The Bay Area needs Link21—but current governance doesn’t set the project up for success

The long-awaited second transbay crossing is a step closer to reality. Link21, as the project is now being called, will likely be the single largest Bay Area infrastructure project of the next few decades. At the time of writing, it is still in the very early stages of planning. Little has been defined about the project beyond it being a new passenger rail tunnel between Oakland and San Francisco. But what we do know is that Link21 can revolutionize Bay Area transportation, if the project is governed and designed wisely.

Link21 will likely be the single largest Bay Area infrastructure project of the next few decades.

The Link21 project is being undertaken as a partnership between BART and Capitol Corridor. The two agencies are natural allies in this initiative. Prior to the pandemic, BART was approaching maximum capacity in its existing transbay tube, and the current drop in ridership will likely only provide temporary relief. For Capitol Corridor, a second transbay tube could allow direct service to Downtown San Francisco, providing a single-seat ride from the rapidly growing Sacramento metro area. Capitol Corridor and BART also have a uniquely collaborative relationship – BART is the managing agency for Capitol Corridor, so the staff of the two agencies are shared, even though the two agencies have separate boards.

It makes perfect sense that BART and Capitol Corridor are closely involved with the Link21 project. What is more unusual is that there is no regional transportation authority coordinating the two agencies and taking a leadership role, given the project’s regional significance. Ideally, this leader would either be a regional transit agency covering the full region or a network coordinator in line with what Seamless Bay Area and other organizations are advocating for. This lead entity would strategically advance a business case for this major project without bias towards any one existing system; resolve disputes between stakeholder agencies by focusing on the best outcomes for Northern California residents and riders; and have the authority to implement its solutions. This lead entity would also drive regional coordination and develop plans in conjunction with other key transportation projects including the Downtown Rail Extension and Caltrain Corridor Expansion to ensure that major projects delivered by different agencies are designed to operate as an integrated regional system. 

Right now, on the other hand, BART and Capitol Corridor seem to be leading the Link21 project as equals, with no apparent mechanism to handle conflicts that may arise between their agencies, or with other key affected stakeholders like Caltrain, SFMTA, or the dozens of cities the project will affect. This could lead to inefficiencies and delays, or worse, bad compromises baked into the concrete of the new infrastructure itself. The Bay Area has seen this before, with the lack of fare integration between BART and Muni creating convoluted transfers in the Market Street Subway. A repeat of this would be a waste of the potential that Link21 holds.

Link21’s leading agencies - BART and Capitol Corridor - lack board representation from counties with important key stakeholders.

None of this is a criticism of BART or Capitol Corridor. Both agencies work in the best interest of their own passengers and employees, and it would be unfair to expect otherwise from them. To their credit, they are pursuing a business case framework to evaluate different options for the project—a best practice in megaproject development. Nevertheless, to achieve the best possible result, Link21 should be led by an organization empowered to coordinate the Bay’s transit agencies and with an overarching mandate to improve mobility for Bay Area residents. The lead entity shouldn’t have a bias toward a specific technology, but instead be tasked with delivering a project that creates the most public good. 

Throughout the early planning of the Link21 project, BART and Capitol Corridor have emphasized their goals of maximizing regional connectivity, equity, and integration of the two rail systems. These are admirable goals to strive for, and ones that could do a lot to advance Seamless Bay Area’s vision for a more connected transit network. It is undoubtedly a good thing that new infrastructure is being built to better integrate the Bay Area’s transit system. Yet, there are multiple indicators that the current project governance poses significant risks to achieving the stated goals: 

1. Link21 lacks a clear governing structure to effectively manage the project’s long-term success. Having two agencies with equal power to project manage is an unstable arrangement itself, likely to contribute to years of delay over the long term. These two agencies are governed by different boards made up entirely of local elected officials and largely lacking relevant expertise in overseeing major capital projects. Over the life of the project these boards will likely have significant turnover, which poses the additional risk that officials will call for a change in direction in future years that lead to delays and costs. 

2. Link21’s leading agencies lack board representation from counties with important key stakeholders. Together, the BART and Capitol Corridor boards include representatives from eight counties, but arguably not the right eight counties: Placer County and Yolo County each have two seats on Capitol Corridor’s board, yet San Mateo County, critical to the Bay Area’s rail network and a major destination for many people who might use a second transbay crossing, has no representation at all in the governance of the two agencies leading the Link21 project. 

3. The lack of a lead entity notwithstanding, there needs to be an appropriately sized governing board to effectively oversee Link21 and deliver an integrated system. It is important for the governing entity to effectively serve the 21-county Northern California megaregion while also remaining small enough to enable effective and efficient oversight. Thus, it is not recommended that Link21 end up with a 21 member board. At the other end of the spectrum, cooperation is needed not just between BART and Capitol Corridor, but also among the several other agencies that will provide connecting service with the new transbay tube, and have to share tracks and coordinate schedules at multiple locations across the Bay Area. For example, local bus routes will need to be adjusted to serve new stations. If the crossing includes standard gauge tracks, it should be connected and integrated with Caltrain. Transfers with Muni Metro service will also require consideration and coordination. All of these services would benefit from schedule and fare integration— as well as overall network management— to avoid service duplication and ensure coverage.

Opportunities to build infrastructure at the scale of Link21 don’t come often, which is why it’s critical that we make the most of this opportunity. A clear, logical governance structure can help prevent the project from falling into the delays and controversies that many other Bay Area transit investments have faced. BART and Capitol Corridor should be commended for their leadership in getting the project off to a strong start with a robust business case approach.  However, both agencies, with the help of MTC and state representatives, should prioritize identifying a more stable governance structure for the project—in the context of broader network management reforms—to ensure the project provides the greatest possible benefits and will be delivered in our lifetime.