Super Collider Would Mean Tax Bonus of $1 Million a Year for Its Area, Study Finds

Construction of the multibillion-dollar superconducting super collider in California would present local governments in Northern California with a net tax windfall of more than $1 million annually, a new study concluded Thursday.

University of California Cooperative Extension economists George Goldman and David Strong calculated the impact by balancing anticipated gains from taxes on new industry and new jobs against the tax income that would be lost by building the huge atom smasher--exempt from taxation--on about 7,700 acres of farmland.

An earlier study by UCLA economists had predicted more than $500 million in added tax revenues for the state alone during the massive project’s eight-year construction phase. Millions more would flow to the state each year during the super collider’s projected 25-year operating life.

However, those benefits have failed to placate farmers and other critics of the project, since the benefits would come with 13,000 to 16,000 new residents living in 5,000 to 5,800 new homes--and could induce added “spinoff” growth in rural counties already resisting urbanization pressures.

California is among about 30 states competing for the $4.4-billion project, which calls for a college-like research campus and an oval-shaped tunnel 53 miles in circumference. The state plans to nominate two sites, one east of Stockton and another west of Sacramento, to the Department of Energy, which will select the location for the federal project.

At the Stockton-area site, in San Joaquin County, UC Extension has calculated that the super collider would generate a $260-million net increase in sales and create 6,156 jobs. Although a few government agencies in the area would actually lose revenue from taxes despite this growth--neighboring Stanislaus County, for one, would be out $60,000 a year--the region would have a cumulative net tax increase of $1.2 million.

Local agencies with a net loss of revenue because of the collider would be reimbursed by the state under pending legislation, said University of California spokesman John R. Gustafson.

At the other site, straddling Yolo and Solano counties, the impact would be slightly larger, with a net increase of $264 million in sales and 6,178 jobs. This private-sector boost would create $1.8 million in added local tax revenue annually, the new report concluded.

John Eilers, leader of a group opposed to the San Joaquin County site, said Thursday that he had not seen a copy of the study, but that based on experience, “I doubt they are getting into the cumulative effects or the environmental effects.”

Indeed, the report notes that it “does not address any potential secondary land use and economic changes that might occur.”

Eilers and others worry that while the state has agreed to pay for problems directly resulting from construction of the machine, local governments will be forced to widen the roads, dig the sewers and build the schools needed for new residents drawn by spinoff industries attracted by the collider.