Why support a tax measure that has nothing for bikes?
SVBC recently endorsed City of San Mateo’s Measure CC that would increase the property transfer tax on properties worth $10 million or more in order to fund general services. “Improving sidewalks, bike lanes and roads to reduce traffic congestion and improve safety“ is one of the community priorities that will be funded as a result of this measure.
SVBC’s City of San Mateo Local Team believes that this endorsement will help them build stronger relationships with city council members and staff, outside of facilitating more bike infrastructure in the city.
At the same time, SVBC also decided to support the City of Palo Alto’s Business Tax Measure (Measure K) which will be on the ballot this November. Measure K is projected to raise approximately $9.6 million annually for general government services and programs. The City Council adopted advisory spending guidelines indicating the Council’s intent to spend the tax proceeds on train crossing and rail safety, affordable housing and unhoused services, and public safety services.
The measure allocates no funds for bike infrastructure/policies - then why support it?
First - Grade Separations
Palo Alto has six at-grade crossings over the Caltrain tracks. Grade separation would provide safer crossings for all - people walking, bicycling and driving. There is no current proposal which confirms that the proposed grade crossings would prioritize pedestrians and bicyclists. Endorsing this measure would help SVBC get a stronger voice and say in the planning process and influence the design to prioritize movement of people over vehicles.
Second - Affordable Housing
If our communities were planned in a way that our places of work, residence and other amenities were closer together - we would have had more people biking around, right? As housing costs continue to rise, people move farther and farther away to afford a place to live, and it becomes harder and harder for them to bike to work and to other critical destinations. Hence the need for more affordable housing. Simple isn’t it?
Essentially, housing and transportation are two sides of the same coin and we can't solve one without another. We need to be collaborating with other organizations that work on housing and land-use to be able to advance our goal of getting more butts on bikes.
Past affordable housing initiatives supported by SVBC:
Should SVBC invest its time and resources to weigh in on such measures?
Some of you are probably saying “SVBC is a bicycle coalition! We shouldn't divert our time and resources on efforts that don't relate to bicycling.” We get that. BUT - will focusing on bike issues alone get enough people onto bikes? Will focusing on safe streets alone bring jobs/work places/other destinations within easy biking distance? Also, bike lanes everywhere do not ensure a better community in and of themselves. As a bike coalition, if we ignore broader societal issues they will eventually slow our roll.
At the same time, whenever a project is proposed, agencies come back saying “we don't have enough funds.” Public agencies need money to make things happen. By weighing in on measures that help a city budget, we help our issues too! It means that next time we approach a city for dollars for bike/ped stuff, we have a stronger say. And needless to say, in this process we’re demonstrating that we’re good partners and building stronger relationships.
SVBC advocates for people centered communities. One of the key activities in our recently adopted strategic plan is "Work with community partners to advocate for effective public transit, affordable housing, and smarter parking policies so our communities have jobs, housing, and services closer together and within easy reach by bicycle." - That being said, wherever possible, SVBC will be strategically considering taking position on and selectively engaging on broader community issues that intersect at the crossroads.
