Current Issue Archives Search Chapter Home Editor
The Loma Prietan
November 2000

No on Measure A

by Irvin Dawid

Sixteen years ago, Santa Clara County made Californian history by placing the first transportation sales tax on the county ballot. As a new county resident, I can still recall what led me to vote in favor: The freeways were packed, and funds from state and federal governments simply weren't enough to solve the problems. However, the Sierra Club opposed the tax. More than most voters, its leaders understood that widening existing freeways and constructing new ones would, in the long run, only exacerbate the congestion problem. As usual, the Club was ahead of its time, but most voters, like me, chose to support it.

Fast forward 16 years to today and the Club finds itself in a very similar, though seemingly opposing, situation. We are presented with a "transit-only" sales tax ballot proposal, promising the same, universal "traffic relief". In fact, of the six transit projects listed, we can definitely support five, three of them unequivocally and even enthusiastically. The dilemma we are faced with, however, is that we are unable to support the first and most expensive project: to connect the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) from Fremont to Milpitas, San Jose, and Santa Clara.

The magnitude and cost of the $3.8 billion BART project is such that it threatens not only the other five, but also all existing transit services in Santa Clara county.

But let's step back a moment and consider how we got into this unpalatable fix of having to oppose a transit-only sales tax.

The situation began to unravel as recently as June 27, 2000, when the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group, at the urging of Ron Gonzales, mayor of San Jose, asked the Santa Clara Board of Supervisors (SCBOS) to place an advisory measure, accompanied by a half cent sales tax, on the November ballot, primarily to fund the BART to Santa Clara project. (If supported by the Supervisors, the Measure would have needed only a simple majority to pass.) The project was "balanced" with road and other transit projects, but the lion's share of the sales tax was then, as previously, to fund the BART project.

Never before in the county's political history has a measure ever been rushed to the ballot as quickly and forcefully as this one.

On August 8, the SCBOS failed to secure the four votes needed to put the tax on the ballot. Supervisors Jim Beall and Blanca Avarado correctly recognized the hasty manner in which the plan was put together. Instead, they called for a "Smart Growth Planning Process", with the goal of putting an interlocking transportation, land use, and affordable housing measure on the November 2002 ballot.

Unfortunately, that motion was not voted on but was sent to committee for further discussion. Incredibly, the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) was already planning to meet the very next day and vote to do exactly what the SCBOS refused to do. (Only Supervisor Blanca Avarado voted against the proposed measure.) However, the transit district could not include road projects in the measure, which also requires at least two-thirds voter approval.

On August 29, without public participation, the VTA called a special meeting to reallocate all state and federal transportation revenues for the next 36 years to road projects in order to assure voters that their highway needs would be met. Such a decision, which omits rail, bus and other forms of public transformation, is likely to have dire consequences for Santa Clara county's overall transit system. Instead of taking a regional, long-term approach, the political forces at work show how reckless and desperate they are to fund the BART extension.

The most important message the Sierra Club wishes to convey is that Measure A is all about politics, not about transportation. Measure A will not take effect until April, 2006, giving us time to do the requisite planning that will compare bus, light rail, and commuter rail for the Fremont-South Bay corridor. We can use this time to analyze alternative alignments, station locations and technologies. We will prepare a preliminary environmental review, and most important of all, we will engage the public in the process. The VTA has done none of the above; all it carried out was a "fast-track" study with the sole purpose of updating costs and ridership to assess project feasibility. The study provided information only to "elected policy makers," not to the general public who were expected to be impressed and satisfied with the San Jose Mercury's polling information that shows how we are all enamored with the VTA's project. Apparently, our elected leaders felt nothing else was necessary.

The Sierra Club strongly opposes Measure A. We insist that a Major Investment Study be undertaken on the Fremont-South Bay corridor and the results published BEFORE voters commit to a 30 year expenditure plan.

Others may choose to politicize transportation projects. We prefer to study them, subject them to thorough analysis, and above all, bring the public into the process. By not doing so, we may well have a transit disaster on our hands by the time Measure A reaches its mid-life, if not earlier. We have six years left on the 1996 Measure B, so why not begin the planning process now for our transportation needs in 2006 and beyond?

If you would like to support the Sierra Club in defeating Measure A, contact: Irvin Dawid 650-853-0558 (h), 650-496-7439 (w) or Bill Michel 650-965-8456 (h), 510-574-5417 (w), Bill Michel at work.