COUNCILMEN PUSH FOR STREET FUNDING.

Byline: TONY CARDENAS and GREIG SMITH  Local View

Los Angeles streets have more than 80,000 potholes, each one ready to wreak havoc on your tires or your suspension, or run you off the road. That is why we are proposing a bond that would, over eight years, repair the 4,000 miles of streets that are in the worst condition in our history. And beginning in the first year after the repair work is complete, it would mandate that the City Council allocate sufficient funding to keep all city streets in good condition in perpetuity.

That is worth much more than the approximately $7 a month it would cost the average homeowner. Compare that sum to the $671, on average, that our broken roads cost Los Angeles motorists every year in car-maintenance costs, according to the Road Information Program Report. Nationwide, studies have shown over and over that public investment to improve the quality of roads saves lives and prevents injuries. It saves taxpayer money in health care and public safety costs. And it greatly reduces vehicle maintenance costs. It even increases real estate values.

The need could not be greater. Over 4,000 miles of streets, nearly 60 percent of our street system, are in poor condition, and it will take 80 years to repave our streets at the current pace. Even then, we will not catch up because the previously paved streets will need to be resurfaced again. This situation has evolved from inadequately funding the proper maintenance of our streets since World War II. But pointing fingers will not fix the streets. We have inherited this situation from our predecessors, but we can make sure that our children and grandchildren don't inherit it from us. That is the choice that we want to put before voters in November.

History tells us that people will support bond-funded projects if they feel that they will directly benefit from them. And, in the past, when voters have entrusted the city with bond money, we have completed projects on time and found efficiencies that enabled us to achieve more.

For example, Proposition DD, a $178 million bond dedicated to upgrading Los Angeles Public Library branches and building new ones, which passed with 71.7 percent of the vote, was executed efficiently enough to allow additional libraries to be built that were not part of the plan. Proposition Q, a $600 million city public safety bond, approved with 67 percent of the vote, was equally successful. Its ambitious goal of building 13 new public safety facilities, including six police stations and a Valley emergency operations center, is on track to be completed on budget and a year ahead of schedule.

Critics are right to question whether we are cutting city spending and finding ways to be more efficient. We constantly and aggressively seek new ways to cut costs. We have cut the fat, and now we are down to the muscle and bone.

We want to allow residents to make the choice. Our bond proposal must be approved by two-thirds of voters, which means that it will not happen unless it is widely supported. Repaving the streets of our city will benefit everyone in the short term, and will continue to benefit us for generations to come. The cost of doing nothing is immeasurably higher to all of us. We owe it to ourselves. We owe it to our future.

So do we want our streets fixed in eight years or 80 years?