Promises and Perils of a Multi-Jurisdictional Approach By

Promises and Perils of a Multi-Jurisdictional Approach By

Making Self-Help Infrastructure Finance Regional: Promises and Perils of a Multi-Jurisdictional Approach By David Weinreich A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Urban and Regional Planning) in the University of Michigan 2016 Doctoral Committee: Professor Jonathan Levine, Chair Associate Professor Scott D. Campbell Professor Elisabeth Gerber Associate Professor Joseph D. Grengs Professor Emeritus Martin Wachs, University of California, Los Angeles COPYRIGHT ©2016 DAVID WEINREICH ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Dedication To my family ii Acknowledgements This research was made possible by fellowship from the Dwight David Eisenhower Graduate Transportation program of the U.S. Department of Transportation; a fellowship from the University of Michigan Initiative in Disability Studies; and support from the Rackham Graduate School at the University of Michigan. I would like to acknowledge the incredible support of my advisor, Jonathan Levine, and of my entire committee, including Scott Campbell, Elisabeth Gerber, Joseph Grengs and Martin Wachs, who all provided extraordinary comments, ideas and advice throughout the process. iii Table of Contents Dedication ............................................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................ iii List of Tables ........................................................................................................................................... v List of Figures ....................................................................................................................................... vi List of Appendices .............................................................................................................................. vii Abstract ................................................................................................................................................ viii Chapter 1 Multi-Jurisdictional Option Taxation: The Problem and the Theory ..............1 Chapter 2 Review of Literature ..................................................................................................... 20 Chapter 3 Propositions and Methodology ................................................................................. 44 Chapter 4 A Typology of Multi-Jurisdictional Funding Strategies & Selection of Regions for Study ............................................................................................................................... 67 Chapter 5 San Francisco Bay Area Case Analysis .................................................................... 89 Chapter 6 Atlanta Case Analysis ................................................................................................. 118 Chapter 7 Seattle Case Analysis .................................................................................................. 158 Chapter 8 Denver Case Analysis ................................................................................................. 200 Chapter 9 Cross-Case Comparison ............................................................................................. 241 Chapter 10 Conclusions and Policy Implications ................................................................. 272 Appendices ........................................................................................................................................ 293 References ......................................................................................................................................... 302 iv List of Tables Table 1.1 Elements of Prescriptiveness ...................................................................................... 15 Table 2.1 Foster’s Regional Impulses .......................................................................................... 36 Table 3.1 Local vs. Regional Scales ............................................................................................... 46 Table 3.2 Elements of Prescriptiveness ...................................................................................... 52 Table 3.3 Summary of Variables for Analysis ........................................................................... 53 Table 3.4 Potential Benefits & Costs of Blanket vs. Special Authorization ..................... 56 Table 3.5 Potential Benefits & Costs of Prescriptive vs. Permissive Processes ............ 57 Table 3.6 Indicators of the Boundary-Spanning Agent ......................................................... 61 Table 3.7 Interviews Conducted by Region ............................................................................... 63 Table 4.1 Advantages, Disadvantages of Each Strategy ......................................................... 76 Table 4.2 Likely Features by Multi-Jurisdictional Funding Category ............................... 78 Table 4.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Transportation Funding Strategies Observed Across 50 U.S. Regions ...................................................................................................................... 80 Table 4.4 Regions That Have Attempted Multi-Jurisdictional Transportation Tax Elections ................................................................................................................................................ 82 Table 4.5 Pre-Authorization & Permissiveness in Cases Studied ...................................... 87 Table 4.6 Boundary-Spanning Agents Across Cases Studied ............................................... 88 Table 9.1 Authorization Types By Process ............................................................................ 242 Table 9.2 Prescriptiveness of Authorizing Legislation ...................................................... 243 Table 9.3 Comparison of Prescriptiveness Across Cases ................................................... 244 Table 9.4 Summarizing Dependent Variables (Taken from Case Chapters, 5-8) ...... 253 Table 9.5 Summary of Cross-Case Findings ............................................................................ 263 Table 10.1 Geographic Equity Solutions, By Region ............................................................ 278 Table B-1 Home Rule in States from this Study .................................................................... 299 v List of Figures Figure 1.1 Local Funding Can Fragment Infrastructure ...........................................................4 Figure 1.2 Transportation Revenues by Government Level (Thousands of 2009$) ......7 Figure 1.3 Dimensions for Evaluating MOTT Legislation .................................................... 14 Figure 2.1 Highway Revenue Shares Over Time ...................................................................... 24 Figure 2.2 Transit Revenue Shares Over Time ......................................................................... 24 Figure 2.3 Top Ten States Using Local Option Tax Revenues, Share Non-Federal $ Provided by LOTTs (1998) .............................................................................................................. 25 Figure 2.4 Schematic of “Third Wave” Multi-Sectoral Networks ....................................... 40 Figure 4.1 Cases Represented ........................................................................................................ 80 Figure 5.1 Timeline of Bay Area Events ...................................................................................... 93 Figure 5.2 The Final RM2 Proposal: A Focus on Cross-County Transportation ............ 94 Figure 6.1 Timeline of Atlanta Events ...................................................................................... 121 Figure 6.2 Regional Transportation Roundtable Members .............................................. 131 Figure 6.3 TIA Project Selection Process ................................................................................. 137 Figure 7.1 Timeline of Seattle Events ....................................................................................... 160 Figure 7.2 Sound Move Plan, Approved 1996 ........................................................................ 163 Figure 7.3 Sound Transit 2 Proposal, 2008 ............................................................................ 165 Figure 7.4 RTA & Subarea Map ................................................................................................... 180 Figure 8.1 Timeline of Denver Events ...................................................................................... 202 Figure 8.2 1997 DRCOG’s Metro Vision 2020 Unconstrained Long-Range Rail Plan: The Basis for the Guide the Ride Projects Selected ............................................................. 204 Figure 8.3 RTD’s Final FasTracks Proposal ............................................................................ 236 Figure 10.1 Share of Projects that Cross County Lines ....................................................... 282 vi List of Appendices Appendix A Case-Specific Data Collection Issues ................................................................. 293 Appendix B Local Home Rule in the United States ............................................................... 296 Appendix C Geographic Equity Approaches in Each Region ............................................. 300 vii Abstract

View Full Text

Details

  • File Type
    pdf
  • Upload Time
    -
  • Content Languages
    English
  • Upload User
    Anonymous/Not logged-in
  • File Pages
    364 Page
  • File Size
    -

Download

Channel Download Status
Express Download Enable

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

  • Not to be reproduced or distributed without explicit permission.
  • Not used for commercial purposes outside of approved use cases.
  • Not used to infringe on the rights of the original creators.
  • If you believe any content infringes your copyright, please contact us immediately.

Support

For help with questions, suggestions, or problems, please contact us