Posted on 12/23/2005 8:42:32 AM PST by NormsRevenge
After months of negotiations, an $11.7 billion transportation and infrastructure plan to repair roads, ease traffic, strengthen levees, and expand affordable housing is coming together in the Senate. A similar proposal, with new school construction funding, will be unveiled in the Assembly in January. Both houses hope to get their proposals ready within two weeks, when the new legislative session gets under way.
And Gov. Schwarzenegger's own plan, which Capitol sources say may be pared down from its original $50 billion price tag to $35 billion and may be phased in over time rather than in one lump, is scheduled to be unveiled on Jan. 5.
Combined, the election-year proposals call for a historic infusion of money to build and maintain highways, schools, water projects, high-speed rail, housing development, local street improvements, even bike trails and neighborhood green belts. Hopeful that new cash is on the way, even fanciful projects are getting a new look, such as an upper deck for miles of Interstate 405 in Los Angeles, or an extension and renovation of L.A.'s I-710.
But while many projects are gaining at least tacit support, the method of paying for them is proving divisive. The core dispute is over money: Should California sell billions of dollars of voter-approved General Obligation bonds to raise the money--bonds that are backed by the state's General Fund? Or should the state sell revenue bonds backed by fuel tax money from Proposition 42, the transportation funding measure that voters approved five years ago?
Members of both parties say the Democrats generally favor GO bonds, and that the governor favors a mix of GO and revenue bonds. Both they say both finance schemes--plus others, such as boosting the fuel tax by a penny or two, or a quarter-cent hike in the statewide sales tax to pay down the bonds--are all on the table. A penny increase in the fuel tax brings in $175 million; a quarter cent sales tax hike brings in about $1 billion. Whatever plan is ultimately approved will require voter approval.
"The public seems to be okay with raising the gas tax, if the money is dedicated to a specific project and actually gets there. But you need to restore the Proposition 42 money before you start talking about raising the gas tax," said Steve Schnaidt, a former Senate transportation consultant.
"The problem is that if you redirect the Prop. 42 revenues, you're not really getting any new money, you aren't really sure you'll have enough to do what you want," he added. The Senate proposal contains money to keep Proposition 42 whole.
As the final negotiations get under way on the transportation piece of the complex proposals, there has been an unusual exodus of key transportation experts from the Capitol. Even by the standards of the Capitol, where staff turmoil is not unknown, the departure of five top experts in less than a month is surprising.
The exodus includes Andrew Antwih from the Assembly, Schnaidt and Randall Henry from the Senate, Diane Eidam from the California Transportation Commission's staff, and Joel Riphagen from the Legislative Analyst's Office. All took new jobs elsewhere.
"It's not a purge, they left for their own reasons. But everybody's talking about it," one staffer said. Another described it a as a "brain drain."
Senate Leader Don Perata's heavily rewritten infrastructure plan, amended a half-dozen times this year, is still being reworked. Already at $10.3 billion, Senate aides say it has grown by another $1.4 billion to include additional money for affordable housing sought by Sen. Tom Torlakson, D-Antioch, the chairman of the Senate's Democratic Caucus. That put the Senate package, which includes scores of local road construction projects, at $11.7 billion, but the figure could grow.
The California Alliance for Jobs, which represents construction companies and workers, offered a $30 billion to $40 billion bond plan that includes an immediate upgrade of the 25 most dangerous roadways in California, as identified by Caltrans, plus a quarter-cent sales tax increase to pay down the bonds.
Some combination of fees, taxes and borrowing will ultimately finance the huge infrastructure proposals. But that mix is still unclear.
"There are lots of numbers floating around," said Robert Oakes, a spokesman for Torlakson. "General Obligation bonds, revenue bonds that are paid with fees or taxes-- that's all part of the discussion. But there are only so many slices in the pie."
That pie is the concern of Democratic state Treasurer Phil Angelides, who is running for governor next year, who favors a large infrastructure bond, but notes that a $50 billion bond requires a $3.4 billion-a-year debt service payment.
Environmentalists' concerns are rising with the emphasis on affordable housing and port improvements--in part because of fears that a surge in development and construction could hurt the environment.
"A number of environmental groups, including those on the resources side, environmental health and environmental justice, are concerned there will be concers or desires or issues raised by people in January who have so far not been involved in these discussions," said Gary Patton, executive director of the Planning and Conservation League.
The governor's press aides declined to discuss the governor's position on the Legislature's infrastructure proposals. But Democrats and Republicans alike noted that many of the themes of the Senate and Assembly's plans are likely to emerge in the governor's state of the state speech on Jan. 5 "We may all be riding together on this," said an Assembly Democratic staffer familiar with the proposals.
Just was CA needs, more debt.
Senate aides say it has grown by another $1.4 billion to include additional money for affordable housing sought by Sen. Tom Torlakson, D-Antioch, the chairman of the Senate's Democratic Caucus.
-----
Yes, more debt to fund socialism. Standard liberal vote-getting, power-securing methodology.
They could add 15-20% more freeway space overnight by abolishing the commie-lanes.
Aw, come on now. Can't we all just cough up with a little more?
/ sarc
Just was CA needs, more debt.
--
try thinking of it as an investment..
a big investment
factor in the waste fraud graft and corruption that will go along with it not to mention the kickbacks bribes and backroom deals ,, ouch!
The prevailing wage, bonanza train is warming up, about to leave the station and the CAGOP hasn't even got their car ready. The Austrian attached a $30B sleeper, Perata attached a smaller, $11B lounge car and Nunez is dickering on a $15B model with room for kids.
The CAGOP had better hurry if they are going to be part of the action when the train slows for inspection by the decision makers at union, trust fund, headquarters.
Campaign bucks are hard to find and the trust funds only have so much money left.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.