Government Finance and Operations 08/17/2012
Economic Development
SB 1156 (Steinberg) – Support
As Proposed to Be Amended
SB 1156, by Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, would
create a structure for continuing local economic development
activities in transit priority areas and for the manufacture of
renewable energy equipment.
The foundation of CSAC’s support is allowing counties a clear
option whether to financially participate in tax increment
financing for economic development purposes or not. We believe an
approach that encourages collaboration between counties and
cities will best serve Californians. This approach would not only
allow counties appropriate control over their own general funds,
but necessitates discussions about what kinds of development
benefits the community as a whole.
We appreciate the work and long discussions Senator Steinberg and
the other stakeholders have had with counties during this
process, and the resulting bill, which includes a variety of
governance models and a list of eligible uses, is one that we can
fully support.
The Assembly Appropriations Committee passed SB 1156 at its
hearing on Thursday, August 16. The bill now moves to the
Assembly floor.
Local Revenue
AB 1191 (Huber) – Sponsor
As Amended on January 23, 2012
AB 1191, by Assembly Member Alyson Huber, would have provided
counties and their cities a process to seek reimbursement for
revenues lost as a result of the triple-flip and the VLF swap.
CSAC and the Regional Council of Rural Counties jointly sponsored
the bill, which died in committee this week.
Several years ago, the state shifted a portion of the local sales
and use tax away from counties and cities to pay off some of the
state’s debt, the Economic Recovery bonds; this diversion will
end when these bonds are fully paid. Around the same time, the
state also decided to reduce a tax whose proceeds went entirely
to counties and cities, the Vehicle License Fee.
To reimburse counties and cities for these reductions to their
taxes, the state directed county auditor-controllers to
reallocate a portion of K-14 property taxes to counties and
cities. Due to Proposition 98, the schools are made whole by the
state General Fund. Thus, the end result of these accounting
maneuvers is that the state pays its debt with its own money and
locals don’t suffer tax revenue losses because the state reduced
the rate.
However, basic aid schools don’t receive state General Fund
money, so to avoid cutting schools the deal stipulated that
county auditor-controllers may not allocate property taxes away
from these basic aid schools for these purposes. No one foresaw
at the time that any county would one day contain only basic aid
schools. But that has now occurred.
Amador County finds itself in the unfortunate situation of having
no source to reimburse itself for the taxes the state redirected
and reduced.
AB 1191 outlined a process by which county auditors could present
information to the State Controller that identifies the amount of
reimbursement owed to each local agency pursuant to the deals the
state made with locals. Once those amounts are appropriated by
the Legislature, the Controller then transfers the owed funds to
the county auditor for distribution to the affected county and
cities.
This is money that the state has already been counting on
spending, but instead of reimbursing counties and cities
indirectly through Proposition 98, it would be reimbursing locals
directly in the same amount.
AB 1191 failed to get off the Senate Appropriations Committee’s
suspense file. CSAC and RCRC will work to get similar language
passed in the last two weeks of the legislative session.
AB 1289 (Davis) – Support
As Amended on July 3, 2012
AB 1289, by Assembly Member Mike Davis, AB 1289, would have
applied interest penalties uniformly for underpayments to various
state funds. Currently, underpayments to the State Trial Court
Construction Fund are penalized at a far higher rate than those
for all other funds.
AB 1289 would have made the state whole for local underpayments
by requiring full repayment plus penalties equal to the annual
LAIF returns. The LAIF rate is what the money would have earned
absent underpayment.
This change to statute would have not only ensure the state is
made whole, but would also have been fair to local agencies. The
State Controller only audits most counties every few years, and
the current high penalty rate is applied annually, so an error
made a few years before the discovering audit results in an
exorbitant penalty.
AB 1289 failed to get off the Senate Appropriations Committee’s
suspense file and is dead for the year.
Telecommunications
SB 379 (Fuller) – Support
As Amended on June 25, 2012
SB 379, by Senator Jean Fuller, would modify the state’s
High-Cost Fund- A (CHCF-A) to help support technology deployment
to rural California.
Last year, the FCC changed the focus and goals of the USF to
recognize that telephone and broadband have become unified
systems. As part of that change, the FCC will require that rural
telecommunications companies achieve broadband speeds of 4Mbps
downstream and 1 Mbps upstream, reaching higher speeds in future
years, as a requirement to receive federal high cost support. To
achieve that goal, the CHCF-A governing statutes must be revised
to conform to the federal program or California’s efforts to
provide basic phone service to residents in hard to reach areas
could lose roughly $25 million annually in federal
support.
Both the CHCF-A and the California High-Cost Fund B (CHCF B),
were established to subsidized both small independent telephone
companies and large telephone corporations to provide service in
the rural and smaller metropolitan communities. These subsidies
promote the goal of universal service by providing reasonable
rates for basic telephone service in many rural and hard-to-reach
areas of the state. Access to reliable, high-speed internet
service is the next generation of universal service. SB 379 would
help bring the state’s policies in line with the goal of
broadband deployment to the most rural areas of the state while
also protecting access to affordable basic telephone service.
Affordable telephone and other telecommunication rates are vital
to both residential and business customers in our member
counties. Without the changes to CHCF-A the state could lose $25
million annually of federal support, potentially causing rate
increases for all telephone customers and ensuring the delay of
broadband deployment. The deployment of technology in all areas
of California is a high priority of our members. We believe it is
imperative that state programs and policies are updated to
support the goal of residents throughout all of California having
access to broadband services.
The Assembly Appropriations Committee passed SB 379 at its
hearing on Thursday, August 16. The bill now moves to the
Assembly floor.