Proposition 192
Seismic Retrofit Bond Act of 1996
- This act provides for a bond issue of two
billion dollars ($2,000,000,000) to provide funds for a seismic retrofit
program.
- Earmarks $650 million for seismic retrofitting of toll bridges.
- Appropriates money from the state General Fund to pay off bonds.
- Requires measures to reappear on November 1996 ballot if rejected in March
1996.
The information below was provided by the California Journal.
Background: The state's Seismic Retrofit Program was
established following the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake to identify and
strengthen bridges that needed to be brought up to seismic safety standards. A
review by the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) placed about 1039 state
highway bridges in this category, called Phase 1. Retrofitting of Phase 1
bridges is generally complete; the work was funded by state gas taxes. After
the 1994 Northridge earthquake, Caltrans identified another 1209 state-owned
bridges that do not meet seismic safety standards. In addition to these "Phase
2" bridges, Caltrans also identified seven state-owned toll bridges in need of
retrofitting. The cost to retrofit Phase 2 bridges and the toll bridges is
estimated at $2 billion. State highway projects traditionally have been
financed through the state's gas tax, which was increased by $.09 with approval
of Proposition 111 in the 1990 June primary election, and maintenance of
state-owned toll bridges has been covered by toll revenues. The legislation
that placed Proposition 111 on the ballot was approved prior to the 1989
earthquake; following the earthquake, a law was enacted giving seismic
retrofitting priority over other state highway projects.
Proposal: Proposition 192 authorizes the issuance of $2
billion in general obligation bonds to reconstruct, replace or retrofit
state-owned highways and bridges, including toll bridges, that make up Phase 2
of the Seismic Retrofit Program. Of this amount, $650 million is earmarked for
seismic retrofitting of toll bridges. The proposition specifies that
expenditures for retrofitting these bridges, overpasses and interchanges be
funded exclusively from the bonds; state gas taxes and toll revenues could not
be used for this purpose. Diversion of the bond funds for other purposes would
be prohibited. The state auditor general is directed to conduct an annual
audit, available for public review, to ensure that funds are spent only on
identified projects. Projects financed under this proposition would be exempt
from the state's requirements regarding environmental impact statements and
mitigation measures. Money from the General Fund would be used to pay off the
bonds, including interest, which is estimated to be $1.4 billion over 25 years.
If the proposition is not approved in the March 1996 primary election, it would
be placed on the November 1996 general election ballot for another vote.
Arguments for: Proponents, including among others former
Governor George Deukmejian and Chamber of Commerce President Kirk West, say
that approval of this proposition will speed up the process of retrofitting
state-owned bridges to meet seismic safety standards, which will save lives,
reduce damage and improve the mobility of emergency vehicles and commercial
traffic following an earthquake. Hundreds of earthquakes batter the state each
year causing severe, hidden damage to the transportation system, particularly
bridges and highway overpasses. Evidence that retrofitting works can be seen in
Southern California, where every bridge strengthened with state-of-the-art
technology survived the 1994 quake intact, according to the California Chamber
of Commerce, the director of the state Office of Emergency Services and a
retired California Highway Patrol commissioner. These supporters of Proposition
192 say that retrofitting costs one-tenth as much as rebuilding a bridge after
it has collapsed. This bond measure will prevent diversion of funds from
critically needed highway and passenger rail projects that otherwise are being
shifted to earthquake safety repairs. Proposition 192 also will boost the
economy by creating jobs.
Arguments against: Some taxpayer and
environmental groups -- such as People's Advocate, the Sierra Club and Planning
and Conservation League, among others -- say that Proposition 192 benefits the
highway lobby and toll bridge authorities in the San Francisco Bay Area at the
expense of taxpayers who already are paying for seismic retrofitting through
the state's gas tax and tolls. Highway builders would benefit because the bonds
would free up gas taxes to be spent on new freeway construction, and toll
bridge authorities would not need to use their revenues to pay for needed
repair work on Bay Area toll bridges. Opponents cite California's tradition of
paying for highway and bridge repairs with current revenues and say that
taxpayers should not be tricked into approving expensive long-term debt
financing to subsidize new highway construction. Furthermore, opponents argue,
the state's bonded indebtedness already is at a dangerous level and its bond
rating could slip further if this measure passes.
For additional information please see:
- Yes on 192
Proposition 192 - Seismic Retrofit
