Quote:
Originally Posted by Nerv
I’m not sure how transit in SD is going to happen going forward but after the pushback that happened on expanding San Diego’s interstate 5 with them going for the smallest change (I’m getting 1 carpool lane on each side where I live) I don’t see hwy 78 getting any great expansion without the locals going after the person pushing for it. I can’t speak for the folks in the south county but expanding freeways or major highways is not popular in the north county by residents unless it’s so far out it has zero negative impact to residents. No one likes the traffic but they seem more willing to put up with it than endless expansion into people’s neighborhoods.
I think the elected officials aren’t in step with residents and learn their lessons the hard way when pushing in the wrong direction.
The 78 surely needs some expansion work but I’d tread lightly on what you suggest if I was making that call.
You can’t expand freeways and highways forever and the residents have to remind the current local elected idiot that as they pass through their terms here...  |
The 5 is getting two carpool lanes, which will later be switched to 'managed lanes' (toll lanes). Or at least, it was under the old plan, although Ikhrata has shown a good deal of support for managed lanes as a revenue generator. The environmental review for the whole project is already done, the only reason SANDAG isn't building both lanes at once is their lack of funding.
And that's perhaps the real issue here, is that SANDAG has a huge amount of territory to cover and very little money to do it with. We're the same size as LA county with 1/3rd the people and money. And currently we're only taxed at 1/3rd the rate LA county is for transit, so right now SANDAG is trying to cover the same geographic area as LA with 1/6th the funding.
That's not even enough to finish a freeway network, much less a more expensive transit network. Just to get us on LA's per capita transit tax rate we'll need to triple our sales tax from 0.5% to 1.5%. But even then SANDAG is only going to get 1/3rd the income their counterparts in LA do, when to get the same results they'll need to spend fairly similar amounts (the per mile costs of rail don't vary much with ridership). Seattle, in a similar position as SD, makes up the difference with a combination of taxes on cars and property which come out to around six times the overall rate San Diegans currently pay for transportation infrastructure, lining up with this figure.
Keep that figure in mind, 6x times the current level of per person taxation. There's a lot of legitimate concern that the sticker shock of raising transportation taxes six times over their current level will put off SD voters. In 2017 LA was barely able to pass California's requirement of a 2/3rds majority for an increase of 2x to 3x. In 2016 Seattle's increase from 3x to 6x only passed by 53%, under California state law that ballot proposition would have failed (not to mention one of the key components in keeping the tax increase even somewhat progressive, a 1% annual property tax, would violate California's Prop 13). Even in the best of circumstances this would be extremely difficult measure to get passed.
Then on top of that you're throwing on the "broken promises" issue and Ikhrata angering leaders who oppose him by dissing them in the media. Now you suddenly have to deal with a well organized, well funded, and influential opposition campaign with a very voter friendly soundbite. The mayors of SD and Chula Vista, who came out as some of the strongest support for the new plan at the SANDAG meeting two weeks ago, are now refusing interviews on the subject and limiting themselves to vague statements about their overall support of transit. That's the sort of thing a politicians do to avoid tying themselves to a losing position, which isn't exactly a strong show of support from the most transit friendly areas in the region.
I do believe in a transit based future, in San Diego even, but I'm also realistic. It would take a political genius to give this plan even a shred of a chance, and Ikhrata seems more of an engineer than a politician. A more transitionary plan might be better suited to the situation.