SPECIAL REPORT / ELECTION PREVIEW : DECISION ’94 / A Voter’s Guide to State and Local Elections : Propositions : PROP. 1A

What it is: This measure would authorize the sale of $2 billion in general obligation bonds to help pay the state’s share of the estimated $20 billion needed to repair damage from the Jan. 17 Northridge earthquake and to provide for the seismic strengthening of highway overpasses throughout California. The bridge retrofitting program would get the bulk of the bond money--$950 million. The remainder includes $575 million for housing rehabilitation, $265 million for quake repairs to schools and other public buildings, $65 million to reduce earthquake hazards in public buildings and $145 million for highway repairs that are not eligible for federal funds. The principal and interest on general obligation bonds are paid by the state out of its general fund, which is supported primarily by revenues from state income and sales taxes.

*

Arguments for: The use of bonds to raise these essential funds avoids a tax increase that could further depress California’s struggling economy. By earmarking some of the money for seismic retrofitting, other state funds would be freed for transportation maintenance and construction projects. All retrofitted bridges survived the Northridge earthquake, proving that seismic strengthening is a wise investment. The bond issue would enable the state to complete retrofitting at an accelerated pace. For low-income victims of the earthquake, it could become the only source of financing available for home repairs.

*

Arguments against: The use of bonds to pay for seismic retrofitting and roadway repairs violates the California tradition of financing highways on a pay-as-you-go basis. A temporary gasoline or sales tax increase is the preferred method of financing highways. Those methods are less expensive and avoid saddling future generations with today’s debts. Furthermore, passage of the bond issue would not cover all costs of seismic retrofitting or alleviate the need to find additional revenue to finance the state’s transportation program.

*

Who supports it: Gov. Pete Wilson, state Sen. David A. Roberti (D-Van Nuys), the California Organization of Police and Sheriffs, the California Chamber of Commerce, California Professional Firefighters and the Congress of California Seniors.

*

Who opposes it: Center for the California Taxpayer, People’s Advocate, Committee to Protect the Family and the National Tax Limitation Committee.