Laserfiche WebLink
05/18/2009 <br />ORIGINAL <br />RESOLUTION NO. 14937 <br />A RESOLUTION FINDING A SEVERE FISCAL HARDSHIP WILL EXIST IF <br />ADDITIONAL CITY PROPERTY TAX FUNDS ARE SEIZED AND ADDITIONAL <br />UNFUNDED MANDATES ARE ADOPTED BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA <br />WHEREAS, the current economic crisis has placed cities under incredible <br />financial pressure and caused city officials to reopen already adopted budgets to make <br />painful cuts, including layoffs and furloughs of city workers, decreasing maintenance and <br />operations of public facilities, and reductions in direct services to keep spending in line <br />with declining revenues; and <br />WHEREAS, since the early 1990s the state government of California has seized <br />over $8.6 billion of city property tax revenues statewide to fund the state budget even <br />after deducting public safety program payments to cities by the state; and <br />WHEREAS, in FY 2007 -08 alone the state seized $895 million in city property <br />taxes statewide to fund the state budget after deducting public safety program payments <br />and an additional $350 million in local redevelopment funds were seized in FY 2008 -09; <br />and <br />WHEREAS, the most significant impact of taking local property taxes has been to <br />reduce the quality of public safety services cities can provide since public safety <br />comprises the largest part of any city's general fund budget; and <br />WHEREAS, in 2004 the voters by an 84% vote margin adopted substantial <br />constitutional protections for local revenues, but the legislature can still "borrow" local <br />property taxes to fund the state budget; and <br />WHEREAS, on May 5 the Department of Finance announced it had proposed to <br />the Governor that the state "borrow" over $2 billion in local property taxes from cities, <br />counties and special districts to balance the state budget, causing deeper cuts in local <br />public safety and other vital services; and <br />WHEREAS, in the past the Governor has called such "borrowing" proposals <br />fiscally irresponsible because the state will find it virtually impossible to repay and it <br />would only deepen the state's structural deficit, preventing the state from balancing its <br />budget; and <br />WHEREAS, the Legislature is currently considering hundreds of bills, many of <br />which would impose new costs on local governments that can neither be afforded nor <br />sustained in this economic climate; and <br />WHEREAS, state agencies are imposing, or considering, many regulations <br />imposing unfunded mandates on local governments without regard to how local <br />agencies will be able comply with these mandates while meeting their other <br />responsibilities; and <br />14937 <br />MUFF # 209 <br />