CaliforniaCityNews.org

Road Work: San Jose Weighs a Parcel Tax for Street Maintenance; $600 Million Needed?

According to San Jose’s Transportation Director, the city is around 85 percent short when it comes to funding that is needed to maintain local roads over the next decade. Consequently, the cash-strapped local government may look to a parcel tax as a way to generate revenue. It is projected that San Jose will need to raise around $600 million out of $1 billion in costs over the next 10 years to address the city’s poor road conditions because state funds will only cover a small portion. Under a parcel tax, some property owners would have to contribute as much as $400 a year. While the transportation committee has not made a final decision on the matter, some council members have spoken strongly in favor of the tax. Street maintenance has been neglected in light of the city’s 10 straight years of large budget deficits. The question is whether or not voters will support such a tax, as two-thirds approval is necessary. Mercury News reports:

“City officials noted that voters a decade ago approved bond measures totaling $599 million to pay for new police and fire stations, parks and libraries. ‘Time and again, when projects are a clear benefit to the community, taxes do get approved,’ Councilman Ash Kalra said. […] San Jose officials surveyed city voters four years ago and found 58 percent might support a $100 million parcel tax for road maintenance. That was still short of the two-thirds margin needed for passage and before the nation plunged into an economic recession.”

The transportation committee will discuss further the parcel tax at its meeting in March. The city’s roads have already been ranked as some of the worst in the Bay Area. San Jose officials are sure to have their eye on the outcome of a bond measure in San Francisco that would fund street maintenance. Voters will decide its fate during the November 8th election.

Watsonville Council Ponders Takeover of State Highway to Revitalize City’s Downtown

The Watsonville City Council has agreed to take a journey down a long road, as the city will study whether or not it should take over a state highway that runs through the city’s downtown. Known as Main Street, the four-lane Highway 152 has been an impediment to revitalizing the city’s core, and advocates of the takeover suggest it could lead to a revitalization of the business and residential district. However, since city offices are only open 4 days a week to save money, there are concerns that the local government cannot afford to take on the maintenance of a highway (though the state would surely be glad to drop the cost of handling it due to its own money woes). Control would also require money for changes to traffic flow and pedestrian access as well as beautification programs. There is also risk involved because if the city spends the money to control the road, it is not guaranteed that businesses will set up shop after changes are implemented. Patch reports:

“Less than a mile of Highway 152 is within the downtown corridor, but the city will ask the state for the entire stretch of highway that falls within Watsonville. That will mean the city is responsible for maintenance and liability but also gets the property rights. The city council needed to make a resolution and write a letter of intent, then introduce legislation to the California Transportation Commission. The commission takes up requests for relinquishing in September, so the issue won't actually be decided until next fall. Still, city leaders were excited about the possibilities.”

Mayor Daniel Dodge acknowledged there were concerns to be had but also pointed out that the idea is still in the initial stages; he commented that “We're only entering into the discussion stage. This is a vision entering Watsonville into 2012 and beyond." Grants could also help with the funding process. Time will tell if the takeover will be the road to ruin or the road to glory.

NTSB Releases Findings from its Investigation on the San Bruno Pipeline Disaster

It’s taken a year, but the National Transportation Safety Board's (NTSB) has released the findings of its investigation into the San Bruno disaster. The full report is a whopping 140 pages, but the key takeaway is that PG&E's pipeline integrity management program is deemed deficient and ineffective. The investigation criticizes the utility’s slow response time, as it took 95 minutes to stop the flow of gas and to isolate the rupture site, which lead to more property damage and danger for local residents. In comparison, the report applauds the prompt and appropriate response time of local authorities in San Bruno, as firefighters and police officers were at the scene almost immediately after the rupture. The executive summary states, “More than 900 emergency responders from the city of San Bruno and surrounding jurisdictions executed a coordinated emergency response, which included defensive operations, search and evacuation, and medical operations.”

PG&E's pipeline integrity management program is singled out for deficiencies for the following reasons:

• Was based on incomplete and inaccurate pipeline information.
• Did not consider the design and materials contribution to the risk of a pipeline failure.
• Failed to consider the presence of previously identified welded seam cracks as part of its risk assessment.
• Resulted in the selection of an examination method that could not detect welded seam defects.
• Led to internal assessments of the program that were superficial and resulted in no improvements.

A list of 28 findings and recommendations can be found here. For instance, one recommendation to the governor states that “Expeditiously evaluate the authority and ability of the pipeline safety division within the California Public Utilities Commission to effectively enforce state pipeline safety regulations, and, based on the results of this evaluation, grant the pipeline safety division within the California Public Utilities Commission the direct authority, including the assessment of fines and penalties, to correct noncompliance by state regulated pipeline operators.”

PG&E released the following statement in response to the report:

“PG&E is grateful for the NTSB’s thorough investigation of the San Bruno pipeline accident and fully embraces the Board’s recommendations for improving the operations and management of the company’s natural gas system. We are implementing those recommendations as part of a larger effort, both immediate and long-term, to promote safer pipeline operations. We are committed to continuing to learn from the San Bruno accident and to sharing those learnings across the natural gas industry so that a tragedy of this magnitude never happens again. We are deeply sorry that our pipeline was the cause of the accident, and we remain committed to supporting the City of San Bruno and its residents as the healing and rebuilding process continues.”

The NTSB also released a video on the findings from its investigation:

Roadside Spirit: Los Angeles Residents Stay Off the Roads to Avert So-Called Carmageddon

If you didn’t hear about the so-called “Carmageddon” in the city of Los Angeles, then you might have been living under a rock, but the doomsday predictions for unending gridlock never materialized as Los Angeles residents seemed to heed dire warnings by staying off the roads over the weekend so that construction could occur on the 405 freeway. In fact, the weekend closure ended early since the demolition crew finished their work about 17 hours ahead of schedule. City and transportation officials were quick to praise residents for avoiding the freeways and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa commented, “Mission Accomplished.” While the city is busy congratulating itself on avoiding a major traffic mess, officials are already planning for the next closure, as the same process will have to be done again in 11 months. By significantly hyping the closure and throwing out names like “carmageddon,” officials were able to strike fear in the hearts of traffic-weary Southern Californians, but the lack of any drama may hamper the city’s message for the second time around. The LA Times reports:

“[L.A. County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky] and other officials acknowledge that they'll need to retool their message next time to penetrate media cynicism and the public consciousness. Dennis S. Mileti, a University of Colorado sociologist who analyzes human behavior around natural and man-made disasters, said media saturation broke through "the clutter of everyday life to reach so many people." ‘It could be different next time when you have Son of Carmageddon,’ Mileti said. ‘It will be a direct consequence of the breadth and depth of media coverage devoted to it.’”

As the closure drew to an end, the only lasting impact on Los Angeles residents seems to be the fleeting taste of the impossible: a traffic-free Los Angeles. But Mondays have a way of crushing pipedreams...

Villaraigosa New President of U.S. Conference of Mayors; Appears on Meet the Press

On Monday, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa took on a new role: President of the U.S. Conference of Mayors, and he addressed fellow mayors at an event in Baltimore. California officials noted that the mayor’s new job would benefit the Golden State through such high-profile representation. In addition, Villaraigosa was set to lead a delegation of mayors to a meeting with President Obama on Monday. When asked about potential criticism regarding the time commitment of his new position, the mayor stated, “With so much of our funds coming from Sacramento and Washington, if you're not there, you're not doing your job.” In his comments to other mayors, Villaraigosa spoke about the need to improve education and federal budget cuts that have impacted cities. The LA Times reports:

“’Our cities are not just the engine — they're the engine and the axles and the chassis and the door handles of the nation's economy,’ he says. Villaraigosa faces a daunting task in taking on Congress. Seeking to reduce Washington's red ink, Congress has already slashed federal funding for programs cherished by mayors, including the Community Development Block Grant program, a key funding source for local efforts to generate jobs, revitalize run-down neighborhoods and help low-income residents. And more cuts loom.”

To cement his burgeoning national profile, the mayor appeared on the TV show “Meet the Press” over the weekend. On the show, he criticized the press for focusing so much time on the Anthony Weiner scandal as opposed to the poor economy, unemployment, and foreclosures. In some of his remarks, the mayor noted, “We're cutting infrastructure and transportation. In America's cities, we're saying that America needs to focus at home again. And this issue of the war in Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq is now an issue that's front and center of the debate in our cities.” Watch the show here:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

His term as mayor expires in 2013, so speculation has swirled that Villaraigosa will bank on a new national profile for his next role in politics.

New Technology Allows Cities to Quickly Restore Telecom during Phone Outages, Disasters

It is now possible to rapidly recover telecommunications during cable cuts, phone system crashes, power failures, evacuations and even carrier failures due to a new service called Telecom Recovery, offered by TelData Enterprise Networks, A West Coast Cabling Company.

Every city should have a communications recovery capability in place just in case the unexpected happens, but many do not, or what they do have is inadequate. While there are many options for mass/emergency notification, Telecom Recovery provides the often-overlooked and difficult-to-solve opposite: the rapid recovery of incoming calls to existing phone numbers. One of their products can also restore outbound dial tone to an entire phone system, even if all the carrier lines are cut, and even if the carriers themselves have failed or are congested.

One of the company’s latest innovations, which will soon be released, is a smartphone app that can turn a smartphone into a satellite phone when it’s in or near the workplace. Telecom Recovery also has the ability to recover 9-1-1 calls for failed dispatch centers and even isolated communities. For example, several small towns on the 395 corridor have found themselves repeatedly cut off after wildfires damaged their lines, losing their 9-1-1 service. Of course, this presents safety concerns. With Telecom Recovery’s systems in place, this will no longer be a problem.

The funny thing about outages is their unpredictability. One California hospital had their copper phone lines stolen during the night, which Telecom Recovery quickly fixed. Even a popular episode of American Idol or the rush after a football game can cause enough congestion to overwhelm carriers’ lines. Telecom Recovery is designed to help restore communications in situations like these.

Telecom Recovery has customers in 40 states around the country and just about every industry. Any city or other organization that feels serious pain when the phones stop ringing can benefit from this service. Contact Julie Mondragon at Teldata at 619-387-2205 or www.teldata.com for more information.

The Perfect Storm: Public Infrastructure Expert Outlines Consequences of Aging Network

The Los Angeles Division of the League of California Cities was pleased recently to welcome guest speaker Richard Little, the Director of the Keston Institute for Public Finance and Infrastructure Policy at USC. Little informed attendees that when it comes to infrastructure finance, reinvestment is badly needed and the nation is on the verge of a perfect storm in funding civil infrastructure.

The Keston Institute actively addresses the economic policy, financial, demographic and other dimensions of public infrastructure development in California, in addition to undertaking research, outreach, and education activities to further understanding and awareness of present infrastructure challenges. The word “challenges” is fitting to describe the work and financing that the structures we all rely upon greatly need; in fact; Little argued that if the country is to restore infrastructure back to decent levels, the costs are in the trillions.

When it comes to actually paying for infrastructure, Little pointed out that we need to think about how we actually view it’s role; to be specific, is it a public good, a market commodity, or something in between? If taxes are chosen as the means to fund infrastructure, we can conclude it is seen as a public good, and if fees are used for funding, then it is seen as a commodity. In California, Little believes that ongoing projects relying on bond funds won’t be able to continue because current patterns are unsustainable barring tax increases or spending cuts, as he noted that we can’t bond our way out of our predicament.

While voters may understand that without tax increases services will be limited, there are undoubtedly plenty of stakeholders to satisfy when it comes to infrastructure projects, such as environmental concerns, and it is no easy feat to deal with conflicting demands. In detailing where financing can come from, Little listed options such as taxes (general or targeted), user fees, non-enterprise revenue streams, revenue from asset monetization, and leveraging public money with private capital for a public/private partnership (PPP). Little also mentioned the ample capital in pension fund investments as a way to finance revenue-backed projects, among other financing methods.

Little pointed out that it’s important to realize that public/private partnerships are merely a delivery method and that while entering into such an agreement can be advantageous, it’s vital to set clear goals and establish trust between entities. Also, transparency, fair competition, and appropriate value for the cost are among the concerns that PPPs raise. A lack of accountability and poor organizational culture can lead to great deficiencies in project management, resulting in inflated budgets if either public or private leadership is not held responsible.

Staying economically competitive depends on an efficient and functional infrastructure, but as it stands, our nation’s bridges, highways, and other systems are in steep decline—despite their maintenance being in our great interest. According to Little, the country’s avoidance of taxes and fees for infrastructure has created a lack of adequate revenue streams to renew our critical systems, and furthermore, how such revenues are created is not as important as just having revenues to begin with. However, the focus on having funds solely from a policy perspective does not seem to take into account the political capital required to raise such revenues, especially at a time of great fiscal hardship. Simply put, it’s easier said than done when anti-tax movements are increasingly vocal and voters don’t want to see their wallets get hit. It seems in the end that if paying to address our infrastructure problems is avoided, the nation will pay in other ways, namely greater economic decline, among the other consequences of an aging infrastructure network.

Road Rage: Riverside-SBDO Area Ranked 5th in Nation for Pedestrian Danger; Study on Metro Areas

Maybe it’s the influx of retirees roaming in their Cadillacs, but the state of Florida has the top four most dangerous metropolitan areas for pedestrians, according to a new nationwide study from the Transportation for America, a Washington-based coalition of private organizations and local governments that lobbies for transportation spending. But metro areas in California don’t get off easy either when it comes to the organization’s rankings. Coming fifth for pedestrian danger in the nation is the Riverside-San Bernardino area of Southern California. Perhaps one of the more alarming findings of the study is that Latinos and African-Americans are about 50 percent more likely to be a pedestrian injury or death victim. This stat reflects a trend across the nation. When it comes to states’ overall rankings, the Golden State takes the 16th position as the most dangerous state for pedestrians.

Here are how major metro areas in California rank, according to the study:
5. Riverside-San Bernardino
21. Sacramento
27. Los Angeles-Long Beach
28. San Diego-Carlsbad
30. San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara
41. San Francisco-Oakland

The organization that conducted the study pushes for more funding to improve design and safety precautions in metro areas so that fewer pedestrians in America are killed or injured. Some other major highlights from the report include the following:

• 6,957 pedestrians were killed in California between 2000 and 2009
• 67 percent of all pedestrian fatalities occurred on roads that are eligible to receive federal funding for construction or improvement, with federal guidelines or oversight for their design.
• Nearly 60 percent of pedestrian fatalities from 2000 to 2009 occurred on roads with speed limits of 40 mph or greater. Pedestrians have only a 15 percent chance of surviving a collision with a car traveling 40 mph.
• In California between 2000 and 2007, the average pedestrian death rate for Hispanics was 3.1 per 100,000 people, a rate 97 percent higher than the 1.6 rate for non-Hispanic whites.
• Nationwide, 3,880pedestrians 15 years and younger were killed between 2000 and 2007. 526 of those killed were in California.

The report emphasizes that many pedestrian injuries and deaths — as well as those of motorists — are preventable with low-cost design features and retrofits. You can read the full study here.

Amended Realignment Bill Eases Locals’ Financial Burden Prior to Prison Transfers

An amended budget bill is set to go before the governor that would lower the amount that local governments have to pony up in order to tap into state jail-construction money. Originally, under the terms of AB 94, counties would have had to shell out 25 percent of a jail’s costs, but now jail financing can be arranged at 10 percent of the overall cost. The ease in financing is to ensure that local governments can take on extra prisoners as part of the governor’s realignment plans, which will send some state offenders to local facilities. Each county will be capped at accessing $100 million. It is expected that around 40,000 state inmates will be shifted to the control of local governments, and jail financing is sure to be vital for providing extra capacity when one takes into account that many prisons are already overcrowded. The Press Enterprise reports the following on the funding:

“The money is part of $1.2 billion in jail financing the Legislature approved in 2007. It would help build new county jail beds as the governor seeks to shift several state responsibilities to counties, including oversight of some lower-level convicts and parolees. Supporters say counties need more money to handle so many new inmates but are struggling to come up with the matching money as their economic fortunes have fallen amid the recession. Assemblyman Bob Blumenfield, D-Sherman Oaks, chairman of the Assembly Budget Committee, called the legislation a technical clean-up bill. About half the funding from the 2007 bill, AB900, has been awarded to 11 counties that agreed to match a quarter of the cost. Those counties cannot reapply for the 10 percent rate if they have spent any of the money.”

San Bernardino County is one of the counties that originally applied to receive $83 million in funding from the 2007 bill. However, officials in San Bernardino are upset that the newest bill won't refund the county the difference between a 25 percent match and a 10 percent match, which amounts to about $16 million. Read more here.

The Economist Hosts Debate on Restricting the Growth of Cities to Improve Quality of Life

The Economist is hosting a debate based on the following motion: “This house believes that restricting the growth of cities will improve quality of life.” Defending this motion in the debate is Paul James, Director, Global Cities Institute, RMIT and Director, UN Global Compact, Cities Programme. And against the motion is Chetan Vaidya, Director of the National Institute of Urban Affairs, India. The debate was structured as follows: opening statements, rebuttals, guest contributions, and closing statements. Readers can vote on the persuasiveness of the arguments to give their say about the motion. So far, 51 percent of viewers are in favor, positing that the growth of cities should in fact be restricted.

James’ overall position is characterized as follows:

“It is not metropolitan living, suburbanisation, or even the human shift to the predominance of city over rural dwelling that are the principal problems per se. It is rather the kind of cities that we tend to create: sprawling and bloating.”

Vaidya’s overall position is characterized as follows:

“Rather than restricting city growth, urban strategy should focus on harnessing the benefits of urban growth by managing it well, ensuring improved and equitable service provision and promoting good governance.”

The background for this debate is characterized as follows:

“Just over half the world's population now call cities home. Soon some 500 cities around the world will have more than 1m people each. Within a couple of decades, says the UN, 5 billion people will live in cities, with the most rapid rise in the number of urban dwellers coming in Asia and Africa. Urbanisation typically comes, in the long term, with great gains to human development: it helps to create wealth, spur innovation, encourage freedom and improve the education of those who make it to town. But the rapid spread of sprawling, ill-planned mega cities, the rise of slums that are home to millions of the poor, the dreadful pollution and congestion common to many fast-growing cities, the rising power of urban gangs and even paramilitary forces in some countries, all suggest that too-rapid growth can harm, as well as improve, the residents' quality of life. So should, and could, the growth of cities be restricted, and by whom? Would restrictions improve the lives of city dwellers—and what of the lives of those left outside the city walls?”

You can read the opening statements here.