Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 01202004 - D3 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS rr `... t. CONTRA d =, COSTA FROM: Supervisor Gayle B. Uilkema COUNT BATE: January 20,2004 by SUBJECT: Constitutional Amendment--Local Taxpayers and Public Safety Protection Act SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)& BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDAT"ION(S): CONSIDER position on the Local Taxpayers and Public Safety Protection Act, a constitutional amendment, principally sponsored by the League of California. Cities, California State Association of Counties and the California Special Districts Association. BACRGitt�� l'l 1REAS0NU FOR RECOMMENDATIONS): The 20104 Local Taxpayers and Public Safety Protection Act is a constitutional amendment designed to increase local control over local tax dollars. As enumerated in Act's findings,it would: * Require voter approval before the Legislature can reduce local government revenues or take there for state,rather than local purposes, * Ensure that local tax dollars are available to fund local services like police and fire, emergency and trauma care,parks,roads, libraries and water delivery; * Mage it absolutely clear that if the State Legislature mandates that local government provide new or expanded programs or services, then the State would have to reimburse local governments for the cost of these programs; + Provide flexibility for state budgeting decisions, but require voter-approval on any future State Legislative actions that would reduce funding for essential local services. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: Yes SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF 6OUNTt ADMINISTRATOR__, RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE —APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE{S}: -- M ACTION OF BOAR ON 20 2 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS X UNANIMOUS(ASSENTNOne # I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE ANC!CORRECT COPY OF AN ABSE ABSE NT: NOES: ACTION TAKEN ARID ENTERED ABSTAIN:_-,___ r ON MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contact:Sara Hoffmai,335-1090 cc: CAO ATTESTED_Jamy 20, 2004 State Representatives JOHN SWEETEN,CLERK OF (via CAO} THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Supervisor U##kemANIS COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CSAC �Tl �, t Jt f , Ana � r � �{� /I 'i Deputy r ....................I.................................................................................................................................... .......................... BACKGROUND/REASON(S)FOR RECOMMENDATION(cont1d): The act is being sponsored principally by the League of California Cities, California State Association of Counties (CSAC) and the California Special Districts Association. The consortium is seeking the support of individual counties,cities,special districts and others. CSAC expects to file the Act with the Attorney General sometime in late February. Signature gathering would begin sometime in February and conclude by the end of April. If qualified, the Act would then go on the November 2004 ballot. Initial funding for the Act has been provided by CSAC and the League, each of whom have committed $1 million of non-public revenue. Estimates for the cost of the campaign run from just over$9 million to over$15 million, depending upon the intensity and funding of any opposition. Fundraising will obviously be key to the potential success of the Act. Pat Leary, CSAC Legislative Representative, will be present at the Board meeting to provide an overview of the Act and to answer any questions of Board members. all The Local Taxpayers and Public Safety Protection Act Ensuring Voter Control Over Local'Tax Dollars for Public Health, Safety and Other Essential Local Services The Problem; For more than a decade,the California State Legislature has been taking away;increasing amounts of local tax dollars that local governments use to provide essential services like police and fire protection,emergency and public health care, roads,parks,libraries and water delivery. In fact,through good times and bad,the State has been taking away billions in local tax dollars each year--forcing local governments to either raise local fees or taxes to maintain services,or cut back on critically needed services. The system is broken.Voters must act now to protect local services by protecting local revenues from being taken by the State. The Solution: The 2004 Local Taxpayers and Public Safety Protection Act would increase local control over our local tax dollars.This measure would let the voters have the final say on proposed actions by the State Legislature that would further reduce local government funding. it would protect the vital local services that California residents rely on each and every day—such as public safety and emergency care, roads, libraries,harks and transportation--by requiring voter approval before the State could reduce funding for local services or shift more costs to local governments. What this measure dour: 0 Requires voter approval before the Legislature can reduce local government revenues or take them for state,rather than local, purposes. 0 Ensures that local tax dollars are available to fund local services like police and fire, emergency and trauma care, parks, roads,libraries and water delivery. • Makes it absolutely dear that if the State Legislature mandates that local governments provide new or expanded programs or services,then the State would have to reimburse local governments for the cost of those programs. • Provides flexibility for state budgeting decisions, but requires voter-approval on any future State Legislative actions that would reduce funding for essential local services. What this measure DOES NOT do: • does not raise taxes. In fact,this measure will help decrease pressures for local fees and taxes by protecting local revenue sources from State rails. C Does not increase funding to local governments.Simply prevents the State Legislature from raiding future local government funding. C Coes not reduce funding that schools receive from local property taxes or funding that schools receive from the State. • Does not reduce funding for other state programs like schools or highways. 2004 Local Taxpayers and Public Safety Protection Act Q&A What would this measure do? The 2004 Local Taxpayers and Public Safety Protection Act would increase local control over our local tax dollars. This measure would let the voters have the final say on proposed actions by the State Legislature that would further reduce local government funding. It would protect the vital local services that California residents rely on each and every day—such as public safety and emergency care, roads, libraries, paries and transportation—by requiring voter approval before the State could reduce funding for local services or shift more costs for state programs to local governments. Why Is your measure needed? For more than a decade, the California State Legislature has been taking away increasing amounts of local tax dollars that local governments use to provide essential services Eike police and fire protection, emergency and public health care, roads, parks, libraries and water delivery. In fact, through good times and bad, the State has been taking away billions in'local tax dollars each year--forcing local governments to either raise local fees or taxes to maintain services, or cut back on critically needed services. The system is broken. Voters must act now to protect local services by protecting local revenues from being taken by the State. When do you pian to put this on the ballot?How many signatures do you need to qua'l'm' Officially,we need 598,105 valid signatures to qualify the measure for the November 2004 ballot. We plan to collect a far greater number of signatures to ensure it qualifies and that the voters are given the opportunity to protect their local tax dollars and protect funding for local public safety, health and other essential local services. Who supports this measure? The principal sponsors of the 2004 Local Taxpayers and Public Safety Protection Act are the League of California Cities, California State Association of Counties and the California Special Districts Association. Now that we have filed the initiative,we expect to grow abroad and diverse coalition of public safety and health advocates, taxpayer and business groups, seniors, community leaders and others who all have an interest in supporting the voters'right to protect their local tax dollars and their local services. Will this measure prevent state fiscal reform efforts? No. In fact, a key element of State fiscal reform is drawing a clear line in the sand that prevents the State Legislature from using local revenues to solve its problems or as a means of increasing state spending at the expense of local services. Nil this Measure raise taxes? No. In fact, this measure will help decrease pressures for local fees and taxes by protecting local revenue sources from state legislative raids. Does this measure increase revenues to local governments? No. it simply prevents the State Legislature from further taking local government revenues without a vote of the people. Now will:the new Governor respond to this?don't you think you should first give him a chance to correct the fiscal problems of the state? First, we would like to thank the Governor-elect for his positive statements in the media and during his campaign and his pledge to protect local services. We look forward to working with Governor Schwarzenegger to achieve his stated goal of protecting local governments and allowing local governments to provide the services that CA residents rely on every day. The fact is,however, the voters deserve to have the final say on state actions that will erode their local tax dollars and local services—no matter who is the governor and what the composition of the legislature. Why didn't you attempt to recollect lost ERAF property tax dollars? This measure was intentionally drafted to draw a line in the sand and prevent future state legislative raids of local government funding. While local governments and services are still suffering from the continual state raid of property taxes, given the state of California's fiscal health,we believe a more responsible approach at this time is to"stop the bleeding"at current levels. Will this measure erode funding for educatlon? No. this measure does not reduce state funding to schools and does not reduce funding that schools receive from local property taxes. What about other state programs?Will your measure reduce funding for State programs like roads and prisons? Again, our initiative simply prevents the State from taking LOCAL revenues without a vote of the people. The state still has flexibility over its own revenues. Nil this measure tie legislature's hands In passing a budget? No. Our initiative does not tell the state how to spend its own revenues. It simply prevents the State from taking funds that are designated for local governments and local services, or shifting/imposing costs to locals--unless first approved by a vote of the people. Aren't we just adding to the state's fiscal woes by initiating further"barllot-box- budgeting"that puts restrictions on how they can spend their revenues? No. The initiative does not tell the state how to spend the state's own revenues(as some propositions have done). What it does do is prevent the state from taking local revenues for state purposes without a vote of the people. It essentially confirms that local tax revenues are for local government services unless the voters decide otherwise. Does this measure prevent the new Governor or Legislature from rolling back the car tax? No. It simply ensures that local governments will be kept"whole"through a backfill or some other means, if the legislature and/or Governor want to roll back the car tax Wthout providing backfill to local governments,they are free to do so but must get the approval of the electorate. THE LOCAL TAXPAYERS AND PUBLIC SAFETY PROTECTION ACT SECTION ONE. Short Title. These amendments to the California Constitution shall be known and may be cited as the LOCAL TAXPAYERS AND PUBLIC SAFETY PROTECTION ACT. SECTION TWO. Findings and Purposes (a)The People of the State of California find that restoring local control over local tax dollars is vital to insure that local tax dollars are used to provide critical local services including, but not limited to,police,fire,emergency and trauma care,public health, libraries,criminal justice, and road and street maintenance. Reliable funding for these services is essential for the security,well-being and quality of life of all Californians. (b)For many years, the Legislature has taken away local tax dollars used by local governments so that the State could control those local tax dollars. In fact,;the Legislature has been taking away billions of local tax dollars each year, forcing local governments to either raise local fees or taxes to maintain services, or cut back on critically needed local services. (c) The Legislature's diversion of local tax dollars from local governments harms local governments' ability to provide such specific services as police, fire„emergency and trauma care,public health, libraries,criminal justice, and road and street maintenance. (d) In recognition of the harm caused by diversion of local tax dollars and the importance placed on voter control of major decisions concerning government finance, and consistent with existing provisions of the California Constitution that give the people the right to vote on fiscal changes,the People of the State of California want the right to vote upon actions by the State government that take local tax dollars from local governments. (e)The Local Taxpayers and Public Safety Protection Act is designed to insure that the People of the State of California shall have the right to approve or reject the actions of state government to take away local revenues that fund vitally needed local services. (f) The Local Taxpayers and Public Safety Protection Act strengthens the requirement that if the State mandates local governments to implement new or expanded programs, then the State shall reimburse local governments for the cost of those programs. (g)The Local Taxpayers and Public Safety Protection Act does not amend or modify the School Funding Initiative,Proposition 98(Article XVI, section 8 of the California Constitution). '. 1 (h) Therefore,the People declare that the purposes of this Act are to: (1)require voter approval before the Legislature removes local tax dollars from the control of Local Government, as described in this measure; (2)insure that local tax dollars are dedicated to local governments to fund local public services; (3)insure that the Legislature reimburses local governments when the State mandates local governments to assume more financial responsibility for new or existing programs; and (4)prohibit the Legislature from deferring or delaying anneal reimbursement to local governments for state-mandated programs. SECTION THREE. Article XIIIE is hereby added to the California Constitution to read as follows: ARTICLE XIIIE Local Taxpayers and Public Safety Protection Act Section 1. State-wide Voter Approval Required. (a) Approval by a majority vote of the electorate, as provided for in this section, shall be required before any act of the Legislature takes effect that removes the following funding sources, or portions thereof, from the control of any Local Government as follows: (1) Reduces,or suspends or delays the receipt of, any Local Government's proportionate share of the Local Property Tax when the Legislature exercises its power to apportion the Local Property Tax;or requires any Local Government to remit Local Property Taxes to the State, a state-created fund, or,without the consent of the affected Local Governments,to another Local Government; (2) Reduces,or delays or suspends the receipt of,the Local Government Base Year Fund to any Local Government, without appropriating funds to offset the reduction,delay or suspension in an equal amount; (3) Restricts the authority to impose, or changes the method of distributing,the Local Sales Tax; (4) Reduces, or suspends or delays the receipt of, the 2003 Local Government Payment Deferral; or (5) Fails to reinstate the suspended Bradley-Burns Uniform Sales Tax Rate in accordance with Section 97.68 of the Revenue and Taxation Code added by Chapter 162 of 2003 Statutes; or reduces any Local Government's allocation of the Property Tax required by Section 97.68 while the Sales Tax Rate is suspended. 2 (b) A vote of the electorate,as provided in this section, shall also be required if an act of the Legislature that establishes classifications or exemptions from the Local Property Tax or the Local Sales Tax does not include a continuous appropriation of fundis that shall be transferred to Local Governments in an amount equal to the net loss of revenue from those classifications or exemptions. In lieu of distributing reimbursement revenue as provided in this section, any statute exempting property from the Local Sales Tax or Local Property Tax may provide an alternative procedure for such distribution. (c) Prior to its submission to the electorate,an act subject to voter approval under this section must be approved by the same vote of the Legislature as is required to enact a budget bill and shall not take effect until approved by a majority of those voting on the measure at the next statewide election in accordance with subdivision(d). (d) When an election is required by this section,the Secretary of State shall present the following question to the electorate: "Shall that action taken by the Legislature in [Chapter_of the Statutes of®1,which affects local revenues,be approved? Section 2. Definitions (a) "Local Government"means any city, county, city and county,or special district. (b) "Local Government Base Year Fund"means the amount of revenue appropriated in the 2002-2003 fiscal year in accordance with Chapters I through 5, commencing with section 10701 of Part 5 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, adjusted annually based upon the change in assessed valuation of vehicles that are subject to those provisions of law. In the event that the fees imposed by those provisions of law are repealed,then the Fund shall be adjusted annually on July I by an amount not less than the percentage change in per capita personal income and the change in population,as calculated pursuant to Article XIIIB. (c)"2003 Local Government Payment Deferral"means the amount of revenues required to be transferred to Local Government from the General Fund specified in subparagraph D of paragraph 3 of subdivision(a)of section 10754 of the Revenue and Taxation Code in effect on August 11, 2003. (d)"Local Property Tax"means any Local Government's January II,2003 proportionate share of ad valorem taxes on real property and tangible personal property apportioned pursuant to the Legislature's exercise of its power to apportion property taxes as specified in Article XIIIA, section 1. "Local Property Tax"also means any Local. Government's allocation of the ad valorem tax on real property and tangible personal property pursuant to Article XVI, section 16. (e)"Local Sales Tax"means any sales and use tax imposed by any city,county, or city and cotmty pursuant to the terms of the Bradley-Burns Uniform Sales and Use Tax 3 (Chapter 1 of Part 1.5 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code)in accordance with the law in effect on January 1,2003. (f)"`Special District"means an agency of the State,formed pursuant to general law or special act,for the local performance of governmental or proprietary functions with limited geographic boundaries, including redevelopment agencies,but not including school districts, community college districts,or county offices of education. (g) "State"means the State of California. Section 3. Interim Measures (a)The operation and effect of any statute,or portion thereof,enacted between November 1,2003 and the effective date of this Act,that would have required voter approval pursuant to Section 1 if enacted on or after the effective date of this Act(the "Interim Statute"), shall be suspended on that date and shall have no further force and effect until the date;the Interim Statute is approved by the voters at the first statewide election following the effective date of this Act in the manner specified in Section 1. If the Interim Statute is not approved by the voters, it shall have no further force and effect. (b)If the Interim Statute is approved by the voters,it shall nonetheless have no further force and effect during the period of suspension;provided, however,that the statute shall have force and effect during the period of suspension if the Interim Statute or separate act of the Legislature appropriates funds to affected local governments in an amount which is not less than the revenues affected by the Interim Statute'. (c)A statute or other measure that is enacted by the Legislature and approved by the voters between November 1,2003 and the effective date of this Act is not an Interim Statute within the meaning of this section. SECTION FOUR. Article XHIB Section Six (6)is hereby amended as follows: SEC. £.(a)'whenever the Legislature or any state agency mandates a new program or higher level of service on any local government,the State shall annually provide a subvention of funds to reimburse such local government for the costs of such program or increased level of service,except that the Legislature may,but need not,provide such subvention of funds for the following mandates. (0(1) Legislative mandates requested by the local agency affected; (2)Legislation defining a new crime or changing an existing definition of a crime; or (e)(3) Legislative mandates enacted prior to January 1, 1975,or executive orders or regulations initially implementing legislation enacted prior to January 1, 1975. (b) The annual subvention offices required by this section shall be transmitted to the local government within 180 days of the effective date of the statute or regulation or 4 order by a State officer or agency that mandates a new program or higher level of service, or within 180 days of a final adjudication that a subvention of funds is required pursuant to this section. Far purposes of this section, the Legislature or any State agency or officer mandates a new program or higher level of service when it creates a neve program, requires services not previously required to be provided, increases the frequency or duration of required services, increases the number of persons eligible for services, or transfers to local government complete or partial financial responsibility for a program.for which the State previously had complete or partial financial responsibility. (c)If during the fiscal year in which a claim for reimbursement is filed for a subvention of funds, the Legislature does not appropriate a subvention of funds that provides full reimbursement as required by subdivision (a), or does not appropriate a subvention of funds that provides full reimbursement as part of the state budget act in the fiscal year immediately fallowing the filing of that clai ,for reimbursement, then a local government may elect one of the following options. (1) Continue to perform the mandate. Ae local government shale receive reimbursement for its costs to perform the mandate through a subsequent appropriation and subvention of fuss;or (2) Suspend performance of the mandate during all or a portion of the fiscal year in which the election permitted by this subdivision is made. The local government may continue to suspend performance of the mandate during all or a portion of subsequent f scat years Cantil the fiscal year in which the Legislature appropriates the subvention ofands to provide full reimbursement as required by subdivision (a). A local government shall receive reimbursement fear its costs for that portion r�,fthe fiscal year during which it performed the mandate through a subsequent appropriation and subvention offunds. The terms of this subdivision do not apply to, and a local government may;not make the election provided for in this subdivision,for a mandate that either requires a local government to provide or modify any form of protection, right, benefit or employment status for any local government employee or retiree, or provides or modifies any procedural or substantive right for any local government employee or employee organization, arising from, affecting, or directly relating to future, current, or past local government employment. (d)For purposes of this section, "mandate"mans a statute, or action or order of any state agency, which has been determined by the Legislature, any court, or the Commission on State Mandates or its designated successor, to require reimbursement pursuant to this section. SECTiON FIVE. Construetion. (a)This measure shall be liberally construed to effectuate its purposes,which include providing adequate funds to Local Government for local services including,but not 5 limited to,such services as police,fire,emergency and trauma care,public health, libraries,criminal justice,and road and street maintenance. (b) This measure shall not be construed either to alter the apportionment of the ad valorem tax on real property pursuant to Section 1 of Article XIIIA by any statute in effect prior to January 1,2003 or to prevent the Legislature from altering that apportionment in compliance with the terms of this measure. (c)Except as provided.in Section 3 of Article XIIIE added by Section Three of this Act, the provisions of Section I of Article XIIIE added by Section Three of this Act apply to all statutes adopted on or after the effective date of this Act. SES 10N SAX. If any part of this measure or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction,the invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications that reasonably can be given effect'without the invalid provision or application. 6