This post also has some more specific points on regional priorities, where there is potential legislation but still a need to first publicize and persuade the broader public.
Each year, the City of Alameda sets a legislative agenda — a list of what changes in laws the city hope can be supported or opposed at the state and federal levels, toward the betterment of the people and organizations here in Alameda.
The draft of the legislative agenda that staff are presenting to City Council this Tuesday is generally positive but diffuse. Rather than setting forth concrete priorities that the City of Alameda will lead, it's more of a laundry list of potential legislative actions that could materialize and Alameda may consider joining.
The times we're all in call for a more vigorous and a more pointed approach.
If I may offer some suggestions to City Council on how to firm up this legislative agenda — first, at the regional/state level (in the areas of transportation and housing, where I do have some background) and next at the federal level (where I have no expertise but am willing to write frankly).
Improving traffic safety across the state
The draft has these to offer as the city's first priorities for infrastructure and transportation:
The city can be more explicit.
Making Alameda safer for pedestrians and bicyclists and lowing transportation-sector greenhouse-gas emissions requires more funding for these improvements. Much of this funding has come through the state's Active Transportation Program, which Gov. Newsom and Caltrans have drastically cut while they've held steady all other auto-oriented transportation programs.
The City of Alameda should have as an explicit state-level legislative priority to join lobbying efforts to restore the Active Transportation Program's full budget in the next state budget cycle.
Providing transit at the regional level
Alameda depends upon AC Transit, SF Bay Ferry, and BART. Even if you don't directly ride one of these services, someone you depend upon likely does. And even if don't know someone who rides these services, you benefit from other people being transported efficiently (in terms of roadway space) and cleanly (in terms of carbon emissions).
In ~2 years time, much of this transit service may disappear. A slow-but-steady increase in transit ridership may be instantly cut short when pandemic-era emergency funds from the Biden/Harris administration expire. Without another means of support to bridge this intermediate period, multiple transit agencies may cut service so deeply that they enter "death spirals" in which cutting their scheduled service further reduces their ridership.
Attempts to get a funding measure onto the 2024 ballot failed when multiple counties across the Bay Area fought at cross purposes. Attempts to craft a funding measure for the 2026 ballot are now underway.
Preliminary polling was just released last week, and Alameda County is where a potential funding measure is polling highest.
This is simultaneously an almost existential challenge and an opportunity to improve Bay Area transit.
The City of Alameda should have an explicit legislative priority to support this process of creating and supporting the regional transit funding measure. Not just waiting to see what ballot measure emerges, but also to help drive public attention toward the need to support public transit into, out of, and across our part of the Bay Area:
- Invite county leaders and state legislators to the Mastick Senior Center to meet people who rely on the city's free AC Transit passes for seniors.
- Provide regular updates to City Council and the Transportation Commission on the "count down" to service cuts in BART and AC Transit. (SFMTA has just commenced its own service cuts.)
- Have the same level of urgency about getting out in advance to support a regional funding measure as the city has had with getting out in advance of bus route and schedule changes as part of AC Transit's Realign process.
Building subsidized affordable housing at a regional level
Just as the effort to place a transit funding measure on the 2024 ballot disintegrated, the regional attempt to craft a bond measure to support subsidized affordable housing across the 9-county Bay Area went up in smoke in August 2024 — and never made it to the November ballot.
City of Alameda's stated excuse for forgetting to study its own bond measure for affordable housing (as was promised in Housing Element) was that this would happen at a regional level. Unfortunately it didn't.
Unlike transit service, for which relevant regional decision-makers agree that a regional funding measure is the next logical step, the next steps for subsidized affordable housing are less clear (at least to my knowledge). Still, the City of Alameda should have an explicit legislative priority to be a part of advocating for more funds for subsidized affordable housing — whether it happens locally, regionally, state-wide, or a hybrid combo.
Protecting Alamedans a̶t̶ [from] the federal level
This draft of the city's legislative agenda opens with "general principles" that are positive, carefully refined, and perhaps better suited for hypothetical threats on the horizon on the morning of November 5, 2024 — rather than for this month, when we're all already in the maelstrom:
The City of Alameda (City) reinforces the City’s commitment to the values of dignity, inclusivity, and respect for all individuals, regardless of ethnic or national origin, gender, race, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, or immigration status.
The City will strongly consider supporting local government action and legislation that safeguards against hate-based violence and discrimination against marginalized communities, promotes social equity, and enhances the quality of life and health of Alameda residents and businesses.
The City will seek funding opportunities and partnerships with the County, state, and federal government for projects that reflect the City’s strategic principles and will work to ensure all funding that has been granted to the City is received.
The City will strongly consider opposing any legislation or regulations that negatively affects the City’s budget, residents, and businesses or imposes unfunded mandates on the City
It's too late to "strongly consider supporting [...] legislation" in the future tense — it's time to take "action" in the present tense.
There is no relevant legislation to wait on and weigh in on, because the Republican-led Congress has decided that there is – at least for the time being — no legislative branch.
So in place of a federal legislative lobbying agenda, this moment calls for a more basic agenda: simply spreading the word about how Alameda and Alamedans are affected by executive actions.
This blog also wrote briefly about the Trump/Musk administration's attempt to massively cut funding of research universities and hospitals.
While I'm obviously quite opposed to this administration, talking publicly about what's happening isn't necessarily a partisan exercise. It's about reporting facts and serving constituents.
At the very end of last week, upwards of 220,000 federal employees were fired by this administration. They appear to have laid off anyone and everyone who had a probationary status. (Federal staff typically, but not always, under 12 months of employment. Note that this has nothing to do with seniority level; many of those laid off are highly experienced mid- or late-career professionals.)
I started learning of this when my LinkedIn news feed filled on Friday with federal transportation staffers in San Francisco trying valiantly to find new positions in the private sector for their laid-off colleagues. This isn't just in DC — it's in federal offices across the country. A trickle has now turned into a massive flow of postings to LinkedIn.
Just as the City of Alameda takes pictures of local business owners holding a sign that reads "I'm Local" now's the time to think of what the city can do to call attention to more locals with stories to tell. For example:
- photos of Alameda residents who work at UC Berkeley and UCSF and Stanford holding signs reading I'M LOCAL AND TRUMP CANCELLED MY RESEARCH GRANT
- photos of Alameda residents laid off from federal agencies holding signs reading I'M LOCAL AND ELON MUSK FIRED ME FROM PUBLIC SERVICE
Back when local newspapers existed, these are the sorts of stories they'd be telling. Giving local angles and personal color on national topics. Telling everyday stories of how abstract and amorphous topics affect real people. But we barely have local news organizations any more.
So in addition to its explicit legislative agenda, the City of Alameda's leaders should think toward the bigger picture and the reality of the way messy public decisions (or a lack of decisions) are actually made across the Bay Area, in Sacramento, and in DC. It's time to think not just in terms of following legislation, but also in terms of a public-awareness agenda on behalf of public services, the people who provide them, and all of who depend upon them here.