The author here misses the point. We are tired of being taxed with no accountablility. If all of these projects are so great then what's wrong with having a sunset clause every ten years and then requiring the voters to reaffirm continuing the tax. This sounds like the usual democrat/union tax and spend with no accountablilty to the voters!! Or better yet, just a cheap way to get publicity!!

Lol, oh California.

Cheryl has never seen a tax hike she did not like. I am not sure who voted against this in our Council but am glad they did so. This tax in perpetuity is a real bad idea. Once approved, you have NO control over the projects. This is like voting an elected official for life in office. They no longer care about the public since they do not have to be elected. With this perpetuity clause, there is no more accountability on how they spend the money.

Like all the transportation taxes, they claim to solve a ton of problems. After approved, they say they need more money to actually do any of the specific projects and you will have to pay another tax if you actually want your project completed. I assume this funding will continue to fund the Wheels Express buses which are costing the taxpayers an arm and a leg because of the tremendous subsidy. Then we have the high speed rail to nowhere. That bond money will be taking away the money we need for real transportation issues.

We already have one of the highest sales taxes in the state. We need to stop voting for additional taxes and make our elected officials accountable. The money for these projects would also be here if we did not have the high increase of pension costs, all brought to us by the elected officials. The same elected officials who are asking for more money from us.. Stop supporting the tax hikes and stop supporting the elected officials, like Cheryl, who believe an extra tax is the answer to everything.

Wow! I think the above missed the point of the opinion piece. Pleasanton wants less traffic, they want infrastructured built but they don't want to have to pay for it? The vote was to put it on the ballot. You can individually vote no if you want.

How are our roads going to get fixed it we don't fund it? Is there anyone out there who just walks? Oh wow this tax is for pedestrian and bike trails too! I guess the roads magically fix themselves.

There is accountability. There is a citizens watch group.

You are already paying the half cent. . .we need the connectors, we need our city streets repaired. . .or we can make them all private and assess ourselves. . .that would cost less, NOT!

Oh and the projects go before the voters every 20 years? Did you read the entire piece???

Great, a citizen's watch dog committee--that's reassuring especially after how it was used by the school district after the bond was passed!!

This agency delievered. All precious projects are done or in process ten years early. Be informed!

Web Link

I am informed. . .its a 20 year tax committment!!

What do you mean we don't want to pay for it? We are already paying for it but the elected officials are taking our tax money and not spending it wisely. Every dollar going to the extra pension cost is money that is taken away from education and traffic infrastructure.

An "oversight committee", appointed by the politicians is not enough accountability. As mentioned above, this will be not different that the bond oversight committee of the school district that was promised and did not materialize. If there are supplemental taxes like this, there should be a time limit on the tax. At the end of the tax, if there is more to do and they have used the funds wisely, people can vote for an extension. Let the voters decide (the ones paying the tax) if it should be extended. Don't burden all future generations with this tax.

Which project(s) are 10 years ahead of schedule?

Isn't the Alameda County Transportation Commission a duplication of the MTC? Why pay the salaries of multiple commissions that do absolutely the same function?

I do not see where the transportation is being eased at the city, county, or regional level. In fact a number of projects to mitigate traffic congestion are instead causing more congestion.

And counter to what one reader wrote, we do pay plenty in transportation taxes. Its just that the state government is spending this money elsewhere. Probably on salaries of commissioners.

Besides all the salaries being paid for the alphabet soup of transportation agencies in the area, some of our elected officials, and especially the county supervisors, receive a stipend for each meeting they go to at each of these agencies, in addition to their pay. That is why we have all these agencies; there is more money for the elected officials.

We need to combine many of these transportation agencies to reduce overhead. However, do not expect that to happen when the elected officials make extra money by having more agencies.

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?