Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/19/2008, C5 - OPPOSITION TO STATE BORROWING OR CONVERSION OF LOCAL REVENUES council Mme' j aGEnaa REpont �N - CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: Jonathan P.Lowell, City Attorney SUBJECT: Opposition to State Borrowing or Conversion of Local Revenues CAO RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution opposing proposals by state government to borrow or convert local tax and other revenues in order to temporarily balance the state budget. DISCUSSION In 1952, the voters of California approved Article XVI, Section 16 of the California Constitution, providing for tax increment financing for community revitalization. While that provision did not authorize the legislature to appropriate such community redevelopment funds for state programs, the legislature took a series of actions over the years that, in fact, diverted such revenues to state programs and away from local governments. In response to the state actions, California voters, in 2004, overwhelmingly approved Proposition IA to place limits on the pattern of state borrowing and send an unambiguous message to state leaders that they should stop the destructive and irresponsible practice of taking local government funds to finance the state budget and temporarily balance the state deficit. In 2006, by a 77% margin of approval, the voters of California also approved Proposition IA, providing similar protections for transportation funding for state and local transportation projects, including important municipal street maintenance and public transit programs. Both ballot measures reflected a drafting compromise, which allows the Governor to declare a "severe state of fiscal hardship" permitting the state to borrow locally allocated funds, on the condition that are repaid in three years with interest. On July 1, 2008, the State Legislature missed its Constitutional budget adoption deadline and discussions in certain legislative circles have turned to borrowing local funds as a means to balance the state budget. Notwithstanding his authority to invoke the fiscal hardship provision, the Governor has expressed that such action would be irresponsible because it would deepen the state's structural deficit and cripple local government and transportation services at a time when those services are becoming increasingly important to local communities. Staff supports the Governor's conclusion that it would be fiscally irresponsible temporarily to support the structural deficit at the state level with more borrowing. Such a course of action simply delays the inevitable at the state level, while unfairly placing the burdens of the state's growing deficit on local governments that have fulfilled their duties to their constituents by making consistently responsible budget decisions. Cities' investments in infrastructure, C5- � r Opposition to State Conversion of Local Tax Increment Funding Page 2 affordable housing and basic public safety and other community services will create needed jobs and speed an economic recovery which will, in turn, benefit the state, but those efforts would be severly curtailed by legislative action to covert local funds to state programs. Instead, the Legislature should fulfill its constitutional budget obligations by utilizing state revenues, respecting the overwhelming support of California voters for not using local property taxes, redevelopment tax increment and transportation sales tax funds to fund the day-to-day operating cost of state programs. Accordingly, staff recommends that the Council adopt the attached resolution encouraging the Legislature to carryout its constitutional obligation to compromise on a balanced budget without unfairly appropriating vital local funds. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact related to opposing state action, but state borrowing (or conversion, as there no certainty these funds will be returned to local governments) of local funds could amount to loss in revenues to the City well in excess of$1 million. Attachment: Draft Resolution G:Wgenda-Ordinances-Resol\Legislative Platform\Agenda Report.State-local budget borrow.2008.8.12.DOC C5 - z -'� - ATTACHMENT RESOLUTION NO. (2008 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO OPPOSING PROPOSALS BY STATE GOVERNMENT TO BORROW OR CONVERT LOCAL GOVERNMENT,REDEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION FUNDS IN ORDER TO TEMPORARILY BALANCE THE STATE BUDGET WHEREAS,on July 1, 2008 the State Legislature missed its Constitutional budget adoption deadline; and WHEREAS, both the Governor and the Legislative Budget Conference Committee have recommended balanced budgets without resorting to "loans" or seizures of local government property tax, redevelopment tax increment and transportation sales tax funds; and WHEREAS,in 1952 the voters of California approved Article XVI, Section 16 of the California Constitution, providing for tax increment financing for community revitalization—not for balancing the state budget— and such action of the voters never authorized the legislature to take or"borrow" community redevelopment funds for state Programs; and WHEREAS,in 2004 by an 84% margin of approval the voters of California approved Proposition lA and sent a clear and unambiguous message to state leaders that they should stop the destructive and irresponsible practice of taking local government funds to finance the state budget and temporarily balance the state deficit; and WHEREAS,in 2006 by a 77% margin of approval the voters of California also approved Proposition 1A, providing similar protections for transportation funding for state and local transportation projects, including important municipal street maintenance and public transit programs; and WHEREAS,both ballot measures allow the Governor to declare a"severe state of fiscal hardship" and "borrow" these funds if they are repaid in three years with interest, but the Governor believes it would be irresponsible to borrow such funds right now because it would deepen the state's structural deficit and cripple local government and transportation services; and WHEREAS,refusal by the Legislature to carryout its constitutional obligation to compromise on a balanced budget is not a"severe state of fiscal hardship" and would not justify reductions in critical local services, community revitalization programs and infrastructure maintenance at a time when cities are struggling to balance their own budgets during an economic down tum; and C5" ATTACHMENT WHEREAS,cities' investments in infrastructure, affordable housing and basic public safety and other community services will create needed jobs and speed an economic recovery which will in turn benefit the state; and WHEREAS, the Legislature should balance the state budget utilizing state revenues and respect the overwhelming support of California voters for not using local property taxes, redevelopment tax increment and transportation sales tax funds to fund the day-to-day operating cost of state programs; and WHEREAS, it would be fiscal irresponsibility to temporarily support the structural deficit at the state level with more borrowing; and WHEREAS,it is time for the state of California to cut up its "local government credit cards" and deal with the budget deficit in a straightforward way; and WHEREAS,California voters are counting on state leaders to balance the state budget using state funds; NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of San Luis Obispo hereby declares that it: i. Opposes efforts by state government to borrow or otherwise convert local tax funds, redevelopment tax increment or transportation sales tax proceeds to balance the state budget and finance state operations; and 2. Believes any such actions would be fiscally irresponsible for the state and would substantially negatively impact local government services and infrastructure investments. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby directed to send a copy of this resolution, expressing the City Council's strong opposition to the borrowing or conversion of local government funds for state government purposes, to the Governor and appropriate state legislators. On motion of seconded by and on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 19`x' day of August, 2008. David F. Romero, Mayor C5- q U ATTACHMENT ATTEST: Audrey Hooper City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: CJ than P. Lowell City Attorney C5�5