AgdaPkt 2008-10-13 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

9A Page 11 `BudgeY Con#inued from Page 1... Monday,the Senate voted on a°more cuts, no taxes"proposaf the Repub(icans began to shape over Labor Day weekend. It was defeated by Democrats on a parfisan vote.Tuesday,the Assembly#ook up ihe same proposal where it was aiso defeated along partisan lines. By Wednesday it was obvious that mos#of the budget cards have been played. The Assembly Democrats already put kheir Conference Gommittee budget up for a vote several weeks ago.This was rejected by the Republicans. Senate Democrats had also voted on a modified version of Gov_ Arnold Schwarzenegger's"August Revise"budget, which was also rejected by the Repubiicans. The Governor has now asked for a formal vote on his"August Revise"proposal. As of Priority Focus' publication, a vote on this proposal was scheduled in the Senate for�riday, Sepk. 12. However, this vote was cancelled late Thursday afternoon. The Governor's proposal includes a temporary 1-cent sa{es tax increase for three years foilowed by a permanent quarier-cent reduction.The previous Democrat proposal,that was rejected, oniy increased the sales tax for three years. 7he difference between the two sales tax proposais is the argument fhat the quarter-cent sales tax reduction over time will offset the initial increase. It is unclear ii enough Republican legislators wili view this as sufficient po(itical cover for to put their budget up for a vote. Also contained in the Governor's"August Revise"is a three-year, $225 mi{iion annual hit ta redevelopment agencies.The League has strongly opposed this aspect of the proposal,arguing that the loss of this crucial redevelopment funding would be damaging not anly to cikies but to the entire state.This lobbying has involved many efforts to convince the Governor and legislators tha# this praposal is coun#er producfive to whaf California needs to achieve a stable and sustainable economy as well being contrary to recen# rhetoric over how more infill development is needed to cambat climate change. RedeveEopment funding provides economic stimu)us fhrough the creation of hundreds of thousands ofjobs annually,sales tax revenues for loca!and state government, and investment in the infill development necessary to help California achieve its ambitious green house gas emission reduction goals. It has been difficult for the League to identify legislators who appear willing to stand in the way af at least a ane-year redevelopment hit.Although s#ate lawmakers do understand that a hit to redevelopment would be hard, the issue is dwarfed by the ba#tle to use cuts or taxes to close a $15.2 billion budget shortfa[I. At a recent mee#ing of police chiefs,the Governor spoke of a modificatian of the redevelapment proposal fhaf would be limifed to a one-year take with a repayment provision. ft is not clear if or when such a modified proposa{would be put forwerd. What City Officials Can Do As rumors r�ow abound in the Capitol, city a�ciaks are asked to remain on high alert.The budget is expected to break in one of two ways. tf the Governor's proposa!gets enough votes,when it is voted on, and ths redevelopment hit is included in a trailer bill, city officials should be ready to act to oppose andlor limit this cut as much as possible. if the Governor's budgef fails,then the state continues to navigate into uncharted water.This is likely to involve proposals for deeper cuts and borrowing. The League wi11 prflvide updates as they develop through alerts, its regianal managers, the League's Web site and Priority Focus. Stay focused! Stay ready! `HR 3221'Continued from Page 1... Cities throughout California stand to gain from the legislation as maney is appropriated in the coming months as HR 3221 is expected to help Cafifornia's housing market.The legislation 2