As the campaign over transportation inevitably ratchets up, the myriad of issues — as defined by opponents and advocates — will be regularly reoccurring news staples. Most will be economics-driven. Some will be ideological.
*A tax hike during a recession, one that would give Hillsborough County the highest sales tax in the state.
*Questions about who actually will use light rail.
*Queries about subsidies.
*Concerns about the long-term economic viability of the Tampa Bay area minus meaningful mass transit and the jobs-producing ripple effect from a modern transit system.
*Variations on an improved quality-of-life scenario, including a long-overdue counter to counterproductive urban sprawl.
*Unflattering comparisons to Detroit as the only other major market in America sans mass transit.
A November 2010 election, one where the ballot would present voters with a one-cent sales tax option for transit improvements — rail, buses and roads – is now historically close to reality. The election is less than a year away, and the Hillsborough County Commission is moving ahead with a plan. The same commission that failed multiple times this decade to respond responsibly to major transportation initiatives.
Recall how we got here. The commission recently voted 5-2 to draft a resolution stating its intent to seek the sales surtax referendum next November. Specifically, that’s Rose Ferlita, Kevin Beckner, Ken Hagan, Kevin White and – especially – Mark Sharpe who voted in favor of putting the tax on the ballot and actually ushering Tampa into the 21st century. Politics and ideological labels took a back seat to Tampa’s future. Well done.
And yet two commissioners, Jim Norman and Al Higginbottom, thought otherwise. Sure, a tax hike on anything, let alone during an economic slump, is a tough sell. And the exact resolution language is yet to be formulated. But the overriding principle is still this: However you see the priorities, how can letting the voters have the ultimate word not be one of them? Are they not to be trusted – even if there’s not a stadium included?
Stand against the economic and quality-of-life viability of this area if you must, make your politically-expedient case as best you can, and invoke the name of Ralph Hughes ad infinitum, but don’t deny locals a direct say in the future. Theirs as well as the next generation’s.