San Diego County residents are facing uncertainty over SANDAG’s proposed multi-billion dollar transit projects, particularly the so-called ‘Big Dig’ initiative, which some believe offers little tangible benefit to commuters.
Critics argue that the narrative surrounding the Del Mar bluff railway’s imminent collapse is misleading. Contrary to these claims, SANDAG has recently invested $88 million in a stabilization project, which is expected to secure the bluffs for the next 30 years.
Many community leaders have noted a pressing question: why allocate $5 billion for a proposed tunnel when a relatively small investment has already addressed the immediate concern?
Supporters of these projects seem to be driven by a broader vision of transforming San Diego County into a transit hub akin to East Coast cities. However, advocates for motorists contend that the area’s infrastructure is rooted in automobile use, making it impractical to envision a rail system that rivals those in more densely populated places.
Statistics from SANDAG’s 2019 “State of the Commute” report illustrate this point, indicating that only 346 out of every one million vehicle miles traveled in San Diego County were logged by bus or train. In stark contrast, a staggering majority of 999,654 miles were traveled by automobiles.
Critics also caution against the real objective behind the proposed tunnel— the establishment of a double track system. This would theoretically facilitate more frequent train services by allowing trains to pass each other. However, even an increase in rail travel wouldn’t significantly diminish the congestion on roads.
Concerns have been raised regarding SANDAG’s track record with taxpayer money. Many residents feel betrayed, citing 38 years of broken promises, particularly concerning infrastructure improvements like the state Route 78 and Interstate 5 interchange, which were pledged but remain unfulfilled.
The criticisms do not end there, as there have been reports of executives misusing taxpayer funds through extravagant expenses, and contractual agreements that violate state laws as noted by independent audits.
Frustrated residents are starting to question the intentions of SANDAG’s board, believing that their decisions have disproportionately favored expanding transit infrastructure over the needs of motorists. While it has momentarily suspended its 5 cent per-mile Road User Charge, observers suspect that some board members may resurrect this idea in the future.
“Before we spend billions of dollars digging tunnels or realigning tracks, we should first consider the taxpayers’ interests,” affirms opposition voices.
With transit solutions that could yield better returns—like improving highway infrastructure—being overlooked, many contend that these resources could be better allocated.
Investing in functional highway enhancements might not only alleviate traffic congestion but also save taxpayers on fuel costs while contributing to environmental sustainability. It is posited that city leaders should prioritize creating safer and more efficient travel options for the majority of citizens—those dependent on automobiles.
In light of these developments, as discussions continue over how to address transportation in the county, the focus remains on what will best serve the populace in the long term.
image source from：https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2025/04/23/opinion-sandags-case-for-multibillion-dollar-project-is-full-of-holes/
