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
Chris
July 17th, 2012
3:18 pm
@ Road Scholar: No. it is necessarily Republican thing. But in a largely Republican state — it would seem a correlate. What we are talking about is a Georgia way of getting things done, easily predating the Republican wave that began to take over Georgia before even the Reagan “revolution.” Present-day democratic counties like Fulton and DeKalb would not be immune.
I would not draw the lines of good and not-so good behavior between the parties, but between the clean/honest/open and the not-so clean/honest/open. Remember, too, that many of these business people and development-focused officials do not think they are doing anything wrong in instances that — for some us — might seem unfair, preferential, or heavy-handed. This is business as usual to them. Many of their mentors and colleagues have done similarly. It is endemic, and in most cases — all is legal.
Some here may recognize a widely circulated story regarding Georgia’s rank as worst in public integrity (to generalize). One can find this on the world wide web at stateintegrity.org/georgia. It states: “Georgia’s ethics laws are loaded with loopholes and are poorly enforced, yielding one of the nation’s worst scores on the State Integrity Index.”
NO for T-SPLOST
July 17th, 2012
3:08 pm
See what they did to Gwinnett County? See what they did to the 400 toll? Didn’t keep their promises did they??? What about MARTA – what a joke – they couldn’t manage either…
VOTE NO TO THIS T-SPLOST – get out and VOTE ON JULY 31st – VOTE NO, NO, NO, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH
Road Scholar
July 17th, 2012
2:30 pm
I’m fixated on the comments about not trusting our legislators, local governments and GDOT. Since this is a predominate conservative state, the people who were elected are not trusted, i.e.Republicans. Those same legislators vote in each congressional districts for their rep on the GDOT Board, i.e. Republicans. The Board selects the GDOT Commissioner as well as the remainder of the upper echelon of management at GDOT i.e. Deputy Commissioner, Treasurer, Chief Engineer, etc. The Governor, a repub, selects the Planning Director at GDOT, who is responsible for project selection in not only the yearly program but also the TSPLOST programs around the state. It is safe to say the Planning Director is a repub.
The TSPLOST has a citizen review board which is to ensure the money is spent correctly, the projects on the list are delivered in a timely manner, and to be accountable to all the citizens. Since our decision makers are all repub, isn’t it safe to assume the CRB will be mostly, if not all repub.This is how this state works.
So if all decision makers, administrators, and program reviewers are repub, and they can not be trusted, then shouldn’t the anti’s leave their party, and begin another party that is self righteous, Christian only, and experts on everything. Their motto could be ( esp for the future TSPLOST) ” My Way or the Highway!”
How could the conservatives be so wrong as to elect these thieves and liars to office….repeatedly…?
Relocation Services and Moving Companies Blog » T-SPLOST pros and cons – Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog)
July 17th, 2012
2:19 pm
[...] post by Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) and sponsored by Moving [...]
middleground
July 17th, 2012
1:32 pm
Dear fellow Georgia people. TPLOST is a con job and will not help your commute but make developers rich.
middleground
July 17th, 2012
1:30 pm
Chris, your view was insightful and welcome voice. Thanks for posting.
Chris
July 17th, 2012
1:15 pm
oops …in my prior comment, I meant there is NOT anything necessarily wrong with rapid development for short-term profit … as long as it is wisely planned.
Chris
July 17th, 2012
1:11 pm
I am mindful of several things:
There is anything necessarily wrong with this, but for years our power players have sought rapid development in order to profit from the short-term value created by turning new construction for the private sector, and enlarging the potential for property taxes in the public sector …
But secondly, WE ALL let this happen while ignoring a proper expanding and maintaining of other infrastructure to support the added population — infrastructure like public education, storm drainage, sanitary sewers, etc … and the peculiar concern here: roads.
Here is the pattern we are building on: Once a development permit is granted in this region, the next tactic is almost always to seek variances from public sentiment and local code in order to leverage the short-term windfall to the private sector for investing in such “development”. Developers say they must have these variances or they will not invest, or can not complete. Thusly, we have received less productive development while causing more long-term problems for the city and region. (Sort of sound like the blackmail some feel we are experiencing in this well-financed call for a “Yes” vote?).
Lastly … I am personally not yet convinced that this plan will — in the long run — lead us to reductions in traffic congestion, smog, and ground level ozone — or to adding a useful margin to other tax revenues which might fund JUST AS needed improvements to other regional infrastructure like storm and sanitary sewers, public education, etc.
SAWB
July 17th, 2012
1:09 pm
Roads to nowhere? Well, every road I’ve been on seems to go somewhere and there are a lot more roads taking people where they want to be than there are transit lines in Atlanta.
Living near work sounds like a great idea, but just how realistic is it. Unless you’re a tenured college professor with lifetime employment the majority of folks change jobs every few years whether they want to or not. Most people are not going to continually house hop around town to follow uncertain job opportunities.
Everyone needs to be realistic we don’t all live in Connecticut and work in Manhattan. Atlanta is a decentralized mess and that is just the way things are. We have to make decisions that address things the way they are and not the way we wish they were. Right now the most bang for our buck will come from road improvements and not beltlines or spotlights at some little airport.
Chris
July 17th, 2012
12:58 pm
I am also mindful that there is little in the way of improved access to public transportation in neighborhoods which could benefit the most from access to education, training,and jobs. I am mindful that this lack of access is costing my city in unemployment, lost productivity, and social program costs. I am very mindful that fuel purchases are exempted from this T-SPLOST — eliminating payment into the road improvements by the 18-wheelers and all the other drivers of other vehicles which are using our roads the most. I am also mindful that Georgia has a very low fuel tax, and is known to be heavily lobbied by special interests.