GreenLight the Postmortems Continue

Opinion by: E. Eugene Webb PhD

The postmortems over the GreenLight sales tax referendum continue. A typical example is Tampa Tribune writer Josh Boatwright's article: Greenlight defeat likely means less walkable City, more sprawl.

Boatwright lays out a scenario that blames voters for rejecting a horrible Ordinance, and an ill conceived plan called GreenLight and hints that defeat will lead to  most of the development problems the County will see in the next century or so.

Let me burst the bubble of those who would lay the blame for all things bad in Pinellas County at the feet of those who voted down GreenLight.

Those to blame for any transit oriented problems Pinellas County may endure in the short term future are those who developed the GreenLight plan, not those who recognized it for what it was a get rich scheme for a select few funded by a never ending flow of tax revenue.  

If the objective of the politicians, the Chambers of Commerce and the big power players who wanted redevelop south Pinellas County is to make those of us who worked to defeat GreenLight and those who voted with us feel bad, sorry that dog does just not hunt.

If those folks really want to know who screwed up Pinellas County Public transportation, all they have to do is take a short walk down the hall to the smallest room in their house and look in the mirror.

Boatwright rambles on about the sea of parking lots and how in some way this referendum would have changed all of that, all the while the auto industry is having its best year ever. Obviously not everyone wants to ride a bike, bus or train.

Also noteworthy is the fact that the Countryside Mall, which is mentioned as an example of large surface parking, is miles from the GreenLight proposed rail route which is indicative the how ill conceived the GreenLight plan really was.

If you voted NO on GreenLight don't let the naysayers make you feel bad, they're just trying to butter you up for their next attempt fleece to public.

For now take comfort in the knowledge that your NO vote on GreenLight probably saved Pinellas County from one of the most ill conceived tax referendums every put forth in this County.

E-mail Doc at: dr.webb@verizon.net. Or send me a Facebook (Gene Webb) Friend request. Twitter@DOCONTHEBAY. Please comment below, and be sure to share on Facebook and Twitter. See Doc's Photo Gallery at Bay Post Photos

St. Petersburg Chamber of Commerce Box Score O for 2

Opinion by:  E. Eugene Webb PhD

St.Petersburg Chamber of Commerce Mission Statement:

The St. Petersburg Area Chamber of Commerce shall be the preeminent leader of business in order to ensure the economic growth and vitality of our community.

Notice the mission statement does not call for a political agenda.

Since the day Chris Steinocher arrived as president and CEO of the St. Petersburg Chamber of Commerce he has wanted to be a big player in City and County politics. Problem is under Steinocher’s leadership the Chamber can’t seem to get on the right side of the major issues.

First there was the LENS, which the Chamber backed to the hilt and the public soundly rejected.

Now there is GreenLight, which Steinocher co-chaired and pulled out all the stops for, soundly defeated at the polls.

There has always been a question in my mind as to whom the St. Pete Chamber really represents. When you look at the Board of Directors it looks like the name would more correctly be The St. Pete Corporate Chamber of Commerce. Small and medium sized business seems to be somewhat under represented on the Board.

That could explain why the Chamber is so out of touch with their members clients and customers - the public.

The St. Pete Chamber has been handed its hat twice now in major ballot initiatives. We may be approaching the moment where the Chamber’s endorsement and/or support are more of a curse than a blessing.

It’s also way past time for St. Pete City Council to turn to Steinocher and the Chamber every time they have a question about the pulse of business in the City. Looking at the recent record one could assume the Chamber doesn’t have a clue.

The time has come for a little soul searching among the Chamber membership and their leadership regarding their political role. Just because it’s big, bright, shiny,  expensive,  has high political exposure and is paid for by tax dollars does not mean it will pass public muster based on the Chamber’s endorsement.

It’s time for the St. Pete Chamber to get back to their stated mission. 

E-mail Doc at: dr.webb@verizon.net. Or send me a Facebook (Gene Webb) Friend request. Twitter@DOCONTHEBAY. Please comment below, and be sure to share on Facebook and Twitter. See Doc's Photo Gallery at Bay Post Photos

Respect Voters and the Consent of the Governed

It's been several days since Greenlight Pinellas and the Polk County transit referendum were overwhelmingly defeated and the question of "what's next" is being asked. 

Both in Hillsborough and Pinellas, we keep hearing we're going to be put through a second referendum because the power brokers did not like the first answer they got from voters. Some elected officials and special interests organizations want us to continue down the same path, despite what the voters said. They will tout that it often takes two, sometimes three attempts for "them" to finally ram a boondoggle referendum through.

Look at other cities, "they" say, like Denver, St. Louis, Phoenix where initial initiatives were defeated but subsequent referendums got passed.

This question was raised by LightRailNow blog:  

If rail has previously been rejected by voters, but a new rail measure is subsequently presented for a vote, how long does it take to achieve successful voter approval for rail?

Here's their answer based on looking at 6 such cases since 2000.

Years between Rail Referendum Rejected and
 later referendum Passed

They concluded:  

The process of re-submitting a rail transit measure to a vote may depend not so much on public attitudes but on the determination of sponsoring officials, their responsiveness to public input, and their willingness to re-craft specific project details to more closely conform to public needs and desires.

Sounds like what we see in Hillsborough County with the Transportation Policy Leadership Group and their mercenary force of Parsons Brinckerhoff. 

This is the agenda of try, try again until "they" win. 

According to a Mineta Transportation Institute study of ballot initiatives with rail transit component, success or failure criteria:

• Passing transit initiatives in communities featuring transit agencies of questionable reputations, in those fielding credible opposition, or those lacking a traffic congestion “crisis” is extremely difficult  

• Support for transportation-related tax increases from business community and key elected officials is apparently linked to their close involvement in development of the package 

• Attracting campaign funds in excess of $1 million seems essential to effectively promoting transit initiatives. 

• Importance for community consensus amongst the business, elected and environmental communities  

• Importance of utilizing experienced campaign consultant 

• Specified routes to increase perceptions of individual benefits 

• Threats of tangible service cuts  

• Effectiveness of a region’s predominant newspaper in portraying an initiative in a positive or negative light

Was that the playbook of Greenlight Pinellas and the 2010 rail referendum in Hillsborough?

I would add also those pushing rail consistently regurgitate talking points attempting to create generalized false narratives that factual data do not support. I call that deception.

The Mineta study also pointed out the need to include roads:

Failure to include funds for highway improvements risks alienating transit nonusers, who are typically a majority.

In other words, throw some roads in to your rail boondoggle for voter bait to gain support because a majority of people want roads not trains. 

The study concludes that the most important factors for success was "high-profile support from both political leadership and the business communities."
While the high-profile political leaders may change, the Tampa Bay Partnership and the Chambers of Commerce continue spending their time and resources to push "their" rail agenda.

Voters in Hillsborough and Pinellas have soundly said NO once to high cost rail projects. Voters in Polk County have said NO twice to transit related referendums. 

Where is respect for the voters? 

Do our elected officials not believe in the "consent of the governed"? 

Do our elected officials not believe in the intelligence of their own constituents?  

As Florida DOT Secretary recently stated:

“We need to create a framework for private entrepreneurship to lead the way,” argued Florida Department of Transportation Secretary Ananth Prasad during a panel at the ITS World Congress. “Legislation at the state and federal level needs to be loosened up.” 

In many cases, public-private partnerships will have a larger role in financing new transportation projects

We need mobility solutions now, with the highest priority to fund our roads first because 98% of us use them everyday.

Our county commissioners should not continue holding our road funding hostage to push another boondoggle referendum. 

Is it the proper role of government to "transform" or redesign our county using our tax dollars to try to coerce or force us to get out of our cars and use transit?

Let's not go backwards and gamble billions of tax dollars that forces us to be stuck on last century's infrastructure. 

The future is going to bring innovative transportation solutions, options and competitive services we may only dream of today, that could make costly rail systems irrelevant and obsolete tomorrow.

 

The future will include roads and buses need roads, so let's fund them now.

Please respect Voters and the "Consent of the Governed".

212,249 Voted No on GreenLight but We Can't Just Say NO to Public Transportation

Opinion by: E. Eugene Webb PhD

There were few more strongly opposed to the GreenLight sales tax referendum than me. There is no reason to rehash my opposition in this Post because you can read all that on my Blog Bay Post Internet.

What is important is what happens next.

Those who voted no cannot simply take their ball and go home.

And those who were in support of the GreenLight effort cannot ignore the results of the election.

There are certainly lessons to be learned from this election. There are some hurt feelings and wounded pride in the losing camp, but there should also be some new found wisdom when it comes to selling public transportation funding to the public that will pay for it.

Stubborn positioning on either side of the issue is just not productive.

For any Pinellas County public transportation initiative rail is out. Any component for rail is out. Any funding for rail is out.

Light rail needs to be totally separate initiative, regionally based with its own unique funding mechanism.

There are some glimmers of hope as Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn and St. Pete Mayor Rick Kriseman are already sending signals they are willing to talk about a regional plan for rail. Let's bring in the Hillsborough County Aviation Authority and the Pinellas County Aviation Authority and create a powerhouse regional transit consortium.

Pinellas County needs a, grid based bus system that serves the entire County.

Funding it with a sales tax is not a bad idea. PSTA already has a plan. We don't need to spend millions on consultants, bring in TBARTA and start the whole hijacking the process all over again.

Update the PSTA plan, put together a five or seven year budget, involve some citizens along with the politicians, develop a sales tax proposal that is incremental and tied to the projected PSTA budget.

No train, no transit oriented redevelopment, no grand scheme, right sized buses, honest and trustworthy leadership and solid public transportation.

All points of view need to be at the table.

PSTA can be the Pinellas County gateway to regional light rail. A healthy, well funded and efficient PSTA in Pinellas County and HART in Hillsborough County could become the inter-modal feeder system that would make regional light rail succeed.

We have been here before. Disagreeing on direction and resolving our differences at the Ballot Box and moving forward.

We're doing that right now in St. Pete with the Pier and there is no reason we cannot take the same approach County wide with public transportation.

Almost everyone involved on both sides of this issue knows what needs to be done. The only thing left is have the courage to put pride, stubbornness and self interest aside and get to work.

E-mail Doc at: dr.webb@verizon.net. Or send me a Facebook (Gene Webb) Friend request. Follow me on Twitter@DOCONTHEBAY. Please comment below, and be sure to share on Facebook and Twitter. See Doc's Photo Gallery at Bay Post Photos

The Enemy is Reality: Voters and Taxpayers Fed Up

On Tuesday, five Florida counties soundly rejected sales tax referendums, including the Greenlight Pinellas rail boondoggle and transit related referendums in Polk County and Alachua County. Citrus County and Hernando County had infrastructure related sales tax referendums that were also defeated.

How badly were all these initiatives defeated? They ALL went down in flames.
Greenlight Pinellas - Defeated 62-38%
Polk County - Defeated 72-28%
Alachua County - Defeated 60-40%
Hernando County - Defeated 56-44%
Citrus County - Defeated 75-25%

In addition, a sales tax referendum in Martin County (just north of Palm Beach County) was narrowly defeated by 83 votes and is going to a recount on Saturday, that many expect the defeat to hold.

Here's a picture of how bad Greenlight Pinellas was defeated - 248 of 299 precincts voted NO. Even downtown Clearwater, one of the end points of the light rail, voted No.

Pinellas County votes a whopping NO
to Greenlight Pinellas 62-38%

What do all the overwhelming defeats mean?

Is it a strong indicator of distrust and skepticism voters and taxpayers have today?

Is it a strong indicator that our current elected officials are not spending what they already have wisely, effectively and on our highest priorities? Do voters and taxpayers think government at every level is overreaching and spending our tax dollars on things they shouldn't be?

Most of the referendums were comprehensive, attempting to raise additional revenues for multiple issues. Have voters and taxpayers simply seen too many failed "comprehensive" referendums, where elected officials push the "something for everyone" carrot to get the costly referendums passed, and then they end up over promising and under delivering? Do voters and taxpayers lack the confidence there will be appropriate oversight, discipline and accountability with spending these additional tax revenues, especially when spent on numerous issues rolled into a single tax?

Are voters and taxpayers fed up watching taxpayer funded entities like PSTA spend almost a million dollars of taxpayer monies advocating for a sales tax few will benefit from?  Are voters and taxpayers fed up watching PSTA spend years of their time and resources pushing for Greenlight and higher taxes instead of focusing on their bus service? Are voters and taxpayers simply fed up with taxpayer funded entities using their bully pulpit and our tax dollars with a one-way message advocating against the taxpayer?

Are voters and taxpayers fed up watching the collusion of taxpayer funded entities and special interests groups push higher taxes for projects that benefit the few - them?

Are voters and taxpayers fed up with cronyism and what appears to be a circle of money between elected officials and special interests?

Are voters and taxpayers fed up with being told we must hand over more of our tax dollars in the name of "economic development" that in reality feeds our tax dollars to special interests?  Are voters and taxpayers fed up with being told we have to continually subsidize development?

We already hand lots of our tax dollars every year to entities pushing "economic development".  What success have we gotten in return? What is the actual return on investment as far as economic prosperity and growth from using all these tax dollars? Can anyone measure?

Some of those entities turn around and use the monies they receive to advocate for higher taxes. Is something wrong with this picture?

Are voters and taxpayers fed up watching elected officials and taxpayer funded entities like PSTA ignore and mock those oppose them?

Are voters and taxpayers fed up with lies and deception used to push for higher taxes?

Are voters and taxpayers fed up with those continuing to push referendums requiring federal debt dollars for costly solutions we do not need nor can afford?

Are voters and taxpayers fed up with the continued emphasis on taxpayer funded solutions to all our problems?

Are voters and taxpayers fed up with the lack of common sense, fiscally responsible solutions because someone's beholden to deep-pocketed special interests?

Are voters and taxpayers fed up with the too much one-sided, biased reporting and editorializing by local media favoring these costly referendums?

Are voters and taxpayers fed up with the "powers to be" ignoring "We the People"?

It's somewhat amusing to hear Pinellas County Commissioner Ken Welch, who also chairs the PSTA board, state that he was surprised by the outcome of Greenlight Pinellas.

The $1.2 Million pro rail Greenlight PAC was doing polling because they were paying a polling company according to their campaign finance reporting.  If things were going "their" way, we would have heard about it. They knew Greenlight was going down, they just didn't know how bad.

The opposition to all these referendums was obviously broad and deep.

The enemy is NOT No Tax For Tracks, the Tea Party or anyone else who voted against all these referendums.

The enemy is reality.

The defeats were NO surprise. Just think about the questions above.