Gas Tax Plan Runs Into Foe : Ballot measure: Opposition by the building industry could threaten voter approval of the proposed increase.

A politically powerful association of builders and developers Thursday became the first major interest group to announce its opposition to a proposed 9-cent-a-gallon gasoline tax increase that voters are being asked to endorse next June.

The 7,000-member California Building Industry Assn. said it will campaign against the gas tax hike because it is part of a transportation improvement plan that places new responsibilities on developers to help reduce traffic congestion.

“We are in support of the overall gas tax increase concept, but our members cannot accept this legislation because of the unworkable congestion-management program,” said Owen R. Waters, the association’s senior staff vice president for governmental affairs.

Waters said the decision to formally oppose the gas tax increase came after Assemblyman Richard Katz (D-Sylmar), the author of the congestion-management plan, refused to accept changes that the developers considered critical.

“We haven’t been treated well here recently and . . . we ain’t going to take it any more,” Waters said.

Surprised by the association’s decision, Katz reacted angrily, accusing the developers of letting their own desire to make a profit overshadow the need to make congestion management an important element in any future land use planning.

“The association is putting the greed of their members above the needs of the people of California,” he said. “What you have here is a classic case of special interest, in this case developers who will build on every corner and level every mountain to make a profit.”

He said he had offered to modify the proposal, but what the developers wanted in effect was “a process whereby they can get out of the whole thing, and we’re not going to do that for them.”

Just three weeks ago, the influential California Teachers Assn. announced that it also was contemplating similar opposition, although it did not go so far as to take a formal position.

The gas tax increase, designed to help finance the 10-year transportation improvement program, is tied to a proposed constitutional amendment that would modify the state’s spending limit. Voter approval of the constitutional amendment in June would trigger the gas tax hike.

Both measures are part of a delicate compromise reached by Gov. George Deukmejian and Republican and Democratic legislative leaders last summer.

The opposition of either interest group presents a dilemma for Deukmejian and the legislative leaders, who promised each other that they would make no major changes that would jeopardize the compromise. At the same time, they have been told by political experts that strong opposition from any interest group could kill the measures’ chances of passage.

Then, to make matters worse, if lawmakers capitulate to the developers, they face the potential of losing support from environmentalists. Sierra Club officials, particularly, have said that they would actively oppose the gas tax measure if the congestion-management program is “tinkered with.”

Sen. John Garamendi (D-Walnut Grove), the sponsor of the spending-limit proposal, said lawmakers will have to try to find a “common ground” with the teachers and the developers.

The opposition from the teacher group stems from its concern that modifications in the spending limit would mean that schools would get less money than they are now entitled to get.

“My attitude is that we have to resolve the problem,” Garamendi said. “We cannot afford to have significant opposition. Both these groups are very significant.”

But Katz said he did not consider the opposition of the developers to be a significant threat to the passage of the ballot measure.

“If I had to choose between alienation of environmentalists or developers, I’ll fight with developers every time,” he said.

While applauding the goal of Katz’s congestion management program, developers contend that it is so complex that neither developers nor governments could make it work.

The program requires local governments to assess the effect that proposed new developments would have on traffic congestion and then reach an agreement with the developer to mitigate the impact. The mitigation could take several forms, including the payment of fees to local governments to be used to expand the transportation system.

The transportation improvement program is a comprehensive plan to relieve traffic gridlock, and includes the gas tax increase, the construction of new highways, expansion of mass transit and the congestion-management proposal.

BACKGROUND

A proposal to increase the state’s gasoline tax 9 cents per gallon was approved by Gov. George Deukmejian and the Legislature last summer as part of a compromise that also provides for modifications in the state spending limit. The gas tax increase cannot go into effect, however, unless voters approve the spending limit changes next June. Revenue from the tax increase would be used to help finance a 10-year, $18.5-billion transportation improvement program.