Hmmm, perhaps we should not be subsidizing more roadway expansion on the level that we do, JTA should focus on mass transit only and the gas tax should go away? I can see pros and cons on both sides of this debate.
QuoteOfficials warn they'll use construction money for buses if it isn't extended.
By Larry Hannan
In addition to running the local buses and the Skyway, the Jacksonville Transportation Authority is in charge of major road construction projects in Duval County â€" for now.
But with a major source of revenue that funds the bus system and the Skyway set to end in a few years, the authority's traditional role as a builder of roads may be jeopardy.
The local gas tax, which puts a 6-cent surcharge on every gallon of gas sold in Duval County, is scheduled to expire in 2016. If the tax isn't extended by City Hall, JTA officials warn they will have use road construction money to keep the buses and the Skyway operating.
So we at least know that the skyway gets very little from this revenue source.
Quote
The tax generates about $25 million to $30 million a year. It was created in 1986 by the City Council for needed road improvements in the city but limited to 10 years only.
Since then, the tax has been extended to 2016 â€" and most of its revenue now goes to cover the annual losses of operating the buses and Skyway. The gas tax generated $28.3 million in 2010 and is expected to bring in $27.7 million this year.
Last year, the Skyway got $620,000 of the gas-tax money. It also received an extra $2.5 million from the bus fund, but it's unclear if that money came from the gas tax because sales-tax revenue and grant money also goes into the bus fund.
full article: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2011-05-06/story/jta-faces-challenge-renewing-6-cent-gas-tax#ixzz1LZoIJDFX
Man, your comment in that slew of nonsense is the only one that's not completely retarded.
What a bunch of uninformed people. "Bah! Get rid of them there buses if if it means having more money for these insanely costly roads & filling up mah 14 MPG truck!"
God, how conditioned we've become. I seriously think the only way to get people to realize how dumb this whole system is is to have sustained debilitating gas prices (like $6+ a gallon).
QuoteI can see pros and cons on both sides of this debate.
Wow, only 3 posts to something at the HEART of MetroJacksonville. All the rail zealots want a commuter rail system, but if you vote for the gas tax, something democratic at heart, it leads to more roads and more sprawl, republican at heart but allows for commuter rail to hang around because JTA has the money.
What to support here, what to support here? More roads and gas tax and save the choo choo projects, or damn the tax and kill commuter rail? Spin Cycle is officially on FULL BLAST!!! ;D
Kill the Gas tax if it will slow road construction, force us to infill while giving us cheaper gas.
At this point, I prefer to kill the gas tax, road building and streamlining mass transit operations to a smaller area with frequent reliable service. Like a household budget, it's time to do more with less. I'm fine with a delay on spreading our resources too thin to serve the suburbs with infrequent commuter rail if it means establishing a real workable and sustainable core city first.
QuoteAt this point, I prefer to kill the gas tax, road building and streamlining mass transit operations to a smaller area with frequent reliable service. Like a household budget, it's time to do more with less. I'm fine with a delay on spreading our resources too thin to serve the suburbs with infrequent commuter rail if it means establishing a real workable core city first.
Lake, you cannot kill the gas tax without killing light/commuter rail. JTA uses that gas tax money to help pay for the other operations. Kill the gas tax, yes, you kill the roads, but now you force JTA to work with less, and forget light rail as no new projects will be on the table without a source of funding.
I'm fine with that. I'm not Ock. I'll live with only the mobility plan priority transit projects for the urban core and improved amtrak service if it comes with forever killing unneeded massive suburban highway construction too. Our local budget would be better off long term once we slow down our sprawl growth.
Quote from: thelakelander on May 06, 2011, 05:21:17 PM
I'm fine with that. I'm not Ock. I'll live with only the mobility plan priority transit projects for the urban core and improved amtrak service if it comes with forever killing unneeded massive suburban highway construction too. Our local budget would be better off long term once we slow down our sprawl growth.
I'm curious as to what road projects JTA has done in the last few years that you consider "unneeded massive highway construction?"
Of those I'm aware of...
Two of the more dangerous intersections - Atlantic/Kernan and Beach/Kernan got overpasses and new interchanges. In both cases, traffic now flows better and both appear to be safer than previously. The projects near the port will only serve to boost the port expansion which is hailed by experts as a major economic driver for the entire region.
Wonderwood was a JTA project. Added a fourth evacuation route from the beaches and relieved congestion from Mayport. That's sounds positive. What am I missing?
What we need is exclusive travel lanes on major arterials. That would get people to seriously consider mass transit. We need additional travel options - but JTA is working on those, yes?
I often wondered why the gas tax is tied to transit. You want people to use mass transit. So you fund it with gas tax money. But if more people use mass transit - then there's less gas tax money to fund transit. Seems conveluted to me. JTA should be funded using a separate revenue stream not associated with the gas tax. Whether its roads or transit - everybody benefits somehow whether they want to admit it or not. You have to pay for progress - replacing roads, bridges, or addign commuter rail, streetcars, etc. They money has to come from somewhere.
Quote from: exnewsman on May 06, 2011, 05:46:47 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on May 06, 2011, 05:21:17 PM
I'm fine with that. I'm not Ock. I'll live with only the mobility plan priority transit projects for the urban core and improved amtrak service if it comes with forever killing unneeded massive suburban highway construction too. Our local budget would be better off long term once we slow down our sprawl growth.
I'm curious as to what road projects JTA has done in the last few years that you consider "unneeded massive highway construction?"
I think the debate is worth having. It may not be in the city's best interest to having JTA play the role of a road builder and mass transit operator. Maybe road building should be handled by FDOT and COJ Public Works? Anyway, to answer your question, JTA isn't alone in pushing through road projects that may not be worth the cost taxpayers paid to construct them. When push comes to shove, many of the proposed overpass projects (for example) may be just that.....unneeded.
QuoteOf those I'm aware of...
Two of the more dangerous intersections - Atlantic/Kernan and Beach/Kernan got overpasses and new interchanges. In both cases, traffic now flows better and both appear to be safer than previously. The projects near the port will only serve to boost the port expansion which is hailed by experts as a major economic driver for the entire region.
Atlantic/Kernan and Beach/Kernan combined cost over $80 million. Businesses also closed as a result of the Atlantic/Kernan project. Traffic should flow smoothly up until Sleiman builds out his massive development and other developments fill in at these intersections.....then what? Spend another $80 million to get traffic flowing smoothly for another five year period? In addition, after spending $80 million, the completed projects make it significantly more dangerous for pedestrians to cross these wide arterials. In the end, I try to look at things from a holistic standpoint with taxpayer dollars, even if it negatively impacts the industry I work in. When I ask myself if $80 million would be better spent on isolated highway overpasses or used to better education, keep libraries open, maintain parks or investing in cheaper complete street solutions that actually encourage less automobile usage long term, the overpasses don't rank as a high priority category.
QuoteWonderwood was a JTA project. Added a fourth evacuation route from the beaches and relieved congestion from Mayport. That's sounds positive. What am I missing?
This may not be a JTA project but one I really have problems with is spending a combined $237 million on Collins Road. I understand the reasoning but again fall back to is this the best use of $237 million of taxpayer money. 9B is another I have some issues with. Overall, I believe its time for us as a community to expand our horizons and creativity and attempt to find less expensive solutions that actually take cars off the streets instead of encouraging more.
QuoteWhat we need is exclusive travel lanes on major arterials. That would get people to seriously consider mass transit. We need additional travel options - but JTA is working on those, yes?
Not necessarily. Corridors should be evaluated on a case by case basis (based on context) when deciding how to properly addres them. We need to modify our zoning, live within our means and learn how to do more with less. That means, strengthing mass transit, walkability, cycling options, densifying and encouraging infill along corridors where we've already invested in the infrastructure. While mass transit and roads have their place, they only a small part of the overall puzzle (zoning and the integration of land use and transportation is most important imo). Its time to start evaluating things from a more holistic view.
QuoteI often wondered why the gas tax is tied to transit. You want people to use mass transit. So you fund it with gas tax money. But if more people use mass transit - then there's less gas tax money to fund transit. Seems conveluted to me. JTA should be funded using a separate revenue stream not associated with the gas tax. Whether its roads or transit - everybody benefits somehow whether they want to admit it or not. You have to pay for progress - replacing roads, bridges, or addign commuter rail, streetcars, etc. They money has to come from somewhere.
Maybe JTA shouldn't be in charge of all of these things. Maybe JTA is already stretched to thin to do any one thing truly effectively? By the same token, why aren't we seriously considering other funding mechanisms for various projects. In Detroit, the private sector ponied up $100 million of their own cash for LRT and convinced the feds to match that with $100 million more. In downtown Orlando, the LYMMO BRT operates off of downtown CRA and city parking garage revenue. For Sunrail, they've allowed the hospitals to pay for rail stations instead of forcing them to build structured parking to meet city parking requirements that aren't designed with walkability in mind. In Dallas, the M-Line Streetcar is operated with volunteer service. In short, there are other methods worth exploring to fund our needs. While I would not cry if the gas tax went away or stayed, I also think we should be looking at non-traditional ways of funding and maintaining various projects to move them forward. It appears that this gas tax debate and the election of either Hogan or Brown may open the door to this discussion.
Also, in the event that the tax isn't extended before the new mayor takes office, it basically means that JTA has a five year window to truly proves its worth to the community. A rope has been extended to JTA. Its going to be up to the agency to either climb or hang itself by 2016.
Quote from: mtraininjax on May 06, 2011, 05:19:13 PM
QuoteAt this point, I prefer to kill the gas tax, road building and streamlining mass transit operations to a smaller area with frequent reliable service. Like a household budget, it's time to do more with less. I'm fine with a delay on spreading our resources too thin to serve the suburbs with infrequent commuter rail if it means establishing a real workable core city first.
Lake, you cannot kill the gas tax without killing light/commuter rail. JTA uses that gas tax money to help pay for the other operations. Kill the gas tax, yes, you kill the roads, but now you force JTA to work with less, and forget light rail as no new projects will be on the table without a source of funding.
not necessarily...keep in mind that JTA is studying the potential for a regional authority....just the type of agency that could pay for commuter rail operations....theer's also the sunRail plan, which involves state funding for operations for many years...similar for TriRail.
Quote from: thelakelander on May 06, 2011, 05:21:17 PM
I'm fine with that. I'm not Ock. I'll live with only the mobility plan priority transit projects for the urban core and improved amtrak service if it comes with forever killing unneeded massive suburban highway construction too. Our local budget would be better off long term once we slow down our sprawl growth.
Is this the Mobility Plan that Councilman Webb wants to defund with a 5 year moratorium on mobility fees? If there is a moratorium on the fees, for any set period, all the developers will get their approvals during the moratorium, and the rest of us taxpayers will be stuck paying for development. Not that that will be a big change from the current way of doing things.
And, despite any local moves, the Governor wants to do away with all fees that might hinder development under the banner of "jobs jobs jobs".
Mr. Webb has proposed a moratorium on concurrency fees for an unspecified time (he's hinted at 12 or 18 months)...but depending on how his bill is written, it may be almost useless...thats because the mobility fee will replace concurrency (hopefully by July)
I give Mr. Webb more credit than to get hung up on terminology "concurrency" or "mobility" fees - I think his intent is clear - to sweep away anything which might hinder development.
Or, he is more clever than I give him credit for, by getting a "concurrency" moratorium to appease his developer contributors, then "mobility" sweeps in and he claims he tried, but ... Of course, the fly in this ointment is that he will have to vote on the mobility fee.
At this point, I don't believe the general public (even the tea party) will go for a concurrency moratorium. I hope I'm not wrong (after this is Jax we're talking about).
QuoteSo we at least know that the skyway gets very little from this revenue source.
Not so sure, there, Lake. It appears all the total dollars JTA puts towards the Skyway may come from this gas tax. It's just that some $2.5 million of it is laundered through the bus system on the way to the Skyway. JTA is just playing a classic shell game to hide how much the taxpayers locally contribute toward running the Skyway. Read the article highlight below again:QuoteThe tax generates about $25 million to $30 million a year. It was created in 1986 by the City Council for needed road improvements in the city but limited to 10 years only.
Since then, the tax has been extended to 2016 â€" and most of its revenue now goes to cover the annual losses of operating the buses and Skyway. The gas tax generated $28.3 million in 2010 and is expected to bring in $27.7 million this year.
Last year, the Skyway got $620,000 of the gas-tax money. It also received an extra $2.5 million from the bus fund, but it's unclear if that money came from the gas tax because sales-tax revenue and grant money also goes into the bus fund.
As to elimination of the gas tax affecting commuter rail or street car projects, I am not so sure it will hinder them. Commuter rail and street cars are more likely to be primarily funded by federal and regional/FDOT monies I would think based on prior experience. By the way, local taxpayers paying for many of our expressway and other major roads normally paid by FDOT and the Feds has been a sore point for some for many years. The only advantage to JTA doing these projects is to accelerate them but then we locals are paying much for that impatience. We need to avoid falling into the same rut with mass transit that could be funded by non-local monies as well.
I agree with Lake that eliminating the tax to prevent JTA from doing more road projects is a good thing. (P.S. I think you need to add the JTB road and interchange and Chaffee Road projects to their bucket list.) If this forces JTA to be more focused on mass transit than roads, it's all worth killing the tax. JTA has proven industrious in rounding up outside monies for its agenda and I am sure it will be doing so for mass transit if that is all it is left with by killing the tax.
Doubtful stjr...I can tell you that the Skyway gets a good bit of its funding from FTA 5309 grants...which are only available to fixed-route rail systems....for next fiscal year, the grant will be around $500,000.