My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2009-07-13 clsd and jnt
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009 partial
>
2009
>
AgdaPkt 2009-07-13 clsd and jnt
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/9/2009 3:45:46 PM
Creation date
7/9/2009 3:08:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Redevelopment Agency
Date
7/13/2009
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
403
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 />9A <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />taking an additional $350 million in both FY 2009-10 and FY 2010-11 from redevelopment <br />agencies. <br /> <br />This massive hit on local redevelopment agencies totals $1.050 billion and would mothball many <br />planned local redevelopment projects that provide economic development and jobs that are <br />desperately needed in this economy. Given that the courts have already deemed this action <br />unconstitutional. if approved. it will trigger additional litigation. <br /> <br />Borrowing Property Taxes under Prop 1A <br /> <br />DOF proposed borrowing local property taxes under Proposition 1 A through an 8 percent across- <br />the-board approach. LAO and others are suggesting alternate formulas that suggest that <br />enterprise special districts should lose their remaining property tax shares and the exemptions <br />should be made for hardships situations. The Legislature is free to come up with other means of <br />distributing the hits. <br /> <br />The Budget Conference Committee unanimously rejected the proposal to borrow $1.9 billion in <br />local property taxes. An additional factor in the decision could be that DOF seems to be running <br />into legal problems trying to get around the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) of <br />2009 maintenance of effort requirements if they back out of state funding for schools. While the <br />loCal. property taxes are not currently included in the budget package. the proposal could come <br />back on the table. <br /> <br />Prop. 1 B Local Streets and Roads Funding <br /> <br />The Conference Committee adopted LAO's proposal to offset local impacts by releasing the <br />remaining $700 million in Prop. 1 B local street and road funds-of thIs amount, approximately <br />$258 million is available for cities. Only cities that have not yet received their full Prop 1 B <br />allocation are eligible for these funds. <br /> <br />Prop. 42-Sales Tax on Gas Revenues <br /> <br />OOF proposes to defer payments to local governments for cash flow purposes during FY 2009- <br />10. Draft proposals indicate deferrals in both.October and January to be repaid in May 2010. The <br />committee rejected a previous proposal from LAO to borrow 80 percent of Prop. 42 (sales tax on <br />gas) funds for FY 2009-10. <br /> <br />Local Public Safety Funding-COPS/Booking Fees <br /> <br />COPS. Booking Fees and other local public safety programs are currently being funded by the <br />new 0.15 percent increase, approximately $500 million per year. in the Vehicle License Fee (VLF) <br />adopted as part of the budget signed in February. While the LAO had proposed taking half of <br />these revenues for the General Fund, this was not adopted by the Conference Committee. <br /> <br />Transit <br /> <br />The Conference Committee adopted the OOF's proposed transfer of $336 million in transit <br />spillover revenue to General Fund relief. Another proposal redirects $315 million in Public <br />Transportation Account funds to pay for debt service on transit bonds. <br /> <br />State Funding Shifts through Fees <br />. The Budget Conference Committee adopted a DOF proposal requiring the Department of <br />Industrial Relations Division of Occupational Safety and Health (OSHA) and the Division <br />of Labor Standards Enforcement to charge fees on employers. This will have impacts on <br />local governments as well. <br />. The committee also adopted a requirement for the Bureau of Forensic Services to charge <br />fees to state and local agencies for services. This would have a statewide impact of $20 <br />million and could mean significant costs for smaller communities that rely on these <br />services. A fee schedule is to be developed, and the bureau will report back to the <br />Legislature In January. <br /> <br />3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.