My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2008-06-09
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009 partial
>
2008
>
AgdaPkt 2008-06-09
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/5/2008 3:27:51 PM
Creation date
6/5/2008 3:01:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Redevelopment Agency
Date
6/9/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
194
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />8A <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />Proposition 1 B Funds. As originally outlined in the Governor's January budget, there is no <br />additional allocation of Prop. 1 B Local Streets and Roads funds to cities for FY 2008-09. As of <br />May 15, the Department of Finance reports that $339.5 million has been allocated to 323 of <br />California's 478 cities (from the total FY 2007-08 allocation of $550 million). <br /> <br />The May revise contains no major alterations to any of the additional proposed allocations of <br />Prop. 1 B transportation funds that were listed in the Governor's January budget. <br /> <br />"Spillover" Funds from Gasoline Tax Revenues. Due to the increase in gas prices, the <br />"spillover" monies collected from gasoline sales tax revenues are $286 million higher than <br />estimated in the Governor's proposed January budget, for a total of $1.177 billion. The spillover is <br />produced when the growth in revenue collected from sales taxes on gasoline sales taxes is <br />higher than the growth in revenue derived from all other taxable sales. <br /> <br />An explanation of the "spillover" is posted online at <br />www.californiacitvfinance.com/SpilloverFAQ . pdf. <br /> <br />The May revise allocates $306 million to the Public Transportation Account (PTA) with remaining <br />funds from the "spillover" revenues going to K-12 home-to-school transportation and debt service <br />on current and prior year transportation-related general obligation bonds. <br /> <br />The California Transit Association (CTA) provides an analysis of the PTA allocation for FY 2008- <br />09, concluding that the allocation to transit should be greater than the amount stated in the May <br />revise based on applicable statutory formulas and the historic intended use for these funds. <br /> <br />The CTA analysis of the PTA FY 2008-09 allocation is available at <br />www.cacities.orq/resollrce files/26813.2008-09MavRevision.pdf. <br /> <br />HousinQ <br /> <br />The May revise contains no major alterations to any of the additional proposed allocations of <br />Prop. 1C housing-infill funds that were listed in the Governor's January budget. <br /> <br />Resources and Environment <br /> <br />The Govemor's revised budget proposes an additional $13.3 million in funding for the Department <br />of Parks and Recreation to provide funding for 48 state parks. The proposal provides $11.8 <br />million from the General Fund plus $1.5 million generated by increasing state park fees ($1-$2 <br />per person at selected parks). <br /> <br />The California Air Resources Board (ARB), under the revised budget, would transfer $48.7 million <br />from its Air Quality Improvement Fund to finance loans and loan guarantees to assist truck <br />retrofits proposed by ARB. This would be a one-time transfer. <br /> <br />Local government fleets, to the extent that they qualify under the new regulations, may qualify for <br />the loans and loan guarantees offered by ARB. <br /> <br />Propositions 84 and 1 E. The May revise makes several minor adjustments related to specific <br />projects funded by Props. 84 and 1E. <br /> <br />Debt Repavment and Local Government Finances <br /> <br />Reimbursement State Mandates Program <br /> <br />The Governor's January budget proposed payment of state mandates to local government as part <br />of the repayment of mandates for costs incurred prior to July 1,2004. Instead, however, the <br />revised May budget would defer $75 million in state mandate repayments. Cities receive about 30 <br />percent of mandate repayments. <br /> <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.