Laserfiche WebLink
<br />B. A~t 0 <br /> <br />BUDGET from page 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <br /> <br />Even so, some funding to cities for specific <br />programs outside Proposition 1 A was cut, de- <br />ferred or suspended. In evaluating the impact of <br />these cuts, we need to remember that Califomia's <br />local governments are already a significant partner <br />in helping to close the state's budget gap. (Please <br />visit www. calocal.org for a copy of the LOCAL <br />coaltion's response to the govemor's budget <br />proposal.) <br /> <br />ERAF Contributions <br />Consistent with the Prop 1A agreement, local <br />governments will once again contribute $1.3 billion <br />in property tax shifts to help solve the state bud- <br />get. Cities, counties and special districts will <br />contribute $350 million each and redevelopment <br />agencies will contribute $250 million. The indi- <br />vidual city contributions will remain the same as <br />2004-05 and may be found on the State <br />Controller's website at www.sco.ca.gov. The <br />redevelopment property tax shift for both 2004-05 <br />and 2005-06 (which remains the same) is avail- <br />able at www.californiacityfinance.com. <br /> <br />Additionally, local governments will continue to <br />contribute the ongoing shift of approximately $5 <br />billion in ongoing ERAF property tax shifts to help <br />the state meet its constitutional requirement to <br />fund schools. <br /> <br />Transportation <br /> <br />. Proposition 42: In light ofthe current fiscal <br />crisis and long-term structural deficit, the <br />governor's proposed budget has led to another <br />year of proposed borrowing from Proposition 42 <br />revenues for FY 2005-06. The value of Proposition <br />42 revenues is estimated to be $1.3 billion for the <br />State's General Fund, approximately $253 m of <br />which would come to local govemments. <br /> <br />Further, the governor is committed to curbing <br />the state's ability to borrow from Proposition 42 <br />and will introduce legislation this year that consti- <br />tutionally prohibits the suspension of future Propo- <br />sition 42 transfers, beginning in fiscal year 2007- <br />08. As oftoday, no language has been drafted. <br />Similar to Proposition 1A, this proposal will be <br />accomplished through a constitutional amend- <br /> <br />ment, to be placed on the ballot, which will require <br />the state to payback without interest approximately <br />$3.4 billion in Proposition 42 funds over 15 years <br />beginning in FY 2006-07. While the current budget <br />proposal is silent on whether or not Proposition 42 <br />will be suspended in FY 2006-07, it leaves open <br />this possibility. <br /> <br />. Public Transportation Account <br />"Spillover" Revenues: In addition to the PropOJ <br />sition 42 suspension, the 2005-06 budget pro- <br />poses to suspend a transfer of sales tax monies <br />to the Public Transportation Account, equivalent to <br />an estimated $216 million savings to the state's <br />General Fund. <br /> <br />Tribal Gaming Bonds <br /> <br />Although tribal gaming monies were expected <br />to generate a partial early payback of Proposition <br />42 monies and other transportation loans to the <br />tune of $1.2 billion, a lawsuit filed to challenge <br />aspects of the Tribal/State Compacts has thrown <br />into jeopardy the issuance of those bonds. The <br />governor's budget does not anticipate resolving <br />that litigation in this fiscal year, so this revenue has <br />not been included in the 05-06 budget. In addition, <br />questions have arisen as to whether the total $1.2 <br />billion will actually be realized due to securitization <br />problems associated with the nature of the stabil- <br />ity ofthe revenues stream. <br /> <br />GoCalifomia <br /> <br />Lastly, the governor announced a comprehen- <br />sive strategy referred to as "GoCalifornia,. to <br />enhance the impact of transportation investments <br />over the next 10 years. As part of this effort, new <br />performance measures for both the transportation <br />system and state management are being devel- <br />oped in partnership with statewide transportation <br />stakeholders. As part of this strategy, the adminis- <br />tration will focus on delivery tools for faster <br />completion of transportation projects, including <br />design-build contracting and public/private partner- <br />ships. The administration will also focus on <br />improving and facilitating the movement of goods <br /> <br />Continued on Page ., <br /> <br />PAGE 2/PRIORITY FOCUS <br /> <br />Visit the League's Official Web Site--www.cacities.org <br />