|
Business & Labor
$37-Billion California Package Tops Bond Measures
(california.construction.com,
October 2006 issue)
By Jane
Irene Kelly
When voters go to the polls Nov. 7,
construction industry officials will be watching the fate
of a huge, $37-billion package of infrastructure bond proposals
in California, billions more in school bond issues in other
areas, plus land-use regulatory issues in a dozen states.
The main event is California's six infrastructure
propositions, to authorize a combined $37.3 billion. Jim Earp,
executive director of the California Alliance for Jobs, a
construction industry and labor coalition pushing for the
measures' passage, says they "will enable us to invest
in our core infrastructure, which hasn't been done significantly
in California for the past 20 or 30 years, and will allow
us to pass on to future generations something that isn't broken."
The largest item in the package is Proposition
1B, which calls for $19.9 billion for transportation over
10 years. Of that total, $11 billion would go for improvements
along such major corridors as Interstate 5, Highway 99 and
a fourth bore for the Caldecott Tunnel linking Alameda and
Contra Costa counties.
"The passing of 1B is imperative,"
says Tom Holsman, Associated General Contractors of California
CEO. "It will create a ripple effect in the California
economy that will be all positive."
Earp says, "Measures 1A through
1E are clearly most important for the construction industry.
In particular, 1B would help us to fast-track several projects
that have been sitting on the shelf - including major corridor
improvements. We won't have to rely on little dribbles of
money to come from the highway fund. Ultimately, the [$19.9
billion bond] will help more people and goods to move more
efficiently throughout the state of California."
Here is a line up of important California
propositions:
Proposition
1A: Transportation Investment Fund
Amount: $1.4 billion per year
Proposition 1A would set limits on the
state's ability to borrow money from the gasoline sales tax,
which is intended to be used for specifically to fund transportation
projects. (There are two state gasoline taxes in California:
One is a "gas tax" or excise tax of 18 cents per
gallon. The other is a 6 percent sales tax on gasoline transactions.)
In 2002, California voters approved
Proposition 42, which dedicated sales tax money to fund transportation
projects. But California has dipped significantly into that
money as a way to manage other budget shortfalls. Proposition
1A requires that the state repay the borrowed funds within
three years - and with interest. Borrowing by the state also
would be limited to twice within any 10-year period, and previous
loans must be repaid before the state can borrow again.
According to the state Department of
Finance, California has borrowed $2.1 billion of gas taxes
and has paid back approximately $1.4 billion as of mid September
2006. The state will repay the balance over the next nine
years.
Proposition
1B: Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, Port Security
Bond Act of 2006.
Amount: $19.9 billion over 10 years
This bond measure would provide about
$20 billion for repairing and expanding highways, bridges
and roads, improving and expanding local transit and rail,
and strengthening port security. Projects would include the
creation of new carpool lanes throughout the state, improvements
to major road and rail corridors (I-5, Hwy. 99, etc.), and
the addition of a fourth bore for the Caldecott Tunnel (connects
Alameda and Contra Costa Counties via Highway 24).
|
More than $11 billion would be designated
for providing congestion relief by increasing capacity on
California's roads, and the rehabilitating the state's highways
and local roads. Approximately $4 billion would go to expanding
and improving public transportation, including retrofitting
and replacing school buses. More than $3 billion would go
toward improving the movement of goods through ports while
reducing air pollution Approximately $1.5 would be used to
make seismic improvements to bridges and overpasses and also,
to enhance security, and disaster response/anti-terrorism
activities at harbors, ports and ferry terminals and transit
systems.
According to a recent story (Oct. 1)
published in the Sacramento Bee, California has "a $160
billion backlog of transportation needs" and since 1990,
voters have approved only $5 billion in state bonds to upgrade
transportation. Paying back the bonds, with interest, would
cost the state an estimated $38.9 billion over 30 years.
Proposition
1C: Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2006.
Amount: $2.85 million bond
This bond measure would provide $2.85
billion to fund 13 new and existing housing and development
programs intended to help the homeless, low-income renters
and first-time buyers. $1.35 billion would be used to fund
three new programs aimed specifically at increasing development
in urban areas and near public transportation, including projects
such as housing, parks, transportation and water and sewage
systems.
Approximately $625 million would be
used to fund homeownership programs for low- and moderate-income
homebuyers. $590 million is intended for construction or renovation
of rental housing projects, such as apartment buildings.
Funds from 1C, about $285 million, also
may be used for the purpose of providing shelters for battered
women and their children, clean and safe housing for low-income
senior citizens; homeownership assistance for the disabled,
military veterans, and working families; and repairs and accessibility
improvements to apartments for families and disabled citizens.
Funds would be allocated over a number
of years.
Proposition
1D: Education Facilities, Kindergarten-University Public Education
Facilities Bond Act of 2006.
Amount: $10.4 billion bond
Proposition 1D would dedicate $10.4
billion for modernization and new projects for schools from
kindergarten to the university level. It would benefit K-12
public schools with $7.3 billion and another $3 billion for
community colleges, the California State University and the
University of California. About $7 billion would be spent
on K-12 schools.
Approximately $3.3 billion would be
used for the modernization of existing school facilities,
and school districts would be required to pay 40 percent of
the project costs unless they qualify for state hardship funding.
The bond would provide $1.9 billion
for new construction. The fund would cover various costs associated
with building new facilities, including site acquisition,
project design, engineering, construction and inspection.
Up to $200 million of the $1.9 billion would be available
for earthquake retrofit projects - but school districts would
be required to pay 50 percent of such projects unless they
qualified for state hardship funding.
About $1 billion would be used for relief
grants for overcrowded schools. School districts that receive
these grants would be required to replace portable classrooms
with newly constructed permanent classrooms, and would have
to remove portable classrooms from the overcrowded school
sites. Districts would have to pay 50 percent of project costs,
unless they qualify for state hardship funding.
About $500 million would fund a "new
facility program" which would provide grants to high
schools and local agencies that offer career technical programs.
The grants would be allocated on a per square foot basis,
with a maximum of $3 million for each new construction project
and $1.5 million for each modernization project. Schools would
need to provide 50 percent of project costs unless there is
hardship.
The remainder of bond - about $629 million
- would be used for modernizing and building charter school
facilities, creating certain types of environment-friendly
facilities (such as those that use recycled materials, or
promote efficient use of water/energy), and construction and
reconfiguring of joint-use projects, such as libraries, gymnasiums,
child care facilities that are located at a school but used
for joint school/community or K-12/higher education purposes.
Proposition
1E: Disaster Preparedness and Flood Protection Bond Act of
2006.
Amount: $4.09 billion.
Proposition 1E would provide more than
$4 billion for repair of levees and flood control infrastructure.
Seventy-five percent of this money would be spent in the Central
Valley and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. This is a very
urgent measure because the state Department of Water Resources
has a backlog of $7 to $12 billion in necessary levee repairs
or upgrades. The Central Valley Flood Control System and Delta
levees would receive $3 billion to repair and improve levees.
$800 million would go to projects outside the Central Valley.
$290 million would be used for protecting flood corridors
and improving flood-hazard maps.
This act rebuilds and repairs California's
most vulnerable flood control structures to protect homes
and prevent loss of life from flood-related disasters, including
levee failures, flash floods, and mudslides. Protects California's
drinking water supply system by rebuilding delta levees that
are vulnerable to earthquakes and storms.
"Levees protect farms, homes and
businesses in the state, as well as the drinking water supply
for 22 million Californians," says Earp, "If these
levees fail, your clean water fails. We need [these funds]
for our own protection, because if wait for the Feds to do
take care of the levees, we'll end up like Louisiana, pointing
fingers at each other."
Proposition
84
Amount: $5.4 billion
This ballot measure would authorize
$5.4 billion to address a myriad of natural resource issues:
better water quality, protecting rivers and lakes, flood control
projects, energy conservation, protecting the coast, acquiring
and developing state parks, conserving wild habitats, and
water planning.
Projects would include public access,
river parkways and urban stream restoration, and storm water
pollution prevention; state flood control projects, including
evaluation, system improvements and a flood corridor program;
urban water and energy conservation projects; a Clean Beaches
Program; state park system acquisition, development and restoration;
and statewide water planning projects, such as water conveyance
systems and floor control projects.
Local Measure: Measure R: Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit District
Rail Project Authorization -- County of Marin (Two-Thirds
Approval Required)
Shall an ordinance be adopted authorizing
the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District (SMART) to construct,
operate, and maintain a passenger rail project and bicycle/pedestrian
pathway on publicly owned right-of-way, from Cloverdale in
Sonoma County, to Larkspur in Marin County, with a connection
to the Larkspur-San Francisco ferry; imposing a 1/4 cent sales
tax for 20 years; establishing a Citizens Oversight Committee;
and establishing an annual spending cap?
Voters in Marin and Sonoma counties
will decide in November whether the sales tax should be raised
by one-quarter percent to build a passenger rail service system
that will run alongside the Highway 101 corridor. (There used
to be a rail system along that track, but when 101 was built,
people stopped using it.) The $1.4 billion project (which
would be spread over 20 years) would provide train service
from Cloverdale (Sonoma County) to Larkspur (Marin County),
where a major ferry terminal is located. The rail line would
have 14 stops, and would be built along 70 miles of the old
Northwestern Pacific rail corridor. There are plans to also
create a bike and pedestrian path adjacent to the rail line.
The idea for building this new rail system has been kicked
around since at least the 1980s, and traffic congestion is
extremely bad along that portion of Highway 101. It is hoped
that a rail system would not only provide relief from the
traffic woes, but also, improve air quality because of a reduction
in pollution.
"Measures 1A through 1E are clearly most important for
the construction industry. In particular, 1B would help us
to fast-track several projects that have been sitting on the
shelf - including major corridor improvements," says
Jim Earp, executive director of The California Alliance for
Jobs. "We won't have to rely on little dribbles of money
to come from the highway fund. Ultimately, the [$19.9 billion
bond] will help more people and goods to move more efficiently
throughout the state of California."
For ENR's national coverage of
the upcoming election, go click
here.
|
