Laserfiche WebLink
potential revenue loss represents a movement toward further reduction of local control over <br />land use decisions, and a city's ability to raise revenues for local servlcas. The loss of this <br />ability could cripple cities' provision of services, and would create fiscal 'winners and losers' <br />among the jurisdictions Involved. <br /> <br />One provision of the bill grants 'bonuses and priorities' to approved jurisdictions in the <br />affected region for a number of sources of transportation, infrastructure, and library funding. <br />These priorities would be offered at the expense of other jurisdictions in any other part of the <br />State, not just in the Sacramento region, illustrating a clear inequality In the legislation. <br /> <br />Finally, there is a continuing threat to local funds by the State in its attempt to resolve Its <br />budget deficit. Combined with the current economic downturn and projected reductions In <br />sales tax revenues, this presents cities with an unacceptable risk, making protection of local <br />revenue streams even more critical for cities throughout California. Any such reallocation <br />proposal should only be considered after measures have been taken to prevent the State <br />from using local government revenues to cover its own general fund shortfalls, <br /> <br />This bill will not accomplish the regional solutions or 'smart growth' elements that it purports <br />to foster. Reportedly, the jurisdictions within the region to be affected oppose this bill on a <br />three-to-one margin, citing concerns about the revenue disparities that are likely to result, <br />and fears that It will promote regional acrimony and encourage further sprawl. <br /> <br />It is not in Redwood City's best interest for the State to have the authority to redistribute even <br />a portion of local sales tax revenues. Our experience with the State's authority to radistrlbute <br />local property taxes, and Its ability to manipulate the Vehicle Llcanse Fee and backfill, <br />demonstrates that this Is a very real threat to local control of local revenues. <br /> <br />Redwood City believes any bills that involve city revenue should only be drafted with Input <br />from the League of California Cities, which opposes this particular bill. <br /> <br />Alternative <br />1. The City Council could choose not to adopt the attached resolution, and not go on record as <br /> opposing Assembly Bill 680. <br /> <br />Fiscal Impact <br />Adoption of this resolution will not have an immediate fiscal impact to Redwood City. However, if <br /> Assembly Bill 680 Is made into law and other regions adopt similar revenue sharing programs, <br /> Redwood City could, lose a potentially significant portion of sales tax re~~ <br /> <br />Public Communications Assistant to the City Manager City Manager <br />Manager <br /> <br />Attachment <br />Assembly Appropriations Committee Analysis of Assembly Bill 680 <br /> <br /> <br />