Loading...
CC SR 20220607 F - Cal Cities State Budget Request CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 06/07/2022 AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Calendar AGENDA TITLE: Consideration and possible action to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter of support for the League of California Cities’ (Cal Cities) state budget request. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: (1) Authorize the Mayor to sign a letter of support for Cal Cities’ state budget priorities, which asks that some of the historic state budget surplus be spent on local government. FISCAL IMPACT: None Amount Budgeted: N/A Additional Appropriation: N/A Account Number(s): N/A ORIGINATED BY: McKenzie Bright, Administrative Analyst REVIEWED BY: Karina Bañales, Deputy City Manager APPROVED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, City Manager ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: A. Draft letter in support of Cal Cities state budget request (page A-1) B. Governor Newsom’s May Budget Revision summary prepared by Renne Public Policy Group (page B-1) BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: Lawmakers are in the process of finalizing the 2022-23 State Budget as the Legislature must pass a final, balanced budget before June 15. Cal Cities, which works to defend and expand local control through advocacy efforts, is calling on lawmakers to use th e state’s historic surplus to allocate $1.6 billion for programs that achieve shared city and state goals for housing resiliency, as well as reimburse cities for unfunded, state -mandated programs. 1 CITYOF RANCHO PALOS VERDES On November 2, 2021, the City Council adopted the City’s 2022 Legislative Platform, outlining the policy positions of the City.1 The platform includes the support of legislation that grants full cost reimbursement to local agencies by the state and federal government for all mandated programs (2022 Legislative Platform, item 5.A.). Specifically, the Cal Cities budget request seeks the following: Establish a Housing and Economic Development Program - $500 million This would establish a Housing and Economic Development Program that would facilitate a partnership between the state and local agencies that adopt local property tax increment financing tools to support affordable housing, upgrade essential infrastructure, and spur economic development. This would create a state-local partnership to provide matching funds to help propel investments in affordable housing, public infrastructure, and job creation. Organic Waste Recycling Program Implementation - $180 million The Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery’s (CalRecycle) Organic Waste Reduction Regulations (SB 1383), adopted in November 2020, require local governments to reduce landfill disposal of organic waste 75% by 2025 and to increase edible food waste recovery by 20%. Compliance obligations for local governments began in early 2022, and local governments continue to develop a comprehensive suite of local collection, enforcement, and funding programs. While a local assistance grant program is in the process of being created in the current legislative cycle, additional funding is needed to implement and comply with SB 1383. Reimburse Local Governments for State-Mandated Programs - $933.5 million According to data obtained from the State Controller’s Office, as of October 2021, the state owes cities, counties, and special districts more than $933 million, including estimated accrued interest, in mandated costs incurred since 2004. Local governments rely on the state to reimburse them in a timely manner for costs related to state-mandated programs. Failing to pay for these costs threatens the stability of local budgets and the ability of local governments to fund essential services to the community. Given that local governments have diligently carried out crucial, unfunded programs for many years, Cal Cities is urging the Legislature to make local governments whole and support the financial sustainability of local governments. 1 The 2022 Legislative Platform and a record of the bills the City Council has taken a position on during the 2021-2022 legislative session is available at rpvca.gov/LegislationCorner. 2 CONCLUSION: Staff recommends the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign the letter in support of Cal Cities’ budget request for cities as drafted or with revisions (see Attachment A). ALTERNATIVES: In addition to the Staff recommendation, the following alternative actions are available for the City Council’s consideration: 1. Identify revised language to add to the letter. 2. Do not authorize the Mayor to sign the letter. 3. Take other action as deemed appropriate. 3 June 7, 2022 Via Email The Honorable Nancy Skinner Chair, Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee 1021 O Street, Suite 8630 Sacramento, CA 95814 The Honorable Philip Ting Chair, Assembly Budget Committee 1021 O Street, Suite 8230 Sacramento, CA 95814 SUBJECT: 2022-23 State Budget Request to Invest $1.6 billion in the Vitality of Cities – SUPPORT Dear Senator Skinner and Assemblymember Ting: In the spirit of a strong state and local government partnership to benefit all Californians, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes supports Cal Cities’ request for a one-time allocation of $1.6 billion (General Fund) in fiscal year 2022-23 to establish a Housing and Economic Development Program, implement organic waste recycling regulations, and reimburse local governments for unfunded, state-mandated programs. Local governments are essential to the strength of California’s economy, and their vitality is dependent upon fiscal stability. These proposed investments would support the economic vitality of local governments and would also help further the state’s ambitious climate resiliency and affordable housing goals. The City urges the Legislature to seize the historic opportunities the state budget surplus presents to invest in our communities and advance our shared goals. A strong state -local fiscal partnership would propel significant investments in a bright, sustainable future for all Californians. The Cal Cities budget request seeks funding for three critical issues: Establish a Housing and Economic Development Program – $500 million The City of Rancho Palos Verdes supports establishing a Housing and Economic Development Program that would facilitate a partnership between the state and local agencies who adopt local property tax increment financing tools to support A-1 fJAVln L. B RAnLEY, MA YOR BARBARA FERRARO, MAYOR PRO TEM FRIC 1\1 FGRIA. COUNC Ii MFM8FR cJOI IN CRUll<SI IANI<, COUNCIi MFM8FR l<E:N DYD/\, COUNCIL ME:Ml:lE:I~ Senator Skinner and Assemblymember Ting June 7, 2022 Page 2 affordable housing, upgrade essential infrastructure, and spur economic development. This program is crucial to achieving our housing supply and climate action goals. While cities appreciate the property tax tools the Legislature created after dissolving redevelopment to help address a range of community issues, the lack of funding has resulted in few cities being able to fully utilize them. Tools such as the Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts, Community Revitalization and Investment Authorities, and Affordable Housing Authorities may differ in their focus and details, but their common challenge is they lack sufficient financial capacity. The establishment of a state-local partnership to provide matching funds would greatly expand the viability of these tools, and propel significant investments in affordable housing, public infrastructure, and job creation. Organic Waste Recycling Program Implementation – $180 million Local implementation of organic waste recycling programs is essential to achieve California’s goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, cities and counties need significant additional funding to implement this state-mandated program without diverting existing resources from other essential services and increasing the financial burden on taxpayers. The Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery’s (CalRecycle) Organic Waste Reduction Regulations (SB 1383), adopted in November 2020, require local governments to reduce landfill disposal of organic waste 75% by 2025 and to increase edible food waste recovery by 20%, an effort we strongly support. However, compliance obligations for local governments began in early 2022 and local governments continue to develop a comprehensive suite of local collection, enforcement, and funding programs. Cities and counties greatly appreciate the Legislature’s creation of the SB 1383 local assistance grant program in the 2021 Budget Act. Additional funding is greatly needed though, which provides a renewed opportunity for state and local partnership to further our shared climate goals In order to comply with SB 1383, local governments have had to ra ise their rates to cover the additional program costs, which further burdens our residents at a time when inflation is at its highest rate in decades and personal budgets are already impacted. Given the state’s budget surplus, now is the right time for the state to increase funding to implement this program to help keep solid waste and recycling rates from increasing even further. A-2 Senator Skinner and Assemblymember Ting June 7, 2022 Page 2 Reimburse Local Governments for State-Mandated Programs – $933.5 million According to the State Controller’s Office, as of October 2021, the state owes cities, counties, and special districts more than $933 million, including estimated accrued interest, in mandated costs incurred since 2004. Cities and counties rely on the state to reimburse them in a timely manner for costs related to state-mandated programs. Failing to pay for these costs threatens the stability of local budgets and the ability of local governments to fund essential services to the community. Given that local governments have diligently carried out crucial, unfunded programs for many years, now is the time for the Legislature to make local governments whole and support their financial sustainability. As you know, state and local government must work together to advance our shared goals. Through that collaborative process, there is hope to mitigate the impacts of climate change, ensure all Californians have access to affordable housing, and create thriving communities throughout the state. Thank you for consideration of this request and for the continued partnership. Sincerely, David L. Bradley Mayor, City of Rancho Palos Verdes cc: Ben Allen, Senator, 26th State Senate District Al Muratsuchi, Assemblymember, 66th State Assembly District Senate Budget Committee Members (via email to sbud.committee@sen.ca.gov) Assembly Budget Committee Members (via email to asmbudget@asm.ca.gov) Jacki Bacharach, South Bay Cities Council of Governments Jeff Kiernan, League of California Cities Marcel Rodarte, California Contract Cities Association Sharon Gonsalves, Renne Public Policy Group Rancho Palos Verdes City Council and City Manager A-3 May 16, 2022 To: Mr. Ara Mihranian, City Manager Ms. McKenzie Bright, Administrative Analyst City of Rancho Palos Verdes From: Sharon Gonsalves Renne Public Policy Group Re: May Revision, Governor Newsom FY 22-23 State Budget Update Dear Mr. Mihranian: The following is a preliminary summary of the Governor Newsom’s May Revision of his FY 22-23 state budget proposal. Moving forward, as you have the opportunity to dive into the proposals in greater detail, if there are other areas or line items of interest expressed by Council or department heads, please do not hesitate to reach out to our team to ask questions or request additional information. May Revise: Budget Update Summary On May 13, Governor Newsom presented his budget update, “building on the state’s ongoing work to confront California’s greatest existential threats, bolster our economic growth, and make historic investments in California’s future.” The press conference lasted 2.5 hours, and included robust Q&A with the Governor, as well as with Keely Bosler, the Director of the Department of Finance. Governor Newsom structured his proposed additional largely one-time funding investments in the context of seeking to bolster current programs that align with the following state priorities: 1. Lowering Costs 2. Rebuilding California 3. Creating a Healthier California 4. Making a Safer California 5. Climate Commitment Governor’s Priorities The Governor’s priorities for allocating state surplus funds include offering inflation relief to California residents, improving energy system reliability to avoid blackouts, and paying down state debts and pension liabilities. Additionally, the Governor took a stand on California’s Pro-Life Agenda, stating that California will “advance our values, not just our principles” by tethering several of the proposed state spending priorities to enhanced protections and access for those fleeing from states with anti- abortion and anti-LGBT policies. Further, the Administration continues to seek opportunity for the state to become an insulin supplier and to work toward a single-payer health system, with Universal Health Coverage as a first and novel step. The Governors May Revision of the FY 22-23 budget proposal can be found HERE. B-1 May Revision, By the Numbers Overall budget: $300.7 billion • Just under a 5% increase over January’s projected revenues • $227.3 billion General Fund spending, which reflects a 15.5% increase from January • $68.9 billion Special Funds • $4.4 billion Bond Funds Overall Surplus: $97.5 billion, which triggers: • $3.4 billion Proposition 2 funds, accelerating pay off of retirement liabilities • $7.2 billion reserve deposits into the State’s Rainy-Day Fund • $35.7 billion in Proposition 98 spending – which reflects an increase of just over $21 billion from January numbers Discretionary Surplus: $49.2 billion • Increase of $31.7 billion since January • 99% of increased May revenues is proposed as targeted one-time funds as outlined below Areas of Interest to Local Government While this budget reflects just over $300 billion in spending, including just under $100 billion in surplus funds, there is not much proposed investment by way of direct funding to municipalities. However, we have identified the following investments to be of particular interest to local government. Homelessness, Housing & Mental Health • Project Homekey. $150 million in additional funding is proposed. • New Homeless Interim Housing Program. $500 million is proposed to be allocated for grants to local governments for constructing interim homeless housing on state lands. • Homeless Housing Assistance and Prevention Program (HHAP). The May Revise states that the Administration is committed to extending this program at its current $1 billion annual funding level, pending further discussion with the Legislature to meaningfully increase outcomes and accountability on local HHAP spending to focus on highest priority needs, such as encampment resolution, Homekey operating sustainability, and CARE Court housing supports. However, funding will not be released until local accountability plans for homelessness have been received by the state to be figured into awarded funding. These are due by June from cities and counties, who must put together a plan showing how they will use the dollars to meet specified metrics and is accompanied by a spending augmentation of 18% for those found to be in compliance. • Adaptive Reuse. $600 million ($500 million in the May Revise plus $100 million proposed in the January budget) is proposed over two fiscal years for adaptive reuse projects that convert underutilized retail and office properties to housing. It also includes proposed streamlined approvals process to enhance the speed of delivery. With new 6th Cycle B-2 Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) targets set at an additional $2.5 million units as the statewide goal, the state is investing where its priorities are to “make real what we promote,” and is “leaning in hard” to meet needs. Mental Health • CARE Court. $65 million for state focused one-time initial costs to implement CARE Court, but negotiations are ongoing with counties to determine actual cost needs and an ongoing funding burden has yet to be disclosed. This item continues to be controversial and negotiations between the Administration, Legislature, counties, and stakeholders is ongoing. Additionally, this builds on the proposed $1.5 billion from the January Budget proposal for mental health beds. • $290 million augmentation, Children’s Mental Health Package. This builds on the $4.5 billion in children and youth behavioral health initiative from last year with an additional $290 million augmentation in the May Revision: • $85 million in wellness and mindfulness programs • $75 million youth led media campaigns • $50 million school and community-based crisis response • $40 million community-based youth suicide prevention and outreach • $40 million career development and parental support Transportation • Active Transportation. $500 million is allocated for active transportation projects. • Federal Infrastructure Funding. The May Revise projects that California will receive $38 billion in funding under the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act over the next five years, and thus provides a combined $194 million to address increased Caltrans’ staffing needs. Drought Relief As part of an overall $7.2 billion to tackle drought between FY 2021-22 and January FY 22-23 Proposal, the May Revise includes $1.3 billion in additional drought-related proposals. Depending on the yet to be fleshed out details of the proposed investments, these spending priorities may trickle down to the local level in the form of grant funding opportunities for specific projects. Proposed spending includes: • $530 million to support water recycling and groundwater cleanup; advance drinking water and clean water projects that leverage significant federal infrastructure funds; and continue aqueduct solar pilots. • $553 million to provide grants to urban water districts and smaller community water suppliers for drought-relief and related projects. • $280 million to address fish and wildlife impacts associated with drought and climate change. • $187 million to support agricultural water conservation practices. Economic Development and Tax Relief • CaLCompetes Tax Credits and Grants. The May Revise proposes extending for five additional years the existing Cal Competes Program, which offers tax credits to attract and retain high B-3 quality jobs, at $180 million annually. An additional $120 million one-time is proposed for Cal Competes grants, which can be offered to businesses in addition to tax credits. • New Tax Credit Program Proposal. The May Revise combines two tax credit programs (New Innovation Headquarters Credit and Pre-Development of Green Energy Technologies Credit) that were proposed in the January budget into a single program administered by the Energy Commission, funded at $1.05 billion over four years. This program is also required to provide additional consideration to companies that relocate from states that have enacted anti-LGBTQ+ and reproductive rights laws. • Cannabis o Proposed revisions to cannabis taxation. Eliminate the cultivation tax, shift the point of sale of the 15% excise tax from distribution to retail. The Administration assesses this may create a temporary loss in local revenues and has proposed a $150 million investment in targeted grants to backfill potential losses. o $20.5 million for grants to local governments to expand local retail access. • Tax Relief o Sales and use tax exclusion for lithium extraction for a three-year period, with local impacts backfilled. o One-year suspension of the state’s portion of sales tax on diesel fuel. o Clarification that recipients of federal PPP grants will not be subject to state income tax on the amounts received. o Offers applicants under two recent Main Street hiring tax credit programs the ability to claim eligible credits over the next five years. • Small Business Hard-Hit Industries Grant Program. The May Revise proposes this new program to assist businesses that suffered most in the pandemic and agricultural businesses suffering from drought impacts. The program would be administered by the Office of the Small Business Advocate (CalOSBA) and offer: • $500 million in grants, ranging from $10k-$50k, to businesses in the top ten industries most impacted by the pandemic. • $75 million in grants to small agricultural businesses, ranging between $30k-$50k, to provide additional relief to those small businesses most affected by severe drought. Energy • State megawatt (MW) gaps have been prioritized in the May Revision. • $10 billion combined proposed investment between the January FY 22-23 proposal and May Revision: $2 billion (January), $8 billion (May). The additional $8 billion proposed funding is broken down as follows: • Strategic Electricity Reliability Reserve (5,000 MW). $5.2 billion. • Energy Arrearage Relief. $1.2 billion. • Residential Solar Incentives. $970 million to the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) for incentives residential solar and storage systems, of which $670 million is to be directed to low-income households. • $225 million: New electricity transmission, including from Salton Sea. The development of lithium valley has emerged as a significant state priority to meet the needs of the future. The proposal includes economic development pathways for locally based jobs created by the development of this new industry. B-4 Broadband • Middle-Mile Augmentation. The May Revise proposes to augment prior budget allocations for development of middle-mile broadband by $1.1 billion over two fiscal years to address increased cost of labor and supplies. Public Utilities Commission • Revising Electrical Rate Setting. The May Revise indicates that the Administration will be pursuing legislation to allow the PUC to adjust electricity rates to predetermined fixed charges with considerations of low-income customers. This rate reform effort will reduce charges attached to volumes of electricity consumed, help control rate volatility, and enable creation of better price signals that will enhance widespread electrification efforts. As this proposal continues to develop, RPPG will continue to track this closely as the revised rates could have fiscal impact to municipalities. Fire, Emergency Services, Public Safety • Cal Fire. $150 million to Cal Fire for enhanced operational support, staffing, and equipment. • CalOES. $183 million to the Office of Emergency Services for various improvements to strengthen California’s emergency response readiness. • Mutual Aid. $25 million to improve local law enforcement mutual aid deployment resources. • Non-Profit Security. $50 million for security assistance to non-profit organizations at risk of hate-motivated violence and threats. Public Safety The May proposal reflects an increase of $193 Million over January proposed investments. This funding reflects spending priorities to enhance the Fentanyl Task Force at DOJ and combat fentanyl trafficking, increase victims’ services, address officer wellness, curb child sex trafficking and exploitation, fund missing and murdered Indigenous persons, and for non-profit security grants. This builds on the $356 Million proposed in the January Budget that addresses ghost guns, gun buy- back programs, retail theft task forces, investigation and prosecution, and support for impacted small businesses. Miscellaneous • Peace Officer Wellness. $50 million in grants to local government supporting peace officer wellness, mental and emotional health, and improve community trust and relations. • Access to State Parks. Proposals include $13.5 million to purchase additional state park passes that can be checked out from local libraries. • Strategic Water Storage. $500 million is provided in FY 25-26 for strategic water storage, including in aquifers and off-stream reservoirs. • Coastal. $50 million is provided to the Coastal Conservancy to purchase critical shoreline properties to preserve natural resources and advance climate resilience. • Methane Satellites. $100 million in Greenhouse Gas Reduction funds is allocated to expand the number of satellites launched for methane observations and allow California to identify the source of these emissions and work with programs to hold emitters accountable for violations. B-5 State Appropriations Limit (SAL): GANN Limit Not Triggered Under Revised Proposal 1 At the state level, the State Appropriations Limit (SAL) – often referred to as the GANN limit –is triggered when revenues exceed the limit as calculated over a two-year period. Once the GANN limit is triggered, state lawmakers may only spend any revenues over that limit in very narrow and specified ways: returning money directly to the taxpayer or spending more in education. This is a narrative to track, as the revenue projections specific to capital gains is a conservative estimate of a volatile market and true figures could change as the year evolves, which would require the state to alter spending plans. While evading the GANN limit is an unlikely scenario with the high surplus, there are ways for the state to spend down revenues. In the May Revise, this is reflected by GANN excluded spending priorities that: 1) direct state relief to the taxpayer, 2) heavy investment in state infrastructure, 3) updated estimates of emergency spending. 1 In 1979, voters approved Proposition 4, an initiative that added a constitutional amendment, also known as the Gann initiative, which placed limits on the growth of expenditures for publicly funded programs. Division 9 of Title 1, beginning with Section 7900 of the Government Code, was added to laws to establish the process for calculating state and local government appropriations limits and appropriations subject to limitation under Article XIII B of the California Constitution. IN DETAIL: MAY REVISE PROPOSED INVESTMENTS TO PAY DOWN GANN CALCULATIONS $18.1 Billion Proposed Inflation Relief Package. • $11.5 Billion taxpayer rebate ($400 per registered vehicle, up to two cars, limited program) • $2.7 Billion in emergency rental assistance ($8.1 Billion total program) • $1.4 Billion for utility relief, including $1.2 Billion for additional energy arrearage relief and $200 Million for water – builds on the $2 Billion investment in arrearage relief from FY 21-22 Budget. • $933 Million: Health care worker retention, including $1500 to hospital and nursing staff • $750 Million: Grants to local governments for free public transit (free bus/train rides for 3 months) • $439 Million: Diesel tax pause on sales, for the state’s portion only • $304 Million: Middle class health care subsidies • $157 Million: Fee Waivers for childcare, should assist 40,000 families $17 Billion Additional Infrastructure Investments. This builds off the $20 Billion already proposed in the January FY 22-23 Budget Proposal, with an additional $17 Billion proposed infrastructure investment in the May Revision: • $6.2 Billion in Energy • $5.6 Billion in TK-16 (inclusive of higher education) • $1.8 Billion in Drought and Water • $1.2 Billion in Housing and Homelessness • $1.1 Billion in Broadband, focused on middle-mile investment • $500 Million toward deferred maintenance Fighting Covid-19 With Science. Building on the proposed $1.25 Billion investment in emergency spending measures due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the May Revision proposes an additional $1.1 to fight COVID-19 with science to keep Californians safe. B-6 California Budget Process/What to Expect Moving Forward Each year, the Governor must release a preliminary budget proposal by January 10th, which is then followed by a “May Revise” released in mid-May, reflecting updated revenue projections based on actual receipts. Final Negotiations for the State budget. • The budget committees of each house will close out subcommittee recommendations and each will move to adopt its version of the state budget leading into final negotiations with the Governor. • Typically, the Assembly and Senate may convene a conference committee to resolve differences in their spending plans. Last year the Administration, Speaker, and Pro-tempore negotiated the ultimate deal privately. • June 15. Either way outstanding issues must be addressed, and the Legislature must vote on a balanced budget package to send to the Governor by June 15th, which is a constitutional deadline, or they do not get paid until an agreement has been brokered. The Legislature will reconcile any differences which results in a final proposed budget which is then passed by both houses. • July 1. The Governor then has until July 1 to sign the budget deal, which is the start of the new fiscal year, and may line-item veto specific appropriations. In recent years, the June 15 package has become all but ceremonial. The constitutional deadline does not apply to trailer bills, which are bills that ‘trail’ behind the main budget package and adjust appropriations in the main budget bill either up or down, with accompanying statutory language necessary to enact the spending items. These bills are very often issue specific, but also can be “Budget Bill Jr’s” that amend many sections of the larger budget package. For instance, due to the large surplus last year, there were several Budget Bills Jr. for the 2021-2022 Final Budget. With an even higher surplus this year, we expect there to be multiple iterations of the “final” budget bill with trailer bills likely trickling through the legislative process through fall. These trailer bills are almost always pre-negotiated between the Department of Finance/Administration and chief budget consultants in each house/Legislative leadership prior to appearing in print, and there is little opportunity to engage at that point. Even so, this process can present opportunities to engage sooner to tweak spending proposals or the provisional language authorizing spending to open it up for greater access. ### B-7