Nearly a month after torpedoing the Go Hillsborough half-penny tax transit initiative, county commissioners were back at the drawing board Wednesday, an alternative proposal it'd like to pitch to voters in tow.
Six of the seven commissioners voted to set a June hearing in which it will discuss a rejiggered version of a plan that would use revenue from a half-cent sales tax to fund a transportation overhaul that would not, I tell you, not include light rail.
Neither did Go Hillsborough, which was a 30-year plan that funded clusters of projects in 10-year increments. Commissioners voted that one down after a grueling April 27 hearing in which residents on both sides of the political spectrum criticized the proposal, albeit for different reasons. The new plan, on which county residents can similarly voice their opinions at a June 9 hearing, is a 15-year plan that includes bus rapid transit and a high-speed ferry (!) along with the road improvements that made Go Hillsborough a nonstarter for mass transit advocates.
“This isn't the final thing that's going to be able to fund transportation decades into the future. But it is a start," said Commissioner Kevin Beckner, the most progressive commissioner on the board, who has long advocated for funding transit in a way that goes beyond simply widening highways and buying more buses. "It's what we've been able to accomplish with a divided community and divided government. And so while the divided community has led to divided government, we need to do what we can today.”
Commissioner Sandy Murman, who said increasing the tax on gasoline to help fund transit (another tool in the ol' transit-funding tool belt, some say) seems like “like the biggest no-brainer I've ever seen in my life,” wasn't particularly enthused about another public hearing on another proposed sales tax increase no one seems to want, but she supported at least having the discussion.
“I hope we can look at this sensibly....because we need transportation that looks to the future, not just the past,” she said. “There is so much potential here that we have not tapped, and I want us to tap it. I am not going to look forward to another defeat at a public hearing, but if that's what everyone wants to do, then I'll be right there.”
Commissioner Stacy White was the board's sole 'no' vote. His comments on the proposal seemed to reflect those of former (and currently prospective) commissioner Jim Norman, who famously called the much more elaborate 2010 Moving Hillsborough Forward proposal (which, yes, included rail) a "boondoggle."
“It's amazing that everyone seems to be able to tighten their belts except government,” White said.
Beckner said that the need to ease the county's notorious traffic woes is dire, and, given that addressing the problem is sorta-kinda what government does, if White knows of a better way to address it — cutting child or elder services? Why not? — he oughtta step up.
“So if, as a commissioner — you have the prerogative to bring forward something specific that you think would be able to help fill this budget gap — I ask you to do that," Beckner said. "Take the leadership, take the responsibility to bring that forward.”
Again reflecting Norman's comments in 2010, White said allowing the public to vote on the measure was tantamount to supporting the measure itself.
Other Republicans on the board begged to differ.
“Allowing the public to vote on an issue does not equate to supporting the referendum," said Commissioner Ken Hagan. "I know opponents said that in 2010; they're saying it again in 2016. By scheduling a referendum, all you're doing is saying you support the public's right to vote on an issue facing our community. Period.”
Earlier in the day, members of the public, including activists, called for action on transportation.
Ed Turanchik, himself a former commissioner, called for a different solution: tax increment financing, or diverting some of the increased tax revenue from new growth into a fund that is dedicated to easing Hillsborough's traffic troubles once and for all. Nearly all other solutions, he said, are simply divisive.
“I really don't like what's happened with the transportation discussion because it's taken allies, people that would naturally be working together and somehow [they're] becoming adversaries. And that's wrong.”
