Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 06:08:03 PM EDT
|
( - promoted by njdem)
Yesterday the Burlco Times reported that the Burlington County Bridge Commission, which has been under GOP control for the last 20 years, has hired engineers from Drexel for an emergency review to examine the bridges they have apparently failed at maintaining...The two spans operated by the Burlington County Bridge Commission both scored lower than the Minnesota bridge on the federal scale. The Burlington Bristol Bridge, built in 1931, received a 30.1 rating and is listed as "structurally deficient" in the national bridges inventory of the Federal Highway Administration.
The Tacony-Palmyra Bridge, built in 1929, received a 34.1 rating, but bridge commission officials noted that, despite its rating, it was not included on the federal inventory list of structurally deficient bridges in New Jersey. So the Tacony bridge isn't bad enough to make the list yet, but still not a ringing endorsement of the commission's oversight which was pointed out by Freeholder Candidate Tom Bader..."The Bridge Commission's failure to maintain these bridges is the cost of corruption," said Bader, a Democrat from Moorestown. "This threat to the publics safety is the result of two plus decades of GOP waste." The corruption he references was the indictment of its former spokesman and further suspicions of billing for work that was not performed. Funny he should talk about GOP waste though, because today comes a story that rather than preparing to bond to repair the bridges they are supposed to be fixing, the GOP freeholder board has voted to bond for a $20 million program to fund a "lease bank" and assist local governments with low interest loans...The ordinance would create the Burlington County Lease Bank, which would provide a maximum loan of $1 million for items such as vehicle and equipment purchases.
The bridge commission approached the freeholders last month with the idea. The commission, using its powers as an improvement authority, operates a bond program intended for major capital programs like roads and buildings. The Lease Bank, however, would provide money for smaller purchases and, for the first time, would include school boards. While I like the idea of helping local towns, shouldn't they focus on their primary charge which is maintaining the roads and bridges? Especially after all of the news recently and the fact that the state says it will cost between 5 and 7 billion to repair the infrastructure. Is this really the time for this concept? They are charged with major capital improvements, not buying a vehicle or equipment for local towns. To me this just looks like more of the shell game to continue accumulating debt at all levels while telling the taxpayers you are not raising taxes. And here is a question: Who decides the towns that will get approved for these loans? Doesn't this have the potential to turn into a $20 million taxpayer funded slush fund where the freeholders can buy political support during a very tough election year? If this plan does go forward, I would hope there are some well spelled out controls and guidelines to govern it. |
| Jason Springer :: Freeholders using Burlco Bridge Commission to bond for "smaller purchases" |
|
|
Featured Stories  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
