Respect the Will of the People So Tampa Bay Can Lead the Way in Transportation Innovation

Rail is like a cat with nine lives. While the rail cartel has lost every transportation sales tax hike referendum in Tampa Bay since 2010, they continue pushing their rail agenda. 

With a sales tax hike now dead for November, the rail cartel shape shifters are morphing into their latest two prong strategy. The first prong is pushing AGAIN to create a regional transit agency that will result in a regional taxing authority. Their second prong is to push our state legislature to allow cities to have their own "transit" (not transportation) referendums to fund high cost rail.

These are bad ideas on numerous fronts! 

In government, bigger is not better nor more efficient, especially over the long term. Bigger agencies just keep getting bigger and bigger and more powerful. Powerful government entities can be a breeding ground for more corruption. When local taxpayers are an arms length away from the decision makers, their influence is diluted while special interest influence increases. It is much harder for local taxpayers to fight a regional taxing authority's bad policies. 

Regarding city referendums, where is the business model and business case that confirms the cities of Tampa or St. Petersburg could ever fund costly rail projects? Remember Buckhorn was on the only NO vote on the Tampa Streetcar when he was on the Tampa City Council in the 1990's. He said back then the Streetcar did not have a viable financial model. And he was absolutely right.

Taxpayers do not want to be responsible for bailing out more rail boondoggles. State taxpayers bail out Tri-Rail in South Florida every year to the tune of tens of millions of dollars. State taxpayers have been forced to pay for SunRail that is drowning in deficits through 2020. If the state legislature ever passed legislation to allow transit referendums by cities, they better ensure there could never be any taxpayer bailouts when the high cost rail projects go financially south and drown in deficits. 

The reason for a regional transit taxing entity? The entire region would fund the costly rail boondoggles and bail out the financial disasters.

The media arm of the rail cartel is doing their part. The TBT published this editorial recently.
The half-full, half-empty Tampa Bay transit debate

Any significant change — from merging the Hillsborough and Pinellas bus systems to creating a new regional transit authority to allowing transit referendums by cities — would require action from the Legislature.

It's going to take multiple approaches to meet this challenge, from better bus service to express highway lanes to light rail.

Too many public officials still lag behind private business leaders in acknowledging the urgency of the issue and agreeing that mass transit including light rail, not more roads, is the long-range solution. 

The earliest another voter referendum could be held on a new transit plan may be 2020. That's how long it likely will take for any structural changes to transit oversight to be adopted, a premium transit study by the state and HART to be completed, and a new transit vision to be created and sold to voters.

State Senator Latvala, Appropriations chair, is pushing for a third time the merger of HART and PSTA. He already forced two taxpayer funded studies previously done and after both studies a merger was rejected. Latvala must not threaten to withhold state funds to our local transit agencies if they don't agree to merge. That is bully tactics and totally unacceptable behavior.

Latvala should focus instead on a real problem in his own backyard - reforming PSTA. PSTA has been fiscally mismanaged for years.

Latvala should focus on overhauling the incompetent PSTA Board dominated by almost all electeds who continue to provide too little oversight and allow CEO Brad Miller to run amok. It was Brad Miller who misused Federal transit security funds to promote Greenlight Pinellas. That alone should have been grounds for removal.

PSTA has too many issues and Hillsborough county taxpayers want no part of them. Merging PSTA into HART is not the answer to PSTA's problems.

If Latvala wants better productivity and to save taxpayers money, he should focus on getting rid of agencies we simply do not need. Start by eliminating the Hillsborough County PTC that is the inhibitor to innovation and the poster child for cronyism and corruption. Then get rid of TBARTA which is duplicative, a waste of taxpayer money and their responsibilities can be folded in elsewhere such as FDOT.

Also, according to the TBT editorial:

The 2010 Hillsborough referendum was supported by voters in Tampa, and the 2014 Pinellas referendum won its strongest support among St. Petersburg voters.

Sunbeam times blog reported after the 2014 defeat of Greenlight: Majority of St. Petersburg Residents Also Rejected Greenlight Pinellas, 52:48

An analysis of voter data by the Sunbeam Times reveals that the measure failed by a 4 point margin, with 52% of residents voting it down and 48% voting in favor (the county rejected by 62% to 38%). 49 of St. Petersburg precincts voted against Greenlight Pinellas and it was only favored by 40 precincts. It was approved only in a geographically contiguous area largely in the South and East of the city. The Greenlight plan was soundly defeated in Western and northern areas of the city.

Below is a picture of the precincts (in green) that supported the 2010 Hillsborough County rail tax.

Hillsborough County 2010
Rail tax map of vote results by precinct

Precincts near the proposed rail lines voted for the tax in 2010. However, there were still a significant number of precincts in the city of Tampa that voted against the tax. Since then, voters within the entire Tampa Bay region have become more educated on the issue, thus the even bigger defeat of Greenlight Pinellas in 2014. 

The Go Hillsborough debacle did not help the rail cartel's cause. It simply added more skepticism and distrust. 

There is absolutely no guarantee that voters in the cities of Tampa or St. Petersburg will vote for a sales tax hike into perpetuity to pay for high cost trains that few of them will ride.

The reality is innovation and technology are and will continue disrupting traditional transit services.  Uber and Lyft continue to expand their quasi-transit businesses, UberPool and Lyft Line. We used UberPool numerous times when we were in San Francisco last March and it worked great at a real nice price. 

Hat tip to Robert Poole's Surface Transportation Innovations Newsletter this month that included "Disrupting urban transit":

If automated shuttle buses and automated versions of Uber/Lyft/Didi (Didi is in China) ride-sharing vehicles materialize in a decade or two, does it really make sense to be investing many billions of dollars in light-rail and heavy-rail systems over the next several decades? In an op-ed piece in the Los Angeles Daily News on July 6th, Susan Shelley raised this question about current transit expansion plans in that region:

"Metro CEO Phil Washington says his agency is building a transit system for 100 years from now, but every day that sounds more disconnected from reality. The future has arrived, and it's on the road. We could be planning for improvements to our freeways, and transit service upgrades made possible by cost-effective driverless buses."

Three days later Bryan Mistele, the CEO of traffic firm INRIX, had an op-ed in the Seattle Times, headlined "Sound Transit's Expansion Will Be Obsolete Before It's Built." That plan, estimated to cost $54 billion, would be constructed over the next 25 years, and would provide transit with an additional one percent of daily trips by 2040. He argued that autonomous, connected, electric, and shared vehicles will likely cause the system to be obsolete before it opens. These are sobering thoughts, from a transportation professional who is very knowledgeable about these disruptive forces.

According to this recent article, Columbus will 'leap-frog' light rail as transit option after Smart City Challenge win

A wave of new transportation technology is coming to Columbus after the city won the federal Smart City Challenge. 

The grant money will usher in driverless cars but could end the idea of rail as a mass-transit option.

“The City of Columbus plans to leap-frog fixed rail” by using new modes of transportation, Columbus says in the U.S. Department of Transportation application.

The reality is the window of opportunity for building costly rail systems is quickly closing and our local rail cartel surely understands that. 

As costly rail becomes passe, the Feds and the States may stop funding costly outdated rail projects as more cost-effective, flexible and more efficient transportation solutions are available.

The best place to be to take advantage of the biggest transportation disruption since the automobile is to stay flexible and not get financially forever locked into costly projects.

It's exciting times for transportation as innovation is fast emerging. From platooning and "connected" vehicles to autonomous vehicles and buses to deliveries being made by drones, we will be able to more efficiently utilize our existing rubber-wheeled infrastructure. 

The rail cartel needs to change course because they have lost every transportation sales tax hike referendum they have championed. They must respect the will of the voters, the will of the taxpayers and the consent of the governed. 

Stop trying to push tax hikes for costly trains!

Because Tampa Bay is in a great position to take advantage of new technology and innovation. 

Instead of looking in the rearview mirror, we can charge ahead and lead the way in Transportation solutions for the future.

A City Transportation Referendum is a bad idea

Once this mess begins, getting the locals to work together will be a bigger nightmare than the recent referendum efforts have been.

St. Petersburg Fl
Opinion by: E. Eugene Webb PhD
Author: In Search of Robin

Talk continues to surface regarding a city only transportation referendums in the bay area. The thinking seems to be these over hyped transit ideas would be an easier sell in the big Cities than they are in the un-incorporated areas and smaller towns.

It seems odd when these same people were talking about the “regional” benefits from a transportation tax and light rail during GeenLight and Go Hillsborough.

Locally, Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn and St. Petersburg Mayor Rick Kriseman are supporting the idea of a city referendum to get the transportation ball rolling or more likely the trains running.

Most of the opposition I have seen is based on Republican reluctance to raise taxes. So far, the local transit tax initiatives of the mayors have died a quiet death in the Florida Legislature.

There are a number of reasons why city transit referendums are a bad idea.

For any transit system to work in the bay area, it must be regional in design and scope. The thought of each of the larger cities in Pinellas or Hillsborough county developing their own public transit project is humorous at first and frightening when you think about it.

How do we provide for common technology, physical connection, intersystem transfers, ticketing and so on?

What this concept leads to is a patchwork quilt of disparate transit systems that do not communicate or seamlessly interconnect at any level.

A lot of people will make a lot of money, and nothing will work.

This whole approach is just another way for the light-rail  people to get their foot in the door. It is easier to fool a few people than all the people.

Once this mess begins, getting the locals to work together since each will have a fixed amount of money will be a bigger nightmare than the recent referendum efforts have been.

Then there will be the hold out(s) who will refuse to go along and the whole process will be a huge waste of taxpayer money, political capital and effort.

Instead of running around the state Buckhorn, Kriseman and the rest of the mayors pushing this local transit tax effort should work together to develop a multiphase transportation plan for their respective areas that shows some common sense and actually works.

Here locally, that means dumping the MPOs, TBARTA, transit oriented redevelopment disciples, light rail lobbyists and hire a group of professionals who can develop a multiphase transportation plan the people can have confidence in.

Hash it out, refine it. Use best brain power available. Put that plan on the ballot supported by a sales tax increase and watch it pass.

The people are not opposed to a transit plan that is based on common sense and regional needs.

e-mail Doc at mail to:dr. webb@yahoo.com send me a Facebook (Gene Webb) Friend Request, and be sure to Like or Share on Facebook.

See Doc’s Photo Gallery at Bay Post Photos

Disclosures:

Contributor to: Bob Gualtieri for Pinellas County Sheriff
Contributor to: Carlos Beruff for US Senate

We Need More Honesty, Not Fear Tactics at County Center

As we posted here, the taxpayers got a Victory recently as the Hillsborough County commissioners finally took action to approve using our existing growing budget to fund our roads and transportation needs.

This action will be implemented through a Board policy, not an ordinance that would have greater teeth. Therefore, this will only be a Victory if the county commissioners ensure and force county staff to strictly follow the Board policy each year.

We have concerns, though, because at the August 10 Transportation Workshop, County Administrator Mike Merrill clearly showed his annoyance at some commissioners who were  justifiably questioning and challenging him. Merrill used fear tactics to paint a doom and gloom picture distorting the reality of our budget and our existing growing revenues. 

Merrill even left out 20% of the county revenues in his budget impact presentation. While his math (or lack thereof) was questionable, the intentions were clear. How dare the county prioritize its budget to fund transportation first. 

(In other words - We need our growing revenues to grow the county bureaucracy, pay for a new baseball stadium, more parks, more pork projects and more hand outs to special interests.)

What the county bureaucrats presented at the August 10th workshop had holes in it, included half-truths and some outright distortions. Their tactics used in an attempt to obstruct the county from prioritizing its budget was appalling. These tactics need to stop now. Trust is an issue with County Center and trust must be earned back. We must have honesty down at County Center. 

Jim Davison, a doctor who lives in New Tampa who has been involved with the transportation issue for many years made a public comment at the August 17 BOCC meeting. Davison has spent his own time scrutinizing the county budget. His comment is below and can also be found at 54:34 in the August 17 BOCC meeting video on HTV.

GOOD DAY, COMMISSIONERS, I’M HERE TO MAKE A FEW COMMENT REGARDING THE WORKSHOP LAST WEEK AND CONGRATULATE YOU ON INCHING FORWARD. 

THE ADMINISTRATION HAD SOME STARTLING FIGURES AND ASSUMPTIONS THAT I CAN'T ALL ADDRESS IN THREE MINUTES. BUT I WOULD APPLAUD THE ADMINISTRATION FOR INCLUDING A 3.5% GROWTH FACTOR IN THE SALES TAX IN THEIR MODELING. 

IF THAT NUMBER HAD BEEN APPLIED TO THE SALES TAX AND THE TRANSPORTATION REFERENDUM YOU WERE CONSIDERING, THE REVENUE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN $3.5 BILLION OVER 30 YEARS THEY WOULD'VE BEEN $5.9 BILLION, A SMALL MISTAKE. 

THE INFLATION RATE THAT WE USED IN THE MODELING IS NOT USED BY MOST EXPENDITURE LIMITATIONS LEGISLATION IN THE UNITED STATES. THE INFLATION RATE THAT IS USED IS THE CPIU, THE REGIONAL CPIU WITH THE TAMPA ST. PETERSBURG INFLATION RATE FOR ALL URBAN CONSUMERS. AND IT'S DONE THAT WAY FOR OBVIOUS REASONS. 

I DON'T HAVE TIME TO ADDRESS THE MODELING BUT TO ASSUME THE FIRE AND THE SHERIFF GROWTH WOULD BE UNLIMITED OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS IS LUDICROUS. DURING THE RECESSION, THE METRICS FOR THE SHERIFF CHANGED AND THEY WERE LOWERED. THEIR BUDGETS DID NOT INCREASE. CRIME WENT DOWN.AUTO ACCIDENTS WENT DOWN SO THE ENTIRE METRIC SYSTEM HAS TO BE CHANGED AND LOOKED AT MAKING SURE THE SAFETY OF THE PEOPLE ARE PROTECTED. 

AND THE ANTI DILUTION CLAUSE I MEAN THAT'S REALLY SEARCHING FOR A REASON NOT TO DO THIS. IT'S A MATHEMATICAL FORMULA. THERE WAS NO MATHEMATICS PRESENTED, AND I'M SURE YOU HAVE IT, AND BUT THE PEOPLE SHOULD KNOW WHERE THE COUNTY IS ON THEIR BORROWING. THEY SAID THEY NEEDED REVENUES TO PAY FOR THE BORROWING. WELL, IF YOU LOWER THE BORROWING, YOU DON'T NEED AS MUCH REVENUES. IT'S JUST A SIMPLE MATHEMATICAL FORMULA AND YOU DON'T NEED CONSULTANTS TO TELL YOU THIS.

YOU CAN ACTUALLY PICK UP THE PHONE, CALL FITCH, CALL MOODY, CALL STANDARD & POOR'S AFTER YOU GET THE PLAN TOGETHER WHEN YOU HAVE TIME BECAUSE THE CONSULTANT SAID THIS WOULDN'T BECOME A PROBLEM UNTIL FURTHER OUT YEARS IN THE PROGRAM. SO THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TIME TO CONSULT FITCH AND MOODY AND SAY YOU KNOW THIS IS WHAT WE’RE DOING, THIS IS WHY WE'RE DOING IT, IS THIS GOING TO AFFECT US. 

I CAN SHOW YOU COUNTIES IN THE UNITED STATES WHOSE REVENUES DROPPED TO 2% WHO STILL RETAINED A TRIPLE A RATING FROM ALL THREE, AND THERE ARE COUNTIES IN THE UNITED STATES THAT HAVE FAR MORE RESTRICTIVE TAX AND EXPENDITURES LIMITATIONS THAT HAVE TRIPLE RATINGS SO THIS IS A HERRING, BUT THAT'S UP FOR YOU TO DECIDE. 

BUT I CAN TELL YOU PEOPLE WANT THEIR BOND RATING PROTECTED BUT THEY DON'T WANT TO GO BACK TO THE EXPENSES AND HOW THE COUNTY WAS GROWING BEFORE THE RECESSION. WHEN THE COUNTY WAS HIRING ONE OUT OF EVERY 100 PEOPLE THAT WAS MOVING TO THIS COUNTY. WHEN WE WERE THE SECOND LEADING EMPLOYER IN THE COUNTY. WE DON'T WANT TO GO BACK TO THAT. SO PLEASE GO BACK. GOOD LUCK TO THE ADMINISTRATION.

According to the County's latest Comprehensive Financial Annual Report for FY2015 (CAFR), Hillsborough County is the fourth largest employer in the County (behind Hillsborough County Schools, MacDill and USF). The CAFR states the County was the second largest employer behind the Schools in 2006 when the economy was humming.

The county became bloated when revenues were furiously flying in and no one was watching the hen house. The county had absolutely no incentive to be efficient as they could easily move money around and hire as many people as they wanted. 

As our revenues are going up and up and up, we cannot afford to grow local government and the bureaucracy again - while continuing to neglect our roads and transportation. 

We need a fiscally responsible local government not a bloated one. 

The way to stop another bloated bureaucracy is to prioritize our budget, reign in our spending and have the fiscal discipline to fund our roads and transportation first.

The commissioners must get this transportation funding Board Policy done on September 8.

Because taxpayers demand no less.

Largo Zip Line Generates Neighborhood Opposition

Who knew that the City of Largo was pursuing a "tree adventure", more commonly known as a zip line, in a park and recreational complex that backs up to residential homes?

Apparently the neighboring residents who use the park did not know.

A community meeting was held on Monday, August 15th at the Largo City Hall about the proposed zip line/tree adventure proposed at the Highland Recreation Complex. The Eye was there, and so was a packed room full of residents who live near Highland park and had strong opposition to the proposal that is literally almost in their backyard.

Daryl Works, in the blue shirt speaking in the video below, brought his own picture board armed with information and concerns for why he and his fellow neighbors oppose this proposal. Works thinks there are alternative locations better suited for this type of venture by the city. A direct link to the Youtube video is here.




It appears that those who would be most impacted by the "tree adventure" proposal were not made aware when this project started over two years ago.

According to the Minutes of the May 13, 2014 City of Largo Commission Work Session

As part of the recreational offerings at Highland Recreation Complex, staff have researched the viability and revenue potential of a tree adventure course. A tree adventure course is a collection of aerial games and zip lines in the canopy of a forest where participants face varying challenges.

There were some questions raised by the commissioners at that meeting about noise and the impact on parking and neighboring homes but no question was raised whether the idea or proposal had ever been brought up with the residents most impacted. The commissioners reached a consensus at that May 2014 meeting to support city of Largo staff soliciting proposals for a tree adventure course at Highland Recreation Complex. 

According to the city of Largo's Parks and Recreation website, there are numerous parks and nature preserves in Largo.

Why did staff recommend Highland for this "tree adventure" course? According to the Commission Work Session minutes, the county had already been engaging with vendors and took some vendors there who "liked Highland Complex's central location and visibility."

Didi the vendors drive the decision for the location? Were any other locations seriously considered?  

An RFP was solicited by the city of Largo and TreeUmph was selected as the vendor for the proposed zip line tree adventure project at Highland park. It appears that it was after a vendor was already selected that the city finally made the effort to inform the neighboring residents about the project. 

Residents told us that some small signs were placed this past June (two years after this effort started) to notify the residents of a community meeting about a "tree adventure" - no mention of the "zip line". Only three people showed up at that meeting. 

The residents felt that meeting was not properly noticed and it was very late in the process to finally be engaging those most impacted. There was never any notice placed at the park itself about the zip line/tree adventure proposal. The notice about the June community meeting was never posted at the park complex.

Many of the community residents did not know what a "tree adventure" was but they would have understood "zip line" if that term had been used on the meeting notice signs.

Needless to say, the neighboring residents most impacted are not happy and they oppose this project. Once many of them understood what this project actually was, they started organizing with their neighbors who showed up in droves to voice their opposition at the August 2nd city of Largo commission meeting. An ordinance authorizing leasing the city property at Highland Recreation Complex for a tree adventure course was on the commission agenda.

Go to 42:15 of the video recording of the August 2nd meeting to hear the discussion and public comment. 

A motion was made to deny the ordinance but it failed 2-5. 

Further discussion by the commissioners requested city staff reach back out to the neighboring residents regarding the proposed design. Motion to bring the zip line/tree adventure ordinance back to the September 6, 2016 commission meeting passed 6-1.

And thus the August 15th meeting held at Largo City Hall.

City staff brought renderings to Monday's meeting, "Rendering A" for the original zip line/tree adventure plan and a slightly modified version "Rendering B". Version B moved the end of the zip line a bit further away from some residences backyards.  

City staff emphasized at the beginning of the meeting they were there to get input on which version (A or B) at Highland the community preferred not whether the zip line/tree adventure should be there or be somewhere else. 

City staff attempted to use the infamous "put your dot on the plan you prefer" consensus building technique. However, the consensus from those attending this community meeting appeared to be "Neither".

Neighboring resident weighs in at
City of Largo community meeting on zip line/tree adventure
proposal at Highland Recreation Complex

The opposition in the neighboring community has done their homework, perhaps much more than the city of Largo staff. 

Information they have found include:

• Other zip lines are not as close to a residential neighborhood and in larger footprints further away from where people live.
• Tree adventure vendors will place a zip line where ever they may be provided an opportunity to do so and site is not driven by the vendor
• While other zip line locations have limited access that can be gated or chained, Highland has numerous open access points.
• The city has insisted there are restrictive covenants to prevent use of the Nature Preserve for such "tree adventure". The restrictions in the Quit Claim Deed for the property deeded from SWFMD to city of Largo convey the Preserve cannot be used for hunting, firing ranges, rehabilitation camps, sports stadiums, arenas, or commercial amusement parks. The city has insisted the "tree adventure" zip line is not an amusement park. 
• The Largo FY2017 budget capital improvement plan includes adding restroom facility to Largo Central Park and creating a master plan for the use and access of the park's 100 acre midsection. The budget document states "Public input will be sought once the process begins." 

Why didn't the city of Largo seek out public input when the process began on this tree adventure venture? 

Some opponents believe Largo Central Park or the Nature Preserve that have a bigger footprint away from residential would be better suited for a zip line/tree adventure.

The city of Largo expects at least 45K guests to use the zip line the first year. The city will get 5% of the annual revenues. The city says they will receive $50K to $100K a year but if 45K ride the zip line the first year at a cost of about $50 a ride, the city will receive over $112K. 

All the money received from this venture will go into the general fund for use anywhere.

The Largo city commissioners will vote on September 6th whether to approve the "tree adventure" zip line at Highland park. It is expected the opponents will show up again to voice their concerns. 

The project has generated ill will from those who live nearby who felt there was not proper public outreach from those impacted the most.

The Largo commissioners will have to decide whether it is worth approving the now tainted project. 

And fair warning if a proposed zip line disguised as a "tree adventure" comes your way.


Links to recent local media coverage:
Opponents target Largo zipline course

Neighbors draw the zip…line on proposed project at park

Residents voice opposition to proposed Largo zip line

A Victory for Taxpayers - Now County Center Must Commit to Making Board Policy Work

The Eye was at the county commission Transportation Workshop last Wednesday. The video of that meeting can be found on the HTV website by selecting the meeting date August 10, 2016. Everyone should watch it. 

The Workshop was opened for public comment. All but one of the citizens who spoke were supporting Commissioner Murman's proposal for an ordinance to use our growth revenues within our existing budget to fund our roads and transportation.

It has taken years to get here, but finally the county commissioners voted 6-1 (Miller voted no) to pursue a Board policy requiring 1/3 of our new revenue growth to be put aside to fund our roads and transportation. The Board policy language will be brought to the September 8th BOCC meeting for approval. 

While Murman's proposal will be accomplished through a board policy and not an ordinance, this is a seismic shift from where we were a year ago. 

This is a victory for the taxpayers of Hillsborough County.

After Hagan fought the effort with Merrill (watch the video), he ended up voting for the motion. We will watch closely to see if there's an attempt to obstruct the intent of the policy or water it down when the policy is up for Board approval September 8th.

The eventual 6-1 vote is not representative of the discussion that actually occurred at the meeting. Hagan's mocking comments did him no favors but they are recorded for all to see.

County Administrator Mike Merrill brought in the big guns, the county's financial advisor and bond counsel, to provide their comments on Murman's proposal. 

Budget Director Tom Fesler presented an analysis on 10 years of revenue growth, analysis of 1/3 of new revenue growth going to transportation and 10 years of funding analysis. The budget analysis was done based on numerous factors including estimated population growth, estimated inflation rate and estimated growth rate. 

The presentation was flawed, however, as Commissioner Murman pointed out Merrill had left out 20% of the revenues in the analysis. Somehow the Times failed to report that tidbit.

This is the first time we've ever seen such level of analysis during the budget cycle. Unfortunately, too many budgets recommended by Merrill have simply been rubber stamped, no questions asked.

We're a growing county and their doom and gloom attitude towards funding transportation within our existing growing budget was quite astonishing. More astonishing when we continue to watch Merrill pull tens of millions of dollars out of his rabbit's hat to spend on all kinds of other things. 

This behavior is no longer acceptable!

The meeting showcased that County Administrator Mike Merrill and Commissioner Hagan do not want to prioritize our county's budget. 

Neither does the Tampa Bay Times. According to their Sunday Op-Ed, prioritizing our county budget is an "empty gesture".

The county is not creating a new revenue stream for transportation; it's merely raiding money already there.

Their attitude is absurd and out of touch with reality and the electorate today. 

The Tampa Bay Times would better serve their readers if they started questioning the county budget. There are a number of questionable oddities including ghost projects being financed by debt and budgeting for capital projects with no known operating costs. These oddities go against any normal budget process we know and is not good governance. 

The Times should look at past budgets of a decade ago or more ago. They prove that the commissioners will re-align spending to higher priorities, including towards funding our roads and transportation. 

The county commissioners are elected to make tough decisions not rubber stamp unelected bureaucrat Merrill's budget recommendations. If the commissioners can't, won't or refuse to make tough budget decisions that the rest of us must do everyday, they need to find another job.

As we posted previously, 69% of those polled last year during the Go Hillsborough campaign stated the county needs to do a better job spending what we already have. 

How is that done? By prioritizing the budget to fund our highest priorities FIRST.

If the county cannot prioritize it's spending, there's no limit to the expansion of local government and no limit to what the county will spend OUR tax dollars on. 

If the county cannot prioritize its spending, then the county is telling the taxpayers that everything must be a priority. 

No one believes that. 

But we get it. Merrill, Hagan and the Tampa Bay Times want a new baseball stadium and costly trains. They know the county will have to pick our pockets more to get them.

The county was forced to prioritize our budget during the recession. The services that the county cut the most was our transportation funding. They diverted all property taxes that historically always funded our roads to other things when the recession hit. 

However the county refused to re-appropriate those dollars back to transportation as our revenues began going up and up and up.

When forced to, the county had to prioritize. When our revenues are healthily increasing, suddenly the county cannot prioritize. What hogwash!

Requests were repeatedly made by citizens during the budget process over the last few years for the county to fund our roads and transportation. Those requests fell on deaf ears. 

Why? 

Because the tax hike and spenders down at County Center, Mayor Buckhorn, their cronies and special interest backers and our local media (Tampa Bay Times) want another sales tax hike referendum.

According to this recent Tampa Bay Business Journal article, Mayor Buckhorn, wants to get behind a citizen petition led referendum to force a sales tax hike get on the 2018 ballot. 

Buckhorn also stated this in the TBBJ article:

“I would think that if [St. Pete] Mayor [Rick] Kriseman and I had the ability to do that within the municipalities that we could pass it and we could fund the beginnings of a transportation system, particularly rail, that would link downtown St. Pete to downtown Tampa and the airport,” Buckhorn said.

We'd like to see the financial viability of that business case. 

Buckhorn, the mayor of downtown Tampa only, is now living in the twilight zone.

Remember it was Buckhorn on the Tampa City Council back in the 1990's who was the lone NO vote on the Tampa Streetcar. He said it did not have a long term viable business model. And he was right.  

CIT revenues are another local funding source for transportation capital projects. 

Those who continue fretting and lamenting that the county cannot prioritize our budget to fund our roads and transportation know that the CIT tax will come up for reauthorization between now and 2026 when it expires.

It was the county who blew out the entire CIT future revenues for unincorporated Hillsborough. Who recommended doing that in 2007? Commissioner Hagan and then county Finance guy Mike Merrill. 

Talk about actually raiding and financially constraining future county commission boards….Where was the Times back then? Crickets……

That is why we doubt taxpayers will stomach another 30 year tax and believe there should be no attempt to extend the CIT for longer than 10 years. 

The MPO estimates that extending the CIT out to 2040 (14 years), using a 3.58% growth rate, unincorporated Hillsborough would receive over $1.7 BILLION of new revenues. If the CIT was extended for 10 years, the county would probably receive over $1.5 BILLION.

MPO's CIT revenue estimates if extended
from MPO's 2040 LRTP

Before the CIT comes up for reauthorization, the county must prove they are being good stewards of the money they already receive. Trust must be earned back. 

Prioritizing our budget is how to get that done.

This move by the commissioners to fund our roads and transportation FIRST before spending our tax dollars on pork projects, lower priority items, unnecessary spending, subsidizing special interests and wealthy sports team owners is a step in the right direction.

We would have preferred an ordinance but when this Board policy is approved, the commissioners will be put on notice that we will now watch the budget process like a hawk.

The policies of obstruction and failing to start addressing our transportation issue must come to an end. 

Because most importantly, the commissioners must have someone at County Center who is committed to making the Board policy work.

No More Budget Shell Games - Fund our Roads and Transportation Needs Now!

The county commissioners held a Budget Workshop July 28. The Eye was there. The Workshop was opened to public comment and a number of citizens, including myself, requested the county move now on implementing Commissioner Murman's proposal to use the growth revenues in our existing ballooning budget to fund our roads and transportation needs. 

The dynamics of the Budget Workshop was quite telling. Commissioner Hagan kept insinuating cuts would have to be made for such a plan. That is almost laughable. It does prove some commissioners and unelected bureaucrats do not want to prioritize our ballooning budget, unless, of course, it's to fund a new baseball stadium for another wealthy sports team owner.

Everything cannot be a priority. If everything is a priority then nothing is a priority. That is fiscally irresponsible.

Such an attitude is what forces Hillsborough County taxpayers to continue funding pork projects, lower priority items, and subsidize wealthy special interests BEFORE funding our roads and transportation needs.

County Administrator Mike Merrill brought up a concern about our reserves and our AAA credit rating. According to the budget presentation given at the Workshop, the county has been dipping into our reserves the last few years to fund parks, fire stations, service centers, nebulous economic development projects - while holding our road funding hostage.

We do not remember hearing this concern during any of those previous budget cycles. Page 25 of the Recommended FY2017 budget states:

Our reserve funds remain stable, and Hillsborough County remains well positioned to excel in meeting the needs of our residents and our business community. 

So which is it? 

If Merrill is suddenly concerned about our reserves affecting our bond rating, then why did he put the county in such a position to begin with?

Decisions still must be made regarding how the $23 million one-time BP settlement windfall, that has no restrictions on it use, will be spent. Some commissioners want to use the funds for transportation which has the biggest funding gap in our budget. Others prefer the money be used for environmental purposes or for our stormwater infrastructure. 

The FY2017 budget dishonestly includes $30 million of taxpayer money to buy back developer's impact fee credits as "transportation spending". This buy back scheme that benefits developers represents 3/5 of the entire transportation spending for FY2017. That is nonsense. The games being played with our tax dollars must stop.

Merrill is a professional at magically pulling money out of his rabbit hat when he wants to.  

We were at the April 13th Community Transportation Plan and Mobility Fee Workshop where the impact fee buy back program was presented to the county commissioners. Merrill and his staff showed how easy it was to "find" or "reallocate" tens of millions of existing budget dollars to fund this buy back scheme. 

At the same time Merrill and his staff have been telling the public for years there was no money for roads. Outrageous!

The county commissioners need to revisit this impact fee buy back program. Either get rid of it and let the actual free marketplace work or consider using the $23 million one-time BP oil spill money to pay for them so taxpayers aren't on the hook for funding another scheme benefitting special interest developers. 

Then the county can honestly use that $30 million Merrill "found" to fund real transportation projects.

There is another BP oil spill settlement the county expects to receive that will have restrictions on its use while this settlement has no restrictions on its use.

Merrill astonishingly revealed at the Workshop that he can start a procurement process for a project that has not been approved by the commissioners and budgeted for. Perhaps that explains how Parsons Brinckerhoff got their million dollar blank check no bid contract procured so fast for the crony Go Hillsborough campaign. That is not good governance.

We have watched a "go along to get along" county commission for too many years. The commissioners have been led by unelected bureaucrats with little or no questions asked, for way too long. 

It was refreshing to see some commissioners pushing back on the unelected bureaucrat's agenda. Both Commissioners White and Murman are to be commended for their comments and actions taken at the Budget Workshop.

The county should not be addressing flagged items at this Workshop. There has not been one budget public hearing because too much time was wasted on two sales tax hike public hearings. White and Murman want to start addressing our transportation issue now and get to work on actually getting something done. Kudos to them.

The poll done by the Go Hillsborough campaign last April highlighted the issue of trust and confidence for how the county spends what we already have. 

Poll questions regarding trust and current spending
Click to enlarge

County collects enough already – no need to raise taxes – do better job of spending money we already have:  69% agree with 46% strongly agreed

We cannot trust politicians to spend new tax money on transportation problems as they promise – they will divert the money as they did the CIT:  69% agree with 42% strongly agreed  

This should have been a big red flag to the county commissioners. When over 2/3 of voters polled agree there is a lack of trust and there is no need to raise taxes, no sales tax hike was ever going to pass.

The sales tax hike is dead. The rubber has hit the road and we must pursue a new direction. 

Our existing budget cannot be used as a shell game to continue funding everything else under the sun except our roads and transportation, a primary responsibility of local government. 

Thankfully some commissioners understand that and want to move on to Plan B. Other commissioners, addicted to a sales tax hike, appear to be in some kind of denial.

The key to start funding our roads and transportation needs now within our existing growing budget is getting Commissioner Murman's funding proposal approved at the Community Transportation Plan Workshop to be held on August 10th at 1:30pm. 

This meeting will be open for public comment. Weigh in by attending and making a public comment in support of Murman's transportation funding proposal or by emailing the county commissioners here. 

Time to break away from failure.

Time to stop using our budget as a shell game to fund everything under the sun but transportation.

Time for the Chamber of Commerce and our business community to get behind Murman's proposal if they are truly serious about starting to solve our transportation problem. 

Time for our local media to wake up and accurately report what is going on with our county budget because they have been asleep at the wheel. 

Time to put our roads and transportation needs FIRST in our growing budget.

Time for the County to pursue success not failure.

 We demand it!