Shaping Our Cities: November Ballot Measures to Watch

As election season heats up, we’re exploring local ballot measures that will shape the future of our communities—especially when it comes to land use, infrastructure investments, and housing. With hundreds of local initiatives on the table, I’ve sifted through dozens of land use and infrastructure measures to give you insights into key issues communities are grappling with. These ballot measures are hoping to 

  • Increase resources via bond issuances and new tax structures. For instance, Charlotte’s three ballot measures aim to issue $400 million in bonds for infrastructure, housing, and neighborhood investments. 

  • Prioritize investments that mean the most to voters. In Honolulu, voters will decide whether to allocate 0.5% of property tax revenues to a new Climate Resiliency Fund

  • Streamline processes to get projects done more efficiently. California’s Prop 5 aims to speed up projects by reducing voting thresholds from 67% to 50% for infrastructure and development initiatives.

Out of all of those, I picked four that showed a range of voters topics. Here are four that could make meaningful change for the cities they are approved (or denied) in:

A New Infrastructure Financing Mechanism for Oklahoma?

This November, Oklahoma voters will have the chance to weigh in on a new type of infrastructure financing tool with State Question 833. This measure, which received overwhelming support in the state legislature, proposes the creation of Public Infrastructure Districts (PIDs). PIDs would allow property owners to fund public improvements by issuing bonds, which would be repaid through property taxes. However, the key here is that 100% of the property owners within a proposed PID must agree to its creation.

Although property taxes for these PIDs would be capped at 10 mills (or $10 per $100,000 of assessed property value), some critics have voiced concerns over the measure’s vague language and potential lack of safeguards. And, opponents worry that PIDs may complicate future efforts to pass larger city- or county-wide bond measures. Despite these uncertainties, supporters argue that PIDs could offer much-needed resources for affordable housing and other critical public infrastructure projects.

Will voters upzone South Pasadena to increase housing stock?

While much of the country grapples with housing supply chains, California has taken aggressive steps by issuing mandates for cities to increase their housing supply. To build its required 2,067 units by 2029, South Pasadena is asking voters to eliminate building height limits in certain areas to promote development and diversify housing options.

With South Pasadena’s well known local charm and low profile, it’s not hard to see why this ballot measure has sparked heated debate. Headlines like “South Pasadena… Way of Life is Being Tested” capture the concerns of those worried that these changes could alter the character of the city. Beyond that, opponents fear supporting this ballot measure will take away residents' future ability to vote on building height restrictions.

Supporters of this measure trust in South Pasadena’s Housing Element and argue that this measure is necessary to avoid legal consequences. If the measure doesn’t pass, South Pasadena risks being subject to the "Builder’s Remedy," a legal tool that could give developers the authority to bypass local zoning and design standards, potentially reshaping the city without much local input.

Nashville tests voters with Mobility initiative- will it work this time?

Nashville’s "Choose How You Move" initiative, led by the city’s mayor, aims to improve transit frequency and focus investments in four key areas: sidewalks, signals, service, and safety. These investments are definitely warranted as the city faces a population boom, growing traffic congestion, and increasingly dangerous streets.

This measure, backed by a proposed half-cent sales tax surcharge projected to raise $100 million annually for 15 years, translates to about $6 per month for Nashvillians. Learning from Nashville’s failed 2018 ballot measure for light rail transit, the "Choose How You Move" initiative has pivoted away from transit rhetoric, embracing a more multimodal approach. We will find out on November 5th if that makes a difference.

NYC’s waste problem is going to the voters- will they decide to expand sanitation services?

New York City’s waste problem is hard to ignore—you can smell it on most summer days. While the stench is unpleasant, the city’s waste mismanagement has contributed to a growing rat problem. This prompted Mayor Adams to appoint a Rat Tsar in 2023. And that wasn’t all—NYC commissioned a $4 million study to tackle the issue head-on. The results, published this summer, delivered a clear solution: containerization (surprise surprise). No more piles of trash bags left on sidewalks for rats to feast on.

The Mayor’s office has already launched a containerization campaign, but this November, voters will decide whether to expand the Department of Sanitation's powers to enforce these policies citywide. The ballot measure would grant the department greater jurisdiction and enforcement abilities to manage containerization across the city. Sounds like a no-brainer, right? Well, not quite. The proposal includes provisions that would also give the Department of Sanitation the authority to ticket street vendors. This raises concerns for vendors who are already struggling to operate in an increasingly tough city environment.

These measures are just some examples of what you could find on your own election ballot. There’s still time to dive into your local ballot measures. I highly recommend checking out Ballotpedia.org, my go-to resource during election season. Let’s make sure we’re all ready to shape the future of our cities!

The Untapped Power of TIFIA: How to Fuel TOD with Federal Financing

In 2022, the U.S. Department of Transportation introduced new guidance referred to as TIFIA 49 which allows infrastructure dollars to support real estate projects. With a housing shortage looming, this bold move could help the U.S. meet the demand for 4.5 million homes. Yet, despite strong support at all levels of government, only one TOD project has secured DOT’s TIFIA financing so far.

Why aren’t more TOD projects leveraging this funding? Here are the key challenges:

  • Outdated Land Use Policies: Many cities are grappling with outdated policies that restrict development near transit. Within the last year, Washington and Colorado have created TOD-friendly policies, enabling cities to better engage developers and streamline projects.

  • Financing Standards Misaligned with Reality: A significant hurdle to TIFIA financing is proving creditworthiness. Most TOD projects are financed through special purpose vehicles (SPVs) with no financial history, making it nearly impossible to meet federal credit standards. To over come this, developers can rely on a city’s (or agency’s) credit score made possible through a public-private partnership agreement.

  • Project Structuring and Team Setup: Navigating regulations like Davis-Bacon, Buy America, and competitive procurement rules adds complexity (and costs) to developer processes. Aligning with wage laws and competitive standards during predevelopment is essential to keep projects eligible.

  • Environmental Regulations: Federal financing requires compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which reviews projects for environmental and social impacts. Recent streamlining efforts under the Biden administration have made it easier for infill and adaptive reuse projects to advance.

  • Underwriting Complexity: Construction loans for infrastructure assets are typically paid back through user fees, developer assessments, and taxes. Since TOD projects integrate real estate and infrastructure projects, property taxes and/or real estate rents become part of the infrastructure’s project revenue (and risk) making underwriting more complex. Depending on which project components are publicly financed adds complexity for creating a complete capital stack.

TIFIA is an untapped resource that could drive critical TOD projects forward. But to unlock its potential, we need targeted policy changes in the upcoming legislative session. And, for this tool to have the most impact, developers need to anticipate such moves and establish the right structures to seize this opportunity.

At Building Better Cities, we’re committed to helping cities and developers navigate the complexities of transit-oriented development. If your project could benefit from expert guidance in leveraging federal financing tools like TIFIA, or if you need support structuring your TOD initiatives, don’t hesitate to reach out. Let’s work together to turn bold ideas into transformative, sustainable urban projects.

Energy that packs a (lot of) punch

When we think of cleaning or greening the grid, we often think first of solar, wind and hydro energy. Renewables make up 20% of the national grid and growing investment will only up that percentage. But how do we get to a carbon free grid as fast as possible? 

We need to look at clean energy sources that pack a lot of punch… and keep on punching. What do I mean? Nuclear.  

I’ve previously talked about nuclear fusion and the distant future of making it commercially viable. But we haven’t talked about nuclear fission, an existing technology that we’ve known and used for decades. In the years following Fukushima and Chernobyl, nuclear has become a lot safer and public sentiment has warmed to the idea of expanding nuclear power. These trends parallel the growing interest in small modular reactors (SMRs).

How can SMRs help us build better cities? 

Safer and more modular: SMRs provide up to 300 MW(e) per unit, about ⅓ of the energy generated by traditional nuclear power reactors. Because of their size, SMRs don’t require intensive cooling operations that typically involve active cooling, pumps, power, or computer/human intervention, making them safer than traditional nuclear reactors. Their size also offers more flexibility for deployment in utility grids with constrained transmission and distribution lines.

Consistent baseload: The sun doesn’t always shine and the wind doesn’t always blow. Until energy storage solutions can scale up and provide consistency to renewable energy, the grid is still dependent on fossil fuel energy sources. Because of their consistent energy supply, SMRs are great substitutes for fossil fuels, providing baseload and peak energy needs. 

Power density: Renewables are land-use intensive. To power ⅓ of the national grid using solar energy, we will need up to 4250 square miles- the equivalent of 14 times the area of New York City. And solar is most efficient when located near sunny urban centers. Now, for the same amount of energy supply, SMRs require a fraction of that land mass- up to 580 square miles (about 2 x NYC). 

So, what’s the next step?

In 2023, over 12 states passed legislation that allow for the development of nuclear reactors, including West Virginia, which lifted a ban on nuclear reactors put in place to protect the coal industry. On top of this legislative effort, the US federal government has pushed billions of dollars into the development of SMRs because of its theoretical viability to rival fossil fuels. 

Just this month the IAEA (the International Atomic Energy Agency) reviewed Estonia’s plans to get to a zero carbon grid by 2050 which relies heavily on the use of SMRs. With the IAEA’s feedback, Estonia will progress their plans to develop SMRs. 

Despite growing momentum, 2023 did see some setbacks for SMRs deployments. NuScale and the Utah Associated Municipal Power System canceled their SMR pilot project at the Idaho National Lab. The project was planned to deliver 462-MW reactor(s) to energize communities throughout the mountain west. After years of progress, the project’s budget pushed the quoted price for a MWh of nuclear energy from $58 to $89, making it noncompetitive with the grid energy prices. The project couldn’t fill enough subscriptions to ensure the project would remain financially viable. 

There are still multiple pilot projects underway throughout the world. Even Microsoft has hired experts to develop nuclear energy sources to power data centers. The DOD has awarded a contract option to X-energy to develop transportable micro nuclear reactors. And, if energy storage cannot scale and regulatory environments become even stickier for fossil fuels, there’s a growing chance that the economics will work and utilities will turn towards small nuclear to clean the grid.

Who Builds Our Cities?

I often write about that what and how of city-building, but not always about the who. With the growing investment in the construction and infrastructure industries around the world, we are led to the question:

Who builds our cities? 

Below, I explore the similarities and differences between the US labor market and the labor force behind the World Cup. Two similar ambitions to build new infrastructure in two very different environments.

Workers Take Charge in Tight Labor Markets

The US construction industry employs over 7.6 million people who build nearly $1.4 trillion worth of structures each year. And, with the influx of infrastructure dollars, 15 million jobs will be created or saved in the next 10 years. This has definitely shown itself to be true. In just the first 6 months after the passage of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, nearly 4,300 projects have been spurred.

Despite these investments, the construction labor market has tightened up. COVID-19 highlighted shifting population dynamics, high workforce attrition rates, the need to upskill workers, and… the impact of slowing immigration. This last element has been especially challenging for the construction industry, where immigrant workers make up nearly a quarter of the workforce. These pressures have left 440,000 jobs open even as money floods the construction market.

In such a tight market, workers are able to dictate the rules of engagement. The Association of General Contractors surveyed their membership and found that 77% of firms have difficulty hiring skilled workers. This has led to a new reality where 86% of firms have raised base pay rates for their workers, passing those costs along to project owners. And, existing employees, carrying the work load for unfilled positions, are feeling the pressure. They’ve organized in a growing number of disputes, walkouts, and strikes to negotiate for better work conditions and pay.

Constant Labor Market Reduces Pressure for Reform

In stark contrast to current US labor dynamics, what we just witnessed in Qatar highlights the harsh reality of labor supply and demand in the Gulf countries.

For over 70 years, the Gulf countries have sourced foreign labor. At first, to build the necessary infrastructure to grow the global oil industry right in their backyards. And most recently, foreign labor has been at the heart of Qatar’s World Cup infrastructure. As of today, the Gulf countries’ workforce is comprised 70% of migrant workers, whereas 49% of the population are migrants. That gap is even more extreme in Qatar: migrant workers account for 90% of the workforce, drawing from nearby countries, such as Nepal and Pakistan, as well as far away Philippines.

In the Gulf countries, the kafala system has become a mainstay for migrant workers. The kafala system defines the legal status of migrant workers, requiring local sponsors to be responsible for a worker’s employment and living expenses. Employers recruit with one-time contracts that make it very difficult to switch or leave a job. In 2016, Qatar took progressive steps to abolish the kafala system (only to later reinstate certain contingencies). Yet, World Cup construction brought to light harsh working conditions and human rights injustices perpetuated by the kafala system. To build seven stadiums needed for the games, migrant labor worked over 60 hours a week in temperatures higher than 104 degrees in the summers which led to thousands of worker deaths.

Constant migrant labor supply, poor labor regulations, and racial and ethinic stereotyping all contribute to the problem. Workers are prevented from organizing and difficult employees can be replaced by a continuous stream of migrant labor. Even as Qatar has instituted policy reform, there are still limited Qatari structures to support better working conditions.

Awareness and Support

Given the growth in the US and the Gulf, both regions rely on migrant labor. But that’s where the similarities stop. The difference in labor dynamics, to some extent based in immigration policy, has ramifications on how much labor has power to demand change.

So, how do we look towards the future? Labor rights will need to be at the forefront. This means investment in jobs training programs, provisions that allow workers to voice concerns, fair payment terms, and hospitable working conditions. Here are just some examples of what can be done:

Earth Day Actions!

Leading up to Earth Day on April 22nd, I’m reflecting on how we can act to reverse extreme climate patterns. This includes small things, like conserving energy and separating recyclables, and larger actions, like donating to environmental conservation organizations. Below, you’ll find three ways you can build better (and more sustainable) cities. And, if you want to learn how to drive even bigger change? Read the latest issue of Building Better Cities.

Choose renewables and offset carbon emissions

This month, our household enrolled in the utility’s green energy program at 100% renewables. This means we will be paying a premium of $0.02/kWh (~$7/month). By doing this, we will be “planting” 80 trees or “taking” .7 cars off the road this month!

  • These states allow consumers to choose green energy [ElectricityRates]

  • New study finds that making renewable energy a default has enduring effects [ScienceDaily]

  • Pay for carbon offsets for your energy use and travel [Forbes]

Plan a new, greener commute

As offices start to open up, more people will start commuting again. What might have once been an easy choice to pick transit over private vehicles, might be more challenging. Here are some resources to help you make a sustainable and safe decision about your commute.

  • Calculate your commute’s carbon footprint [MapMyEmissions

  • If you drive >6km to work, WFH might be more sustainable [IEA]

  • Transit might be safer than indoor dining [NYTimes]

Reduce waste in your community

This Earth Day, many communities will be hosting clean-up events. But, it doesn’t have to be something we do just once a year. There are many ways to reduce waste, from eliminating single use plastics to supporting organizations and people that protect the world.

  • This foundation is removing plastics from the ocean [Surfrider Foundation]

  • Cover and secure waste bins to prevent litter [EPA]

  • Support Indigenous people, less than 5% of the global population but they manage 28% of the world’s land surface and 80% of global biodiversity [IISD]

Earth Day Shopping List