The Politics of Regional Referendums for Transportation Investment in American City-Regions: Lessons from Georgia

Transcription

1 The Politics of Regional Referendums for Transportation Investment in American City-Regions: Lessons from Georgia Michael Leo Owens, Ph.D. Department of Political Science Emory University

2 GEORGIA

3 Mobilisation For Regional Cooperation, Governance, Investment in City-Regions versus Mobilisation Against Regional Cooperation, Governance, Investment in City-Regions

4 WHY GEORGIA, ESP. ATLANTA? Defeat of a tax for regional cooperation, governance, and investment in city-regions across Georgia, esp. in the Atlanta region, contradicts the trend among city-regions and counties to adopt taxes devoted to transportation investment The tax defeat sheds more light on the ways in which political behavior in city-regions contribute to the understanding of racial politics, contemporary conservatism, and defensive localism in the Sunbelt generally and vice versa. The Atlanta case raises anew the prospects and limits of urban regime analysis for explaining policy choices at a metropolitan/city-region level. Findings regarding the process and products of the regional referendums allow for lesson drawing and consideration of a set of implications for future regional referenda for transportation investment and equity in the United States.

5 The State of Georgia, particularly the metropolitan Atlanta region, faces a number of critical issues relating to its transportation system and everincreasing traffic congestion. In light of the dwindling resources available to help solve the problems, it is imperative that all available resources be used to maximum efficiency in order to alleviate the gridlock in and around the metropolitan Atlanta region. (Georgia Assembly, Transportation Act of 2010).

6 TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENT ACT of 2010 Regional Commissions Multi-county (mean: counties) Overlap Metropolitan Planning Organization boundaries Regional Transportation Roundtables Elected county and municipal officials Executive committee chosen by members Identification of transportation & transit projects Unanimous selection of projects Regional referendums 1% ( one-penny ) transportation-oriented local option sales and use tax (T-SPLOST) 10 year sunset All or nothing referendum (pass every county in a region) July 2012 Primaries Punishment for failing to pass tax (increased local match for future state transportation grants)

7 THE TSPLOST FAILED STATEWIDE, EXCEPT IN 3 REGIONS 38% turnout among registered voters 58% voted no, including 66% in Atlanta Region No Plan B by the legislature

8

9

10

11

12

13

14 $6M CAMPAIGN FOR THE TAX Growth Machine Coalition, led by the Mayor of Atlanta and Metro Chamber of Commerce, backed by the Governor : (1) Jobs, Jobs, Jobs; (2) Less Traffic, More Jobs, Get Home Faster; (3) Keep Atlanta a Competitive Place Creating Jobs; and (4) Modernize for a Clean and Fast Regional Transit System

15 %Turnout % Yes % No Atlanta Region County Cherokee Clayton Cobb DeKalb Douglas Fayette Fulton Gwinnett Henry Rockdale City Atlanta Alpharetta Avondale Chamblee Chattahoochee Hills* Clarkston Decatur Duluth Dunwoody* East Point Johns Creek* Jonesboro Lawrenceville Lithonia Marietta Milton* Riverdale Sandy Springs* Smyrna Stone Mountain Union City * Incorporated in last decade

16 Qualitative Factors Supporting Transportation/Transit Taxes Category Factors (Present in Atlanta) Elite and Public Perceptions 1. Traffic congestion crisis (yes) 2. Existing transit lacks problems (no) 3. Extensive stakeholder participation in planning (no) Breadth of Support 1. Enthusiastic business community (yes) 2. Enthusiastic key elected officials (mixed) 3. Supportive environmental groups (no) 4. Lack of effective opposition (no) Elements of the Proposal 1. Mix of multimodal projects (yes) 2. Extension of rail lines (yes) 3. Highway/road construction/improvements (yes) 4. Broad spatial distribution of benefits (yes) 5. Tax sunset provision 10 years (yes) Professionalism of Campaign 1. Consultant /leadership w/ ballot campaign experience (mixed) 2. Fundraising capacity $1 million (yes) 3. Extensive targeted messaging via direct mail, TV, radio, Internet (yes) Timing of Referendum 1. Recent, esp. unsuccessful, referendum (no) 2. General election (no) Source: Adapted from Haas et al and Beale et al. 1996

17 Narrow Support: Pessimism about the Solution

18 Narrow Support: Public Distrust of Politicians

19 Opposition by Traditional Supporters: Environmental Groups & Civil Rights Organizations

20 The overwhelming regional opposition to the T-SPLOST kept metropolitan Atlanta s transit détente... of continued automobility with limited transit in place, characterized by mediocre rail and bus service in the urban core and a skeletal express bus system radiating outward, with rail stations and bus stops surrounded by 33,000 park and ride spaces. (Henderson 2006, )

21 Next Steps