Commissioner Murman quoted in this Tampa Bay Times article on TBX accountability:

So, about those Tampa Bay Express accountability measures …

• Caitlin Johnston, Times Staff Writer

Friday, June 24, 2016 1:45pm

TAMPA — Hillsborough leaders made a big show early Thursday morning of adding accountability measures before approving a $6 billion road project known as Tampa Bay Express.

Assistant County Attorney Cameron Clark told the Hillsborough Metropolitan Planning Organization during its marathon 8½ hour meeting earlier this week that the board has no legal authority to hold the Florida Department of Transportation to an agreement.

“DOT is not answerable to the board directly,” Clark told the board around 1:30 a.m Thursday. “If they miss something, there’s not like there is a penalty for it.”

Two MPO members, Hillsborough County Commissioners Sandy Murman and Kevin Beckner, both sought to add extra conditions to the board’s approval of TBX, which easily passed the board 12-4.

Murman’s amendment called for increased communication between the MPO and DOT, including quarterly updates. Beckner took that a step further by moving to require that the state present reports on the human impact of the project, mitigation plans for the affected neighborhoods, options for premium transit in the area, and any updates on a federal inquiry into whether the project violates civil rights laws.

“We need to stand with the public and make sure FDOT is accountable to us,” Beckner said.

Both amendments passed unanimously.

But while DOT district secretary Paul Steinman agreed to those stipulations at Thursday’s meeting, there was concern over what ability the MPO has to ensure the department keeps its word.

“I know DOT only answers to the governor,” Murman said Thursday morning. “Can we hold them (to an agreement)? How much power can we have over them?”

The answer: not much.

“You’re basically saying these are the things you’re going to request going forward,” Clark said. “If some condition was violated, it’s not like the approved funding source goes away.”

But the MPO does have some recourse, Clark said. In order for DOT to proceed with a project, it has to be in the MPO’s Transportation Improvement Program, which the board votes to approve annually, as it did Thursday morning.

While this vote normally takes place on an annual basis, Clark said there’s nothing to prevent the board from amending the list of priorities at any time throughout the year.

“If you determine those conditions are not satisfied, you can always come back and you can remove previously approved funds,” Clark said. “You are always free to do that.”

Commissioner Murman mentioned in this Tampa Bay Times article on MPO meeting:

TRANSPORTATION

In wee hours, Hillsborough leaders approve Tampa Bay Express, keep it in long-term plan

By CAITLIN JOHNSON Times Staff Writer

Published: June 23, 2016

Updated: June 23, 2016 at 08:53 AM

TAMPA — It was one step forward for Tampa Bay Express, one giant step backward for the opposition.

The Hillsborough Metropolitan Planning Organization voted 12 to 4 shortly after 2 a.m. Thursday morning to keep the controversial $6 billion road project known as TBX on track and in its long-term funding plans.

But what was an incremental step for TBX was a big setback for the critics, who oppose the plan to add 90 miles of tolled express lanes to the interstate system linking five counties and viewed the meeting as their chance to stop the project from moving forward.

Despite mounting opposition from Central Tampa neighborhoods and groups like 1,000 Friends of Florida, the vote to approve the project did not come as a surprise. Only two of 16 members — Tampa City Councilman Guido Maniscalco and Hillsborough County Commissioner and MPO Chairman Les Miller — had publicly stated their intent to vote against the project before Wednesday’s public hearing.

County Commissioner Kevin Beckner and Tampa City Councilwoman Lisa Montelione were the other two dissenting votes.

“The work that all of you put in for your community has been unprecedented, at least in my experience,” Montelione told the weary crowd. “You can’t be discouraged. You can’t let this give you the opportunity to throw your hands up and say, ‘That’s it. I’m done. I’m tired. We lost. I’m over it.’”

Miller attempted to block the most controversial aspects of the plan from proceeding — the downtown interchange, Interstate 275 from downtown north to Bearss Avenue, and Interstate 4 east to Plant City — but that motion was voted down 5-11. Planning Commissioner Trent Green was the fifth vote.

“We’ve got to realize that the people that’s going to be effected the most don’t want this,” Miller said.

While the vote to approve the long-range plan in its current form easily passed the board, Hillsborough County Commissioners Sandy Murman and Beckner both sought to add extra oversight and accountability measures to the project.

Murman’s amendment called for increased communication between the MPO and FDOT, including quarterly updates. Beckner took that a step further by requiring FDOT to present reports on the human impact of the project, mitigation plans for the affected neighborhoods, options for premium transit in the area, and any updates on a federal inquiry into whether the project violates civil rights laws.

Both amendments passed unanimously.

Plant City Commissioner Nate Kilton commended the audience on their passion for their communities, but said TBX needed to move forward as “one cohesive package” if it was going to be successful.

“I have significant concerns about taking out these sections of the road,” Kilton said. “One of the biggest problems is the bottleneck we have at I-4 and I-275. If we’re not going to correct that, then why even bother with this, to be perfectly honest?

TBX received strong support from the business community, many of whom attended the eight-hour meeting to advocate for the project which will expand I-275, I-4 and Interstate 75 from Pinellas Park through Westshore and downtown Tampa, north to Pasco County, east to Polk County and south to Manatee County.

Though a majority of the board voted in support of TBX, many of them were noticeably silent during the meeting, speaking only to cast their votes.

Tampa City Councilman Harry Cohen voted to keep TBX on the board’s long-range plan, but was not without his reservations.

“I want you to know categorically that I am very skeptical of the toll lane concept,” Cohen said. “And I am going to be asking the question of every person that is running for governor in the next cycle, ‘What is your position on toll lanes?’ This conversation is not over.”

Hundreds of people flooded Hillsborough County Center and spent hours urging the MPO’s board to either approve or reject the massive road project.

Opponents waved signs and wore buttons imploring the MPO to remove TBX from the plan, which would effectively kill the project.

They arrived hours before the meeting, eager to make their voices heard. And when they filled every seat in the board room, they were directed to overflow seating downstairs where there still weren’t enough chairs to accommodate everyone. An estimated 500 people turned out for the meeting.

“We can do better,” Michelle Cookson, a member of the Stop TBX Coalition, told the MPO. “We’re at a critical crossroad, and we can turn toward prosperity and economic stability and 21st century growth. Or we can stay stuck in the past.”

Though speakers opposed to the project outnumbered those in favor by a 2:1 ratio, many in the audience supported TBX. They flashed “TBXyes” stickers, wore green T-shirts, and told the board TBX will provide much-needed relief for an overburdened interstate system.

“Our transportation needs are great,” said Don Skelton, former secretary for Florida Department of Transportation’s district office. “This is an investment in transportation, which is an investment in economic growth.

“If we can’t move people and goods, we’re going to strangle ourselves economically.”

The distinction between opponents and supporters was stark.

Some of the challengers sported T-shirts and pajama pants, while many of the champions stood in suits and ties. They varied not just in dress, but in occupation: students, entrepreneurs and teachers spoke out against the project while executives, engineers and former FDOT secretaries advocated for its continuation.

“These are people who are paid to be here for this project because this project benefits their employers,” Seminole Heights resident and business owner Nikki Rice said to the board. “It is time now to consider your constituents.”

They introduced themselves as either residents of a neighborhood or members of the business community. When they stated their address for the record, the geographical divide was clear: the opposition hailed mostly from Seminole Heights, Tampa Heights and other urban neighborhoods while the supporters listed addresses in Wesley Chapel, New Tampa and Pinellas County.

And when the final vote was announced, they either resolved to continue their fight or breathed a sigh of relief.

“We have engaged and energized many hundreds of citizens to be involved in our most critical issue: transportation,” Cookson said following the vote. “We have brought the focus back to where it ought to be. We need transit, many systems that are connected and move more people and goods in less space.”

About 185 people signed up to address the board. Not all of those individuals spoke, but public comment lasted seven hours. The board then deliberated for an hour and voted shortly after 2 a.m. Thursday to approve the long-range plan.

This is the fourth time in three months that a public transportation hearing drew large, passionate crowds and stretched late into the night. In April and then again in June, Hillsborough County Commissioners heard from hundreds of people about whether to put a half-cent sales tax for transportation on the November ballot.

Commissioners rejected the referendum both times.

When it is completed decades from now, TBX will add managed toll lanes to 90 miles of previously free roads.

But these won’t just be typical toll lanes. Unlike the Lee Roy Selmon Expressway, which charges a flat rate, the cost of using TBX’s express toll lanes will fluctuate based on demand. When traffic in the main lanes is at its worst, it could cost a driver $2 to travel a single mile in the express lane — or $15 to travel the 7½ miles from Bearss Avenue to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard.

The project also includes a new northbound span of the Howard Frankland Bridge and will revamp the downtown and Westshore interchanges.

But the project needs the approval of the Hillsborough MPO, a group comprised of elected officials and representatives from public entities that evaluates transportation and development.

“FDOT is committed to working with the community on transportation solutions for our region,” FDOT district spokeswoman Kris Carson said. “We will continue the public outreach as we plan and prepare for TBX.”

Thursday morning’s vote allows the project to move forward, but it in no way finalizes it or prevents officials from opposing it in the future. The MPO must approve its Transportation Improvement Program every year, so funding for TBX phases such as the downtown interchange expansion could be nixed in the future.

Because of that, supporters like Michael Peterson with the Greater Tampa Association of Realtors said this allowed the MPO “to hedge your bets tonight.”

“Voting yes for TBX only allows less than $500,000 for voluntary purchases (in the next year) and you get another year to work out the problems,” Peterson said.

FDOT has told local officials that if they remove TBX from Hillsborough’s long-range plan, then the billions the state will allocate for the project in future years would go elsewhere — but not to other road improvements or transit projects here in the bay area. Instead, the money would be used to add toll lanes to highways in other parts of Florida.

That’s not a threat, state officials have said repeatedly, just the reality. Regardless, the fear of losing out on that funding motivated many of those who came out to support TBX.

“If we reject TBX our tax dollars will be spent by somewhere else, somewhere else in Florida,” Ken Roberts said.

But while many at the MPO hearing viewed the project as an “all-or-nothing,” siding with either TBXyes or Stop TBX, Tampa resident Taylor Ralph said he represented a new constituency: the “TBX Maybe” folks.

Taylor encouraged the board not to let FDOT dictate what projects move forward, but instead to ask that TBX be split into its individual components. He suggested the MPO put the development of the toll lanes on hold while other options are studied.

Meanwhile, he said the MPO and FDOT should move forward with critical improvements, such as rebuilding the northbound span of the Howard Frankland.

“We’ve been told we either accept all of the TBX plan, including the tolled and express lanes, or we don’t get anything,” Ralph said. “They’re playing a game with our tax dollars.

“We call the shots … we develop the priorities.”

Contact Caitlin Johnston at cjohnston@tampabay.com or (813) 226-3401. Follow @cljohnst

Commissioner Murman quoted in this Tampa Bay Times article on transportation:

Hillsborough commissioners reject latest transportation tax plan

• Steve Contorno, Times Staff Writer

Thursday, June 9, 2016 10:36pm

TAMPA — Six years ago, Hillsborough County voters rejected a referendum to raise the sales tax by a full penny for 30 years to pay for transportation projects.

This time, it won’t even get that far.

For the second time in seven weeks, county commissioners on Thursday rejected a half-cent sales tax hike of 20 years on a 4-3 vote. Now it’s increasingly likely that after three years of meetings, studies and debate, commissioners won’t have a proposal to take to voters in November and they may walk away from the transportation conversation without a long-term solution.

Lines broke the same as they did in April: Commissioners Kevin Beckner, Ken Hagan and Les Miller voted for it; Victor Crist, Al Higginbotham, Sandy Murman and Stacy White voted no.

“I cannot in good conscious increase the tax burden on hardworking citizens by a margin of more than 7 percent,” White said. The tax would’ve increased the sales tax from 7 cents on a dollar to 7.5 cents.

Commissioners then voted 4-3 to study an alternative proposal from Murman to divert future growth in sales and property taxes to transportation. The breakdown of the vote was the same.

Murman said her plan would give the county a base to pay for road work and other projects while the county conducts a larger transit study that includes whether to buy CSX rail lines for a commuter line.

“Why would we preclude that option when in 2, 3, 4 years we’re going to be back here thinking, ‘How can we go back to the voters one more time?” Murman said. “They’re going to say, ‘No, we gave you that shot.’ “

Commissioners initially came to Thursday’s meeting planning to consider a 15-year tax. But Hagan said that was a “watered-down” and “symbolic” solution and instead made a motion to bring back the 20-year tax that commissioners previously rejected. He implored his colleagues to let the voters decide.

“Why would we deprive the public of that right?” he asked.

But none of the previous no voters were swayed.

The public hearing Thursday lasted well into the evening as 69 speakers signed up to weigh in on whether the county should raise the sales tax by a half cent.

Young professionals and business leaders turned out in large numbers to push commissioners toward a resolution that would reinvent Hillsborough’s transportation system to lessen gridlock and repair crumbling roads. Many advocated for a sales tax of at least 20 years, insisting that a long-term funding was needed for a transformative plan and to attract federal grants. They wore buttons that said “Yes! to 20,” a campaign pitch from the Greater Tampa Chamber of Commerce.

Jeff Lucas of Tampa said he moved here from Atlanta where he spent hours of his day stuck in traffic and predicted Hillsborough would head that way as it’s population boomed.

“I’ve seen our future and I can paint the picture for you and it’s not pretty,” said Lucas, who added that many tourists will be paying the tax as well.

A half-cent sales tax would raise $117.5 million a year, the county estimates.

But the advocates were matched almost equally by opponents of any tax hike, many from the suburbs and rural parts of the county who questioned the county’s plan and didn’t want to pay for transit in Tampa they won’t use.

Others said commissioners hadn’t demonstrated a willingness to support transportation in the past and were now looking to taxpayers for an easy fix.

One speaker, Yvette Maldonado, sarcastically suggested that commissioners may discover the will to pave roads if they were named after baseball stadiums.

“Wow,” she said, “I think I found the solution folks.”

The hearing, though in a different location, was nearly identical to one on April 27, when more than 60 people offered diverging opinions on how best to pay for much-needed road work and much-desired transit projects here.

That meeting ended after commissioners rejected 4-3 proposals to raise the sales tax from 7 percent to 7.5 percent for periods of 20 and 30 years. In May, though, they voted 5-2 to instead consider a 15-year tax.

“What part of no don’t you people understand?” said Kathy Brown, wearing a sticker with “Tax” crossed out.

Since then, commissioners have met repeatedly in a desperate attempt to find common ground and pass some kind of solution. Instead, divisions only deepened.

The last-minute proposal first introduced Wednesday by Murman further muddied the waters. Assuming 5 percent growth in county taxes each year, Murman insisted her proposal could replace the sales tax.

Despite the decision, commissioners won’t leave its three-year transportation initiative completely empty-handed.

The commission already set a policy that half of all future growth in property tax revenue for the next three years and one-third after that will go toward transportation. They also passed new mobility fees that eventually could bring in $35 million a year from developers.

Still, with an estimated $9 billion in current and future transportation needs, the policies already passed likely won’t be enough. There’s consensus on the board that the county’s transportation network is a problem that will burden future boards, economic recruitment efforts and overall quality of life for citizens. But a solution remains elusive.

Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn said the county’s lack of action is handcuffs the cities, which cannot raise sales taxes on their own. Each city and the Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority would have received a piece of the sales tax surcharge.

“Unfortunately, the commission’s majority continues to lack the courage to let voters decide the way we move forward,” Buckhorn said. “Any plan that does not incorporate the needs of the three cities is not a plan and is merely a failed effort by politicians more concerned about the next election rather than the next generation.”

Commissioner Murman quoted in this Tampa Bay Times article on transportation:

On eve of Hillsborough transportation vote, deep divisions and new plan surface

• Steve Contorno, Times Staff Writer

Thursday, June 9, 2016 8:10am

TAMPA — On the eve of another transportation vote, Hillsborough County commissioners made this much clear on Wednesday: They are as divided as ever on how to pay for transportation needs, and the issue will not be resolved anytime soon.

Supporters of a half-cent sales tax hike hoped that Wednesday’s commission workshop would eliminate any lingering doubt that a tax increase for 15 or more years is still the best way to pay for road work and transit projects.

That didn’t happen. Instead, when today’s public hearing and vote starts at 6 p.m., the commissioners will enter the room without a consensus.

Adding to the confusion was another last-minute alternative proposal from Commissioner Sandy Murman to pay for existing and future transportation needs entirely with growth in the county’s sales and property tax revenues. It’s the second time in seven months that she has dropped a new plan just hours before a big vote.

Some commissioners wondered aloud whether they needed more time to consider Murman’s latest proposal and delay today’s scheduled hearing.

That didn’t sit well with Commissioner Ken Hagan.

“This proposal strikes me as nothing but a shell game,” he said.

The lack of consensus means commissioners could — for the second time in two months — leave a public hearing to raise the sales tax without the four votes needed to send it to a referendum, to let voters decide in November. The first time was on April 27, when the commission rejected 20- and 30-year half-cent sales tax plans by a vote of 4-3.

The commission is sharply divided into two camps: those who back a sales tax hike to pay for transportation and those who think it can be paid for with growth in the tax base.

The former had their case bolstered Wednesday by county staff and consultants, who said property tax revenues are unreliable for major transportation projects because they dip and dive with the economy and will be viewed unfavorably for federal grants.

Murman doubted that. Her goal, she said, was to get two transportation trust funds off the ground: one for unincorporated Hillsborough and one countywide. Then they could go back to voters in a few years after the county has finished a planned transit study and a review of whether to buy CSX lines for conversion into a commuter rail system.

“Get the funding stream moving forward and then we can really go big when this study is done,” she said.

Commissioner Les Miller, though, warned that dedicating future growth to one priority will cannibalize the rest of the budget and other services at a time when the county’s population is on the rise.

“That’s a major, major problem,” he said.

City of Tampa officials added that if the county goes down that road, it will be leaving the three cities — Tampa, Temple Terrace and Plant City — out to dry. All three jurisdictions, plus the Hills­borough Area Regional Transit Authority, would automatically receive a portion of any new sales tax revenue.

But there’s no guarantee they would get anything under proposals tied to growth.

Commissioner Murman mentioned in this Tampa Bay Business Journal article:

Sandy Murman surveys constituents on how they want to fund transportation

Jun 3, 2016, 4:14pm EDT

Commissioner Sandra Murman has emailed a transportation survey to her constituents in an effort to find out how they want to pay for repairs and improvements.

The survey comes in the wake of continued disagreement over how to to fund Hillsborough County’s current and future transportation needs. In a 4-3 vote last April, Hillsborough County Commissioners decided not to place the Go Hillsborough half-cent sales tax referendum on the November ballot, taking a significant step backward in getting a unified plan on transportation.

Murman’s short survey asks participants to rank different sources of revenue on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being the most preferable source and 5 the least.

“In terms of what you would most prefer to utilize for transportation repairs and improvements, including transit and improved bus service …”

1. Pay a 15-year ½ cent sales tax
2. Pay a 10-year ½ cent sales tax
3. Pay a 5-year ½ cent sales tax
4. Pay a 15-year ½ cent sale tax
5. Pay a 10-year ¼ cent sales tax
6. Pay a 5-year ½ cent sales tax
7. Utilize 5-cent per gallon tax option

The first three would generate $117 million in revenue per year, and the next three provide $58.5 million a year while the gas tax would raise $18 million per year.

The survey also asks participants to answer yes or no on whether they would support re-prioritizing the county budget to put more revenue toward transportation.

They are also asked if they support having a dedicated source of revenue for transportation that does not involving raising taxes, like a “transportation increment tax fund and if they support merging the two bus systems — Hillsborough Area Regional Transit and Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority.”

Murman is seeking to get all responses by June 7.

Under the defeated Go Hillsborough initiative, the bulk of money generated in the first 10 years would have gone to Hillsborough County, which would have received $649 million or 55 percent. The Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority would have gotten $294 million or 25 percent of the funds for the bus system that it operates.

The city of Tampa, which was looking to extend its historic streetcar and build a rail system between downtown andTampa International Airport, would have received 17 percent or $198 million. Plant City would gotten two percent or $20 million while Temple Terrace would have gotten 1 percent or $14 million.

Sales tax plans to fund transportation have proved unpopular in the past. In November 2014, the Greenlight Pinellas penny sales tax initiative was defeated. And in 2010, a referendum to fund a rail-focused transit system also failed.

Frances McMorris

Reporter

Tampa Bay Business Journal

Commissioner Murman quoted in this Tampa Bay Times article on transportation:

Hillsborough administrator says sales tax ‘the only way’ to pay for transportation needs

• Steve Contorno, Times Staff Writer

Thursday, June 2, 2016 8:04pm

TAMPA — There was no indication Thursday that Hillsborough County commissioners are any closer to a consensus on how to pay for much-needed road work and transit projects.

But one thing was clear: If commissioners settle on anything other than a sales tax hike, it will be over the objections of County Administrator Mike Merrill.

A week before commissioners will once again consider sending voters a referendum to raise the sales tax by a half cent for transportation, an insistent and exasperated Merrill took aim at critics of the county’s plan and at alternative proposals he said won’t do the job.

At one point, Commissioner Sandy Murman told Merrill she’s heard concerns that the county’s plan is a list of projects that don’t factor in future technological advancements or upcoming transit studies.

“That’s what I’m hearing now is vision, connectivity, where’s the transit?” she said.

Merrill replied: “For someone to say that they don’t know there’s a plan and there isn’t specificity means that they haven’t been paying attention.

“We’ve made specific connections between points of job centers and communities in that plan. We’ve identified specific fixed guideways. We priced it out. It’s expensive.”

He added: “It takes time to build. That’s why the sales tax turns out to be the only way to pay for it if that’s what we want.”

Merrill took issue with one new idea gaining traction among some commissioners and the anti-tax community: Creating a tax-increment finance district, or TIF, throughout the county.

In a traditional TIF, a locality will incentivize development in certain zones and then capture the growth in revenue to further improve that district. But under this proposal, the entire county would be a TIF district and all growth in revenue would be pledged to transportation.

The county couldn’t use that money to pay for other services and needs as the population grew. And if revenues plummet, as they did during the recession, then there goes the money needed for roads and buses.

That’s problematic, Merrill said, and look no further than Pasco County. In 2011, Pasco instituted a TIF as part of a means to pay for transportation expenses. But in recent years the county has had to raise the property tax rate to plug its other budget holes, he said.

“I’m sure somebody told them five years ago that it was a good idea to pay for transportation with a TIF,” Merrill said. “We can make that choice, but I think it’s our responsibility to let you know what the consequences are. It’s mortgaging our future.”

Pasco County Assistant Administrator Heather Grimes said the county “has continued to experience steady, strong growth over the past few years” since the TIF was enacted, and they expect an additional $2.5 million for transportation in 2017.

Further, she said, the rise in property taxes were to increase the pay of Pasco County Sheriff’s Office deputies “that have been leaving to work in Hillsborough County or the city of Tampa.”

Hillsborough County Commissioner Stacy White continued to advocate for a TIF as a way to funnel money to transportation without raising taxes. He said he believes it could raise $1 billion in 10 years, roughly the same as a sales tax.

“I think we should be prepared to have both options on the table June 9,” White said.

Merrill said he will bring details and an outside expert to lay out the merits of the proposal, but he will still oppose it.

“I wish there were a different way to do this,” Merrill said. “I’d love to have the last three years of my life back if I could’ve told you three years ago that there’s a better way to do this.”

Before making a decision next week, commissioners said they want more details on what specific projects would be eliminated if the duration of the sales tax surcharge was cut to 20, 15, 10 or even five years. A presentation from staffers demonstrated that anything less than a 15-year tax would remove transit entirely from the list of transportation projects.

Murman also wanted to hear similar breakdowns from the city of Tampa and the Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority and what they would do with their share of the taxes under all of those scenarios.

But Commissioner Kevin Beckner, who supported a sales tax hike of 20 and 30 years, said: “It’s not the plan that’s preventing us from moving forward. To be honest, I think it’s building political will.”

Contact Steve Contorno at scontorno@tampabay.com. Follow @scontorno.

Commissioner Murman quoted in this Tampa Bay Times article on transportation tax:

If Hillsborough transportation tax drops to 10 years, it could lose its biggest supporter

• Steve Contorno, Times Staff Writer

Friday, May 27, 2016 11:42am

TAMPA — Getting to four votes on a sales tax hike to fund transportation in Hillsborough County has proven difficult (to say the least), and commissioners in favor of that option continue to tinker with the duration of the surcharge in the hopes of reaching a majority.

Three commissioners who voted against half-cent sales tax increases of 20 and 30 years last month — Sandy Murman, Victor Crist and Al Higginbotham — are lukewarm, or at best undecided, about the latest iteration: Asking voters to approve a 15-year tax in a November referendum. (Commissioner Stacy White, the fourth commissioner to vote no on April 27, opposes any sales tax increase at this time.)

Murman told the Tampa Bay Times that 15 years was still too long for her and instead floated a 10-year proposal. Her logic being that commissioners approved a 10-year, $905 million list of transportation projects last month, so the tax should match that duration.

“I don’t know how we can consider more than 10 years,” Murman said.

Commissioners will hold a public hearing June 9 on the 15-year plan, the 10-year plan or really any transportation tax plan they come up with, and then vote. If a new tax is approved, it will be put on the November ballot so that residents can have their say.

But a 10-year proposal would lose the support of one of the most vocal and consistent advocates of a transportation sales tax: Commissioner Ken Hagan.

“I would support five before I supported 10,” he told the Times.

A 10-year tax would mean the elimination of almost all transit projects like new buses, extending downtown Tampa’s street car and establishing a ferry to connect south county to MacDill Air Force Base, according to a presentation by county staff. Those transit projects rely on federal grants that require a long-term funding source to secure.

With a 10-year tax, the county can fix potholes, provide some congestion relief and improve safety at some intersections and sidewalks, staff wrote. Commissioners will see the presentation, which looks at what a surtax of five, 10, 15, 20, and 30 years could accomplish, at Thursday’s meeting.

At 5 years, the county could address some of its road maintenance backlog.

But at least with a 5-year proposal, Hagan said, commissioners could pay for maintenance projects while waiting for the results of several in-depth transit studies on the horizon, including the conversion of CSX lines into commercial rail. Then, the county can go back to voters at the next presidential election in four years to ask for a more long-term tax with a greater understanding of the county’s needs and the possibilities for addressing them.

Not that Hagan’s enthusiastic about a 5-year proposal, either. He still sees the need for a long-term funding solution to pay for the county’s many transportation needs and to keep up with the future needs that will come with projected growth in Tampa and the rest of Hillsborough (and, technically, the 20- and 30-year tax hikes are still on the table).

Settling for something shorter, Hagan said, is just kicking the question to a future board while the maintenance backlog gets bigger and bigger. And, he added, it’s not as though the tax’s opponents will go away.

That echoes the Greater Tampa Chamber of Commerce, which on Thursday implored commissioners to reconsider a tax of at least 20 years.

“Rather than allowing residents to vote on an option of at least 20 years, the Board of County Commissioners is now considering a 15-year option,” the chamber said in its statement. “This is an insufficient response to our community’s transportation needs and we urge our County Commissioners to revisit their prior actions and support the option of a half-cent sales tax for a duration of at least 20 years.

“Voters should have the right to make the decision on the funding of our future transportation options and our elected officials have the responsibility of giving them a viable solution.”

Hagan said he doesn’t see how a 10-year tax solves the county’s transportation problems.

“We need a transformative transportation plan,” Hagan said. “And in order for that to occur, transit and multi module options must be an element of our plan.”

Commissioner Murman quoted in this Tampa Bay Times article on transportation and spending:

While struggling to pay for roads and buses, Hillsborough commissioners funneled millions to their own projects

• Steve Contorno, Times Staff Writer

Saturday, May 28, 2016 3:40pm

TAMPA — Even as Hillsborough County struggles to find a way to pay for much-needed road repairs and new transit, commissioners are steering millions of dollars to pet projects and other priorities in their districts.

Since 2013, commissioners have put aside at least $115 million to build new parks and recreation centers, launch incentives for historic preservation and the film industry and provide assistance to local museums and charities.

The sum represents spending initiated by commissioners and approved by majority vote and projects included in the budget at the request of a commissioner.

A list of the expenditures provided to the Tampa Bay Times by county staff includes 110 projects and programs ranging from $16 million for the Environmental Lands Acquisition and Protection Program to $2,000 for Rebuilding Tampa Together. Budget director Tom Fesler said the list may not capture all commissioner-initiated spending though “it should be reasonably complete.”

The items include:

• $15 million for the Hillsborough County Sports Complex in Brandon (Commissioner Ken Hagan).
• $6 million for a park at a location to be determined along the Alafia River (Commissioner Stacy White).
• $4.4 million for Historic Preservation Challenge grants (Commissioner Victor Crist).
• $3.4 million to replace the Riverview library (Commissioner Sandy Murman).
• $2 million for the Capital Asset Preservation Program (Commissioner Kevin Beckner).
• $1.4 million for Lucy Del Park (Commissioner Les Miller).
• $650,000 for Plant City park lighting (Commissioner Al Higginbotham).

Commissioners defended the spending as needs identified by their residents.

By diverting all that money to transportation, “we would’ve been neglecting our constituents and certain things they want to have,” Miller said. “It’s six of one and half a dozen of the other.”

Others said it was about finding balance.

“Until you’re actually here and understand the enormous responsibility of the funding of different agencies and different things the county is responsible for, you don’t understand the challenges we face balancing the budget,” Beckner said.

“Transportation’s an enormous need,” he said. “We’ve got to find a stable, reliable funding source to tackle that issue.”

Both Beckner and Miller have supported raising the sales tax by a half cent to generate $117.5 million a year for transportation projects. Commissioners will hold a public hearing and vote on whether to raise the sales tax on June 9. If approved, it will go to voters in a November referendum.

Crist, who voted against a sales tax surcharge in April, also said it was wrong to solely scrutinize commissioner spending. Crist has advocated cutting the budget by 3 percent across the board.

“Commissioners are out in the field,” he said. “We see things, we know what our constituents are complaining about the most or what would make the greatest difference.”

Even if it wouldn’t have been nearly enough to solve the county’s transportation needs in the coming decades, often estimated at $9 billion, Murman said the money commissioners spent on projects would have helped. And it could convince voters that commissioners are looking to cut their own spending before asking residents to raise taxes on themselves.

“I understand a lot of these projects are sacred ground for several commissioners. I get that,” Murman said. “We all like to bring home money for our district. But when you have a major problem and you need to solve it you really do need to put your own interests aside for the greater good.”

As tax collections plummeted during the depths of the recession, the county cut transportation spending by about $25 million a year to plug other holes. Spending on commissioner initiatives dropped, too. In 2010 and 2011, they spent just $6.2 million on their own projects and programs.

But as county revenues rebounded, transportation spending remained relatively flat. Meanwhile, commissioner spending jumped from $9 million in 2012 to $38.5 million in 2013.

Last month, commissioners voted to direct half of all new growth in revenue over the next three years and one-third after that toward transportation. That could significantly curb the amount of money commissioners can spend on their own priorities.

Parks are a perennial favorite of commissioners when it comes time to dish out new revenue. Murman, who has pushed for several parks in her district, said there should be a moratorium on any new parks until the county finishes its master park plan later this year.

“There are a lot of parks on the list,” Murman acknowledged. “We should’ve held off doing any new parks for a while until we got that plan back.”

But Hagan defended the most expensive park on the list: the Brandon sports complex. He said the park, a public-private partnership with Tampa Electric Co., will draw national youth tournaments and should eventually generate revenue for the county.

“There is some merit to that logic” of cutting back on commissioner priorities, Hagan said. “But you need to balance transportation needs with all of our needs and services.”

Commissioner Murman quoted in this Tampa Bay Times article on transportation sales tax:

The date is set: Hillsborough will debate transportation sales tax on June 9

• Steve Contorno, Times Staff Writer

Wednesday, May 18, 2016 11:34am

It will be the second time the county will hold a public hearing to examine raising the sales tax by a half cent to pay for $117.5 million a year in road improvements and transit projects. The last hearing, on April 27, ended with commissioners voting 4-3 against tax increases of 20 and 30 years.

The June 9 hearing, set with a 6-1 vote initiated by Commissioner Les Miller, will be to consider raising the sales tax from 7 percent to 7.5 percent for a period of 15 years, though the length and cost of the tax could be amended at that public hearing. If approved, it would go to Hillsborough voters in a referendum in November.

While the board overwhelmingly agreed to move ahead with the meeting, there was still considerable dissent and lack of consensus on the best path forward.

For example, Commissioner Sandy Murman said a gas tax increase was a “no brainer” that needed to be considered, and that the county lacked a modern, technology-based transit plan.

But she still voted to set the public hearing. She also asked county staff for information on how much a sales tax hikes of a half cent and a quarter cent could generate and fund for five, 10 and 15 years.

“If we have to do this one more time to get to the same result we got to last time then we’ll do it,” Murman said. “Because at that point then we can force ourselves to look at the budget.

Commissioner Victor Crist said commissioners and an independent task force should comb the budget for savings that could fund road and transit projects. He voted for it but said he didn’t know if he would support it on June 9.

The strongest opposition came from Commissioner Stacy White, who voted against setting the public hearing date and was critical of any new revenue for transportation.

He also put his fellow commissioners on notice if they vote to put the sales tax hike on the ballot. White called it the equivalent of the “board going to the voters with its hand out.”

“Support of this referendum is support for a tax hike,” he said.

That drew a strong rebuke from several commissioners, who didn’t appreciate White’s characterization of the vote.

“This is about our future and the one thing we must realize as elected officials in this county is that we as elected officials should not be repressing the vote of the public,” Miller said. “By not allowing them to do that we’re suppressing the vote. We should let them decide if they should tax themselves a half cent for 15 years.”