Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City unveils $24.8 billion 10‑year capital plan and proposes a $170 million streets bond
Summary
Acting City Administrator Amy Brown and capital planners presented a 10‑year capital plan that prioritizes earthquake safety, state‑of‑good‑repair work and accessibility; the plan proposes a $170 million streets bond as a near‑term measure and recommends pursuing long‑term revenue such as a local VLF to sustain maintenance.
Acting City Administrator Amy Brown and the capital planning program presented the city’s proposed 10‑year capital expenditure plan, recommending roughly $16.3 billion in City direct investments and $8.5 billion in outside agency funding for a total program of about $24.8 billion covering fiscal years 2012–2021.
Brian Strong, capital planning program director, and Ed Ryskin, Public Works director, outlined priorities: seismic and public‑safety projects, state‑of‑good‑repair renewals, ADA and curb‑ramp programs and targeted investments in parks and public health facilities. The presenters noted a significant backlog in pay‑as‑you‑go renewal needs and emphasized that deferring maintenance increases long‑term costs.
The plan includes a proposed $170 million streets bond sized to provide roughly three years of resurfacing and associated curb‑ramp and sidewalk work to address an eroding paving condition index (PCI ~64, with a target of 70). Planners framed the bond as a stopgap to address backlog while seeking a stable long‑term revenue stream (examples discussed included a local vehicle license fee and a possible quarter‑cent sales tax) to fund ongoing maintenance and avoid returning to another bond in the near future.
Speakers described constraints on bond sizing: a self‑imposed policy to hold incremental property tax rates at or below the 2006 level and a discretionary cap on general‑fund debt service (3.25% of discretionary revenue). Staff said they would conduct further outreach, public polling and refine bond scope before placing measures on a ballot and noted some bonds are being timed to avoid overcrowding future ballots.
Public comment urged a deliberate public process for the parks bond schedule and cautioned against accelerating park bonds without adequate outreach. The committee moved the plan forward with recommendation while flagging questions about long‑term maintenance funding and debt‑service impacts.
