Laserfiche WebLink
<br />cf'A- £; <br /> <br />Continued from Page 1 - League Applauds Budget Agreement... <br /> <br />One day later, the budget was passed by the Senate (34-4) and the Assembly <br />(64-13), and sent to the governor for his signature. Both houses also passed the budget <br />trailer bills. The League staff is reviewing both the budget and trailer bills to examine the <br />details in the final language (see "The Fine Print... ft for some key items for cities). <br /> <br />You can review the full text of the bills online at www.cacities.orQ. The bills are: <br />Senate Bill (SB) 77 - Budget Bill, Assembly Bill (AB) 131 - Health Omnibus. AB 138- <br />Mandates, AB 139 - General Government, AB 141 - Hydrogen Highway/PIER, AB 145 - <br />Uniform Civil Filing Fees, AB 146 - Budget Revisions, SB 62 - Transportation, SB 63 - <br />Education, SB 64 - Boards and Commissions, SB 68 - Social Services Omnibus, SB 71 <br />- Resources Omnibus, <br /> <br />While the return of Prop. 42 funding was expected - the governor had proposed <br />it his May budget revision and the Legislature adopted it in the budget subcommittee - <br />the VLF gap loan repayment in full was a big surprise. The governor had proposed an <br />early repayment of half the loan amount, but the funding was not included in the budget <br />package adopted by the conference committee. <br /> <br />The League joined with the California State Association of Counties (CSAC) in <br />applauding the budget agreement as one that keeps faith with California voters and <br />repays much-needed funds to California communities (for more information, see the <br />Joint Press Release on the League's web site - www.cacities.org). <br /> <br />Proposition 1A, the League- and local government-sponsored constitutional <br />amendment passed by almost 84 percent of California voters in November 2004, limited <br />the state's ability to take or borrow local funds. The measure sent a clear signal that <br />voters wanted local funds preserved to pay for local services. <br /> <br />Proposition 42 was passed in 2002 by 69 percent of statewide voters. It <br />dedicated the sales tax on gasoline to transportation projects, including repair and <br />maintenance of local streets and roads. But it allowed the state to shift funding to the <br />state general fund during times of state fiscal stress. FY 2005-06 will mark. the first time <br />since Prop. 42 passed that the $1.3 billion sales tax on gas will be spent on <br />transportation. Cities and counties will receive $254 million of that amount for local <br />street and road maintenance projects ($126.5 million for cities). For city-by-city Prop. 42 <br />funding information, see the League's web site - www.cacities.org. <br /> <br />Full VLF Gap Loan Repayment a Welcome Surprise <br /> <br />City and county officials throughout the state greeted the news that full <br />repayment of the VLF gap loan would come one year early with surprise and <br />enthusiasm. <br /> <br />"This is a win-win for the state and local governments," said League of California <br />Cities President Pat Eklund, who is also a council member of the city of Novato. "It's a <br />savings for taxpayers because it wipes this debt off the state books and it provides funds <br />for important local services like law enforcement, firefighting and vital health services." <br />Visit the League's web site to view city-by-city VLF gap loan amounts. <br /> <br />We have not yet been able to determine when the state will process the loan <br />repayment, but will provide this information as soon as it is available. The timing is <br />particularly critical for cities and counties that were considering securitization of their <br />share of the gap loan by selling it to investors. (For details, see "Early Repayment of <br />VLF Gap Loan: A Welcome Surprise for All Citiesft). <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />- 1r <br />