Most people are surprised to find
that their property tax monies do not fund county roads.
Revenues to fund roads have come from the following sources: 50% of funding
from either the 25% “timber receipts” for harvest on federal lands, (or the
federal Secure Rural Schools and Communities Act monies to make up for the drop in harvest
on federal lands); 35% of road funding from gasoline taxes; 8% from other federal exchange
programs and 7% from Proposition 42. Next fiscal year 2007-08, revenues from gas tax money
and other federal exchange programs will remain the same. There will be no Proposition 42
monies, although these are anticipated to double in future years. As the Secure Schools
and Communities Self-Determination Act (SSCSA) has not been reauthorized by Congress, this
revenue will reduce by $3.75 million by reverting to the old 25% timber receipt formula
which may now produce about $250,000. In simple terms, the County Road Department will
lose about half of its revenues next year (about $4.5 million.)
Under the current road budget, about 65% goes to pay for the salary
and benefits of its 80 employees; 25% goes to fund overhead (fixed operational costs); and
10% is “discretionary” used to buy asphalt, rock, chip seal materials and to pay
for equipment replacement. Siskiyou County has 1,360 miles of road and 175 bridges to
maintain. This discretionary budget translates to roughly $750 a mile. Materials alone
cost $15,000 a mile to chip seal and $75,000 a mile to overlay. (This assumes using the
county road crew to do the job.) At these costs, Siskiyou County has several billion
dollars of infrastructure that are not currently being fully maintained. (Even with full
SSCSA, the County lacks about $5 million needed to fully maintain roads and bridges.) For this reason, the County no longer accepts new
roads into its system.
The Board of Supervisors will have to figure out how to
compensate/adjust to the dramatic loss in revenue. If the loss is born entirely by the
Road Department, road maintenance shops around the county could be consolidated to fewer
locations. Reductions in funded personnel and decreased services could result in the
adoption of a Road Maintenance and Plowing Priority Plan – such as limiting snow
plowing to main school bus routes and discontinuing maintenance on certain roads.
One option is to shift
funding from the General Fund – over which the Board has some discretion. This is the
pot of money that also funds: the Sheriff, Jail, Probation, District Attorney, Public
Defender, Planning, Building, Assessor, Auditor, Recorder, Treasurer, Clerk,
Administration, Agriculture, Libraries, County Counsel, Veterans, Museum, Farm Advisors,
Economic Development and Tourism. This option could affect funding and services in these
other departments. (As mentioned in prior columns, Behavioral Health, Public Health and
Human Services are funded largely with ear-marked pots of money that cannot be shifted to
other uses.)
Congress is still haggling over attaching some form of SSCSA monies
to one bill or another. Statewide, an initiative could be put before the voters to add an
additional .5% to the sales tax to fund roads. Locally, voters could consider a tax on
heavy trucks – such as gravel, log and bottled water trucks to pay for their road
impacts. Traffic impact fees could be levied on developers to improve their local roads.
The County could pass permit review fees and charge for encroachment permits.
In any event, this will be a difficult budget year.
|
