Letter: Measure P is a rush to solutions on roads

Measure P is a rush to solutions on roads
Most people would like to see improvements to our area roadways, especially the “mangled” streets in Hollister, and solutions to our intra-county transit issues. However, the way Measure P is written can be viewed upon as a rush to solutions that are based on emotion rather than proper considerations being given. The expenditure plan for this measure, as it is written, does not make sense! Consider the following:
• 50% would be used for Hwy. 25 improvements? The proposed 152/Shore Road/Hwy. 25/Hwy. 101 connection has yet to begin. Besides, we don’t even own Hwy. 25 so why make a 30-year commitment to do something the state should do on its own?
• Highway 156 west to San Juan Bautista is already planned for a four-lane improvement by the state. This will be its responsibility to maintain.
Measure P needs to be postponed and better thought out. One-hundred percent of any 30-year “special tax” revenue must be earmarked to benefit locally owned county and city roads and streets, not state-owned highways, and to improve county transit issues. Measure P should receive a no vote at this time.
John Ucovich, San Benito County