I think the "Save Our Icons" tax increase is a good example of how to successful market a campaign like this. It had good logo design, was distributed widely ahead of the actual petition, and framed the argument as something that needed to get done to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past. I think whatever SORTA's plan is it should include something with the existing subway for this very reason.

 

The narrative needs to be that Cincinnati may have stumbled many times in the past to get over the finish line, but now is our time to finally finish what we started so that Cincinnati can start moving forward instead of looking backward at what could have been.

The Save Our Icons campaign was really good but remember that the original goal was to pass a tax increase that would fund the renovation of both Union Terminal and Music Hall. Once the Tea Party got involved, they successfully convinced Hamilton County to cut the tax in half to only cover the renovation of Union Terminal. Fortunately the City and 3CDC were able to cobble together enough money from other sources to renovate Music Hall as well, but the Save Our Icons tax itself only half-succeeded at its original goal.

 

Likewise, I think the SORTA board is terrified of the Tea Party and COAST types who are going to run a massive campaign in opposition to whatever tax increase SORTA proposes. COAST is going to lie and say that "SORTA is going to spend this money on streetcars, not buses" and our lazy media outlets will amplify that "viewpoint" (lie) and low-information voters will believe it.

29 minutes ago, taestell said:

Likewise, I think the SORTA board is terrified of the Tea Party and COAST types who are going to run a massive campaign in opposition to whatever tax increase SORTA proposes. COAST is going to lie and say that "SORTA is going to spend this money on streetcars, not buses" and our lazy media outlets will amplify that "viewpoint" (lie) and low-information voters will believe it.

 

What is frustrating is that COAST only still has power in Hamco because the media amplifies their voice. This is not the same place it was 10 years ago. Most of the statewide Dems won the county by about 10 percentage points. Aftab and Jill both won the Hamco portions of their districts by about 10 percentage points. Sherrod won by 19 percentage points! A tax levy for improved bus service would win pretty easily I think, if the media didn't amplify the anti-tax minority's message. 

Better Bus Coalition outlines Cincinnati earnings tax increase for November ballot

 

 

Cincinnati’s earnings tax would increase to 2.3 percent if voters approve a plan that the Better Bus Coalition expects to put on the city ballot this fall that would increase the transit portion of the tax to shore up the Metro bus system.

 

Under the plan, the city’s charter would be amended to increase the transit earnings tax from 0.3 percent to 0.5 percent. Cincinnati's total current earnings tax is 2.1 percent.

 

The coalition’s president, Cam Hardy, said the grassroots organization plans to raise money to hire both signature gatherers and run a fall campaign, which is expected to be opposed by the region’s business community. Cincinnati’s major business groups, including the Cincinnati Business Committee, long have been wary of increasing the earnings tax, which is levied on personal and business income earned within the city of Cincinnati.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2019/01/16/better-bus-coalition-outlines-cincinnati-earnings.html

Wow, right on cue!

 

I'm loving what the BBC has done since it started a year and a half ago.  They are now putting pressure on major employers in the city, if this does get the required signatures. The employers won't be happy with an earnings tax increase and (hopefully) will push SORTA to get a ballot measure out there so that the city earnings tax gets reduced in favor of a county-wide tax.

Edited January 16, 20196 yr by 10albersa

I think Cam and the Better Bus Coalition are doing a great job of keeping this issue in the media.  SORTA has been ineffective in leading on this issue.
I very much support better public transit, but agree that a tax that is not on a county level will face push back. 

Would an increase in the city income tax just shore up the current system, or would it provide enough funding to build Bus Rapid Transit lines?  
 

I highly doubt it.  It probably is just to prevent service cuts and fare hikes, no route expansions.  We'd need the 7 cents county tax to get to BRT.

 

Which is why I think companies will be extra motivated to get SORTA pushing the conty-wide tax instead of the city tax, it would theoretically lower their tax burden.

Edited January 17, 20196 yr by 10albersa

I am confused by the Business Courier's statement that this tax increase, if passed, would only increase Metro's funding by 35%. The current Metro earnings tax is 0.3% and the proposal is to raise it to 0.5%. So the amount of revenue collected from this tax should increase by 66%. Maybe @thomasbw has some insight on this disparity.

 

I do like the fact that this ballot initiative will really hold SORTA's feet to the fire. SORTA declined to put a sales tax on the May ballot and BBC was ready to go, literally the next day, with their petition drive for this alternative funding plan. If SORTA does put a sales tax on the ballot in November, we could see two different Metro funding proposals on the same ballot. I wonder if Cincinnati's "business community" will come out with a campaign supporting the sales tax and opposing the earnings tax (Yes on X, No on Y) like they did with the term limit changes this year.

 

I do think putting text into our City Charter banning the city from using any of this money for rail is a bad idea in the long run, for the same reason I opposed Issue 9 in 2009 and Issue 48 in 2011. It's holding rail to a different standard than other forms of transportation for no real reason.

 

I am a little surprised that they did not propose a progressive earnings tax. Maybe something like 0.5% on income up to $100k in income, 0.7% on income over that. Or is that not allowed by state law? I'm not sure if any other cities in Ohio have progressive earnings taxes.

I don't know if it is permitted under Ohio law.  It definitely exists in New York City and perhaps elsewhere. 

 

And to be clear, this would raise Cincinnati's total earning tax from 2.1% to 2.3%, still less than Columbus's 2.5%, which doesn't include COTA.  Magically, Columbus is growing faster than Cincinnati despite having higher taxes of every type. 

11 hours ago, taestell said:

I am confused by the Business Courier's statement that this tax increase, if passed, would only increase Metro's funding by 35%. The current Metro earnings tax is 0.3% and the proposal is to raise it to 0.5%. So the amount of revenue collected from this tax should increase by 66%. Maybe @thomasbw has some insight on this disparity.

 

I do like the fact that this ballot initiative will really hold SORTA's feet to the fire. SORTA declined to put a sales tax on the May ballot and BBC was ready to go, literally the next day, with their petition drive for this alternative funding plan. If SORTA does put a sales tax on the ballot in November, we could see two different Metro funding proposals on the same ballot. I wonder if Cincinnati's "business community" will come out with a campaign supporting the sales tax and opposing the earnings tax (Yes on X, No on Y) like they did with the term limit changes this year.

 

I do think putting text into our City Charter banning the city from using any of this money for rail is a bad idea in the long run, for the same reason I opposed Issue 9 in 2009 and Issue 48 in 2011. It's holding rail to a different standard than other forms of transportation for no real reason.

 

I am a little surprised that they did not propose a progressive earnings tax. Maybe something like 0.5% on income up to $100k in income, 0.7% on income over that. Or is that not allowed by state law? I'm not sure if any other cities in Ohio have progressive earnings taxes.

Metro funding consists of three main sources with a few other smaller amounts. 

 

1. City Earnings Tax

2. Fares

3. Federal Funds

 

The City Earnings Tax is about 1/2 of the total funding for the system, so while that portion will increase by 2/3rds, the overall system funding will increase only about 35% (I'm just assuming the numbers are correct). Now, increased miles and hours will increase our federal funding as well and our fare revenue as well too, but I think that's what they were trying to say. 

 

Also the IGA between the City and SORTA already prohibited these funds from going to the Cincinnati Streetcar, but I'm glad they put it in the ballot language to prevent COAST from saying that we were increasing taxes to pay for the streetcar.

That makes sense. I thought that federal funding had something to do with it, but for some reason the concept of fare revenue completely escaped me.

1 minute ago, taestell said:

That makes sense. I thought that federal funding had something to do with it, but for some reason the concept of fare revenue completely escaped me.

Metro has a higher than average farebox recovery. 

Planning Commission delays decision on bus benches

 

 

The Cincinnati Planning Commission delayed a vote on Friday over whether to allow the Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority to place bus benches with advertising at stops throughout the city.

 

SORTA has requested to place newly designed benches that are more expensive and of better quality than many of the concrete-and-wood benches that still are scattered illegally throughout Cincinnati neighborhoods. 

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2019/01/18/planning-commission-delays-decision-on-bus-benches.html

Does anyone know how much money Metro collects from fare revenue, vs. how much money Metro collects from just Zone 1?

If the city ends up passing an earnings tax increase, I think it would be interesting to evaluate eliminating the fare collections from Zone 1 entirely.

On SORTA's site it shows that the 2018 budgeted revenue from fares was $17.7 million. The total money collected from the earnings tax was projected at $56.4 million from the 0.3% earnings tax. The added 0.2% earnings tax would increase the revenue from the earnings tax by $37.6 million. Even if all fares were removed, that would leave an additional $19.9 million for added frequency, maintenance, etc.

 

I wouldn't want to increase the earnings tax and let everyone in the metro area get free rides, but if we could eliminate the fare in Zone 1, that might cost SORTA something like $10-$15 million, maybe? I'm sure there would also be higher maintenance costs for higher usage that would need to be taken into account which would lead to depreciation of the buses, etc. I don't know how much revenue is received via Zone 1 vs. the other zones. Also, I don't know if there are any legal reasons SORTA couldn't give free rides. All of this is very back of the napkin math.

My preference would be to eliminate the concept of zones entirely and make all fares time-based. That would also eliminate all of the confusion and complexity around transfers. Basically instead of paying $1.75 for Zone 1 fare, you would pay $1.75 for a 2-hour Metro pass, and any subsequent rides within that 2-hour period would be free.

But why should the City of Cincinnati subsidize the suburbs even more after putting in additional money?

I do like the idea of a 2-hour pass instead of getting transfers and stuff, but this plan seems like it would help out everyone outside of the city the most.

I get that argument, but I don't think now is the right time to be talking about reducing or eliminating Zone 1 fares. If the charter amendment passes, it will raise $35 million more for SORTA every year, but it we simultaneously make Zone 1 free and that costs $10-15 million, now we're down to the new tax only bringing in $20 million extra per year. I would rather SORTA get as much money as possible and let them modernize their fleet, increase frequency, add more TVMs along major routes, modernize fare boxes (please enable tap cards), add more real time arrival signs, improve bus stops, etc.

Oh yeah, and actually build some real BRT!

If we raise $35 million more for SORTA every year and eliminate the surcharge on other zones, we are doing the same thing I proposed, except we are helping the suburbs instead of the city.

 

I would also love to see modernization of our fleet, investment in infrastructure, and increased frequency. I'm not opposed to keeping the Zone 1 fare if they modernize payments, but I'd like to know how much they collect from Zone 1 vs. the other zones. I would personally love to see a system like London's Oyster Card where you don't need to think about ordering a transfer, or getting a day pass instead of individual passes. If you transfer within X time, it doesn't charge you again. If your charges on individual trips exceeds the cost of a day pass, it stops charging you at the price of a day pass and you can keep riding the rest of the day for free.

Why should I support an increase to the city's earnings tax for a countywide transportation system? I don't think I can.

 

I would absolutely support an increase in the city's earnings tax if we stopped metro at the city line. Or, for that matter, if we force non-city residents to pay a much, much higher fare.

I can't vote to tax myself more to subsidize the rest of the county even more than they are already getting now.    Non starter with me.   

I'm all in for fixing transportation in our region but Hamilton County (and preferably the surrounding other counties) has to be involved.

Edited January 22, 20196 yr by oakiehigh

It's important to note that the city's earnings is not only paid by people who live in the city, but by anyone who works in the city. I agree that it would be better to have a countywide funding source (or even a multi-county one). But the reason BBC is proposing a city level tax is because our city charter provides a mechanism for citizens to gather signatures and put something on the ballot. Our county does not, so we are at the whim of the SORTA board and County Commissioners.

This is a minor tax increase so it isn't worth getting fired up over.  About $100/yr for someone earning $50,000. 

 

The real solution to the transit dilemma in the United States is for the states and federal government to fund capital and maintenance and operation costs like everywhere else in the world instead of forcing this silly local game. 

 

 

PG Sittenfeld tweeted that he supports putting a bus tax on the ballot ... in Spring 2020:

 

 

Presumably he thinks that means SORTA can't have one ready in time for Fall 2019 election, or thinks that they shouldn't do it then for some strategic reason.

 

It seems that Better Bus Coalition is still collecting signatures to get their city charter amendment put on the ballot in Fall 2019...

As long as the county does not try and do something stupid by putting an additional sales tax on the ballot then the bus levy will have a chance. If they want to raise the sales tax by .50-.75 to support a bus tax and another .25-.50 to balance the budget, it would kill both of them.

The charter amendment is written in such a way that if the county passes a transit sales tax of at least 0.9%, the city's transit income tax automatically rolls back to 0.1%. So even if both were on the ballot at the same time, I would be likely to vote for both.

On 1/16/2019 at 1:41 PM, taestell said:

COAST is going to lie and say that "SORTA is going to spend this money on streetcars, not buses" and our lazy media outlets will amplify that "viewpoint" (lie) and low-information voters will believe it.

 

I just found this Twitter account which is opposing the Metro bus tax and calling it the "streetcar bailout tax". Even though not a penny of Metro's current tax goes to the streetcar, and not a penny of the new Metro tax would go to the streetcar. We truly live in a post-fact world.

City Council in now considering whether to put an issue on the November 2019 ballot stating that if a countywide bus tax is passed, Metro's current funding source (0.3% city earning tax) would end. So it's looking like there will be three different transit-related ballot issues coming up (assuming Better Bus Co. can gather the needed signatures for theirs):

1. Nov. 2019 - Better Bus Co. ballot issue - would raise city's earning tax to increase funding for Metro, but include a provision that if a countywide Metro sales tax is passed, the city's Metro earning tax would drop down to 0.1%.
2. Nov. 2019 - City Council ballot issue - keeps earning tax at current level but states that if a countywide Metro sales tax is passed by 2020, the city's Metro earning tax would be eliminated.
3. Spring or Nov. 2020 - countywide sales tax proposal goes on the ballot in Hamilton County.

Sittenfeld proposes repeal of transit earnings tax to pave way for bus funding

 

The city of Cincinnati’s 0.3 percent transit earnings tax would be repealed if Hamilton County voters decided to replace it with a sales tax by the November 2020 election, a charter amendment by Councilman P.G. Sittenfeld proposes. 

 

The charter amendment is the first step toward overhauling the way the Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority is funded. A council vote to put it on the May 2019 ballot could come as soon as Wednesday, although it needs six votes to pass. 

 

Assuming city voters approve it, the next step would be to send Hamilton County voters a sales tax levy that would replace the earnings tax revenue with new sales tax revenue. 

 

SORTA’s sole source of local funding today is the 0.3 percent city earnings tax. For more than 40 years, depending solely on a city source of tax revenue has been viewed by political and business leaders as the incorrect way to fund what should be a regional transit system. The SORTA board has been discussing going to the county ballot to ask for a county tax for at least five years and commissioned several studies about its operations in an attempt to make the case. The city’s total earnings tax is 2.1 percent today. 

 

Full article below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2019/02/26/sittenfeld-proposes-repeal-of-transit-earnings-tax.html

Here we go.  They're trying to confuse the hell out of the electorate.  People will get mad at the "confusion" and just vote no for everything.  Which is what they want. 

Yeah this is quite ridiculous, and I am surprised PG is pushing this.  I'm assuming this has to be separately voted on since this only regards the City and not the county, but there's no reason this should be voted on now, instead of in 2020.

The reason they want the City to vote on this now is so that we get it out of the way, and then in 2020 they can present a simpler message, "Vote yes on this sales tax and when it's approved the income tax will go away."

 

If we voted on the sales tax and the income tax repeal on the same ballot, it's possible that the sales tax would pass and the income tax repeal would fail. Which I know some of us transit supporters would love, but it's something that the local "business community" wants to prevent.

What a tragedy it would be to have so much money going to transit....

I get that they are angling for a simpler 2020 vote, but I can't help but feel that this is mainly being pushed by the business community to find creative ways to kill the BBC proposal.  I also have little faith that SORTA will promote and market the 2020 measure effectively, and fear that we will be sitting here November 4th, 2020 with the same .3 earnings tax and a transit authority on the brink of making drastic changes.

Edited February 27, 20196 yr by 10albersa
*Better Bus Coalition, not Better Bus Bureau

That's true, and from what I've heard, the business community is really worried about what BBC is doing. BBC released a statement yesterday saying they are still collecting signatures for their ballot issue, but left open the possibility that they might not submit them if they are satisfied with the plan City Council and Metro are proposing. I think that would be a mistake. Right now, BBC has the power to get their issue onto the ballot and I would say it has a pretty good chance of passing. Why not go through with it, and make the Chamber put in the effort to try to get it repealed...the same way the Chamber put big money behind the two-year term ballot issue last November, repealing the four-year term amendment that was passed a few years earlier.

Yeah the BBC has real grassroots leverage right now (and an increasingly blue Cincinnati + Hamilton County).  They've made a lot of good moves, so hopefully this ballot threat wasn't empty and they just got their bluff called.

 

I wish we would put a Metro Moves re-do on the ballot in 2020, it would definitely do better than last time and they've got time and grassroots help to overcome The Enquirer, Cranley and COAST.  At the least take that Chamber/OKI report (that dropped last week) on transit and job hubs and really overhaul the current system, I've had enough waiting around.  Bus-only/BRT lanes should be a minimum on most of the big arterial routes, especially the highways.

Just to tack on: The downtown bus lane is getting painted today.  I (cynically, of course) figured they would purposely leave it hard to notice and call Bus-only lanes a failure. Great work from the BBC!

The latest Planning Commission packet has details on the proposed Northside Transit Center. If built as designed, it looks like it will be quite nice. Certainly would be the city's second largest and nicest bus transfer center (after Government Square). 

 

Details starting on page 274: https://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/planning/about-city-planning/city-planning-commission/mar-15-2019-packet/

Portune criticizes plan to raise county sales tax

 

Hamilton County Commissioner Todd Portune said Monday that supporters of a 1 percent county sales tax to fund expanded bus service and infrastructure throughout the county should first have agreement with the county before sending such a measure to voters. 

 

Increasing tensions between the commissioners and supporters of such a levy, which could be on the ballot in 2020, came into the open at the monthly meeting of the Hamilton County Transportation Improvement District.

 

The Cincinnati USA Regional Chamber, senior business leaders, some members of the Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority board and some city officials continue to craft and build support for a sales tax that would replace the current 0.3 percent city earnings tax that funds Metro today. It would allow expansion of bus service throughout Hamilton County with the goal of connecting more people to job sites.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2019/03/26/portune-criticizes-plan-to-raise-county-sales-tax.html

Quote

He also said that SORTA should seek other, new revenue and pointed to a company known as Transit X, which wants to deploy aerial pods on fixed guideways in the air.

 

 

It's...Sky Loop 2.0!!

Portune is really dizzy. Would love to see him replaced with another Dem.

Yet another politician buying into the hot private sector transportation solution of the day.

15 minutes ago, edale said:

Portune is really dizzy. Would love to see him replaced with another Dem.

 

Todd is a wonderful person and really smart. He's been a great public servant. That said, this Transit X stuff is bonkers. He's not the only one around here who thinks stuff like that is going to save us. Everyone wants to hang their hat on the big earth-shattering project instead of getting down to business and improving actual public transit. 

He's always talking about unrealistic ideas that make him seem....less than smart. Remember when he said the Oasis line was going to be a functioning commuter rail line in time for the MLB All Star Game? He announced that like 6 months before the game. He also was pitching FCC using Paul Brown Stadium well after everyone had concluded that such an arrangement would not work, and he talked about it like it was some new idea that only he had thought of. I could list many more ideas of his that were puzzling (to put it nicely) but no need to pile on. 

I do agree with Portune that the city earnings tax should remain intact and that increased bus service can be funded in-part by a sales tax increase, although a .25% sales tax increase doesn't really raise much money and would not enable a significant improvement to bus service throughout the county. 

 

 

 

49 minutes ago, edale said:

He's always talking about unrealistic ideas that make him seem....less than smart. Remember when he said the Oasis line was going to be a functioning commuter rail line in time for the MLB All Star Game? He announced that like 6 months before the game. He also was pitching FCC using Paul Brown Stadium well after everyone had concluded that such an arrangement would not work, and he talked about it like it was some new idea that only he had thought of. I could list many more ideas of his that were puzzling (to put it nicely) but no need to pile on. 

 

I think he has a tendency to get emotionally attached to pie-in-the-sky type ideas. He's an eternal optimist. 

49 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

although a .25% sales tax increase doesn't really raise much money and would not enable a significant improvement to bus service throughout the county.

I assume he's trying to appease the 'no new taxes' people, trying to time it with the museum tax falling off.  What he isn't seeing is that those people will exist whether you put a .25 on the ballot or a 1.00.  If they want to win at the ballot box, they need to get a grand plan together and sell it.  Telling us that we have to pay more just to keep things running just makes most people mad that they can't balance a budget, or people like us apathetic.

 

I was browsing the Indianapolis metro's website today for fun and was incredibly jealous that we can't even keep up with them in regards to transit.

https://www.indygo.net/brt/

Edited March 26, 20196 yr by 10albersa

^That's why they're trying to package bus service within a county "infrastructure" tax.  Because the Western Hills Viaduct is about to fall down because they said so. 

How would road money from the potential SORTA levy be doled out?

 

The proposed 1 percent sales levy for expanded Hamilton County bus service and infrastructure in 2020 will bring in $40 million annually in its first year for roads and other bus-related infrastructure. That’s a big chunk of money that local elected officials from township trustees to council members to mayors will no doubt will want a say in spending.

 

To build trust with the suburbs and ensure the city does not control all of the money, the plan is to use the Public Works Integrating Committee to decide how the infrastructure portion of the $150 million levy will be spent. It’s an obscure, appointed board, although the state lawmaker who came up with the idea noted that the individuals appointed to it traditionally have been elected officials.

 

Today that committee sends proposed local projects to the Ohio Public Works Commission for funding consideration by the state.

 

The concept is the brainchild of state Rep. Bill Seitz, R-Green Township, the powerful Ohio House majority floor leader. In an email, Seitz said the SORTA board is ill-equipped to make decisions about road projects. 

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2019/03/29/how-would-road-money-from-the-potential-sorta-levy.html

Business leaders are on board, Republicans are on board and... COAST is on board!?!

Can SORTA please take the open lane to the basket and slam it home? This isn't that hard folks.  Knowing the level of support, they better ask for the full 1 cent raise and get BRT implemented on those 2 routes.