Voters should know what they're voting on before they vote.
The Tampa Bay Times begins a recent editorial about the Florida Supreme Court striking down Amendment 8 from the November ballot (emphasis mine):
Voters should know what
they’re voting on, which is why the Florida Supreme Court was entirely correct to
strike the deviously worded Amendment 8 from the Nov. 6
ballot.
We agree. Voters should
not be forced to rely on any deviously worded amendment that could deceive
them.
So what about
the massive transit tax hike charter amendment that is on the November ballot?
There is no transportation plan and not one project referenced in the ballot summary language or 5 pages of the All for Transportation (AFT) tax hike charter amendment. AFT did not provide the courtesy of telling the voting public any specific projects the 30 year massive 14% transit tax hike actually funds.
Yet it has been reported in local media that this 30 year 14% massive transit tax hike is funding the MPO's 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP).
There is no transportation plan and not one project referenced in the ballot summary language or 5 pages of the All for Transportation (AFT) tax hike charter amendment. AFT did not provide the courtesy of telling the voting public any specific projects the 30 year massive 14% transit tax hike actually funds.
Yet it has been reported in local media that this 30 year 14% massive transit tax hike is funding the MPO's 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP).
When the petition drive began in June the Times published an
article titled Petition language reveals details of Hillsborough sales
tax transportation initiative reported (emphasis mine):
The priorities are based
on a long range transportation plan that was developed four
years ago by the Hillsborough County Metropolitan Planning
Organization, based in part on responses to a survey of more than 6,000 people.
The Hillsborough MPO admits in their 2040 long range
transportation plan (LRTP) that the majority of respondents to their public
outreach resided in the city of Tampa. Tampa has less than 1/3 the population
of Hillsborough County. 6000 respondents is less than 1/2 percent of the
population of Hillsborough County.
Did bias create a flawed MPO long range transportation plan? The MPO 2040 LRTP states:
Based on responses from
the to the Imagine 2040 survey, most respondents agreed that the programs
should be funded at medium to high levels, and that additional funds
should be spent in KES areas with larger employment bases like Downtown Tampa
and the USF area as the best way to improve Hillsborough County’s
transportation system by 2040.
Is spending additional transportation funds (e.g. tax hikes) in
the city of Tampa the best way to improve transportation in Hillsborough
County. What about unincorporated Hillsborough, traffic congested Brandon
and rapidly growing South County?
While the 2040 plan is still in place, it is now quite outdated. Since it was created, the county commissioners created a 10 year transportation funding plan.
Back to the Times editorial about Amendment 8, they also wrote:
While the 2040 plan is still in place, it is now quite outdated. Since it was created, the county commissioners created a 10 year transportation funding plan.
Back to the Times editorial about Amendment 8, they also wrote:
The word
"charter" did not appear in the amendment text, title or summary.
The word "rail" does not appear anywhere in AFT's
charter amendment. It is not in the text, title or summary of the transit tax
hike ballot language. It is nowhere to be found.
But…costly rail is all through the MPO's 2040 LRTP. It is included in the MPO's one-cent funding scenario. Interesting that we find the use of one-cent vs one percent to describe a transit tax hike in the MPO documentation and AFT's ballot language. Is that coincidental? Previous proposed transit tax hike ballot language used percent terminology as that is how the transportation surtax is referred to in state statute.
But…costly rail is all through the MPO's 2040 LRTP. It is included in the MPO's one-cent funding scenario. Interesting that we find the use of one-cent vs one percent to describe a transit tax hike in the MPO documentation and AFT's ballot language. Is that coincidental? Previous proposed transit tax hike ballot language used percent terminology as that is how the transportation surtax is referred to in state statute.
Beth Alden, Executive Director of the Hillsborough MPO, has told
us the MPO will include rail again in their 2045 planning they recently began.
The MPO must be planning on AFT's transit tax hike passing in November so their
2045 LRTP will match it.
Ironically, when the MPO was beginning their 2040 plan, they surveyed registered voters in Hillsborough County that revealed (emphasis mine):
Ironically, when the MPO was beginning their 2040 plan, they surveyed registered voters in Hillsborough County that revealed (emphasis mine):
...they [registered
voters] perceived the 2010 referendum as a “rail” referendum with nothing for
roads; that the projects to be funded were not clearly defined
As we stated previously, no transportation plan is referenced
and not one project is identified in the AFT tax hike charter amendment language
, ballot title, text or summary language.
The Times editorial about Amendment 8 ends with (emphasis mine) :
The Times editorial about Amendment 8 ends with (emphasis mine) :
Those who so firmly
believe in charter schools should be more than happy to let them appear
on the ballot by name, not by subterfuge [deceit or deception]. ….Instead,
voters were nearly left with no context to suss out [realize or grasp] the
schools that shall not be named until the Florida Supreme Court made the
correct decision on behalf of clarity and candor.
The Times wanted clarity and candor regarding Amendment 8.
When contacted, the Times stated they were told by someone from both the MPO and AFT, when the petition drive began in June, that AFT's transit tax hike was funding the 2040 LRTP. When we subsequently asked the Times who at the MPO and AFT told them that, we did not get a response back. It is logical to assume it was Beth Alden from the MPO since she was quoted in the Times June article.
Does the AFT massive tax hike fund the MPO's 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan or not?
If so, why did AFT NOT disclose that anywhere in their ballot title, text or summary language and/or reference it anywhere in the Charter Amendment?
If AFT's transit tax hike is not funding the MPO's 2040 long range transportation plan, then what transportation plan and projects is their 30 year 14% transit tax hike funding?
Why would AFT keep such information secret?
The MPO confirmed that voters want to know clearly defined projects that any additional funding would be spent on.
So where is the clearly defined list of projects that will be funded by AFT's 30 year 14% transit tax hike? Voters want to know this information BEFORE the election.
This is especially important with this massive tax hike because the 5 pages of tax hike regulations prohibits and greatly restricts changes - even when there is failure or an economic downturn. Taxpayers are stuck for 30 long years.
The Times wanted clarity and candor regarding Amendment 8 and they applauded the remedy of the Florida Supreme Court striking Amendment 8 from the ballot.
The Times should hold AFT's charter amendment to the same level of accountability, clarity and honesty to ensure voters are not subject to any ballot language deceit and deception.
If AFT cannot be honest with the voting public about specifically what their $16 Billion tax hike is funding, the remedy for voters is to vote No.
Voters should not have to pass the transit tax to then find out what exactly it is funding.
When contacted, the Times stated they were told by someone from both the MPO and AFT, when the petition drive began in June, that AFT's transit tax hike was funding the 2040 LRTP. When we subsequently asked the Times who at the MPO and AFT told them that, we did not get a response back. It is logical to assume it was Beth Alden from the MPO since she was quoted in the Times June article.
Does the AFT massive tax hike fund the MPO's 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan or not?
If so, why did AFT NOT disclose that anywhere in their ballot title, text or summary language and/or reference it anywhere in the Charter Amendment?
If AFT's transit tax hike is not funding the MPO's 2040 long range transportation plan, then what transportation plan and projects is their 30 year 14% transit tax hike funding?
Why would AFT keep such information secret?
The MPO confirmed that voters want to know clearly defined projects that any additional funding would be spent on.
So where is the clearly defined list of projects that will be funded by AFT's 30 year 14% transit tax hike? Voters want to know this information BEFORE the election.
This is especially important with this massive tax hike because the 5 pages of tax hike regulations prohibits and greatly restricts changes - even when there is failure or an economic downturn. Taxpayers are stuck for 30 long years.
The Times wanted clarity and candor regarding Amendment 8 and they applauded the remedy of the Florida Supreme Court striking Amendment 8 from the ballot.
The Times should hold AFT's charter amendment to the same level of accountability, clarity and honesty to ensure voters are not subject to any ballot language deceit and deception.
If AFT cannot be honest with the voting public about specifically what their $16 Billion tax hike is funding, the remedy for voters is to vote No.
Voters should not have to pass the transit tax to then find out what exactly it is funding.
This post is contributed by EYE ON TAMPA BAY. The views expressed
in this post are the blog publisher's and do not necessarily reflect those of the
publisher of Bay Post Internet.
Cross Posted with permission from: Eye
On Tampa Bay
No comments:
Post a Comment