Speaker 2: I am adopting a resolution supporting regional measure three. The Bay Area Traffic Relief Plan and a resolution supporting Proposition 69 and opposing Senate Bill one repeal to protect local transportation improvements.
Speaker 0: And I pulled this item and as my understanding, Gayle is going to be ready to present. And I wanted to make sure that everyone is aware of our three and the costs, but then especially the proposed benefits to Alameda. I think it's important for us to share that. So everyone is aware. Go ahead. Ms.. Payne.
Speaker 1: Do me to just respond to your question.
Speaker 0: About if you could give a little background.
Speaker 1: About the regional measure through your OC support. Regional staff is recommending to support regional Measure three, and it's going to be on the ballot June 5th. It does require a simple majority to pass and. We what it does is it does increase the bridge tolls. And for the seven state owned bridges, that excludes the Golden Gate Bridge. And we in return will get more transportation moneys for the bridge corridors and their approaches.
Speaker 0: And for Alameda, the bridge.
Speaker 1: That's closest to us and has the most use is the Bay Bridge. And what's interesting is Alameda owns about over 20% of Alameda commuters commute to San Francisco. And however, that's about 7000 people commuting Alameda commuting to San Francisco. The majority of them do not drive alone. So will not pay. Do not pay the bridge. Tolls will not pay the additional bridge tolls. There's about 22% drive alone. So we'll pay those additional bridge tolls. The other 78% take part. Take ferry, take the transbay busses, carpool so they won't pay for those additional tolls. So it's actually more aluminums will benefit from the additional transit that will come from these additional revenues. For example, we to the our ferry operator will be able to double their ferry service. Transbay busses will get an additional revenues and the transbay terminal, the new one in san francisco will pay for those operating expenses. So it's just another stable source that will allow for these really big projects that Alameda just can't afford to do. Ourselves there'll be a study to look at bart alameda going from bart, going from the east bay to alameda to san francisco, an additional transbay tube. So these are the types of projects we as a community can't afford. However, it is very important for us to be connected to San Francisco, which is has world class jobs, culture, medical care. So it keeps us connected. We are growing as a region. We have aging infrastructure. We have a backlog of projects. That corridor, that Bay Bridge quarter, there's only been one Bay Bridge for the past decades. And yet the region keeps continue to grow. So that's that's why it's so important for Alameda. Another thing is the majority of the moneys in an arm three come or go to transit, about 75% will improve transit. That means there will be reduced greenhouse gas emissions and we are vulnerable to sea level rise. So that will also be an additional benefit that will see. And I. I think that's it. And I'm available for questions.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Counsel, any questions? We do have a speaker on this item. Harold got Steve.
Speaker 1: I Carol.
Speaker 9: Gladstone. Alameda Resident I just want to speak in opposition to regional measures. It's a regional measure. It would affect mostly people traveling across the bay, but it would benefit all the counties around it. I just want to call your attention.
Speaker 1: To an.
Speaker 9: Informed editorial written by Mark Saulnier. He's now, I believe, a congressman he used to be. The U.S. currently serves on the U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and previously served as.
Speaker 1: The chair of the California.
Speaker 9: Senate and Assembly Transportation Committee. And he recommends opposition. It was an editorial in the East Bay Times dated the 13th of April. As I just want to read a few of the things that he had in this article, he feels that we have challenges of traffic, affordable housing we must address. But regional Measure three is not the answer. The measure would permanently increase the price to travel the Bay Area state owned toll bridges from $5 to $8 by 2025 and from $6 to $9 on the Bay Bridge during commute hours.
Speaker 1: It demands that bridge commuters take.
Speaker 9: Hundreds of dollars out of their paychecks to fund a grab bag of transportation projects cobbled together by state lawmakers. And by 2025. Typical commuters would pay about $700 more each year. That's not total. That's more than they already pay. And then on top of that would be that $12 a gallon gas tax, but they would see little to no improvement in their commutes.
Speaker 1: He feels that.
Speaker 9: There are so many things promised by this bill, but absolutely none of them are completely guaranteed. So. Because it's spread over so many projects. Not a single one of them is promised that any defined point in the future. So whether we would ever see anything, any benefit for what we're paying into is kind of doubtful, especially since the last time a lot of money was handed to the MTC. They bought a building and they renovated it with using a lot of money that was supposed to go for transportation funds. This bill will set up a. Unelected board, $1,000,000 of it goes to set up an oversight board, which would not be controlled by the voters but would control the outcome of the funds that go toward this measure. And it also has a poison pill in it that enables unlimited increase in the amount of tolls in the future without voter oversight. So that's just the other view. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'd like to ask staff if is in regards to unlimited increases, is this anyone know what? The unlimited increases. There are other issues raised in that, but starting with the unlimited increases, I'm not aware of or in regards to guaranteed projects. Is there do we know that in fact, we're going to get these benefits?
Speaker 1: So there is the oversight board and there.
Speaker 0: And it's not elected.
Speaker 1: It's who chooses. I'm not sure if it's elected as. In regards to. I also read that article and it talks about the lack of performance measures and just the lack of oversight in general. And, and just the picking the projects from it seem to say not from a planning process and as part of been part of the process. And so it felt like it would there was more of a process that these projects were taken from the core capacity transit study, that there was a region wide analysis on what the needs are, especially for the Bay Area Bay Bridge corridor. And when you look at what some of the long or the short term and mid-term. Those are easier to quantify the exact benefits in that study. It is quantified. It is true that some of the long term benefits are more difficult to quantify, like Bart Alameda when you start talking about the second Trans Bay two because that's not fully analyzed at this point. So there is $50 million in there to analyze that second trans bay tube. However, because it's not defined, well defined yet, it's hard to know exactly what those benefits are. So I think that's some of the. The wide variation there.
Speaker 0: Okay. So I wanted to follow up so we know that it's going to go up a dollar a year until. You know, it's like three. Every year it goes up another dollar until it hits some point. It's then this language provides that it freezes their or does that then can go up indefinitely forever and it doesn't ever come back to the voters. And I'm going to just have to say this is just like the hospital tax that once we sign it, we're just pretty much stuck with it without ever having it come back to voters for review. Is this does anyone know? Like can can it keep going up?
Speaker 1: It's my understanding it's only $3.
Speaker 0: And then it freezes. There is no ability that's worth to go. Does do we know for sure is that in is there.
Speaker 7: The reason that we're.
Speaker 0: Having. I don't actually need to know more than I'd like this. Someone know for sure because that sounded like that was one of the issues raised. And that's the first that's important. I haven't seen the fine print of this. Vice Mayor, do you know.
Speaker 7: The reason that it's a regional measure three is that we've had previous regional measures that have increased the tolls a couple of different times. So my understanding, having gone to some of the meetings around this, is that essentially it raises it there's three proposed increases to the various tolls. The schedules are laid out there. If we wanted to increase the tolls again, we would have to do another measure because the tolls or the tolls. And so we always vote on on those increases in mayor.
Speaker 1: That's my understanding.
Speaker 0: I yes.
Speaker 6: Member Ashcraft, thank you. And I would also add that the as Ms.. Paine pointed out in the first part of her report, if you are in a carpool, then you go through the carpool lane. And one of the things we're trying to do in many different ways is to discourage single occupancy travel. And the higher pricing on the Bay Bridge during commute hours is akin to congestion pricing that cities like London and New York are doing. And so it is both a way of funding transit options to get people out of their cars, but also cleaning up our environment. And actually, we have made progress in the last years in reducing greenhouse gases, and this is a way to continue to do it. Alameda would specifically benefit in many ways, including more funding for our ferry system in water. Transit is a and and so are we ready for motion.
Speaker 0: So I wanted to make sure staff do know for certain that it just ends up for those three times the $1, $1, $1 or can well is there any ability to increase it beyond that without a vote of the people?
Speaker 1: That's my understanding. I have not ever heard that it would be beyond the $3. Right.
Speaker 3: Just quickly. It would require another vote of the people and also require another piece of enabling legislation to allow the people to vote on it and, you know, MTC to actually decide to put it on the ballot. So who knows what's going to happen by then, but I'm ready to move approval of this item.
Speaker 6: And just for clarification, that's the whole motion, the whole matter, which is also supporting Prop 69 in opposing.
Speaker 1: A Senate bill, one.
Speaker 3: Of the item.
Speaker 1: Okay.
Speaker 0: All those in favor.
Speaker 1: I.
Speaker 0: Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. And I believe that completes our concert calendar. Yes. What? We're going to take a short break at this time. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Oh, that was.
Speaker 0: Then resume and I believe we're on six eight now.
Speaker 2: Adoption a resolution authorizing the use of 1.67 million of the Phase three allocation. Alameda County Measure A1 housing bond funds to support the Roseville Redevelopment Project is required for application to Alameda County Rental Housing Development Fund 700 block of Eagle seven.
Adoption of Resolution Supporting Regional Measure 3 (RM 3), the Bay Area Traffic Relief Plan; and

Adoption of Resolution Supporting Proposition 69 and Opposing Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) Repeal, to Protect Local Transportation Improvements in SB 1. (Transportation 4227287)