State works on a transit master plan

Arizona Tax Revolt commentary:

This transportation boondoggle will inevitably be paid for with a substantial statewide property tax increase. If you want to saddle Arizona taxpayers with that extra tax burden do nothing.

On the other hand if you want to preclude it join the Arizona Tax Revolt by either donating your time or dollars to qualify the property tax rollback initiatives which would require a two-thirds vote in each county to authorize a statewide property tax increase.

The Arizona Republic
Published: December 09, 2007
Glen Creno

Arizona's unimpeded growth is forcing state leaders to come up with a long-term transportation plan.

The state's population of 6.4 million is expected to hit 11.3 million in 20 years, according to the state Department of Economic Security. The Valley is the 15th-most-congested metro area in the country. Even smaller cities like Prescott and Maricopa are looking for ways to cut traffic.

"Congestion is inevitable," said Martin Schultz, vice president of governmental affairs for Pinnacle West Capital Corp., parent of Arizona Public Service, and spokesman for a group of business leaders pressing for a plan to go to voters in 2008. "It's a serious problem. . . . We've been on a continuous building mode in transportation, but you don't get any time to stand on your laurels or sit on your butt. You have to keep planning."

It's unclear what the statewide plan will look like, how much it will cost or how it will be paid for.

But during a conference of mayors and other city officials last week, Gov. Janet Napolitano did make clear she wants to move forward quickly. "We are behind right now," she said. "We've got to play catch-up ... our fellow Arizonans are paying a heavy time tax."

Getting together Highway and transit planning in Arizona is handled by interlocking agencies.

Local or regional agencies like the Maricopa Association of Governments plan on a local or regional level, while the Arizona Department of Transportation plans and builds the state system.

Planning is also based on available funding.

What's different now is that agencies can look solely at what they need rather than setting priorities based on how much money they have available to spend, officials say.

It's important for each region to finish their plans so they can seek public input for suggestions and modifications, said Eric Anderson, MAG transportation director.

"That creates the buy-in," Anderson said. ADOT and MAG are both looking at regional planning efforts. Ultimately, ADOT will pull together a statewide plan that extends to 2030 or 2050. That document will be made available to any agency that might want to implement it.

Having so many agencies involved may seem inefficient, but it beats having planning done by a few people in a "smoke-filled room," said John Leonard, associate dean of civil and environmental engineering at Georgia Tech.

Georgia is in the midst of planning improvements to its transportation system, with a lot of agencies trying to come up with a plan, similar to what's happening in Arizona.

"One of the real challenges in Georgia is . . . finding someone to step up in the middle of the process and orchestrate in the cacophony, all of these different needs and agendas," he said. "Not take over but be a referee." He said Arizona may need its own referee.

Getting voter approval

While there is a push to get a transportation plan on the 2008 or 2009 ballot, rushing things could defeat the effort.

If the plan isn't clear, with a palatable way to pay for it, voters could say no.

The trick is to not seek too little in the plan because it's difficult to go back to voters asking for more money. But getting too ambitious also can backfire, said Eric Anderson, transportation director for the Maricopa Association of Governments.

That happened recently in the Seattle area when voters killed an $18 billion transportation plan that would have built new lanes and light rail. Those who supported new highways said there was too much transit in the plan. Transit backers said just the opposite. It took five years to develop the plan.

Martin Schultz, a vice president at Pinnacle West Capital Corp. and transportation activist, is the spokesman for the business coalition pressing for a 2008 vote. He hopes the Legislature won't drag its feet in getting a plan to voters.

"There is no 'Plan B,' " he said.

Getting along

Arizona has a history of bickering among its cities and regions when it comes to transportation planning.

Rural parts of the state, and smaller Valley cities, have traditionally sniped at Phoenix over the split of transportation money.

It happened at an August MAG meeting when Phoenix Councilwoman Peggy Neely demanded a "weighted" vote for $10 million earmarked by the Legislature for widening of Interstate 10 in the West Valley. With the vote weighted on population, Phoenix and East Valley cities prevented Avondale, Goodyear and Litchfield Park from getting the full amount. Instead, the three cities wound up with $6 million.

Goodyear Mayor Jim Cavanaugh is chairman of the Maricopa Association of Governments Regional Council and also chairs a collection of Arizona's councils of government and municipal planning organizations. He said he is trying to reduce the rivalries and jealousies.

"The smaller cities outside Maricopa County have not been trusting of Maricopa County and Phoenix," he said. "There's simply no reason we can't eliminate that."

Sierra Club lobbyist Sandy Bahr isn't so sure.

"The problem with doing something regionally or on a statewide basis, someone will have to give up some power," she said. "People will have to come to the table and give up some of their power to some other entity and, traditionally, they have been reluctant to do that."