Laserfiche WebLink
<br />8A <br />Page 1 <br /> <br />l.EAGUE C. · <br />~CtfIES I <br /> <br /> <br />Advocate Weekl <br /> <br />October 9, 2009 <br />Issue #39-2009 <br /> <br />IN THIS ISSUE: <br />Page 3: Ninth Circuit Concludes City's Mobile home Rent Control Ordinance Constitutes a "Taking" Under the <br />Constitution <br />Ninth Circuit to Consider Retiree Benefit Case <br /> <br />SENATE EXPECTED TO RETURN TO SACRAMENTO NEXT WEEK: SB 67,65, <br />OTHER ISSUES REMAIN IN BALANCE <br /> <br />The Senate is expected to return to session on Tuesday, Oct. 13. close to a month after the <br />official end of the 2009 legislative session. The goal is to address a number of items, including <br />two of critical importance to local agencies. S8 67 contains clean-up language to the Proposition <br />1A property tax provisions that will enable California Communities to move forward with the <br />securitization program benefiting more than 700 local agencies. SB 65 contains necessary clean <br />up to the Highway User Tax Account (HUTA or gas tax) deferral language. For more, see Page 2. <br /> <br />.................................... <br /> <br />LEAGUE SUMMARIES OF RTAC REPORT NOW AVAILABLE <br /> <br />Last week, the Regional Targets Advisory Committee (RTAC) released its report advising the <br />state Air Resources Board (ARB) on how to set regional targets for transportation related <br />greenhouse gas emissions from cars and light trucks under S8 375. For more, see Page 2. <br /> <br />.................................... <br /> <br />STATE'S RAID ON TRANSIT FUNDS RULED ILLEGAL <br />State Supreme Court Rejects State's Request for Review <br /> <br />The California Supreme Court last week rejected the state's request to review a lower court's <br />ruling that the recent seizures of transit funding were illegal. Earlier this year, the Third District <br />Court of Appeal ruled that the state violated statutory and constitutional amendments enacted by <br />voters since 1990. By not accepting the state's petition for review, the high court upheld the lower <br />courts ruling. For more, see Page 3. <br />