Defending a veto
- Share via
Re “A triple whammy,” editorial, Oct. 4
Your editorial about the governor’s veto of SB 974 was misleading. The governor supports the bill’s concept, which would levy a fee on each loaded container from the major ports. However, the bill had flaws: It ignored the needs of the San Joaquin Valley, which was shut out of serious consideration for funds yet bears much of the negative effects; the narrowly focused uses of revenues were not in line with strategic priorities of the state’s goods movement plan; and it missed the opportunity to leverage and encourage public-private partnerships. It also added a burden on businesses while not ensuring accountability for expenditures.
The governor has supported substantial infrastructure improvements for Southern California. He championed Proposition 1B, which provides $1.65 billion for goods movement projects in Southern California. Most of the $1 billion in bond money slated for air quality improvements will be used at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Another $400 million is for projects in the San Diego area.
Dale E. Bonner
Sacramento
The writer is secretary of the state Business, Transportation and Housing Agency.
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond. In your inbox twice per week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
