No on Regional Measure 3
I have been interested in and followed regional transportation issues since I was first elected to the Benicia City Council in 1992. During my tenure as a council member and as mayor, I also served as our city’s representative on the Solano Transportation Authority and also as chairman of the STA.
Since that time of my service on the council and the Solano Transportation Authority (STA), I have stood in opposition to a number of attempts to raise our county sales tax which would be dedicated to transportation issues. I have taken this position in opposition since I am aware that our local, regional and state transportation agencies have been given more than adequate resources to solve our transportation problems. They have, however, repeatedly squandered the funds that we, the taxpayers, have provided. The Bay Bridge and Benicia Bridge cost overruns are just two examples.
Now, with Regional Measure 3, a bridge toll increase proposal, which is on our June primary ballot for voter approval, here is another attempt by these local and regional agencies to further tax all those who use our bridges to spend on a myriad of programs that will benefit only a small number of those who pay those tolls. For example, Santa Clara County voters can vote to approve this measure without one bit of concern that they will have to pay anything.
Regional Measure 3 is dishonest and unfair to the voters and taxpayers of our region and I urge all Benicians to vote NO ON MEASURE 3.
Jerry Hayes, former Benicia mayor and former Solano Transportation authority chairman
Disturbing signs
A few disturbing and ugly anonymous signs have popped up in Benicia of late. Something about vagrants taking over the city. Really?
First of all, no one is taking over the city. Second, what is a vagrant? Do you mean the homeless in Benicia? Third, have those of you that put up the signs made an effort to help those homeless few that are in Benicia (if those are who you mean by vagrants)? Have you ever been homeless? Unable to work? Had a bad economic turn of events? Probably not. Where is your heart? Benicia social services and the police try hard to work with these folks to help them. And still, some of them will always be homeless. Wouldn’t you feel better if you helped them rather than castigate them and their town?
Susan Street,
Benicia
Sharing is caring!
I agree Mr. Hayes on RM3. VOTE NO.
Susan please tell us just where these signs are. I have never seen any. Have you reported this to the police? By the way I do think we in Benicia care very much for anyone who has problems. We volunteer and donate. We sure do not want to look like Fairfield and San Francisco. Give us more info Susan. If someone wants to donate a good place to start is the CAC.
Bob, look around. They are found anywhere campaign signs are found.
I will.
John I did look around. I found one sign at the inter-section of Rose Drive and 2nd street. Very poorly done and hard to ID. There may have ,more but are now gone. , ,This is way over blown.
When I moved to Benicia, the bridge tolls were 45 cents. SO, if you double every decade (which is average), you get 90cents in 1990, 1.80 in 2000, 3.60 in 2010 and 7.20 in 2020. It’s 5 bucks now, so we’re getting a “bargain”. But, I still wouldn’t vote for RM3 since the money won’t STAY here in the region. Once those swindlers in Sacramento get it, they give it away to SoCal just like they give away our water. I’d consider voting to split the state up into 3 states EXCEPT it is a lightly veiled attempt to get 6 Liberal Senators in place of 2 in the US Senate.
Bay Area CPI would put it at $2.20 since 1967. So no, it is not a bargain at $5. And outrageous at $8.
CPI is another government swindle…it is less accurate than doubling every 10 years for “normal” average price increases. Try it yourself. Take the price of bread, the cost of your home or an average car…
Ok, let’s try it.
Color TV in 1970 (modest version) $400. Double every 10 years, they will be about $13,000 in 2020. Hmm.
Car in 1970, averaged about $3500, that goes to $112,000
Car in 1980 7500, goes to 120,000. seems cars are a lot better and a lot cheaper.
Let’s try hamburger meat. 0.70/lb in 1970 must cost $22/lb in 2020.
Gas in 1980 was $1.20 so that is apparently close to $19/gal today.
25 cent loaf of bread in 1960 goes to $8 in 2020.
I don’t think doubling every 10 years works.
Let’s try the CPI for the Bay Area which since 1970 is about 8.5
TV would go from $400 to $3400. CPI is way low, but TV costs are not fair, there was an electronic revolution since 1970.
Car would be $30,000 today (if it doubled every decade, my car bought for 25000 in 2008 would be 50000 today; but new it is selling for $30000!)
Hamburger meat: at 0.7/lb in 1970 would be $6 today, so the CPI is again too high.
Gas at $0.25 in 1970 would be $2.10 today so CPI is way low there (although gas fluctuates a lot and has since the OPEC boycott in the 70’s)
Bread would be about $3.8 from 1970 prices under the CPI
Here is the problem with doubling every decade: it might have been a good rule of thumb when inflation was super-high in the 1980s, but inflation has come down a lot since and has averaged a little over 2% since 2000 (including a big deflation in housing and other costs during the Great Recession) so applying that rule of thumb over a long period is not going to work. CPI has its faults but it does get critiqued, revised and examined by academics, private business economists and just about every layperson in the country.
At any rate, at $5 the bridge tolls are way above inflation, and at $8, an outrageous hit on working people. Vote NO
OK…still think the CPI is a government swindle so they can afford to give modest raises to folks on fixed incomes-but better than nothing. Not that I’m interested in statistical accuracy (since anything can be “proven” with improper application of stats); but note on this chart how straight the line is for cumulative inflation since 1970…https://inflationdata.com/articles/charts/cumulative-inflation-decade-1913/
Also think RM3 is a bad deal–but mostly because it screws people who commute by car in favor of those who don’t. Another “sin” tax of a sort.
The curve is by decade (that smooths the fluctuations that were big in the late-70s and early 80s) and it appears to be for the US average; from the chart data it is an average of about 4.5% since 1970. Bay Area is closer to 5% average since 1970 (which makes quite a difference compounding over 45 years), but if you look at the past 15 years, it is half that (1675 to 2326 over 15 years is 2.2% for the US data in the chart).
As for RM3, the whole thing is a fraud, sold as if they will complete all the dozens of projects when they are only providing 2% to 10% of the needed funds. And they hide the fact that it will collect over $10 billion in 25 years, but they only account for $4.5 billion in expenditures, hiding in fine print $1.5 billion for BART and MTC operating funds, and completely hiding over $4 billion for??? we don’t know…maybe interest on bonds but there is no mandate to use bonds. VOTE NO.
Greg, the mayors E-Alert on May 21, 2018 recommendation is a YES Vote on RM3 along with a letter of support from Mayor Tom Butt from Richmond. I would say they both are Socialist Progressive. Take a look at the 2014 Richmond mayor election. Public TV had a great program all about that election. Find it and watch it. He won because of his anti Chevron campaign. Yes he is anti fossil fuel unless it benefits his ideals. The big one is Marin Clean Energy.
Great comment Greg – the way I see it is that since a toll increase affects so few people who vote we should be pushing for congestion pricing for those driving into the San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose/Silicon Valley area. Want to drive your car into these areas, it will cost you the equivalent of a bridge toll for the privilege. This has worked wonders in places like London and Rome and I believe Paris, so why not in the Bay Area. Very easy to implement and it would make those who vote for toll increases think twice about where the money is going. .
Yes, or simply a fee to park (at all parking lots, including business and agency parking lots) which can be modest and everyone pays. Not just the 10% who cross bridges.
But RM3 is a fraud. I passes out 2% to 10% of the funds needed to about 3 dozen projects, none of which will be completed with the funds.
Worse, it will collect over $10 billion in 25 years, and only fund $4.5 billion in those projects! Where does the other $5.5 billion go? Fine print: $1.5 billion for operating costs to BART and MTC (the most wasteful in the Bay Area)!!! The other $4 billion??? Wall Street bond holders? They won’t say or commit and we don’t get to know!!
VOTE NO
This is not about tolls. Just a cover from the anti fossil fuel, big oil folks. They want to control your ,habits. They want you to buy an electric or hybrid car and force you to use public transportation. It more ,than likely will pass. It will because we live in a very Socialist Progressive state ,and for sure the bay area tops the list. The writer is correct for some of the reasons but the big one is still the political clout the Socialist Progressives seem to have. Think Bernie Sanders and Senator Warren. Not good.
The measure was sponsored by and the campaign is funded by the Bay Area Council, Silicon Valley Leadership Group, with major funding from Facebook, Google and others. They don’t want a business tax on parking so they are picking on the 10% who have to cross bridges to work. I would hesitate to call the sponsors Progressive Socialists. Progressive Democrats in Benicia voted to oppose RM3! So there is a broad spectrum of political opposition.
And don’t forget it also ties the tolls to the inflation rate meaning no more votes for increases. They will be automatic. And since everyone will have electronic tolls you won’t actually notice anymore cash impact without looking at your credit card statement.
I would ask Two mayors who are a vote yes on RM3. Tom Butt of Richmond and his Benicia tag along Mayor Patterson. Yes they are Socialist Progressives regardless of what the local folks say. The local Progressive folks could well be seeing the President Trump achievements and are joining in on the celebration. Good for them.
RM3 was started and pushed through the legislature by the Bay Area Council and the Silicon Valley Leadership Group. Hardly Socialists or Progressives. They are running the campaign, with big donors Facebook and Google. Ditto.
They are Progressives for sure. Maybe the Socialist was a little harsh.
Tolls are now at the point of diminishing returns. If we raise the the tolls to $7, the total gross revenues will begin to decline as commuters will find other ways to travel.
We cannot tax our way out of our fiscal problems.
At the core of the budgetary problems are government employee pension plans and compensation packages. Go the http://www.transparentcalifornia.com and see the revenues expended for your government employees. Prepare to be shocked.
Do you want to pay $7 bridge tolls so that $120,000 annual compensation state and local employees can have a salary increase? Wake up.