The Voters May Not Buy It : Better have a backup to the bond issue

Along with all the other things that were wrong with it, the Northridge earthquake now seems to have had bad political timing. Because the temblor took place in an election year, many of the state politicians to whom Californians normally might look for bold leadership in the rebuilding effort are instead playing it cautious and politically safe.

That seems to be the only reasonable explanation for this week’s bad decision by Gov. Pete Wilson and some leaders of the Legislature to pay for the state’s share of rebuilding costs not with a modest and temporary tax increase, as was correctly done after the 1989 Loma Prieta quake, but with $3 billion in two bond issues on next June’s primary election ballot--$2 billion for quake repairs to highways and state buildings and $1 billion for schools.

Nobody likes taxes. But bonds, too, must be paid for by the taxpayers. And in the long run they cost more than equivalent taxes. For example, with interest the $2-billion quake bond issue proposed Thursday will, over 20 years, cost taxpayers $3.4 billion. Some bargain.

To make matters worse, the bond issue is larger than needed for the state’s share of repairs, which the Wilson Administration estimates at $1.05 billion. It has been padded with funds for highways elsewhere, mostly in Northern California--no doubt to sweeten the package for those voters, and their state legislators, who did not suffer damage in the Jan. 17 quake.

But California voters, if not the politicians, are hip to the dangers of being overly bonded, which is why several bond proposals--even for schools and parks--have been defeated in recent elections. So it would be no surprise if the proposed earthquake-rebuilding bonds met a similar fate.

If that were to happen, Sacramento, with a state budget already facing a deficit, would be left with nothing for repairing quake damage. And that lack of state commitment could jeopardize the impressive flow of financial aid thus far provided by the federal government, aid that eventually could exceed $9 billion. Without some state funds, Congress would be justified in asking if California deserved further generosity.

One of the few state leaders who has shown the gumption to fight for a temporary sales tax increase is Assembly Speaker Willie Brown (D-San Francisco). In the state Senate Quentin L. Kopp (I-San Francisco) has pushed the equally reasonable idea of a modest gasoline tax hike to pay for rebuilding fallen freeways and retrofitting state highways against future quakes.

Both should stick to their guns when the quake bond election plan comes before the Legislature for its approval next week. At the very least, they should fight to get some kind of pay-as-we-go quake tax in place as an emergency alternative to the bond issues, should they be defeated in June.