HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 4.C 12/05/2005i, ,
LEAGUE
C .1. T1
December 1, 2005
December 5; 2005
1400 K Street, Suite 400 •_ Sacramento, California 95814
Phone: 916.658.8200 Fax: 916.658.8240
For -Immediate Adtion
Paste 1 of'6
TO-. Mayors, Councilmembers and City Managers (Please Distribute)
FROM: Chris McKenzie, Executive Director
RE: Proposition 42 Transportation: Please Write or -Call the Governor
NOW!
ACTION REQUESTED:' 'The'League' and the California State Association of Counties
(CSAC) are asking city and, county officials to. (1) thank Gov; Schwarzenegger and
legislative leaders4or providing full funding of Proposition. 42 transportation monies this
year; (2) thank -',them for making transportation and infrastructure a priority in 2006; and
(3) urge the goernor to "Fill the Gap" in Prop. 42 funding for cities and counties, by
funding the.tocal street and.road maintenance program under Prop. 42 in FY 2006-07
and FY 2007-08.
• Backaround.. The proposal to shift -the sales tax, on gasoline and dedicate it for
transportation purposes was first enacted in 200,0, in AB 2928. The legislation provided
funding for both state, projects',and local street and; road maintenance. Additionally, in
2002 the voters passed. Prop. 42, which was intended to constitutionally "assure" that the_
sales tax on gasoline would,be dedicated to transportation purposes and to "make it
difficult" for the Legislature and governor to take this money and use it to support state
general fund programs Since its enactment, with"the exception°of`the current fiscal
year, the disappointing, history- of the Prop. 42 program has been one of the state using
its authority to suspend the program each year and then taking the money to help reduce
general fund deficits.
During the first years of'the'AB 2928/Prop. 42 program,, local governments were loaned
money from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) to cover.two years of
local street maintenance costs under the program. Local governments received this
Prop. 42 "in -lieu" money,while the money for state projects was suspended, again to
reduce state 'genera I'fund deficits. In order to receive these initial funds, local
'governments were required,to pay back the STIP in fiscal..years°2406-07-and 2007-
-08 by foregoing any Proposition 42 revenues. Consequently, under current law; cities
and counties will not receive additional Prop. 42 funds until FY 2008-09.- the
Proposition,42. Funding Gap!
Where .We Are Today. The s'tate's -fiscal situation has improved significantly over the
past :year The debate over FY 2006-07 state budget will beginwith"the introduction of
the.governor's budget in January of 2006, just a little over a month away. The governor's
office is preparingthestate budget right now. The governor is also working on proposals
0
Dec 01 2005 17:23:21 Via Fax -> 707 779 4419'hichael Bierman Page eez,Dr 007 °
a
to provide significant new resources. for infrastructure investments, including
transportation — as are'Senate Pro Tern Don Perata and Assembly Speaker Fabian •
Nunez.
Disruotion of Local Transportation Fundina is Counterproductive.. With. both the
governor and' key legislators working to address the :state's need for" infrastruetuce
investments, we believe it makes no; sense to allow any disruption in the funding ,that
cities and counties so urgently neeflo continue'repairs and maintenance, on the state's
secondary highway system — local streets ,and roads.
What You Can Do. This is the -time to; influence the development of the nexCstate
budget.. 1 Please write or call the governor's office over the next week. Thank him for
having worked -with the Legislature.:this year to fully fund :Prop. 42 in the current budget.
Thank him for his leadership; and that of'Sen. Perata and Speaker'Nunez,`in,pursuing
new, and potentially ongoing funding,for transportation infrastructure.
Additionally, please urge him to propose�a FY 2006.07 budget that "Fills the:Gap
in. Prop. 42 funding oflocal streets and roads -- in keeping with the,promise,of
Prop. 42. Tell him about the projects in your city1hat will be stalled if the. Prop. 42
funding gap is not filled. Also, please, send copies of vour'letter to vourlegislator&,_so
thev.are aware of What vour request to the governor.
A sample letter and talking points are -attached, along with "a sample letter to "the editor
that you can send to your local.
media.
Fund the Pr000sition 42 GAP! It is time to :rebuild California. There is no better place
to start than'in the local communities of.ourstate.
Note: See Talking Points on p. Vor "Reasons to Fund the Gap.
NOW.
2 0
D6601 2085 17:23:4B Via Fax -> 787 77B 4419 Michael Bierman Page 803 Of 887
Proposition 42 Transportation Funding
• Talking Points
Let's Fix. the, Broken Transportation ;System: We applaud the. efforts
of Gov. Schwarzenegger., Senate Pro Tem Don Perata and Assembly Speaker
Fabian Nunez, to fix the state's broken transportation system.
✓ Thank You ,for Fully Funding Prop..42 Local Street' and Road Transportation
Projects_ This Year., We thank the governor and the Legislature for fully funding
Proposition 42 transportation .projects in the current budget;- This action kept faith
with the 69 pefcent,of voters who supporteProp: 42 in.20
d02, and directed
much-needed revenue to.the local street and road repairs that California citizens
deserve.
✓ Stabilize Propositi6n'.42 Funding. We also strongly support -efforts by the
governor, Sen. Perata and,Speaker Nunez; to -fund transportation infrastructure,
and to stabilize.'Prop. 42 funding by ensuririg_that it becomes a predictable
revenue stream for transportation purposes.
Let's "Fill the Gap"l We also urge that -Gov..Schwarzenegger include, as part
of his infrastructure_.reform plans, a plan to "fill the gap"` to provide Prop. 42 funding
for cities and counties. in FY 2006-07 and FY :2007-08.
✓ While in the future (beginning in FY 2008=09), cities. and counties are expected to
receive an equitable sha"re:'of Prop. 42 funds, we are not slated to receive any
allocations in.FY.2006-07 or 2007=0.8.
✓ The interruption in funding will;seriously undermine our efforts and those of other
local jurisdictions .to:repair.:and maintain the ;many, miles of .the state's secondary
highway system that affects the citizens that we serve everyday:
® Reasons to "f=und,the Gap" NOW!
✓ Local Streets and.Roads are Important Transportation Link. Cities and
counties are responsible for 82, percent 'of .the California's maintained miles. It
does no good to fund state projects only and let the local system continue to
deteriorate. Citizens; need both systems to get to =work and to get goods to
markets.
✓ Local Streets and Roads are In'Need of Repair. With a $13 billion backlog in
road,:and bridge, rehabilitation projects, .city'and' county streets and roads
desperately need this transportation money to maintain the public's investment in
the transportation ystem. If1hese streets and roads are allowed to further
deteriorate, the reconstructiornof the road is vastly more expensive than the cost
of routine maintenance.
✓
[Projects in Your City. Provide examples of the repair projects in your city that
would be affected by a two-year gap,in'Prop. 42 funding. Be sure to identify why
these projects are important: the number of people who use the affected roads
0 3
Dec 01 ZOOS 17,24'.15 Via Fax 787
97 770 4419 Michael Bierman Page 004 Of 007
each day;-the-,cqst of -deferred maintenance, risk of losing any other related
fbhding, impacts on local businesses, etc. I
✓ Keep thePromise of Proposition 42. The voters solidly approved Prop, 42 and
expect this money to be.used for the: state and local transportation system:
Restoring 'the f undi,nq'f.or local street
treet and roads the FY 2006-07 and 2007-0.8
budgets keeps this prom- it"e to the voters.
✓ Local:Furdin,g Essential,.
ancounty City and dificials, are-not,asking to take
money from,oth6r transportation progra ms to pay for local maintenance efforts,
during these'two years. The state's fi6anciafposition, coupled with effqrts�tq pass
ajarger state infrastructure package, set the�stagefor a nUmber,of creative
alternatives to meet this Prop. 42 fundinggoal.
✓ -State, and Local Partnership to Rebuild California. State and ,local
governments need to. work together' to address. California's public infrastructure
needs. Legislati Legislative leaders and the governor are making positive statements :and
gestures about the need to address this, growing problem from!.a, comprehensive
perspective_ This is a partnership that can work, and addressing the Prop, 42
GAP has to be a piece of this, greater. effort.
✓ Local Governmbks Can Put1he Mon6y, to Immediate Use; It is a. proven fact
that
tht local governments can put this, money,to work immediately in a very Visible,
waytoMeet local transportation needs. This, will improve the trarisportAon
servi'teV"in the communities across California and help accelerate economic
recovery..
• We Need ' Stable, Ongoing, Revenues: for infrastructure. We urge, the governor to
direct the, Department of Finance to address "the looming Prop. 42. funding, ga'p for
c , itiin and counties, as: well as 6nsUre'that California citizens will have predictable,,
-ongoing revenue stream to build and maintain the, reliable transportation
infrastructure system they. need and -deserve.
E
Dec 01 2885 17;2493 Via Fax -> 787 778 4419 Michael Bierman Page ®85 Of 887
Sample Letterrto Governor Schwarzeneggerre. Prop. 42 Transportation Funding
•_ Date
Gov Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: "Fill the Gap": Proposition 42 and Funding for the Secondary Highway System
Dear Governor Schwarzenegger
The city of applauds your efforts, and those of Senate Pro Tem Don Perata and
Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, tofix'our broken transportation system. We greatly appreciate
the work you did with the Legislature this year to fully fund Proposition 42 transportation projects,
including city and county street and road repairs and maintenance. Further, we:strongly support
your goal of stabilizing Prop. 42 funding, to ensure that it becomes a predictable revenue stream for
transportation purposes.
However, we want to drawyourattention to -a looming gap in Prop. 42 funding that cities and
counties face under current law, - one that seriously threatens local governments' ability to maintain
and repair the 82 percent°of the state highway system ("the secondary highway, system".) for which
we are responsible.
The issue -is this: while in the future (beginning in FY 2008-09) cities and counties are expected to
receive an equitable share of�P,rop. 42 funds, we are not slated to receive any allocations in FY
2006-07 or 2007=08. Theinterruption in funding will seriously undermine our efforts to repair and
• maintain the many miles of the state's "secondary highway system that everyday affects the citizens
that you and we both serve.
(Provide examples of the repair and maintenance projects in your city that would`be affected by a
two-year gap in Prop. 42 funding: Be'sure to identify why these projects are important the number
of people who use the affected roads each day, the cost of deferred maintenance, risk of losing any
other related funding, impacts .om local businesses, etc. j
We urge you, as part of ,your infrastructure reform plans,, to "fill the gap',.'- stabilize Prop. 42
funding for transportation, as.welLas provide the funding our, citizens, need to ensure that
repairs and maintenance,of their local streets and roads will not be. interrupted for two years.
As caretakers of'California;s secondary highway system- we know that deferred maintenance_ simply
drives up the cost of road;repairs "down the road. We urge that�youLdirect your Department of
Finance to address the looming Prop. 42 funding gap for cities and counties, as well as, to ensure
that California citizens will' have predictable„ ongoing revenue stream to build and maintain the
reliable transportation infrastructure system they need and deserve.
Sincerely;
Cc: MikeJGenesi,;Director,,California Department of-Rnance
'Your citv's legislators
f PecAl 2885 17:25:29 Via Fax -> 707 778 4419 Michael Bierman Page B07 Of 887
Proposition 42 = Transportation Funding:
• Sample Letter to the Editor
Word. Count: 235 (not including information abocut local pro1eots)
RE: "Fill the Gap" in Local Transco rtation Funds
Dear Editor:
The governor and legislative leaders did the right thing by California voters earlier this
year when they decided this year's' budget would fully fund Proposition 42, the 2002
measure that allocates the sales tax on gasoline to transportation projects.
Today, as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegge.r;, Sen. Pro Tem Don Perata and Assembly
Speaker Fabian Nunez, consider proposals to. repair or build, new .roads, bridges and
other critical infrastructure, l urge that they remember that 82 percent of the state's road
miles are maintained by cit ies'and�counties.
It's critical that new state proposals do two things. First, make sure that Prop. 42 funds
(from the sales tax on gasoline) are devoted to transportation projects on an ongoing
basis -just as the voters: intended when they passed that measure in 2002. That would
provide cities and counties With .a reliable source of funding to repair and maintain local
streets and roads where virtually, every'vehicle trip starts and ends. Second, the state
should "fill the gap" in -'Prop. 42 funding-- a two year lapse in the aocal'share of
transportation funding that is built into current law.
While locals are slated to receive an increased share of the Prop. 42 funds .in FY 2008-
09, the loss of two years, of ifundiifg would' leave many street and road repairs stuck in
neutral. This is counter=productive: deferred maintenance simplydrives up, the cost of
road repairs "down the road."
[Provide brief example repair projects in your city that would be affected by a two-year
gap in Prop. 42 funding. Identify why these, projects are important- the number of
people who use the, affected roads each day, the cost of deferred maintenance, risk of
losing any other related funding, impacts on local businesses,, etc.]
Yours truly,
0