AgdaPkt 2008-06-16 Clsd and Spec

Browse Search

'EmInent DomaIn Reform' Continued from Page 1... Sixty..ftvee percent of voters supported Proposition 99, the Home Owners Protection Act, which directly protects singfe..family homes from being taken by the government for private development. On the other hand, 61 percent of voters rejected Prop. 98, signaling that they were not wilting to sacrifice decades of progress or future investments in new water supplies, affoo:fabIe housing, environmental protections and welf-planned communities for an ill-conceived scheme. Prop. 98 'M>UId have been so destructive that more than 70 newspapers statewide opposed the measure as "cynical and devious. (L.A. TimBs) and a "wolf in sheep's cfothing" (Palm Springs Desert Sun). In the months leading up to the June 3 election, numerous high level state officials publicly opposed Prop. 98, including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, U.S. Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, fonner Governor Pete \MIson, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) and many others. A large and diverse coalition of organizations atso denounced Prop. 98, including the CaIifomia Chamber of Commerce, the Naturat Resouroes Defense COUncil, the League of Vbnen Voters and the AARP. Prop. 99 was supported by a broad coalition of environmental groups. business. housing rights, seniors, local government and more. This coalition included the Caflfomja league of Conservation Voters, Sierra Club California, Silicon Valley leadership Group, Consulting Engineers and land Surveyors of CaIifomia, the California Mexican American Chamber of Commerce, Silicon Valley leadership Group, the league of Women Voters, the Mobile Home Owners Coalition, California Alliance for Retired Americans and the league of California Cities. For more information about the No on 981Yes on 99 campaign, please visit www.no98ves99.com. 'Budget Commlaees' ContInued from Page 1... Below is a summary of the status of key city funds before the full Budget Conference committees begin to meet next week; · Proposition 1A (local property taxes) and Prop. 42 (transportation revenues) remain untouched. · Prop. 172 (local public safety), city allocations of Vehicle Ucense Fees (VlF), and special district property tax revenues remain untouched. · local redevetopment funds remain secure (with the exception of a separate discussion involving correcting redevelopment pass-through reporting errors identified in a recent State Controller's audit) · local Citizen Options for Public Safety (COPS) funding and Booking Fees remain vulnerable. (Gov. AmoId Schwarzenegger proposes full funding with a 10 percent cut; the Assembly proposes to fund COPS at the Govemor's level, but only allocates a token $1,000 for Booking Fees; the Senate proposes totund neither; the recently quafified initiative, the Safe Neighborhoods ~ requires COPS to be fuIIy-funded at FY 2007-08 levels, plus inflation, and also ff.mds Booking Fees at FY 2007-08 levels.) · Transit Funding: Both the Assembly and Senate budget committees propose inaeased levels of funding over the Governor's May budget revise. The Budget Conference Committee wrn next begin to work on reconciling the differences between the Senate and Assembly versions d the budget' As listed above, the fate of local public safety funding for COPS and Booking Fees is uncertain and the budget deficit remains large. Although some form of a Iottefy "securitization- proposal may be part of the finaf package, the Democrats have not embraced the Governor's budget stabilization reforms. Recent revenue raising and -loophole closing" propoeaIs by Democrats have been rejected by Republicans, while Democrats oppose the notion of dosing the budget with cuts only. 2 8A Page 2