The San Mateo City Council voted not to take a position on a bill that would authorize a regional transit ballot measure, an effort that has split many elected officials countywide.
Senate Bill 63, co-sponsored by state Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, would authorize a 2026 ballot measure for San Francisco, Alameda and Contra Costa counties — with San Mateo County and Santa Clara given the option to opt in — for a half-cent sales tax that would help major transit operators like Caltrain and BART close steep structural deficits.
During a San Mateo City Council meeting, Jackie Rigoni, chief of staff for Noelia Corzo — San Mateo County Transportation Authority board member and San Mateo County supervisor — said the District 2 leader supports the bill.
“We know we can’t rely on the federal government anymore for anything, let alone funding for transit, and we can’t let our transit agencies collapse,” Rigoni said.
Starting in fiscal year 2027 — which begins in July 2026 — Caltrain is projecting a $67 million deficit, slightly higher than originally predicted. By fiscal year 2034, the shortfall is expected to reach $82 million.
Recommended for you
Deputy Mayor Adam Loraine and Councilmember Danielle Cwirko-Godycki voted in favor of supporting the measure. Loraine said with the recent passage of Measure T, which increased height and density limits in parts of the city, San Mateo is seeing increased development, and that will affect transit demand.
“If we were to not address the fiscal cliff for BART and Caltrain meaningfully, we might see a loss in service at maybe the worst possible time, at a time when we would want to see greater service when we could accommodate a growing population,” he said. “When it comes to fiscal cliffs, it's a bigger problem than the city of San Mateo can solve by itself or even San Mateo County.”
But not all county leaders are in agreement. Jackie Speier, TA board member and San Mateo County supervisor, voiced concern for the measure in a previous TA meeting and has echoed similar sentiments from other officials that operators like BART haven’t proven responsible enough for such high levels of funding.
While some San Mateo councilmembers did not voice explicit opposition to the bill, some were hesitant to take a position. Additional details, such as the sales tax structure, are still in the works and must be completed in July.
“I would prefer to let our negotiators continue to work on it because there's a lot of discussion as to how we are going to audit and how we are going to make sure that the money, if it's spent, is spent appropriately,” Councilmember Lisa Diaz Nash said during the meeting. “I would prefer to take no position.”
Thank you Councilmembers Cwirko-Godycki and Lorraine for standing up for public transportation. Imagine the additional car congestion if BART and Caltrain need to cut back on services, forcing more people to drive or UBER.
BART, Caltrain, Samtrans are overfunded and mismanaged. Voters need to educate themselves better.
If there was a real fiscal cliff with public transit in the Bay Area, these 28 Transit Agencies would start merging. The fact that they don't, means they don't have to. They are fairly rich. The crisis is made up.
Here is what a former BART board member stated:
“BART management appears uninterested in addressing its monumental operating deficits.”
“That’s because “fiscal crisis” has become a rather successful operating model for BART.“
“To avoid a fiscal calamity, strong crisis management is needed. Normally, that involves a highly specialized team of experts who work independent of management, doing a deep analysis of the operations and developing both cost-containment and revenue plans. This usually includes streamlining processes, eliminating under-utilized services, consolidating redundant functions, renegotiating labor and vendor contracts, and plain old budget cuts. So far, little of that has happened at BART.“
Whereas other agencies across the nation took some hard look at efficiencies, cost cutting, service adjustments, BART management just chose to let the voters figure this out.
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!
(2) comments
Thank you Councilmembers Cwirko-Godycki and Lorraine for standing up for public transportation. Imagine the additional car congestion if BART and Caltrain need to cut back on services, forcing more people to drive or UBER.
There is no real "Fiscal Cliff".
BART, Caltrain, Samtrans are overfunded and mismanaged. Voters need to educate themselves better.
If there was a real fiscal cliff with public transit in the Bay Area, these 28 Transit Agencies would start merging. The fact that they don't, means they don't have to. They are fairly rich. The crisis is made up.
Here is what a former BART board member stated:
“BART management appears uninterested in addressing its monumental operating deficits.”
“That’s because “fiscal crisis” has become a rather successful operating model for BART.“
“To avoid a fiscal calamity, strong crisis management is needed. Normally, that involves a highly specialized team of experts who work independent of management, doing a deep analysis of the operations and developing both cost-containment and revenue plans. This usually includes streamlining processes, eliminating under-utilized services, consolidating redundant functions, renegotiating labor and vendor contracts, and plain old budget cuts. So far, little of that has happened at BART.“
Whereas other agencies across the nation took some hard look at efficiencies, cost cutting, service adjustments, BART management just chose to let the voters figure this out.
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.