When the Measure B transportation sales tax failed, the staff and several board members of the Sacramento Transportation Authority (SacTA) suggested that all it needed to pass was better marketing. False! STAR and many others immediately starting working with SacRT for a better transit component, and Sacramento Transportation Choices formed to come up with a better overall vision for tranportation, resulting in the Transportation Principles. All of this was moving quickly because we knew we must be prepared for the next measure in November 2018 and because we know that without real community engagement the “son of Measure B” would be just as bad as the original.

There now seems to be widespread silence from the agencies. We don’t know if they have decided not to go for the next election, or if they are just working behind the scenes and going to release something as a “done deal.” At the May 11 Sacramento Transportation Authority board meeting, attended by several STAR members and other transportation advocates, a ballot measure was not on the agenda, nor did the board address questions about it. At the Roads 101 meeting hosted by Sacramento County in Carmichael there was also no mention of a new measure.

There is a lot of discussion around how much the county and cities will be getting from the recently passed SB 1 Transportation Funding legislation. While the bill was advertised as making a significant dent in our transportation maintenance backlog statewide, a more realistic assessment says that it will only help the state highway system and arterials maintained by the county and cities, that not much if any will ever trickle down to the local street level. Some people have suggested that the tax increase (mostly user fees) in the legislation will reduce the willingness of voters to go for local tax measures, but that is uncertain. It could just as well be seen as part of a new paradigm that we have to maintain our tranportation system if we want it to function in support of mobility and economic health.

Some transportation advocates are hoping that a new county measure will be delayed until 2020 so that public engagement can occur and a progressive measure can be developed that advocates and voters can support. STAR has not taken a position on the date. Los Angeles County Measure M, which passed easily in the last election, was the result of four years of hard work with true community engagement by agencies and advocates. Though it does include some freeways, it is mostly about transit, walking, and bicycling. That is what LA is ready for, and we believe Sacramento is ready for as well.

There are indications that the City of Sacramento does not want “son of Measure B” to be on the 2018 ballot. An extension of Measure U, which funds public safety and parks, will be on the ballot in the city. The city has talked about but not committed to a housing measure in 2018. The idea of a separate city transportation measure that would make transit much more prominent, and might much more easily pass in the transit-supporting city than parts of the county which are transit-averse and tax-averse, has been listened to with interest though not yet supported by members of the city council.

It should be said that SacRT really wants a 2018 ballot measure in order to overcome past issues and move forward with their strategic vision. Again, STAR does not have a position at this time, but the consensus seems to be that it is worth waiting for a better measure.

What could 2020 gain?

• Further development of the advocacy organizations and coalitions, with full inclusion of underserved communities and neglected voices.
• True public engagement to develop the measure, including community meetings run by community organizations (rather than the traditional “outreach” in which the agencies tell the public what they already decided to see if there is too much opposition).
• Development of a real vision for transportation, and a set of performance measures that would apply to all projects, in support of that vision.
• A shift in transportation investment that emphasizes walking, bicycling, and transit over roadway expansion. If the next measure is a half-cent sales tax, many in the advocacy community support 2/3 of the half cent for transit, for a total of a half cent for transit (Measure A plus the new measure), still below state and national standards but an immense improvement.
• Time to work with the county and cities to improve their list of projects that they submit to SacTA. Many of the projects in Measure B had been on the books for decades, and didn’t reflect changing transportation modes, projections, community desires, and climate change realities.
• Consideration of other funding mechanisms instead of or in addition to regressive sales taxes, including property tax, developer fees, and user fees.
• A real commitment to complete streets, where all new projects must consider and in almost all cases meet the needs of all users for walking, bicycling and transit. We’ve invested plenty in the past on a cars-first transportation system, and it is now time to shift to a transit-first and walking and bicycling prominent system.
• A real commitment to “fix-it-first” or a state-of-good-repair for roadways, transit, and sidewalks. The commitment must be specific, with no waivers, and must be ongoing for the life of the measure, not just for a short period of time.
• Real community support for a progressive measure that passes easily because it is what the citizens want rather than what the politicians and road engineers want.

This said, we are keeping a close eye on things and are continuing to plan, develop and engage, just in case 2018 suddenly pops up. If it is an unchanged “son of Measure B,” it seems likely that the entire advocacy community will oppose it. We’ll keep you informed.

[Note: The intriguing header graphic is from the Chicago Department of Tranportation and was used in STAR’s presentation at Transit 101: Transit Dreamin’ workshop, but it does not necessarily reflect the position of STAR nor of our partner organizations.]

• Measure B 2016
• transportation funding