2 minutes ago, taestell said:

 

So the way many suburbanites will view this is that their income tax will stay the same but a new sales tax is being added to fund Metro on top of what they're already paying. They will gloss over the details and not realize that the existing Metro income tax is going away because they won't see their paycheck increase. Meanwhile Covington and other area cities will rejoice in the fact that they are suddenly getting more tax revenue without having to pass a tax increase.

 

 

This is only true for people in Covington though. People in Hamco will get a tax break on their earnings tax if they work in Cincy because no municipality has a higher income tax rate. 

6 minutes ago, seaswan said:

IF we got BRT, what corridors would be best?

 

Reading Road and Glenway are the first two proposed to be implemented. That would be followed eventually by Hamilton Ave and Madison Road. 

 

https://reinventingmetro.com/index.php?page=bus-rapid-transit

 

 

You can't simply re-purpose the money to another cause, but I agree with you. It would have been easy for council put on the ballot some kind of language that said "if Hamilton county passes a sales tax of 0.7% or higher, we will eliminate the 0.3% income tax to Metro and add a 0.1% income tax dedicated to infrastructure improvements".

 

Then you get to vote on a potential 0.2% income tax decrease, and most will take the city up on it.

^ Exactly. I would have liked to see all of these things together on the same ballot (elimination of the 0.3% Metro earnings tax, increase of city earnings tax by 0.1%, addition of countywide Metro tax by 0.7%). Assuming you could word each issue so that it would only take effect if the other two also passed.

The 2002 plan was the best.  Keep the earnings tax, add a 1/2-cent county sales tax.  1/4 cent to immediate increased bus service in the county, the other 1/4 cent to construction of a rail system.  

 

The only way I would have changed that was to have dedicated a small portion of the 1/4 cent rail side to ongoing maintenance of the rail system.  So an escrow account would be created the moment the tax goes into effect that could not be used to pay capital bonds and must instead be reserved for maintenance of capital improvements and eventual replacement of rolling stock.   This helps protect against a budget crisis 20 years down the road when equipment needs to be replaced, signaling needs to be upgraded, etc.  

4 hours ago, DEPACincy said:

 

Reading Road and Glenway are the first two proposed to be implemented. That would be followed eventually by Hamilton Ave and Madison Road. 

 

https://reinventingmetro.com/index.php?page=bus-rapid-transit

 

 

I always thought madison would be great 

On 7/11/2019 at 9:56 AM, jmecklenborg said:

This whole plot is centered around reducing the city earnings tax from 2.1% to 1.8%, as if that will be a watershed in the city's history.  

 

I think many people are easily tricked by politicians who reduce one tax and then increase another, and they don't do the math to determine whether they're actually paying more or less in total. The same thing happened when Kasich reduced the state income tax but increased the state sales tax. I think some people believe that they are getting "a better deal" if they get a bigger paycheck due to lower income tax, even if they have to turn around and spend more on everything they buy because sales tax is higher...

 

It's like, occasionally people will tell me that I should move to Florida because there's no income tax there, so it would be like me getting a big raise! They, of course, never seem to know what Florida's sales tax or property tax rates are like.

When does SORTA need to decide the % they are putting on the ballot? And is it on the St Patricks Day primary date or Nov 2020?

2 hours ago, taestell said:

 

It's like, occasionally people will tell me that I should move to Florida because there's no income tax there, so it would be like me getting a big raise! They, of course, never seem to know what Florida's sales tax or property tax rates are like.

 

Also, "high tax" California has a $20 billion surplus this fiscal year, after a $10+ billion surplus last year, largely because they tax capital gains as ordinary income, and that can be as high as 12%.  However, there is no municipal earnings tax in California AND property taxes are comically low for the state's many grandfathered single-family homes and condos.  

 

A lot of Californians are paying like $2,000 in property tax.  Malibu.  Beverly Hills.  Paying less property tax than 1,500 sq foot cape cods in Ohio.   

That deception is the entire thing fueling the Republican party in this country. Trick people into thinking they get to keep their money by having them pay little in federal income tax, then giving every single tiny government agency the power to tax. Then send them five digit bills for health care every year of their lives and charging them $250,000 for college. We win.

"Sales Taxes are fairest and most painless tax."

^ That fawning over the stadium tax ("voters can't afford to refuse!") is so gross. Anyway, what the deal with the sunset of that tax? That endorsement claims "the sales tax will be removed in about 20 years -- or less" but it's been over 20 years since it passed ... does it basically have no hard sunset date and just last until all of the stadium bonds are paid off?

City Council set to send repeal of transit earnings tax to voters

 

Cincinnati City Council is expected to vote Wednesday on an amendment to the city’s charter that would repeal a 0.3% earnings tax used to fund the Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority’s Metro bus system if Hamilton County voters approve a new sales tax to fund the agency. 

 

Council’s Education, Innovation and Growth Committee sent the charter amendment to the full council on a 3-1 vote. If the full council approves it, voters would have their say in November. A majority would be needed to approve it. If they do, the city earnings tax would fall from 2.1% to 1.8%.

 

The charter amendment has the support of the Better Bus Coalition, which until Tuesday had considered its own transit-improvement measure that would have raised the earnings tax. Cam Hardy, president of the grassroots organization, told council members that he was pleased with the progress a bipartisan coalition of stakeholders, including the Cincinnati USA Regional Chamber, has made.

 

“A united campaign that brings together bus riders, employers, public officials – everyone with a stake in public transportation – will succeed in Hamilton County and provide the investment needed to build a first-class bus system,” the Better Bus Coalition said in a statement. 

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2019/08/06/city-council-set-to-send-repeal-of-transit.html

BBC says it's willing to support a full repeal of the earnings tax if it's replaced by a sales tax of .7% or greater. Is there anything in this charter amendment to enforce that >.7% demand?

 

Additionally, is that .7% exclusively for Metro/bus service or does it include the infrastructure bundle that has had some buzz? If it's bundled, then that's what, maybe .5% for bus service? Is that even an improvement on the present funding situation?

 

I'm worried BBC is getting taken for a ride, so to speak.

17 minutes ago, Robuu said:

I'm worried BBC is getting taken for a ride, so to speak.

 

Yep. I think they got sweet-talked by the Chamber and the other power brokers.

From what I've heard, Metro is going to pursue a 0.9% sales tax with 0.2% going to infrastructure around transit routes. Obviously we have to wait for the ballot language to be release before we know for sure.

 

I'm definitely concerned they will only put 0.5% toward transit and be in the same perpetual funding crisis we are currently in, but we would have used the political capital on the one sales tax and there won't be an appetite for an increase.

I imagine there is something like a 90% success rate for a 0.5 cent transit tax. An 80% success rate for a 0.7 cent transit tax. But if we pass a 0.5 cent transit tax, there is like a 5% chance we pass an additional 0.2 cent transit tax in the future. This is the sales tax we'll have for the next generation or two, and we better get it right.

21 minutes ago, taestell said:

 

Yep. I think they got sweet-talked by the Chamber and the other power brokers.

 

The Chamber is all in on improving the bus system. Their priorities align very well with BBC. Pete Metz is their transportation policy guy and he is a bus rider himself and a big transit advocate.

I wonder though, how the chamber would react if Cincinnati voters rejected the .3% earnings tax decrease, but county voters passed the sales tax.  I would find it funny, because the big companies are only behind this improvement if they get to decrease their earnings tax.  They'd show their true colors if that result happened.

I have the same concern as @ryanlammi. I believe that a Metro tax has a good chance of passing no matter what amount they pick. So it would be a total waste to pass a 0.5% tax that barely improves anything at Metro when we could have passed a 1% tax that would totally transform the system into something way better. I don't doubt that there are good people at the Chamber who genuinely care about improving transit ... but the primary reason the Chamber wants a sales tax to pass is so that they can decrease the earnings tax. Because the Fortune 500 companies downtown want the earnings tax to decrease.

17 hours ago, taestell said:

^ That fawning over the stadium tax ("voters can't afford to refuse!") is so gross. Anyway, what the deal with the sunset of that tax? That endorsement claims "the sales tax will be removed in about 20 years -- or less" but it's been over 20 years since it passed ... does it basically have no hard sunset date and just last until all of the stadium bonds are paid off?

I've wondered the same thing.  How long does that tax last? Does it actually ever end? 

37 minutes ago, taestell said:

I have the same concern as @ryanlammi. I believe that a Metro tax has a good chance of passing no matter what amount they pick. So it would be a total waste to pass a 0.5% tax that barely improves anything at Metro when we could have passed a 1% tax that would totally transform the system into something way better. I don't doubt that there are good people at the Chamber who genuinely care about improving transit ... but the primary reason the Chamber wants a sales tax to pass is so that they can decrease the earnings tax. Because the Fortune 500 companies downtown want the earnings tax to decrease.

 

It is true that the folks on 4th Street want the earnings tax to go down, but it is also true that many of them want a better bus system. They hear their employees telling them that they want better commuting options. They see a better bus system as a way to recruit more millennials to the region. 

10 minutes ago, 14Bremen said:

I've wondered the same thing.  How long does that tax last? Does it actually ever end? 

 

I have tried on multiple occasions to find the actual text of the ballot issue online and have not succeeded. 1996 was not that long ago and you would think it would be available somewhere online (old newspaper article, BOE website, League of Women Voters website, etc.) but it doesn't appear to be.

8 hours ago, taestell said:

 

I have tried on multiple occasions to find the actual text of the ballot issue online and have not succeeded. 1996 was not that long ago and you would think it would be available somewhere online (old newspaper article, BOE website, League of Women Voters website, etc.) but it doesn't appear to be.

 

Yeah I can't find it either.  I don't believe that the sales tax is actually dedicated to the stadium debt or that it sunsets when the bonds are retired.  

 

Hamilton County does have a nice history of its sales tax receipts here:

https://www.hamiltoncountyohio.gov/government/departments/budget_and_strategic_initiatives/sales_tax

 

It's amazing to see how huge the increases were year-over-year back in the 70s and 80s when there was inflation.  We have been in a low inflationary period since the passage of the 1996 tax.   

 

Here is a follow-up on the bizarre bus shooting this past Friday night:

https://www.wcpo.com/news/crime/despite-shooting-victims-death-metro-driver-who-shuttled-him-to-er-is-a-hero

 

By chance I was at UC about 20 minutes after the bus arrived at the ER, and saw the passengers transferring to a new bus that Metro sent to the hospital.  About 15-20 people were on the bus and they all looked rattled.  Nobody was talking or emotional in any way, and they were all sort of staring off into space.  

 

There was still a bicycle on the front of the bus that was shot.  I didn't see any damage to the bus, so I assume the gunfire came through the right side, since the left side was facing outward toward the driveway.  They had the bus completely blocked off with police tape and about 20 police officers standing around so I couldn't get close.  

 

About two hours later 50-75 friends and family showed up by 11pm that time the news that the passenger had died had already been publicized.  

 

After seeing how successful the Columbus transit pass has been for people getting to work downtown, it is time we considered this for our system.  I-71 and I-75 are gridlocked every rush hour, and with WC and Mason growing incredibly fast every year, that is going to get worse faster than we can add lanes to these highways.  The least expensive and most effective way to alleviate the congestion there would be to boost funding/# of buses for the I75 and I71 park and ride metro routes and offer free passes for those routes.  We already effectively have transit-only lanes on our highways (both have signs mentioning the shoulder is for buses only). 

 

I know this isn't too fair, as the WC and Mason people don't need a handout to ride the bus like other parts of town, but the overall benefit to the region would be good.  Is anyone here closely following the Reinventing Metro team or with the BBC and do we know if they are looking at the success they had in Columbus?

From what I understand, the effort to give Downtown Columbus workers free bus passes was pushed and funded by Columbus Downtown Development Corporation, Columbus' equivalent of Cincinnati's DCI (Downtown Cincinnati Inc). Given the fact that DCI is now part of 3CDC, an organization that makes a significant amount of its profit from running parking garages, I don't think they would be as gung-ho to support free transit passes for downtown workers.

56 minutes ago, 10albersa said:

After seeing how successful the Columbus transit pass has been for people getting to work downtown, it is time we considered this for our system.  I-71 and I-75 are gridlocked every rush hour, and with WC and Mason growing incredibly fast every year, that is going to get worse faster than we can add lanes to these highways.  The least expensive and most effective way to alleviate the congestion there would be to boost funding/# of buses for the I75 and I71 park and ride metro routes and offer free passes for those routes.  We already effectively have transit-only lanes on our highways (both have signs mentioning the shoulder is for buses only). 

 

I know this isn't too fair, as the WC and Mason people don't need a handout to ride the bus like other parts of town, but the overall benefit to the region would be good.  Is anyone here closely following the Reinventing Metro team or with the BBC and do we know if they are looking at the success they had in Columbus?

 

I agree. The thing transit does is it expands the person carrying capacity of our roadways. Every full bus is 55-60 single-occupancy vehicles removed from the roadway. It makes a difference, even on highway commutes from the suburbs. Ideally, it would be great to have more people using local lines more often but that takes approaching not only the employer but also the potential rider in highlighting that transit can be used to go other places besides your commute.

9 minutes ago, taestell said:

Given the fact that DCI is now part of 3CDC, an organization that makes a significant amount of its profit from running parking garages, I don't think they would be as gung-ho to support free transit passes for downtown workers.

 

Yeah, that'll quash it right there.  If that's the case, it would be nice if SORTA would build this into their new plan, granted the levy passes in 2020.  At the least, attempt to organize it among downtown employers and just go around DCI.  They'll have a few more cents to give back to transit (as a thank you) if the levy passes. Yes, I know that's naive

On 8/7/2019 at 10:49 AM, DEPACincy said:

They see a better bus system as a way to recruit more millennials to the region. 

 

If that's the case then we need a truly better bus system, not small incremental improvements that barely move the needle. 

I.E. If we're going to built "BRT" thehn it needs to be on par or better than Indy's Red Line, not more of "Metro+." 

46 minutes ago, Gordon Bombay said:

 

If that's the case then we need a truly better bus system, not small incremental improvements that barely move the needle. 

I.E. If we're going to built "BRT" thehn it needs to be on par or better than Indy's Red Line, not more of "Metro+." 

 

Agreed. And we need the four lines in the reinventing Metro plan. Not just the two they are now talking about. I live in Northside and would take the Hamilton Avenue/Ludlow/Clifton line to work downtown everyday if it existed. The Glenway and Reading lines will be high volume but the Hamilton Ave and Gilbert/Montgomery Ave lines hit more high density nodes with lots of millennials. And nodes are key for BRT, vs. the relatively high densities found all along Reading Road, but very few truly high density nodes.

2 hours ago, 10albersa said:

Mason growing incredibly fast every year

 

As an aside, Mason grew 92% in the 1990s and 40% in the 2000s and only 9% this decade. That growth will likely reverse and turn into losses in the next decade unless they change their zoning to allow more high-density development. As it stands now, it is getting very close to being built out. 

 

EDIT TO ADD: The losses will be because of declining household sizes. Historically, Mason had very large households compared to the region as a whole, but it has been trending toward smaller households, and at a faster rate than the region as a whole. 

Edited September 17, 20195 yr by DEPACincy

4 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

 

As an aside, Mason grew 92% in the 1990s and 40% in the 2000s and only 9% this decade. That growth will likely reverse and turn into losses in the next decade unless they change their zoning to allow more high-density development. As it stands now, it is getting very close to being built out. 

 

This is getting a little away from the topic, but Mason had a measure on the ballot (I think last year) that would have allowed increased density in certain areas of the city (particularly around their downtown area). Even with the relaxation, each individual case would have been voted on by the city council. It wouldn't be a blanket approval for these areas. Right now the city charter forbids development over a certain density. It was voted down by about a 2/3 majority if I recall correctly.

1 minute ago, ryanlammi said:

 

This is getting a little away from the topic, but Mason had a measure on the ballot (I think last year) that would have allowed increased density on certain areas of the city (particularly around their downtown area). Right now the city charter forbids development over a certain density. It was voted down by about a 2/3 majority if I recall correctly.

 

Yea, and that's why the trend toward smaller household sizes will lead to population losses. It'll be interesting to see if their tone changes once the growth stops. Mason could be very similar to what we now see with the development in Dublin if they'd let it happen. 

Just looked it up, and the limit is 8 units per acre for multifamily.

1 hour ago, ryanlammi said:

Just looked it up, and the limit is 8 units per acre for multifamily.

 

To put that in perspective, my area of Northside has about 10 units per acre and all the houses are single-family detached. 

3 hours ago, Gordon Bombay said:

If that's the case then we need a truly better bus system, not small incremental improvements that barely move the needle. 

I.E. If we're going to built "BRT" thehn it needs to be on par or better than Indy's Red Line, not more of "Metro+." 

 

2 hours ago, DEPACincy said:

Agreed. And we need the four lines in the reinventing Metro plan. Not just the two they are now talking about.

 

Apparently the latest version of the Reinventing Metro plan was unveiled today and doesn't even call for two specific BRT routes anymore. It just sets aside some money for BRT and says that whether or not BRT gets built "depends" on various factors.

 

 

5 minutes ago, taestell said:

whether or not BRT gets built "depends" on various factors.

 

 

I mean, it does though. All the main arteries proposed aren’t overly wide and go through various business districts with various degrees of pedestrian or auto orientation. It’s unfortunate, but you can’t just dedicate a lane for busses to travel uninterrupted for 5 or more miles.

But the fact that they're no longer naming the Reading and Glenway corridors as priority BRT routes is really troubling to me. It makes it seem like SORTA's leadership is not that committed to making BRT happen. Saying that it "depends on federal funding and community input" is true of course. But if you are trying to build a new piece of transit infrastructure, you typically want to start out by presenting a bold vision and selling it to the public, and then getting the community support and the federal funding to make it happen. Show people how awesome it would be to get around on a BRT system running on those streets with center platform stations, dedicated lanes, and signal priority. Show people what they're going to get if the tax passes and put some effort into selling it.

^I think you run the chance of having the opposite effect if you come out with a lane-dedicating BRT proposal before having any community engagement. It could involve taking away curbside parking, which always upsets people, and could even encourage cars to speed now that the road would be wide open, making business districts less pedestrian friendly.

 

I’m not against BRT as a concept but it’s certainly more easily adaptable to Indianapolis’s flat grid than our arterial roads. It comes down to geography 

4 hours ago, taestell said:

But the fact that they're no longer naming the Reading and Glenway corridors as priority BRT routes is really troubling to me. It makes it seem like SORTA's leadership is not that committed to making BRT happen.

 

Yep, I'm already getting a sour feeling about this.  It has all the markings of them trying to back off of the BRT proposal.  All they have to do is point to the enthusiasm that was generated in Indy for their BRT route's opening.  Instead, they will hesitate and play it safe, and to the detriment of the regional system.  How do they expect that more people are going to ride when the fastest routes take an hour to get from most parts of the county to downtown?  I live in Wyoming, it's a 17 min drive downtown, or a 1 hour bus ride... The only cases in which the bus is even a reasonable choice are gridlocked busy weekends like Oktoberfest and BLINK where parking will be annoying to find.

 

I'll vote for it, but I'm confident it will fail if you are telling voters to increase it without giving us a shiny new toy.  I will be vocal whenever SORTA brings this Reinventing Metro show to Wyoming/Lockland/Reading in 2020.

Edited September 18, 20195 yr by 10albersa

Hamilton County has more than $1 billion in infrastructure needs along transit routes, study says

 

Hamilton County has more than $1.17 billion in planned infrastructure projects along Metro bus routes, according to a new study commissioned by the Cincinnati USA Regional Chamber.

 

The total is among nearly $2 billion in overall planned projects throughout the county, including those not along transit routes, according to the analysis by Stantec.

 

Included in the total is the $335 million project to replace the Western Hills Viaduct with a new bridge and plans to secure the hillside above Columbia Parkway in the city.

 

The chamber released the analysis on Tuesday night to bolster the case for a countywide sales tax levy that would boost spending on road, bridge and sidewalk projects along with the Metro bus system, which is run by the Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2019/09/18/hamilton-county-has-more-than-1-billion-in.html

If they want to get this thing on the March 17 (presidential primary) ballot, they need to file the paperwork by December 18. So they better work out these details fast.

Maybe naive, but is it possible they're backing away from the Reading/Glenway options because those aren't considered the most politically viable, rather than truly backing away from BRT as a whole? 

 

And/or that they are considering more of the Better Bus Coalition insight?

 

The BBC's proposed routes in the better bus plan were both North/South. https://betterbuscoalition.org/see-proposed-brt-routes 

Metro/SORTA is transitioning to the Transit app instead of their standalone EZ Ride App.

 

 

^amazingly/infuriatingly... it's still not clear if live tracking will include the streetcars:

 

 

I have always used the Transit app for streetcar tracking and it seems to be based on real time location, not schedules.

32 minutes ago, jwulsin said:

^amazingly/infuriatingly... it's still not clear if live tracking will include the streetcars:

 

 

The streetcar already is on the Transit app. 

Can you actually see the streetcar (or buses) on the map like you can on bustracker.go-metro.com?  That's all I want.  I don't want to have to plan a route or set a destination or anything.  I don't see a way to do that on the Transit app. 

I haven't ever ridden a bus here but can you do Google pay currently or is this upgrade going to do that? Went to Portland last month and loved that I could use Google pay for buses and streetcars.

The fare boxes on the bus do not accept Google Pay/Apple Pay/other NFC payments. The way it will work is that you buy and activate a ticket in the Transit app, then you show the bus driver your phone as you board. For streetcar it is the same, except that you do not show the driver as you board.