Tax hikes may be needed for transportation

Wednesday, Jan. 23, 2002 | 11:11 a.m.

Proposals Among the tax increases proposed by the RTC:

RTC General Manager Jacob Snow said people throughout the region already pay an estimated $500 million a year because of traffic congestion, and the new money would help prevent the situation from getting worse.

"We're paying already because we waste so much fuel and so much time," Snow said, calling the current situation a "crisis."

The plan is at least a year and a half away and faces several hurdles.

The RTC board will consider endorsing the plan on Feb. 14. If it passes, the Clark County Commission will have to approve a measure to go before voters in November.

The Legislature would consider that vote during the 2003 session and could enact the tax increases in July 2003.

RTC Chairman and Clark County Commissioner Bruce Woodbury he anticipates some resistance to the tax proposals, but will work to sell the package to other governments in the region and to the public.

"These are never easy issues," he said. "We have a real challenge to show the voters it's necessary and will be money well spent."

He said the cost of rejecting the revenue boosts would be "absolute gridlock."

The Southern Nevada Home Builders Association, a politically potent trade group representing developers, is supporting the increases. Irene Porter, association president, said the transportation issue affects the entire community.

"We've always supported the transportation issues," Porter said. "It's part of the whole community issue."

A similar proposal 10 years ago, which won support from taxpayers and the Legislature, paid off with roads and highways throughout the region, Porter said.

But unlike Question 10, which is still providing revenue to the coffers of the RTC and local governments, the new package would have a firm "sunset clause," Snow and Woodbury both emphasized.

After the $2.5 billion is collected, the tax hikes would expire, they said.

Question 10 in 1991 provided $2 billion for road work, including construction of much of the Beltway that largely circles the Las Vegas Valley.

The Beltway and other roads help connect the new residential subdivisions on the urban perimeter to the jobs and business of the urban center, including the Strip. But what might be a boon to home builders is anathema to environmentalists.

Jane Feldman, co-chairwoman of the conservation committee of the Sierra Club's local arm, criticized the RTC for not putting more emphasis on mass transit.

According to Snow, 75 percent or more of the increases will go to road work. Snow said the RTC is not abandoning mass transit, which can help cut the smog in the air produced by thousands of individual cars. But the federal government will pick up the tab for most local mass transit systems, he said.

Feldman said the RTC is doing far better today in seeking those federal funds for clean and efficient people movers, but could still do more before looking at more taxes for more roads.

"I would like to see a whole lot of emphasis on alternative transportation before we go crazy on taxes," she said. "Our minds are so locked into one solution, which is to drill for oil and build more roads. We need to get beyond that."

Still, the vast majority of the 1.5 million people living in Southern Nevada depend on cars to move them around. Traffic jams have become a fact of life, and people are already paying the price for too many cars on too few miles of road, Snow said.

Keith Schwer, director of the Center for Business and Economic Research at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, said he is still analyzing the impact of the proposed tax increases.

He said Nevadans generally have a reputation for opposition to taxes, but there are significant exceptions. They are willing to pay for infrastructure for schools and quality of life if people make a good argument, he said.

He said several of the proposals -- including a 1 cent per gallon tax on jet fuel -- would put some of the burden on tourists, a move that local taxpayers have supported before.