Prop. 91

With the start of the election year beginning tomorrow, and with the California Presidential primary and election a month away, I suppose it's time to start reviewing the propositions on the ballot this February.

First up for today is an easy one- Prop. 91.

Basically, this proposition limits the ability of funds raised through gas taxes that are designated specifically for transportation and transportation-related projects. Historically, in tight times, the State has "borrowed" money from this fund to be used for General Fund shortfalls. Unfortunately, the money is normally not paid back into the transportation fund, limiting funding for needed transportation upgrades, such as seismic upgrades, highway repaving and so forth. So, Prop. 91 is a way to tell the state to stop raiding the transportation fund to pay for excess spending on pet projects.

Now, what makes this so easy is that it doesn't really matter what happens with this because Prop. 1-A was passed last November, which accomplishes the same goal. In fact, the sponsors of Prop. 91 are advocating voting no. As stated in the Voter Guide under "Arguments in Favor of Prop. 91": "VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 91. IT'S NO LONGER NEEDED. As the official proponents of this measure, we are encouraging you to VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 91."

In any other circumstances, this would be a Yes. In order to meet the transportation needs of the state, funds from gas taxes need to be allocated for the reasons they are being raised- transportation. However, with the passage of Prop. 1-A last November, and at the urging of the supporters, I recommend a No on 91.

Coming up- I suppose I should talk about Iowa, but I don't really expect anything to be settled. But we'll see what happens or if there are any surprises.