Fresno leaders weigh $100 million 'Pave Now' bond to tackle deteriorating streets

Fresno city staff proposed a two-year, $100 million program to speed up repaving and related concrete and ADA work across the city, presenting a financing plan based on lease-revenue bonds and a mix of contractor work and in‑house concrete crews.

Assistant City Manager Kelly Santino and Public Works Director Scott Mosier told the City Council that citywide pavement condition has declined from about a 60 (in 2021) to an estimated 55 today and that construction-cost escalation has roughly doubled prior repair estimates. Mosier said preventive treatments such as slurry seals are far cheaper than waiting until a street reaches a failed condition that requires full reconstruction.

The administration’s “Pave Now” plan would split $100 million across two fiscal years (about $51.2M in year one, $48.7M in year two) and mix small public-works self‑performed concrete/ADA repairs with contractor-led paving. Staff said the program is designed to deliver some projects in the current paving season and to coordinate concrete work and paving in the correct sequence to avoid having new pavement cut for later repairs.

Council members pressed staff for more specifics. Several asked for alternate financing scales (examples requested: $75M, $100M, $125M and $150M) and for a clear mapping of the recommended streets the city would repave first, with explicit criteria (PCI, traffic volumes and “bang for buck”) and evidence those choices were the best value for taxpayers. Council members also asked the administration to show how much additional lease‑revenue capacity could be unlocked by packaging specific city assets as collateral, and whether selling or repurposing underused properties could reduce future debt requirements.

Santino said staff are confident $100 million is feasible on affordability grounds and that they have identified assets marketable to the bond market; he asked the council to approve a reimbursement/enabling resolution so staff can prepare bid packages and start work this season. Mosier said project lists are not final and that many of the items on the draft list are the “low‑hanging fruit” that can be delivered quickly.

Council asked for (and staff agreed to provide) the following before the council takes a final vote: (a) a 3‑scenario financing comparison (roughly $75M / $100M / $150M) with annual general‑fund debt service estimates; (b) an itemized “asset packaging” memo showing which city facilities could be used as collateral and how those assets would be combined to expand borrowing capacity (staff flagged an initial $50M of additional affordability as plausible but asked for market confirmation); (c) a prioritized street list with PCI, lane‑miles and traffic metrics and a short explanation of why each street was selected; and (d) a delivery plan that shows which work the city will self‑perform (concrete/ADA) and which will be competitively bid.

Council members repeatedly emphasized they prefer the city prioritize streets where the investment produces the best lifecycle value — catching streets before they fail — rather than targeting only the very worst blocks (which can be far more expensive per lane‑mile). They also highlighted the equity question: older neighborhoods without local maintenance districts have different needs than newer areas and requested staff show geographic equity in the recommended list.

Santino and Mosier said staff will return with the alternate scenarios and a refined list; several council members said they want to vote quickly so work can begin this summer but still want the additional analysis in hand before finalizing any bond issuance.