According to a draft of the investment plan, specific projects that could see funding from the measure range from the installation of new traffic signals in Foster City, for example, to ferry service in Redwood City and improvements to the State Route 92/Highway 101 interchange.
Whether a slew of transportation projects promised to Peninsula commuters will get a boost in funding will likely hinge on ballots that have yet to be counted after Measure W fell just short of the two-thirds approval it needed to pass.
Garnering just over 66 percent of the vote as of results posted at 1 a.m. Wednesday, the countywide half-cent sales aimed at alleviating traffic congestion will be in question until additional votes are counted. Preliminary results from Election Day will be updated by county officials again Thursday, Nov. 8, as well as Tuesday, Nov. 13, and again Friday, Nov. 16.
Estimated to generate $80 million a year for 30 years — or around $2.4 billion total — 50 percent of Measure W revenue would support public transportation in the county through SamTrans and Caltrain if it passes. In addition, 22.5 percent of the funds would go to highway projects throughout the county, 12.5 percent of the money would fund arterial and local road improvements, 10 percent would pay for regional connections and 5 percent would be allocated for bicycle and pedestrian projects.
The measure faced opposition from bicycling advocates and others who wanted to see the tax revenue allocated toward projects that would discourage driving instead of highway improvements. Tax fatigue has also weighed on some voters, and many oppose sales taxes generally for being regressive and disproportionately burdening the poor.
But for Measure W advocates, among them SamTrans Chair and Belmont Councilman Charles Stone, concerns about the service cuts SamTrans commuters may experience if the measure fails loomed large. Stone said he wasn’t surprised by the early results for Measure W late Tuesday night given the challenge of earning two-thirds of the vote from residents.
“Two-thirds [of the vote] is always an uphill battle,” he said. “I hope that we find a way forward if this doesn’t pass that doesn’t involve too many cuts to the lifeline services that many of our most vulnerable residents use.”
Projects that could see funding from the measure include State Route 92/Highway 101 interchange improvements, building express lanes on Bayfront Expressway in Menlo Park and East Palo Alto, and Dumbarton Corridor Highway improvements, including express bus service and express lanes.
Recommended for you
Congressional representatives and state legislators facing challengers were successful in holding onto their seats this fall. Garnering 76.3 percent of the vote, U.S. Rep. Jackie Speier, D-San Mateo, held off challenger Cristina Osmeña, a solar industry executive and Republican, in the race for the 14th District in the U.S. House of Representatives.
U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Palo Alto, picked up 71.3 percent support from voters in a race against technology company director Christine Russell, a Republican, to serve another term in 18th District in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Despite change management consultant and Republican Christina Laskowski’s run for the 22nd Assembly position, Democrat Kevin Mullin earned nearly 72.7 percent of the vote and will hold down the seat to enter his fourth term in office.
Democrat Marc Berman, who was challenged by Republican business owner and engineer Alex Glew, was re-elected with 74 percent support from voters to his seat in the 24th District in the state Assembly.
Hopefully it will fail. I'm not really sure what they were thinking- $2.5 BILLION dollars and no specifics- just platitudes like 'reduce congestion'.
Here's a tip for Charles Stone and others: if you're going to ask the taxpayers for huge amounts of money, tell us what you're going to do with it. Exactly what you're going to do with it. All the things W said it was going to do sounded good but "how?". I'll vote for bond measures and even increased taxes when I know what projects they pay for - but just giving Samtrans and company a huge pot of money to play with? No way.
For Measure W advocates, among them SamTrans Chair and Belmont Councilman Charles Stone, concerns about the service cuts SamTrans commuters may experience if the measure fails loomed large. Stone said “I hope that we find a way forward if this doesn’t pass that doesn’t involve too many cuts to the lifeline services that many of our most vulnerable residents use.”
So was this measure to IMPROVE public transit, or serve as a LIFEBOAT for existing service? It can't be both!
Samtrans statistics show they provided 11,433,000 rides last year ÷ 771,000 population = 14.8 rides per person per year. 14.8 rides or 7 round trips ÷ 365 days = 2% Is Charles Stone, Samtrans Chair, telling us they need $40,000,000 as a lifeboat - in ADDITION to existing funds to service 2% of the population? This indicates that Samtrans is a dysfunctional bureacracy that needs a complete change of leadership!
The same elected officials doing the exact same thing Misleading the Voters, The Grand Jury warned the residents. This year Mark Simon kept his name off of the Endorsement List for some reason. https://www.sanmateocourt.org/documents/grand_jury/2012/structural_deficit.pdf
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(3) comments
Hopefully it will fail. I'm not really sure what they were thinking- $2.5 BILLION dollars and no specifics- just platitudes like 'reduce congestion'.
Here's a tip for Charles Stone and others: if you're going to ask the taxpayers for huge amounts of money, tell us what you're going to do with it. Exactly what you're going to do with it. All the things W said it was going to do sounded good but "how?". I'll vote for bond measures and even increased taxes when I know what projects they pay for - but just giving Samtrans and company a huge pot of money to play with? No way.
For Measure W advocates, among them SamTrans Chair and Belmont Councilman Charles Stone, concerns about the service cuts SamTrans commuters may experience if the measure fails loomed large. Stone said “I hope that we find a way forward if this doesn’t pass that doesn’t involve too many cuts to the lifeline services that many of our most vulnerable residents use.”
So was this measure to IMPROVE public transit, or serve as a LIFEBOAT for existing service? It can't be both!
Samtrans statistics show they provided 11,433,000 rides last year ÷ 771,000 population = 14.8 rides per person per year. 14.8 rides or 7 round trips ÷ 365 days = 2% Is Charles Stone, Samtrans Chair, telling us they need $40,000,000 as a lifeboat - in ADDITION to existing funds to service 2% of the population? This indicates that Samtrans is a dysfunctional bureacracy that needs a complete change of leadership!
The same elected officials doing the exact same thing Misleading the Voters, The Grand Jury warned the residents. This year Mark Simon kept his name off of the Endorsement List for some reason. https://www.sanmateocourt.org/documents/grand_jury/2012/structural_deficit.pdf
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.