AgdaPkt 2006-02-13 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

SA Page 3 LEAGUE COMMENTS ^ T TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING HEARINGS League Legislative Director Daniel Carrigg was among those invited to provide comments at two of the legislative "subject hearings" this week, dealing with the transportation bond (5B 1165 - Dutton) introduced as part of Gov. Schwarzenegger's Strategic Growth Plan (SGP); and whether funding for housing should be part of the bond package. The first hearing occurred on January 24, sponsored by the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee (Sen. Alan Lowenthal, chair). The committee sought "an overview and reactions" from Secretary of Housing and Transportation Sunne McPeak, as well as comments from a number of key stakeholder groups, including the League of Califomia Cities, the California State Association of Counties, the Clean Air Coalition, California Transit Association, Prop. 42 Coalition, Professional Engineers in California Government, the California Association of Councils of Govern- ment and others. 5B 1165, described in part as the "Congestion Reduction, Clean Air, and Trade Corridor Bond Act," would authorize placing before the voters bonds totaling $26 billion: a $6 billion bond in 2006 transportation and congestion relief projects; a 2008 bond to improve road capacity and reduce congestion ($6 billion); and a 2012 bond for trans- portation and air quality improvements ($14 billion). While the League has no position on the pro- posal on this time, Carrigg presented the following observations: Transportation Funding a Priority. Funding for infrastructure, including transportation infra- structure. is a priority for the state and California cities. Prop. 42 Funding a Critical First Step. For cities, a constitutional amendment to "lock down" Prop. 42 funding for transportation purposes is a baseline priority, one that should be addressed before enacting a transportation bond measure. Local Streets and Roads and Important Part of State Transportation System. Most of the bond proposal is targeted toward state highways, with little funding allocated directly for the 81 percent of the state's maintained miles that are the responsibility of cities and counties. Change In Super-Majority Vote Require- ments for Local Ballot Measures Would Aid Local Funding Efforts. The state can pass a bond measure if it is approved with a majority vote of the state's voters, while local bond mea- sures require a two-thirds vote to pass. Determining Project Priorities. The pro- posed guideline process makes it unclear as to what projects will emerge as the state's priorities, and how regions can affect this process. Design-Build and Design-Sequencing. The league has supported these concepts, which the bill authorizes CalTrans and transpor- tation authorities to use. Concerns About Need for Housing Funds The second hearing, conducted on January 25 by the Assembly Committee on Housing and Community Development (Assemblymember Gene Mullin, chair), addressed the question, "Should housing be included in the infrastructure bond?" Opinions varied on that specific question, but both the committee and those testifying agreed that the state needs more affordable housing. based on California's growing population. Assemblymember Mullin opened the hearing by discussing the overall housing problem in the state, explaining that only 14 percent of the families in California can afford to by a home and emphasizing that additional housing is needed in the state. Assemblymember Bonnie Garcia, vice chair, commented that the question isn't necessarily the housing itself, but where that housing is built. She stressed the importance of transportation systems in close proximity to housing, and in Continued on Page 7 Visit the League's Official Website--www.cacities.org PmoRITYFOCUS-PAGE3 January 21, 2006 - Issue #4 . - ..--.._~"-'_., ,---" -,-_..,"-,..,_._--_..-- .._---- ,-'-""'."-"'-'----"-'