HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06081993 - 1.134 /3 Y
STATE CAPITOL 8,���tt r COMMITTEES:
P.O.BOX 924849 CC
SACRAMENTO,CA 94249-0001 (� Y" TM �r y �� AGRICULTURE
� r `slatnre HOUSING AND COMMUNITY
DISTRICT OFFICE DEVELOPMENT
304 WEST F STREET LOCAL GOVERNMENT
ONTARIO,CA 91762 FRE D'AGUTAR
ASSEMBLYMAN,.SIXTY-FIRST DISTRICT
Representing the cities'of.Chino,Chino-Hills,Montclair,Ontario;Pomona,and Rancho ' �®
ay
17 ; 1919.3
pY 2 0 1993
vA COSTA or COISORS
Thomas Torlakson, Chair CILER I
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ��c`
300 East Leland Avenue, Suite 100 IE-Aliv
Pittsburg, CA 94565 �' y. 1993
Dear Chairman Torlakson:
For years local governments have been denied the ability to
adopt budgets which reflect local priorities and fiscal realities
because of state mandated programs. And for years the state has
ignored local governments ' pleas for relief from these mandates.
The time has come to address this issue directly.
As you are no doubt aware, Governor Wilson 's current budget
proposes a shift of $2 . 6 billion from local governments to
schools, thus ending the state's post- Proposition 13 commitment
to local governments. If the state severs its financial ties
with local governments, I believe it is only fair that the
Legislature relieve them of the financial burdens it has imposed
upon them.
To this end, I have introduced Assembly Constitutional
Amendment 26 (ACA 26) , legislation which would relieve local
governments of all unfunded state mandates, both pre- and
post-1975 . The fiscal problems facing local governments are
largely the result of state policies, and the state' s decision to
renege on the AB 8 program. Thus, the Legislature must adopt the
policy approach that if a program is important enough to mandate,
it is important enough to fund.
Ironically, a failure to eliminate unfunded mandates will
result in yet another mandate--you will be forced to raise taxes
to finance programs the state will not fund. I ask you and the
Board to support this measure.
Sincerely,
F 4EDUI
FA:J,r._.. :..:.: . .
enc:.;
Printed on Recycled Paper
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE-1993-94 REGULAR SESSION
• Assembly Constitutional Amendment -No. 26
Introduced by Assembly Member Aguiar
(Principal coauthor: Assembly Member Johnson)
(Coauthors: Assembly Members Andal, Bowler, Conroy,
• Goldsmith, Haynes, Hoge, Jones, Knowles, Nolan, Rainey, .
Richter, Seastrand, and Woodruff)
(Coauthors: Senators Lewis and Russell)
May 5, 1993
Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 26—A resolution
to propose to the people of the State of California an
amendment to the Constitution of the State, by amending
Section 6 of Article XIII B thereof,relating to state-mandated
local programs.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
ACA 26, as introduced, Aguiar. State-mandated local
• programs: costs.
Existing provisions of the California Constitution provide
that whenever the Legislature or any state agency mandates
a new program or higher level of service on any local.
government, the state shall provide a subvention of funds to
reimburse the local government for the costs of the program
or increased level of service,except that the Legislature may,
but need not, provide a subvention of funds for certain
• mandates, as specified.
This measure would instead provide that no local
government may be required to implement a new program
or higher level of service mandated by the Legislature or any
state agency unless and until the state provides a subvention
of funds to the local government for the costs of the new
program or increased level of service.
• The measure would also provide that the requirement that
99 80
ACA 26 —2—
the
2—
the state. provide a subvention of funds as a condition
precedent to the implementation by a local government of a
new program or higher level of service mandated by the
Legislature or any state agency applies to new programs and
higher levels of service mandated both before and after the
effective date of this subdivision.
Vote: %. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. •
State-mandated local program: no.
1 Resolved by the Assembly, the Senate concurring, That
2 the Legislature of the State of California at its 1993-94
3 Regular Session commencing on the seventh day of
4 December 1992, two-thirds of the members elected to
5 each of the two houses of the Legislature voting therefor,
6 hereby proposes to the people of the State of California
7 that the Constitution of the State be amended by
8 amending Section 6 of Article XIII B as follows:
9 SEC. 6. Whene the or e y stere
10 egeney des a new program er higher level e€
11 sem4ee en wty leeel govermne (a) No local
12 government may be required to implement a new
13 program or higher level of service mandated by the
14 Legislature or any state agency unless and until the state
15 shell,preside State provides a subvention of funds to
16 ase sueh the local government for the costs of •
17 meh the new program or increased level of service,
18 except that the Legislature may, but need not, provide
19 stah this subvention of funds for any of the following
20 mandates:
21 {a}
22 (1) Legislative mandates requested by the local.
23 agency affected.-, .
24 {�}
25 (2) Legislation defining a new crime or changing an
26 existing definition of a crime; er .
27 {e}
28 (3) Legislative mandates enacted prior to January 1,
29 1975, .or ,executive orders or regulations initially
30 implementing legislation enacted prior to January 1,
31 1975.
99 110
-3— ACA 26
1 (b) The requirement that the State provide . a
2 subvention of funds as a condition precedent to the
3 implementation by a local government of new program
4 or higher level of service mandated by the Legislature or
5 any state agency applies to new programs and higher
6 levels of service mandated both before and after the
7 effective date of this subdivision.
a
C
99 110