Prop 22: Should state be able to take local money? | TheUnion.com
YOUR AD HERE »

Prop 22: Should state be able to take local money?

State legislators have long had the power to dip into local government funds to close budget gaps during tough times.

Local jurisdictions that have lost money over the years are backing Proposition 22, which aims to end the so-called raids.

“It’s a big burden on the quality of life,” said Nevada City Manager Gene Albaugh, who watched libraries, police and fire departments suffer after state take-backs. “We want to stop the raids of our local government fund. We want to control those locally.”



The state took $617,000 from Grass Valley’s Redevelopment Agency this summer, and the city will have to pay another $127,000 next year. Truckee paid $625,000 this year, and Placer County paid $3.2 million.

Grass Valley allots about $1.4 million annually into the RDA fund and uses it for neighborhood improvement projects such as the roundabout on East Main Street, street improvements and partnerships with groups such as The Center for the Arts.




But opponents of Prop. 22 say the state needs the flexibility to dip into local funds, especially in a budget crisis, and argue the state programs at stake are more critical than redevelopment projects.

About $1 billion hangs in the balance for fiscal year 2010-11, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office. That money could be locked into local RDA and transportation funds if Prop. 22 passes, or dispersed through the state general fund if it fails.

“If Proposition 22 passes, our schools stand to lose over $1 billion immediately and an additional $400 million every year after that,” wrote the California Teachers Association. “At a time when our public schools are already suffering from crippling budget cuts, Proposition 22 would devastate them.”

Among Prop. 22’s opponents are a union of state-employed firefighters and the California Nurses Association; both say the proposition will bring more cuts to vital services provided by the state.

Money-shifting happens because state and local funds are intimately connected. Both levels of government share sales tax and fuel tax revenue, and they split the bill for programs such as health and social services.

While the state doesn’t collect property tax, it has the authority to redistribute that revenue.

In recent years, voters have limited the state’s authority to shift around local money; Prop. 22 is an even tighter restriction.

To contact Staff Writer Michelle Rindels, e-mail mrindels@theunion.com or call (530) 477-4247.

Yes on Prop. 22:

• California League of Cities

• California Chamber of Commerce

• Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association

No on Prop. 22:

• California Teachers Association

• California Nurses Association

• California Democratic Party


Support Local Journalism


Support Local Journalism

Readers around Grass Valley and Nevada County make The Union’s work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.

Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.

Your donation will help us continue to cover COVID-19 and our other vital local news.

 

Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.

User Legend: iconModerator iconTrusted User