No Case For a Sales Tax Hike, No More Talking About Stalking - Move to Plan B

The Tampa Tribune today published Ken Roberts Letter to the Editor titled ‘No case’ for referendum for sales tax increase. We are reposting his well thought out letter on the Eye and also include some of our own editorial comments.

‘No case’ for referendum for sales tax increase

Should Hillsborough County commissioners vote to put a sales tax increase referendum on the 2016 ballot? Regardless what the specific plan is, should we raise sales taxes to pay for it? A careful look reveals no case for a sales tax increase referendum.

First and foremost: The county already has the money. We have been told for years now that there is no money available to fund transportation improvements, and we must have a new revenue source. But if you ignore what they have been saying and watch what they are doing, you find this is nonsense. During the 2016 budgeting process about $121 million of new money was found. While saying transportation is the top priority for the county, commissioners spent only $8 million of this extra money on transportation.

The people have already donated $121 million. There is no case for us to raise taxes on ourselves for another $117 million a year for the next 30 years. Transportation improvements are expensive enough without paying for them twice.

Second, there are those on the board who say, “We believe in democracy; let’s put it on the ballot and let the people decide.” But, again, if you ignore what they say and watch what they do, this position doesn’t hold water, either. While they are saying they want to let the people decide, what they have been doing is working to deny our right to decide on another important tax item that was scheduled to appear on the 2016 ballot.

State law requires voters to review and re-authorize taxing authorities. In 2016 we were scheduled to vote on whether to continue the taxing authority of the Children’s Board of Hillsborough County, but supporters of a sales tax increase had that item taken off the 2016 ballot. They thought that two tax issues on the same ballot would spell doom for at least one of them, so they went to our state legislators and asked them to act to get it off the ballot to increase the odds of passing a sales tax increase. Our state legislators quietly passed a law and took it off the ballot.

If the county commission believes so strongly in the people having the right to decide, then why take away the people’s right to decide on continuation of the Children’s Board’s taxing authority? The answer is: They are not interested in our right to decide. They are interested in passing a sales tax increase.

Commissioner Sandra Murman has offered an alternative to a sales tax increase for funding transportation improvements. Three components are involved: a 5-cent increase in the gas tax ($25 million); a new mobility fee to pay for the impact of development on the existing system ($30 million); and a reprioritizing of the budget to dedicate a significant amount of new revenues to a transportation fund. Dedicating 50 percent of the $121 million of new money from the 2016 budget would mean $60 million. Add that to the gas tax and mobility fee, and that’s a total of $115 million per year to fund improvements — with no new sales tax increase!

We need to oppose putting a sales tax increase on the ballot and insist the county use the three-step funding approach to improve transportation as outlined above. A sales tax increase is not needed, and a vote to put one on the ballot is a vote for a sales tax increase. Tell the commissioners to vote “no” on putting this on the ballot and use the money they have.


Ken Roberts
Apollo Beach
The writer is with Citizens Organized for Sound Transportation.

——————————————————————————————— 

Roberts brings up the point how local power brokers and Children's Board lobbyists successfully lobbied Tallahassee last year to get the Children's Board property tax, up for reauthorization in 2016, off the 2016 ballot. Back then the Hillsborough County power brokers were fearful of having two tax referendums on the 2016 ballot fearing they would both be defeated. We never heard a peep about that action from the "let the voters vote on the transportation sales tax hike" crowd. That action actually disenfranchised voters this year from voicing whether to reauthorize the property tax for the Children's Board which recently had to deal with their own cronyism issues.

Received via a public records request was the text message thread below dated 5/21/2015 between crony Beth Leytham and County Administrator Mike Merrill. How often did Leytham meet with the editorial boards as a conduit between her and Merrill to influence Merrill? Leytham informs Merrill that the Governor signed the bill that got the Children's Board property tax reauthorization off the 2016 ballot. Merrill answers Leytham with a hand clap emoticon to display his "glee"and responds "the way is being made clear" [for his huge proposed sales tax hike to get on the 2016 ballot]. Is that nauseating?

Text messages between Beth Leytham and Mike Merrill
on 5/21/2015 (click to enlarge)

5/21/2015 is two weeks before the 6/11/2015 Policy Leadership Group (PLG) meeting where the Parsons/Leytham/Merrill cabal proposed another huge 30 year one-half percent sales tax hike - a huge tax hike for a plan that did not even exist. The cabal knew from the get-go that another sales tax hike referendum was the answer. That is why Merrill was cheerfully clapping when told the Children's Board property tax reauthorization got off the 2016 ballot.  

I have been a consultant and have had consultants work for me and I have never seen communication like this between consultants and the high level executive that hired them. 

Is the language used in this text thread professional? Is the language used in this text thread how consultants and their employer normally communicate? Is the language used in this text thread appropriate between the highest level bureaucrat in the county and the politically well connected PR crony Leytham? 

What consultant and high level executive talks about stalking? 

When Noah Pransky first broke his story about Beth Leytham back last September, Merrill had the audacity to tell Pransky he did not even know who Beth Leytham was in August 2014. That was when Leytham sent Merrill a text message regarding the hiring of a transportation expert [Parsons Brinckerhoff her client] with "communication team in tow" [a team of one - her]. 

That is laughable. How does Merrill get from saying he did not know who Leytham was in August 2014 to having the text message thread above in May 2015 saying it's ok to be stalked by his consultant.

There is something very wrong down at County Center that has enabled cronies and close associates to wield such undue power and influence, and enabled a powerful bureaucracy to spin out of control overreaching its own authority.

The dark cloud hanging over Go Hillsborough is not going away. The process was flawed resulting in a flawed plan. The ethics of the entire debacle stinks. What business community will support and sink $2 million into an advocacy campaign to support such a crony flawed smelly mess? 

Roberts LTE lays out the fiscal reality that we do not need a sales tax hike to fund our roads and transportation. 

There is a way out but the commissioners must use their own political capital which is what they are elected to do. They must dump Go Hillsborough and reign in the bureaucrats to bring integrity back into the process. They must do fiscal due diligence to reprioritize our current budget and use the powers they already have to start funding our roads and transportation NOW.  

Stop pursuing a sales tax hike and stop any further talking about any type of stalking.

We must move on to Plan B!

Update:  Text thread that reflects the names of the Leytham/Merrill text thread can be found here.

It's All Been Corrupted and Compromised: Shut Down the PLG and Go Hillsborough NOW!

The Eye has always been skeptical of the transportation initiative and the Policy Leadership Group (PLG) since it was created in March 2013. How could we not be skeptical when the very first participants invited to participate were the rail cartel. On August 4, 2013 I posted A Solution looking for a Problem and said way back then

We need problem solving public policies not agenda based policies. So yes as Salinero stated I will be watching this process closely and suggest all taxpayers in Hillsborough County do as well. Or hold on to your wallets!

How prescient....because the process ended up creating a $1.35 million taxpayer funded crony mess resulting in a flawed proposed huge $3.5 - 7 Billion sales tax hike.

No one at County Center or the county commissioners can feign ignorance about this mess. They were warned and those warnings are publicly documented.

We have documented the cronyism, the deception, the flawed process, the half-truths, the flat out lies, what appears to be violations of our Sunshine laws, what could be violations of our electioneering laws, violations of provisions within Parson's CCNA umbrella contract and the phoniness that has surrounded the entire Go Hillsborough campaign.

The problems are not going away. Certainly Mike Merrill, Parsons, Bob Clifford, Beth Leytham and the county commissioners cannot think these issues are going to go into hiding and be swept under the rug while law enforcement is investigating.

They better think again. 

WTSP's Noah Pransky's latest 10 Investigates reveals that some county commissioners intentionally and consistently use their personal email accounts to have private discussions about county business. As reported by Pransky, the commissioners did not hand over these emails when requested via Statute 119 public records requests until a private citizen threatened legal action. 

Those public records – never produced for 10 Investigates by commissioners – reveal that not all the emails were personal in nature, with many dealing with county-related topics such as transportation expansion (now dubbed "Go Hillsborough") as well as coordination on newspaper op-eds Leytham helped the commissioners write. 

The 85 emails from Hagan and 27 emails from Murman also demonstrate how frequently the commissioners use their personal AOL accounts to discuss public business. And the failure to turn the documents over to 10 Investigates, despite several requests, raises new questions about whether additional electronic communications may exist between the county's most powerful politicians and one of its most powerful behind-the-scenes operatives.

Hmmm Sound familiar? There's no private servers sitting in a bathroom but these commissioners intentionally used their personal email accounts to secretly discuss county business with the politically well connected PR lobbyist Beth Leytham. How many more secret emails or text messages exist like these and what do they say? Taxpayers and voters deserve to know.

Leytham has been dubbed the "Queen of Damage Control" but we'll shorten it to "Queen Beth" because she is now Queen of all the damage she herself has created but cannot control, regardless of how many times the Tribune tries to circle their wagons to cover for her.

Queen Beth blurs all lines between the many hats she wears -- political consultant, close advisor, close friend, close associate, lobbyist, campaign consultant, private citizen, candidate volunteer. She uses those hats for easy access to the electeds, Mike Merrill, the media and other so-called power brokers. Queen Beth rarely discloses which hat she is wearing when. Does that enable her to circumvent lobbyists requirements and campaign filing disclosures?

What did we learn from Pransky's latest report and the private emails? Certainly more questions need answering. 

Confirms our previous claims that the Go Hillsborough campaign, County staff, County Attorney Chip Fletcher, Parsons, Queen Beth and some county commissioners violated our broad Sunshine Laws by refusing to timely comply with Statute 119 Public Records Requests.

"To paraphrase Attorney General Pam Bondi, access to public records is not up to the whim of public officials — it is an enforceable right of the people. Our elected officials, and those who work on their behalf, have to remember that they have a legal duty to produce all records related to public business pursuant to a request for such records."

Confirms that Queen Beth was running a "shadow" Go Hillsborough campaign totally in the dark outside the public view.

Confirms our claims the intention of the Go Hillsborough campaign was always to result in putting another huge 30 year sales tax referendum on the ballot. 

Murman apologizes while Hagan hits back with a full page letter to Pransky ala the known Leytham style of deflecting, doubling down and pointing fingers at others.  

How can our own electeds, their staff and the County Attorney's office not fully understand our broad Sunshine laws and how to comply with them? 

What "imprecise communications" is County Attorney Chip Fletcher referring to that he stated his office was taking responsibility for? 

This private email exchange between Queen Beth and Hagan, received through a public records request and referenced in Pransky's latest report, provides "their private" Go Hillsborough referendum timeline. 

Private email exchange between Leytham and Hagan
 re: timeline for referendum (click to enlarge or click link above)

How can Queen Beth be scheming secretly with Hagan in April about a referendum timeline? She was being paid hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars at that time to run the campaign and Go Hillsborough was telling the public in April that recommendations on funding options were to be made much later in the process. 

Should the county demand their money back from her? She was circumventing the very process she was being paid to run.

Also, this email exchange occurred at the very same time Queen Beth had conducted a Go Hillsborough poll at taxpayer expense in April. Suddenly Hagan "jumped the shark" and publicly came out for a sales tax referendum almost 2 months before the tax hike was formally proposed at the June 11 PLG meeting. 

It is apparent that Queen Beth gave Hagan the poll results back then but she refused to provide any poll information to citizens who requested copies of the information via Statute 119 Public Records Request. 

How did Queen Beth communicate the poll results to Hagan? Who all did she communicate them to - any other county commissioners, Merrill.....and when did that communication occur?

What is this petition drive Leytham refers to in the email exchange? Has that ever been publicly discussed? It obviously was discussed with County Administrator Mike Merrill because she states he opposed it. Who else was a petition drive discussed with - any other county commissioners?

Who is this "professional grassroots" campaign - costing $450K - Queen Beth refers to? Who was she orchestrating that strategy with? Isn't the use of "professional"and  "grassroots" together in the same sentence an oxymoron? Perhaps Queen Beth should check Webster's dictionary for the meaning of each. A "professional grassroots" campaign costing $450K is called astroturfing - the deceptive tactic of simulating grassroots support for a cause undertaken by people or organizations with interest in shaping public opinion.

As we posted previously, the Parsons contract is Risky Business to taxpayers. The CCNA procurement process used to hand Parsons their million dollar no bid blank check contract to create a transportation plan was never intended to be used for campaign work, micro-targeting of voters, polling and electioneering work for putting a sales tax referendum on the ballot. 

The Go Hillsborough campaign collected lots of rich data, rich voter information, contact information, etc. at taxpayer expense. The county needs written contractual assurances from Parsons that all the information and data gathered is owned by the County, has been given to the County and no one associated with the Parsons/Leytham/Go Hillsborough campaign can hand any of this rich information collected with taxpayer dollars to anyone except the county. That ensures that anyone may access any and all the information collected with taxpayer dollars via Statute 119 public records requests. 

The county commissioners must step up to protect the taxpayers and hold themselves accountable.

The county commissioners must terminate the tainted Parsons contract immediately.

No more taxpayer money should go to Parsons and all activity with Parsons should be stopped. Tainted Parsons should not be brought back at taxpayer expense to present any plan created through this flawed and corrupted process. 

The PLG was the group instrumental in creating the Go Hillsborough debacle. We now know the PLG has been compromised and corrupted too. We always said that way too much of the PLG effort was being orchestrated behind the green curtain, outside of Sunshine with little transparency. The PLG must be part of the law enforcement investigation. 

The county commissioners must terminate the Parsons contract immediately, cancel the November 5 PLG meeting, shut down the PLG and end the phony Go Hillsborough campaign.

Because it's all been corrupted.

Bring Back Integrity, Remove Merrill from the Transportation Initiative

It is unfortunate that the county commissioners voted at the October 7 BOCC meeting to bring tainted Parsons Brinckerhoff back to present their tainted Go Hillsborough plan at the November 5 Transportation Policy Leadership Ship Group Meeting. The tainted Parsons contract should have been terminated instead. 

The taxpayers are now forced to pay tainted Parsons hundreds of thousands of dollars more while they and the county are being investigated by law enforcement. How tone deaf is that? As we posted previously, the Parsons contract is Risky Business.

We now wonder what County Administrator Mike Merrill may be orchestrating between now and November 5. What buttons and levers are being pushed by the Wizard of Oz behind the green curtain and outside of Sunshine, especially since the commissioners ridiculously scheduled a workshop immediately after the November 5 PLG meeting. What are these folks thinking?

In this TBT article published recently Merrill sounded off:

County Administrator Mike Merrill said part of the problem stems from the ease with which opponents can organize, while backers — who range from homeowner associations to chambers of commerce to concerned citizens — lack a unified voice.

"What they really need to do is let commissioners know that this is very important to them," Merrill said. "Because, mostly, all the board is hearing from mostly is this small band of folks that have been hammering away." (emphasis mine)

How can Merrill honestly make a statement like that?

Merrill has been touring the county for the last year and a half like an unelected County Mayor making presentations pushing for another huge sales tax referendum.  

The presentation Merrill presented titled "A Comprehensive Mobility Proposal can be found here. 

Fourteen pages of Merrill's 35 page presentation is about fixed guideways with numerous pictures of high cost rail, including this one that looks like an accident waiting to happen and  a way to increase congestion.

From Merrill's presentation - train, car lane and bike lane
 An accident waiting to happen

Just THREE pages of Merrill's 35 page Mobility presentation is non-transit needs. It's called "non-transit" and not road needs because that bucket is much more than desperately needed road repaving, road improvements and road projects. The non-transit needs includes sidewalks, bike lanes, trails and expensive complete streets.

From a public records request submitted, I received a list of the organizations that the transportation tax hike presentations were made to. That list can be found here. Note that the tab of the spreadsheet is titled "Coordination meetings". Is that legal?

Merrill's "Coordination Meetings" with local power brokers
and so-called stakeholders

Merrill, his deputy Lucia Garsys and Parsons Brinckerhoff's Bob Clifford have presented to all the local power brokers. County and city of Tampa staff also participated in those meetings. Hagan participated in some of the power broker meetings as well we understand.

Some of those power broker meetings with Merrill, Hagan, other county staffers and city of Tampa staffers were private and not open to the general public. The private advocacy campaign to support a sales tax hike referendum was discussed with county and city of Tampa staff - such as raising money, who would lead the advocacy campaign and when would the campaign start. Discussing an advocacy campaign in these meetings goes way beyond the bounds of educating or reaching out to stakeholders for their input about the transportation issue. 

To digress for a moment. What exactly was said at those meetings? Who has been already been trying to raise money for an advocacy campaign for a sales tax hike referendum that is not even been on the ballot? Have there been any violations of Sunshine laws? Have there been any violations of our electioneering laws? It is ILLEGAL for Merrill, county staff or city of Tampa staff to be discussing or "coordinating" about an advocacy campaign. The law enforcement investigation must find out if any illegal or unethical activity occurred at any of these meetings - perhaps they need to interview those who participated and attended.

Merrill and company presented to numerous taxpayer funded entities, the Chambers, the leader of the rail cartel - Tampa Bay Partnership, the Downtown Partnership, the leaders of civic and community associations, engineering groups and homeowners associations. 

Merrill even presented to 2 partisan Democrat groups. Is that legal or ethical for the County Administrator to be making policy making presentations to a partisan group and to only one political party?

Merrill used his County Administrator power as if he was an elected policy maker to speak to all these groups, organizations and associations and push for a huge sales tax hike. Merrill and company used their "bully pulpit" to speak to thousands of people in an attempt to garner support for a huge sales tax hike referendum.

Now Merrill complains whines that all those people he presented to, and somehow he assumes are all backers of his huge tax hike, lack a unified voice. That is a ridiculous assumption and a ridiculous position. Merrill needs to stop blaming others for the mess he helped create and that occurred on his watch. 

The reality is Merrill and company have been trying to sell a bad, flawed product created by a flawed, crony, unethical and perhaps illegal process. 

Proposing a huge tax hike for a plan that does not exist is totally backwards to any true project management/program management methodology. The reason this effort is so backwards is because the answer was already decided at the beginning. The County handed Parsons a Work Order issued under an umbrella Miscellaneous ENGINEERING Services contract procured through a CCNA process intended for ENGINEERING Services, with a Scope of Work titled "Hillsborough County Transportation REFERENDUM Support".

No wonder there is no unified voice of support. Who wants to back a huge sales tax hike  proposed by the Merrill/Clifford/Leytham team that is now under a law enforcement investigation? 

Merrill should never have been "handed" responsibility for the critical but politically charged transportation issue in January 2014. How did that even happen? 

Somehow Merrill "magically" become the facilitator of the Transportation Policy Leadership Group initiative after Herb Marlowe, the facilitator the county hired in June 2013, left in December 2013. The county commissioners never publicly discussed, never voted on or never took any formal action in the Sunshine to appoint or assign Merrill total responsibility for the transportation initiative. 

That decision was done behind the green curtain and outside of Sunshine. Why? Perhaps because we have separation of powers in our County Charter and the electeds cannot delegate their policy making power to the County Administrator, an unelected bureaucrat.

The County Administrator's role is to implement the policies decided by the electeds. Of course he can provide advice and recommendations to the county commissioners. However it is not the role of the County Administrator, an unelected bureaucrat accountable to no voter, to run around the county on the taxpayer dime acting like a policy maker. 

Merrill had to expand our local government and hire numerous high level staff to do his day job while he focused on transportation. 

At the same time the county was doling out hundreds of thousands of dollars to politically well connected PR lobbyist Beth Leytham via the crony Parsons no bid contract, Merrill hired a new county Communications Director, another brand new high level staff position. While Merrill grows his bureaucracy, the county refuses to appropriately fund our roads and infrastructure.

Merrill is tainted because he's been front and center of this entire transportation initiative mess. His credibility on the transportation issue is shot and trust has been lost.

Merrill has turned the policy making power totally upside down at County Center and that must stop.

The county commissioners must protect the taxpayers and take back control and leadership of our local transportation issue. 

The county commissioners must disengage themselves from the cronies, the lobbyists and the special interests pushing a sales tax hike agenda.

The county commissioners must remove Mike Merrill from the transportation issue.

Because integrity must be brought back to the transportation issue.

Then You Win

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

That quote... really an imagined quote mis-attributed to Mahatma Gandhi, sums up the attitude of the local media and the politicians regarding Go Hillsborough.

We reported over the past year numerous issues with Go Hillsborough, and regularly reached out to county leaders.

They ignored us.

Go Hillsborough and the Transportation Policy Leadership Group refused to consider any alternatives besides a sales tax increase. Only the single sales tax increase was proposed... or was it two? Yet there was no real plan to build anything, only a promise to spend. They did not consider impact or mobility fees, they ignored the TBX plans, refused to develop any real plans, as if their lack of action developing feasible transportation plans over the last decade was our fault. What do we know?

Beth Leytham, working her magic "because I'm good" PR, deflecting her own creation of the mess called Go Hillsborough:

“Actually I don’t think this is just coming to light because of the TV,” Leytham said. “I think the tea partiers and anti-tax types have been talking about this for months and months.”

They laughed at us.

From the Tribune's editorial on September 19,

But tea-party opponents of the effort will look for opportunities to drive a wedge into every crease that opens in the process, no matter how small or trivial. In this case, they have the appearance of cozy relationships between elected officials and a contractor.

No. Tea Party opponents are not driving a wedge into every crease in the obviously flawed Go Hillsborough process. The Go Hillsborough team is quite good at doing that to themselves. We just report it. The Tribune presented no evidence otherwise. Only now the Tribune states the audit needs to

Eliminating that appearance [of cozy relationships between elected officials and a contractor] should be done quickly so the public can be assured the effort is about improving transportation and not about improving the bottom lines of contractors and the friends of elected officials.

Eliminating the appearance? Or should we get to the truth?

Many others besides the Tea Party, have come out against Go Hillsborough, from the Sierra Club to La Gaceta. The big story was broke by Noah Pransky. Are Sierra Club, Patrick Manteiga, and Noah Pransky Tea Party? So what gives, Tampa Tribune?

The Tribune has a lot of credibility to lose here. They've refused to acknowledge their meetings and  own "cozy relationship" with Beth Leytham, the focus of much of this investigation. Why not? 

The Tribune, severely damaged by their unacknowledged relationship with Beth Leythan, the center of the controversy, is leading the fight.

Here's a Tribune "Letter of the Day" from September 30.

Having lived through the Greenlight Pinellas war, I see another tea party activist using the same tactics to denigrate a thoroughly reasonable proposal that would benefit the entire community in West-Central Florida. Sharon Calvert is using the same methods that some No Tax For Tracks members used to unjustly defeat Greenlight Pinellas. One member repeatedly misled local municipal councils and went to Denver and brought back a totally erroneous report on Denver’s light rail. She constantly smeared PSTA management, calling into question some of their actions which in hindsight proved to be perfectly legal and reasonable. Now I see Calvert using the same misrepresentations to try to defeat Go Hillsborough — all in the name of “no new taxes.”

The fact the Tribune allowed this fact free LTE to be the Letter of the Day, much less published at all, is clearly a set up.

"Unjustly" defeated Greenlight? It was justly defeated 62 - 38%.

"Smeared PSTA management, calling into question some of their actions which in hindsight proved to be perfectly legal and reasonable."

Seriously? Which is worse in your world, an erroneous report on Denver or the federal government demanding repayment of misappropriated funds, that was not judged "perfectly legal and reasonable", but was in fact judged potentially criminal?

"This is how the tea party is destroying America."

No. This is people like Dave Stanton who are destroying America, by purposely ignoring the malfeasance and dishonorable behavior if it fits their agenda, and tarnishing those that expect more from our public servants.

Remember Greenlight Pinellas, when proponents stated only the tea party was against it. Remember 62-38. We're all tea partiers now.

And weeks later, Joe Henderson has yet another column, on the Sam Rashid story that keeps on giving him columns... so many, I've lost count.

Yes Rashid used crude language. About a month ago.

Can we move on, Joe?

Unless, you know, you really want to write something about the real issues that we and Noah Pransky have uncovered regarding Go Hillsborough, and the valid concerns that Rashid raised.

But that's not as easy as writing another column about Rashid and his bad word.

As Joe closes,

There are legitimate reasons to raise an eyebrow about the way Go Hillsborough is being run, so let the investigation reveal specifically what’s going on and act accordingly.

No matter what turns up, though, I have a feeling it won’t be enough for Rashid and opponents of the transportation measure. I’m sure the Lindbergh baby kidnapping figures into this somehow.

That’s not true, of course, but when you hate something as badly as Sam Rashid appears to hate this proposed sales tax increase, there’s no need to wait for the facts. Those things can be inconvenient anyway.

Gosh, Joe almost took on the real issue. But he dipped back into the ad hominem attacks on Rashid, rather than the merit, or lack thereof, of his argument.

By the way Joe, did you know that Sheriff David Gee was a fundraising chair for County Commissioner Stacy White during his run for commission?

Sheriff Gee was fundraising host for Commissioner Stacy White

Now we hear that (downtown only) Tampa Mayor Buckhorn, on a trip to Denver this week, with over 100 Tampa Chamber of Commerce members inspected Denver's so called light rail success was quoted  as saying "those Tea Party cowards are funding the opposition to Go Hillsborough."

The only funding the Tea Party is contributing are our taxes that is funding the Go Hillsborough debacle.

Who's the coward, Buckhorn? Hiding behind the skirt of his "friend and advisor", not a lobbyist or campaign manager, but a political donor to him, Beth Leytham, who Buckhorn has helped direct hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to.

We'll take you on any time, downtown Bob. Name the time, name the place. Bring some facts, not pejoratives.

Then they fought us.

As we wrote last week, now they've lost. Just like 2010. Just like 2014.

We are all Tea Party now.

Then we win.

The Death of Go Hillsborough

The impact of WTSP's Noah Pranksy's ongoing reporting on Go Hillsborough, is still rumbling throughout Tampa Bay like 20 straight days of thunderstorms in July.

• Hillsborough County Commission Chair Sandy Murman proposed lobbying reform
• Former Connect Tampa Bay co-founder and President, Brian Willis, Democrat running for County Commission, got some free publicity, said he had a better plan
• Tampa City Council votes to suspend their part of the contract.
• Tampa City Council also wants to review lobbying rules
• Hillsborough County Administrator asks Sheriff David Gee to investigate Go Hillsborough
• Hillsborough County Commissioner Kevin Beckner's motion to audit the Go Hillsborough process passed the BOCC unanimously
• The Tribune's Joe Henderson wrote Go Hillsborough could hit a stop sign
• The Tribune and Times, as if choreographed by a well connected PR firm, both editorialize on putting the investigation behind Go Hillsborough quickly
• SaintPetersBlog Mitch Perry weighs in, asking if the Hillsborough County transportation tax is DOA
• The Times relishes in the schadenfreude of Go Hillsborough in a Greenlight Pinellas remembrance
• La Gaceta's Patrck Mantiega wrote "This transportation tax, from the start, has just been a vehicle for Beth Leytham and her associates to pad their pockets."
• The Tribune's Salinero attempts to explain it away
• Many other leaders have been quoted in the media voicing concerns, eager to get things cleared up, and move on.

Regardless how the audit, investigation, lobbying reforms, hand wringing, etc. turns out, Go Hillsborough is toast. Done. Fini.

But no one has really caught why Go Hillsborough is dead.

Off the tracks.. and dead!

Sure, as Henderson wrote, 

If the review finds no violations occurred, as Merrill has insisted is the case, opponents will scream it’s a whitewash and business as usual. Even if commissioners went ahead with the referendum, imagine trying to convince a skeptical public that this isn’t an inside job where taxpayers get handed the bill.

True that. With good reason.

We agree with with Mitch Perry as well:

This proposed tax was always going to be a tough sell in a county that overall doesn’t seem to believe it needs to pay more for improved transportation. Now it’ll be even tougher.

True that too.

Yet they are all missing the reality that Go Hillsborough is forever tainted by their own doing, and the real downstream impacts. They can't recover from all the mistakes, lack of transparency, and insider dealings.

They could have learned from the mistakes of the 2010 referendum, but they didn't.

They could have learned from the mistakes of Greenlight Pinellas, but they didn't.

They could have heeded the AECOM study, which we the Hillsborough County taxpayers paid for, but they didn't.

They could have awarded the contract in an open and transparent process, but they didn't.

They could have not hired a crony leader of the rail cartel, Parsons Brinkerhoff, but they didn't.

They could have separated themselves earlier from an insider/PR/lobbyist/advisor/friend who always seems to get the business her way, but they didn't.

You get the picture. 

Hillsborough County Commissioners, the transportation Policy Leadership Group, and county Administrator Mike Merrill made a series of decisions.

Each decision was the wrong decision.

Now Go Hillsborough has to live with that legacy.

Will the expected business interests throw the big money at the real campaign? Will the same businesses that got behind Moving Hillsborough Forward in 2010, and Greenlight Pinellas in 2014 get near this thing?

The Tampa Bay Partnership, Downtown Partnership, Chambers of Commerce, Westshore Alliance, real estate developers, land use attorneys, big banks, real estate associations, et al.

Now they won't touch this thing.

If they do, they'll be tainted as well.

Without the corporate money from a multi-million dollar PAC, there will be no campaign, and no corporate support.  

Without that, no Go Hillsborough.

Time to cut our losses.

It gives me no great pleasure to write this, as we have to fix our transportation problems now.  But it is their own doing.

As we've asked before, and now more than ever.

Where is Plan B?

Time to dump Go Hillsborough, and get started on a new plan. We can start now. Work with the current budget, develop quick wins, demonstrate success, and rebuild confidence.

Before we go for the moon shot.

Wizard of Oz Orchestrating Another 30 year Tax Hike: Part 2

After the Hillsborough County Transportation Policy Leadership Group (PLG) took a ceremonial vote to continue pursuing Go Hillsborough's proposed huge 30 year $3.5 Billion sales tax hike, we began revisiting how did we get here.  

Our previous post identified there is a Wizard of Oz down at County Center who is manipulating the process - much of it outside the Sunshine and behind the green curtain.

We'll pick up where we previously left off with the hostile takeover of HART put on the back burner, for now. Wizardry could not dampen the distraction of that issue.

At the May 28, 2014 PLG meeting, it was announced by then facilitator Herb Marlowe that the transit projects were to be presented at the next PLG June 2014 meeting. We remember vividly because Mayor Buckhorn informed us all that rail would be included. The transcript and video of the May 28 meeting can be found here. This is from the transcript of the May 28, 2014 PLG meeting:

>>BOB BUCKHORN: I THINK IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT -- AND OBVIOUSLY EVERYTHING HAS SEEN THAT WE PUT A RAIL PROJECT ONTHIS LIST, SO NO SURPRISE TO ANYBODY, IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.WE'RE GOING TO GET THIS DONE.

>>MARLOWE: WELL, LET ME JUST PREVIEW AGAIN OUR JUNE MEETING. WE'LL BE PRESENTING TO YOU THE FIRST PARTS OF THE BUSINESS PLAN, WHICH WILL INCLUDE ALL THE KEY ECONOMIC SPACES AND WHAT THOSE PROJECTS WILL COST; TRANSIT....

>>MARLOWE:  IF I MAY JUST MENTION, WE WERE PLANNING FOR MORE OF A FOCUS ON TRANSIT IN OUR NEXT WORKSHOP.

What happened next? 

No transit projects were EVER presented to the PLG.

Suddenly the June and July PLG meetings were abruptly cancelled by Merrill. The Wizard of Oz needed some breathing room behind the curtain to manipulate some levers and buttons.

The cancellation of the June PLG meeting to present transit projects occurred conveniently right after the AEComm transit assessment was completed in May. That assessment stated that Hillsborough County should invest in transit prudently and cautiously and that we do not have transit ridership high enough to qualify for federal funding of fixed guideway solutions.

Apparently, the Wizard also did not want to rain on the MPO's (Metropolitan Planning Organization) parade. Why? Because the MPO presented at the July 21, 2014 HART board meeting a downtown rail plan study they did in conjunction with the Downtown Partnership. 

While there were no open and public meetings in June or July last year, nothing stopped. The Wizard's levers and buttons continued to be orchestrated behind the green curtain.

Coincidentally, last June County Administrator Mike Merrill, in his newly empowered role as Hillsborough County's first unelected County Mayor, started taking a presentation out on the road advocating for another 30 year sales tax hike.

We posted here what Merrill presented to the HART board at their June 9, 2014 meeting. At that time transit projects were still planned to be presented at the June 26 PLG meeting.

Merrill stated there will be a comprehensive list of proposed projects at the next Policy Leadership Group meeting on June 26 that will include a BRT demo project, people movers, etc. When asked by a Board member what the BRT demo project was, Merrill didn't answer the question. We'll have to find out more at the June 26 meeting because no details were provided by Merrill about the list of proposed projects. (emphasis mine)

Note the slide Merrill titled "What are We Agreed On?". Merrill or someone apparently forgot about 2010.......Does equity in mobility and funding solutions sound Socialistic? Does equity in mobility and funding solutions mean throwing our tax dollars at high cost solutions just to be equitable? Where's cost-effective, efficient or even effective?

Slide from Merrill presentation June 9, 2014
 to HART Board

Tying all our transportation funding into a single huge 30 year sales tax hike is not "Equitable"! That is not wise, prudent or necessary.

Advocating for a tax increase is policy making. Policy making is the responsibility of elected county commissioners or an elected county mayor. It is not the responsibility of an unelected bureaucrat, the county administrator. 

As late as the June 18, 2014 BOCC meeting, Merrill told the county commissioners an entire transportation plan was to be presented on June 26: 

THAT'LL BE BROUGHT TO THE POLICY LEADERSHIP GROUP ON JUNE 26th, SO THAT WILL BE THE FIRST TIME THAT THE ENTIRE TRANSPORTATION PLAN IS PRESENTED (emphasis mine). 

THERE WILL BE A BALANCE OF TRANSIT 

That never happened. 

Merrill had an entire plan ready to be presented last June? Why wasn't it ever presented to the PLG? What happened? Who got "cold feet"?

Instead, Merrill started taking this presentation touting trains, fixed guideways and a new huge tax increase out on the road to over 60 local organizations. 

He was even contacting homeowner associations and asking if he could come speak to them on the transportation issue. When was the last time a County Administrator was soliciting homeowner associations? Why weren't the county commissioners out making these presentations? 

Merrill's presentation includes that we invest "early" in Fixed Guideways in direct opposition to what the AEComm transit assessment stated. Is that why the county wanted to bury the AEComm report?

County presentation advocating for
high cost fixed guideways

Did the commissioners back then ever take a vote on this policy direction? No. Why aren't the county commissioners in synch with the state's direction for highly utilized managed lanes added for additional road capacity that are shared with express bus service? 

Merrill lived in Germany a while and he likes trains. However, the rendering below from his presentation looks more like a safety hazard than anything else. Somebody's bound to get killed with a solution like this. Has Merrill Googled the issues with the new DC streetcar lately?  Is a train, a single lane of traffic and a bike path what Hillsborough County wants to spend billions on to fix our traffic issues? Ridiculous?

Rendering from county transportation presentation

Merrill's presentation is almost entirely focused on transit. It is so biased that his one page Value Proposition does not even mention roads, the county's largest and most utilized asset that has the biggest funding gap. In addition, some of Merrill's Value Proposition talking points are very questionable as they came from APTA (noted in very small print), the big transit lobbyist in DC.

The Wizard of Oz also created  a "we must have transit options"  video and a "comprehensive mobility" proposal video. These videos were created PRIOR to the Go Hillsborough campaign. Who authorized these videos?  How much did they cost taxpayers?

The videos tout fixed guideways (again in opposition to the AEComm transit assessment) and implies we'll have high cost rail in 10 years. And some kind of rail will connect to All Aboard Florida in Orlando. Huh? Roads will be improved to get to "transit hubs". Really? 

These presentations and videos were the cart before the horse, way out of line and exceeded the County Administrator responsibilities as defined in our Charter. They confirm the Wizard of Oz down at County Center has been pulling the levers and pushing the buttons for another 30 year sales tax hike long before Go Hillsborough. 

The next PLG meeting finally got scheduled in August.

Next up:  what the Wizard ordered.

Proposed 30 Year Sales Tax includes Light Rail

County Administrator Mike Merrill, acting in a pseudo-role as an unelected County Mayor, held a media briefing Wednesday to leak the transportation plan to the media before it was even publicly presented to the PLG. We assume Merrill or someone already screened the commissioners with this information prior to this event.

So there was disappointment but no real surprises at Thursday's Policy Leadership Group meeting. The media did their duty of "reporting what Merrill told them" before the meeting yesterday.

Why disappointment? 

Disappointing because Bob Clifford of Parsons Brinckerhoff previously told me that Parsons would present several scenarios to the PLG that they could then publicly discuss. 

Disappointing because of the questions not asked on this critical issue by our elected officials, who some instead made a scripted commentary. Remember due to our Sunshine Laws, this is the only venue for these electeds to engage publicly on the issue. Why weren't there more challenging questions asked?

Disappointing because we have four county commissioner on the HART board and nothing was said how this plan fits in with HART's current TDP, as if this plan would operate in a separate universe. This plan does tell you why Merrill wanted to restructure HART last year with all electeds. We anticipate that issue resurfacing if this plan moves forward to get control of a new boatload of money to HART. We anticipate that working as well as the CIT tax. 

Many in the PLG have stated "we need options" more times than can be counted over the last year but where were any options yesterday? Nowhere to be found. For a truly open, transparent, and "intellectually honest" discussion (which Commissioner Hagan stated they were having), Parsons should have presented the PLG with more than just ONE plan option.

What one option did the million dollar taxpayer funded GoHillsborough effort offer the PLG? The only option Parsons was tasked to provide when they were handed last September a no-bid contract for scope of work titled "Hillsborough County Transportation REFERENDUM support". A sales tax referendum. Within the ONE plan for a sales tax referendum, there was only ONE option presented: a half-cent sales tax (7% tax increase) for 30 years to be on the 2016 Presidential election year ballot.

Apparently, this ONE option presented by Parsons and Merrill basically came from a poll of 600 likely voters that reflected a whopping 52% will support a half-cent sales tax. What's missing from this poll is all the information about who they actually polled, their demographics, where they resided in the county, the exact wording of the questions, etc. Why didn't the PLG members ask for this information? Parsons did not even provide the margin of error for the poll. There could actually be NO Majority support for this half-cent sales tax.

Half-cent sales tax proposal based on ONE poll of 600 likely voters
 (no other information provided)
Click to enlarge

At least we now know why they insist we must pass another 30 year CIT-like tax because Commissioner Hagan stated almost verbatim the poll question that 30 years will provide time to increase transit ridership to pursue light rail. The problem we are told is that light rail is not seen as a viable alternative for unincorporated Hillsborough County RIGHT NOW. 

We get it the pursuit of light rail is like a cat with nine lives.  "They" will pursue it to no end no matter how many times voters vote NO. From the recommendations below, it looks like light rail is already baked in this plan for the City of Tampa. (Remember the city of Tampa took the federal funds for the streetcar which is now bankrupt and this plan gives them a way out)

A 30 year tax will provide a revenue stream to go after state/federal funding for high cost transit solutions in the future. That was actually stated as "the game is to have a revenue stream to get federal/state funding." Federal funding for transit projects is getting more and more competitive. Who thinks 10 years from now as we are now spiraling towards $19 TRILLION of federal debt that federal funding will become easier to get.

Some of the talking points presented at the PLG meeting yesterday and some commentary.

Hillsborough County is #11 for worst traffic congestion in the US  
No citation was provided for where this statement came from so we looked up US traffic congestion information at Inrix.com and the Texas Transportation Institute, both do traffic congestion studies and research. The cities they state having the worst congestion in the US:  NYC, Chicago, LA, San Francisco, Dallas, Houston, Atlanta, Honolulu, DC, Seattle, Philadelphia, and Miami. In Florida, we know Ft. Lauderdale has worse traffic congestion than Hillsborough, Orlando may also. The average commute time in Hillsborough is right at the national average of about 30 minutes.

Dedicated lane BRT is supported but there are questions surrounding implementation and use. 
Remember GoHillsborough only provided cost per mile information for high cost dedicated lane BRT. They never provided the cost per mile for shared lane BRT such as HART's MetroRapid service. GoHillsborough never mentioned managed bus toll lanes as a way to add road capacity that buses could also utilize. GoHIllsborough never provided cost per trip/passenger information for anything. That is key to understanding the cost-benefit of an investment and whether that investment is being made in a highly utilized or under utilized asset. The only transit cost information that would have made sense to anyone that GoHillsborough provided were for the options "they" wanted. GoHillsborough simply lumped HART's entire 10 year plan into one big amount so no one could compare it to anything.

Half-cent sales tax preferred: no other source or amount receives majority support 
No margin of error provided so is this a true statement?

74% of "citizens" are more likely to support a referendum if developers pay more.
Supposedly this was from the same poll of 600 likely voters:

74% more likely to support referendum if developers pay more
Click to enlarge

There should be some type of impact fee assessed for new development infrastructure. Some type of mobility fee may be considered, similar to what Pasco County implemented. The impact fee monies will be complimentary and in addition to the $3.5 BILLION, not part of the $3.5 Billion tax. There should have been an estimate of what an impact/mobility fee would generate but none was provided. Also what exactly would these monies be spent on?

This is where Commissioner Stacy White passionately questioned land use far beyond just mobility fees and wanting to pursue in our county comprehensive land plan some type of "densities swap" to the urban core. Stacy wants an analysis done of exchanging density entitlements. We wondered if this is like cap and trade. This is the first time we've heard about it so we will be looking for more details.

It would have been refreshing to hear that kind of passion questioning why we must have another 30 year Cit-like tax or why does all transportation funding have to be tied to a sales tax. Commissioner Higginbotham did bring up that we have existing revenues we can leverage to start funding hopefully our roads - we don't have to wait until a referendum passes or fails in late 2016. Instead Commissioner Les Miller stated (literally) that we are DOOMED if we don't get this boatload of money in 2016. We remember PSTA's Brad Miller saying the same thing about Greenlight Pinellas. In that same vane, Commissioner Ken Hagan  stated there's "no possible way to fix the crisis". Wait a minute - Hagan's been on the county commission since 2004 and was part of the commission who blew out the CIT tax by 2008 creating this "crisis".  The fix is another 30 year tax like the one he blew out?

Regarding the CIT tax, it was sold to voters in 1996 (when it passed 53-47%) that it would be used for projects in 5 year increments. Merrill had the audacity to state how successful the CIT was at doing just that and that is how this new 30 year tax could wok. I think some folks behind me about fell off their chair because we all know what happened to the CIT.  The entire tax was spent by the county within 11 years, much of it on pet projects to help incumbents get re-elected. Today we still pay the tax until 2026 but it simply goes to paying back debt. 

Other than Miller's passion for us being Doomed, Hagan's scripted message this will end the crisis and White's land use request, we did not see a whole lot of positive passion from the rest of the PlG for this plan. If they thought this was a great plan, wouldn't the rest of the PLG members chimed in more about how much they "love" the plan  not just thanking people for the hard work and that this is simply "better than 2010". 

Interesting that the only sound that came from Mayor Buckhorn publicly at the meeting was the loud ringing of his cell phone going off. He waited until the Tribune approached him afterward to state this:

The lower apportionment for transit was made more palatable, the supporters said, because of Clifford’s recommendation that Tampa, Plant City and Temple Terrace use 10 percent of their share of the tax proceeds for mass transit. 

That would be enough for Tampa to start a light rail system, said Mayor Bob Buckhorn. 

“We in the city are not going to exclude rail as an option,” Buckhorn, a member of the leadership group, said after the meeting. “We think that’s what our future looks like. That’s why this flexibility looks so good.”

Transit lobbyist Kevin Thurman also weighed in:

Kevin Thurman, executive director of the pro-transit group Connect Tampa Bay, agreed that a light-rail system might be possible with the 10 percent spending option. Thurman pointed out that the Hillsborough Area Regional Transit agency, known as HART, is getting 25 percent of the tax proceeds, about $881 million.

Combining that money with the 10 percent flexible funding for the three cities could raise the percentage of total transit funding from 36 percent to 44 percent, he said.

Below are the 15 recommendations made by Parsons Brinckerhoff:

Parsons Recommendation #1 states to "develop modernized streetcar or similar technology from downtown to TIA/Westshore/and/or USF area

Parsons Recommendation #2 states to put a 1/2 cent sales tax on the ballot in 2016 - will generate $117.5 annually ($3.5 BILLION over 30 years)

Parsons Recommendation #3 states it will be a 30 year tax to leverage SIGNIFICANT funding from other sources (federal/state funding)

Parsons Recommendation #4 breaks down the split: 

• Maintenance - 23.8%
• Transit - 36.1%
• Roads - 36.1%
• Sidewalks/Bike paths - 3.9%

Parsons Recommendation #5 breaks down the jurisdictional allocations with the addition of HART receiving 25%

• HART - 25%
• Hillsborough County - 55.23%
• Plant City - 1.72%
• Tampa - 16.82%
• Temple Terrace - 1.23%

Parsons Recommendation #6 states Hillsborough County must ensure new growth pays itself - prepare a mobility fee ordinance to go into effect simultaneously with 1/2 cent sales tax 

Parsons Recommendation #7 states consider establishing a dedicated maintenance fund program

Parsons recommendation #8 states that the city of Tampa should consider using at least 10% of its 1/2 percent allocation towards co-funding the modernization and extension of the streetcar (to turn it into a light rail) or other premium service (light rail according to Buckhorn) within the City of Tampa.

Parsons recommendation #9 states that Hillsborough County should consider using at least 10% of their 1/2 percent allocation towards co-funding BRT (assume that is the high cost dedicated lane BRT) within Hillsborough County. 

Parsons recommendation #10 states Plant City use at least 10% of their 1/2 percent allocation towards co-funding express bus and circulator service within Plant City.

Parsons recommendation #11 states Temple Terrace use at least 10% of their 1/2 percent allocation towards co-funding BRT and express bus service within Temple Terrace.

Parsons recommendation #12 states to conduct more public engagement meetings to develop initial 10 year project list for the referendum. (Was that included in the million dollar Parsons contract or are we paying them and PR lobbyist Beth Leytham more of our tax dollars?)

Parsons recommendation #13 states to build trust, confidence and accountability by creating processes that notify, inform and update citizens on specific projects. (Is that a confidence builder to feel comfortable with them spending your $3.5 BiLLION?)

Parsons recommendation #14 states to realign projects and priorities to most efficiently and effectively improve traffic flow and transit as well as contribute towards economic prosperity. 

Parsons recommendation #15 states to develop and implement policies regarding alternate forms of transportation and new transportation technologies such as improved transit, automated control vehicles, private provision of transportation services and tolling. (Does that mean getting rid of the PTC and enabling ride sharing?)

 The packet from Parsons given to the county commissioners show these project costs:

GoHillsborough Estimated Project Costs

Something looks very strange. HART's  Vision Plan TDP which would double bus service in Hillsborough County is a 10 year plan not 30 year plan. The $1.5 Billion includes their funded existing services. The unfunded portion is about $600-$700 million over 10 years. Where are these Fixed Guideways reflected at a cost of almost $2.6 BILLION and over $4.2 BILLION? Are they dedicated lane BRT or rail? They had previously provided the cost per mile at $54 million per mile for fixed guideway BRT and $88 million per mile for rail. Do the calculations and these appear to be about 5 mile routes. Hmmm.. That's a lot of tax dollars for 5 miles.

One of the major problems I have with this entire GoHillsborough effort is that it is an opinion based effort not a data driven one. Where's the data? Parsons told me at one of their last meetings there would be data to back up their plan. Where is that data because it's not in the packet given to the county commissioners. Instead the packet provides a list of projects citizens wrote on maps with no clue of the cost or actual viability of anything. Here's one of the wish lists:

Light Rail all over Hillsborough County 

This is what you get when it's a free for all of opinions which is what GoHillsborough did.

Don't be fooled - as Mayor Buckhorn states, light rail is in this plan and when the city of Tampa partners with HART - that is county money NOT just Tampa's apportionment of a new county tax.

Next up are 12 more GoHillsborough meetings between now and July 16. We assume these will be those facilitated small groups directing you to some answer. We also assume more money will be flowing to Parsons Brinckerhoff and PR insider lobbyist  Beth Leytham.  Sweet deal huh?

They are allowing one month for these meetings and Merrill asked (really directed) the county commissioners that he wanted 2 votes on July 16.  The first vote for the PLG to approve the plan and a second vote to ask the county attorney to write the ballot language. 

We hear that won't be difficult as it's already written....

Stay tuned....