HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso No. 1990-544 - State Budget Actions and Urging Repeal of SB2557 RESOLUTION NO. 41/2-414
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDDING RELATING TO
STATE BUDGET ACTIONS AND URGING REPEAL OF SB2557
WHEREAS, after the longest budget stalemate in California's
history, the Governor and California Legislature finally enacted a
1990/91 budget package that shifts state and county costs to cities,
and diverts city revenues to finance state/county responsibilities,
and
WHEREAS, counties are an administrative arm of the state with
responsibilities for carrying out state programs, while cities are
in a different business of providing local municipal services which
are determined locally and have no responsibility or authority for
administering state or county programs; and
WHEREAS, the Governor and California Legislature have shifted
state and county financial responsibilities to cities; and
WHEREAS, all 457 cities in California balanced their budgets
only to find their budgets were subsequently thrown out of balance
by cost shifts and revenue losses designed to balance the budget of
the state; and
WHEREAS, the actions in the State budget package were enacted
by passage of SB2557, which ( 1) directed counties to charge cities,
school districts and special districts for the county function of
administering the property tax; (2) authorized counties to charge
cities for booking prisoners arrested by city employees; and ( 3 )
allowed counties to retain property tax revenues that should other-
wise go to 90 "No and Low Tax Cities" ; and
WHEREAS, these shifts of city revenues to counties were spe-
cifically enacted to replace cuts in state revenue for counties that
should have funded state responsibilities carried out by counties;
and
WHEREAS, the Governor and California Legislature have avoided
their financial responsibilities by enacting measures that are poor
public policy, which rob from one local government to finance
another, and result in no real solution to the continuing financial
problems facing all levels of government in California;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of
Redding that the City of Redding supports the repeal of SB2557 and
the protection of cities from the state budget process; and supports
alternatives that will provide adequate long-term funding for both
cities and counties.
CA
t
•
v •CI)j •
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was introduced
and read at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Redding on the 6th day of November , 1990, and was duly adopted
at said meeting by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Arness, Dahl , Moss & Buffum
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Fulton
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
d/Aac
CY : 1 , yor
ity .f Redding
ATTEST:S �n(
ETHEL LgA. NICHOLS,% Clerk
FORM APPROVED:
PPS g4e
L A. HAY , ty Attorney
-2-
CITY O/F�1\r"OF �g/�
'ITEM ND. REPORT TO CI Y Y COUNCIL
MEETING DATE
APPROVED BY .
DEPARTMENT OIREOTOR
Date October 30, 1990
GTT MANAGER L-040-300
From City Manager
Subject Recommendation for
Resolution Urging Repeal
of SB2557
Background
As Council is well aware, the State Legislature, in the closing
hours of its last session, enacted SB2557 which had the effect of
requiring California' s cities to help finance the state budget.
This was done by withdrawing funding from counties and then permit-
ting them to substitute for that lost revenue billings to cities for
prisoner booking and property tax administration. This bill was
enacted several weeks beyond the constitutionally-mandated deadline
for the state budget and, as such, imbalanced every city budget in
the state. The effect of the bill, however, is still unknown in
that the bill is effective January 1, 1991, but is retroactive to
July 1, 1990. Counties are still in the process of devising formu-
las to implement this bill, and presumably no one will receive a
bill until after January 1, 1991. The farther into the fiscal year
this budgetary impact is deferred, the more difficult it will be to
make cuts sufficient to pay these prospective bills. As you know,
we have registered our concerns with Shasta County in two letters,
urging that every consideration be given to the total situation.
In the meantime, the League of California Cities and the County
Supervisors Association of California have united in an effort to
secure repeal of SB2557 and to otherwise improve local government
relationships with the state. In fact, the League of California
Cities Board of Directors and the CSAC Board of Directors met in a
rare, if not only, joint session a couple of weeks ago in order to
present a united front on this matter. Cities are taking a variety
of actions aimed at securing some relief from this extraordinary
action by the state.
The Issue
Should the Redding City Council take a formal position requesting
repeal of SB2557 and convey that action to our legislative repre-
sentatives?
Alternatives Available to Council; Implications of Alternatives
Fundamentally, Council can either enact such a resolution, express-
ing its opposition to this high-handed action by the state, or
decline to do so. Taking a strong position will assist the League
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Page 2
of California Cities in securing relief from this measure. Failure
to take a strong position will probably be interpreted by the state
as lack of unity of purpose on the part of cities and counties.
Conclusions and Recommendations
I respectfully recommend that Council enact the attached resolution
and direct that a copy be sent to the City' s legislative represen-
tatives in Sacramento, to the League of California Cities, and any
other parties that may have an interest in the matter.
rmc/ga
a:cnc1302.rmc
Attachment