Los Angeles Transportation Board Drafts Tax Hike Proposal

Earlier this week I posted a story about Los Angeles' move to fund transit improvements through a tax increase. The LA Times published a recent update to the story. The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) has approved the drafting of the ballot measure to be sent before the voters. Of course there are a few turns and twists on the way to the half cent sales tax approval.

The first hurdle is that AB 2321 must be approved by the legislature. This measure authorizes the MTA to pursue the tax increase. Anyone who is familiar with the legislature knows that nothing is certain until the bill is signed by the Governor.

The second issue is surpassing the daunting two thirds threshold needed to pass the measure. The MTA released the results of a survey that reported that 73 percent of likely voters support the half cent sales tax increase. However parts of the county that are rumbling about not being included could be pivotal in the success of the measure.

The full LA Times article can be found here.

More Truckers to Be Paid Prevailing Wages

One of the most contentious issues in Public Works contracting in California is the payment of truckers, who haul materials on and off site. Supporters of the coverage say that the hauling is connected to the project, while opponents say that the work is "off site" and not covered. The Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) in May issued a determination that expanded prevailing wage to cover contractors employees that haul materials on and off of construction sites.

The AGC of California goes into some of the details in this article here.

The guidance that they are giving to contractors in counties that do not have a prevailing wage determination is to seek one from the DIR's Division of Labor Statistics and Research.

Specifically they advise this: "In order to eliminate potential liability, your company should request from the DIR an appropriate prevailing wage rate for this type of work for every Public Works contract you plan to bid."

I am certain that there will be more information developing in the future with regards to this subject. Stay Tuned.

Los Angeles Goes for Transit, While Arizona Goes for Traffic

With all the commotion about high gas prices it is interesting to compare the leadership coming out of Los Angeles and Phoenix, Arizona. According to a recent LA Times Article, business and labor officials are coming out to support a tax increase to provide more funding for mass transit. 500 miles east on Interstate 10, Arizona's leadership is shooting for a tax increase that is going to give over 80 percent to highways and roads. Am I missing something here?

Business and labor leaders in Los Angeles are concerned with two things, traffic congestion and the cost of commuting. David Fleming, chairman of the Los Angeles County Business Federation said that his groups greatest concern was congestion. Labor leaders also have noted that the increase in transportation costs is eating away at the wages of LA's workers. It looks like a coalition is forming to pass the tax, however it will be difficult because in order to pass a tax over two thirds of voters must support the measure.

Arizona on the other hand has gone to the complete other side of the traffic continuum. They are opting for funding more highways and roads. This funding will more than likely will increase sprawl. They are facing opposition from the taxpayers and environmentalists. The Arizona Federation of Taxpayers has said that the measure spends too much on public transportation. According to the Arizona Star, the Sierra Club opposed it as well and complained that only 18 percent of the $42.6 billion that would be raised during the next 30 years from the new tax would go to such things as more buses and light rail. I am siding with the Sierra Club on this one. According to www.ArizonaGasPrices.com the cost of gas today is $4.07 per gallon. Yes, this is cheaper than California, but no bargain.

It will be interesting to see how this tale of two metros plays out on November 4th. Hopefully the voters in Arizona have more vision their leaders.

Border Fence Exempt from Environmental Regulations

The US Supreme Court said that it is not going to intervene in the construction of a fence along the US and Mexico Border. The fence, which stretches from San Diego to Texas, crosses private property, military installations, Native American Tribal Land and National Wildlife Refuges.

Defenders of Wildlife and the Sierra Club sued the federal government in November of 2007. In 2005 Congress authorized Department of Homeland Security to waive environmental laws if it would expedite the building of the wall. They asserted that Congress overstepped its role by letting an Executive Branch Appointee, Michael Chertoff decide laws. The Legislative Branch (Congress) is supposed to be a lawmaking body of our government. But from 2000 to 2006 Congress pretty much was not minding the store and let the Administration do as they pleased. The High Court agreed with the Administration.

The fence will is going to harm endangered species habitats from San Diego to Naco, Arizona to El Paso, Texas. Unfortunately, animals near the border don't understand the difference between the US and Mexico. While the effectiveness of the wall to stem immigration will be unknown, the impact on the endangered species is certain.

An article about the court case can be found here.

LA Unified Schools: Too Many Seats and Not Enough Students

The LA Unified School District (LAUSD) is one of the largest school districts in the country. They have over the last few decades been in a process of refurbishing and building new schools to accommodate students. The price tag for this is $20 billion. However, demographics are shifting. People are having less children in the areas that were predicted to have large numbers of families. Less children = less students and less demand for seats.

According to an article this weekend from the LA Times:

"The district plans to build campuses that will take hundreds of students from those schools, further reducing their enrollment. By the time the building program is completed in 2012, there will be tens of thousands of empty seats at dozens of once-crowded schools, a Times analysis shows."

The full article is quite informative and can be found here.

The districts need to make accurate demographic predictions about where people with children will live.

I believe that this underscores the problem with planning schools. You are damned if you build too much and there are not enough pupil. But you are SOL and have a major crisis if there are not enough seats for students.