Contra Costa Herald

News Of By and For The People of Contra Costa County, California

Supervisors withdraw Blackhawk police tax measure set for August 27

By Leave a Comment

Possible November ballot measure instead

By Daniel Borsuk

At a specially called Tuesday meeting, on May 28, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors took the unusual action of withdrawing a special tax, measure approved a week earlier, that would have permitted residents of the Blackhawk Homeowners Association to vote on whether to increase a parcel tax to keep police services intact.

The special election scrubbed by supervisors on a 3-0 vote, was originally to be held August 27 and would have generated sufficient parcel tax revenue from Blackhawk homeowners to maintain police services that are provided by the Contra Costa County Sheriff at current levels, three deputies and one lieutenant.

At the request of District 3 Supervisor Diane Burgis of Brentwood, whose district includes the residential area consisting of 2,027 exclusive homes near Danville, the supervisor said after the May 21 action she had met with representatives of the Blackhawk Country Club, which opposes being included in any type of parcel tax proposal for police services. Burgis said she will present at an upcoming meeting a Blackhawk police services parcel tax proposal that would be “fair and agreeable.”

“We’ve had challenges concerning the funding for the police district,” Burgis admitted.

In the May 21 action, the special taxes levied in the zone for police protection would have been increased in fiscal year 2020-2021 to $380 per parcel for residential properties, including single, small multiple and large multiple, $3,040 per parcel for commercial/industrial/institutional properties and $13,300 per parcel for commercial/theater properties. The ordinance also would have taxed parcels owned by the Blackhawk County Club, which are currently exempt from the Zone A police protection special tax.

While admitting the association has been losing revenues to support the police services at current levels, Blackhawk Homeowners Association President Ron Banducci, who is also chairman of the Blackhawk Police Advisory Committee, had informed supervisors at the May 21 meeting that without the infusion of increased revenues from homeowners residents would lose one deputy from its police department.

At Tuesday’s meeting, Banducci warned supervisors to leave intact their May 21 decision to allow a vote on the August 27 parcel tax measure that would also, for the first time, include the Blackhawk Country Club to be assessed parcel taxes.

He cautioned supervisors Federal Glover of Pittsburg and Board Chair John Gioia of Richmond about any “backroom deal by Supervisor Burgis and the Blackhawk Country Club for $40,000 for 10 years” to allegedly be excluded from a police district tax district.

Blackhawk Homeowners Association member, Rick Marse, said the fact that Burgis and the country club have been meeting makes any kind of deal “completely irregular.”

Another Blackhawk resident Henry Schutzel thought that the meeting was invalid because it violates the public open meeting law. “I believe this meeting is a violation of the Brown Act,” he claimed.

Even then, without much comment from Supervisors Glover or Gioia on the issue at hand, Burgis’s request was unanimously approved.

Supervisors to study county sales tax proposal for November 2020 ballot

By Leave a Comment

The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors recognized National Emergency Medical Service Week, May 19 through 25, by handing out resolution to Contra Costa County Fire Chief Lewis Broschard and EMS Director Pat Frost on Tuesday. The supervisors’ resolution recognizes the vital work of responders including medical technicians, paramedics, police, firefighters, emergency nurses, emergency physicians, emergency medical dispatchers, EMS educators, and EMS administrators for the roles they play in the EMS system. Photo by Daniel Borsuk.

Exclude Blackhawk, Bollinger Canyon from commercial cannabis ordinance; prevent rail service from returning to line through Richmond park

By Daniel Borsuk

The possibility Contra Costa County residents might be voting on a sales tax measure, perhaps in the November 2020 general election, gained traction Tuesday when Supervisor Karen Mitchoff convinced supervisors to have the Finance Committee study the feasibility of placing a tax measure before the voters, next year.

Supervisors voted 5-0 to assign the Finance Committee to examine the pros and cons of putting a sales tax proposition on the November 2020 ballot while also considering another agenda item — the pros and cons of placing a half-cent sales tax ballot measure to fund transportation projects laid out in the Contra Costa Transportation Authority’s Transportation Expenditure Plan.

As it turned out, supervisors rejected the idea of pushing ahead on a new transit tax proposition, thinking the timing might be off-track. Mitchoff reasoned another half-cent sales tax for transportation projects might not draw the necessary two-thirds majority voter approval particularly when voters remember passing the half-cent Measure J by a 71 percent voter approval in 2004. Measure J’s $2.5 billion will not be exhausted until 2034.

“I don’t believe our taxpayers will support a transit tax measure requiring a two-thirds voter approval” Mitchoff said. “We need to have a conversation on a countywide general sales tax.”

The supervisor from Pleasant Hill thinks a county sales tax that needs a 50 percent voter approval might be a better route to go, even though the revenue would have to be disbursed to diverse services like medical, social services, public defender, sheriff, public works, district attorney and other county services.

“You should focus on other services,” said Justin Decker of the International Federation of Professional Technical Engineers Local 21. “We’re against the transit proposal.”

County eligibility worker Kathy Beverly said the county is seriously understaffed with eligibility workers at 170 unfilled positions.

“County workers oppose a transit sales tax proposal,” she said.

SEIU Field Representative Ye Do cautioned supervisors that placing a transit tax on the ballot could backfire when there is a need to financially address social services. She cited how a single father of three children needed county assistance when he had to move three time under hardship conditions.

San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Alameda counties assess sales taxes in order to generate additional revenues to fill in funding gaps that property tax and state and federal resources fall short on funding county services, especially social and medical services. Alameda county draws $150 million in annual revenue from its sales tax.

“It’s very clear we need a sales tax for transportation, “said District 5 Supervisor Federal Glover of Pittsburg, who also serves as the county representative on the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. “It’s a quality of life issue. It may not be optional. Just to get to work, to go home. These services are so crucial. I don’t know if we have any other bargaining chips.”

“This is a helpful issue,” said Vice Chair Candace Andersen of Danville. “What we need are more park and ride lots.”

Board Chair John Gioia, who has at previous board meetings promoted the county sales tax concept, remarked because of passage of Measure J, “Things have changed. When one sales tax measure for transportation passes, it makes the next sale tax measure much harder to pass.”

The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors presented a resolution to Contra Costa County Director of Health Services Anna Roth recognizing May as Menth Health Month. During the month of May, county agencies have made a commitment to raise awareness and public education to replace misinformation and eliminate stigma concerning mental health and promote understanding that people living with mental health challenges can lead to productive lives. Photo by Daniel Borsuk.

Supervisors Exclude Blackhawk, Bollinger Canyon from Commercial Cannabis Ordinance

In other action, supervisors voted 5-0 to add Blackhawk and Bollinger Canyon to the list of areas to be excluded from the county’s commercial cannabis ordinance. The ordinance had prohibited commercial activities in Alamo, Bethel Island, Contra Costa Centre, Sandmound Slough, and Saranap.

Dan Clancy, owner of the Bollinger Canyon property that he had planned for cannabis cultivation and distribution purposes, pleaded with supervisors “give us a shot.”

But the site, which was a former Nike missile site, apparently fell through the cracks during the planning process, according to Ruben Hernandez of the Department of Conservation and Development and was meant to be excluded for any type of cannabis activity.

Supervisor Andersen, who represents the Bollinger Canyon area, said the Bollinger Canyon site was “a clerical error” during the planning review process.

Blackhawk Police Tax Election Set for August 28

Supervisors voted 5-0 to authorize an August 28 election in the County Service Area P-2 Zone A Blackhawk area even though there was opposition from the Blackhawk Country Club that did not want to be included in the police assessment district for the first time in the 35-year history of the police zone. The country club claims it does not need the police services provided by the county sheriff’s department because of the low crime activity emanating from the club. There have been two calls for police services in the past year.

The Blackhawk Police Department consists of one lieutenant and three deputies provided by the county Sheriff-Coroner’s Office, but according to Ron Banducci, chairman of the Blackhawk Police Advisory Committee and president of the Blackhawk Homeowners Association, unless voters pass the August tax measure the police department will have to cut one of the deputy positions.

“Although physically within the district, the Blackhawk Country Club has not historically been included in the parcel tax structure” Banducci told supervisors. “This means that for 35 years, the country club has been receiving services from the Blackhawk police, but has not provided financial support. The Blackhawk Police Advisory Committee believes it’s time for the country club to pay its fair share. The Blackhawk County Club is the largest country club in Contra Costa County. It’s not fair for our residents to be subsidizing police services for a county club which has annual revenues of over $20,000,000.”

Supervisors Oppose BNSF Railway Co. reactivating rail service through Richmond park  

Supervisors voted 5-0 in approving a resolution opposing the plans of BNSF Railway Co. to reactivate rail service through Miller/Knox Regional Shoreline Park and Ferry Point in Richmond. Supervisors cited potential safety, health, and environmental impacts should the railroad resume rail service through the popular park owned and maintained by the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD).

No one from the railroad spoke, but based on an Oct. 9, 2018 letter to the EBRPD, the railroad has “indicated that regarding extending use of the rail line through Miller/Knox Regional Shoreline Park, including Ferry Point, that ‘it has notified the Park District of its expanding business of Richmond Terminal, necessitating the reactivation of its rail use with the easement in the near future.”

Among the impacts the supervisors concurred would affect residents frequently using the park are:

  • Creating a significant safety hazard for the community, especially children at the park.
  • Allowing trains to cut off visual and physical access to the shoreline and Bay.
  • Bisecting a heavily used community and regional park.
  • Allowing storage of railroad cars carrying hazardous substances.
  • Increasing harmful diesel emissions in the community and the park, leading to increased health risk, a community which is already disproportionately impacted by local emissions.
  • Increasing asthma rates in a city that already has one of the highest asthmas rates in the Bay Area.
  • Increasing blockage of the West Richmond Avenue railroad grade crossing.

Supervisors receive report on performance bond reduction for solid waste collection ordinance

Supervisors also approved as a consent item a two-page report from Environmental Health Director Marilyn Underwood about the effects of the board’s 2018 decision to reduce the performance bond amount from $50,000 to $20,000 for the Solid Waste Collection & Transportation Ordinance.

“Environmental Health issued the first non-franchise solid waste collection and transport permit on March 19, 2019 to JUNKCAT, LLC, “Underwood’s report states. The company serves mostly West County.

“More recently, EH staff have had productive conversations with local representatives from O2E Brands (parent company of 1-800-GOT-JUNK) and anticipate an application for a non-franchise solid waste collection and transport permit from the Central Contra Costa County branch office in the near future,” the report states.

Underwood’s report also mentions, “EH staff continues to attempt to engage with companies such as Junk Beez and Vets Move Junk (local companies that have begun advertising to Contra Costa County residents) in an effort to inform these companies about the requirements of the non-franchise waste collection and transport permit program.”

New Year means higher tolls on seven Bay Area bridges beginning Tuesday

By Leave a Comment

Bay Bridge Toll Plaza photos taken 9 /16 & 18/13. Karl Nielsen Photography www.karlnielsenphotography.com (805) 570-3395

First of three voter-approved increases

The Bay Area Toll Authority (BATA) reminds drivers that several important changes take effect Jan. 1, 2019, at the region’s seven state-owned toll bridges. These include the first of the $1 toll increases approved last year through state Senate Bill 595 and confirmed by voters through Regional Measure 3 in June 2018. This will mark the first toll hike at the state-owned toll bridges since 2010. Additional $1 increases will go into effect on Jan. 1, 2022, and on Jan. 1, 2025.

Regular tolls for two-axle cars and trucks (as well as for motorcycles) at the Antioch, Benicia-Martinez, Carquinez, Dumbarton, Richmond-San Rafael and San Mateo-Hayward bridges will rise to $6 from the current $5 on Jan. 1, 2019.

At the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, regular tolls will climb to $7 from the current $6 on weekdays from 5 a.m. to 10 a.m. and from 3 p.m. to 7 p.m. During weekday off-peak hours from 12 midnight to 5 a.m., from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m., and from 7 p.m. to midnight, Bay Bridge tolls will rise from $4 to $5; and on Saturdays and Sundays, Bay Bridge tolls will increase to $6 from the current $5.

Tolls for vehicles with three or more axles also will rise by $1 on Jan. 1, 2019, at all seven of the state-owned toll bridges: to $16 for three axles, $21 for four-axles, $26 for five axles, $31 for six axles, and $36 for combinations with seven or more axles.

Senate Bill 595 continues the peak-period toll discount for motorcycles, carpools and qualifying clean-air vehicles crossing any of the state-owned toll bridges on weekdays from 5 a.m. to 10 a.m. and from 3 p.m. to 7 p.m. The discounted toll is scheduled to increase to $3 on Jan. 1, 2019, from the current $2.50. To qualify for this discount, carpoolers, motorcyclists and drivers of qualifying clean-air vehicles must use FasTrak to pay their tolls electronically and must use a designated carpool lane at each toll plaza.

Senate Bill 595 also established a 50-cent toll discount for two-axle vehicles crossing more than one of the state-owned toll bridges during weekday commute hours of 5 a.m. to 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. to 7 p.m. To be eligible for the toll discount, which is to be applied to the second toll crossing of the day, motorists must pay their tolls electronically with FasTrak. Carpools, motorcycles and qualifying clean-air vehicles making a second peak-period toll crossing in a single day will qualify for an additional 25-cent discount off the already-discounted carpool toll. The two-bridge discount will not be available to drivers who use cash to pay their tolls.

New FasTrak customers can obtain toll tags at hundreds of Walgreens and Costco stores around the Bay Area. A complete list of participating locations — as well as an online enrollment and registration feature — is available on the FasTrak Web site at bayareafastrak.org. Customers also may enroll in the FasTrak program by phone at 1-877-229-8655; by calling 511 and asking for “FasTrak” at the first prompt; or in person at the FasTrak customer service center at 375 Beale Street in San Francisco. Operating hours are Monday-Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and Saturdays, 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. FasTrak can be used in all lanes at all Bay Area toll plazas.

On Wednesday, Dec. 19, 2018 BATA formally approved the new toll schedule through adoption of BATA Resolution No. 128 at its regular December meeting. The Authority today also adopted BATA Resolution No. 129, which authorizes arrangements for the escrow of Regional Measure 3 funds pending the resolution of two lawsuits challenging state Senate Bill 595 and Regional Measure 3. Both lawsuits are pending in Superior Court in the City and County of San Francisco. Under BATA Resolution No. 129, the Regional Measure 3 toll increases, when collected, will be placed into an escrow account managed by an independent trustee. Following a process similar to voter-approved sales tax measures that face legal challenge, these funds will be transferred at least once each week from BATA to a Union Bank (Mitsubishi United Financial Group – MUFG) trust account, where the funds will be managed by a bank trust officer until final resolution of all litigation. Once the BATA legal team certifies there is a final resolution, the Authority will be asked to release the escrow. If BATA prevails in the litigation, the funds will be applied to BATA-approved programs. If BATA should lose the litigation, the funds will be reimbursed to tollpayers.

BATA, which is directed by the same policy board as the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), administers toll revenues from the Bay Area’s seven state-owned toll bridges. Toll revenues from the Golden Gate Bridge are administered by the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District, which joined with BATA to operate a single regional FasTrak customer service center in San Francisco. MTC is the transportation planning, financing and coordinating agency for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area.

Supervisors consider cannabis industry tax measure, approve $3.5 billion 2018-19 budget

By Leave a Comment

$400 million increase over current year’s budget

By Dan Borsuk

Contra Costa voters could see a cannabis industry tax measure on the November 6 ballot after supervisors on Tuesday thrashed through statistics and ideas on what route to take in complying with the 2016 passage of state Proposition 64.

Determined to assemble a cannabis tax ordinance by an August 10 deadline in order to file a tax measure ballot for the November election, supervisors, under the guidance of Julie Enea of the County Administrator’s Office, presented a cannabis business tax levy proposal assembled by HdL, the Crescent City-based consulting firm hired by the county to assist the county in developing an ordinance in the aftermath of the passage of Proposition 64, the 2016 state initiative that legalized the sale of recreational marijuana.

The proposed cannabis business tax levy sets initial and maximum rates for eight license types.  Those proposed rates are:

  • Cultivator: Indoor, artificial lighting:  7/ft. initial rate, $10/ft. maximum rate.
  • Cultivator: Greenhouse, mixed lighting:  $4/ft initial rate, $7/ft. maximum rate.
  • Cultivator: Outdoor, natural light:  $2 ft. initial rate, $4 ft. maximum rate.
  • Cultivator Nursery: $1/ft. initial rate:  $2/ft. maximum rates.
  • Manufacturer/Non-retail microbusiness: 2.5 % of gross receipts initial rate, 4% of gross receipts maximum rate.
  • Testing: Not Available; initial rate:  2.5% percent of gross receipts maximum rate.
  • Distribution: 2% of gross receipts initial rate; percent maximum rate.
  • Retailer/Retail microbusiness: 4% of gross receipts initial rate and 6% of gross receipts maximum rate.

The supervisors’ cannabis tax ordinance proposal still requires a public hearing slated for July 10 when supervisors are expected to take official action on the tax ordinance proposal as well as the cannabis health ordinance.  The cannabis health ordinance will not appear on the November ballot.

During the supervisor’s proceedings on Tuesday, citizens and supervisors alike were concerned the amount of money the county would raise from a cannabis tax might fall short of the mark in adequately enforcing the law, especially the health ordinance.

Since enactment of Proposition 64 beginning this year, the state has collected only $34 million in tax revenue of the anticipated $175 million.  The state is considering shelving a plan to cut the excise tax from 15 percent to 11 percent even though cannabis sales are not as brisk as anticipated.

Board chair Karen Mitchoff of Pleasant Hill said the board should model the tax ordinance measure so that it requires a two-thirds majority voter approval, have an oversight committee and be reviewed yearly for adjustments based on the consumer price index.

“We’re going to impose this tax to cover our costs,” said District 2 Supervisor Candace Andersen of Danville, who represents a district where a number of citizens have aired widespread opposition to Proposition 64’s implementation.

Shawn Casey of First 5, a pro children’s organization, proposed that the county create with cannabis revenues a fund to aid children harmed by the effects of cannabis.

“I’m in favor of reasonable regulation,” said Vickie Norris of Friends of Proposition 64.  “I’m in favor of a tax.”  Norris noted Contra Costa’s tax proposal that HdL prepared won’t price out businesses like what occurred in Berkeley which had to scale back its retail sales tax which was 35%.

“The legal market is taking a piece out of the black market,” said HdL’s Mark Lovelace.  “Thirty percent of the marijuana remains in the black market.”

Supervisors OK 2018-2019 Budget Proposal

In speedy action, supervisors voted 5-0 in approving a $3.5 billion 2018-2019 recommended budget without public fanfare.  Supervisors will officially adopt the budget in September.  The spending plan is an increase from $3.1 billion for the current 2017-2018 fiscal year.

482,055 Square Foot North Richmond Warehouse Approved

Without hearing any opposition, supervisors unanimously approved a 482,055 square foot warehouse-distribution project that could create up to 800 jobs in the North Richmond.  Construction of the proposed Panattoni Warehouse project at 500 Pittsburg Ave. could get underway in the first quarter of 2019.

District 1 Supervisor John Gioia, who represents the North Richmond development site owned by Redus EL LLC, said the Panattoni Warehouse project is the first of at least two other similar warehouse distribution projects that are in the pipeline that will come before the supervisors in the near future.

Gioia refused to provide details about the other two warehouse-distribution projects.

“This is just not a warehouse,” the supervisor said.  Upon commenting how the North Richmond area is in a stage of transition from residential to warehouse, the supervisor said, “North Richmond has become ground zero for the fulltime warehouse area that is patterned after AMAZON, the type of company the gets products out sooner.”

In approving the project at Pittsburg Avenue and Richmond Parkway, supervisors approved a number of “traffic calming measures” in order to minimize the environmental impacts from more than 100 truck trips during peak period AM and PM periods.  Those traffic calming measures include “chokers and bulbouts.”

The developer will install solar power and plant 200 trees to replace 21 old trees that need to removed from the project site.  A 1.3-acre area site has been designated for a gas station with a mini-mart that will be constructed sometime after the warehouse-distribution building is constructed.

Call for Applications: San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority, Independent Citizens Oversight Committee

By Leave a Comment

Deadline Extended – Due April 18, 2018

Measure AA is expected to generate $25 million annually for San Francisco Bay restoration over the next 20 years. Funding from this voter-approved measure will allow for the restoration of thousands of acres of natural habitat for wildlife, support our local economy, improve access to public lands, address flooding issues, and create thousands of new jobs.

The San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority’s Governing Board seeks six individuals to serve on the Independent Citizens Oversight Committee. The Committee has three main roles:

  1. Annually review the Authority’s conformance with Measure AA.
  2. Review the Authority’s audits and expenditure and financial reports.
  3. Publish an annual report of its findings, which will be posted on the Authority’s website.

The Board seeks committee members from all four Bay Area regions (North Bay, East Bay, South Bay and West Bay) with special subject matter expertise. Each member of the Independent Citizens Oversight Committee must possess expertise in one or more of the following:

  • Water quality
  • Pollution reduction
  • Habitat restoration
  • Flood protection
  • Improvement of public access to the San Francisco Bay
  • Financing of these objectives.

Ineligibility Factors for Membership

No person may serve on the Independent Citizens Oversight Committee who:

  • Is an elected official or government employee;
  • Has had or could have a financial interest in a decision of the Authority; or
  • Is affiliated with an organization associated with a member of the Governing Board.

Apply to serve on the Independent Citizens Oversight Committee by April 18, 2018.

Application Submittal, Materials, and Deadline

Send your application to karen.mcdowell@sfestuary.org by April 18, 2018. Electronic signatures and scanned signatures will be accepted.

For more information, visit the SF Bay Restoration Authority’s website or contact Karen McDowell, Project Manager, SF Bay Restoration Authority or 415-778-6685.

Contra Costa Taxpayers Association East announces inaugural meeting March 28

By Leave a Comment

The Contra Costa Taxpayers Association (“CoCoTax”) is pleased to announce the formation of a new East Contra Costa chapter. To celebrate, CoCoTax East will hold its inaugural public meeting on Wednesday, March 28 with a luncheon meeting at Vic Stewart’s Restaurant at 2270 Balfour Road in Brentwood.

CoCoTax promotes “good government at affordable cost” and is well known as a “tax watchdog” organization. But, according to Jack Weir, CoCoTax President, “CoCoTax is much more than a tax watchdog. Good tax receipts flow from well designed, developed and managed cities and counties. As such, CoCoTax seeks to work with residents, businesses, and local government to grow the tax base and provide for a quality lifestyle for residents through economic development, prudent zoning, and other strategic planning tools.”

The first CoCoTax East meeting will focus on Economic Development in East County and will feature three East County speakers:

Ron Reagan, is owner and President of Reagan Management Services in Brentwood and a member of the Contra Costa Airport Commission; Ron will address the issue of economic growth at and around the Byron Airport.

Gus Vina, Brentwood City Manager will discuss the economic development element of the City’s Strategic Plan.

Kevin Romick, Oakley City Councilman and member of the Contra Costa Transportation Authority board of directors, will highlight Oakley’s development progress and discuss the present and future infrastructure needs and plans in East County.

The luncheon is open to CoCoTax members and the public. People wishing to attend can register online at www.cocotax.org/event-2851592 or by contacting Denise Sheehan at denise@cocotax.org.

The cost to attend is $35; alternately, attendees can attend the luncheon for free by becoming a CoCoTax member for $37.50, a 50% discount on their first year’s membership.

For more information about CoCoTax or the luncheon, please contact Hal Bray at hal.bray@pacbell.net or 925-286-4905.

Writer says Frazier again gets ‘F’ on taxes

By Leave a Comment

Editor:

You can thank Assemblyman Jim Frazier for that pain at the pump you’re feeling now that gas is an extra 12 cents per gallon.

Frazier and his fellow Democrats in Sacramento raised taxes $52 billion annually, including a 12 cents/gallon gas tax hike, 20 cents/gallon diesel gas tax hike and a $25-$175 vehicle fee increase. The average household will be paying an extra $600 a year.

Frazier not only voted for the tax-hike legislation, but sponsored his own version of the tax-hike bill, Assembly Bill 1. So it’s no surprise that Frazier once again received an “F” on his legislative report card from the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. He voted in favor of taxpayer interests only 16 percent of the time on 22 tax bills in 2017.

This makes the fifth year in a row that Frazier, whose campaign slogan is “People before politics,” has received an “F” from HJTA for putting politics before people when it comes to their taxes.

Unfortunately, Frazier is not alone – a record 79 legislators flunked the tax scorecard. “By approving major new burdens on middle class taxpayers, the current crop of Sacramento lawmakers is exhibiting an outright hostility to the taxpayers who pay the state’s bills,” said HJTA President Jon Coupal.

How bad is the hostility? State lawmakers this year proposed $373.4 billion in higher annual taxes and fees, according to the California Tax Foundation. That’s nearly $200 billion more than the total taxes and fees annually collected by state government.

When will it end? Only when taxpayers decide they’ve had enough and stop sending taxaholics like Frazier to represent them in Sacramento.

Dave Roberts

Oakley

Gov. gives Bay Area voters chance to increase bridge tolls by $3 to fund transportation on next year’s ballot

By Leave a Comment

The setting sun reflects off of the Carquinez Bridge’s towers. This bridge project was funded through Regional Measure 1. Photo courtesy of MTC.

By Metropolitan Transportation Commission

Governor Brown’s action today to sign into law Senate Bill 595 clears the way for Bay Area voters to decide – potentially as early as next June – on Regional Measure 3 (RM 3), which would raise tolls by up to $3 on the region’s seven state-owned toll bridges to finance the sweeping $4.5 billion package of congestion relief and mobility improvement projects identified in the bill. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), in its role as the Bay Area Toll Authority, is expected to decide by early 2018 when the RM 3 question will appear on ballots in the nine Bay Area counties. The Commission also will decide the amount of the proposed toll increase and whether the proposed increase would be instituted all at once or phased in over several years.

The RM 3 expenditure plan provides mobility improvements in each of the region’s seven state- owned bridge corridors, helping to speed up commutes and provide better travel options, particularly for those traveling to major job hubs, such as San Francisco and Silicon Valley. The plan includes numerous congestion relief projects in the bridge corridors, including new express lanes, a direct freeway connector from northbound U.S. 101 to eastbound Interstate 580 in Marin County to improve access to the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge as well as improvements to the westbound approach in Contra Costa County; constructing a direct connector between Interstates 680 and 880 in Fremont and improvements to the I-680/State Route 84 interchange in Alameda County serving the Dumbarton Bridge; upgrading the I-680/State Route 4 interchange in Contra Costa County serving the Benicia Bridge corridor and the U.S. 101/State Route 92 interchange in San Mateo serving the San Mateo-Hayward Bridge; various improvements to relieve congestion in the Dumbarton Bridge corridor and improve State Route 37 in Marin, Sonoma, Napa and Solano counties; completing the widening of U.S. 101 to three lanes in each direction through the Marin-Sonoma Narrows. Major public transit improvements that would be funded by the measure include 306 new BART cars that will expand the fleet to accommodate record ridership; new ferries and expanded service and terminals across San Francisco Bay; further extension of BART’s Silicon Valley service to downtown San Jose and Santa Clara; extending Caltrain to downtown San Francisco; expanding transbay bus service and AC Transit’s bus rapid transit lines serving the transbay corridor; extending the new SMART rail system to Windsor; and expanding San Francisco’s fleet of Muni Metro rail cars to improve transit access not just to San Francisco, but within it as well. RM 3 also would fund a $150 million grant program to improve bicycle and pedestrian access to regional transit hubs and to close gaps in the San Francisco Bay Trail.

“Nobody likes higher tolls,” commented MTC Chair and Rohnert Park Mayor Jake Mackenzie. “But nobody likes traffic jams or crush-loaded train cars either. The Bay Area has been blessed by seven straight years of strong economic growth. But the price we’ve paid is the growing congestion on our freeways, railways and ferries. If our region is going to maintain its economic leadership, we have to invest in projects that will keep businesses and their workers moving. Gov. Brown and the state Legislature deserve a lot of credit for shaping RM 3 into a comprehensive and integrated strategy that will modernize both our highways and our transit networks.”

For details on the complete range of investments that would be funded if a majority of voters in the nine Bay Area counties approve RM 3, go to the MTC website or see the complete list, here.

MTC is the transportation planning, financing, and coordinating agency for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area.

Frazier votes ‘no’ on proposed bridge toll hikes

By Leave a Comment

SACRAMENTO – Assemblymember Jim Frazier (D-Discovery Bay) voted ‘no’ on SB 595, which would require the nine Bay Area counties to hold a special election, known as Regional Measure 3, to propose raising tolls on state-owned bridges in the Bay Area. After the vote, he issued the following statement:

“I recognize the need for funding transportation improvements, but after much thought, I believe adding another tax on commuters is not the answer. I ultimately voted NO on the bridge toll bill because $8 per crossing is just too much of a financial burden on drivers. If you commute from Solano County to San Francisco – entailing two bridge tolls that would potentially total $16 a day – that’s highway robbery.”

Sen. Glazer explains vote against transportation bill, gas tax hike

By 1 Comment

Cites failure to ensure reliable transit & ineffective use of funds

Senator Steve Glazer (D-Orinda) who represents most of Contra Costa County in the California State Senate, issued the following statement today, regarding his vote against SB-1, the transportation funding bill which included a 12 cents per gallon gas tax increase, as well as increases to the Vehicle License Fee. He was the only Democrat in the Senate and only one of two in the entire legislature to vote no.

“I want to thank Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León, Sen. Jim Beall and Gov. Jerry Brown for their hard work in addressing the problem of crumbling roads and aging transportation systems.

My constituents are particularly dependent on good roads and highways and reliable transit systems, so I agree we need additional transportation investments.

But this transportation package did not have the support of my district, for good reasons. Even after a multi-million dollar lobbying effort supporting the $52 billion bill, sentiment in my district ran two-to-one opposing these new gas taxes and car registration fees.

My constituents have told me loud and clear that they want any new taxes to be spent more wisely and effectively. For instance, it doesn’t make sense to spend billions of dollars on an unpopular High Speed Rail system that backers claim might be completed by 2029 when it could go for transportation improvements today.

Beyond the issues of setting better spending priorities and taxes, I also believed this bill could have been improved. We need to be more forward thinking, where we recognize the role technology can play in allowing us to use our roads and highways more efficiently.

And we need a plan that provides commuters with the confidence and assurance that reliable transit will be there for them every day of the year.

This bill also failed to ensure that any new transportation funding given to local transportation agencies be used only for the purposes intended and not diverted to other uses.

I was also concerned about last-minute amendments to this bill that the environmental community and air quality regulators say will unwisely limit our ability to control diesel pollution from trucks. These changes have never been fully vetted and deserve more scrutiny.

I look forward to continued discussions with the governor in which we take into account the need to modernize our approach to transportation in an efficient and reliable manner.”

The bill passed both the State Senate and Assembly and awaits the signature of Governor Brown. To learn more about the bill, click here.