SAN FRANCISCO – The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) select committee tasked with developing a proposal for a funding mechanism for public transit has failed to come to a consensus. Now, the full commission will take up the task — and it must not fail.
“We can’t let the unthinkable happen and let transit agencies fail. It will be a domino effect, stripping the Bay Area of the public transit that’s the lifeblood of our region. Everyone suffers when transit service fails. But low-income and BIPOC people, who often have the fewest transportation choices, will bear the brunt of diminished or absent public transit, with reduced access to jobs, education, and necessary services,” says Transform Transportation Policy Advocate Abibat Rahman-Davies. “It’s time for the commissioners to think big and take their responsibility to provide a stable funding source for the whole region seriously.”
The Bay Area’s 27 transit agencies face a fiscal crisis. An additional funding allocation from the legislature in 2023 will run out soon, and Bay Area legislators and MTC have struggled to find a solution acceptable to all stakeholders that could win enough support at the ballot box. Most recently, MTC created a select committee to craft a measure with broad support.
We recognize this is a daunting task. Counties and cities have different priorities. Business interests and labor unions want specific provisions. But the members of the select committee, rather than providing certainty amidst the dissent, have not shown the leadership we need in this moment. Members have been focused on parochial interests and swayed by special interests. Today, as the MTC Special Select Committee mandate ended, they failed to reach a true consensus.
The Bay Area cannot give up on regional transit. As a member of Voices for Public Transportation, we have been working for years toward a vision for a more robust, vibrant, connected transit future for our whole region. If any of our transit systems is forced into drastic service cuts or ceases operation, we will lose a vital link in a transit chain, stranding residents from throughout the region.
We are not giving up. We call on MTC to quickly develop a funding proposal where no one is left behind, meaning that it is regional, fully funds the transit operator gap, and contains projects that reduce emissions. Any projects that increase vehicle miles traveled (VMT) should be strictly mitigated.
Reliable transit protects our climate from an emissions catastrophe and our roadways from endless gridlock. It’s time for MTC to step up, make hard decisions, and show it’s up to the challenge of leading the way for Bay Area transportation.
https://transformca.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/ac-transit-bus-scaled-e1724966973827.jpeg10861920Abibat Rahman-Davieshttps://transformca.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Company-Logo.pngAbibat Rahman-Davies2024-10-22 09:11:002024-10-23 16:53:23Transform Responds to MTC Select Committee Inaction on Regional Transit Funding
After SB 1031, a bill to fund Bay Area transit, was withdrawn, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) set up a special select committee to craft a regional transit measure that could gain wide support. The commission meets monthly through October to set up a framework for a new funding bill to be sent to the legislature at the start of the 2025 session.
On September 23, 2024, MTC held a meeting of the Transportation Revenue Measure Select Committee that should have produced a near-final version of the measure for ratification in October. Unfortunately, the meeting ended without consensus. While all members agreed that transit desperately needs to be funded, how exactly it should be funded has been up for debate. We understand the challenge of bringing together many diverse stakeholders with sometimes opposing interests, but it’s a challenge MTC must meet.
Contentious MTC meeting
At the September select committee meeting, members were asked to vote on two different scenarios that have been continually refined at each of the previous meetings. The Core scenario — which includes Alameda, Contra Costa, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties — has an opt-in for the other counties and is funded through a sales tax. The Hybrid Scenario (formerly the Go Big Scenario) includes all nine counties and aims to sustain current service levels and close operator-reported deficits with funding from a ½ cent sales tax combined with a payroll tax.
Disagreements came to a head as select committee members were asked to express their support for the scenarios through a gradient of agreement: 1 — strongly agree, 2 — have some reservations but agree, 3 — neutral but strong reservations, 4 — will go along but have strong reservations, or 5 — strongly disagree. The tallied vote showed virtually a tie between the two scenarios, with both scenarios around 3.8. This score reflects weak support, and many commissioners advocated for a third option that was not brought up for a vote: the Hunger Games scenario. That option would largely remove MTC from the picture, leaving individual counties and transit agencies to run their own, sometimes competing, funding measures. This level of disagreement further illustrates the deadlock on the committee on how to save our failing transit systems.
Turning a deaf ear to the public — and MTC’s charter
Which scenario the MTC special select committee will ultimately choose to save our transit systems is unclear, but what is clear is that many commissioners are out of step with what the community is demanding. The committee voted on the scenarios before public comments were even made, so their votes weren’t influenced by public input. In fact, during public comments, many commissioners left the room.
In explaining his vote, one commissioner, who voted “strongly disagree” for both scenarios, stated that while he wants to find a solution, he is not optimistic, and he doesn’t believe MTC is even the right place to create a solution to fund our transit system. However, according to California law, the role of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission is “to provide comprehensive regional transportation planning for the region comprised of the City and County of San Francisco and the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma.”(emphasis added). It’s precisely MTC’s primary role to solve this issue, so if MTC is not the right arena for this, then who is?
Regressive funding sources
Advocacy groups and many members of the public have called for a solution that doesn’t add to the financial burden that disenfranchised groups face. Yet many MTC commissioners have continued to push for scenarios funded either completely or mostly by regressive taxes such as a sales tax.
Progressive revenue sources like parcel and payroll taxes have strong community support. The committee removed the parcel tax because of concerns about overusing it, since it is a potential funding source for the housing bond.
The business community spoke up fervently against a negligible 0.18% payroll tax, claiming that it sent a bad message to Bay Area businesses. The commission seemed very concerned about the business community’s opposition to a payroll tax, and many commissioners spoke up in agreement with the business community’s disapproval of the payroll tax. However, many members of the public mentioned during public comment that they liked a payroll tax because they felt that businesses should pay their fair share toward the transit services they rely on.
Bay Area transit is regional — we need a regional solution
Keeping our transit systems fully funded and operating reliably is a regional problem that needs a regional solution. Unfortunately, during the select committee process and especially in the September meeting, many commissioners have been focused on their county’s benefit and fairness for their county, failing to see the big picture.
Many commissioners also continued to push for the Hunger Games scenario. However, people don’t use transit systems by county; they ride regionally. Someone might get on a bus in one county, connect to BART in another county, and then take MUNI or Caltrain at the other end. A failure of any of our transit systems would be catastrophic for the whole region, not just one county, so we need to solve this problem together.
In addition, multiple measures introduce multiple points of failure. We already fund big capital projects regionally, so we should be able to fund transit operations regionally.
Speak up for public transit
MTC’s October special select committee meeting will decide on the final solution to submit to the legislature. We need you to call in and tell MTC commissioners that they need to get the train back on the tracks. Ask them to listen to the voices of the people who will vote for the measure and of transit riders.
No one wants Bay Area transit systems to fail or be forced into drastic service cuts. The MTC must put forth a regional scenario that covers the deficit, is long-term, and is funded by mostly progressive revenue sources. Transform and our allies at Voices for Public Transit are working hard to support this scenario. We are deeply grateful to everyone who has come to meetings and spoken out. While the Hybrid (formerly Go Big) scenario is not the perfect option, it is a regional solution that would save transit operations, and you are the reason it is still being considered. Please come out one more time on October 21. Help us win approval for a regional solution.
https://transformca.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Caltrain-electric-train-scaled-e1729530333133.jpeg6571920Abibat Rahman-Davieshttps://transformca.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Company-Logo.pngAbibat Rahman-Davies2024-10-02 17:35:312024-10-02 17:35:32The Train Has Gone Off the Tracks: People Are Speaking Up but MTC Is not Listening
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.
Representatives from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) joined a Voices for Public Transportation (VPT) meeting on August 21 to outline three scenarios under consideration for a regional transportation measure. Transform and VPT believe the Go Big Framework deserves strong support, while the other options fall short of what we need to ensure transit transformation. We’re rallying people who care about the future of public transportation in the Bay Area to attend the MTC Transportation Revenue Measure Select Committee meeting on Monday, August 26, 2024, at 9:30 a.m. The meeting will be held at the Bay Area Metro Center, 375 Beale Street in San Francisco, in the first floor board room. If you can’t attend in person, consider joining on Zoom or sending public comments by email to [email protected] by 5:00 p.m. on Friday, August 23.
Here’s what you need to know about the scenarios MTC is considering and talking points to support a robust transit funding measure.
Core Transit Scenario: The opt-in option
This option would cover San Francisco, Contra Costa, Alameda, and San Mateo Counties, with an option for the other five Bay Area counties to opt in. It proposes a half-cent sales tax and would raise money to fund the agencies operating in those counties: BART, AC Transit, MUNI, and Caltrain.
MTC estimates this option would raise $540 million annually from these four counties and $1 billion if all nine counties opt-in. In this scenario, 10% of the funding would go to region-wide transit transformation projects. MTC would have to find additional funding to cover those projects in counties that don’t opt-in. The remaining 90% would initially shore up funding for transit operations before shifting entirely to county-by-county discretionary transportation spending.
Unfortunately, the Core Transit Scenario would not fill the broader operating funding need in a way that keeps our transit systems running without service cuts. It is hard to imagine that voters would vote to increase their taxes for a measure that would result in service cuts. While some flexibility for counties is needed, the Core Transit Scenario would give counties carte blanche on two-thirds of the entire measure without any guarantees that the money would be spent on needed investments in transit, walking, and biking as opposed to harmful highway expansion projects.
The Go Big Framework: A nine-county solution
The second scenario MTC is considering would raise $1.5 billion annually through a 0.54% payroll tax or a $0.28 per square foot parcel tax across all nine Bay Area counties.
This scenario would allocate 20% of funds to transit transformation, with 10% going to MTC for regional projects and 10% returned to counties. It would allocate 50% of funding to operators to maintain their 2023 levels of service initially, with amounts adjusted for inflation after that. The remaining 30% would be county-by-county discretionary transportation spending, known as county flex funds, for use on any projects included in Plan Bay Area. This could include road repairs, new bike lanes, or transit improvements, but it could also mean adding highways.
One of the sticking points in negotiating a region-wide measure is the desire of counties to keep the revenues raised locally rather than subsidizing operations in other counties. Transform is recommending a guaranteed 90% of the revenue raised in a county would be returned to that county over the life of the measure to address this concern.
While Transform opposes any regional transportation revenue going to highway expansion, we believe this is by far the best scenario presented by MTC and look forward to improving it further. It uses a progressive revenue source, gives a great deal of autonomy to counties to serve the varied needs of their residents, gives robust funding to transit transformation, and, most importantly, fills the transportation funding deficit.
Scenario Three: Going it alone
The final scenario is to abandon the project of a regional transportation revenue measure entirely. The MTC’s only role would be to seek authority for local jurisdictions to run their own ballot measures to raise revenue. This option would provide no transit transformation funding and wouldn’t guarantee the future of the Bay Area’s interconnected transit network. It would be particularly challenging for multi-county operators like BART and Caltrain and cities like San Francisco that could see three separate transit funding measures on the same ballot. Many Bay Area residents live and work in different counties, and funding a harmonized and fully operational regional transit network serves everyone’s needs. Further, putting multiple transportation funding measures on the ballot will confuse voters, making it more likely these measures would fail.
Speak up for regional transit transformation
MTC is hearing a lot of loud voices from different interest groups right now. They need to hear from those of us who want a revenue measure that will protect our regional transit system, share the costs proportionately, with those of greater means contributing the most, and bring about transit transformation, encouraging more people to ride instead of drive.
If you can attend in person, attend virtually, or submit a public comment, here are questions and talking points Transform and VPT suggest raising to MTC:
The number of counties that will get funded matters. Will we get a measure that excludes transit riders in the North Bay and South Bay, or will our measure help everyone?
The revenue mechanism should be progressive. Will the measure be funded by a sales tax, which hurts working people, or will it be funded by those with the most ability to pay?
The amount of money raised needs to be enough to keep transit fully operational or the whole purpose is defeated. Some scenarios won’t even keep transit funding at the levels they are today, which we all know is already inadequate. How will MTC ensure the measure includes adequate funding for all transit operators?
Please speak up for regional transit funding at the MTC Transportation Revenue Measure Select Committee meeting on Monday, August 26, 2024, at 9:30 a.m.:
In-person: Bay Area Metro Center, 375 Beale Street in San Francisco, in the first floor Board Room
Or send public comments by email to [email protected] by 5:00 p.m. on Friday, August 23.
Working together, we can save public transit in the Bay Area!
https://transformca.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/ac-transit-bus-scaled-e1724966973827.jpeg10861920Abibat Rahman-Davieshttps://transformca.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Company-Logo.pngAbibat Rahman-Davies2024-08-22 16:25:322024-08-23 12:43:04We Still Have a Path to an Excellent Regional Transportation Measure — With Your Help
On July 29, 2024, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) held its second select committee hearing to discuss a new transportation revenue measure for the Bay Area.
If MTC and Bay Area legislators craft a bill that garners wide enough support, the enabling legislation can pass in 2025, and the measure can go to Bay Area voters in 2026. An effort to pass enabling legislation in 2024 fell apart after MTC threatened to withdraw support, so the stakes are high.
Debating a sales tax to raise the needed revenue
Sales taxes are the most common method to fund transportation, and some voices — especially in the business community — are advocating for a regional sales tax as the funding mechanism. In fact, Select Committee member Jim Wunderman of the Bay Area Council openly threatened to fund opposition to a transportation measure if it was funded by a payroll or income tax.
However, the burden of a sales tax falls disproportionately on poorer residents who spend a greater percentage of their income purchasing goods. Transform and Voices for Public Transportation (VPT) have pressed MTC to move forward with a more progressive revenue source, such as a payroll or per-square-foot parcel tax.
MTC has done polling to try to determine what provisions in a regional transportation funding measure would make it most likely to gain the two-thirds majority needed to pass a ballot measure with a new tax. It showed no clear preference for the funding mechanism, but when talking to participants during the poll, MTC noted that cost of living seemed to be the biggest concern; a sales tax would increase the cost of living inequitably, leaving the lowest-income Bay Area residents to shoulder more than their share of the burden.
Earlier polling done by Transform’s partners showed a sales tax being less popular than an income tax.
Potholes vs. new lanes
MTC’s polling showed funding for road maintenance such as filling potholes is popular. Transform supports a fix-it-first policy and has encouraged MTC to limit road spending to a state of good repair with safe and complete streets improvements. We are strongly opposed to using funds to build or expand highways.
More lanes, even new HOV or paid express lanes, don’t reduce congestion but do lead to more vehicle miles traveled, more greenhouse gas emissions, and more deadly air pollution, often in neighborhoods already environmentally burdened. And building new lanes is expensive
— the money from this measure will serve many more Bay Area residents if it’s spent on transit and active transportation.
A smaller measure?
The regional transportation funding measure was initially envisioned to cover the nine Bay Area counties: Napa, Sonoma, Marin, Solano, Contra Costa, Alameda, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara. However, one of the challenges of crafting a measure with broad support is divergent transportation needs among those counties.
More rural areas have different priorities from dense, urban cities and counties. And transit agencies like VTA in the South Bay don’t have the same transit fiscal cliff that BART and Muni are facing. Thus, there are questions about how much of the tax revenue collected within a county will return to that county.
As an alternative, the committee is considering a measure that would cover either three or four counties: San Francisco, Alameda, Contra Costa, and potentially San Mateo. Additional counties could have the option to opt in at a future time if they’re not included in the initial measure.
In the spirit of regional collaboration and advancing the best, biggest measure possible, Voices for Public Transportation urges the inclusion of all nine counties in the regional transportation measure. It’s not clear whether a plan that doesn’t include all nine counties will raise enough revenue to save BART, and it certainly will not be able to deliver on transformational transit investments voters want to see. On the other hand, it’s likely that more of the revenue from a smaller measure would go to public transit and wouldn’t fund new highway lanes. What is non-negotiable is that a smaller measure, or one with fewer counties, must still provide essential transit investment, even if that means shrinking other expenditures within the measure.
What you can do
The road to a regional transportation funding measure is long and full of twists. Thank you to those of you who’ve been on this journey with us for the past year; your support has made a huge difference.
In the next few weeks, MTC could make some decisions that shape the future of transportation funding in the Bay Area. Please scroll down to send an email to MTC Commissioner James T. Spering, the influential chair of this committee. It just takes a moment to send a note. And stay tuned for opportunities to speak out at upcoming MTC hearings. Every voice matters.
https://transformca.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/398F7252-4539-4698-9C05-D735FBCDAC42_1_201_a-scaled-e1720487355568.jpg13581920Abibat Rahman-Davieshttps://transformca.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Company-Logo.pngAbibat Rahman-Davies2024-06-07 08:38:002024-10-14 15:50:30Losing SB 1031: Setback for Regional Transportation Measure, Not the End
https://transformca.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/VPT-logo.png513811Zack Deutsch-Grosshttps://transformca.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Company-Logo.pngZack Deutsch-Gross2024-05-31 05:11:002024-10-14 15:51:24Voices for Public Transportation Respond to SB 1031 Not Advancing in 2024
https://transformca.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/VPT-logo.png513811Zack Deutsch-Grosshttps://transformca.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Company-Logo.pngZack Deutsch-Gross2024-05-24 08:21:002024-10-14 15:53:23Voices for Public Transportation Applauds Senate for Passing Connect the Bay Bill
https://transformca.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/d8a2fb_6ad9c86477524feab9f19451172cec44mv2.webp350436Zack Deutsch-Grosshttps://transformca.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Company-Logo.pngZack Deutsch-Gross2024-05-21 08:14:002024-10-14 15:45:22Tell the California Senate to Support the Connect the Bay Bill
https://transformca.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/d8a2fb_9a1cf58e50ac4d91967196395ca15fb8mv2.webp576925Zack Deutsch-Grosshttps://transformca.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Company-Logo.pngZack Deutsch-Gross2024-05-03 06:46:002024-10-14 15:55:46Polling Shows More Highways Could Kill the Regional Transportation Measure