Poll: Support for Caltrain tax

Fresh off of a big win after securing a $647 million federal grant for the $2 billion electrification and Caltrain Modernization Program, state legislators are pushing a bill to ask voters for an eighth-cent sales tax increase. That’s because despite construction beginning in the coming weeks, Caltrain has long noted the existing project only funds electrification of 75 percent of its fleet.

The Silicon Valley Leadership Group is suggesting there’s viable support for the new tax that could potentially enable Caltrain to accommodate more than 250,000 riders — a steep increase from its current 62,000 passengers and the 110,000 capacity expected from the underway modernization program.

As one of the few transit agencies without a dedicated funding source, Caltrain is now looking to have guaranteed tax revenue instead of relying solely on fares and contributions from Santa Clara, San Mateo and San Francisco counties.

But it’s not the only proposal voters may consider in the gubernatorial race when transportation will be a hot topic for the Bay Area.

A variety of transit agencies are looking to 2018 as the year to potentially ask local voters for increased sales taxes and bridge tolls to fund billions of dollars worth of infrastructure needs. It also comes on the heels of the Legislature hiking gas taxes, increasing vehicle registration fees and charging electric car drivers.

The Caltrain sales tax bill unveiled last week was promptly followed by the Silicon Valley Leadership Group announcing Monday, June 26, the results of a poll conducted in early May. After polling 1,200 likely voters, 74 percent supported the tax if it would more than double Caltrain’s ridership capacity, according to SVLG. 

It’s part of the SVLG’s annual Silicon Valley Poll series being released this week and CEO Carl Guardino said there’s impressive support for a tax that would help address congestion.

“This appears to be the right effort at the right time to meet one of the region’s most frustrating priorities — traffic,” Guardino said, noting the tax that would build off electrification “would be transformative not only for Caltrain riders, but for everyone stuck and stalled on 101, El Camino and 280.”

Increasing capacity beyond electrification

Caltrain Chief Communications Officer Seamus Murphy said the agency is still working on a business plan to outline what kinds of additional improvements are needed to increase capacity beyond initial electrification.

“We’ve always made it clear that electrification is just the foundation and that there are other improvements that need to happen in order to take full advantage of the potential that electrification offers. There are going to be capital needs in the future if we really want to grow the system to the place it needs to be to address ridership demand and growth,” Murphy said.

For example, it’s expected to cost another $440 million to replace the remaining 25 percent of its diesel fleet with electric trains and go from six- to eight-car trains to accommodate more riders. Plus, another $250 million is needed to expand boarding platforms. Extending Caltrain into the Transbay Terminal, which Murphy described as a critical, could cost another $3.9 billion.

But the linchpin is additional funding, particularly as Caltrain balanced its budget by dipping into reserves and Murphy said member agencies from the three counties frequently have to reduce contributions to meet their own needs.

Unfair proposal or critical for economic health?

But some suggest it’s unfair to ask non-Caltrain commuters to pay for such costly improvements. Mark Hinkle, president of the Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association, noted government is rarely incentivized to cut costs and prior private operators of the long-running rail line used to turn a profit.

“This is going to benefit people who ride Caltrain trains, so why shouldn’t they pay for the improvements?” Hinkle said. “Why should we pay for a sales tax increase that only a very small majority of the taxpayers are using?”

Hinkle was skeptical that expanding capacity would actually reduce congestion on highways, but it’s a prospect business leaders say is vital if Silicon Valley is going to retain its status as an economic powerhouse.

“This is critical not only for the economic health of our region, but the quality of life for all of us,” Guardino said. “The 101-Caltrain corridor is the economic boost that lays the golden egg; 1.6 million jobs, 53 percent of all patents filed from California, 20 percent of the entire state’s GDP, 14 percent of all sales tax revenue in California are from that 50-mile stretch.”

He noted SVLG approached state Sen. Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo, to author the legislation that would allow the three counties to place the eighth-cent increase on their 2018 ballots. Two-thirds of voters must then approve.

The Caltrain sales tax has long been considered, but Guardino noted a 2011 poll showed there wasn’t sufficient support. Following the SVLG’s survey this year, they asked Hill to act. Now, Senate Bill 797 is being ushered through Sacramento by nine Bay Area lawmakers.

“The congestion along the Highway 101 corridor is negatively impacting our regional economy and people’s quality of life,” Hill said in a press release. “Increasing Caltrain ridership is one of the most cost-effective ways to reduce traffic on the 101.”

A piece of the puzzle

But it isn’t the only prospect being considered as traffic woes heighten. Another piece of legislation could have voters in the nine-county Bay Area voting on whether to hike bridge tolls up to $3, and various counties may consider their own locally-controlled sales tax increases to fund transportation needs.

There are no guarantees, but Caltrain would likely receive some funding should the bridge toll measure pass and support from the state’s gas tax increase.

Guardino noted between buses, trains, ferries, highways and local streets, there’s nearly $150 billion in need and the Caltrain sales tax is an important piece of the jigsaw puzzle.

Murphy said Caltrain is weighing the various funding options and considering what types of improvements — such as grade separations, adding train cars and electrifying its whole fleet — could enable them to expand capacity.

Whatever Caltrain chooses, it’s expected to have the backing of state and federal representatives as well as a slew of business groups.

“San Mateo County businesses are focused on improving mobility, expanding transit options and reducing congestion,” Rosanne Foust, CEO of the San Mateo County Economic Development Association whose husband Jim Hartnett is the Caltrain general manager, said in a press release. “A dedicated Caltrain funding source is critical and should be placed before voters after broad engagement of public agencies and stakeholders in all three counties.”

samantha@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 106

Twitter: @samantha_weigel