State's smaller population shouldn't be a worry

It's human nature to have a “negativity bias.” When we hear that California's population is declining, we tend to fall for the fallacy that bigger is always better. Population statistics are often treated as a race with the media exclaiming, “Texas is ahead of California in growing its population.” The reality is that this trend can be positive for the Golden State even though the sensationalized decline is small.

California's Department of Finance reports “The state's 2023 population is at about 39.1 million, falling by just 37,000 people from the year prior.” Those net numbers consider births and deaths, plus in-andout internal and international migration. Other indices claim the one-year 2021-22 decline is as high as 200,000.

Marin also is experiencing a population decline.

It's driven by our relatively low birth rate and higher death rate due to our aging residents, rather than by those choosing to relocate to Texas, Arizona or other states with lower costs (and lower incomes).

The state indicates that, between 2021 and 2022, Marin's population decreased by 6,600. That's a 2.5% drop, though the decrease is imperceptible.

Since the price of California's homes is based on supply and demand, any decrease in demand should help lower housing prices and expand availability.

Perhaps a little contrarian thinking might push this positive trend. Public policy should encourage out migration to other states perhaps with a tax-forgiveness program to cover moving costs.

California is a prosperous high-cost, hightax, highly regulated and high-income state. In Florida, Texas and throughout the South, living costs are lower, taxes are higher, businesses are less regulated and employees are lower salaried. For those on the political right, a new home in, say, Mississippi, is enticing.

California has a carrying capacity. It's already reached its limit. Looking at the big picture, more outmigration could cool our overheated housing market while ameliorating crowded schools and highways while decreasing demand for scarce water resources.

***

There's talk about adding passenger services to the railroad running along the Highway 37 corridor between Novato, Vallejo and Amtrak's mainline in Suisun near Solano County's Fairfield. Currently, a daily freight train or two use the track. The portion between Novato and Napa Junction near Vallejo is owned by SMART.

Caltrans was just made eligible for a $500,000 planning grant from the Federal Railroad Administration's Corridor Identification and Development program to study this possibility.

If that study ultimately demonstrates that the rail line will carry sufficient passengers to make the project worthwhile, then the issue arises of paying to build and run the trains. Public transit funding is a two-part formula. Capital costs generally derive from federal and state sources. Operating expenses are the responsibility of the localities served.

There is little chance Marin and Sonoma voters will increase the bicounty sales tax which is SMART's fiscal bedrock, to fund trains from Novato to Vallejo. Nor are Napa and Solano residents likely to pass their own tax to run the service.

There's an alternative. Treat the rail line primarily as a branch of Amtrak California's bustling Capitol Corridor enabling direct service to Sacramento, San Jose and the San Joaquin Valley. Amtrak could simultaneously schedule peak period commuter-oriented trains between Vallejo, Napa and Novato with connections to SMART.

This east-west line won't be high-speed rail, but the trip to the mainline in Suisun from Novato is comparatively quick and convenient. Amtrak-operated trains could also provide Solano and Napa auto commuters with a visible transit alternative to their daily grind on congested Highway 37.

The longshot task is to convince Amtrak to connect the North Bay to its system and for the state Legislature to fund the local share, just as it already does for the Southern California Surfline trains.