Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09221987 - 2.8 TO � BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: Phil Batchelor Ck ltra County Administrator Costa DATE: September 21, 1987 �' @ coirty SUBJECT: 1987 Legislation Having a Fiscal Impact on Contra Costa County SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1 . Acknowledge receipt of this preliminary report from the County Administrator on legislation which passed in 1987 which has a fiscal impact on the County. 2 . Authorize the Chair to write to the Governor requesting that the Governor sign SB 351, SB 1148, SB 349, AB 2519, SB 848, AB 1364, AB 650. 3 . Authorize the Chair to write to Senator Marian Bergeson requesting that she introduce legislation in 1988 to modify that portion of SB 709 which transfers a portion of the County' s property tax to .cities in this County which have been characterized as no-property tax and low-property tax cities. 4 . Authorize the County Administrator and the County' s lobbyist to work with Senator Bergeson and staff of the Senate Local Government Committee to modify that portion of SB 709 which transfers $5,119,939 of County property tax revenue to the cities of Pleasant Hill, Lafayette, Clayton, San Ramon, Danville, Orinda, Moraga, and Hercules so that the County is reimbursed for this loss and so that a needs test is incorporated into the legislation. 5. Direct the County Administrator to continue to analyze SB 709 and report to the Board on the net fiscal impact of the bill on the County. BACKGROUND: The Board of Supervisors, in preparing its legislative program for 1987, proposed a number of measures which have a positive fiscal impact on the County. A remarkable number of these bills were passed and are now on. the Governor' s desk awaiting his approval or veto. Several other bills were passed this year which have a fiscal impact on the County. Each of these bills is described below briefly. It must be emphasized, however, that CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: _ YES SIGNATURE: Rmk4e�1i3'.I� "6/,- X RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE X APPROVE _OTHER SIGNATURE(S): z ACTION OF BOARD ON September 22 1987 A.IPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER X Also, REFERRED issue to Finance Committee (SupErvisors Powers and Schroder) ; DIRECTED that a meeting be scheduled between the County, Superior and Municipal Court Judges, and affected cities to discuss the impacts of SB709; and AUTHORIZED the County Administrator to continue to pursue legislation to amend SB 709. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TARN AYES: NOES. AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: _ OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. cc: Listed 011 Paae 6 ATTESTED PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY ,DEPUTY M382/7-83 — Page 2 nearly all of these bills are awaiting final action by the Governor. Until the Governor acts on each of these bills it is impossible to determine the net financial impact on the County. In addition, since approximately 1000 bills were sent to the Governor the last week of the Session, it has not been possible to review each one to determine in any precise manner the full financial impact on the County. We have, however, identified 16 bills which appear to have a fiscal impact on the County. *1. SB 213 (Robbins) Increases traffic school fee by $1. 00 to a total of $24. 00. Depending on the passage and approval of other legislation, the proceeds from this increase may be available to the General Fund. Estimated to generate $25,000 annually. *2. SB 349 (Bergeson) Increases the assessment rate on non-parking offenses from $1.00 to $2. 00 for each $10. 00 or fraction thereof of fines and forfeitures collected, to be deposited in the Courthouse Construction Fund and the Criminal Justice Facility Temporary Construction Fund and extends the surcharge and spinoff of revenue on parking citations to the Courthouse Construction Fund at $1. 50 per citation. Will increase annual revenue going to these two funds as follows: Courthouse Construction Fund $ 800,000 Criminal Justice Facility Temporary Construction Fund $ 600,000 TOTAL $1,400,000 *3 . SB 351 (Robbins) Deletes requirement to spinoff $10. 00 to the State on each filing of a violation of the requirement to have proof of insurance coverage available in a vehicle and, instead, requires this spinoff of $10.00 only for actual convictions. Would reduce payments to the State by an estimated $150,000 a year, 400 of which, or $60,000, would be County money. The balance of the savings would go to the cities. 4. SB 1148 (Bergeson) Adds a 50 cent penalty assessment for each $10.00 or fraction thereof of fines or bail forfeiture to be used to fund the CAL-ID Program. It is estimated that this provision will add $240,000 in new revenue each year to fund the CAL-ID Program. Receipt of this money should allow some current General Fund money to be backed out of the Sheriff ' s budget. *5 . AB 1940 (Quackenbush) Adds $1 . 00 to the traffic school diversion fee for Contra Costa, Santa Clara, and San Diego counties. AB 1940 has already been signed by the Governor. It should generate $25,000 a year in new revenue. However, its provisions will be replaced by SB 213 if SB 213 is signed by the Governor. b ` Page 3 *6 . AB 2519 (Campbell) Allows the Board of Supervisors to authorize the court to impose two $50 assessments on DUI offenders for deposit in the criminalistics laboratory fund and alcohol program fund. Currently, these two assessments are removed off the top of the fine and forfeiture revenue. By imposing the assessments in addition to the other fines and forfeitures a total of $500,000 in fine and forfeiture revenue will be freed up, 40% of which, or $200,000 a year, will go to the County. The remaining 600, or $300,000, will go to the cities. 7 . SB 12 (Maddy) Authorizes a $1. 00 penalty assessment for emergency medical services, 2/3 of which would be used to reimburse physicians for losses they incur in providing emergency medical services. The remaining 1/3 could be used by the County for other emergency medical services determined by each County. Total revenue is estimated to be $600,000 per year. Part of this revenue will have to go to physicians in private and district hospitals in the County, but some of it should be available to the County. 8 . SB 68 (Roberti) Appropriates $5 million, statewide, to increase reimbursement under the Medi-Cal program for obstetric services. This appropriation should generate $5 million in matching federal funds for a total of $10 million. Some of these funds will come to the County on the basis that it provides obstetric services to a number of Medi-Cal patients, both in this County and, through contract, to patients in Solano County. It is difficult to estimate how much of this will come to physicians and hospitals in Contra Costa County, and how much of this will go to physicians and hospitals in the private sector. 9 . SB 115 (Presley) Extends to the law library board of trustees the authority to borrow money to erect a building to house the law library. Previously, this authority was only available to trustees in counties with a population in excess of 2,000,000. It is unclear whether this bill could be of any benefit in covering part of the cost of the law library which will be located in the new Bray Courthouse Annex. It may, however, be worth exploring this provision to see whether it could be of any assistance to the County. 10. SB 317 (Presley) Increases the fee on marriage licenses to be dedicated to domestic violence centers from $19 to $25. While all of these increased fees must be passed through to approved domestic violence centers it may be possible to back out any County General Funds now going to such centers, thereby making additional funds available to the General Fund. Page 4 *11. SB 848 (Boatwright) Provides a pilot project grant to Contra Costa County in the amount of $1.7 million over three years to determine the most effective means of treating persons who are dually diagnosed as mentally ill and substance abusers. Of the total, $145,000 is appropriated for the 1987-88 fiscal year in view of the fact that the bill will not be effective until January 1, 1988 and a period of start-up will be necessary. 12 . AB 650 (Costa) Appropriates $110. 3 million to counties in one-time unrestricted block grants for the 1987-88 fiscal year. Contra Costa County' s share of this is $2,219,927 . AB 650 also provides that if the County' s proportion of general revenues going to four programs is higher in 1986-87 than in 1981-82, the County shall be reimbursed in full for the difference. The four programs are AFDC, In-Home Supportive Services, Community Mental Health ( Short-Doyle) and Food Stamps. Payment is to be made by November 30, 1988. A similar comparison is to be made on justice programs and reimbursement is authorized up to a statewide total of $15 million, with a cap on the amount any one county can receive of $1 million. If the State fully buys out the cost of the trial courts, this provision is suspended. It appears that Contra Costa County is not eligible for any of this $15 million for the first year. 13 . AB 1109 (Tucker) Provides for the assessment of a $5. 00 processing fee for each disbursement of money collected under a writ of execution, attachment, possession or sale. The proceeds would be deposited in a special fund to be used to replace vehicles for the Sheriff and Marshal. It should be possible to back out of their budgets a corresponding amount of General Fund dollars to be used for other purposes. *14. AB 1364 (Vasconcellos) Provides an appropriation of $229,000 to Contra Costa County for the Therapeutic Nursery School, Lynn Day Care Center, and We Care Center. Allows the County to remove County General Fund dollars from these programs to help offset the deficit in the Health Services Department budget. The General Fund dollars thus removed may be used to match any available State Short/Doyle funds on a 90o State-loo County basis. 15. AB 1743 (Bates) Authorizes an increase in the fee for obtaining a copy of a birth certificate from $7 . 00 to $9.00 and increases the amount of money going into the Children' s Trust Fund from .$4 .00 to $6 . 00 per birth certificate. We need to determine whether any contract programs now funded with County money would be eligible instead to receive these increased revenues. Page 5 16 . SB 709 (Lockyer) This is the Trial Court Buy-Out legislation. The bill provides for a block grant payment to counties on the following schedule, beginning July 1, 1988: For each Superior Court Judge $480,000 For each Superior Court Commissioner and Referee $468,000 For each Municipal Court Judge $474,000 For each Municipal Court Commissioner $455,000 and Referee In exchange for the block grant, counties would have to send the State their entire share of fines and forfeitures. Cities are allowed to keep their share of fine and forfeiture revenue. The block grant covers the cost of the judges' , commissioners' , and referees' salary and benefits, municipal court staff positions prescribed by statute, deputy marshals and bailiffs, court-appointed counsel in juvenile depending proceedings, materials and supplies, and actual indirect costs, not to exceed 18%. Specifically excluded for counties with a population in excess of 350,000 are the costs of the Probation Department, Public Defender, and pretrial release programs. Also excluded for all counties are the costs of the District Attorney, Grand Jury, law library and courthouse construction. In addition, it appears that the County Clerk' s support of the Superior Court is excluded. An incentive is built in to encourage counties to continue to collect fines and forfeitures. If these collections are reduced in any year compared to the prior year, there is a dollar for dollar reduction in the amount of the block grant. If, on the other hand, fine and forfeiture revenue increases from one year to the next, the block grant would be adjusted upward by the lesser of the COLA provided to State employees, or the percentage increase in the fine and forfeiture collections. Counties would also lose their current SB 90 local assistance and would waive all claims for State reimbursement of local mandates which have not been approved by a State agency. The County would also lose the existing reimbursement for Superior Court Judges. The bill also creates 109 new judicial positions, including two ( 2) new Superior Court Judges for Contra Costa County. SB 709 includes a $20 million Trial Court Impact Fund which would be disbursed by the Judicial Council to counties which improve court management and efficiency, case processing, and computerization. Most troubling to the County is that at the last minute, on the final night of the Session, SB 709 was amended to include the provisions of AB 339 (Cortese) which requires the transfer of County property taxes to cities which either impose no property tax or whose property tax is less than the equivalent of 10 cents per $100 of assessed value. This provision costs the County $5,119,939 annually. These funds have to come out of any net amount the County receives from the Trial Court block grant. The payments are phased in over 10 years, beginning at 10% and increasing 10% each Page 6 year. The funds would be distributed as follows, based on calculations made earlier this year by the Auditor-Controller: Pleasant Hill $1,404,172 Lafayette 1,343,649 San Ramon 739,444 Danville 681,887 Orinda 509,150 Moraga 304,634 Hercules 125,418 Clayton 11,585 TOTAL $5,119,939 This provision was apparently included in a typical "smoke-filled back room" session with no input from most legislators, no committee hearing and no input from the affected counties. The County Administrator has been advised by staff to the Senate Local Government Commitee that the Chair of that Committee, Senator Marian Bergeson, was furious at the process used to include this provision in SB 709. We have been led to believe that Senator Bergeson is willing to introduce legislation in January to modify this provision, perhaps by requiring a "needs" test before a city would be eligible, or by providing replacement revenue to the County for the transfer of property tax revenue. However, SB 709 is optional with each County. If this County opts in, we receive the block grant, new judges, and must transfer $5,119,939 to the no- and low-property tax cities. All of the other provisions noted above also apply to the County. If, however, the County determines not to participate in SB 709, none of the provisions of SB 709 apply to the County. The County would not receive the block grant, but could keep its fine and forfeiture revenue; would not receive the two new Superior Court positions, and would not have to transfer the funds to the no- and low-property tax cities. Opting to be a part of SB 709 requires approval of a majority of the Superior Court Judges, a majority of the Municipal Court Judges, and a majority of the Board of Supervisors. Cities have no direct voice in this decision, which will be one of the most critical the Board will have to make in 1988. The State must be advised by May 1, 1988 whether the County wishes to participate in SB 709. Thus, a very careful fiscal analysis of either opting in or out of SB 709 is critical. *CONTRA COSTA COUNTY-SPONSORED LEGISLATION cc: County Administrator Presiding Judge, Superior Court Presiding Judge, Municipals Courts Sheriff-Coroner Walnut Creek-Danville Municipal Court Health Services Director Marshal Auditor-Controller Social Services Director County Clerk District Attorney