Public Support for Transportation Sales Taxes in California: A Two County Assessment

Green, Andrew D.; Neiman, Max; Bockman, Shel; Sirotnik, Barbara

doi:10.1515/cjpp-2012-0009

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, the perception of existing transportation service matters. A study of transportation tax measures in two southern California counties found that “respondents in both counties are approximately 7% more likely to support the extension of the transportation sales tax measures when [existing] transit options are viewed favorably.” However, an unfavorable view of existing transit does not cause significant opposition ( 21 ).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lessons Learned from 40 Years of Local Option Transportation Sales Taxes in California

Lederman¹,

Brown²,

Taylor³

et al. 2018

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inflation-adjusted federal funding of transportation projects per vehicle mile of travel has been decreasing for decades. In response, states and regions around the United States have scrambled to make up the shortfalls. In the nation's most populous state, California, the 18-cent per gallon motor fuel excise tax remained unchanged between 1993 and 2016, despite the fact that inflation and increased vehicle fuel efficiency together eroded the fuel tax's buying power (1). Since the 1980s, the growing gap between transportation program needs and revenues has been increasingly backfilled in California (and several other states) by county sales tax measures for transportation. Since 1976, California residents have voted on 76 local option sales taxes (LOSTs) to fund transportation in 30 of the most populous of the state's 58 counties. As of 2017, 24 counties, home to 88% of the state's population (2), have active LOST measures. The most recent measures in these so-called Self Help Counties have been approved by at least two-thirds voter majorities as required by California law. Transportation sales tax measures can produce substantial revenue for the maintenance, operation, and expansion of transportation facilities and services; sales tax revenues dedicated to transportation today produce over US$4 billion per year for transportation construction and maintenance in California (3). Voters in some counties have approved LOST measures as many as five separate times (4). LOSTs for transportation have proven politically popular; voters tend to like them because they fund popular projects via taxes automatically levied in very small increments (often a ½-or 1-cent per dollar) over a very large number of transactions. Because these small levies apply to nearly all consumer purchases, LOSTs generate substantial revenue for transportation. On the other hand, LOSTs are less related to travel than are fuel taxes or tolls, which means that light users of transportation systems tend to pay more per mile in transportation sales than do heavy users (5). Despite LOST's increasing role in transportation finance, there is no comprehensive, up-to-date data source on transportation sales tax measures. Given the labor intensiveness of gathering comparable data on LOST measures, and in particular on what they fund, this research focuses on the most 782757T RRXXX10.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lessons Learned from 40 Years of Local Option Transportation Sales Taxes in California

Lederman¹,

Brown²,

Taylor³

et al. 2018

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Political science research indicates that voters’ willingness to approve taxes is influenced by perceptions of the taxes’ impacts (McCaffery and Baron 2006), and support for LOSTs depends in some part on favorable perceptions of existing transportation services (Green et al 2013). Studies also attempt to understand how well LOST voters are informed, with one study finding that a portion of the electorate “will choose not to acquire information—even if the cost of information is minimal,” although study results depend on the cost and quality of additional information (Feddersen and Sandroni 2006, p. 3).…”

Section: Losts and Equitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Arguing over Transportation Sales Taxes: An Analysis of Equity Debates in Transportation Ballot Measures

Lederman

Brown

Taylor

et al. 2018

Urban Affairs Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What’s a fair way to pay for urban transportation? Local option sales taxes (LOSTs) for transportation are an increasingly common mechanism for locally financing transportation in the context of declining federal and state funding. LOSTs are typically regressive, raising equity concerns. But their fairness also depends on who benefits from them, based on which projects are funded, where projects are located, and when investments occur. We examine how perceptions of these four dimensions of equity (income, geographic, temporal, and modal) are represented and debated in the ballot arguments for 38 LOST elections in California. We find that measure supporters use subtle language to imply that proposed expenditure plans achieve equity on all dimensions, promising “something for everyone.” Measure opponents, by contrast, typically attack specific perceived inequities in proposed expenditure plans. We find that tradeoffs among types of equity debated in ballot arguments frame winners and losers across multiple equity dimensions.

show abstract

“…First, political characteristics such as ideology and party identification have impacted vote choice in transportation sales tax elections. Democrats are more inclined than Republicans to support such a tax (Hamideh et al 2008) and conservative, antitax sentiment coupled with distrust of local elected officials can increase opposition to adoption (Beale, Bishop, and Marley 1996; Green et al 2013). Second, the characteristics of the sales tax measure and the projects included in the expenditure plan are important.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

County Governments and Democratic Decision Making: Explaining Why Counties Seek Approval of Local Option Sales Taxes

Green

2014

State Politics Policy Q.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Local option sales taxes have become an important source of local revenue across the United States. Thirty-three of the 50 states have granted authorization to their counties or cities (or both) to levy local option sales taxes, and said taxes generated nearly $50 billion in 2005, which accounted for 11% of all local tax revenue nationwide. Even though local option sales taxes have significant impacts on a county's ability to fund programs and services, little has been written about the decisions of counties to place such taxes on the ballot. Using demographic, fiscal, and political variables, a model is developed that explains the decision to place a county transportation sales tax on the ballot. Modeling and analysis reveal that counties behave strategically as the impact of demographic, fiscal, and political factors on the decision to place a local option sales tax on the ballot is shaped by whether the county is making an initial attempt to adopt, a subsequent attempt to adopt after voter rejection, or a renewal attempt when an existing local option sales tax is nearing its sunset date.

show abstract

Public Support for Transportation Sales Taxes in California: A Two County Assessment

Cited by 3 publications

References 9 publications

Lessons Learned from 40 Years of Local Option Transportation Sales Taxes in California

Lessons Learned from 40 Years of Local Option Transportation Sales Taxes in California

Arguing over Transportation Sales Taxes: An Analysis of Equity Debates in Transportation Ballot Measures

County Governments and Democratic Decision Making: Explaining Why Counties Seek Approval of Local Option Sales Taxes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About