More thoughts on transportation district funding
So the same day that I wrote about transit withholding taxes, a judge in New York State ruled that the creation of the mass transit district that included outlying counties was not an appropriate act by the state government. See "MTA payroll tax ruling met with joy; transit authority plans appeal" from the Poughkeepsie Journal. From the article:
In his ruling Wednesday, Nassau County Justice R. Bruce Cozzens Jr. called the payroll tax a “special law” passed by a 60 percent majority vote in the Assembly and 52 percent majority vote in the state Senate that does not serve the entire state’s interest. “This law should have been, according to the state Constitution, passed with either a Home Rule message or by message of necessity with two-thirds vote in each house. This did not occur, therefore this law was passed unconstitutionally,” Cozzens wrote.
I don't agree with the judge as transit/transportation is not a legitimate state interest and because services typically cross jurisdictional boundaries, higher level governmental coordination is an appropriate state function and action, but then, I am not a lawyer, and maybe on technical grounds, the law wasn't passed properly.
We'll see what happens in the appeals process.
2. I have been meaning to write yet again about the Allegheny County Regional Asset District in the context of the successful initiative in the Detroit area, where voters in Wayne, Oakland, and Macomb counties agreed to a small property tax to fund the Detroit Institute of Arts.
While other arts institutions are interested in pursuing something similar ("Why Arts Managers Short of Cash Are Looking At Detroit " from the Wall Street Journal), for the most part they are looking at this issue in a piecemeal fashion.
Instead, the RAD as a concept addresses arts and cultural uses and funding in a very systematic manner, which for the most part is unprecedented at the center city-county level (Chicago has a Park District, but it's only operative within the city).
From "Transit bailout with RAD funds does not pose threat to arts, Allegheny County executive says" in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
For 2012, RAD allocated $84.1 million to 89 groups and amenities. About 32 percent went to libraries, another 31 percent to parks, 17 percent to sports venues, 10 percent to arts and cultural groups and 9 percent to big regional attractions such as Phipps Conservatory and Botanical Gardens.
Because transit in Allegheny County has been barraged by massive cuts in funding and service since the 2008 real estate crash, it has been proposed that the Regional Asset District, which is funded by a 1% sales tax, also begin providing some bridge funding to the transit agency. Also see "Pittsburgh Mayor Ravenstahl cautious about idea to fund transit via asset district" from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
Obviously, transit is a regional asset, and combining it with arts/culture/parks funding mechanisms isn't unreasonable. Although arts groups, justifiably, are concerned about competition and likely over time the sales tax amount dedicated to the RAD would have to increase.
Labels: externalities and taxation, mobility withholding tax, proffers-community benefits, special tax districts, sports and economic development, stadiums/arenas, transportation planning
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home