Just as Napa County approved a $5.4 million roads budget this week, the state Legislature proposed a reduction in funding for local roads by almost half that.

The Legislature’s proposals to take gas tax revenue from California’s counties, coupled with a proposal from the State Department of Finance to defer future Proposition 42      payments to counties, could mean the layoffs of 20 or more road maintenance workers, according to Napa County Public Works Director Don Ridenhour.

With only 12 maintenance workers left, routine and safety-related maintenance on the county’s roads would surely suffer, Ridenhour said.

On Tuesday, the Napa County Board of Supervisors approved a budget for 2009-10 that includes $5.4 million for road maintenance, with the understanding that until the state takes action to solve its fiscal crisis, the county can’t be certain where significant revenue reductions will hit.

Meanwhile, the Legislature’s Budget Conference Committee Tuesday adopted a budget that includes a provision for the state to take from counties almost all of the gas taxes that residents currently pay. Gas tax comprises half the funds available to Napa County for roads maintenance and operations.

If the budget proposal is approved by the Senate on June 22, Napa County would lose $2.4 million in 2009-2010, according to Ridenhour, severely curtailing the county’s ability to maintain 446 miles of roadway, 79 bridges and hundreds of culverts and roadside drainage systems. Also at stake, Ridenhour said, is the ability to respond to emergency needs such as flooded or impassable roadways.

The State Department of Finance has also proposed to defer payment to counties until May 2010 of the first two months of Proposition 42 revenue, which directs sales tax on gasoline into transportation projects. Ridenhour said this would reduce the roads fund revenue by $720,000 in the first three quarters of the fiscal year. County officials are skeptical that the deferred funds would actually be paid in May. If not, the deferrals would result in further reduction in funding for road maintenance.

The Roads Division of the county’s Public Works department includes 32 road maintenance staff, more than half of whom would be laid off if the proposed state cuts are approved.

“The county cannot accomplish our mission of providing a safe and reliable transportation system with this reduction in funding and work force,” Ridenhour said. “We’re fortunate that our board has always been fiscally conservative, so we are not in the critical situation that other counties find themselves in. But they cannot be expected to take general fund dollars from other programs to cover state raids on local roads funding, especially for multiple years.”

While the state’s proposal includes the temporary release of other funding to counties, Ridenhour said those funds do not take the place of the lost revenue because of restrictions placed on the use. Gas tax funds are used for operations and maintenance, while the temporary funds are restricted to major capital rehabilitation projects.

“When we are unable to maintain roads properly, the eventual cost of replacement and rehabilitation rises dramatically,” said Mark Luce, chairman of the Board of Supervisors. “The long-term effects of the state’s borrowing are exponentially higher costs.”

Noreen Evans, D-Santa Rosa, chairwoman of the Assembly’s budget committee, could not be reached for comment. State Sen. Pat Wiggins, D-Santa Rosa, was also unavailable for comment.