[newzjunkey]

His reasoning: Prop. 1B Transportation Bond: NO! Although some of this money is for long overdue road construction, most goes for equipment, maintenance and social programs that will be obsolete decades before our children have finished paying off the debt. Californians pay the third highest tax per gallon of gasoline in the country – and yet we rank 43rd in per capita spending on highways. Our neglected roads are not the taxpayers’ fault.

I have to disagree with Tom's apparent optimism that we will have a better option than 1B any time soon. Knowing the state of the roads, I'm leaning towards a YES on 1B, but haven't read the language for myself as yet.

[FairOpinion]

"I have to disagree with Tom's apparent optimism that we will have a better option than 1B any time soon. "


==

This is the reason I think we need to vote for 1B. $11.3 M out of the $19M goes for roads, but some of the rest of it is useful as well.

This is how the article summarizes it:

"Proposition 1B: The biggest chunk, $19.9 billion, is for transportation projects that will cost $38.9 billion to repay. Most of the money, $11.3 billion, would be spent to improve highways and local roads; $4 billion goes to public transportation; $3.2 to improving the movement of goods through ports, highway and rail systems; and the final $1.5billion advances disaster response on transit systems and upgrades rail crossings, bridges, ramps and overpasses. We recommend a yes vote on Prop. 1B. "