League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
	San Diego County, CA June 8, 2010 Election
	Proposition H Long-Term Traffic Relief Options City of Coronado Advisory Vote Only Fail: 1,704 / 33.0% Yes votes ...... 3,458 / 67.0% No votes See Also: Index of all Propositions

Arguments For Proposition H

Arguments Against Proposition H

This advisory ballot measure does not authorize any new taxes or increase any existing taxes. It is to determine whether Coronado voters favor completion of the final phases of a study of alternatives to relieve traffic congestion between the Coronado Bridge and the Naval Air Station North Island. A "yes" vote is not a vote to approve a tunnel or any specific construction project, but to support completion of the engineering, cost estimates, and legally required environmental impact analysis associated with each alternative. Traffic to and from the Bridge through the residential streets of Coronado has increased to 80,000 trips per day, and is projected at 117,000 vehicles per day by 2030. Almost two-thirds of the rush hour traffic on and off the Bridge is associated with the Naval Air Station North Island. Gridlock on Third and Fourth Streets delays traffic on Orange Avenue and increases traffic on all other neighboring streets. Over 11 years and $13.2M have been spent developing all alternatives, including traffic management options such as carpooling. A "no" vote would favor immediately terminating this effort with no further action to increase flow capacity to handle projected traffic. Funding for the study has come predominantly from Federal grants and appropriations and from residual Bridge toll revenues. These funds are legally restricted to studies and improvements to the SR 75/282 traffic corridor. The City believes sufficient funds exist to complete the study, now scheduled for mid-2012. A "yes" vote will be essential in seeking future federal, state, and regional funding to support carrying through the preferred alternative that will be selected by the City Council following completion of the project report and environmental documents and public hearings. A "yes" vote will demonstrate a commitment to handle forecasted traffic while preserving the character of Coronado. CASEY TANAKA Mayor City of Coronado CARRIE DOWNEY Councilmember City of Coronado AL OVROM, JR. Councilmember City of Coronado MICHAEL WOIWADE Councilmember City of Coronado Rebuttal to Arguments For - They say: This vote doesn't involve taxes. REALITY: This vote involves wasting $2 million more of your tax and toll dollars on a study that says parcel taxes and big bridge tolls are necessary to build a tunnel. New increased taxes and tolls are coming. - They say: A "yes" vote won't approve a tunnel. REALITY: A "yes" vote will waste more of taxpayers' money. Enough is enough. - They say: Traffic will increase. A tunnel is necessary. REALITY: A tunnel will increase vehicle flow and congestion. The only tools to reduce the rate of vehicle increase are Park & Ride, Commuter Ferry, MTS-Navy Express Buses and Carpooling. - They say: A "NO" vote stops the city from implementing future traffic relief. REALITY: A "NO" vote simply stops the city from studying tunnels. - They say: Funds spent were restricted to studies and improvements. REALITY: Spending $13.1+ million on tunnel studies and lobbyists was wasteful. Funds should have gone toward feasible mitigation for the Third & Fourth Street corridor like noise-buffering landscaping, double- paned windows, protective fencing and shuttle buses. - They say: The city believes funds exist to "finish the study" in 2012. REALITY: No funds exist to build and maintain a tunnel. The study is wasteful. - They say: A `yes' vote will handle future traffic and preserve Coronado. REALITY: A `yes' vote ignores safe and affordable traffic mitigation tools. It seeks a tunnel that will destroy Coronado homes and quality of life. -> -> -> -> -> -> Vote "NO." <- <- <- <- <- <- -> -> -> -> www.stoptunnelspending.com <- <- <- <- BARBARA DENNY Coronado City Councilwoman LEON A. "BUD" EDNEY Admiral, USN (Ret.)

The ballot question before you sounds confusing, but it really isn't. The real question is: Do you want the city to keep spending your tax dollars on the tunnel study? Vote "NO" if you want to avoid: More tax dollars spent on the tunnel study and lobbyists. The risk of having to pay off $598 million of bond debt for tunnel construction with parcel taxes and big bridge tolls. The burden of lifetime tunnel maintenance costs imposed upon Coronado taxpayers. Vote "NO" because: The only available tunnel route begins at the Coronado toll plaza and ends in the J Avenue to Alameda neighborhood. The city may invoke its powers of eminent domain to condemn many homes in order to accommodate tunnel entry, tunnel exit and tunnel exhaust fan towers. A tunnel must cut through an active earthquake fault. An inevitable earthquake will magnify property damage and loss of lives by adding an extra level or two, depending on the type of tunnel. 9/11 changed everything. A tunnel will increase risk of harm to uniformed military employees, and those that support them, because of a man-made disaster targeting a tunnel intended for their exclusive use. A strong "NO" vote will: Make the city pursue realistic, affordable and safe traffic management solutions for the entire town of Coronado - including Third & Fourth Streets. Let the city know it's not okay that they wasted over $13.1 million of your tax money on the tunnel study and lobbyists over the last 10+ years. Vote "NO." BARBARA DENNY Coronado City Councilwoman LEON A. "BUD" EDNEY Admiral, USN (Ret.) Rebuttal to Arguments Against The opponents to the measure miss the point. In 1998, 83% of Coronado's voters cast their ballots in favor of seeking funding for a bored tunnel. In the intervening eleven years, the City has succeeded in acquiring $11 million in federal and regional funding to put toward federally mandated studies of traffic alternatives for the SR 75/282 traffic corridor (roadway between the bridge and NAS North Island.) Any City general fund money spent on these studies was required by law as matching funds. Terminating these studies returns no monies to the City. Thus far, the City has studied 40 traffic mitigation options that range from demand management, including carpooling to bored tunnels, and has completed studies on all reasonable options, except for the recent CALTRANS request addressing the Navy's concerns about tunnel day lighting on Navy property. A tunnel is not a foregone conclusion. Nor are any of the other options being studied. The report will address all impacts of each option so that Coronado's citizens will have a rational basis to decide whether or not to pursue a traffic mitigation project like a tunnel or something less than one. To stop this process now would place any future decision about a traffic mitigation project back to ground zero in terms of time and money. For these reasons, the environmental review on the CALTRANS option should be completed. Let's stay the course. VOTE YES on Proposition H CASEY TANAKA Mayor City of Coronado SUSAN R. KEITH Former Council Member RUTH K. "PATTY" SCHMIDT Former Council Member MARK J. OCHENDUSZKO Retired City Manager TOM SMISEK Former Mayor