At a VTA board workshop on Friday, the board reviewed the agency’s emerging strategy on transit and transportation funding. Similarly, San Mateo County’s agencies discussed transit and transportation funding earlier in the week.
During the MTC discussion about transit funding options in 2024, Santa Clara County leaders had sent a forceful message that the county preferred to engage in regional funding with a parallel “puzzle piece” by reauthorizing its local sales tax and contributing to the BART and Caltrain, the regional services serving the county, and contributing to regional transit coordination (including fare integration, coordinated wayfinding signs, etc).
At the VTA board meeting on Thursday, the county seems to have moderated its position, based on some initial local survey findings, and will be doing more polling to assess voter preferences.
Voters surveyed indicated that they prefer a region-wide approach to transportation planning and funding over one that is solely locally focused.
As with polls conducted by the MTC and by Caltrain, voters support funding transportation improvements by a majority (61%). This is below the two thirds needed for a measure put on the ballot by a government agency, and well over the 50% needed for a citizens’ initiative.
The experience in San Francisco in the last election cycle showed that a citizens’ initiative can clear the 50% threshold (San Francisco’s Prop L did not pass because of a competing measure that passed with more votes). However, a citizens’ initiative requires more funding an effort than a government-backed measure. We wonder about whether it would be harder to raise money, organize and communicate for multiple citizens initiatives happening at the same time.
VTA’s research so far has consisted of focus groups and online surveys, and VTA now plans to do statistically significant polling for a locally focused measure options including
- A new half-cent sales tax for 30 years, to expire in 2056.
- A measure to increase Measure A by an additional 1/2 cent and extend by 30 years, to expire in 2066.
- Extend Measure A at ½ cent without increase, until voters change it.
The staff report layed out the agency’s policy and spending goals, including a focus on improving service above and beyond the MTC’s focus on agency deficits and reducing service cuts. The focus on improving service is in line with the views expressed by transit advocates through the Voices for Public Transportation coalition.
VTA also has interest in capital funding. The smaller measure contemplated by MTC, a half-percent sales tax, would make it challenging to accommodate capital improvements while preventing service cuts. We haven’t seen analysis about an expenditure mix for Santa Clara County that would prevent cuts to BART and Caltrain and have additional funds for local service improvement and capital funding.
VTA continues to want to see Caltrain continue the governance reform process that was a condition of getting Caltrain Measure RR on the ballot in 2020. At last week’s Caltrain board meeting, Chair Heminger convened an ad hoc subcommittee to work through remaining issues in rewriting the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers agreement.
As in Santa Clara County, San Mateo County agencies also grappled with the transit funding question. Like Santa Clara County, San Mateo County has a local transportation sales tax expiring even sooner in 2033. The topic was discussed at the San Mateo County Transportation Authority board (the funding and highway agency) on Thursday and the SamTrans board (the transit agency) on Wednesday. The agencies share staff and are working together on the county’s position. In Santa Clara County VTA serves both roles
Similar to Santa Clara County, San Mateo County is leaning toward a focus on reauthorizing its local tax, while exploring in parallel the ability to opt in to a regional measure. Like Santa Clara County, San Mateo County will also do polling about the potential for a local measure.
Board members and staff differed about the importance of maintaining service at all the agencies serving the county. Board members Romero and Corzo at SMCTA expressed a strong interest in working regionally and supporting a coordinated system with multiple agencies. Some others expressed skepticism that San Mateo County voters would want to support BART, despite the fact that MTC’s poll showed 59% support for a measure that mentioned BART first in the list of transit agencies.
Other discussions at the SMCTA board on Wednesday pointed to the need in San Mateo County to update its expenditure priorities. At that meeting, the board discussed a plan under development to widen highway 101 and add a managed lane (high occupancy toll lane). A number of board members expressed unease or opposition to the highway widening. Also at that meeting, the board discussed the difficulty in funding grade separation projects, for example the Broadway project in Burlingame whose cost has ballooned to over $600 million. The amount remaining in the current Measure A is not nearly enough for grade separation projects in the queue.
Given the uncertain timing of regional transit funding, the initiative to bring in state budget funding to keep transit running in the near term is all the more important.
Santa Clara, San Mateo Counties consider transportation/transit funding strategies
At VTA board workshop on Friday, the board reviewed the agency’s emerging strategy on transit and transportation funding. Similarly, San Mateo County’s agencies discussed transit and transportation funding earlier in the week.
During the MTC discussion about transit funding options in 2024, Santa Clara County leaders had sent a forceful message that the county preferred to engage in regional funding with a parallel “puzzle piece” by reauthorizing its local sales tax and contributing to the BART and Caltrain, the regional services serving the county, and contributing to regional transit coordination (including fare integration, coordinated wayfinding signs, etc).
At the VTA board meeting on Thursday, the county seems to have moderated its position, based on some initial local survey findings, and will be doing more polling to assess voter preferences.
Voters surveyed indicated that they prefer a region-wide approach to transportation planning and funding over one that is solely locally focused.
As with polls conducted by the MTC and by Caltrain, voters support funding transportation improvements by a majority (61%). This is below the two thirds needed for a measure put on the ballot by a government agency, and well over the 50% needed for a citizens’ initiative.
The experience in San Francisco in the last election cycle showed that a citizens’ initiative can clear the 50% threshold (San Francisco’s Prop L did not pass because of a competing measure that passed with more votes). However, a citizens’ initiative requires more funding an effort than a government-backed measure. We wonder about whether it would be harder to raise money, organize and communicate for multiple citizens initiatives happening at the same time.
VTA’s research so far has consisted of focus groups and online surveys, and VTA now plans to do statistically significant polling for a locally focused measure options including
- A new half-cent sales tax for 30 years, to expire in 2056.
- A measure to increase Measure A by an additional 1/2 cent and extend by 30 years, to expire in 2066.
- Extend Measure A at ½ cent without increase, until voters change it.
The staff report layed out the agency’s policy and spending goals, including a focus on improving service above and beyond the MTC’s focus on agency deficits and reducing service cuts. The focus on improving service is in line with the views expressed by transit advocates through the Voices for Public Transportation coalition.
VTA also has interest in capital funding. The smaller measure contemplated by MTC, a half-percent sales tax, would make it challenging to accommodate capital improvements while preventing service cuts. We haven’t seen analysis about an expenditure mix for Santa Clara County that would prevent cuts to BART and Caltrain and have additional funds for local service improvement and capital funding.
VTA continues to want to see Caltrain continue the governance reform process that was a condition of getting Caltrain Measure RR on the ballot in 2020. At last week’s Caltrain board meeting, Chair Heminger convened an ad hoc subcommittee to work through remaining issues in rewriting the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers agreement.
As in Santa Clara County, San Mateo County agencies also grappled with the transit funding question. Like Santa Clara County, San Mateo County has a local transportation sales tax expiring even sooner in 2033. The topic was discussed at the San Mateo County Transportation Authority board (the funding and highway agency) on Thursday and the SamTrans board (the transit agency) on Wednesday. The agencies share staff and are working together on the county’s position. In Santa Clara County VTA serves both roles
Similar to Santa Clara County, San Mateo County is leaning toward a focus on reauthorizing its local tax, while exploring in parallel the ability to opt in to a regional measure. Like Santa Clara County, San Mateo County will also do polling about the potential for a local measure.
Board members and staff differed about the importance of maintaining service at all the agencies serving the county. Board members Romero and Corzo at SMCTA expressed a strong interest in working regionally and supporting a coordinated system with multiple agencies. Some others expressed skepticism that San Mateo County voters would want to support BART, despite the fact that MTC’s poll showed 59% support for a measure that mentioned BART first in the list of transit agencies.
Other discussions at the SMCTA board on Wednesday pointed to the need in San Mateo County to update its expenditure priorities. At that meeting, the board discussed a plan under development to widen highway 101 and add a managed lane (high occupancy toll lane). A number of board members expressed unease or opposition to the highway widening. Also at that meeting, the board discussed the difficulty in funding grade separation projects, for example the Broadway project in Burlingame whose cost has ballooned to over $600 million. The amount remaining in the current Measure A is not nearly enough for grade separation projects in the queue.
Given the uncertain timing of regional transit funding, the initiative to bring in state budget funding to keep transit running in the near term is all the more important. It will likely take multiple puzzle pieces snapping together to save and improve transit on the Caltrain corridor, the region and the state.
