BART Board Votes to Support Raising Bridge Tolls

The BART Board voted Friday, June 30th, to support Senate Bill (SB) 532 the Safe, Clean, and Reliable Public Transportation Emergency Act.

Authored by Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), SB 532 would require the Bay Area Toll Authority to raise tolls on the seven state-owned bridges in the Bay Area by $1.50 from January 1, 2024, until December 31, 2028. Revenues from this toll increase would be distributed by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) to BART and other fixed-route transit operators, including bus, rail or ferry, to address operating shortfalls and help fund initiatives to increase transit ridership.

“In authoring this bill, Senator Wiener continues to show extraordinary leadership in finding creative ways to assist essential public transit through the immense short-term financial difficulties we face in the wake of the pandemic,” said BART Board President Janice Li. “We are so grateful for the Senator’s support for transit, and we look forward to supporting SB 532 through the legislative process.”

President Li also acknowledged the hard work and assistance of SB 532 co-authors Senators Josh Becker (D-Menlo Park) and Dave Cortese (D-San Jose) and Assemblymembers Mia Bonta (D-Alameda), Matt Haney (D-San Francisco), Alex Lee (D-Milpitas), Phil Ting (D-San Francisco) and Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland).

SB 532 offers Bay Area transit agencies experiencing the worst shortfalls a lifeline until a Bay Area regional transportation funding measure can be placed on the ballot, most likely in 2026.

The state budget agreement reached earlier this week also offers short-term help for BART, although it’s not yet clear how much money BART will receive or when it will receive it.

Not included in Press Release — what the Board of Directors Said:

Director Janice Li said that 7 of 9 board members have already submitted individual support letters, but without BART action, staff of the general manager could not take action, negotiate or advocate for the bill—BART could not take part in the discussions for accountability, equity issues. She wanted BART on record during the transportation committee meeting.

Director Rebecca Saltzman: “I don’t know what we would do without Senator Weiner. Without him we wouldn’t have had the budget deal that helps us out.” She continued saying he realized that was a big help and but they needed more help and right away. She highlighted the fiscal cliff is coming by 2026 and they need to support any efforts to bring revenue to the District or it means “awful cuts”. She said to support the riders, they had to support the measure as a temporary 5-year measure. She urged a regional measure in the future to help become sustainable.

Director John McPartland: he explained he couldn’t express enough how much they need the “stop gap” and equated it to they know a Tsunami is coming and they know the data and time when it will hit and they will be underwater while saying this bill helps them survive. He called it the only avenue forward that allows them to have reasonable service to the public they serve and was in favor.

Director Allen said Friday: “So 21% increase in bridge tolls, but just weeks ago, I believe there were three directors here who refused to even support a 5% increase in BART fares so I think there is a little bit of inequity going on here.”

Director Debora Allen: said there was no doubt they have a fiscal crisis and many people have been trying for a long time to address it through only more funding and not so much of reducing the cost of the system. I’ve spoken about that in the past. In response to one of the commentors its an odd argument to say, “BART needs more money to fill the projected deficit for fiscal year 2025-28” which is after when the federal subsidies run out that have been filling our deficits and we need that money for that period of time in order to improve the safety and cleanliness of the system.

We have been running hundreds of millions of dollars in deficit since the pandemic and the budget and spending has continued to increase in each of those years except a small dip and then back up. Yet, over those three years we have not been able to with that additional subsidy we have not been able to improve the condition of the system for the rider, the safety, the cleanliness the reliability and in fact, many would argue it got worse. We need this money to fix the system when we have already had that money and we haven’t fixed it. I think that lends a little question to credibility in the agency itself.

“This is an unfair regressive tax on residents” that will further inflation. It will make it harder to live and work in the Bay Area for many small and large businesses and even other governmental agencies will have to absorb the tax increases and will do so by raising fees on their services. This is just contribute to the inflation cycle.

A $1.50 toll increase on the already $7 toll, is a 21% increase in bridge tolls, and that is before they go up again in Fiscal Year 2025 by a $1 and that $1.50 goes up each year. So 21% increase in bridge tolls, but just weeks ago, I believe there were three directors here who refused to even support a 5% increase in BART fares so I think there is a little bit of inequity going on here. We all know not everyone can take BART to where they are going, we cannot just say well you keep raising the cost of the car and everyone will take BART—BART doesn’t take you everywhere they need to go.

I keep hearing you all say that everyone must share in the pain of BARTS deficit situation and loss of ridership, yet you have continued to increase service levels and that plan continues, keep increasing cost of labor (makes up 77% of budget) and continue to press forward on housing development despite the financial crisis we face. But then from the other side of talking points, you refuse to raise BART fares by less than the current inflation rate. You have no problem though raising the bridge tolls by 21%. This is absurd policy making.

She continued – noting in 2009 labor came to the table to make concessions to help reduce cost of system to offset loss of ridership revenue.

“My frequent mentions of this renegotiate labor contract to save the cost of the system over the last three years has been met with a lot of insulting comments,” stated Allen.

She continued by saying BART supporters in the legislator know the voters have had enough of the agencies spending arrogance so rather than go the traditional route to seek voter approval for another toll hike, lawmakers are electing to bypass the public and just ram this new hike through legislative approval. “its dishonest and reckless because we have heard in these chambers that increasing taxes and fees in the Bay Area right now are not polling in a position where they would win. So what we are doing instead is going around that process and saying well I guess the voters don’t get to have a say in it so we get to raise bridge tolls 21% anyway.”

She continued.

“Its almost like we are kings and queens and are telling people what we are going to do with the peoples money and they don’t have much of a say anymore. You continue to increase spending at BART despite reaching only 40% of ridership 3-years later. Now, you feel the need to take from people without a vote who rely on our bridges to pay for the service that you have been unable to stabilize. And, you have been unable to manage for long-term fiscal stability,” said Allen who added the revenue will continue to go to a system that is 60% of the former riders no longer use and those riders cite safety, cleanliness and conditions on the trains as the reasons why.”

She highlighted her last four BART rides were met with issues each time—yesterday I was bit by a dog. Today I was met with people smoking. “We need to stop the government tax and spend and fiscal insanity in the bay area, residents are leaving and they are the ones who funded this very agency. This is not sustainable, this bridge toll increase nor for the economy of the bay area this is a Band-Aid and not a plan for the long term sustainable for the bay area transit and will be opposing this.”

Director Mark Foley thanks Senator Wiener and it was appreciated. He said the way BART works has changed and they can no longer support it through fares. The way people use BART has changed. “We must evolve our service to survive. This is a lifeline that lets us seek structural change in our fare model and supports staff recommendation.

Director Liz Ames had several questions for Senator Wieners office but no one was online for the call citing she had concerns for the long-term plan. She highlighted she had some concerns on the bill saying she hoped for an amendment to include pilot programs in the bill, but had concerns about building ridership, showing they have a plan in place and its tested and now they could take a package to the voters in 2026 – she wanted a ridership pilot program, but study on the consolidation of transit agencies. Ames said it would have been nice to have the senators aid to talk about the issues because she did not feel comfortable supporting the bill because she didn’t see how they could rush to increase the tolls when they don’t know what the long-term financial plan would be.

“If we are really committed on building ridership, I really think we need to do a substantial amount of pilots to show that we agree we are in a new era of environment, telecommunicate, we need to build ridership so can we do a robust program to show the voters we are testing the waters and build ridership through more products to improve ridership experience. Maybe they will take transit more.”

She said BART is simply trying the same model which isn’t enough.

Li then cut her off saying she was off topic from SB 532.

Ames responded, “the day I am afraid to ask questions is the day I shouldn’t run for office. I am really trying to get to the point. I am trying to get to the point to have a plan so we are sustainable.”

Li cut her off again saying the only topic is a position on SB 532.

Ames said again she had questions of how they are going to develop a plan—which is in the bill and how its going to come about and what it will look out.

“I have so many ideas and they are not being realized,” said Ames who noted there are too many transit organizations and consolidation has been suggested and its not been discussed. Can we support a consolidation study, and can this agency develop a ridership pass program.”

Li again cut her off saying they were presented with what is in SB 532 and are at best were amendments to SB 532 which has not come up.

Staff said there will be broader conversations on the bill in the future and other things in other bills.

Ames thanked staff but said she could not support the bill at this time because she didn’t see how they are going to be prepared for this financial crisis other than doing these stop-gap measures, emergency measures and hoped to see Wieners office to put in pilot programs to amend the bill to show the community that they are serious about consolidation and looking at ridership pass programs. She wanted a more public process and called this “rushed” and potentially people wouldn’t vote for this which is why its being pushed through.

Director Bevan Dufty: if you look at the broad political framework here, if there had been 10 more democrats to the house of representatives, I think things would be very different right now. In President Bidens initial part of his term, he was incredibly successful in promoting transportation and now the gridlock they face is the reality of the political division in the country.

“I reject phrasing of spending arrogance when I believe we have one of the best financial and performance teams of any transit agency in California and the work being done during COVID to shift operations staff to capital projects so we can gain headway and work and get things done sooner,” said Dufty who called it wrong to denigrate the staff and executive leadership who kept the lights on and trains moving during 3-dfficult years.

He said he supported it.

“I support it because of the generations that are coming behind us. For those of us who are parents our children are going to lead different lives. What is going on in Canada right now, that is going to become the norm and we have to look beyond the framework of making it convenient and easy for people to drive. That is the reality.  Young people in the Bay Area, they ride transit. They ride the buses, they get on the trains, they get to where they want to go. I am casting my vote for those next generation that are coming behind us who don’t deserve to have a transit system that doesn’t operate on nights and weekends. It’s absolutely outrageous to me not to support it.”

Dufty then said they are in this situation not because of their management, but rather past generations of leadership at the agency who failed to vote for fair increases because they wanted to be popular and not rock the boat.

Director Lateefah Simon: said this is about the Bay Area transit community coming together collectively how to save the systems in this moment of crisis—transit has to be prioritized by the state, not the region. It’s not just BART, its other agencies too. She was in support of the “unified package”.

Director Li: responded to the comment of passing SB 532 will make it harder to work and live in the Bay Area, but making service cuts and making layoffs is far more devastating to a low-income person’s ability to live and work.  She said the bill speaks for working class folks who are making mega-commutes and that remains her guidepost to keep the system running.

The Board voted 6-2 in support of SB 532 with Ames and Allen dissenting.

Editors Note – articles of interest

• June 27, 2023 –  Senator Glazer’s Statement on Proposal to Raise Bridge Toll Fees
• June 27, 2023 – Bill Would Raise Bridge Tolls to Fund Bay Area Transit Operation
• June 13, 2023 – BART Board at War Over Spending Cuts
• June 9, 2023 – BART Board of Directors Approves Two-Year Budget
• May 30, 2023 – BART Board Refuses to Look at Service and Budget Cuts