Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
SamTrans outlines $50M‑a‑year local plan if Bay Area sales‑tax measure passes; coastside residents press for specific services
Summary
SamTrans staff told the Mid Coast Community Council that a citizens' initiative (SB63/Connect Bay Area Act) would raise a half‑cent regional sales tax for 14 years and could return roughly $50 million a year to San Mateo County; councilors and coast residents urged guarantees for on‑demand services, school‑oriented routes and local oversight.
Jessica Epstein, director of government and community affairs for SamTrans, told the Mid Coast Community Council on April 22 that a citizen initiative called SB63 (Connect Bay Area Act) would ask voters to approve a 14‑year, one‑half‑cent regional sales tax to shore up transit operations across several Bay Area counties. Epstein said the campaign hopes to place the measure on the November ballot after signature gathering. "If it goes to the ballot and is successful, approximately $50 million a year in new funding into our county" could be available for transit, she said.
The SamTrans presentation emphasized two limits on how the money could be used: it must fund transit‑supportive components of projects, and the measure is designed to direct funds collected in San Mateo County back to local investments in the county, while also providing support to larger regional operators. Epstein said the SamTrans board is drafting a local investment plan now and soliciting public input through a short survey and stakeholder outreach, with a planned June 3 action item for the board to adopt a draft investment framework.
Council members and residents pressed SamTrans officials for details about local impacts. "Is this a half‑cent added to sales tax?" asked a councilor; Epstein confirmed it would raise the local sales‑tax rate by half a cent (for example, raising 9.25% to 9.7% in the example given). Coast residents asked how the district would prioritize underserved areas on the coast, expand ride‑share and paratransit options, and whether school‑oriented routes would be supported. Epstein pointed to categories in the draft survey—"expand access to transit for communities that are currently underserved," and a category for on‑demand ride options—and said feedback from coast meetings will be pulled out for special consideration during plan development.
Critics at the meeting urged stronger governance and oversight. Local commentator Greg Diegas argued that a substantial share of any county collection would go to large regional agencies and called for an independent oversight commission, inspectors general and binding performance measures to ensure accountability. Epstein responded that the measure’s designers structured allocations so funds collected in San Mateo County would return for county investments and that SB63 contains new accountability provisions aimed at holding regional operators to standards of service and station maintenance.
SamTrans staff also described internal cost‑saving steps already taken—spending cuts, hiring freezes and other efficiencies—and said operational deficits expected beginning in fiscal year 2028 informed the need for a multi‑year revenue solution. The agency said it would balance funding between operational shortfalls and capital or service expansion depending on the board’s adopted local investment plan.
The next step on SamTrans’ timetable is continued public engagement through April and May, a May 6 information item and a June 3 board action to adopt a draft local investment plan to accompany the regionwide measure.
