We want to make democracy more user-friendly – at every level – but in particular, at the local level where not only educated voting (Do you really know who to vote for at the local level when you close that curtain?), but finding and commenting on what is happening at local council meetings, school board meetings, etc. has been very difficult. With today’s technology, being an empowered citizen is overdue and Voterheads is committed to doing something about it. Read More

Head on over

Voterheads is forward-thinking, user-friendly, government-focused goodness, made magically easy.

If you haven't already, go see it for yourself.  Once you see how well-organized government can be, you'll wonder why we didn't do this earlier.


May 2017

When Global Goes Local: City and County Governments Tackle Climate Change

Posted by / in Issues, Topics / No comments yet

To many of us, climate change feels like an overwhelming, global issue.  International organizations host world forums to determine what steps countries should take to help lessen what many consider to be the negative impacts of development on the earth and environment.  The recent Paris agreement, for example, took years to plan and long, hard negotiations to finalize.  So you may wonder: what can be done, or is being done, by local governments in terms of climate change?

Do local entities even consider items related to climate change, or do they look to state and national governments to determine policies?

climate photoA search of the Voterheads database shows that climate change does indeed fall on local agendas.  Elected officials discussed topics, actions, and events related to climate change during public meetings throughout the country these past couple of months.  What are some of the things they talked about?  Let’s check it out.

The Chatham County, NC Board of Commissioners’ Climate Change Committee gave a presentation on the county’s Emissions Inventory Project. This project is a joint effort by the board and local college students from UNC-Chapel Hill.  The board requested the project in an effort to assess the amount and rates of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions made within the county’s borders.  After the presentation, the board voted to approve continued funding for the project for this year.

Honolulu’s City Council passed a motion requesting that the city administration report on its efforts to establish an Office of Climate Change, Sustainability, and Resiliency. The citizens of Oahu voted for the office’s creation during last November’s election.  The report requested by the council will include the office’s first projects and its development of a resiliency strategy for the region.

Newton, MA’s Program & Services Committee considered a motion put forth by two council members that would require gas stations to place notices upon gas pumps that remind customers that the burning of gasoline contributes to the impacts of climate change. The notice will also provide a link to the city’s website that offers suggestions for alternative transportation options that do not require gasoline.  The committee decided to wait to vote on the measure until more information on gas pump regulations and the stickers’ design is provided during future meetings.

Northampton, MA’s City Council considered a resolution calling on the state legislature of Massachusetts to create a carbon pollution pricing system for the state. The council affirmed its recognition of the detrimental effects of climate change generally and within its jurisdiction.  Consequently, the resolution asked the legislature to act quickly to encourage the development of more environmentally conscious and friendly methods of production and services through higher prices for carbon emitting sources of energy.

The Oakland, CA City Council recently voted on a resolution that supports a state senate bill requiring state pension fund boards to consider the financial risks associated with climate change when determining the investments they will make for state employees. The bill also implements a reporting mechanism beginning in 2020, requiring the state to report on the risks associated with climate change and the carbon footprint attached to the state pensions’ investments.  The committee voted for the resolution to be moved up to the city council for full consideration.

The four governments of Fayetteville, NC, Madison, WI, Maple Valley, WA and Santa Cruz, CA discussed comprehensive plans and strategies during public meetings over the past couple of months. These plans help local governments set up goals and objectives for the coming years, seeking to reduce the impact of various potential issues or problems by thinking ahead.

All four of these local entities considered the potential impacts of climate change in their plans.

Examples include ways to handle rising temperatures, methods for more environmentally friendly urban design including compact and mixed used building, approaches in dealing with the consequences of long-term drought, and the encouragement of applying new technologies for renewable and efficient energy sources.

climate photo

How we think about issues often impacts the decisions we make and the methods we choose to deal with them.  Thinking of climate change, or any other global concern, at only its highest level can make us feel detached from the issue.  But when we begin to see the impacts on our own communities, it not only becomes something more tangible but also inspires hope that solutions can be found at every level of society.  If you are interested in learning more about the local approach to climate change or any other environmental topic, be sure to add them to your interests on your Voterheads account!

Please select the social network you want to share this page with:


May 2017

Not your Grandma’s Bus: Making Mass Transit on Wheels Cool Again

Posted by / in Issues / No comments yet

When was the last time you rode a bus to work or school?  Or took it to go out on a Saturday night?  Many residents rely on public transportation in cities and counties each and every day.  But many prefer light rail or subway options compared to taking the bus.  Why do so many dislike climbing aboard the bus?  Are we all suffering from bad childhood memories of bus rides to and from school?  Most likely this is not the case.  More likely than not we shy away from buses due to the fact that riders often suffer the same annoyances as those of us sitting in our cars: the impacts of traffic.  Due to unpredictable conditions, buses simply cannot offer the same consistency in terms of time schedules as their rail competitors.  As a result, commuters choose other options.  Consequently, local governments, seeking to improve public transportation access for their communities, are turning to a tried and tested option that has lately seen a revival: bus rapid transit systems (BRT).

bus photo

So what exactly is bus rapid transit?  These systems tend to include many of the following characteristics:

  • • Dedicated bus lanes for designated “rapid” buses
  • • Alignment of bus lanes along the center or edges of streets in order to remain separate from the regular flow of traffic
  • • More frequent service, but fewer stops than traditional bus routes
  • • Stations/passenger protected platforms separated from sidewalks in order to prevent passengers from blocking pedestrian traffic
  • • Off-vehicle pay stations and/or all-door boarding to increase the ease and speed of passengers entering and exiting vehicles
  • • Platform-level boarding, which not only assists those with disabilities but increases efficiency upon entering and exiting vehicles
  • • Special treatments that prioritize rapid buses over the regular flow of traffic, including light signal coordination and turn prohibition by non-bus vehicles

These major aspects combine to offer cities and counties an exponentially cheaper option for mass transit compared to building light rail or underground systems.  Bus rapid transit seeks to combine the best of the bus and rail transit: flexibility and efficiency.  In order to “sell the bus” to new riders, bus rapid transit systems often look and feel like their rail cousins.  Rapid buses sport specific, bright designs and colors to stand apart from traffic.  Buses are often sleeker in appearance in exterior and interior details.  Rapid bus stations frequently provide real-time tracking so passengers know when the next, or next few, buses are expected to arrive.  Many local governments also opt to purchase electric vehicles for their rapid systems, an efficient upgrade from the standard gas-dependent buses.  Some rapid buses even offer wifi to their customers as an added bonus.

Many local governments also opt to purchase electric vehicles for their rapid systems, an efficient upgrade from the standard gas-dependent buses.

The popularity of bus rapid transit came through in the Voterheads database when we searched for public transportation related terms over the past few months.  During this time, seven local governments from across the country considered new BRT options, improvements to existing bus rapid lines, and the role these systems play in the sustainability of their communities.

• In Fontana, California, a suburb of Los Angeles, the city council held a workshop to discuss the proposed West Valley Connector, a BRT line in the San Bernardino Valley. The line would run for 25 miles between Fontana and Pomona, CA, offering limited stops for faster service.  The line would also provide quick access between the local train station and airport.

• The County Board of Commissioners in Franklin County, OH considered a resolution to enter into an agreement with the Central Ohio Transit Authority and the City of Columbus for a BRT proposal. The new Cleveland Avenue Bus Rapid Transit would extend through Franklin County lands, and thus the board must allow Columbus and the transit authority right of way and construction rights on those lands.  The board voted to pass the resolution, authorizing the cooperative agreement.

• The Kansas City, MO City Council passed a resolution that allows the city to enter into an agreement with the Kansas City Area Transit Authority for a new BRT line. The line will run from the downtown area along a major north-south thoroughfare within the city’s limits.  The city and transit authority plan to coordinate the funding between the two entities, in addition to federal funding from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA).

• The city of Minneapolis, MN approved the final design and layout of improvements to their C Line BRT and the reconstruction of a line along an additional corridor. The approval also included an agreement with nearby Hennepin County, OH which will work with Minneapolis and the port authority to reconstruct roads and intersections to improve service for both of these BRT lines.

• Montgomery County, MD considered and held public hearings on the creation of a new bus rapid transit line. The proposed line would extend from Burtonsville, MD to the outskirts of the Washington, DC metro area in Silver Spring, MD to better connect the county to downtown Washington, DC.  The planned route will be especially helpful to minority and lower income populations along the Route 29 corridor where the new line will be placed.  The hearing on April 18th lasted over two hours, with local residents offering their testimony in support and opposition to the project.  The council is currently taking the points put forward under advisement.

• In Pittsburgh, PA members of the local port authority presented four different options for a new BRT line from the city’s downtown to the neighborhood of Oakland, where the University of Pittsburgh resides. As one of the major thoroughfares in the city, the port authority hopes to provide the rapid transit in order to encourage more citizens to use public transportation, thus reducing the dependence on individual car usage and traffic.  Citizens of Pittsburgh will have the opportunity to weigh in on the different options over the next month.

• Finally, Reno City, NV recently presented the progress made on their 2016 Planning Commission goals. One of the goals included finding ways to offer more pedestrian and bicycle friendly options to the citizens of Reno City, and making those options as safe as possible.  The update of this goal included the benefits to pedestrians and bicyclists of the city’s new East 4th Street BRT line, planned for construction during 2017 through an FTA grant.  The new line will include dedicated bike lanes and accessible, wide sidewalks.

bus photo

Cities and counties throughout the country see value in BRT systems as cheaper, efficient alternatives to light rail systems.  While many voice concerns over whether these systems will provide the outcomes touted in their proposals, the popularity of BRTs as an alternative option for mass transit indicate that we might see more of them throughout the United States in the coming years.  Interested in learning more about different transportation options and developments in your area?  Then be sure to add some transportation related terms to your Voterheads account today!

Links to Voterheads’ events:

• Minneapolis: https://www.voterheads.com/events/79935

• Reno City: https://www.voterheads.com/events/79651

• Franklin County, OH: https://www.voterheads.com/events/84246

• Kansas City, MO: https://www.voterheads.com/events/84384

• Fontana, CA: https://www.voterheads.com/events/85086

• Montgomery County, MD: https://www.voterheads.com/events/86222

• Pittsburgh, PA: https://www.voterheads.com/events/87299

Please select the social network you want to share this page with:


Mar 2017

Diversity and Immigration; Federal Actions and Local Responses

Posted by / in Educational, Topics, Trending / No comments yet

It is pretty difficult these days to turn on the television, peruse a news source, or skim your social media without some mention of the federal government’s actions. Two executive orders about immigration, issued at the end of January, received a lot of attention.  The first order covered the administration’s policies and approaches to federal immigration law; including the defunding of local governments that serve as “sanctuary” cities or counties that do not detain undocumented immigrants for the federal government should they be held by local authorities.  The second order, issued two days later, prevented individuals from seven countries from traveling into the United States.  The administration argued their actions are necessary for the nation’s security.  Yet many companies, governmental entities, and individuals voiced concerns over the intent and potential consequences of the orders.

So what does this mean for local governments across the country?  While the federal government can enact laws and directives, state and local governments must decide how or if the provisions apply to them.  Curious to see how local governments responded to the federal government’s actions, we at Voterheads combed our agenda database to get a feel for how cities and counties are reacting.

Please select the social network you want to share this page with: