Bad proposal would turn transit tax watchdog into a lapdog

Persuaded by a vow that an independent watchdog would safeguard receipts, Miami-Dade voters taxed themselves in 2002 to add transit. Ever since, commissioners have tried to tie down that watchdog on shorter and shorter chains.

Now legislation moving through county hall aims to trade in the watchdog for a lapdog.

That measure seeks to convert the watchdog to merely an advisor. Citizens’ Independent Transportation Trust members would no longer be independent, would be appointed by county officials, and would be barred from taking any stance without express county commission approval. 

Neutering the watchdog would break faith with voters and destroy trust painstakingly rebuilt after years when the word “crooked” unfortunately dogged commissioners, some of whom did end up in prison or on the run from the law. One current commissioner was appointed to replace a disgraced predecessor.

The Citizens’ Independent Transportation Trust (CITT) is, as the name implies, a citizens group that strives to make sure the half percent surtax on sales collected to build more transit is actually spent to do that job. The county spends most of the money, but municipalities spend 20% to 25%. The trust oversees it all, striving to make sure the tax is used properly.  

That has always rankled commissioners, who say that safeguarding the money slows spending, which is true. But it also aims to make sure voters get what they were promised at the ballot box rather than having funds shuffled to convenient alternatives.

The trust not only fulfills a promise and does a vital job, but its very existence allows the county to accumulate funds for the new mass transit that we need. 

Look at history. Commissioners had long sought a tax to prime the pump for mass transit, but it failed because voters distrusted them. Finally, in 2002, Mayor Alex Penelas spearheaded a drive for a sales tax for a specific list of transportation projects that would be funded only after an independent group analyzed the impact of every expenditure.

“The trust will be a carefully selected group of citizens who will function as a truly independent decision-making body, separate from the government, with significant powers over the use and expenditure of the surtax proceeds,” voters were promised. The document also guaranteed that the county would continue funding transportation from other sources just as it had before the tax was enacted, to ensure that taxes would all fund new projects.

Given those assurances, the tax passed and was collected, but commissioners immediately committed receipts before the trust could be seated. They saw the money and pounced. By the time the trust got there, the cupboard was already bare. 

Next, instead of giving the trust a staff to analyze spending, county hall just handed members their own analysis of every project to affirm. Then, once the trust had a staff, the county faced a recession and diverted trust money for other purposes.

That led to a 2008 grand jury report that “the citizens of Miami-Dade County intended and wanted the tax monies collected pursuant to the ordinance to be managed by an independent body of citizens who are free of political and personal interest…. Any action or step that the Board of County Commissioners takes that helps to decrease the independence or power of the CITT is a step toward further mistrust by the voters. The [county commission] should respect the wishes of the voters and make sure the CITT is a truly independent body that will help voters and residents solve their transportation issues.”

Legislation from Oliver Gilbert III that advanced by a 12-1 vote Dec. 16 would do exactly the opposite of what both the voters and the grand jury demanded, simply by denying history.

“The CITT serves principally to advise the county commission,” the legislation erroneously claims in denying that a watchdog was ever wanted, thus setting the stage to weaken the trust that voters had ordered. The 13-page legislation would undercut the promise to voters.

Among other things, it would tie each trust member to a specific commissioner or the mayor, who would appoint them. Mayors and commissioners leaving office would lead away from the trust on a leash their appointees as well so elected newcomers could name their own pet members.

Most distressing to trust members who discussed the measure once it cleared a first commission review and who are to discuss it again in January was a telling step to put the trust on a very short leash indeed:

“Unless specifically authorized by the Board of County Commissioners, the trust shall not urge, recommend or present a policy position to any entity other than the Board of County Commissioners including but not limited to any federal, state, local government or private entity.” 

As trust members noted, this would outlaw even a letter to the editor, which would deny freedom of speech. How much shorter can the leash get?

“It just seems bizarre and an impossible position to put the CITT in, the position where we tell a municipality” or recommend what they should do to maximize impact from surtax spending, said trust Chair Mary Street. She added, “It seems like that would really undermine our ability to do what we’re supposed to be doing here…. I think that we have an obligation to fulfill our role.”

“That’s not what the citizens voted for when they voted for the half cent sales tax,” said trust member Harry Hoffman. “So, are the commissioners ready to stand up and say ‘we don’t care what you voted for, we know better’? I’ll bet you they’re not.”

We trust that Mr. Hoffman will win his bet when the legislation reaches a committee hearing and then a final vote. Commissioners shouldn’t go out of their way to bait and switch the public with a promise that the current legislation denies ever even existed.