after instituting a new process to choose transportation projects based on merit and award funds in a more transparent process intended to be free of political interference, a handful of North Carolina legislators reinserted politics back into the process in an attempt to stop a light rail project in the Raleigh-Durham metro area.

Durham light rail rendering

UPDATED 5:45 p.m. Thursday 10/1: North Carolina’s legislature adjourned without addressing the cap. Read more about it here.

The surprise provision was inserted into a budget compromise as the state’s legislature was tussling over an annual budget resolution for the coming year. As Streetsblog earlier reported this week:

Lawmakers who still won’t identify themselves inserted language into a state budget bill sabotaging the light rail project. There was no public debate. There was no warning that transit funding was even under discussion. The budget measure placed an arbitrary cap on state funding for [any] light rail project: $500,000. Doing so undermined the process established by the state’s Republican-controlled legislature for awarding transportation funds, which is supposed to be free from political interference.

Back in 2013 the Republican-led North Carolina legislature approved the Strategic Transportation Investments Law, an attempt to get transportation decisions out of the hands of politicians and pick projects governed by objective metrics and projected benefits instead. It was an idea that had — and still has — lots of buy-in from legislators from both parties across the state. It was viewed as an important step toward a process that was more transparent, accountable, and less subject to political interference.

We featured North Carolina’s new process in Measuring What We Value, a free downloadable T4America report on the emerging practice of performance measures: “NCDOT’s focus on strategic selection shifted the department from a short-term portfolio of projects that were not explicitly tied to agency goals to a long-term, formal approach that uses data to assess outcomes.” (Page 17.)

Here’s how Governor Pat McCrory referred to the previous system while testifying before Congress earlier this year:

In my own State of the State address last month, I highlighted that during the past decade or so, as I have driven down the highways of North Carolina, I’ve noticed it goes from two lanes, to four lanes, back to two lanes, to eight lanes to four lanes and then back to two lanes. And everywhere it gets wider it’s named for a politician or a Department of Transportation board member. And where the congestion choke points still exist, the road is nameless.

The flaws of a system where projects are picked based on the political power or connections of the sponsors — regardless of how those projects fit into the state’s goals — was exactly why the process was changed in 2013, with notable consensus in the legislature to do so. Gov. McCrory’s testimony continues:

That’s not the way we do things anymore in North Carolina. We’ve taken the politics out of [transportation] by putting in place a transportation formula that focuses on relieving congestion, improving safety and growing and connecting the economy in all parts of our state. Those changes allow us to be more efficient with taxpayer dollars. In fact, we’ve more than doubled the number of transportation projects that will be built. This new approach will create thousands of new jobs during the next 10 years.

In the Research Triangle metro area — the city triumvirate of Raleigh, Durham and Chapel Hill spans three counties — voters in two counties have already approved separate half-cent ballot measures to raise millions in local funds for a 17-mile light rail project connecting Durham and Chapel Hill. That local commitment was to be paired with $138 million previously committed by the state under the new merit-based process. This new cap essentially kills the Durham-Chapel Hill light rail line by cutting the planned state contribution down to $500,000 — regardless of the projected benefits.

Legislators from both parties have rallied together in support of removing the cap and keeping the new process politics-free. Even legislators that have reservations about this specific rail project believe the new process is a smarter one and have endorsed the cap’s removal, focusing on the consensus forged around the new Strategic Investments process.

Republican Representative Paul Stam told the Raleigh News & Observer that “he is not a fan of the light rail projects, but said the lawmakers ought to ‘stick with the numbers under our strategic transportation initiative.’”

Also in the Raleigh News & Observer

“I’m not a big supporter of light rail,” Rep. Bill Brawley, a Mecklenburg County Republican, said Wednesday. “But what I am a big supporter of is to have a process to assign projects based on the ability of engineers to calculate the benefits – rather than the ability of powerful legislators to get enough votes to spend the money in their district.”

There is good news to report today, however. The House passed an amended budget to remove the $500,000 cap and restore the state’s merit-based project selection process. The Senate is likely to consider the amended budget today or tomorrow, according to local news sources. If the Senate approves the House’s version, the final budget will go to Governor McCrory.

Follow us on twitter @t4america, along with Wake Up Wake County for more info as it becomes available.

And then there were seven: April update on state transportation funding legislation

A total of seven states have now successfully passed legislation in 2015 to raise new money to invest in transportation, avoid budget shortfalls from declining revenue sources and keep up with growing needs — mostly by voting to raise their state fuel taxes.

Georgia passed a bill that will raise approximately $900 million annually mostly for state highway projects. The bill changes how the state taxes gas, switching from a sales tax on gas purchases to a 26-cents-per-gallon excise tax, indexed to both the change in the average fuel efficiency of all vehicles registered in the state and to inflation (measured by the Consumer Price Index). That double indexing will ensure the new per-gallon tax doesn’t lose future value due to inflation or improved fuel efficiency. The bill also places fees on other services, including a $5-per-night hotel fee, $300 annually in fees for electric cars and $100 annually in fees for heavy trucks. In light of this switch from a sales tax to per-gallon taxes on gasoline, it’s worth noting that Georgia is one of dozens of states with a constitutional prohibition on spending per-gallon gas tax revenues on public transportation.

Georgia counties and cities also won a modified option to raise funds for local transportation needs via additional sales taxes of up to one percent if approved by the county commission and voter referendum. Before this modification, a local option sales tax referendum could only be held on dates and in regions determined by the legislature.

Also worth noting is the passage of a separate bill that finally removes the onerous requirement that MARTA (Atlanta’s regional transit system) could spend no more than 50 percent of its locally-raised revenue to fund operations — essentially the state telling them what they could or couldn’t do with their locally-raised revenues. At one point during negotiations there was a provision that would have allowed the cities and counties that contribute to MARTA to increase the sales tax dedicated to the system by 0.5 percent via ballot measures, but this provision was removed from the final bill.

In North Carolina, legislators passed a bill to raise the minimum gas tax rate of their variable tax to 36 cents per gallon. The gas tax was previously 37.5 cents per gallon but would have dropped below 30 cents per gallon in July, which would have cost the state an estimated $266 million in funding for transportation over the next year.

Kentucky, with a variable tax rate similar to North Carolina, passed a similar bill. The state established a new gas tax minimum of 26 cents per gallon. The new minimum will prevent an estimated $250 million drop in contributions to their transportation fund for the year.

The House and Senate in Idaho both approved raising their gas tax from 25 cents per gallon to 32 cents along with increases to the state’s vehicle fees. The bill will raise an estimated $94 million for maintenance of the state’s roads and bridges. The bill is sitting on Governor Butch Otter’s desk waiting for his signature.

Those states join Iowa, Utah and South Dakota as the seven states that have successfully raised new funds in 2015. With legislative sessions and active proposals still moving in a handful of states, more could still follow this year.

Louisiana legislators have filed several bills to address the state’s transportation issues. One bill would raise the state fuel tax by 4 cents per gallon with new revenue dedicated to parish governments. Another proposal would temporarily raise the state fuel tax by 4 cents per gallon for the next three years. A separate bill would reform the way the state selects highway projects, improving the potential for return on transportation investments while adding transparency and accountability that could boost the prospects of the plans to raise new revenue.

Nebraska’s legislature has advanced a bill to increase their state gas tax by 6 cents per gallon, but Governor Ricketts said he opposes the increase and has called for a study committee to assess the state’s transportation need instead.

Lastly, for any Minnesota funding proposals to have a chance this year, they must pass out of their committees by April 24^th. Check back then for results.

States continue to take action to solve transportation funding crises

This year started with a transportation bang for many states across the country. In the last few weeks, four states in particular have made major strides in funding transportation and infrastructure projects as gas prices continue to remain low.

Georgia transportation officials have said they are facing an annual, billion-dollar funding gap to maintain their existing roads and bridges in good condition.Last week, the Georgia House passed HB 170which would make a few notable changes to their current funding structure, where they currently use both a sales tax and a per-gallon excise tax on gasoline. HB 170 would remove the current sales tax on gasoline entirely and increase the current 8.2 cents per-gallon rate by 21 cents for a new rate of 29.2 cents per gallon. The bill also requires the rate be adjusted annually to adapt to growing vehicle fuel efficiency and inflation in the cost of highway construction.

Besides the excise tax, the legislation would also impose new fees on private electric cars and commercial electric vehicles. The bill has been sent on to the state Senate.

In North Carolina, where gas tax rates are pegged to fuel prices, the House and Senate are moving competing bills to address an expected multi-million dollar shortfall resulting from cheaper gas and growing efficiency.

The Senate’s version, SB 20, eventually would raise the floor for the sinking gas tax from 21 cents per gallon to 35 cents per gallon, and increase the percentage rate on fuel from 7 percent to 9.9 percent. But it actually would cut the fuel tax by 2.5-cents per gallon between now and December. This would reduce transportation funding by $33 million between now and July, but is expected to raise an additional $237 million next year and $352 million a year by 2018.

Last week, the House passed a version of this bill that would reduce the current rate of 37.5 cents a gallon to 36 cents and hold it at that rate until the end of 2015. Delaying an expected drop in the adjustable, percentage gas tax rate (a consequence of falling gas prices) would bring in an additional $142 million during the next fiscal year (or approximately half of the Senate’s version).

In Utah, the Senate acted Monday to raise gas taxes for the first time in 18 years, increasing it by 5 cents per gallon this year, with an additional penny added each of the next four years. The state is currently looking at a deficit of $11 billion over the next two decades if the legislature does not act now. Consideration of the plan now moves to the House, where leaders are considering a slightly different approach.

Coming off a bold call to action in Governor Jay Inslee’s State of the State speech, Washington’s Senate on March 2 passed a $15 billion transportation package paid for by raising gasoline taxes by 11.7 cents over the next three years. It also would allow certain localities, including Seattle, to ask their voters for additional transit funding in the coming years.

Iowa, in the meantime, already has passed and enacted a transportation revenue package. Strongly supported by Governor Terry Branstad, the bill increases Iowa’s state gas tax by 10 cents per gallon. New funds will go entirely to highway projects, as required by a restrictive state constitutional requirement in place in Iowa and dozens of other states.

Watch this space for a more in-depth look into how business community and other supporters, along with legislative leaders, helped move the package to passage.

After years of depressed revenues and growing needs, states are making big moves on transportation this year. Whether or not they have long-term economic payoff will hinge on the degree to which their cities and towns get the resources and latitude they need to compete in the 21^st century.

Make sure to check back with our resource that tracks state transportation funding for the latest updates; you can also sign up to receive the latest news and updates.

15 issues to watch in ’15, Part II: Places

It’s a challenge to craft a list of only five states, regions and cities that have important or notable things happening this year. Whether states attempting to raise transportation revenue this year, states changing key policies and continuing to innovate how they choose or build transportation projects, or local communities going to voters to raise money for new projects, there’s no shortage of places worth watching this year. Here are five that rose to the top, but tell us what you think we missed, in your area or elsewhere.

Ed: As the year began, we thought it would be fun to identify 15 people, places and trends worth keeping an eye on the next 12 months. We’re rolling out this list in three posts — read our first post on five policy issues worth watching on Capitol Hill in 2015.

Places

1. Minnesota

If we released a list this time last year, Minnesota might have appeared on that one as well. Though a broad coalition (Move MN) formed to rally support from the public and lawmakers for raising transportation revenues, the DFL majority in both chambers did not pass a transportation funding package in 2014. DFL Gov. Mark Dayton, running for reelection, seemed hesitant to support raising any taxes, though he routinely acknowledged that Minnesota needed to invest in their aging transportation network. Late in the election, he introduced his 2015 legislative plan to raise revenue: a new 6.5 percent wholesale tax on gasoline, in addition to a variety of other fee increases.

Gov. Dayton won re-election, but the Minnesota House flipped back to a GOP majority, providing a new challenge for his plan in the legislature. Though Move MN built an impressively broad coalition, they weren’t able to secure support from the statewide chamber and a few other key groups that represent Minnesota businesses. Gov. Dayton has already been lobbying those groups in 2015 to support his plan that would raise over $6 billion over the next decade.

Republicans in control of the House have issued their plan that would raise no new taxes but allocate $750 million over the next four years via various internal accounting maneuvers. (Great comparison of the two plans here.) With two legislative chambers split between the parties but a growing public call for something to be done to invest infrastructure, Minnesota will be a critical battleground to watch this year. If Congress fails to find a funding solution to keep the nation’s trust fund from going bankrupt this Spring, Minnesota — and states facing a shortfall — could be hit by a double whammy if they’re not prepared to act on their own.

2. Utah

While there had been some noise over the last year in Utah about the need to raise new transportation revenue, there was no concrete legislation introduced or seriously discussed in 2014. In late 2014, Governor Herbert suggested he was open to raising the gas tax in 2015, which was “a proposition [speaker-elect Greg] Hughes doesn’t see getting very far” in the upcoming legislative session, according to the Deseret News. At the time, Rep. Hughes did suggest that “House Republicans do want to look what he sees as an outdated formula for calculating the state’s 24.5-cent per gallon gas tax.” But just a few weeks ago, news broke that a deal could be closer than previously thought. An article in the Salt Lake Tribune last week broke the news that the state’s GOP caucus endorsed the idea of raising transportation taxes, but also overhauling the funding system — which could mean a revenue source that will rise with inflation.

“We have talked about concepts now for two years,” House Transportation Committee Chairman Johnny Anderson, R-Taylorsville, told a forum of the Utah Highway Users Association. “Know that the work is about to be done” to raise tax for transportation. …Anderson said the House GOP Caucus last month endorsed not only transportation-tax hikes, but also the idea to “dump our antiquated” tax system for one that automatically keeps up with inflation and makes those now escaping gas tax contribute.

The Utah legislature is somewhat unique — their trust of the Utah DOT runs so high that they often appropriate significant general funds to transportation projects. Utah could also prove to be a significant bellwether for other GOP-controlled state legislatures to follow. Utah’s session begins January 28, so we’ll soon find out if this proposition has legs.

3. Illinois

Incoming Illinois Republican Governor Bruce Rauner faces significant challenges, but some of his first moves have a lot of advocates hopeful about positive changes that could come in 2015. Just a few years removed from a governor going to jail and a patronage hiring scandal at state agencies, Illinois is also in one of the worst fiscal messes in the country, brought on by billions in unfunded pensions, decreased tax revenue, and repeated downgrades to the state’s credit rating.

As the Governor and the legislature collaborate on a budget and craft a new capital plan for infrastructure investment, the fiscal crisis facing the state provides an interesting opportunity for Gov. Rauner, who ran as a reformer and a prudent fiscal manager on his business bona fides. With the state billions in debt and confidence in IDOT incredibly low, overhauling the system and moving towards a new system for measuring the performance of the state’s transportation spending could be the only way to restore public trust — essential for raising any new money for transportation.

Possibly hinting at a move in this direction, Gov. Rauner appointed Randy Blankenhorn from the Chicago MPO (CMAP) to head the state DOT, an appointment which could help bring the issue of performance measures into the debate. “There’s always hyperbole and optimism when you have a changing of the guard. But I sincerely believe that we have a chance to right Illinois’ ship with Gov. Rauner and Randy Blankenhorn,” said Peter Skosey with the Metropolitan Planning Council (MPC) and the T4 Advisory Board. As part of his transition team on transportation, Gov. Rauner also brought in MarySue Barrett from MPC, one of the leading advocates in the entire state for a performance-based transportation system.

With these pieces in place, it’s possible that discussing a way to restore credibility and create a new transparent mechanism for distributing any new transportation funds could be central in the debate in Illinois in 2015, which makes this an important state to watch.

4. Indianapolis, Indiana

It was a huge victory when the Indiana legislature and Governor Pence approved a long-sought bill in March 2014 that finally gives metro Indianapolis counties the right to vote on funding a much-expanded public transportation network, with a major emphasis on bus rapid transit. Civic, elected and business leaders had been hard at work since 2009 producing an ambitious and inspiring IndyConnect plan, “the most comprehensive transportation plan — created with the most public input — our region has ever seen,” according to Mayor Greg Ballard in the foreword to our Innovative MPO report. Now the hard part comes as they build public and political will and decide what to include on a November 2016 ballot measure that would raise revenue from changes to local income taxes — a challenging revenue mechanism to say the least.

While transit expansion has more support in the region’s core, local leaders acknowledge they have an uphill battle in some suburban counties more skeptical of the merits of transit. Mayor Ballard and the diverse group of Indy businesses (including a booming healthcare industry) supporting IndyConnect understand how important this measure is for helping Indy be economically competitive in the future. Indy likely won’t be supplanting Chicago as the big city of choice in the Midwest, but there’s a desire among local leaders for Indy to be the city that can attract young families who think Chicago is too expensive; or luring recent college grads back home to Indy. And a strong regional public transit system is lies at the very core of their economic strategy.

Though Indianapolis counties won’t vote on the transportation plan until 2016, some of the most important work will be done in 2015 as they continue their model efforts to build consensus in urban and suburban areas alike on a plan to take to the ballot.

5. Raleigh, North Carolina

After watching the Triangle region’s two other counties approve ballot measure to raise funds for a regional transit system originally envisioned by all three counties, Raleigh could finally be joining the party due to a big shakeup in their county’s Board of Commissioners in 2014.

Durham and Orange counties approved half-cent sales taxes in 2011 and 2012 respectively to fund transit operations, improved bus service and a regional light rail line. Although it contains the biggest city in the region (Raleigh), the Wake County Commissioners hadn’t allowed a question to raise funds for a regional transit system to go to the ballot. In fact, a handful of commissioners actively prevented the issue going forward, often stifling debate at times.

That could all change in 2015, as more than half of the county board was replaced last November. Four new supportive members were elected to the county board, replacing four who had consistently been on the other side of the issue, clearing the way for a potential ballot measure in Wake County. It’s worth noting that the mayor of Raleigh, Nancy McFarlane, has long been a supporter of a regional plan for transit, and she joined with other mayors and T4America a year ago to meet with USDOT Sec. Foxx on the importance of passenger rail.

Wake County is one of the fastest growing counties in the U.S. and the county’s population is due to double by 2035. Yet this rapidly growing community with a notable high-tech, research, government and major university employment base is one of the few major metro regions that lacks a significant transit system. Just like Indianapolis, they will be crafting their plan and building consensus in 2015 as they shoot for a vote in 2016. Though the issue has support on the county board now, there will be a public debate and votes worth watching in 2015.

A stirring persuasion for deciding to vote for transit: seeing it built next door

One of the most powerful avenues for persuading a skeptical community to invest in transit is to see it successfully implemented nearby — whether in the community or neighborhood right next door, or a city and region a few hours away. This trend is illustrated in two of this year’s Transportation Vote 2012 ballot measures through two very different stories in Virginia and North Carolina.

In the tidewater region along the Virginia coast, discussions ramped up in the 1980s and 90s about a light rail system connecting the neighboring cities of Norfolk — a little more inland — and Virginia Beach on the Atlantic Ocean, mostly via an underutilized Norfolk Southern railroad corridor that runs in a neat, straight line from Norfolk all the way to the beach.

In 1999, an attempt was made to pass a referendum on the potential light rail system in the City of Virginia Beach, but voters rejected it. Perhaps as a result of the controversy or simple issue fatigue after talking about it the concept for more than a decade, the Virginia Beach city council washed their hands of the whole affair and passed a resolution affirming that the city would have nothing to do with the future construction of the light rail system for ten years.

That setback didn’t stop the project in its tracks.

Norfolk decided to forge ahead on their own with a system spanning the core of their mostly linear city along the Elizabeth River. And in summer of 2011, The Tide — the first light rail system in Virginia — opened to huge crowds and daily ridership exceeding projections.

Crowds of people took rides during the Grand Opening of The Tide in Norfolk, Virginia. Newtown Road Station. Photo by D. Allen Covey, VDOT

Down the road in nearby Virginia Beach, citizens there finally got to move beyond renderings and promises and meetings and see a brand new working light rail system through the center of their neighboring city just a few miles away. Perhaps they bemoaned the perpetual traffic congestion on I-264 between the two cities and wistfully thought about how nice it would be to hop on a train at the beach and get to the downtown mall or the Tides baseball park right on the river in Norfolk.

But most powerfully, the idea of rail transit in their community was no longer an abstraction; a figment of some planner’s or city councilperson’s imagination. There it was, dropping off students by the thousands at Norfolk State and winding right through a newly rebuilt MacArthur Square and park by the mall every day with shiny new passenger vehicles on the way to the burgeoning hospital complex on the west side of town.

A year and a half later, it’s easy to understand how Virginia Beach voters went to the polls Tuesday and gave a hearty “me too!” to the Tide system. Though it was a nonbinding resolution directing the city council that still has the final say on moving forward, 62 percent of voters supported the measure. And in no small part because of the case study of success just a few miles west.

MacArthur Square in the center of Norfolk before, and how it looks after tearing down an old office building and creating a stop and a new park across from the downtown mall. First photo from Bing Maps, second photo by Steve Earley, the Virginian-Pilot

North Carolina Research Triangle

Raleigh-Durham and Charlotte are just a few hours apart on Interstates 85 and 40 and about the same size in population (1.7 million) yet Charlotte has done far more to invest in rail transit in the last decade, with more to come. (Though acknowledging the differences: Charlotte is a metro anchored by a central city and the more spread-out Triangle region is composed of the large and small cities of Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill, Cary and the suburban Research Triangle Park.)

After the better part of two decades of discussion and study, Charlotte’s new Lynx Blue Line opened in 2007 and is a popular line running south from downtown to “uptown” Charlotte that has stimulated a wealth of new development along the way. According to our friends over the Center for Transit-Oriented Development, the Blue Line has catalyzed more than 10 million square feet of new housing, retail and office development along the corridor.

Simliar plans have been discussed in the Raleigh-Durham metro area for almost as long, but with four cities in three different counties trying to agree on a single region-wide plan, they’ve certainly had a harder time making it happen.

Perhaps prodded along by the success of the Blue Line down the road in rival Charlotte, Durham approved a half-cent sales tax last year to fund transit operations and a regional light rail line toward Chapel Hill, and Orange County (Chapel Hill) approved their half-cent tax to do the same just this week on Tuesday.

Rendering of a station in Durham courtesy of Triangle Transit

Unfortunately, the third partner in the region, Wake County (Raleigh), decided not to put a sales tax on the ballot this fall, so as of yet, there’s no truly regional commitment to building rail transit.

Leaders of similar sized cities and regions know that investing in transit, the signals it sends to employers, and the kind of growth that it can stimulate are key to continuing to attract a smart workforce. In a similar story about Nashville, Ralph Schulz, president of the Nashville Area Chamber of Commerce, told the Nashville Ledger that “the lack of a mass transit system costs the area about one in five businesses considering relocating here.” (In that story you’ll see that Nashville Mayor Karl Dean knows it too and is a tireless advocate for investing in more transit.)

With Charlotte signing on the dotted line with the Federal Transit Administration just a few weeks ago to move ahead on a 9-mile expansion to the Blue Line that will reach northward to UNC-Charlotte, the bar has been raised in the region which the Triangle most closely identifies as their competition for jobs and workers.

While they’re two-thirds of the way to a regional system with Orange and Durham approving the tax, unlike Norfolk’s story, the utility of a Chapel Hill-Durham line will be incredibly limited without including lines into Wake County to connect the thousands of jobs in the Research Triangle Park and downtown Raleigh with Durham.

But every trip that a Triangle leader or citizen takes down the road to Charlotte will be a powerful reminder that successful new rail transit in a similar still-sprawling southern city is a downpayment on future growth that reaps dividends in shorter commutes, more access to jobs and neighborhoods, and an increase in the type of walkable neighborhoods that are so heavily in demand these days.

On an optimistic note, if a booming suburban city in the South with jobs scattered across the region like Raleigh can find a way forward with more transit, there’s hope for many other similar regions.

—

Though these regions have voted to tax themselves to invest in transit and make their vision for the future a reality, they can’t do it alone. They need a strong federal partner to come through and help leverage those local dollars into tracks in the ground one day.