|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The Alameda County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously this week to place a transportation sales tax increase measure on the November ballot, a measure that failed by a faction of the two-thirds favorable votes it needed two years ago.
This time it might pass with Art Dao and his team at the County Transportation Commission rewriting the measure to add a “sunset” clause that will give voters a chance to vote on it again 30 years from now.
By removing an “in perpetuity” condition that was in the 2012 proposal, Dao may have enough votes to gain the two-thirds needed.
He’ll certainly have the support of Mayor Jerry Thorne, whose opposition to the permanency of the tax measure two years ago, along with two others on the Pleasanton City Council, was believed to have caused the measure’s defeat by a mere 721 votes out of 527,403 ballots cast.
Thorne admits that a 30-year sunset clause “is probably in perpetuity for many of us,” but it’s the principle that counts. He and apparently enough others just won’t vote for a tax that will last forever.
Before winning last Tuesday’s vote by county supervisors, Dao appeared at meetings before the Pleasanton City Council and the Alameda County Mayors Council in an effort to persuade the lawmakers to support the measure this time around.
Besides explaining the new sunset clause, he said the 2014 measure would bring millions of dollars to Pleasanton and the Tri-Valley to improve transportation. It would include $130 million to turn Highway 84 into a four-lane expressway from I-680, across Pigeon Pass and to connect to the four-lane segment now being built from Airway Boulevard near the I-580 interchange to the western end of Ruby Hill Drive and Vallecitos Road.
The measure also would provide $400 million to help fund an extension of BART to Livermore, another $1.26 million annually for local streets and roads, and $340,000 annually for local bike and pedestrian projects.
The measure would provide traffic relief, including financing to every city in the county to repave streets, fill potholes and upgrade local transportation infrastructure. Funds would also be available to expand BART, bus and commuter rail service, including BART expansion and improvements within Alameda County, bus service expansion and commuter rail service improvements.
Dao gained support this week in a new report by the Bay Area Economic Institute that details the economic impact of the 2014 transportation measure if voters approve it in November. The report finds that the 30-year, $8 billion plan will yield $20 billion in economic activity in the region and create nearly 150,000 full-time-equivalent local jobs in a wide variety of occupations, including design, construction, engineering and transit operations.
Jim Wunderman, president and CEO of the Bay Area Council, summed up the views of Dao, Alameda County mayors and the supervisors the best:
“Investing in Alameda County’s transportation system means investing in Alameda County’s future prosperity. The 2014 Transportation Expenditure Plan outlines a bold and necessary vision with its focus on expanding and modernizing BART, fixing roads and highways, and providing transit programs for youth and seniors. This plan will help make Alameda County a place where businesses of all shapes and sizes want to start, stay and grow.”
The tax money seems to benefit Livermore and Rubyhills and not Pleasanton. Why Pleasanton should pay the bill through higher taxes?
When it comes to taxes, the sun never sets, there’s always an excuse to extend the law.
Politicians have no shame! They apparently think that there is no limit to how they can raise taxes. If it isn’t a new tax, it is a new “fee”. They won’t be happy until they have all of our money.
Do they really think that adding a 30 year “sunset clause” is going to make this palatable? I hope not.
It would be nice if the reporter writing this would have included what percent tax they were asking for.
I would like to see which project would come first, ie. BART EXTENSION TO LIVERMORE, HWY 84 improvements or what. They talk about local contractors and workers to work but wasn’t the BART to Dublin/Pleasanton Line Contractor a Canadian Contractor? These 5 Supervisors need Term Limits. 15-20 years in office is too much just saying.
This story is slanted the wrong way.
Pleasanton does not have enough water to support its current population; is it wise to promote “growth”?
The traffic noise from the Isabel Avenue (Highway 84) project is already having an adverse effect on the nearby homes in Ruby Hill, and probably on the Livermore communities adjacent to Isabel as well.
But, I suppose if property values drop because of overdevelopment of a road never intended to be a 4-lane highway, we’ll make up for the lost taxes with higher sales taxes, eh?
Not all development is wise.
Note that most of the traffic that will be added to Highway 84 is not destined for either Livermore or Pleasanton, but will be heavy-vehicle thru traffic from other parts of the Bay Area, outbound beyond Livermore, that is simply bypassing the 580/680 interchange.
Also note that gasoline consumption and vehicle miles in the U.S. have not been increasing for many years now, largely due to high fuel prices. The supply of energy for transportation isn’t increasing much. Do we really need more roads?
I also agree with those who have observed that a “30 year” sunset provision is a joke. 30 years is at least 5 eternities in politics. We should be choosing more flexible policies.
NO MORE TAXES!! Can you here us now!!?
Never vote for more taxes, it is almost always squandered, embezzled, used for political favors or lines the pockets of greedy politicians.
We pay way more than enough taxes already….way more.
How about this idea, Politicians, trim the budget of waste and fraud and take a cut in YOUR pay before you ask us Americans to dig into out pockets yet again….?
Voting for higher taxes is like asking an armed robber to take more of your money. If you are foolish enough to do that, you deserve to loose your money.
WAKE UP PEOPLE…YOU ARE BEING CONTROLLED.
WE THE PEOPLE ARE DAMN MAD AND TIRED OF ALL THE B–S— THAT COMES FROM OUR WEAK MINDED BUT CLEVER AND SLIMY POLITICIANS AND BUREAUCRATS..NO MORE TAXES—NO MORE STUPID LAWS—NO MORE—NO MORE.
WE THE PEOPLE MUST TAKE A STAND OR WE WILL SUPPER FOREVER.
Thank you for listening, Julia Pardini from Alamo.
PS…I know that I am not from your specific area. But if they can control you they are like cancer…they will spread their greedy claws to our area.
only the foolish votes to raise their own taxes.
The extension of BART further into the area means even more crime guys — it’s my understanding home break-ins is UP 70% over the last year, & BART is a big part of that dynamic. Yet another tax, what’s left to eat on?! We have every kind of insurance & cost to be in business, to support ourselves in our private life, health insurance is off the charts along with more politicians increasing fees,REGULATIONS,FINES, restrictions, fuel costs… HOW ABOUT?! HOLD STILL!! REVIEW & ASSESS WHAT IS PRIORITY, UNFINISHED, NEEDS REVISITING & LEAVE THE PEOPLE THE HECK ALONE FOR A DARN YEAR!? BACK OFF, BUTT OUT, STOP COPYING WASHINGTON DC! ALSO… how is it Jerry Brown can be ON THE BALLOT FOR A FOURTH TERM??! I came home to CA 2 years ago & am totally in horror at the takeover, & ruination here!
How much is the proposed sales tax?
Still nope.
@Kate Kincade :”he extension of BART further into the area means even more crime guys — it’s my understanding home break-ins is UP 70% over the last year, & BART is a big part of that dynamic. ”
Where did you get that 70% statistic? I’ve looked at the Pleasanton Police annual report and I haven’t seem any link between the openings of the BART stations and crime here. Also find it hard to believe that home break-in robbers would choose BART as their means of escape.
Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.
– P. J. O’Rourke
The supervisors had one chance for a sales tax increase and they blew it on the last election with their so called ‘health care tax’ for the uninsured, right after Obamacare was implemented and there should be no reason for uninsured people anymore.
How do we go about dividing Alameda county into two counties? Our representatives only care about the voters in the west county (higher density equals more voters per square mile). The needs of those in the east county are not the same as in west county. But the west county people, and politicians, are just trying to redistribute the money from those in the east side to the west side.
Water rate had gone up. Sewer rate had gone up. Garbage collection rate had gone up.
I’m not voting for this tax.
Just remember to vote.
We can all cry about it till we are blue in the face, but we need to use the only political power we have.
VOTE
2nd highest sales tax in the state. Vote yes if you thing you are getting your money’s worth.
Good thinking…so now we go to Costco and Target and whatever else and spend our money in Contra Costa County. Its easy…same driving distance.
30 years?? I will be dead in 30 years, so how does that help me? It’s just amazing that people in California keep voting for politicians that love to give our hard working money to people who don’t want to work, the useless train to no where and anything they think of take our money. When will the citizens vote these useless spending politicians out.
I’ll probably vote for the tax. I wish the county managed money more efficiently, but I think the money will, for the most part be put to good use.
I’ll probably vote for it, too. It does appear that the transportation tax funds will be put to good use.
Its really getting discouraging of our future especially citizens who are retired and still drive just keep on taxing. your like squeezing blood out of a turnip. The problem is you got keep misspending gas taxes that already suppose to be used for roads and expansions. Its getting to costly to live here in the bay area.
I’d happily pay the added tax, and do so even more happily if an additional penalty taxes were imposed upon single posters, with no command of English grammar, using multiple names to say the same thing. Bwah, bwah, bwah. The poor whiner is no fooling anybody.
I might have to include myself in this:
‘if additional’ … not ‘if an additional’
‘not fooling anyone’ … not ‘no fooling anyone’
gasp….
Who is this Chinaman and why does he want to tax us more??
Jubel, Damon, John,
Nothing is stopping you from giving extra money to the city, school district, county, state, or feds. Time to put your money where your mouths are.
@”Go Ahead”
The idea of people just voluntarily paying taxes for causes that they care about has been brought up before. Perhaps allowing pacifists to opt-out of paying taxes for military spending? Allowing childless couples and retirees to opt-out of paying taxes going to schools? Or, in this case, perhaps allowing people like yourself to opt-out of paying taxes going to improvements in the transportation system? Of course, in that case you shouldn’t be allowed to benefit from improvements to the transportation system either. Maybe only people displaying a certain badge indicating that they paid transportation taxes should be allowed to ride and BART extension to Livermore, or be allowed to use new freeway lanes? Is that what you want? Or do you just want to free-load off of people who do pay the taxes?
To “Go Ahead”,
I do pay more than I am required to pay. We give to the school district, to medical and scientific research foundations, and to cultural institutions, among other things.
The politicians are allowing their financiers (i.e., campaign contributors) get away with added development without paying the proper mitigation fees, and now want the residents to pay for the impact of the added development. Either the new development is not paying to mitigate their impact on transportation, or they are and the politicians are spending it on their own pet projects.
Anyway, we do not need this tax. The new Bullet Train of Gov. Brown will solve all of our transportation problems…
Damon, in other words you expect someone else to pay but you’re not willing to. That’s what I figured. I appreciate your clichéd scenario; so you’re also saying that the 45-50% of people who don’t pay taxes can’t use public services, transportation, highways, etc…that are paid for with tax dollars?
John, nice try but you’re picking and choosing where to give your extra dollars. If you’re in favor of more funds for transportation why don’t you put the money into the General Fund, or a specific transportation fund if one even exists. You “wish the county managed money more efficiently, but I think the money will, for the most part be put to good use.” You don’t find that attitude a little troubling?
@ “Go Ahead” : “Damon, in other words you expect someone else to pay but you’re not willing to.”
Where did I say that I’m not willing to? Do you think that I have a secret plan to evade the very taxes I would be voting for?
@ “Formerly Dan” : “So you say that those who don’t pay taxes are free-loaders? That’s exactly what we conservatives have been saying about welfare/SSI/immigration…etc fraud for years now.”
You know, you could save yourself the long-winded post and just say that you agree with me.
………
Have a good night everyone!
@”Formerly Dan” : “We don’t agree on this particular tax. ”
That wasn’t the question. The question posed was should people who (hypothetically) opt-out of paying additional transportation sales taxes be allowed to avail themselves of the enhanced or extended transportation services paid for by those additional sales taxes? It would appear that your answer is “yes”, and that while you denounce as “free-loaders” people on welfare or SSI you’ve got a blind spot when it comes to your own free-loading tendencies. Thank you for providing yet another example of conservative hypocrisy. The correct answer which would have been true to the conservative principles that you and other conservatives apply to everyone except yourselves is “If I don’t pay the taxes for something, then I shouldn’t be allowed to avail myself of those services”.
No more taxes. Our taxes are already too high. There never is an end to more and more taxes. Additional taxes only reinforce politicians coming up with more taxes. Pretty soon there will be discrete or “fees” for street lighting, street surveillance, individual libraries, raccoon abatement, terrorist abatement, etc. The taxpayers should not be regarded as an infinite source for more taxes. Politicians and elected,officials cannot be trusted to use money wisely despite calls for oversight. Why, for example, does the City of Pleasanton, spend a large sum of money each year for a self-congratulatory party like the one last year at the aquatic center. Instead they could send out nice thank you notes and use the money spent to feed and entertain over a hundred guests on a 4 year scholarship for a civic minded youth needing help going to college.
Damon, I wonder why you continue to change the subject. My post suggested that you go ahead and pay additional taxes. It seems from your responses that you do not and will not. My suggestion is that if you feel the government should be given more money to do more things for you, and society in general, then go ahead and give them more than your required “donation” of tax dollars. You’ve ignored that so I will assume you don’t do it; instead you propose your opt-out scheme with the implication that I don’t want to pay taxes. I never suggested that. You and I differ significantly on our views of government’s role; I demand accountability and efficiency and expect that my tax dollars not be wasted. You seem to be willing to keep handing over more money because, in spite of all the money that has already been put in the hands of government, we still haven’t received satisfactory results.
@”Formerly Dan” : “Notice that you go straight to accusations instead of specifically answering ANY question I posed?”
Yes, Dan, I did notice your attempts to divert the discussion by throwing out shiny baubles.
Well, let’s see where we are: We both understand the plight of the working poor. We are both against welfare and SSI fraud. We both agree that it’s hypocritical for certain people to think that they should be entitled to use extended or enhanced transportation services paid for by taxes on other people but not themselves. Sounds like we are in agreement on a lot of things.
Jerry Thorne now supports the tax despite running for mayor opposing it.
He said regarding the 30 year sunset clause they inserted.
“is probably in perpetuity for many of us,” but it’s the principle that counts.
Really Jerry?
In 30 years you don’t think they are going to have another measure to extend or even raise the tax? Have fun in fantasy land Jerry.
@”Go ahead” : “Damon, I wonder why you continue to change the subject. My post suggested that you go ahead and pay additional taxes. It seems from your responses that you do not and will not. ”
OK, I’m going to try one more time to get the point across to you before I give up. I’m not opposed to the principle of “pro-transportation tax” people (like myself, for example) paying additional transportation taxes while “anti-transportation tax” people like yourself opt-out of paying taxes. But then there’s the problem of implementation. How can you and other “anti-transportation tax” people guarantee me and other “pro-transportation” tax people that you will not use the extended and enhanced transportation services supported by those of us who did pay the additional tax?
We would have enough money for transportation if that was their spending priority. Instead they take most of our tax money and spend it on other things; mostly social services. The county knows we would not raise our taxes for their other projects so they siphon the tax money from transportation to their other projects and tell us they need money for transportation to fix the congestion problem, knowing we would rather pay more taxes for tix the traffic congestion than pay for their other projects.
The government officials will never have enough money to please them. They are always looking at more ways to raise money (taxes, fees, etc.) instead of prioritizing the projects that we really need and finding a way to make them work.
These conversations are pretty ridiculous. I don’t know how we got from talking about a sales tax increase to talking about people who pay no income tax.
And “Go Ahead”, to answer your question, I do frequently over pay my state and federal taxes. I often don’t take deductions to which I’m entitled.
Sucker bet for Pleasanton
Based on US Census estimated population for 2013 (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0653000.html) Pleasanton makes up 4.7% of the county’s population. Oakland makes up 25.7% of the county’s population. From the same web source Pleasanton generates 9.3% of the county’s sales tax. Oakland generates 15.6% of the sales tax. So one would think that we would receive somewhere close to 9% of the Measure B funds. Nope.
Of the Measure B funds for FY13/14 (http://www.alamedactc.org/files/managed/Document/13845/FY13-14_Sales_Tax_Projection_Revised_5-2014.pdf) Pleasanton receives 1.6% of the disbursements. Oakland gets 17.9% of the disbursements.
That’s not good, but to make matters even worse AC Transit gets 38.0% of all Measure B disbursements. How much sales tax does AC Transit generate? Zero. Combine AC Transit and Oakland’s shares they receive 55.9% of all the disbursements.
So Pleasanton gets a lousy return on its investment.
Finally, I’m perfectly happy paying taxes for transportation improvements, but Measure B only disburses 38.9% for ALL street and road improvements. All of Measure B should be used for capital improvements to roads, highways and public transit with the unused portion expended on streets and roads. Until that happens and the distribution is fair to Pleasanton, I will be voting no.
Thanks Dave for those distribution stats…makes it pretty clear. However, are senior shuttles included in the ‘pleasanton’ number? I don’t know what is included and which are city vs country programs.
@ Damon: “OK, I’m going to try one more time to get the point across to you before I give up. I’m not opposed to the principle of “pro-transportation tax” people (like myself, for example) paying additional transportation taxes while “anti-transportation tax” people like yourself opt-out of paying taxes. But then there’s the problem of implementation. How can you and other “anti-transportation tax” people guarantee me and other “pro-transportation” tax people that you will not use the extended and enhanced transportation services supported by those of us who did pay the additional tax?”
This has to be the dumbest comment I’ve ever read. D.U.M.B. Get a brain Damon.
No more taxes! Why are we asked to support Ruby Hill and Livermore? How about making it quicker and safer to get on 680 in the mornings? Since the toll lane was built, the roads leading to onramps are ridiculous.
Pleasanton gets $1,014,697.25 for FY13/14. The breakdown is $717,856.98 for streets and roads, $203,021.23 for bikes and pedestrians, and $93,819.04 for paratransit. I don’t know if senior transport is included in any of this. The transit spreadsheet doesn’t give that detail. In addition, Pleasanton gets a benefit from the funding to LAVTA. They get $150,601.28 for paratransit and $803,095.31 for an unspecified purpose (my guess is operating costs). Livermore and Dublin don’t seem to fare any better by the way. The Tri Valley generates 24.3% of the sales tax for Alameda County which 0.5% comes to $23.7 million. If the Tri Valley could opt out of the county tax and charge ourselves 0.25% sales tax for transportation, we would net $11.8 million which certainly seems like it could cover our streets and roads and allow us to float bonds to build some of the need freeway improvements. It seems unlikely that BART will get to Livermore (sorry Livermore) unless San Joaquin County decides to join the district, so voting for the new Measure B for a $400 million BART study seems like a waste of our tax dollars.
I live in Livermore, but taxes concern us all. The real issue I have with taxes, is that once a tax is voted in, the level of spending also goes up. It’s equivalent to people getting raises. Once the level of income goes up, so does the level of spending. I have yet to see politicians, school districts and the like live within their means, instead of spending the additional money. Everyone was all for the parcel tax in Livermore. I voted no, because I know the school district will not spend it wisely. Because there was already a parcel tax, their level of spending went up. With the parcel tax about to go away, the school district panicked. It’s frustrating. So the same goes with our politicians. Taxes here and there, like the stupid garbage tax that I don’t remember voting on, just keeps the coffers full while middle America slaves away. We need to say no to spending and have everyone living within budget at the county and state level.
Need more money to pay for the “Sweetheart Contract” our elected leaders signed with the BART Unions. Because they reducing potential construction funds from other sources to pay for the increased operations cost cause by the new labor contract.
@Brianna: “The real issue I have with taxes, is that once a tax is voted in, the level of spending also goes up.”
I don’t think that your objection makes a lot of sense. If people choose vote in a tax then of course the level of spending goes up. For administrators to do otherwise would be acting counter to the expressed wishes of the voters.
It sounds like your real beef is not with “politicians” or “school districts,” but with your fellow citizens who voted for the taxes. Sorry, that’s democracy for you.
No.
Let’s keep the eight billion in our own pockets and slow down the runaway growth.
I’d gladly pay you Wednesday, for a hamburger today!!
Tax, tax, tax, tax,tax, tax, tax,tax, tax, tax,tax, tax, tax,tax, tax, tax,tax, tax, tax,tax, tax, tax,tax, tax, tax,tax, tax, tax,tax, tax, tax….
We already have the highest taxes in the country and Calfornia is still going into the crapper.
We continually are asked to raise taxes for transportation because the State keeps stealing the transportation funds to pay for welfare, Medicaid, services to illegals,out-of-control compensation to State union employees, and legislators’ theft.
The only way to control government is to starve it. VOTE NO! And, quit voting left wing loons into the Legislature.
“There is nothing so permanent as a temporary Government program.”
-Ronald Reagan
“There is no such thing as a good tax.” Who said that?
Posted by 30 years is nearly “permanent”, a resident of Livermore
on Jul 9, 2014 at 10:03 am
Traditional mortgages are for 30 years,
and the “mort” is the same as in mortality, it means Death.
Many voters could be paying even more taxes the rest of their lives.
Hopefully voters will chose again NOT to burden their children and grandchildren with a regressive tax nearly forever.
Integrity?
And much of the money might go for us to pay AGAIN for BARTD to finally finish installing the system we have already been paying taxes for, since it was promised over 40 years ago.
BARTD told us, and the Federal and State agencies who also helped fund it, that they needed the money to build the “whole” system to include Livermore, then they never built it, but kept the money.
They also promised a seat for every rider and free parking. They skimped on parking spaces at the Pleasanton station, claiming it was NOT the end of the line. Then they sold much of the parking lot to built apartments, who also lack enough parking.
Ever try to park there? Impossible.
We ALREADY pay BARTD high mandatory sales and property taxes, whether we have a station we can use or not.
Now some of the proposed additional tax on us would go to pay for a new station in Fremont, who never paid a nickel for the original system.
Why should every one who purchases anything here pay even more for something they may not even use?
Our sales taxes are already out of sight. Vote NO again on more taxes.
That way voters can see what actually happens, and decide whether to continue.
One form of “accountability.”
NO MORE TAXES….not one dime!
wh0cd522786 [url=http://viagra24.us.org/]how to order vigra on internet[/url] [url=http://synthroid24.us.org/]buy generic synthroid[/url] [url=http://cialisprice24.us.org/]CIALIS PRICE[/url]
“Oh…yes please…I’d like to pay MORE taxes!”
Said nobody with a thinking brain.
Let’s see. To fund that wish list we must be talking about a 10% increase in the sales tax. Remember these are self-serving politicians speaking, not people passionately trying to increase YOUR quality of life here. With these people administering the checkbook, you can count on an 80% loss of revenue applied to the tasks. And as stated before, the need for higher taxes never ends, and the talk of a 30 year sunset provision as a “dealmaker” is laughable. Can’t we just remain a “sleepy” bedroom community ? (verified by that sleepy old Sunol grade).
Damon (or WYNIT) says:
“…Or do you just want to free-load off of people who do pay the taxes?”
So you say that those who don’t pay taxes are free-loaders?
That’s exactly what we conservatives have been saying about welfare/SSI/immigration…etc fraud for years now.
Good to know you agree.
WYNIT to walk back his response in 3-2-1…
The irony burns…!
WYNIT,
We don’t agree on this particular tax.
I’m just shocked at your take-no-prisoners approach to those who legally pay no taxes. It’s not everyday someone will say that the low-income individual who pays no effective income tax does not deserve the full breadth of services that the rest us provide through our tax dollars.
I didn’t figure you being that nasty to others.
Go figure.
WYNIT,
Notice that you go straight to accusations instead of specifically answering ANY question I posed?
Typical. So VERY typical.
I’m not being hypocritical genius. If you had read a little more carefully I did insert the word FRAUD in my first example. I do understand the concept of working poor.
Thanks for the informative posts Dave!