BealeHenryBishopElbertMarleyWilliam1996. How to pass local option taxes to finance transportation projects. Transportation Research Record1558: 74–82.
2.
CrabbeAmberHiattRachelPoliwkaSusanWachsMartin2005. Local transportation sales taxes: California's experiment in transportation finance. Public Budgeting and Finance25:91–121.
3.
DeaconRobertShapiroPerry1975. Private preference for collective goods revealed through voting on referenda. American Economic Review65:943–55.
4.
GoldmanToddCorbettSamWachsMartin2001. Local option transportation taxes in the United States. Part two: State-by-state findings. Research report UCB-ITS-RR-2001–4. Berkeley: Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California.
5.
GreenAndrew. 2006. Life in the fast lane: Transportation finance and the local option sales tax. State and Local Government Review38:92–103.
6.
HaasPeterMasseyKristenValentyLindaWerbelRichard2000. Why campaigns for local transportation funding initiatives succeed or fail: An analysis of four communities and national data. San Jose: Mineta Transportation Institute.
7.
HannayRobertWachsMartin2007. Factors in fluencing support for local transportation sales tax measures. Transportation34:17–35.
8.
McFaddenDaniel. 1981. Econometric models of probabilistic choice. In Structural analysis of discrete data with econometric applications, ed.ManskiC.McFaddenD.. Cambridge: MIT Press.
9.
PoppDavid. 2001. Altruism and the demand for environmental quality. Land Economics77:339–49.
10.
SandersMitchell. 2000. Uncertainty and turnout. Political Analysis8:45–57.
11.
Southern California Regional Rail Authority.2004. Post-election analysis of Ventura County's proposed sales tax increase measure for transportation improvements (Measure B): Why and how did it fail?Los Angeles: Southern California Regional Rail Authority.
12.
ThalmannPhilippe. 2004. The public acceptance of green taxes: 2 million voters express their opinion. Public Choice119:179–217.
13.
U.S. Department of Transportation.2006. 2004 status of the nation's highways, bridges, and transit: Conditions and performance. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation.
14.
U.S. Government Accountability Office.2005. Highway and transit investments: Options for improving information on projects' benefits and costs and increasing accountability for results. GAO-05–172. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Accountability Office.
15.
WashingtonSimonKarlaftisMatthewManneringFred2003. Statistical and econometric methods for transportation data analysis. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
16.
WerbelRichardHassPeter2001. Factors influencing voter results of local transportation funding initiatives with a substantial transportation component: Case studies of ballot measures in eleven communities. MTI report 01–17. San Jose, CA: Mineta Transportation Institute.
17.
WerbelRichardHassPeter. 2002. Voting outcomes of local tax ballot measures with a substantial transit component: Case study of effects of transportation packages. Transportation Research Record1799:10–17.