More than $200 Million in Bonds Will Be Spent for Motorists, Bicyclists and Pedestrians

public attentionThis is a press release from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans):

This month the California Transportation Commission (CTC) allocated more than $200 million for 27 fix-it-first highway projects and $42 million for 43 transit, bike and pedestrian projects that are partially funded by Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017.

Californians expect their transportation system to be well maintained, efficient, and multimodal” said Caltrans Director Toks Omishakin. “This funding will keep us safely moving motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians and transit users across the state.”

The 27 SB 1 funded SHOPP projects will replace or improve 305 lane miles, 27 bridges, 204 congestion reducing devices, and repair 32 culverts to prevent flooding on highways.

Area projects allocated SB 1 funds include:

SB1 – Tehama 36 Pavement Rehabilitation Project

Pavement. 10.1 Lane Miles

$9.5 million pavement project will upgrade curb ramps to current Americans with Disabilities Act Standards, upgrade traffic systems, revamp drainage systems and improve 10.1 lane miles of pavement on State Route 36 from east of Baker Road to east of Sand Slough Bridge in the City of Red Bluff in Tehama County.

Total Project Cost: $ 9,521,000

CTC Allocation: $ 7,789,000

SB1 – Trinity 299, 36 and Siskiyou 96 Bridge Preventive Maintenance Project

Bridge. 9 Bridges.
$12.2 million bridge project will improve ride quality by grinding and overlaying the bridge decks with reinforced concrete, upgrade bridge rails, replace joint seals, construct bridge approach slabs, clean and paint structural steel, and strengthen existing girders on nine bridges at Mad River Bridge Number 05-0034 on State Route 36 and at Trinity River Bridges Number 05-0081 & 05-0082, Pony Bar Creek Bridge Number 05-0043, Grey Creek Bridge Number 05-0044 and Trinity River Bridge Number 05-0006 on State Route 299 in Trinity County and at Irving Creek Bridge Number 02-0022, Ti Creek Bridge Number 02-0027 and Klamath River Bridge Number 02-0132 on State Route 96 in Siskiyou County.

Total Project Cost: $12,240,000

CTC Allocation: $ 9,620,000

The CTC also approved an allocation of more than $42 million for 35 locally administered Active Transportation Program (ATP) projects, 16 of which received $8.3 million in funding from SB 1. These projects range from improving sidewalks and bicycle lanes to creating safer routes to school for children who ride their bicycles or walk to school.

Additionally, more than $21 million of SB 1 funding was allocated to the Local Partnership Program (LPP) to help match road and transit investments that local communities have made in their region through voter-approved transportation tax measures.

Since SB 1 was signed into law April 2017, Caltrans has repaired or replaced 299 bridges and paved nearly 2,400 lane miles of the state highway system. Caltrans has completed 176 SB 1 projects to date, with 455 projects in the works statewide.

SB 1 invests approximately $5 billion per year to fix roads, freeways and bridges in communities across California as well as strategically investing in transit. These funds are split equally between state and local projects and will allow Caltrans to fix more than 17,000 lane miles of pavement, 500 bridges and 55,000 culverts on the state highway system by 2027.

SHOPP is the state highway system’s “fix-it-first” program that funds safety improvements, emergency repairs, highway preservation and operational highway upgrades. A significant portion of the funding for this program comes from SB 1.

Caltrans is committed to conducting its business in a fully transparent manner and detailing its progress to the public. For complete details on SB 1, visit http://www.rebuildingca.ca.gov/.

More information and updates on these and other projects can be found on Caltrans’ social media channels:http://www.dot.ca.gov/paffairs/social-media.html.

Facebooktwitterpinterestmail

Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules

Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

21 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Willie Caos-mayham
Guest
4 years ago

🕯🌳Thank you Kelley for that information.

tax payer
Guest
tax payer
4 years ago

Caltrans is committed to conducting its business in a fully transparent manner

i call bullshit. they do a lot of things they dont report. like when they are down on the river in arcata cleaning up homeless camps thats arent even near a road.

Kym Kemp
Admin
4 years ago
Reply to  tax payer

Bless them for taking care of problems that needed to be dealt without asking for recognition.

tax payer
Guest
tax payer
4 years ago
Reply to  Kym Kemp

they do get paid

Mr. Bear
Guest
Mr. Bear
4 years ago
Reply to  tax payer

Who said they didn’t?

tax payer
Guest
tax payer
4 years ago
Reply to  Mr. Bear

a paycheck is recognition.

Kym Kemp
Admin
4 years ago
Reply to  tax payer

I hope that doesn’t stop you from saying thank you to clerk at the grocery store…

tax payer
Guest
tax payer
4 years ago
Reply to  Kym Kemp

there is a disconnect here. i was not saying that i was not appreciative, i am saying they are not transparent like they claim. i dont want roads monies being spent on anything other than roads.

Kym Kemp
Admin
4 years ago
Reply to  tax payer

Sorry, with my broken arm I tend to be a little brief and thus not clear on what I’m trying to say.

Caltrans is required to mitigate for certain projects so for instance if they put in a road through a wetland, they have to put a wetland somewhere else. I’m not sure why caltrans would be picking up trash down by the river but my guess it has something to do with some sort of mitigation for something else.

However, that said, if the state of California, which along with taxpayers are Caltrans bosses, wants to have a healthy place for its residents at as little cost as possible, sometimes it makes sense to have someone in charge of roads taking care of an area that someone else is not able to take care of…say trash. I’m all for the State of California getting rid of trash before it goes into the rivers and the oceans. and if that sometimes means that Caltrans is taking care of that then I’m delighted and thankful.

And it doesn’t seem to me to be an important part of transparency to report picking up every trashy area. Like most agencies they do a lot that we don’t even notice.

I know you know this but just for my other readers…. To be clear I’m married to a Caltrans employee and my father and grandfather were Caltrans employees

tax payer
Guest
tax payer
4 years ago
Reply to  Kym Kemp

didnt know about the mitigation. thanks

Sparkelmahn
Guest
Sparkelmahn
4 years ago
Reply to  tax payer

Theet.

Willie Caos-mayham
Guest
4 years ago
Reply to  Kym Kemp

🕯🌳I agree Kym. ☃️🎅👍🏽

Guest
Guest
Guest
4 years ago
Reply to  Kym Kemp

When employed, pay is the recognition. That is not to say it’s not a good thing but why not contract to one of the people who employee homeless to do the work? It would seem a better use of resources and would allow those who have expertise in road maintance with a corresponding pay scale to work on the roads?

tax payer
Guest
tax payer
4 years ago

The SB1 taxes were exempt from expenditures appropriations limits. Proposition 69 was a state constitution amendment that ensures that revenues from SB1 can only be used for transportation-related purposes. Voters approved this proposition in June 2018, locking the tax revenue to transportation only. The SB1 car registration fee increase and all older existing fuel tax revenues before SB1 are still appropriated to the General Fund.

Guest
Guest
Guest
4 years ago
Reply to  tax payer

That is one big issue with bond funding. If a bond is passed to fund projects that should be an intrinsic part of a department’s budget, they shift work go there and it allows more to be spent on things that they otherwise could never get funding to cover. And there’s always the interest paid to the same people that those who complain about income disparity call “the rich”. You know the ones who benefit from tax exempt bonds to pay less than their”fair share of taxes?”…

tax payer
Guest
tax payer
4 years ago
Reply to  Guest

always vote no on bonds

kelley
Guest
kelley
4 years ago
Reply to  tax payer

I concur. I ALWAYS ALWAYS vote no on bonds. Even when they are about my most favorite projects. Bonds are like buying groceries on a credit card…and not the one you use religiously to build airline miles, but more like the one with high interest that you still have access to after losing your job.

tax payer
Guest
tax payer
4 years ago
Reply to  kelley

preach

Bonnie Cook
Guest
Bonnie Cook
4 years ago

Maybe they could share some of the dollars to the county roads. They are the intersections to the highways getting all the money

DivideByZero
Guest
DivideByZero
4 years ago

Oh lucky us, but worth mentioning is the fact they take in 28 million A DAY on gas tax alone. Chuck registration fees on top of that (9.2 billion a year), and you have to wonder, where does all the money go. I think we all know the answer, now don’t we?

Cattle Great 🐂💨🐽
Guest
Cattle Great 🐂💨🐽
4 years ago

Great way to share the road.