Those 133 new, high-tech electronic signs that have been staring blankly at motorists for months along Interstate 80 in the East Bay are about to be activated — but the $80 million price tag has some wondering if it’s a traffic fix or a boondoggle.

The “phased rollout” of the I-80 Smart Corridor project — with overhanging banks of lit green arrows and red X’s that look as if they’ve been lifted from a game show — is scheduled for this month. It’s the first step in creating a network of information-gathering sensors and cameras along the freeway, all aimed at alerting drivers to traffic snarls and easing congestion between the MacArthur Maze and Carquinez Bridge.

“It’s ranked No. 1 as the worst-congested corridor year after year and is carrying about 270,000 people a day,” said Tess Lengyel, planning and policy deputy director of the Alameda County Transportation Commission.

The idea behind the project, which was largely funded by state transportation bonds and Alameda County taxpayers, is both to inform drivers of trouble ahead and let them know of alternative routes.

“We can’t expand any more, so we need to improve what the freeways can do,” Lengyel said.

Not everyone, however, is cheering the idea. One transportation official, noting ubiquitous radio reports, websites and even apps that track traffic, called it “$80 million to tell you what you already know.”

Lengyel counters that the electronic sign network will offer more than “passive” media. For example, the system can alter speeds on 44 metered freeway on-ramps, much as metering lights control the flow onto the Bay Bridge.

The system will also be linked to traffic lights and electronic signs on nearby San Pablo Avenue to help direct overflow when there is an accident, construction or other bottleneck on I-80.

The goal is to have the whole package up and running by late July. The phased rollout is intended to keep a sudden deluge of flashing electronic information from confusing motorists and creating its own havoc.

As for why the signs have been sitting blank for the past 18 months?

“It was a question of testing and fine-tuning the software,” said Caltrans spokeswoman Ivy Morrison.

When the switch is finally flipped in a couple of weeks, all motorists will see at first is a message directing them to 80SmartCorridor.org to learn how the system works.

Let’s hope they don’t do it while driving.

Funny money: The bell has rung on the fight over control of the Democratic County Central Committee in San Francisco, with Chairwoman (and Mayor Ed Lee ally) Mary Jung raising questions about “apparent mismanagement of funds” by former chairman and current Supervisor Aaron Peskin.

In a letter last week, Jung called on Peskin to release information about a Democratic committee fundraising drive that was headed by his friend Michael Bornstein to fight Proposition 8, the initiative to outlaw same-sex marriage that state voters approved in 2008 and was subsequently tossed out by the courts.

The drive raised $300,000, but according to Jung, “We can find no evidence or report that the money was actually used to overturn Prop. 8.”

Instead, Jung said, “The money simply enriched your ally’s for-profit company.”

Peskin, who is among a slate of candidates seeking to depose Jung, called the charges a “smear and just what you would expect from a real estate lobbyist.”

But Jung, who handles government relations for the San Francisco Association of Realtors, is sticking by her guns. She says she wants the Democratic committee’s bank records made public.

For his part, Bornstein, who ran a political canvassing business, said, “At no time did I personally financially profit from any of this work. In fact, I volunteered over 1,500 hours of uncompensated work time to support this effort and the work of our local party.”

What’s really going on here?

The DCCC election has turned into a fight between moderates and progressives for control of the local Democratic apparatus, including its war chest — and the moderates want to raise questions about how Peskin and his allies will spend the money.

Last puff: As political plays go, the timing of Gov. Jerry Brown’s signing of the latest round of antismoking bills was a master stroke.

The bills — including measures raising the legal age for buying tobacco products to 21 and adding e-smokes to the tobacco hit list — sat on various statehouse desks for weeks without any action.

The concern was that if the bills were signed too soon, Big Tobacco would have time to gather signatures to land a referendum on the November ballot to repeal them all.

On the other hand, if the governor waited too long, the initiative clock would be reset — and Big Tobacco could move to put a referendum on the 2018 ballot, effectively keeping the new laws from going into effect for two years.

“We hit it just at the right spot,” said state Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco.

The governor, however, did reject a bill allowing local taxation of tobacco products — which was the piece that would have really upset Big Tobacco.

San Francisco Chronicle columnists Phillip Matier and Andrew Ross appear Sundays, Mondays and Wednesdays. Matier can be seen on the KPIX TV morning and evening news. He can also be heard on KCBS radio Monday through Friday at 7:50 a.m. and 5:50 p.m. Got a tip? Call (415) 777-8815, or email matierandross@sfchronicle.com. Twitter: @matierandross