Laserfiche WebLink
<br />BUDGET UPDATE from page 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <br /> <br />Gov. Schwarzenegger proposed in January <br />and in his May revision to the FY 2006-07 budget <br />to provide early repayment of $920 million in Prop. <br />42 funds. His proposal was to allocate $410 <br />million to the Traffic Congestion Relief Program <br />(TCRP), $255 million to the State Transportation <br />Improvement Program, and $255 million to cities <br />and counties for local streets and roads (half for <br />cities, half for counties). <br /> <br />The League strongly supports the Governor's <br />proposal. The $255 million for local streets and <br />roads will provide the only Proposition 42 funding <br />dedicated to cities and counties for the local <br />system for the budget year. <br /> <br />Senate Approves Reduced Repayment <br /> <br />Senate Budget Subcommittee #4 recently <br />approved repayment at the level of $460 million <br />(half of the Governor's proposal), with the re- <br />quested repayment allocation proportionally <br />reduced (approximately $205 million to the Traffic <br />Congestion Relief Fund, $127.5 million to local <br />streets and roads and $127.5 million to the STIP). <br />The subcommittee cited the recently enacted <br />package of bills to place infrastructure bonds on <br />the November 2006 ballot as background for its <br />recommendation. The subcommittee specifically <br />noted that SB 1266 includes $19.9 billion in bonds <br />for transportation and SCA 7 further restricts the <br />ability of the Governor and the Legislature to <br />suspend Proposition 42 during a fiscal crisis, and <br />provides for repayment of all past Proposition 42 <br />loans no later than June 30, 2016. <br /> <br />Subcommittee background materials further <br />referenced that a FY 2006-07 repayment at the <br />level of $460 million would still provide a significant <br />prepayment of the amount due in FY 2007-08 and <br />would more than double the annual repayment <br />amount required in SCA 7. <br /> <br />Assembly Supports $920 Million, But Shifts <br />Allocations <br /> <br />Earlier this week, the Assembly Budget Sub- <br />committee #5 recommended repayment of the <br /> <br />$920 million in the Governor's proposal, but <br />shifted the allocations. <br /> <br />According to subcommittee background <br />materials, at the time of the Governor's proposal it <br />was estimated that the payment to the STI P and <br />local streets and roads would include the full <br />principal amount of $232 million and an interest <br />amount of $23 million for a total payment of $255 <br />million for each. This resulted in an estimated <br />$410 million for the TCRP. <br /> <br />However, the Legislative Analyst's Office <br />indicates that the Controller has updated the <br />interest amounts owed, and the STIP and local <br />streets and roads would actually receive $13 <br />million in interest payments, for a total payment of <br />$245 million for each. <br /> <br />The subcommittee, on a unanimous vote, <br />passed repayment of $920 million as follows: <br />$308 million to the TCRP; $245 million to the <br />STIP; $245 million to local streets and roads; and <br />$122 million to the Public Transit Account. <br /> <br />What's Next? <br /> <br />Due to the differing recommendations by the <br />subcommittees, the Proposition 42 repayment <br />issue will now go to the full Budget Conference <br />Committee consisting of members of both houses <br />of the legislature. It is unclear when the repay- <br />ment issue will be addressed, but the League will <br />continue to advocate for full repayment for local <br />streets and roads. <br /> <br />Other Budget Issues-Spillover Revenues <br />and the Public Transportation Account <br /> <br />Cities with transit agencies will be interested in <br />the Governor's proposal to divert $669 million in <br />FY 2006-07 to transportation debt funding and the <br />Bay Bridge seismic retrofit project rather than to <br />the Public Transportation Account (PTA). The <br />funds he proposes to use are known as "spillover" <br />funds: revenues from the growth in sales tax on <br />gasoline, to the extent they exceed the growth in <br /> <br />Continued on Page 9 <br /> <br />PAGE 8 - PRIORITY FOCUS <br />May 26, 2006 . Issue #21 <br /> <br />Visit the League's Official Website--www.cacities.org <br />