SPECIAL STATE TRANSPORTATION ISSUE

Governor Davis' Transportation Plan:
the GOOD, the BAD, and the ABSENT

On April 5, Governor Davis unveiled his $5.3 billion transportation proposal, of which $1.5 billion is slated for the Bay Area. Responding to voter polls favoring transportation alternatives over more highways, the plan prioritizes public transit by nearly a two-to-one margin. However, the plan also has some major flaws and the Coalition has been leading a region-wide effort to correct these as the plan moves through the legislature.

Some of the plan's flaws include: hundreds of new buses and trains without a penny to operate them, no funds to make our streets safer for walking and bicycling or to create more livable communities, and funding committed to the inefficient and astronomically expensive BART to San Jose extension. Another gaping hole is the lack of funding for basic urban bus transit, and at the end of May the Coalition will release an analysis that highlights the short shrift low-income communities receive in the plan.

This transportation plan is moving quickly through the legislature and may be finalized by early June. There is still an opportunity to make changes so please read on to see how you can help.

The GOOD

The plan revives existing rail systems. Improvements are slated for the Capitol Corridor between Oakland and San Jose, and the Caltrain Corridor between San Jose and San Francisco, to allow for faster and more frequent express service. Caltrain service to Gilroy will be expanded. The plan also funds Muni light rail improvements, Fremont-to-San Jose commuter rail service and Marin/Sonoma commuter rail service using existing tracks.

And adds new regional express buses. Funding is included for a fleet of 100 low emission buses for express service on carpool lanes, which was shown by MTC to deliver the greatest congestion relief for the fewest dollars.

The BAD

BART extension to San Jose. This project would grab nearly half of all the money heading for the Bay Area. Yet, because it requires at least $3 billion more than the Governor would provide, other more cost-effective projects may be put off for decades. (See What's Wrong With BART to San Jose? for more details.)

Sprawl-inducing highway projects. Highway 101 south of San Jose is already slated for widening from four to six lanes. The Governor's plan instead calls for doubling its width to eight lanes. This would greatly aggravate congestion for existing residents by allowing an additional 4,000 cars per hour to pour onto Santa Clara's roads. A study of this project is underway and the widening should be eliminated from the Governor's plan pending the results of the study.

The ABSENT

Transit operations. Trains and buses don't run without conductors and drivers! The plan's lack of funds for operations means that many of the transit projects will never have enough funding to carry passengers. Since State General Funds are one of the few places to obtain operating funds, the plan should allocate $400 million statewide per year for this purpose.

Safe streets and livable communities. Acknowledging the need for more bicycle and pedestrian safety, MTC's Transportation Blueprint proposed $80 million for bicycle projects. There is currently no funding of this kind in the Governor's plan. There is also no funding for Smart Growth initiatives that can create more livable communities and relieve traffic congestion.

Expanding local and lifeline transit. Local transit systems such as Muni, AC Transit, and SamTrans are the workhorses of Bay Area transit. More funding for these operators' basic services would garner the highest ridership for the money and reduce local congestion. MTC's Blueprint recommended a $33 million lifeline transit program of night and weekend service to primarily serve transit-dependent riders along key routes. The plan contains no money at all for such services.

May 22nd: State-Wide Phone-In Day

EDITOR'S NOTE: Please call your legislators, even after May 22nd! (After mid-June, the budget will be decided, and it will then be too late to call.)

Please call your legislators on Monday, May 22nd (if you can't call on the 22nd, call anytime after) and tell them you want them to make the following changes to the Governor's proposed transportation plan: (1) include funding flexibility for projects with pending studies, such as BART to San Jose, (2) make sure there are sufficient transit operating funds so the new buses and trains don't sit idle, and (3) include funding for safer streets and livable communities (such as transit-oriented development, bicycle, pedestrian, trail, and greenway projects). The most important legislators to contact are listed below.

Note: 916- numbers are for Sacramento offices, other numbers are local district offices.

Senate

John Burton: (no calls please, fax to 916-445-4722)
Liz Figueroa: 916-445-6671, 510-413-5960
Don Perata: 916-445-6577, 510-286-1333
Byron Sher: 916-445-6747, 650-364-2080
Jackie Speier: 916-445-0503, 650-301-1721
John Vasconcellos: 916-445-9740, 408-286-8318

Assembly

Dion Aroner: 916-319-2014, 510-540-3660
John Dutra: 916-319-2020, 510-440-9030
Mike Honda: 916-319-2023, 408-269-6500
Carole Migden: 916-319-2013, 415-673-5560
Lou Papan: 916-319-2019, 650-866-3940
Kevin Shelley: 916-319-2012, 415-885-1212
Virginia Strom-Martin: 916-319-2001, 707-576-2526
Tom Torlakson: 916-319-2011, 925-372-7990
Patricia Wiggins: 916-319-2007, 707-546-4500

What's Wrong With BART to San Jose?

Extending BART from Fremont to San Jose will not solve the Bay Area's congestion woes. Instead, it will gobble up funding from other transit options that MTC has shown would attract many more riders at a far lower cost.

BART to San Jose won't carry a single passenger for 15-30 years--if it ever gets built.

Other options offer relief within just 2-3 years. Rail service from Fremont to San Jose could be up and running every 15 minutes by 2003 on existing tracks-the same frequency as BART would be. Express bus service, utilizing the region's existing 270-mile carpool network, would carry commuters from the Tri-Valley, Fremont BART and other locations directly to job sites in Silicon Valley, and could be put into place even faster.

Extending BART to San Jose would require over $3 billion more in funding. There is no federal rail funding money available to the Bay Area until BART to SFO is paid off in 2007. If BART to San Jose becomes the next federally funded project then dozens of more effective projects in other Bay Area counties will not have a chance at receiving these federal funds.

Other options save taxpayers billions of dollars. The combined capital cost of new commuter rail service using existing tracks from Union City to San Jose, luxury express buses, as well as expanded bus service throughout Santa Clara County would be $540 million, over $3 billion less than BART. This tax savings is especially significant as much of the funding for BART would have to come directly from Santa Claa residents.

BART to San Jose would mean continued gridlock. Santa Clara's spread out housing and job sites require a broad range of transit options, which is why the combination of projects would carry more than twice as many passengers as BART (at about one-seventh of the cost). More transit riders means less congestion for those who are still on the road.

BART serves a crucial function in serving San Francisco and the East Bay, but needs billions of dollars for seismic needs and basic maintenance. Existing customers must be safe and well-served. To learn more about the alternatives to BART between Fremont and San Jose, and a more detailed list of BART improvements advocated by the Coalition check out the World Class Transit report.

Sample Letter

See www.transcoalition.org/govtranspo.html for addresses of key legislators, or to download an electronic copy of the letter. To find out who your legislator is visit www.senate.ca.gov or www.assembly.ca.gov.

The Honorable [Your Rep Here]
Capitol Building Room [See List of Room Numbers]
Sacramento, CA 95814

Dear _____________:

I have/Our organization has serious concerns about Governor Davis' proposed $5.3 billion transportation investment plan. To its credit, the plan has taken some very positive steps to prioritize transit investments instead of highways. However, there are three critical components that I urge you to work to add to the Governor's package:

1. Flexible language for projects that have pending studies or where there's no local consensus, such as the BART extension to San Jose. BART to San Jose would still need well over $3 billion beyond the funds proposed in the Governor's plan. This means funding that could help projects all across the Bay Area will be put off for decades. With other, less expensive options available, I/we urge you to allow flexibility for how funds are spent in this corridor, pending the outcome of a proposed study.

2. Significant funding for transit operations. The Governor included no money to expand existing service or to operate the new buses and trains that his plan proposes to purchase. An additional $400 million annually in operating funds would help close the yearly funding gap identified by the California Transportation Commission.

3. Funding for safer streets and more livable communities, i.e. bicycle, pedestrian, trail, greenway, and transit-oriented development projects. With bicyclists and pedestrians accounting for more than 20 percent of the state's traffic fatalities, I/we urge you to add $250 million for state and local programs that work to protect all users of our streets, and create more livable communities.

I/We appreciate your continued leadership on transportation issues and look forward to hearing about your position on these matters.

Sincerely,

State-Wide Transit Rally on Monday, May 22

On Monday, May 22nd, transit buses filled with local officials and transit advocates will converge in Sacramento to make the case-directly to the Governor and Legislature-that now is the time to invest in California transit. The buses and passengers will make an impressive showing, caravanning up to the Capitol and parking in formation around the grounds. A rousing rally will follow with speeches, music, food, and hundreds (maybe even thousands) of bus riders.

AC Transit is sending one if its brand new, luxury motor coaches, and will leave AC Transit's headquarters (1600 Franklin Street, between 16th and 17th, in Oakland, 2 blocks from the 12th Street BART station) at about 8:00 am. For more information, please contact Victoria Wake at (510) 891-7246 or vwake@actransit.org.

EPA Grant an Opportunity to Grow Better and Control Sprawl

Citing intense threats to the environment, skyrocketing congestion, ailing urban transit systems and deteriorating quality of life in the Bay Area, the Coalition applauded a grant, announced on April 27, that will jump-start smart growth planning in the region.

The Coalition has been working for two years with regional agencies to secure funding for a regional Smart Growth process. This $180,000 grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is the first proposal from the regional agencies to receive funding. It will help the Association of Bay Area Governments work with cities and counties to see how they can grow in ways that reduce traffic congestion, preserve open space and improve air quality.

"Regional smart growth planning is needed so we can envision a more compact, sustainable future, then guide investments to support that vision," said Stuart Cohen, Chair of the Coalition. "For decades we have simply assumed sprawl will take place then funneled billions of taxpayer dollars to support the sprawl, and the result is just more congestion, less open space, and concentrated pockets of poverty in older towns and cities."

Last year, the Coalition's Warning Signs report ranked a region-wide Smart Growth planning process as a top regional priority. The report stated that nothing short of a fundamental shift in our growth patterns and transportation investments will save the Bay Area from the approaching "wall of sprawl."

Alameda County Measure B Update

What do you do when you've won a $186 million increase for transportation alternatives? You fight to make sure the cities, county and, finally, the voters approve it!

After a remarkable campaign to improve the proposed Alameda County Transportation Sales Tax, Coalition members have shown up in force to support Measure B at twelve City Council meetings. This consistent presence has impressed elected officials who were concerned that the Coalition would move on to other issues once we got changes in the expenditure plan.

"If we can continue, as a Coalition, to show our strong support and help pass Measure B in November, we will get all the benefits of the improved expenditure plan," said Jeff Hobson, Chair of the Alameda County Chapter. "We will also strengthen our ability to get future changes in transportation and land use policies and funding. Additionally, we'll prove that the inclusion and support of environmental and social justice groups is the only way to win a two-thirds vote on these issues."

The revised Measure B expenditure plan, including the changes Coalition members fought so hard for, has been passed by all twelve City Councils. Only Newark and Pleasanton still have to vote on the plan, and there will be advisory votes in front of several transit districts. Then the plan will go to the Board of Supervisors in June or July to be placed on the November ballot. If you're not already on the email list to receive updates about upcoming meetings and events, please contact Jeff Hobson at (510) 540-7280 or jhobson@igc.org.

Regional Coalition Meeting

Wed., June 7, 5:30-7:30 p.m.
Dinner provided.
Sierra Club, 85 2nd St., 3rd floor
San Francisco

Silicon Valley Chapter

Thu., May 25, 7:00-9:00 p.m.
Dinner provided.
285 Moffett Blvd., Mountain View
One block from Caltrain/VTA light rail station in downtown Mountain View

Alameda County Chapter

Wed, June 21, 6:00-8:00 p.m.
Dinner provided.
Location TBA

Updated: 6/2/00