ABSTRACT: Two noteworthy 9 June 2009 Special City Council Agenda Items, namely a Resolution approving the Memorandum of Understanding regarding the Maintenance of Effort requirements related to Proposition 172 funding and a Resolution adopting the Fiscal Years 2009/10 – 2011/12 Triennial Budget, are presented. An ADDENDUM of links to articles related to Proposition 172
from the California Local Government Finance Almanac are provided.
Special City Council Meeting
Tuesday, June 9, 2009 @ 4:30 p.m.
Council Chambers
East side of Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenues
Live and archived video streaming available
IV. Orders of Council
A. Consideration of a Resolution approving the Memorandum of Understanding regarding the Maintenance of Effort requirements related to Proposition 172 funding.
B. Consideration of a Resolution adopting the Fiscal Years 2009/10 - 2011/12 Triennial Budget.
ADDENDUM:
Cal Facts: California's Economy and Budget in Perspective - State and Local Finances. Legislative Analyst's Office, December 2006 (PDF)
Proposition 172 Facts. A concise explanation of Proposition 172, the half-cent sales tax for Public Safety adopted by voters as a partial mitigation for ERAF. (PDF)
Net Impact of ERAF, Prop 172 and COPs (73k) ERAF, Proposition 172 and COPs apportionments for all cities, counties and special districts.
CARMEL
ERAF I&II FY 2007-08 - 430,085
Proposition 172 Funds FY 2007-08 + 10,199
COPS(SLESF) FY 2007-08 + 100,000
Net $ ERAF Loss FY 2007-08 - 319,886
Cumulative ERAF Loss - 4,065,222
CumulativeERAF/Pr172/ COPS Loss (+ = gain) - 3,081,135
1 comment:
The local, state, national and global economy is in a recession. I would have a lot more confidence in the city's financial and administrative employees if they had examinied the current budget for inefficiencies and ways of cutting or decreasing the rate of increase in department budgets and possibilities of shifting monies from one department to another department to get a better job done before the city manager called for property owner assessments and truck fees and paid parking.
Governments always seem to use recessions as an excuse to tell us taxpayers we have to pay more in taxes, when they have not used our money well and learned to live within our means.
Why does the city need to raise taxes and fees when the city had a surplus last fiscal year?
I do not have much confidence in the people making finance decisions on our behalf for the above reasons.
The council, despite their so-called Republican label, do not seem to act responsibly with our money by trying to live within the budget they have year to year. We are very fortunate to have the amounts of property taxes, sales and hotel/motel taxes we do have and the large amounts in reserves prove that so the call for higher fees and taxes is uncalled for at this time.
Post a Comment