[Carfreeliving] Idea for a Transit First Transportation Tax

Wed Mar 2 14:14:19 MST 2005

Generally, I would question how this jives with Prop K half cent sales tax 
that was reathorized a couple years ago and already funds many 
transportation projects.  As evidenced by the last election, people are 
not in the mood to pay higher taxes or authorize bonds, so adding another 
tax that overlaps an existing tax seems like a questionable approach.

Perhaps a process for neighborhoods to vote for temporary tax assessment 
districts can be established for home-owners to fund capital intensive 
projects like area-wide traffic calming if they want.  Money saved from 
Prop K funds set aside for traffic calming can then be transferred to 
other areas in need, like transit.  There could be two separate tracks for 
traffic calming projects...neighborhoods with low income or established 
safety problems get one track while neighborhoods with established safety 
problems who are willing to foot the bill get a second parallel track. You 
can pay your way to the head of a queue while those who cannot afford that 
or have major safety problems still get addressed in a separate queue.

Honestly I haven't really thought about this until now so I'm not 
surprised if there are real problems with the idea (beyond the idea of the 
rich being able to pay their way to the front, which some people can't 
stomach regardless of the benefits to others, such as with high 
occupancy/variable toll Lanes, aka Lexus Lanes).

Emily Drennen <bicyclesf at yahoo.com> 
Sent by: Carfreeliving-bounces at livablecity.org
03/01/2005 11:47 PM

To
Carfreeliving <carfreeliving at livablecity.org>
cc

Subject
[Carfreeliving] Idea for a Transit First Transportation Tax

Apologies if you get this more than once. There were some technical 
difficulties.

Thanks,
Emily

*****************************************************************************************************

Dear all,

In response to the current budget crisis for the MTA, I've been kicking 
around an idea for a new funding source, which I have dubbed the 
"Transit-First Transportation Tax" (TFTT). It would be levied as a 
percentage of each residential and commercial property owners' tax bills 
(renters would probably need to kick in to some degree as well as a 
pass-through), and would go to fund MUNI, bikes, peds, disabled access, 
street resurfacing, and some car-related projects as well (such as 
signals, signs, and street paint). The "sell" is that it is in everybody's 
best interest (both businesses and residents) to have a strong and 
affordable MUNI system. Relatively small increases in their tax bills 
could have a big impact on MUNI especially by lowering fares and 
increasing ridership. 

I have included below a very *drafty* outline of ideas, questions, and 
concerns for the TFTT. Please let me know if you think this idea is worth 
pursuing further, and any other thoughts. If it sounds plausible, I'll 
bring it to more folks, with the aim of getting a Supe to take it on. This 
could also be a great project for TLC and/or SPUR. (BTW, if this sounds 
plausible, I'd very much like to continue to work on it. Any funding out 
there anywhere?)
Thanks,
Emily Drennen

*******************************************************************************************************
Transit-First Transportation Tax (TFTT)
Emily Drennen     FEBRUARY 2005

SUMMARY
The Transit-First Transportation Tax (TFTT) would be a new tax levied on 
all residential and commercial properties (as a certain percentage of each 
property’s annual tax bill) and would fund transit-first transportation 
projects (such as MUNI, traffic calming, bikes, peds, paratransit, and 
street resurfacing, etc.). 

Problem Statement
Chronic shortage of funding for transit-first transportation projects, 
such as for MUNI, pedestrians, bicyclists, paratransit riders, etc. 
Declining federal and state funds for transportation projects
Increased demand for municipal services, and long-term municipal budget 
crises
Scattershot transportation project planning and implementation, based on 
the possibility of outside funding
Continuing budget deficits at MUNI, with no major new funding sources 
identified (with a high probability of higher MUNI fares and increased 
service cuts)
Planners and engineers spending too much of their time seeking external 
government grants when they could be doing much-needed planning and 
engineering work
Need for more high-level transportation and land use planning that is 
multimodal, county/corridor/neighborhood-wide, and that takes advantage of 
economies of scale and opportunity 
Annual budget process that is highly political, volatile, short-term, 
which means that transportation budgets are necessarily short-term and 
uncertain for future years
Massive infrastructure needs, such as curb ramp installation/repair and 
street resurfacing/rebuilding, that can barely be addressed through 
current funding mechanisms. Not taking care of these capital needs leaves 
the City vulnerable to much higher costs in the future, such as through an 
ADA lawsuit or skyrocketing costs from deferred maintenance
Inadequate enforcement of traffic laws, leading to needless injuries and 
deaths from reckless driving
Expensive major capital projects in the near future (such as the Central 
Subway, new BRT service on Geary and Van Ness, and the completion of the 3
rd Street Light Rail) without any new major new sources of funding 
identified
An annual tax is the most efficient way to provide consistently provided 
services (bond issues are episodic and are expensive; TIDF-like fees are 
only assessed when development occurs (very dependent on economy and not 
very $-producing))
Outline of ttft
w        TFTT would fund: 
o       MUNI (capital costs, personnel, planning, etc. to keep fares low, 
service frequent, improve reliability and convenience); 
o       pedestrian improvements (curb ramp backlog, countdown ped signals, 
and other projects as identified in the Ped Master Plan); 
o       bike improvements (based on approved projects and priorities as 
identified in the Bike Master Plan); 
o       traffic calming; 
o       ADA access; 
o       Integrated Transportation Management Systems (such as Transit 
Preferential Signals, Next Bus, and SFgo); 
o       traffic enforcement (SFPD increased traffic enforcement with goal 
of increased compliance with traffic laws and reduced injuries and 
deaths); 
o       parking enforcement (increases in DPT staffing for parking 
infractions); 
o       public transportation infrastructure (sidewalks, streets, signals, 
signs, etc); 
o       county-wide planning efforts (SFCTA modeling, Better 
Neighborhoods, etc.); 
o       paratransit service; 
o       school area access and safety
w        TFTT collected by Tax Collector as part of existing property tax 
collections
w        Renters would split the TFTT bill with the landlord of their 
residence or business (what %?)
w        Proceeds of TFTT would be managed by the SFCTA through a process 
similar to the Prop K ½ cent sales tax

BENEFITS
w        Benefits of a dedicated and sufficient funding stream:
o       Rational and logical project development and implementation
o       Better citywide, neighborhood, and corridor planning
o       Better multimodal coordination
o       More matching money available for outside funding sources
o       Ongoing maintenance
o       Less political process
o       More money available for general fund for essential programs such 
as health and human services, fire/police, library, etc.
o       Increased efficiencies from coordinated, planned, and integrated 
project process
w        Appeal to average person:
o       Transportation affects every person, every day in may ways
o       Transportation investments are good for property values, 
businesses, the economy, and jobs
o       Transportation enhancements can increase quality of life (more 
time with family, less stress, less need for a private car, etc)
o       Other city services would receive more money from General Fund 
o       Transportation costs are 2nd highest expenditure for personal 
income in Bay Area. Working together to reduce MUNI fares and increase 
service will bring down personal transportation costs (efficiencies of 
scale). Very small (how small?) yearly amount spent on TFTT would bring 
down annual transportation costs for most people.
Questions to be answered
w        Prop 13 restrictions on this tax?
w        Need estimates and actuals of property taxes paid in SF, with a 
breakdown by residential and commercial
w        Would TFTT rate need to differ for residential and commercial 
uses? 
w        Determination of acceptable amount to fund through property 
taxes:
o       How much $ would be ideal amount to raise through this mechanism 
(to adequately fund MUNI, etc.)? 
o       How much would $ would it cost to provide free MUNI service? 
o       How much to create multimodal utopia?
o       How much would people balk at?
o       How much would tax be for a typical family, small business, and 
other prototypical examples?
o       Any exemptions for low-income property owners? 
o       How to protect low-income renters from paying tax?
o       How to get exempted from or overturn state law requiring 33% of 
transit budget from fare box?
w        Accountability: How to ensure that the SFCTA spends money wisely?
w        Implementation: Any problems with the Tax Collector adding the 
TFTT to tax bills and collecting it?
w        Is there an equity concern already built into the property tax 
structure?
w        What things to include/leave out of funding mix for: a) political 
reasons b) lack of need c) availability of outside sources d) not directly 
transit-first (like Residential Parking Permit program and other parking)?
w        How to handle BART, GG Transit, Caltrain, SamTrans, ferries? 
(Probably best to leave it out of mix, or dictate that TFTT can only be 
used to expand SF service)
w        Sustainability of TFTT:
o       Sunset horizon?
o       How to repeal?
o       Any need to re-authorize, and how often?
w        Timeline for ballot: fall 2005 too soon?
w        When could first benefits from TFTT be realized?
w        Inflation concerns: 
o       How to set tax so that it keeps pace with inflation? 
o       Should it be adjustable (in a range) by the SFCTA based on need, 
or kept as a set percentage?
o       How effective are property values as a barometer for inflation? 
(And does Prop 13 affect this?)
w        Political appeal of “free” Muni vs. “keeping fares as low as 
possible”?
w        How to develop campaign for TFTT?
o       Which Supes to put it on ballot?
o       How to develop enough media, visibility, and support for TFTT?
w        Need to develop simplified explanation of TFTT, why it is 
necessary, and what it’d fund
w        How to tie this into current budget year debate?

Stakeholders
w        Supervisors
w        Mayor
w        Agencies (MUNI, DPT, SFCTA, Planning, DPW, SFPD)
w        Large downtown businesses
w        Small businesses
w        Homeowners and neighborhood associations
w        Renters and SF Tenants Union
w        Homeowners
w        Transportation advocacy groups 
w        Other advocacy groups (seniors, people with disabilities, 
environmental, etc.)
w        Organizations and stakeholders that would benefit from increased 
availability of city funds for their programs (public health, arts, 
police/fire, adult education, youth and senior programs, library, etc.) 
due to a lowered need for city fund support for transportation programs 

Emily Drennen 

415/863-2248 
bicyclesf at yahoo.com
www.emilydrennen.org

Advisory Council Member, Bay Area Air Quality Management District
Citizen's Advisory Committee Member, Metropolitian Transportation Agency
Board Member, Walk San Francisco 
Past Chair, SF Bicycle Advisory Committee 
Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday! 
Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web 
_______________________________________________
Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing list 
to facilitate and promote car-free living in SF
To unsubscribe: 
mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org?subject=unsubscribe
or, for all options, go to:
http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/carfreeliving_livablecity.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/carfreeliving_livablecity.org/attachments/20050302/82f1b0ae/attachment-0001.htm