Transportation Sales Tax: South DeKalb Wants Rail Too
Decatur Metro | August 9, 2011No real surprise here. But still it’s a huge hurdle for the Transportation Roundtable, who’s selecting the list of projects that will go before voters next fall. From the AJC…
DeKalb County politicians, activists and residents have united to fight a proposed penny sales tax for regional transportation plans unless the final project list gets trains running in south DeKalb.
So far, the 5.4-mile rail line to link the Indian Creek MARTA station to Wesley Chapel Road, known as the I-20 project, isn’t a transit priority for the roundtable executive committee that is recommending projects.
DeKalb leaders held a news conference before the committee’s meeting Tuesday to urge the I-20 project be added — or else.
Everybody wants a project to call their own, but there’s only $6.1 billion to go around. Is there a happy medium here or is an all-inclusive list an impossibility?
Latest from Decaturish
I’m not sure I agree with their stance. “If we don’t get our way, the whole thing is off the table.” Seems a bit extreme.
I tend to agree with them. The plan as I understand it calls for extension of rail to Gwinnett and Cobb–counties that don’t support MARTA now and will not support existing MARTA operations with the new tax–while the southside of DeKalb will be paying ANOTHER penny and arguably have less access than south Gwinnett, for example. I don’t blame them for rejecting the plan as it is formulated currently.
Have not been paying as close attention as I should. If your understanding is correct, then I agree with your take on this new development.
We pay for MARTA. Other counties don’t. We pay for Grady. Other counties don’t. Now we are suppose to pay another 1% and get nothing except maybe buses running between Decatur and Emory? Woofrickinhoo!
seriously.
i’d be all for the entire rest of the metro area having the tax.
At the same time, if I were in charge of Marta,
I’d have trains following 285, following i-20 through the city and 10 miles out on each side, and the same for 75 and 85.
I’d also have rail service/stations near each of the major colleges, i.e. Emory, Ga Tech, KSU, (GSU, Olgelthorpe already have them).
I’d also have street cars (like Toronto, Portland, etc) running down ponce from avondale station to the varsity, and on peachtree from its start to brookhaven and piedmont from the capitol to a few blocks past peachtree.
I’d also have high speed rail going from atlanta to athens, athens to augusta, augusta to savannah, savannah to macon, macon to atlanta, macon to columbus, columbus to atlanta, columbus to albany, albany to savannah, albany to macon,
Show me how to do that for $6.1 billion and I’ll work to elect you governor.
Good for them. The 1-20 project should be part of the plan.
I’m a huuuuge transit supporter…have been since I found out that I could take the 123 bus from Glenlake to Market Sq. Mall as an adolescent. That’s neither here nor there…
The important thing is to bring the region into the system. By only having DeKalb and Fulton funding Marta…we have fallen behind. Does the 2 cent vs. 1 cent issue need to be addressed? Sure. Is it worth throwing a temper tantrum over BEFORE the referendum? No. At the end of the day, if the referendum passes with a lot of transit, Fulton and DeKalb will be in great shape thanks to the 40 years of Marta taxes regardless.
What I have an issue with is DeKalb drawing a line in the sand over the I-20 line and Burrell Ellis complete lack of a grip on reality…
“‘Transit addresses traffic and belongs where there is the greatest concentration of people,’ DeKalb CEO Burrell Ellis said.”
Well…that’s great…but the problem is that the proposed I-20 line doesn’t go to the greatest concentration of people. South DeKalb is not as big in population (total or density) as many of the other areas that need transit in the region. The Census shows that trend is increasing…the I-20 corridor is one of the hardest hit areas in terms of population loss over the last 10 years. And as far as ‘traffic’…the I-20 corridor is home to the largest concentration of homes that do not own cars in the region. (http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/legacy?url=http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/usgrid/maps.jsp) I’m not a traffic expert…but how does building a line to areas with fewer drivers help relieve traffic?
There are solid arguments for the I-20 line (assuming it runs downtown to W-C and then North into Indian Creek)…growth potential along many of those neighborhoods like Grant Park, Ormewood, East Atlanta is very large and a commuter option from outside 285 along I-20 is needed…but this initiative has to be about the region and from a regional perspective, there are a lot of other more pressing needs in serving to ease traffic and a greater population than the I-20 line. Making sure DeKalb gets its fair share? Great idea. Drawing a line in the sand over a line that doesn’t even serve your stated goals…? Burrell Ellis, ladies and gentlemen!
“I’m not a traffic expert…but how does building a line to areas with fewer drivers help relieve traffic?”
Transit also addresses transportation needs and economic opportunity. In other words, giving people who don’t own cars a way to get places means they have more employment options (or maybe even one as opposed to none).
I’ll try not to be snarky in my reply and just say ‘yes, I agree’.
However, and this was the point I was making, the justification for this piece of rail that is now DeKalb’s hill to die on, from the mouth of Burrell Ellis, is to relieve traffic and to deliver transit to the most people. My guess is that he really means “I need some rail that I can deliver to my political base” and he is trying to guise it in ‘relieve traffic’ talk..that’s my point.
The last thing we need is DeKalb taking a stance on this vote that is more politically driven rather than being driven by actual transportation needs in the region.
I get what you’re saying. And I’m no fan of Burrell Ellis. But just because he’s championing it for a wrong-headed reason, doesn’t mean it isn’t the thing to do. Doing the right thing for the wrong reason isn’t always best, but in this case it might be, IMO.
I don’t doubt that he is attempting to appeal to his base; that’s what politicians do. But I think he is right to try and get the most transit for DeKalb that he possibly can. If he and, more importantly, his constituency believe the current list is unfair without more transit in S.DeKalb, then he is right to make it clear what changes would have to be made.
Just vote “no”.
“Does the 2 cent vs. 1 cent issue need to be addressed? Sure. Is it worth throwing a temper tantrum over BEFORE the referendum?”
Just how would it be addressed AFTER the referendum? And how is speaking up for their interests throwing a “temper tantrum”? As for the population differences, I’d be willing to wager more people on that side of the county would actually use new rail than on the Lindberg to Emory side.
Because…throwing it before the referendum means possibly losing the revenue from Cobb, Gwinnett, etc. and being stuck with the status quo. I think once you have everyone paying into the system, it will be an easier fix to try to find an equitable balance.
And speaking up for their interests is one thing…declaring “DeKalb won’t support it w/o this piece of rail” is akin to throwing the baby out with the bath water. It’s irrational and silly and in my book, like a temper tantrum when you have a press conference less than a week after the project gets dropped off the ‘tentative’ list.
Finally, I’d be willing to bet your wrong on the Clifton corridor. That’s a key connection b/w a dense area of the county and the job centers where those folks work (like Buckhead, Perimeter, etc.).
“I think once you have everyone paying into the system,”
Except that won’t be the case. The new tax can only be for new capital projects (unless I misunderstand the bill), not existing MARTA operating expenses. Granted, the new money COULD free up MARTA to redirect current capital dollars to operating costs, as MARTA officials seem to believe will happen. This also depends on the state permanently eliminating the 50/50 capital to operations ratio that MARTA is stuck with. I think these are big ifs, and I’d like to see some evidence that S.Dekalb would at least get more bus service as a benefit of paying another penny.
` Is there a happy medium here or is an all-inclusive list an impossibility?
I would respond if I understood the choice being offered.
` Everybody wants a project to call their own, but there’s only $6.1 billion to go around.
I think this runs deeper than “I get mine.” The value returned to DeKalb is looking like a bad deal.
We are assuming there is $6.1 billion. Who wants to bet that actual collections will be far short of that?
I think it’s important to keep a regional perspective on this. Look at how the Atlanta Metro area compares to other areas in the country and then ask yourself what our options are. We’ve been going back and forth on transportation funding for years. Now we have a chance to fund projects with a dedicated 1 cent tax. If it doesn’t pass, there is no Plan B. How long do you think it would take for the region to come up with another idea that might create some funding?
Decatur (& DeKalb) has benefited from the MARTA tax. We have 3 stations pretty much in Decatur’s city limits. I think you can say that we’ve gotten a fair return on that 1 cent tax.
Also, the tax will generate funds at the local level that Decatur (& DeKalb) can spend however they wish. That’s important too.
A lot will depend on what projects make the list and it’s interesting to see that -so far – a lot of transit projects are in the mix. But I think we have to face reality and realize that parts of the metro area are going to be solely interested in road projects – transit isn’t really an option for them. So the mix is going to have to consider a variety of needs and how best to tackle the most important ones with limited funds.
Decatur Mayor Bill Floyd is in the thick of this – he is one of the two representatives for DeKalb County and he serves on the 5 member Executive Committee – they are making the first pick of the projects. I know he is putting his heart and soul into this. I believe he has that “regional perspective” and Decatur is lucky to have him at the table.
Hi, Fred. Thanks for offering your 2 cents.
` If it doesn’t pass, there is no Plan B.
If you ask me, that’s dangerous (non- ) thinking.
` How long do you think it would take for the region to come up with another idea that might create some funding?
As it stands, 2 years.
Here’s one possibility. (Both Cobb and Gwinnett submitted expensive transit projects; both currently have a local TSPLOST for roads.) If the TIA tax fails at referendum in 2012, local match for GDOT grants will be 30%. Then the roundtable can adopt guidelines for an all-transit project list, and the resulting constrained project list will have large transit projects in the big four. In 2014, the big four can carry the ballot measure. All ten counties will benefit from significantly more, new transit than under the current scheme; Cobb and Gwinnett will be able to leverage their local TSPLOST penny for triple the road capital when the local match for GDOT grants goes 30% to 10%.
” In 2014, the big four can carry the ballot measure”
Why do you think this would happen in 2014? It’s my sense that it’s going to be difficult to pass any tax increase, even if they move the referendum to the general election day. It’s hard for me to see it having any chance in a non-presidential election year (though I grant that a lot could change in 3 years).
I do agree that there should be a back-up plan; if this fails I think its going to be a significant blow to future job growth, whether you like the plan or not.
` Why do you think this would happen in 2014?
24 months is the minimum penalty duration prescribed by the Transportation Investment Act. (Also, I presume that some other counties will want out of the penalty box.)
“… for at least 24 months and until such time as a special district sales and use tax is approved.”
“But I think we have to face reality and realize that parts of the metro area are going to be solely interested in road projects –”
True, but the other reality is that, generally speaking, the people who are willing to pay more tax are public transit supporters. Those who are interested in building more roads know this, so there is no reason not to fight for a higher percentage of transit from a negotiating standpoint. Remember, this is an all-in vote; it doesn’t matter if Cobb and Gwinnett voters reject the plan if DeKalb and Fulton voters support it by wide margins. I believe it will take big majorities in Fulton and DeKalb to pass this, and I think there will have to be more transit than roads in the plan to get that majority.
Of all the folks who need the transportation, it is the folks in South DeKalb, BUT, we must come up with ways to encourage the use of the system by making it work sort of like the big cities of NYC, DC, San Francisco, etc.
I’m guessing folks who say I-20E is not “dense” enough have never been on I-20 during rush hour. EVER! That corridor needs is as bad as I-85 north, if not more since that road probably reached its expandability limit. The fact that DeKalb has ALWAYS paid for MARTA would mean that DeKalb transit projects should be at the top of the list, not at the bottom.
The “whining” comments are silly and show a lack of respect. Have Cobb and Gwinnett whined when they’ve opted out in the past?
“I’m guessing folks who say I-20E is not “dense” enough have never been on I-20 during rush hour. EVER!”
Absolutely right. And though it may not be a major factor, I’d imagine some of the people coming and going from Rockdale might like this too.
Exactly!! I avoid I-20 AT ALL COST from 7-9am and 3-7pm. I view it through the same lens as I-85 North. It’s BRUTAL. I’m sure the Conyers & Covington folks would like the line to go all the way to Stonecrest. That would actually make a lot of sense.
And those aren’t fluffy people in those cars. In fact, they appear quite dense.