5 responses to “Transit Poll Says the Quiet Part Out Loud”

1. Phinancier

   March 20, 2024

   Too bad the Daily Journal article did not include the weak points in the law that the Mercury News reported nailed. Then today’s San Fran Chronicle article talked about Weiner writing the bill to force a mode shift on the public. I know what he can do with his mode shift.

2. Joe

   May 9, 2025

   The DJ article yesterday had a couple of tidbit$:
   Caltrain’s leadership is largely eliminating service cuts as a potential solution to its ballooning deficit, but it is still contemplating other methods such as increasing fares or reducing Clipper card discounts.
   Starting in fiscal year 2027 — which begins in July 2026 — the agency is projecting a $67 million deficit, slightly higher than originally predicted. By fiscal year 2034, the shortfall is expected to reach $82 million.
   During a previous board meeting, staff had presented numerous suggestions, which included possible service cuts, though most staff and board members agreed that option would put the agency in a worse position long term.
   However, other strategies are still on the table. Adrian Brandt, chair of the Caltrain Citizens Advisory Committee, said there should be stronger citation enforcement for those who don’t pay the fares. He referenced a Caltrain estimated figure of about 2,800 potential citations that could have been issued — but weren’t — last month, which “highlights a fare collection problem,” he said.
   ————————-
   2,800 potential citations per month x 12= 33,600 per year.

3. Joe

   July 23, 2025

   These guys nailed it in this letter to the DJ Editor. Could not say it better
   Editor,
   Let’s single out Supervisor Jackie Speier for her skepticism of the proposed, regressive half-cent sales tax hike for transit.
   Supervisor Canepa claims voters support the tax based on a “survey.” But that survey was a classic push-poll — respondents were spoon-fed pro-tax talking points (“fiscal cliff,” anyone?). Here’s what voters weren’t told:
   1). This tax would push the sales tax rate above 10% for the first time — 10.38% in Redwood City.
   2). It’s being sponsored by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the same outfit that understated the cost of the so-called “Affordable” Housing Bond by hundreds of millions of dollars per year. MTC has the credibility of a used car salesman.
   3). A special-purpose tax like this is supposed to require a two-thirds public vote. But local officials are pretending it’s a “citizens’ initiative” to lower the threshold to 50%. This proposal didn’t come from the public. Why is this even legal?
   4). Caltrain hasn’t even figured out how to collect fares from its riders. Supervisor Mueller rode regularly and was never asked for a ticket. There’s no enforcement strategy.
   5). As for BART — where to begin? BART Chair Debora Allen said it best: The agency’s dysfunction is the result of “many years of financial mismanagement” by its own board.
   One could go on.
   It’s unfortunate that Supervisor Speier is the only elected official with the wisdom to see through all of this. This regressive tax has all the look and feel of a con being perpetrated on a gullible public.
   C.J. Keane
   Chris Robell
   Redwood City
   ——————-
   Clear incontrovertible critical thinking on display.

4. Joe

   July 28, 2025

   It’s Monday so the Daily Post’s Dave Price is on tap with the latest zingers at our local politicians. Here he is:
   Bay Area politicians have decided they want to raise the sales tax by a half-cent to as much as 10% to bail out BART, Caltrain, SamTrans and other mass transit agencies, and they’ve come up with a sneaky way to get it passed.
   Prop 13 requires a two-thirds majority for voter approval of local special taxes, such as this bailout. But there’s a loophole the politicians want to exploit to make it more likely the tax will pass.
   This loophole, created by the state Supreme Court in the 2017 case California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland, states that if a special tax is placed on the ballot by a citizen’s initiative (that is, regular people circulating petitions to put the tax before voters), it only requires a simple majority to pass, rather than the two-thirds supermajority required by Prop 13.
   .
   .
   Instead of a grassroots effort, it’s an astroturf push for higher taxes.
   The politicians run an enormous risk with this approach. Let’s say the voters approve the tax. Then suppose a taxpayer advocacy group sues to get the courts to say that you can’t use fakery to pass a new tax. The court would look at whether this was a real citizen’s initiative or something dreamed up in the Metropolitan Transportation Commission board room.
   —————–
   The full editorial is here: https://padailypost.com/2025/07/28/opinion-transit-bailout-backers-using-loophole-to-get-new-tax-passed/

5. Joe

   August 7, 2025

   I seldom post the same thing as a comment on two separate threads, but this seems both important and in need of documenting here as well as on the BART post.
   Here comes the next tax ballot:
   After months of back-and-forth deliberation, San Mateo County Transit District voted to opt in to a regional sales tax measure to help transit operators, including Caltrain and BART, narrow their gaping fiscal deficits over the next decade.
   The regional measure, authorized by Senate Bill 63, will likely go before voters in 2026 within several Bay Area counties — including San Francisco, Alameda and Contra Costa — and is mostly intended to narrow major transit operators’ growing deficits.
   A major point of concern from San Mateo County leaders has been the inclusion of robust accountability measures, particularly for BART. Many local transit leaders have long been critical of BART’s fiscal management and what they claim are subpar safety measures and have called for stronger financial oversight and accountability if the county were to opt in.
   In the most recent proposals, the major operators must create a detailed financial plan and will be independently audited, however, the language is not officially part of the bill.
   Transit leaders have also been concerned that, under the current proposal, even if San Mateo County voters don’t approve the measure but the majority of voters across all member counties approve it, the county would still have to be included in the sales tax measures.
   “If voters of San Mateo County, in the end, vote no on this half-cent sales tax, it’s tough luck,” said SamTrans Board Member Jackie Speier, also a member of the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors.
   ————————–
   That last bit is the “Other People’s Money” take.