The passage of Issue 47, by a 13 point margin (56% voting in favor) authorizes an increased local sales tax to support investments laid out in the LinkUS plan for the greater Columbus region served by the Central Ohio Transit Authority (COTA). This includes expanding the regional rapid transit network and adding 500 miles of sidewalks, trails, and bike paths.

Ballot language:

“Issue #47, if approved, will increase Franklin County sales tax by 0.75%. The revenue will be used to increase public transportation infrastructure in the COTA service area. The tax includes 0.5% that would support LinkUS and 0.25% that would replace a temporary sales tax that is set to expire in 2026.”

The Choose How You Move referendum, which passed with 65.5% of voters supporting it, authorizes a new local sales tax to fund new bus rapid transit routes, traffic light synchronization, new sidewalks, and other safety improvements.

Ballot language:

Passage of this measure adopted by Ordinance BL2024-427, allows the Metropolitan Government to complete the entire priority sidewalk network when combined with annual capital spending, provide significantly expanded 24-hour public transportation service 365 days a year including frequent service on major routes, add more neighborhood transit centers, improve safety for all roadway users, and upgrade and modernize nearly two-thirds of the city’s signalized intersections.

This program’s capital cost is estimated to have a current cost of $3,096,000,000. Once construction is complete, the estimated value of recurring annual operating and maintenance costs is approximately $111,000,000. The Metropolitan Transit Authority (WeGo), Nashville Department of Transportation and Multimodal Infrastructure, Metro Planning Department, and Mayor’s Office, in partnership with other Metro departments, will undertake implementation of the program.

This program will be funded by federal grants, revenues from transportation system fares, debt, and a sales tax surcharge of 0.5%. The tax surcharge will end once all debt issued for the transit improvement program has been paid and the Metropolitan Council determines by resolution that the revenues from the tax surcharges are no longer needed for operation of the program.

**Voters were asked to select “for” or “against” the measure.

Proposition 479, which passed with 59.8% support, authorizes the continuation of a half-cent sales tax in Maricopa County which is dedicated to transit and transportation investments for this area anchored by the City of Phoenix. The measure supports projects outlined in the Regional Strategic Transportation Infrastructure Investment Plan.

Ballot Language:

“Descriptive title of ballot measure: A measure continuing the current transportation excise (sales) tax to address the regional transportation system by building new freeways, expanding existing freeways with additional access and capacity, constructing streets and intersections, expanding transit by increasing the frequency of bus service, providing additional bus, dial-a-ride and vanpool services and providing for capital rehabilitation of light rail. Revenues will be allocated as follows:

a. 40.5 percent to freeways and other routes in the state highway system.

b. 37 percent to public transportation.

c. 22.5 percent to arterial streets, intersection improvements and regional transportation infrastructure.

Question submitted to the voters: Do you favor the continuation of a county transaction privilege (sales) tax for regional transportation purposes in Maricopa County?

A “Yes” vote has the effect of continuing the transaction privilege (sales) tax in Maricopa County for twenty years to provide funding for transportation projects as contained in the regional strategic transportation infrastructure investment plan.

A “No” vote has the effect of rejecting the transaction privilege (sales) tax for transportation purposes in Maricopa County.”

By investing in extensive engagement early on, local elected leaders and campaign advocates can foster a culture of trust and open communication within the community, between the electorate and campaign leaders. Community engagement fosters early buy-in from the electorate as well as the start of a coalition capable of mobilizing support for the ballot measure and requisite campaign. Community-informed design processes ensure the eventual investments are targeted and aligned with community priorities.

Nashville’s Choose How You Move Transportation Improvement Plan, which increased the sales tax by half a penny to fund new transit and transportation infrastructure, was based on ideas culled from over 70 plans developed in Nashville in the past decade – plans which were informed by 66,000 pieces of public input.

In 2018, Nashville voters turned down a ballot measure for new transit and transportation investments; the 2024 campaign leadership heeded lessons learned from that year, particularly voter complaints around the lack of a transparent process for developing the plan. In 2024, local leaders supporting the measure held individual listening sessions with Councilmembers, created both technical and community advisory committees, and began community education and outreach efforts early in the plan’s development. Altogether, these engagements helped develop the final plan and, throughout the eventual campaign, resulted in over 10,100 touchpoints across over 370 events, including 225 detailed transit talks.

In Columbus and the surrounding Central Ohio region, the LinkUS Initiative, led by the Central Ohio Transit Authority (COTA), is demonstrative of the planning, research, and engagement necessary to develop a transportation proposal for the ballot. LinkUS, the regional transportation and development plan to be funded by a local sales tax, is the culmination of nearly a decade of collaboration, engagement, and research led by a partnership between the City of Columbus, Franklin County Board of Commissioners, Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission, and the Columbus Partnership. Over the years, this group developed a Community Action Plan, a State of Mobility Report, a framework strategy to replicate across corridors, and extensive planning documents for three priority corridors. COTA also developed an outreach toolkit with fact sheets, anecdotal videos from both residents and local leaders, pocket guides, and one-pagers on the project.

The LinkUS Initiative leverages data to support the plan’s narrative. Proponents noted that over 85% of people in Central Ohio drive alone for their commute, and over the next 25 years the region is expected to grow in population by 725,000 – presenting a clear need for a reliable public transit infrastructure that enables residents to maintain their current, or greater, quality of life. Furthermore, planning documents lay out the benefits of providing greater economic mobility through increased access to jobs.

Design processes and discussions may vary based on the category of infrastructure asset(s) being considered. For example, in the case of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) proposals, like those in Nashville and Columbus, the planning process will inform BRT stops and routes. Alternatively, if the proposal is a set of roadway investments, then it is helpful to define what those investments will look like and where they will be.

Publishing proposed investments, e.g., illustrating them on a map, is a double-edged sword. Voters need and want to know “what” they are being asked to fund, but the project list and map will also clearly show “where” new investment is not going. During the planning process, local leaders should be considerate of what neighborhood, or constituency group, is excluded – or may feel excluded – from new investment and the effects those sentiments may have on building a robust coalition. This intentional thought exercise can also help local leaders identify whose voices still need to be heard and improve the final plan.

Ballot measures, like grant applications, require budget plans with cost and revenue estimates. A critical step in this phase of ballot measure efforts includes scoring all revenues and expenditures, including capital, operating, and maintenance costs. Depending on the jurisdiction, the scoring process and/or requirements will be prescribed by state or local law, e.g., a local revenue commission issues a report, or a state entity has to review and approve revenue estimates. Similarly, there may be legal requirements for defining the expenditures, e.g., the MPO or state DOT need to approve the proposal. Local and state law may also require a benefit-cost analysis; whether or not it is required, benefit-cost analyses may be beneficial for advocates to produce so they can demonstrate the return on investment to voters.

The process of scoring revenues and expenditures will also inform the magnitude and type of tax. It will vary by jurisdiction and financial requirements but a range of taxes could be considered, including sales, property, occupational or income, or other special taxes.

Local leaders must develop an early understanding of the electorate’s position on the question to be put on the ballot. Consumer/voter research, ahead of the start of an official campaign, can provide a comprehensive assessment of baseline support for the measure. In some cases, local transit agencies may already be conducting local consumer research as part of their daily work to market routes and get more riders; this can be a good starting point for local leaders where such data exists. Additional data gathering, like focus groups and polling, could be organized and funded by local advocacy and leadership groups like the local Chamber of Commerce. Altogether, data-backed research methods, including these focus groups and polls, as well as an election model, can be illustrative of a hypothetical outcome based on community sentiment.

One of the last planning considerations for ballot measures is deciding “when” to pose the question to the community on the ballot with the following two critical considerations:

1. Has the proposal amassed sufficient support from the community?
   • Field practitioners recommend that baseline support for the ballot measure be at or above 60% of likely voters before investing in the authorization and campaign processes.
2. When is the best time to put an infrastructure measure on the ballot considering other local dynamics; what else will be on the ballot concurrently such as other tax/bond measures and local/state/national elections?

The timing of a local ballot measure may be limited by state or local law that only allows local leaders to put a measure before voters at certain times, like the November election date or concurrent with other elections.

Decisions on timing of the ballot measure are also dependent on political and electoral considerations – namely those relating to turnout and how the measure interacts politically with candidates and other issues on the ballot. For example, it is usually advantageous to ensure that local ballot measures coincide with the Presidential election, when turnout is highest.

A sophisticated research program, including an election model, can methodologically take into consideration local, state and national variables that influence electoral outcomes. In Columbus, an official noted that advocates for the LinkUS plan considered putting it to the ballot in 2022, however economic circumstances, namely relating to inflationary trends, made it a challenging environment for the measure. As such, they waited until the 2024 cycle to advance it, while continuing planning and community engagement efforts in the interim.

In Maricopa County, this appeal to the fuller electorate was captured in the campaign for Proposition 479, which was unique from the other two ballot measures discussed in this resource as it reauthorized an existing local sales tax. As such, advocates in support of the measure could point back to existing infrastructure assets that were funded by the prior iterations of the authorization in 1986 and 2004. By pointing to that evidence of prior investment, along with the specific investments that would be enabled by extending the revenue stream, the campaign was able to demonstrate the tangible impact of a vote in support of the measure, regardless of which component of the plan a voter was going to benefit from – whether it be freeways or transit investments.

In Nashville, polling and voter research showed the local community was most excited by a (relatively) smaller investment in traffic light synchronization compared to larger investments in transit. This sentiment in Nashville was captured in a successful ad campaign focusing on the benefits of light synchronization and other investments in reducing traffic. Campaign leaders should not let the division of spending in the proposal dictate the strategy, particularly given that the community and constituencies may prioritize aspects of the plan differently.

In a similar vein, a consultant to the Proposition 479 campaign in Maricopa County noted that campaign leaders in similar ballot measure efforts should build their campaign around the message that can be a common thread to all corners of the electorate and ensure a robust support base, even if it is not the primary policy goal. Message discipline and a clear narrative for the proposal that addresses community needs will help advance the winning cause.

Marjorie Pomeroy-Wallace, Mayor Freddie O’Connell’s Chief of Staff, highlighted the breadth of Nashville’s Choose How You Move plan and the city’s communications strategy. She noted that the communications strategy focused on demonstrating the benefits to all street users through the Choose How You Move plan’s “4 S’s” – sidewalks, signals, service, and safety.

In Maricopa County, since Proposition 479 reauthorized an existing revenue stream (rather than create a new stream), advocates could emphasize the investment opportunities that would be missed without a continuation of the local revenue stream. In Central Ohio, the loss-aversion messaging theme emerged from the fact that funding authorized by the measure will serve as the local match for a Small Starts award under the Federal Transit Administration’s Capital Investment Grants program in COTA’s work to establish new BRT routes.

Central Ohio expects to add 1 million residents by 2050, creating the need for expanded infrastructure capacity to ensure physical and economic mobility for current and future residents. Furthermore, Intel’s investment in two new factories in the Columbus area creates a need for transit connections to emerging regional job hubs. In Maricopa County, investors made it clear that continuing development activities in the region were effectively contingent on a continuation of investments in transportation infrastructure, which depended on passage of Proposition 479.