In good news, City Council voted at its July 7 meeting to place an infrastructure bond on the November ballot, giving voters the opportunity to decide its future. The measure passed 4–1, with Councilmember Daysog casting the sole dissenting vote.
In their presentation, staff emphasized that Alameda faces many significant infrastructure needs across the community, with existing funding falling far short of what is required. Those needs are only increasing as climate change places additional strain on our infrastructure, and delaying investments will only make repairs and upgrades more expensive over time. Without a dedicated funding source, the city will be forced to pull from the General Fund, reducing the resources available for essential services such as parks, libraries, and emergency response.
Consultants presented the results of statistically valid polling indicating that a bond structured as proposed could achieve the two-thirds voter approval required to pass. Not easy, but with a strong educational campaign, possible. Here‘s how sentiment towards the need for additional infrastructure funding has changed over the last couple of years:
Below are the categories for capital improvement areas, and example projects, reflecting funding priorities gathered from their polling. Most would impact the experience of bicyclists or pedestrians (more on that in this earlier blog post), but the fourth category, in italics, would be most directly impactful.
- Preventing Flooding and Combating Sea-Level Rise
- Levees, sea walls, flood walls, ecosystem restoration and nature-based solutions to mitigate shoreline flooding from sea level rise
- Stormwater detention basins to expand stormwater storage capacity
- Replacement of storm drain pipes and culverts, and drainage improvements to reduce surface flooding
- Storm pump station upgrades
- Preparing for Earthquakes and Emergencies
- Fire Stations 1, 2 and 4 earthquake retrofits and other safety-related improvements
- Structural improvements to the Alameda Police Department and improvements to optimize the use of existing, including construction of an evidence storage room
- Maintaining Rapid Response to Fires, Accidents, and Medical Emergencies
- Construct new Fire Station 5 on the West End of Alameda, including the relocation and consolidation of Fire Admin, Fire Prevention, Emergency Medical Services at the new site
- Relocate and build Fleet Services Maintenance Facility, possibly as part of shared Civic Facility including other municipal operations, and charging infrastructure for the fleet
- Repairing Potholes and Keeping Streets Safe and Accessible
- Paving streets and repairing potholes
- Sidewalk and park ADA improvements
- Traffic signal upgrades to improve traffic flow and limit congestion
- Street safety improvements to reduce crashes and improve traffic at intersections
- Keeping Pollution Out of the Bay
- Storm system upgrades that may include trash capture, pollution control, green infrastructure and other related improvements
Staff and consultants answered a wide range of questions about the process, priorities, oversight, funding strategies, overall funding amount, and the level of detail in the proposed project list. One of the main concerns—raised primarily through written comments and by Councilmember Daysog—was that the project list lacked sufficient specificity. The consultants responded that the proposed list is actually more detailed than those included in most municipal infrastructure bond measures. In their view, it gives voters a good understanding of how the funds would be used while preserving enough flexibility to adapt to changing needs and avoid unnecessarily constraining future projects. (For more perspective on this, see this post from The Morning Bun.)
In response to a question from Councilmember Jensen about why the City is seeking additional funding for projects that already have existing funding sources (such as pavement, ADA upgrades, and storm systems), Public Works Director Erin Smith explained that current funding levels are insufficient to meet the City‘s needs. In the case of pavement, additional funding would allow the City to rehabilitate many local streets that have deteriorated to the point where they require extensive, and therefore costly, repairs. Because these streets are too expensive to address within the existing annual pavement maintenance program, they are often deferred in favor of less costly projects. An infusion of funding would enable the City to address these high-cost streets, reduce the backlog of deferred maintenance, and improve the City‘s overall pavement condition score.
Below are maps presented by Public Works a few years ago showing the state of Alameda’s pavement.
Councilmember Boller asked about the equity of the funding mechanism, and the consultants said that they looked at various strategies, including a parcel tax based on square footage, but determined those had much less chance of success than what is being proposed.
The public comment at the meeting was overwhelmingly supportive.
If you missed it, you can view a recording of the meeting here, starting at 1:11:30. To learn more about the measure, visit the city’s Stronger Together page.
Much more on this in the months ahead — it’s going to be a busy fall!