Voters throughout Missouri rejected a proposal last week to create a transportation sales tax to pay for more than 800 projects throughout the state.
But where and why did the transportation sales tax, or Amendment 7, fail?
Just less than one million voters cast ballots statewide Aug. 5, with 590,963, or 59 percent, voting against the proposed tax and 407,532, or 40.8 percent, voting in favor of it.
Not a single Mid-Missouri county supported the proposed tax, with 53 percent of Cole County voters rejecting the measure.
Only four precincts in Cole County supported the tax, some by incredibly close margins: Ward 1, Precinct 2, where voters approved it by three votes; Ward 3, Precinct 5, where it was approved by 32 votes; Ward 4, Precinct 4, where it was approved by 51 votes; and Binder Lake, where it was approved by 27 votes.
Outside of Mid-Missouri, only 20 counties out of 116 supported the transportation sales tax.
As for why the tax measure failed to pass, each side has a different explanation.
The opposition group, Missourians for Better Transportation Solutions, called it an unfair tax that voters saw through, while the supporters group, Missourians for Safe Transportation and New Jobs, said it was more an issue of time and being able to educate voters.
"An unfair tax'
Terry Ganey, spokesman for Missourians for Better Transportation Solutions, said the sales tax proposal would have allowed the primary users of highways and roads in the state to escape the funding burden, something he called unfair.
"It's hard to pass a tax increase in Missouri, and it's impossible to pass an unfair tax increase," Ganey said. "That's what Amendment 7 was."
Ganey said trucking companies that primarily use state highways would not have had to pay their fair share, even though they are the ones doing the most damage to the roads.
"People saw what an unfair proposal it was and voted no," Ganey said.
Ganey said a fuel tax increase would be a more appropriate way to raise money for road improvements, adding that it's the way other states tend to fund their transportation projects.
He said a fuel tax would be fair because it actually taxes the user and the state's fuel tax of 17 cents is below the national average of 20.51 cents. Plus, he said, gas prices fluctuate so much in small periods of time, an increase in the fuel tax likely would be hardly noticed by most users.
"If you go to the pump today, the gas might be $3.19 and in two weeks it might be $3.29 per gallon," Ganey said. "There's always this fluctuation of 10, 20, maybe 30 cents per gallon each time you pay for gas, so that capacity is there ... it's just a matter of convincing the public that that's where we need to go if we think we need more money for roads."
Another issue Ganey saw with the proposal is that "it would have closed the door to considering any kind of other way of raising money for the roads." If it had passed, the proposal included a provision stating that for the 10-year duration of the sales tax, no increase to the fuel tax or implementation of toll roads could be considered.
Ganey said the failure of the transportation sales tax has really shown that state officials need to educate the public about the needs of the state's transportation system.
"The Legislature and the governor are going to have to think about a way of educating the public on what the real needs are for our highway system," Ganey said.
"We didn't make our case'
Jewell Patek, spokesman for Missourians for Safe Transportation and New Jobs, said it is a tough economic climate for any tax increases to pass. But one thing was clear from the voters' rejection of Amendment 7 - supporters failed to convince voters that the tax increase was needed.
"It's obvious we didn't make our case," Patek said. "Missourians have shared with us across the state that they believe we need better infrastructure, but the solution we put before them obviously wasn't what they were looking for."
Patek said he's not sure what the more palatable solution for voters would be, but he's sure one is needed before the state's infrastructure falls apart.
"I do know that our roads and bridges will continue to get worse, and that will cost lives," Patek said. "It will also mean missed economic opportunities for the state, so I don't think the status quo is the solution."
Patek said there are no regrets about how the campaign to support Amendment 7 was run, but the one thing he wished they had was more time to help educate voters on the needs of the state and the value of the projects outlined in the proposal.
The entire campaign was jammed into a short two-month timeline, he said, and more time could have helped their cause.
The Legislature approved the measure for the ballot on May 14, and Gov. Jay Nixon announced the amendment would be on the Aug. 5 ballot on May 23.
MoDOT then held public meetings throughout the state in June to get feedback and input on proposed projects before the final project list was set by the Highway and Transportation Commission on July 9, leaving less than 30 days before voters would cast their ballots.
Another aspect was the timing itself, he said. Many voters were busy with summer activities with their families and vacations, which meant it wasn't the optimal time to try to get voters' attention on infrastructure needs.
As far as moving forward, though he's unsure of the solution, Patek said he knows something needs to be done soon and discussions need to be had with Missouri voters on what solution they would support.
"We've worked on this for six years to try to get to the ballot," Patek said. "I don't think Missouri can wait another six years for a solution."
Missouri voters rejected a proposal for a transportation sales tax Aug. 5, with 59 percent of voters statewide casting ballots against the measure.
About Amendment 7
Why was a sales tax proposed rather than other modes of funding transportation improvements?
• Missouri Constitution requires voter-approval nearly all tax increase proposals.
• MoDOT's last "new" tax was a 2-cent increase passed by lawmakers in 1992, and imposed in 1996.
• Sales tax was proposed after series of meetings all over the state.
• Supporters said sales tax allowed funding for non-highway transportation needs as well, since Missouri Constitution requires all fuels tax money to go only to roads and bridges (including administration and the Highway Patrol).
• A 1-cent fuel tax increase generates about $38 million per year, with 70 percent going to MoDOT and 30 percent to cities and counties.
• A 1-cent sales tax increase generates about $780 million per year.
• A 1968 state Supreme Court ruling may require a statewide vote for any toll roads proposal in the state.
Where did sales tax pass?
The sales tax passed in only 20 counties out of 116 statewide.
County / Margin of win (number of votes)
Atchison 163
Bates 66
Carroll 219
Chariton 65
Clark 279
Cooper 273
Dunklin 550
Grundy 3
Harrison 232
Kansas City 211
Knox 128
Linn 73
Livingston 76
Marion 264
Monroe 18
Montgomery 243
Pemiscot 286
Pettis 189
Pike 96
Saline 556