But something needs to be done to fix the infrastructure:
California Tops the List of Worst Roads in the Nation
http://www.allstays.com/Features/CaliforniaWorstRoads.htm
Dec. 27, 2001--California's rutted, cracked and neglected roads now rank at the bottom of all 50 states in roadway quality and per capita dollars being spent to improve them, according to a new study from Transportation California.
``A generation of underinvestment in California's streets, highways, overpasses and bridges has resulted in a shameful deterioration of what once was a showcase transportation network,'' said Larry Fisher, executive director of Transportation California, the state's leading transportation advocacy and public education organization.
Travel in California increased 97 percent between 1980 and 2000, and population increased 42 percent in the same period. Yet California invested less per person in transportation than any state. According to the report, this underinvestment has had an adverse impact on travel, safety and drivers' pocketbooks.
"The ten urban regions with at least 500,000 people, which includes the city
and its surrounding suburbs, with the greatest share of major roads and
highways with pavements that are in substandard condition and provide a
rough ride are: Kansas City – 71%, San Jose – 67%, St. Louis – 66%, Los
Angeles – 64%, San Francisco-Oakland – 60%, San Diego – 58%, New
Orleans – 55%, Boston – 49%, Sacramento – 49% and Oklahoma City –
47%."
5 of the 10 are in CA.
http://www.tripnet.org/RoughRoadsReport052605.pdf
That's correct. The problem, however, is in the financing mechanism. The problem is not the use of bonding. The problem is who is taxed. Bonding is fine if the citizens approve the increased taxation. The question is; which citizens. If the state government is unwilling to give up a portion of existing revenue streams to build and repair infrastructure then bonding is an alternative, with voter approval.
The BigBangBonds got into to trouble for a myriad reasons, mostly partisan, but chief among the objections was attempting to force all Californians to pay for what should be, logically and legally, local and regional taxation. Asking the residents of Modoc County to pay for commuter routes in Riverside and Orange County is neither justified nor defensible by other than socialist reasoning.
Indeed all of these bonding proposals should go on the ballot, but only within the area deriving benefit. They should be local or regional projects taxing local or regional, property, consumption or use. They should not be General Obligation bonds.
This bonding should be Revenue Bonding utilizing tolls, additional, regional, dedicated, sales tax components, or increases in property taxes within the benefit area as their revenue streams.