The transportation sales tax vote is two weeks away. An advocate of mixed-use, walkable communities explains how voters acting with a regional mindset can kick-start our economy. On the other side, a policy analyst says a sales tax is not the best funding option, and that transit expansion should not come at the expense of fixing our highway network.
Tom Sabulis is today’s moderator. Commenting is open below following Baruch Feigenbaum’s column.
By Jim Stokes
Living and working in Atlanta has been a wonderful experience for me. For some 40 years, my wife and I have called Atlanta home — raising our family, devoting ourselves to careers and volunteering in our community whenever we can. The city is part of our family fabric. I have watched Atlanta grow and evolve.
This year, I see metro Atlanta standing at a crossroads. Its evolution — potentially, its economic recovery — is the centerpiece of discussion this summer as residents contemplate a ballot referendum to increase the sales tax by a penny for a broad spectrum of transportation options.
By now, most folks are familiar with the July 31 transportation referendum on a regional project list, which will improve our mobility in its many forms.
Some have voiced concern that the measure doesn’t go far enough; others say it goes too far. Some say it should fund more roads; some say it should fund more transit.
At the referendum’s core, though, is transportation choice. Not everyone will use the transit options, and others will never appreciate that an intersection improvement can be vital to a suburban community.
An important part in this vote is the creation of a “regional mind” that recognizes that traffic and transit don’t stop or start at one city or county line. Transportation is multifaceted. In Atlanta, historically, transportation has meant cars and roads. But trends across our country, many as a result of a changing economy, demonstrate that walkable communities are key to economic improvement.
To me, the transportation referendum is all about reinvigorating our economy by creating the future of Atlanta — many walkable, mixed-use communities. Some communities already have.
Smyrna has revitalized its downtown, as have Suwanee, Woodstock, Norcross and Alpharetta. Young and old alike flock to Virginia-Highland and Midtown. Decatur is a walkable community made more successful by its access to transit.
In the late 1990s, high-end outer suburbs contained most of the expensive housing in the United States, as measured by price per square foot. Today, the most expensive housing is in high-density, pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods. Research has shown that both young millennials and baby boomers want to live in walkable, mixed-use downtowns, or pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods or suburban town centers.
The good news is that there is great pent-up demand for these walkable metro Atlanta neighborhoods, particularly those served by transit.
The July 31 transportation referendum provides us an opportunity to give our city a chance to evolve — as we have always done in this great town.
It’s a chance to grow our economy by creating construction and operations jobs, improving our neighborhoods and property values, and providing our residents the transportation and transit choices that a large, regional metropolitan area deserves and demands.
Jim Stokes is executive director of the Livable Communities Coalition of Metro Atlanta.
By Baruch Feigenbaum
With Georgia ranked 49th in transportation spending, the question should focus not on whether the state needs to increase investment in its transportation network, but what is the best, most efficient and politically realistic way to do so.
Given this framework, there are reasons for voting for and against the Transportation Investment Act.
Metro Atlanta needs to solve its congestion issues: Residents waste a significant portion of time — and money — stuck in traffic. Transit service is inadequate; frequency and coverage are below cities of similar size.
Competitors, including Charlotte, Dallas and Houston, have comprehensive transportation strategies, while other Southern states such as North Carolina and Texas have approved local sales taxes for transportation.
Funding transportation infrastructure with a sales tax is not optimal, primarily because such a tax has no relationship to the usage of the transportation system.
It is politically easier to increase a single tax, especially a tax where tourists contribute a significant amount, but it is arguable that a mix of taxes and user fees would be a better solution.
Transit is important for metro Atlanta’s future and deserves some regional and state funding.
But increasing transit service, a laudable goal, should not come at the expense of developing and maintaining a quality highway network — the overwhelmingly preferred travel mode in the region.
Regional projects such as improving the I-285 and Ga. 400 intersection and bringing MARTA to a state of good repair are excellent, deserving projects. But several projects have purely economic development benefits; others have purely environmental benefits.
The biggest problem is the significant dollars allocated to rail projects. Fixed-rail transit is most effective in an extremely dense region, which Atlanta is not.
Compared to rail, bus capital costs are substantially lower, and buses can be easily moved if development patterns change.
Without new revenue sources, the state also may not have enough funds to maintain roads, let alone widen or build new ones. Another vote can take place in 2014 and a tax take effect in 2015, but these are two more years of underinvestment for Georgia. Meanwhile, the advantage goes to competing regions such as Charlotte, Houston and Dallas.
Around the state and in Atlanta, voters have justification for approving or rejecting the penny transportation sales tax.
These are the important questions voters must weigh as they consider the benefits and the costs.
Baruch Feigenbaum is a senior fellow at the Georgia Public Policy Foundation and a transportation analyst for the Reason Foundation.
30 comments Add your comment
Hopper
July 17th, 2012
12:44 pm
I will reluctantly vote against the proposal. Yes, Atlanta desperately needs a coherent transportation plan. But even more Atlanta needs political leaders who are responsible, reliable, possess integrity and honesty to be able to carry our these reforms. I don’t believe Atlanta has a leadership remotely qualified to do that. In a word, I do not trust most of them to be able to do what they say they will, and for that reason, I will cast my negative vote.
John Galt
July 17th, 2012
12:16 pm
SAWB, I agree that it makes sense to focus first on road projects that would have an impact on unsnarling major arteries, and it makes sense to increase the number of bus routes servicing Emory. That is an easy “right now” alternative for the Clifton Corridor. Unfortunately, our present state of political and ideological trench warfare discards the common welfare as a motivation to pursue meaningful projects. Until politicians eschew corrupting contributions; partisanship above citizens; ideological fiefdoms; and rewarding friends, families, and cronies with taxpayer dollars as policies worth pursuing, any referendums with a possibility of encouraging such bad behavior will receive a “no” vote from this legal voter (I’m not dead, not a paid absentee, not undocumented, and not lacking a photo ID).
MM
July 17th, 2012
12:14 pm
At least one analysis suggests that Atlanta’s long commute times are not due so much to congestion as our long distances between work and home. Perhaps a better public investment would be substantial incentives to encourage people to live near where they work. Or accurate and timely information about jobs-residential matches. Or just shutdown the expressways and let people sort it out for themselves (OK, just kidding, sort of). It’s important to understand the problem before throwing money at it. So often what appears obvious isn’t.
The article states that “Funding transportation infrastructure with a sales tax is not optimal, primarily because such a tax has no relationship to the usage of the transportation system.” But the “optimal” tax is elusive except as an abstract concept. One problem is isolating “usage of the transportation system.” Are you talking about the people who directly use the system? That’s too simplistic to capture all, or even most, of the benefits. Even a person who has no car and walks for groceries still benefits from the lowered cost of transportation by paying a bit less for groceries.
Give me an alternative
July 17th, 2012
12:14 pm
SAWB – why do we have to put all money into roads. we can’t keep paving ourselves out of this mess. the ratio in my opinion is fair considering we haven’t EVER invested in transit as a region/state while all our money continue to go to roads to No where.
Teds
July 17th, 2012
12:11 pm
Dear Steve- You are incorrect in stating that the Transportation Referendum gives the City of Atlanta “say” in that happens to the surrounding counties. Each county has a project list of which they selected and the money will stay in your county. There is no plan to dump all funds into MARTA. We all know they need so help but that is not the issue or intent of the Referendum. Trust me, you should take a look at the project lists at UntieAtlanta.com to see where the money is going………..
SAWB
July 17th, 2012
11:41 am
While in theory I like the idea of transit I wonder if it has the tendency to suck up too much of our limited resources for the impact it actually provides. In the Metro area about 90% of the residents live, work and play outside of the actual city. A person is probably more likely to live in Snellville and work in Dunwoody than to live in Decatur and work downtown.
While the proposed MARTA spur to Emory sounds like a great idea I wonder how much impact it would actually have. I visit the area frequently and notice a large amount of traffic traveling in the opposite direction toward South DeKalb or Gwinnett.
It does seem to make sense to focus first on some of the more significant road projects and then if resources allow look to expand MARTA.
Give me an alternative
July 17th, 2012
11:39 am
Voting Yes!!!!!
John Galt
July 17th, 2012
11:20 am
Vote no.
Steve1255
July 17th, 2012
11:13 am
VOTE NO! THIS GIVES THE CITY OF ATLANTA FAR TOO MUCH SAY SO OVER WHAT GOES ON IN SURROUNDING COUNTIES. THE ULTIMATE GOAL IS TO PUT ALL MASS TRANSIT UNDER MARTA. AND WE KNOW HOW THINGS HAVE WORKED OUT FOR THEM.
sdc
July 17th, 2012
10:50 am
VOTE NO!