On August 26, 2024, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) met to discuss the two frameworks for a transportation funding bill. Thankfully, despite a big push for business interests and few commissioners, the scenario that Transform supports, the Go Big Scenario, also known as Scenario 2, is still in play. The commission has decided to go forward and revise Scenarios 1 and 2, and look into the feasibility of Scenario 3, and bring these revised scenarios to the next MTC select committee meeting on September 23. 

What’s at stake

Ridership for all of the Bay Area’s transit systems is still well below pre-pandemic levels, reducing fare revenue that many providers rely on. Yet providers must maintain routes and schedules to make public transit a viable option and build ridership back up, rather than losing more passengers due to lack of service. MTC is developing language for authorizing legislation for a funding measure that will be on the ballot in 2026. The challenge is to find a solution that stakeholders can agree on.

The options currently under consideration are:

• Scenario 1: Core Counties. San Francisco, Contra Costa, Alameda, and San Mateo Counties would develop a regional funding mechanism just covering their transit systems. Other counties could opt in. The funding mechanism would be a half-cent sales tax.
• Scenario 2: Go Big. This option would cover all nine Bay Area counties and use a progressive funding mechanism of a parcel or payroll tax. 
• Scenario 3: Go It Alone. There would be no regional measure, but MTC would support counties that wanted to run their own revenue measures.

Transform supports the Go Big option because it offers the best chance for an integrated and improved transit ecosystem throughout the Bay Area. Residents rely on more than their local transit systems to move from city to city throughout the region, so a region-wide approach will keep transit consistent and prevent a patchwork of different service levels. Plus, the progressive funding options are the most equitable and sustainable.

Voices in support of transformational transit funding

In the meeting, commissioners reaffirmed their commitment to funding transit. After MTC staff presented the scenarios, several MTC commissioners spoke up in support of the Go Big Scenario. 

Commissioner Noak, who represents Contra Costa County, stated that she supported The Go Big Scenario but had concerns about the funding amounts being reduced after eight years. Commissioner Canepa, who represents San Mateo County, also spoke favorably of Scenario 2, stating that a more regional approach will ensure that everyone pays their fair share into regional systems such as Caltrain. 

Several members of the select committee objected to asking voters to raise their taxes for service cuts, and Scenario 1 would do just that. Many commissioners also pointed out that Scenario 3 would force certain counties to vote on multiple transit measures. San Francisco, for example, would have to vote on three different transit agency funding measures for Caltrain, Muni, and BART. 

Despite the issues with Scenario 1, some members of the select committee spoke up in its favor and against Scenario 2. The primary concerns about Scenario 2 were that it was funded through a parcel or a payroll tax and that currently, a truly regional measure that included all nine counties lacked political feasibility.  

Advocates speak out

Many advocates with Transform and the Voices for Public Transportation Coalition made public comments at the meeting in support of Scenario 2. They coalesced around several demands addressed by Scenario 2:

• This measure needs to be regional, so it must include all nine counties. 
• The main goal of this measure is to fund transit, and Bay Area transit riders and voters have said they support investing in a transit system with fast, frequent, reliable, coordinated, accessible, and affordable service. 
• MTC’s polling showed that voters want transit improvements even more than they want to prevent cuts. Only Scenario 2, the 9-county, $1.5 billion option, achieves this need. 
• We must prioritize safe and complete streets in the measure and limit roadway expenditures to a state of good repair with no highway expansions. 
• It should be funded through progressive revenue sources such as a payroll tax or parcel tax. 
• Scenario 2 has a wide breadth of support from riders, community organizations, and labor unions. 

Many advocates hit home the point that we can’t run a campaign asking voters to increase their taxes and then start implementing transit cuts. Not only will voters not vote for this, but it will make it difficult to ask them to fund transit in the future.

On September 23, 2024, MTC staff will present revised versions of Scenarios 1 and 2 based on suggestions made by commissioners at the August meeting. They will also present on the feasibility of Scenario 3. At the September meeting, the commission hopes to narrow in on one scenario, with a final vote being at the October special select committee meeting. 

While it is good news that the Go Big Scenario is still on the table, advocates, riders, labor, and community groups will have to continue to speak up and take action if we want to ensure that the select committee narrows its focus and selects the Go Big Scenario as the best option to move forward in the upcoming legislative session.