A better use of transportation funds

Four years ago, Contra Costa County voters rejected a halfcent sales tax for transportation by a narrow margin. It was supported by more than 63% of voters, but a twothirds threshold was required for passage. One of the critical factors in its defeat was the opposition of environmental groups.

County transportation planners have proposed another halfcent sales tax, Measure J, on the March 3 ballot. This time, they have heeded the concerns of environmental groups and have come back with a plan that is crafted to better boost public transportation, protect open space and improve pedestrian and bicycling options.

Significantly, this time the transportation tax has the endorsement of key environmental groups, including the Greenbelt Alliance, Save Mount Diablo, Save the Bay and the Sierra Club.

The tax is projected to raise more than $100 million annually over 35 years, effectively doubling the county’s sales tax for transportation.

Julie Pierce, vice chair of the county Transportation Authority, said the plan is “a real change from the way it’s been done in the past,” with a greater focus on transit and access to transit. It does not add a single lane on county roadways.

“We’re not building our way out of this,” Pierce said. “You can’t.”

Pierce added that the measure includes “performancebased” metrics to be imposed on projects before they are funded. Also, the countyraised funds can leverage state and federal dollars to optimize the impact.

Randy Iwasaki, executive director for the Transportation Authority, said the plan is calibrated to reduce congestion and greenhouse gases by cutting down vehicles traveled.

As anyone who lives in or travels within the county knows, its traffic nightmares can be epic and are getting worse. The county population, just over 1.1 million now, is projected to exceed 1.3 million by 2040.

The main critique against Measure J is that it does not go far enough in forcing a change to the landuse decisions that allowed so much urban sprawl and dependence on the automobile.

“Measure J is more of the same,” said David Schonbrunn, president of the Transportation Solutions Defense and Education Fund, a nonprofit advocating radical change in transportation and land use. He called the current measure “slightly better” than the 2016 version.

Schonbrunn is concerned that Measure J’s promises of “a new direction” are not legally enforceable and that more bus rapidtransit lanes are needed to make more efficient use of existing roads and compel transitoriented development.

“The singlefamily home is going to be obsolete in the future,” he said.

Schonbrunn also suggested that Measure J proponents are misleading voters by promising congestion relief when the county’s own studies show that traffic and vehicle miles traveled will get worse even if it passes.

Nevertheless, no one could credibly argue that traffic quagmires would lessen or that developments with singlefamily homes would disappear if Measure J goes down in defeat.

Yes, more infill development must be part of the county’s future — as this plan acknowledges — and more must be done to get people out of their cars, which is also a goal of this plan. But this additional funding needs to be approved now to at least mitigate the effects of a growing population.

The environmental groups deserve praise for pushing for a more sensible plan, and county officials were wise to address such concerns.

We recommend a yes vote on Contra Costa County’s Measure J.