AgdaPkt 2007-09-10 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

9B Page 3 Transparfiafiion Proposition 1B:SB 88{Budge#Commiftee),the band implementafion trailer b911,appropriates $950 million in FY 2007-08 tp cities and counties from the Local Street and Road Program included in Prop. 1 B. Budget language contaEns some technical flaws, however, and does not specif_y how these funds are to be divided be#ween cities and caunties. T�e League of California Cfies is war�cing on clean-up legislation to clarify the bond fund allocation process and to ensure that$554 million wauld go to cities and$400 miHion to c�unties. These amounts are consisfent wifh the budget requests of both fhe League and fhe Caiifornia State Association of Counties(CSAC). A$550 million allocatian to cities would guarantee that each city receives minimum of$400,000 or half of their tota(bond funds,whicf�ever is greater,in FY 2007-08. Propos�t6�n 4;�:i h�bcieigei fuliy funds Prop.42 at$i.6 biifio�. According fo sfatute,cities and coun#ies will not receive Proo.42 funding in FY 2007-Q8 for focal streets and roads because this rs the second of two Prop.42"gap"years; a result of cities and counties receiving funding in FY 2D01-a2 and FY 20�2-03 when other state transporta#ion did nat. Ori��itive no#e,h�w�v�r, k,eginnirrg in FY 2u�a-G9,eiti�s�nd c;c�unties wiii reCetve approximafely double their previous alloeations if Prop.42 is funded in the state budget. Transit:Acoording to#he California Transit Association(CTA),the FY 2007-08 budget packags enacts a$1.259 bi[iian shift of Public Transportation Account funds into new,non-#ransit expenditure programs. The 2007-08 5ta#s Tr�ansit Assistance(STA)Pragram will be funded at approximately$416 mil(ion. Nowever,up to�948 million in Public Transportation Account(PTA)funds are provided ta finance general obligafion transportation bond debt service payments that are supposed to be paid by the General Fund, or that hava already been paid. in addition to the$948 miNion in bond debt service payments,the package also enacts another $311 million in PTA shif�s to non-transif putposes, including for regionaf center transportation costs($129 miiliony, home-to-school transportation ($99 million), and repayment of debt owed by the General Fund to Proposition 42 programs($83 million),for the kotal af$1.259 bi(lion in non- transit expenditures. In addition to the 2007-08 appropriations and PTA funding shifts, SB 79, one of the trailer bills, aEso requires that starting in 2008-OS and beyand,all future"spillover"doilars would be divided in hal#,with 50 pe�cent going to the General�und and 50 percent to the PTA. Qf the amount going #o the PTA in any given year,iwo-thirds would flow to the STA Program and one-third would flow to support transi#capital expenditures from the PTA. Hot�s`sn�.��nd t�se and Rssources PropositEon 1C:SB 86 (Budget Committee}contains the implementing language for$300 million of the$850 million for fihe Regional Planning, Housing and lnfill Incentive Account program from Prop. 1 C. The majority of the funding($240 million)goes tv the Department of Housing anc!Cammunity Development(HCD)to administer a competitive grani program for capitaf impravement projects in quaiifying infi!!projects. The League is concemed with the way the grant program language defines"eligibie applicants" as nonproftt or for-profit developers{n addition to a city,county,pubiic housing authority or redevelopment agency, However,ofher elements of the bif{require that fhe project have the support o#the locai government. 3