Nashvillians will soon decide the fate of the city’s second attempt at establishing a dedicated source of transit funding.
The last time Nashville attempted a transit referendum — the 2018 “Let’s Move Nashville” proposal put forth by then-Mayor Megan Barry — a resounding 64% of voters cast ballots against the measure. This year, Mayor Freddie O’Connell has taken a markedly different approach.
Between the plan’s financing, scope, and development, the plan voters will consider Nov. 5 looks a lot different than the last time around.
Here’s how:
Cost and scope
In 2018, the plan proposed constructing 24 miles of light rail lines along five corridors, 25 miles of bus rapid transit along four corridors, a 1.8-mile-long tunnel underneath downtown and various other bus upgrades.
With the cost of light rail estimated at $200 million per mile, the plan’s entire capital cost was estimated at $5.4 billion. When a national transit group did a deep dive into why the referendum failed, they determined the expense and ambitions of light rail blindsided many voters.
The report said that a bus-centric program could have been more popular amongst residents. And, this year’s plan seems to have taken that into consideration, with a heavy emphasis on improving bus service. If approved, bus frequency would increase to every 15 minutes for extended hours. High frequency service would double, and overall bus service would increase by 80%.
While there’s no light rail, bus rapid transit remains a key component, and has been pitched as a cheaper alternative to rail. Ten corridors have been identified as possible recipients of rapid buses and will require some major overhauls — things like widening streets to add bus-only lanes and constructing new sidewalks and bikeways.
There’s a number of other elements included in the 94-page plan — updated traffic signals, a dozen transit centers, and new park and ride facilities, to name a few. Still, the total cost is less than the 2018 pitch. Capital costs have been estimated at $3.1 billion over 15 years (that number has been calculated in today’s dollars — it increases when inflation is taken into account), with around $111 million in annual operating and maintenance costs.
Financing plan
As priorities have shifted, so has the approach for how to pay for it.
Under the IMPROVE Act — the state law that permits local governments to establish transit funding through referendums — six different taxes are authorized as options to fund transit.
The 2018 plan would have tapped into four of those: the sales tax, the hotel/motel tax, the local car rental tax and the business privilege tax.
Now, O’Connell’s administration is looking to only one: the sales tax. This year’s proposal would increase the local sales tax by a half-cent (so, an extra quarter for every $50 spent). This would raise local rate from 2.25% to 2.75%, in addition to the 7% all Tennesseans pay toward the state.
One of the tax increases proposed in 2018 — the hotel/motel tax — was off the table this time around, given its usage in last year’s deal to finance the new Titans stadium. But, the administration says that the sales tax has the most revenue potential and is the most reliable option of the bunch.
Public engagement
One major criticism of the 2018 plan was that it was too insular, lacking the necessary input of community or stakeholders prior to its release and leaving the plan misaligned with the desires of residents.
Additionally, only a few members of Metro Council were granted meetings — at their request — before the plan’s unveiling. This contributed to some of the problems it ran into later, as the council pushed for and ultimately passed an amendment that listed an additional (and higher) cost as a part of the ballot language.
This year, before unveiling the plan’s contents, the O’Connell administration convened two groups to solicit input— a community advisory committee and a technical advisory committee. They also emphasized the importance of existing feedback, drawing upon 65,000 pieces of input that have been included in prior planning processes such as NashvilleNext and nMotion.
The mayor’s office met one-on-one with the majority of Metro Council members to discuss the plan. This translated to a smooth ride through its three required readings at the council — 32 members signed on as co-sponsors, and it was approved without substantial debate.
Opposition campaigns
In 2018, the plan was up against a robust opposition campaign, including an anonymously funded group and an initiative from the Koch Brothers-backed Americans For Prosperity. There were also some prominent councilmembers — including future Mayor John Cooper — who were assertively opposed.
There was also an effective misinformation campaign, with different groups running advertisements with competing cost information.
The 2024 plan is facing significantly less opposition. In addition to widespread support from much of the council and many local organizations, some major opponents opted to sit this one out. Americans for Prosperity said they would not launch an opposition campaign, and instead would leave the decision up to voters.
Similarities between the plans
In 2018, the mayoral administration was faulted for how quickly it moved. It was less than a year between when the state government passed the IMPROVE Act in 2017 and when Nashville put transit on the ballot.
This year’s referendum is also facing a compressed timeline. O’Connell, who was elected in September, announced his decision to pursue a referendum in February. He had been encouraged by transition teams to do so, given that it is a presidential election year. That usually guarantees a higher turnout, which, experts say, often fares favorably for transit referendums.
By the time the details of the plan were unveiled in April, less than seven months remained until the final vote on Nov. 5.
The O’Connell administration is also under pressure to establish a local source of transit funding before the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law expires. The plan says it will rely, somewhat, on $1.4 billion worth of federal dollars that could be “unlocked” if a dedicated source of funding is created. However, much of those funds are authorized under the BIL, which will run out in 2026.
On Air - 90.3 WPLN-FM