Read on Twitter
Caltrain, the commuter rail line between San Francisco and San Jose, is running out of money and a plan for a new sales tax to support it may have fallen apart. So people are asking "should Caltrain be saved." I'm tempted to say “No," because that's the wrong question!
More details here -- we are where we are because Caltrain has never had a stable funding source, because COVID has killed fare revenues, and because the counties it runs through don’t get along. https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Caltrain-says-future-hangs-in-balance-as-SF-supes-15408435.php#photo-19658069
People are pointing out (rightfully) that all Bay Area transit systems are facing their own funding crises, 60% of Caltrain riders have cars available to make their commute, 60% have household incomes over $100,000, and many of the riders work in tech and can work from home.
If we ask, “should we save Caltrain," we have to ask if it's equitable to save Caltrain while local bus service that service workers and low income families depend on gets cut -- including bus service that serves the places that Caltrain does. https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Muni-will-lose-the-majority-of-its-bus-lines-15383544.php
But here’s a different question: if we have a double track, soon to be electrified, rail corridor that runs through this kind of population density (more than most of BART!), what should we do with it?
Compare this to these light rail and heavy rail lines across the US, all of which operate every 20 minutes or better all day. There are a lot more people around Caltrain! Seems to me it’s a waste to use those tracks to run a “premium" service for rich white collar commuters.
Those tracks should have frequent all day two-way service, integrated into a bus network with connections at station, coordinated schedules, and free transfers. These tracks should be used so all those bus riders (67% no car, 57% under $50,000) have better trips.
To Caltrain's credit, it’s already been planning for that frequency -- but not the full integration. Maybe the Bay Area should say "no" to “should we save Caltrain?” and say “We need a new transit system on the Peninsula that serves everyone and just happens to use those tracks.”
To be clear, that answer requires funding, and it would make no sense to shut down the system to transform it. But that new funding (and maybe new governance structure) could be a means to a radically different and better system.
Or, to put it another way, the Caltrain that should be saved is the Caltrain that doesn’t exist yet, the Caltrain that improves the lives of a whole bunch of people who don’t ride Caltrain today.
