Five public information meetings will be held from November 2, 2011 through Nov. 10, 2011 to provide information on the Dumbarton Rail Corridor project. The goal of the project is to provide regional rail service from the East Bay to the Peninsula via the rail corridor located south of the Dumbarton Bridge. Currently this project is going through an environmental review required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Additional information about the project is available here.

• Wednesday, Nov. 2, 2011, 6 pm – 8 pm
  Silliman Aquatic Center
  6800 Mowry Avenue
  Newark
• Thursday, Nov. 3, 2011, 6 pm – 8 pm
  Fremont Community Center
  40000 Paseo Padre Parkway
  Fremont
• Monday, Nov. 7, 2011, 6 pm – 8 pm
  Kennedy Center
  1333 Decoto Road
  Union City
• Wednesday, Nov. 9, 2011, 6 pm – 8 pm
  Redwood City Main Library
  1044 Middlefield Road
  Redwood City
• Thursday, Nov. 10, 2011, 6 pm – 8 pm
  Menlo Park Senior Center (Belle Haven)
  110 Terminal Avenue
  Menlo Park

At a Caltrain steering committee meeting on October 4, Jessica Zenk of the Silicon Valley leadership group presented the results of SVLG polling to find the right approach to fund Caltrain. Last summer’s polling suggested a 3-county sales tax measure (1/8 cent) with a short sunset (shorter polled better).  Based on the poll, victory seems possible but challenging – the highest-polling options barely cleared the 2/3 level needed to pass.

However, due to the legislative calendar, a San Mateo County ballot measure may be more practical.. The poll did not test this option, but it did show strong support for Caltrain among San Mateo County voters.

The poll found that Caltrain has near universal brand recognition and almost everyone has ridden it at some point (high 80s) but only a small percentage use it regularly (about 8%)

A further round of polling will be needed in the February/March time frame. In particular, additional polling will need to test the option of a San Mateo County focused measure. It might also be useful to poll voters about willingness to pay for capital improvements, which would require higher rates but deliver more benefits.

In the discussion about the option, several current and former officials mentioned that if the best choice is a San Mateo County focused measure, then it would be useful to also strengthen the Joint Powers Agreement. A San Mateo County measure would give SamTrans the ability to keep funding Caltrain. But given the current agreement, any partner can unilaterally choose to reduce funding, and if one partner reduces its contribution, all reduce their contributions. This results in spiky, unstable funding that is not a good fit for a system that individuals, employers, cities, and developers depend on as a stable piece of the region’s infrastructure.

The effective negotiations among the Caltrain partners resulting in funding for 2013 is a good sign that the counties can continue to work together to come up with a workable option to put on the ballot for voter support. Friends of Caltrain strongly encourages that the solution should make Caltrain more stable as well.

At the October board meeting, the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board approved an operating budget that will keep Caltrain running without service cuts for one more year.  Working together the three partner counties came up with an agreement that relies on a one-time source – San Francisco and Santa Clara VTA are repaying SamTrans for more of the old loans for the original purchase of the Caltrain right of way.

In subsequent years, the partners plan to update the formula that governs contribution from each county, based on ridership.  Most notably, San Francisco’s ridership has increased dramatically from 17% when Caltrain was founded in 1991 to about 30% today. In addition, VTA will consider restoring payment for the operating costs of service to Gilroy.

Meanwhile, overall ridership continues at record high levels.  In order to continue to support the service that the Peninsula depends on,  the region will need to make choices about the best way to get stable funding for Caltrain.

On October 21, San Franciscans can come learn about Caltrain modernization and High Speed Rail blended solution

SFMTA board chair Tom Nolan and board director Cheryl Brinkman will host a session giving San Francisco supporters of Caltrain the chance to learn about emerging developments about Caltrain modernization and High Speed Rail on October 21 at 8:30 am at SPUR HQ.

This past summer, a Caltrain study showed that it would be basically feasible to build a “blended system” that can run 2-4 high speed trains per direction per hour between San Francisco and Los Angeles, on upgraded Caltrain tracks.  This “blended solution” is estimated to cost about $1.5 billion, well below the $5 billion estimated cost to build the original 4-track, completely elevated system envisioned by the high speed rail authority.

How would the blended system work? How would this affect San Francisco Commuters? What are the implications for the extension of train service to the TransBay terminal?   How does this relate to the decisions  shaping the fate of High Speed Rail?  Marian Lee, acting director of Caltrains modernization program, will present and answer your questions.

October 21, 8:30 am, SPUR HQ, 654 Mission Street, San Francisco (No charge for the event)

Help SPUR pick the right room: RSVP here: http://caltrainmodern.eventbrite.com/

At a board retreat yesterday, SamTrans board retreat, SamTrans board members discussed the potential of a San Mateo County focused sales tax measure to avoid deeper cuts to its struggling bus services as well as continue to support Caltrain. The San Mateo County focused approach is being considered after a Caltrain-focused 3-county sales tax did not move forward in the last legislative session, since it took a back seat to a regional gas congestion fee which ultimately was converted to a 2-year bill. At this point, a 3-county measure would require exceptional effort to pass the legislature – a 2/3 vote or a budget rider.

One strength of a San Mateo County-focused approach is that San Mateo County typically has high support for public transit. However, a weakness is that supporting SamTrans by itself does not make Caltrain funding stable. Under the current Joint Powers Agreement, any partner can withold payment in any year, as we have seen over the years whenever any one county encounters fiscal problems. Last year’s capitol funding gap, triggered by in this case by San Francisco’s lower contribution, has resulted in less money for train car maintenance, and more rider delays due to breakdowns, according to Caltrain operations presentations.

If a San Mateo County measure is the chosen approach, we would recommend accompanying a ballot measure with other mechanisms to strengthen the Joint Powers Agreement. It is very encouraging to see the partners in Caltrain work together to enable ongoing service. It would be beneficial if this collaboration could generate creative ideas for a Joint Powers agreement that could support Caltrain service in a reliable way. During the Caltrain crisis last winter, we learned how strongly cities, employers, developers, and riders depend on a stable transit system to make longterm investments.