Why Did the Transit Referendum Fail? And What's Next?

In case you have not had the chance to read about last night’s election results, the Hillsborough County Transportation Sales Tax Referendum failed to pass by a vote of roughly 58% to 42%. Indeed, it is very disappointing news to all of us. I want to thank you for your support and hard work during the past year. Although this single referendum failed, we succeeded in engaging hundreds of young professionals and spreading the message that public transit truly matters to our quality of life and economic development opportunities.

However, we are not giving up on our efforts to encourage an economic and physical environment that creates opportunities for young professionals. There are other initiatives and issues which we can accomplish, and that work begins today. But first, I’d like to weigh in on some reasons why this referendum might have failed and perhaps provide some insight into how we can improve upon our foundations.

The current economic climate is very discouraging. I do not blame anyone for being extremely concerned with how the government is spending tax dollars and their desire to keep more of their own hard-earned money. As supporters of this referendum, we knew that anti-tax sentiment was at an all-time high, and rightly so. The lesson we should learn from this is to refine our message. Voters must clearly understand the benefits to the local economy. They must be able to differentiate between “federal waste” and local investments which have a greater effect on their daily lives than most federal spending programs. We cannot simply say “jobs, jobs, jobs”. We have to explain how the process of economic development creates jobs, how the movement of people and goods affects commerce, how transit oriented development works, and how livable communities attract educated professionals and entrepreneurs. The benefits must outweigh the costs in voters’ minds.

2) The specific routes and costs of the projects were not finalized. Taxpayers have a hard time rationalizing an investment when they do not know exactly what they are paying for and how much it costs. Unfortunately, HART’s alternatives analyses were not completed in time for the election. We were unable to tell voters precisely where new routes would go and how exact costs would be structured. In future ballot measures, we need to be sure the public understands the specifics. The best decision is an informed decision.

3) Voters outside of central Tampa were not aware of the potential benefits. Have a look at the results by precinct from the Supervisor of Election’s website: http://results.enr.clarityelections.com/FL/Hillsborough/22912/39204/en/md.html?cid=8035

The green areas indicate precincts where the referendum passed, the red areas are where it was rejected. It is evident that we failed to reach voters outside of Downtown, South Tampa, and the I-275 Corridor. We need to effectively communicate the benefits of transit to those who might not be serviced by light rail. Bus service, road work, and future commuter rail would service them. Also, transit reduces their traffic congestion, preserves green space and low-density communities by focusing high-density growth around transit stops, and encourages economic development across the county, not just in one area.

4) Either young professionals did not turn out to vote, or they were opposed to this referendum. I have not yet found exit polling to support this assertion, but I believe many young people did not vote in Hillsborough County (which historical evidence usually confirms). According to the Census Bureau, the median age of the county is 36.6 years old, and those aged 20-34 represent 20.3% of the total population. Ages 35 and over represent 52.4% of the total population. According to the Supervisor of Elections, voters aged 18-29 represent 19.8% of all registered voters. That means voters over age 30 comprise 80% of all voters. (I know the data ranges don’t all match up, but that’s what was available.) Those figures mean that Hillsborough is a fairly young county, but a higher proportion of the middle-aged and elderly population actually vote. This is similar to national trends, and seems like common knowledge, but it shows that we have our work cut out for us. The demographics we tried to reach were the 18-35 year old college students and young professionals. I believe we greatly succeeded in connecting to our “base”: young professionals who were already involved in community/business organizations. However, we need to reach young people who are not plugged into their communities. That is a difficult and daunting task, but I know that we have the right message and can win them over with the right strategy. Until otherwise proven wrong, I refuse to believe that the majority of young professionals are opposed to initiatives that so obviously benefit our generation. The real challenge is engaging them.

Yesterday’s referendum may not have succeeded, but it does not mean our ideas have failed. We are unified in our desire for a better Tampa Bay region. I have no doubt that we will achieve our goals in spite of setbacks and naysayers. Thank you again for your support, and let’s continue down the path to a promising future.

If you have any comments on the election, suggestions for strategy, or just random thoughts, please send them my way.