.
Tuesday, Aug 11 - SB1085 - Assembly Appropriations Committee.
Make calls TODAY or ASAP –Takes about 20 minutes!
CALL TO ACTION - Call members of the Assembly Appropriations Committee (mtg: Tuesday, 8/11 at 1:00 pm) “OPPOSE SB-1085. If you leave a message, give your name and zip code. You can say, “I don’t live in the Assembly member’s district, but since they’re voting on policy that impacts me and all Californians, I’m counting on my voice being taken into account.”
Assembly Appropriations Committee
Voting on SB1085 Tuesday, August 11 at 1:00pm.
|
Lorena Gonzalez (Chair) D (916) 319-2080 Frank Bigelow (V.Chair) R (916) 319-2005 Rebecca Bauer-Kahan D (916) 319-2016 Richard Bloom D (916) 319-2050 Rob Bonta D (916) 319-2018 Ian C. Calderon D (916) 319-2057 Wendy Carrillo D (916) 319-2051 Ed Chau D (916) 319-2049
|
Megan Dahle R (916) 319-2001 Tyler Diep R (916) 319-2072 Susan Eggman D (916) 319-2013 Vince Fong R (916) 319-2034 Jesse Gabriel D (916) 319-2045 Eduardo Garcia D (916) 319-2056 Cottie Petrie-Norris D (916) 319-2074 Bill Quirk D (916) 319-2020 Robert Rivas D (916) 319-2030 |
Message: Place SB-1085 in the Suspense File.
Call before the meeting on Tuesday, 8/11
at 1:00 pm. Assembly Appropriation Hearing on SB-1085
Coming up NEXT- Calls before noon Thursday, 8/13. Senate Appropriation Hearing on: SB-902, 995, 1120, 1385. Details to follow.
Hearing date/time TBD: Assembly Appropriation Hearing on: AB-725, 2345, 3040
BACKGROUND INFO on Appropriations Calls:
What is the Suspense File?
The Appropriation Committee’s job is to consider the fiscal impacts of a
bill. If the cost of a bill is $50,000 or
more to the General Fund or $150,000 or more to a special fund, the bill
meets
the criteria for referral to the Suspense File. Otherwise, legislators
consider it an "unfunded state mandate" that the cities will figure out
how to pay for.
What is an Unfunded State Mandate? A city’s cost to implement a bill, without reimbursement from the state and with no sources of funding, is called an unfunded mandate.
Each bill requires city/county staff time, including one or more City Planners with input from the City Manager and attorney, to make it operational. Consider these four assumptions about tasks, time and cost to the city to implement a new bill:
1. Staff must read and understand the new law and how it interacts with previous laws.
Est. 40 aggregate hrs. Est. aggregate cost: $3,000 (At $75/hour w/avg CA planner salary at $78K)
2. Write new ordinances, educate planning staff and commission, city council, public.
Est. 120 hrs. Est. aggregate cost: $9,000.
3. Develop record-keeping metrics, collection systems and reporting mechanisms.
Est. 40 aggregate hrs. Est. aggregate cost: $3,000
4. Prepare documents and systems to educate builders, contractors, and community.
Est. 40 aggregate hrs. Est. aggregate cost: $3,000
Total UNFUNDED staff expense for 1 bill: $18,000
Total UNFUNDED staff expense for 8 bills: $144,000
Total UNFUNDED cost to 482 CA cities: $69,408,000.
A Fee Disclaimer. Most of these bills contain a boilerplate legal provision called a “fee disclaimer,” which means that the Legislature is saying that locals can absorb the costs because they have the authority to charge fees. Who are locals supposed to charge fees to when facing massive unemployment and folding local businesses, and when economists are comparing the COVID-recession to the Great Depression?
Talking Points
Key Message: The Appropriations Committees should hold all housing bills imposing additional costs.
1. The COVID economic recession has caused a massive decline in city revenues (including sales tax and transient occupancy tax). Cities are slashing budgets and laying off staff. There is no capacity to absorb additional mandates-no matter how well intended. The League of California Cities estimates cities face a $7 billion revenue shortfall over the next two years. https://www.cacities.org/Policy-Advocacy/Hot-Issues/Support-Local-Recovery
2. In this economy, the idea that locals will recover these costs through fees is ridiculous. Who are locals supposed to charge fees to when facing massive unemployment and folding local businesses, and when economists are comparing the COVID-recession to the Great Depression?
3. The 2020 Legislative Session also lacks adequate public transparency. Many housing bills benefiting developers and land speculators have been rushed and not assigned to all the applicable policy committees.
4. Moreover, the Legislature should not be attempting to override local zoning in communities that have state-certified housing elements. This makes no policy sense, and is an insult to the inclusive public process that developed these plans.
5. The Legislature has enacted many recent housing laws that locals are still trying to implement. This is not the time to pile on new mandates and major policies without full public review. The Appropriations Committee should be sensitive to the economic conditions facing cities and hold these bills.
No comments:
Post a Comment