HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-05-22 - AGENDA REPORTS - PROP 108 CLEAN AIR (2).r
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager Approval
Item to be presented
NEW BUSINESS Ken Pulskamp
DATE: May 22, 1990
SUBJECT: PROPOSITION 108
DEPARTMENT: City Man
BACKGROUND
This item is on the agenda to register the City of - Santa Clarita's support for
the Passenger Rail and Clean Air Bond Act, Proposition 108.
Because it is a bond measure, the law requires Prop 108 to appear separately on
the ballot. This proposition will not go into effect unless both Prop 111 and
108 receive voter approval.
Prop 108 would allow the state to sell the first billion dollars of a total of
$3 billion in general obligation bonds. The bonds will be used to raise funding
for high priority capital rail projects on inter -rail (Amtrak) and commuter and
urban corridors throughout the state. The Saugus -Los Angeles commuter rail
corridor, is eligible for this additional funding.
The remaining $2 billion scheduled for the same purpose is scheduled to go
before the voters in November of 1992 and 1994.
In addition to the apparent transportation benefits, Prop 108 will remove 75-125
traffic autos per every rail car and reduce air pollution.
RECOMMENDATON
That the City Council adopt Resolution 90-93 in support of Proposition 108 and
in conjunction authorize Mayor to sign letters of support.
ATTACHMENTS
� 9 Resolution
Proposition Adopted: ' a
r
Summaries
I
Agenda Item:.�&_
0
RESOLUTION NO. 90-93
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA,
TO SUPPORT PROPOSITION 108
WHEREAS, the state of California faces serious problems in its
fiscal policy which threaten both transportation and environmental programs;
and
WHEREAS, Prop 108 will authorize the sale of the first $1 billion of
General obligation bonds to be used for mass transit guideways on specified
rail corridors including urban, commuter and intercity rail progress to
effectively address these areas; and
WHEREAS, Prop 108 is a companion bill to Prop 111 and will provide
the rail transit portion of the comprehensive transportation blueprint
outlined in Prop 111 - The Traffic Congestion Relief and Spending Limitation
Act; and
WHEREAS, Prop 108 is supported by a broad coalition including
Governor George Deukmejian, State Superintendent of Schools Bill Honig,
California Association of Highway Patrolmen, California Taxpayers Association,
California Transportation Commission, League of Women Voters of California,
California Chamber of Commerce, California School Boards Association,
California State Automobile Association, County Supervisors Association of
California, League of California Cities, California Commission on Aging,
International Union of .Operating Engineers, AFL-CIO, California Police Chiefs
Association, California Retired Teachers Association, California Professional
Firefighters, California Business Roundtable, University of California Board
of Regents, California State University Board of Trustees, and many others; and
WHEREAS, reduction of the state's traffic congestion and air
pollution will require substantial 'investments in alternative methods of
transportation including rail transit.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA CLARITA SUPPORTS PASSAGE OF PROP 108, THE PASSENGER RAIL AND CLEAN AIR
BOND ACT, ON THE JUNE 5, 1990 BALLOT.
of
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS
MAYOR
day
ATTEST:
0
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS
CITY CLERK
I HEREBY CERTIFY that
the City Council of the City of
held on the day of
the Council:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS
•
day of
MAYOR
the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
Santa Clarita at a regular meeting thereof,
, 19_ by the following vote of
-2-
CITY CLERK
Passenger Rail and Clean Air. Bond Act of 1990
Official Title and Summary ,
PASSENGER RAIL AND CLEAN AIR BOND ACT OF 1990. This act provides for a bond issue of one billion dollars
($1;000,000,000) to provide funds for acquisition of rights-of-way, capital expenditures, and acquisitions of rolling stock
for intercity rail; commuter rail, and rail transit programs.
Appropriates money from state General Fund to pay off
bonds. Summary of Legislative Analyst's estimate of net state and local g6yernment fiscal impact: If all authorized
bonds are sold at 7.5 percent and paid over the typical 20.year
period, the General Fund will incur about $1.8 billion to
pay. off .bond principal ($1 billion) , and interest ($790 million)..
The estimated annual cost of bond principal and
interest is $90 million.
Final Vote. Cast by the Legislature on AB 973 (Proposition 108)
rAssembly: Ayes '68
Senate: Ayes 38
., Noes 6
Noes . 0
Analysis by the Legislative Analyst
Background '. :.
Commission (CTC)' reviews highway, rail and other
.The passenger rail transportation system in California
transportation projects proposed for state funding. The
includes, intercity rail, commuter rail, :and urban rail
CTC decides which projects . should be funded on
transit services.
apriority basis. The projects include those proposed by
• Intercity*. rail primarily serves ... business . or
thestate Department of Transportation and by local and
recreational travelers between cities in California :
regional agencies. The selected projects are . then
and to other, parts of the country. Intercity rail
scheduled in a seven-year funding plan adopted .by. the
service is typically operated by .Amtrak and includes
CTC:
services. such as the San Diegans from San Diego to
proposal '
Santa Barbara, and" the.- San ; joaquins from
Bakersfield to Oakland:.
This measure authorizes the state to sell $l .billion in
Commuter rail service .offers frequent
general -obligation bonds to provide funds for rail capital
_generally
service during commute hours to :serve commuters.
outlay. This authorization, however, would only take
- Service during other, periods of the day typically is
effect if voters approve Proposition 111 .The Traffic
limited. The Peninsula Commute 'Rail Service
Congestion Relief and Spending Limitation Act of 1990,
..
(Caltrain) from San Francisco : to San Jose is .an
also to be decided at this election. General obligation
example of this type.of service.
bonds are backed by the state, meaning that. the state is
9 Urban . rail . transit provides regular . service.
obligated to pay the principal and interest. costs on these
throughout the day, generally within an urban or
bonds. General Fund revenues would be used to pay
metropolitan area.. Examples of such service .include
these costs. These revenues come primarily from the
the Sacramento Light Rail System, . the San Diego
state corporate and personal income taxes -and the state
` ': Trolley and'. , the': San Francisco Bay Area Rapid..
sales tax:.. (An overview - of . the . state's bond debt is
. •'
transit'(BART) System.:';:..:: '_
presented 'at the end of the argument section in the
Costs to operate 'these three types of passenger rail .
supplemental ballot pamphlet.).:
service' in -California are . covered;. in. 'part; by-- fare.Upon
-: appropriation by the Legislature, the bond i
revenu'e'es.1ii addition, the rail services receive funds from, ..
money would be -.available for rail capital outlay. These
. '; •:.
various local, state'. and federal sources to subsidize their,
: projects must be located on routes and corridors specified
operating --expenses: In',1989-90; . the state. provided-
in, the measure, or. in future statutes -enacted by the
approximately $20 million to support the operating costs
Legislature
of passenger.rail services
: The measure requires that at least percent of the
Capital Costs. . Capital costs for California's passenger
.15
total .bond funds be': spent'. for intercity' rail purposes.
rail services are also funded from various local;, state and. .
These funds must be allocated among projects in eligible
'
federal ' sources. These . costs. include -acquiring .railroad
'intercity rail corridors based on the relative populations
;rights -of way; constructing rail (and, related) facilities,
served by each corridor
and acquiring. trains::. Currently, state funding ,for these
capital costs is made available from motor v6hicle'fuey.
Fiscal Effect
("gasoline".) taxes, commercial vehicle (`,truck") weight',!..
The fiscal effect of this measure. would depend on
fees, and a portion of the state sales tax: The amount 'of.'
whether. 'voters , approve Proposition. 111, The Traffic
state funds provided for these purposes varies from year
Congestion. Relief and Spending Limitation Act of 1990.
to , :year. In 1989-90, the . state's_ contribution was,
If Proposition 111 -is approved by voters at this election,
approximately $120 million:
the passage of this measure would result in the following
Under . current law, the. California. Transportation .
fiscal effect:
8, -
P90
•
• Direct Costs of Paying Off the Bonds. For these
types of bonds, the state typically makes principal
and interest payments from the state's General Fund
over a. period of about 20 years. If all of the bonds
authorized by this measure are sold at an interest
rate of 7.5 percent, the cost would be about $1.8
billion to pay off .both the principal ($1 -billion) and .
0
interest ($790 million) . The average payment.. for,-.
principal
or-
principal and interest would be about $90 million per,
year. ) .
If Proposition 111 is not approved, this measure would.
not take effect and, consequently, it would have no fiscal, .
effect.
Text of Pro
This law proposed by Assembly Bill 973 (Statutes of .1989, Ch. 108) is
`submitted to the people in accordance with the provisions of _Article
XVI of the Constitution.
This proposed law adds sections to the Streets and Highways Code;
therefore, new provisions proposed to be added are printed in italic
type to indicate that they are new.
PROPOSED LAW
SEC. 2. Chapter 17 (commencing with Section 2701) is added to
Division 3 of the Streets and Highways Code, to read:
CHAPTER 17. PASSENGER RAIL AND CLEAN AIR BOND ACT OF 1990
Article 1. General Provisions
2701. This chapter shall be known and may .be cited as the
Passenger Rail and Clean Air Bond Act of 1990.
2701.01. As used in this chapter, the following terms have the
following meanings:'
(a) "Committee" means the Passenger Rail Finance Committee
created pursuant to Section 2701.12.
(b) "Department"means the Departmentof Transportation:
(c) `Fund" means the Passenger Rail Bond Fund created pursuant
to Section 2701.05.
.2701.02. The Legislature has provided that, in addition to the one
billion dollars ($1,000,000,000) authorized pursuant to this chapter, the
Passenger Rail and Clean Air Bond Act of 1992 will be submitted {or
voter approval for the issuance of additional bonds of one. bil ion
dollars ($1,000,000,000) in 1992 and the Passenger Rail and Clean Air
Bond Act of 1994 will be submitted for voter approval for the issuance
of additional bonds, of one billion dollars ($1,000,000,000) in 1994 fora
total of three billion dollars ($3,000,000,000). .
Article 2. Transportation Improvement Program
2701.05. The proceeds of bonds issued and sold pursuant to this.
chapter shall be deposited in the Passenger Rail Bond Fund, which is
hereby created.
2701.06. The money in the fund, upon appropriation by the
Legislature, shall be available, without regard to fiscal years, for
acquisition of rights-of-way, capital expenditures, -and acquisition of
rolling stock for intercity rail, commuter rail, and urban: rail transit
and for capital improvements which directly support rail
transportation, including exclusive busways which are converted
within 10 years after completion of construction into rail lines, grade
separations to enhance rail passenger service, and multimodal
terminals.
2701.07. The. appropriations for capital improvements and
acquisition of rolling stock for intercity rail, commuter rail, and urban
rail transit shall be used only on the following routes and corridorsand
those specified by statutes enacted by the Legislature:
(a) Intercity Rail.
(1) LosAngeles-San Diego.
(2) Santa Barbara Con nty-LosAngeles.
(3) Los Angeles-Fresno-Sai: Francisco Bay area and Sacramento.
(4) San Francisco Bay area -Sacramento -Auburn.
(5) San Francisco -Eureka.
(b) Commuter Rail.
(1) San Francisco -San Jose. .
(2) SanJose-Gilroy.
(3) Gilroy -Monterey.
(4) Stockton -Livermore.
(5) Ora ngeCon nty-LosAngeles.
(6) Riverside County -Orange County.
(7) San Bernardino County-LosAngeles.
(8) Ventura County -San Fernando. Valley -Los Angeles.
Prop
P90
Law
`(9)� Saugus-LosAngeles.
(10) Oceanside -San Diego
'(11) Escondido -Oceanside.
-(c) . Urban Rail Transit.
(1) Sacramento.
(A) Roseville extension.
(B) Hazel extension.
(C) Meadowview extension. .
(D) Arendextension.'
(2) San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District
;:(A) Bayfair-East Livermore t,
(B) Concord-EastAntioch.
(C) Fremont -Warm Springs.
(D) Daily City -San Francisco International Airport.
(E) Coliseum -Oakland International Airport.
(F) Richmond -Crockett. .
(G) Warm Springs -San Jose.
(3) Alameda and Contra Costa Counties.
(A) Pleasanton -Concord.
(4) Santa Clara County.
(A) Sunnyvale -Santa Clara.
(B) San Jose-Vasond.
(C) State Highway Route 237. .
(5) San Francisco City and County.
(A) Extensions, improvements, and additions to the San Francisco
Municipal Railway.
(6) San Francisco -Santa Rosa -Sonoma. ;
(7) Santa Cruz County.
(A) . Boardwalk area -University of California at Santa Cruz.
(8) Los Angeles Metro Rail:
(A) Wilshire/Alvarado-Wilshire/Western.
• (B) Wilshire/Alvarado-Lankershim/Chandler
(C) San Fernando Valley extension.
(D) Union Station -State Highway Routes 5 and 710.
(E) Wilshire/Western-Wilshire/State Highway Route 405.
(9) Los Angeles County Rail Corridors..
(A) San Fernando Valley.
(B) Pasadena-LosAngeles.
(C) Coastal Corridor (Torrance to Santa Monica). '
(D) SantaMoniea-LosAngeles.
(E) State Highway Route 5
(F) State Highway Route 110.
(10) San Diego County. :...,..._...:_.
(A) EI Cajon -Santee.
(B) Downtown -Old Town. -
(C) Airport -Point Loma. .
(D) Old Town -Mission Valley.
(E) Mission Valley -La Mesa.
(F) LaJolla-Miramar.
(G) Old Town -Del Mar.
(H) Downtown -Escondido.
(I) Chula Vista-Otay Mesa.
2701.08. At least 15 percent of the money in the fund shall be used
for intercity rail purposes and shall be equitably expended on intercity
rail corridors based on the relative population served by each corridor.
Article 3. Fiscal Provisions
2701.10. Bonds in the total amount of one billion dollars
($1,000,000,000), exclusive of refunding bonds, or so much thereof as is
necessary, may be issued and sold to provide a fiend to be used /or
carrying out the purposes expressed in this chapter and to be usea to
reimburse the General Obligation Bond Expense Revolving Fund_
(Continued on page 60)..,
- 9.
1231
t
.. •r
SAI!
� . .. ....
'. _
108 ;.
Passenger Rail and., Air Bond Act of
Argument in Favor of Proposition 108
Rail transit will remove thousands of automobiles from congested...„•;Santa
Cruz Count :.
streets and highways, it. will speed workers to and from their jobs and
homes safely and it will reduce the dangerous pollution of the air we
Boardwalk -University of California -Santa Cruz
',
..
breathe.
LosAngeles-Metro Rail:
I
RAIL TRANSIT IS THE KEY TO A BETTERTRANSPORTATION
Wilshire/Alvarado-Wilshire/ San Fernando Valley Extension'
1.
FUTURE and Proposition 108 the Passenger Rail and Clean Air Bond
Western Union Station -State Routes 5/710'
'
Act, WILL MOVE CALIFORNIA INTO A NEW . ERA OF RAIL
Wilshire/Alvarado-Lankershim/ Wilshire/Western-Wilshire/;;..;
Chandler
TRANSIT.
Route 405
Proposition 108, a well-planned
P p program for improving and
Los Angeles County Rail Corridors:
'
expanding rail transit systems statewide, is an important part of the
San Fernando Valley Santa Monica -Los Angeles_.,,.,,.
;.
INNOVATIVE and COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION
Pasadena -Los Angeles. Route 5
BLUEPRINT provided by Proposition 1l1.
Coastal Corridor (Torrance -Route 110
Most of the programs created by Proposition 111 -will be funded by
Santa Monica)
proceeds from the gas tax. Because Proposition 108 is a bond measure, it
San Diego:
.must appear separately on the ballot. :;.
El Cajon -Santee La olla-Miramar
J
i;f �:,t .
'. Proposition 108 will authorize a $1 billion bond issue. The following
:
._ Downtown -Old Town Old Town -Del Mar
intercity, commuter and urban corridors and extensions would. be
eligible for Proposition 108 funds:
Airport -Point Loma Downtown -Escondido
Old
e
Town -Mission Valley Chula Vista-Otay Mesa
INTERCITY RAIL:
Mission Valley -La Mesa
Los Angeles -San Diego Bay Area-Sacramento-AuburnCurrently,
Santa Barbara -Los AngelesSan Francisco -Eureka
Los Angeles
the state provides little assistance for rail transit.
According to a report from the California Transportation Commission,
state funding for
-Fresno -Bay Area/Sacramento
rail should be increased.
COMMUTER RAIL:
The BENEFITS of PROPOSITION 108 FOR ALL OF CALIFORNIA
San Francisco -San Jose San Bernardino County-
San Jose -Gilroy Los Angeles
ARE ENORMOUS:
Congestion relief: EVERY RAIL CAR REMOVES 75-125 AUTO
Gilroy -Monterey Ventura County -San Fernando
Stockton -Livermore Valley -Los Angeles
FROM TRAFFIC.And frustrated commuters would have real
alternatives to battling traffic in our most congested corridors.
Orange County -Los Angeles Saugus -Los Angeles
Riverside County -Orange Oceanside -San Diego
BETTER AIR quality and ENERGY. SAVINGS.
Light rail can be built at one-tenth -the cost o
County Escondido=Oceanside
URBAN RAIL TRANSIT:
hOSaT-EFFECTIVE:
hi
Remember, Proposition 108.is only part of the overall transportation
_
Sacramento:
Roseville extension Meadowview extension
program provided by Proposition 111. For Proposition 108 to take effect,
Proposition 111 must also be approved by the voters. So it's important to
VOTE YES on BOTH PROPOSITIONS 108 AND 1111
Hazel extension Arena extension 4.BOTH
ARE SUPPORTED BYA BROAD BIPARTISAN COALITION,
BART.
Bayfair-East Livermore Coliseum -Oakland Airport
including the League of Women Voters, seniors, transportation, the
business community, law enforcement, education, labor, health
Concord -East Antioch Richmond -Crockett
care
and taxpayer associations.
Fremont -Warm Springs Warm Springs -San Jose
Daly City -SF Airport
Join the movement toward a SAFER, CLEANER and MORE
EFFICIENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM!
Alameda and Contra Costa:
VOTE YES on PROPOSITIONS 108 and 111!
Pleasanton -Concord
Santa Clara:
TOM NOBLE
Sunnyvale -Santa Clara Route 237
San Jose-Vasona
President
California Association of Highway Patrolmen (CHP)
San Francisco:
KIRK WEST
Extensions, improvements and additions to the San Francisco
President, California Chamber of Commerce '
Municipal Railway
San Francisco Santa Rosa -Sonoma
JIM COSTA
Member of the Assembly, 30th District
Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 108
There is no doubt that many of the rail programs which would be
financed by thepassage of Proposition 108 would be beneficial.
The finance.these
At some point, taxpayers must say "NO MORE DEBT. NO MORE
SPENDING.”
method chosen to projects is questionable.
The rush to pay for so many programs with general obligation bonds
Help keep California fiscally healthy . and .VOTE. NO ON a
PROPOSITION
is NOT SOUND FISCAL POLICY.
108.
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS ARE PAID FOR BY ALL
TAXPAYERS. These are the types of bonds which would finance the
HONORABLE RICHARD L. MOUNTJOY
projects listed in Proposition 108..
Member of the Assembly, 42nd District
On the other hand, these same projects could be. financed with
HONORABLE DENNIS BROWN
revenue bonds. REVENUE BONDS ARE PAID FOR BY USERS OF
THE SYSTEM.
Member of the Assembly, 58th District
The expansion of public debt through the sale of bonds for so many
HONORABLE ERIC SEASTRAND
i
projects, no matter how worthwhile, will have a negative impact on our
Member of the Assembly, 29th District
children and grandchildren who will have to pay for these debts. Bonds
are simply not "free money."
_
10 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency. , - P90,
. • ' Y ,r f
• 1.08
Passenger Rall and Clean ' A
lr. Bond Act of 1990 1
Argument Against Proposition 108
Proposition 108 �s. a bond measure which would finance worthwhile Does. it make any sense to spend so much of our tax dollars to pay off r
transportation projects in California. Our op osition to this measure is debts? ability to '
not based on the worthiness of the projec s bu denoan further. but M du Cal, and ure other. esssent al state services will be jeopardized aiflwe '
on the wisdom of increasing California's d y continue to approve bonds to finance what- we cannot afford. Our
Last year, California sold more general obligation bonds than, an
year in its history—$1.6 billion. Thomas Hayes, . State Treasurer, children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren will pay the price for
anticipates sales of. general obligation bonds in excess of $2 billion this our "buy now
later" mania.
Bonds simply are not free money. We need to pay as we go not
year. .'mortgage the future. Vote NO on Proposition 108
Look at the cost' of bonds on "this. ballot alone. The ;sum' .is
staggering .. '. a number too high for most of us to really comprehend. .
As you might expect, the amount of in taxpa�6rs in the future will RICHARD L. MOUNTJOY
pay on this debt is also staggering. .,Member of the, ssembly, 42nd District
a During fiscal year 1989=1990, $657 million (1.63 percent of the State's ' 'DENNIS BROWN
General Fund) will be spent for principal and interest payments on Member of the Assembly, 58th District
debts. It is anticipated that during fiscal year 1990-1991, ercent of
payments.for ERIC SEASTRAND
debt service will rise.to
$est restraintion, or about 2 inthe approvapof.bonds in the 1990'sl
Fund. Even if we show ments to soar from Member of the Assembly, 29th District
Treasurer Hayes expects principal and interest pay
the current $657 million level to $3.5 billion by the year 2000,
Rebuttal to Argument Against Proposition 108
The
ts are clear: Sound,
hile
rojects make
Everyo
ne in. California, INCLUDING THE OPPONENTS othis N excellentcinvestments. Since everyonewagreeP this s program is. 'SOUND
SOUND
measure, AGREES that THE RAIL TRANSPORTATION PROJECne
THIS BOND MEASURE ARE WOR
THIS be makingpand� is viton al to 8 is A For Pr posi on 108 to take effectO1Propos tion 1� must be approved ;
exactly the kind of investment we
keeping the California economy healthy and prosperoous. b John theBROADBIPARTISAN COALITION of business, our schools,
Every $10 million in transit capital investment su ports 770 jobs and'
produces $33 million in business revenues. seniors, law enforcement, health care, higher education labor and
Improved rail transit will RELIEVE THE TRAFFIC CONGESTION .taxpayers and .
which is choking our cities and will Pave the way for ANEW ERA OF ..VOTE YES on PROPOSITIONS 108 and 177
PROSPERITY.' pay GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN
That prosperity, in turn, generates the tax dollars to a off the bonds. Governor:
The benefits of these investments stretch out for many years in an .
improved economy. ,That's a basic fact of economics. which the LARRY McCARTHY
opponents apparently do not understand. utious whenPresident, California Taxpayers Association
There is no doubt that Californians should be ca' THOMAS HAYES
_ approving bonds. However, some bonds should be approved. THIS,
ONE SHOULD BE APPROVED.
CALIFORNIA HAS THE HIGHEST CREDIT RATING POSSIBLE Treasurer .
from each of the. nation's top bond rating agencies.
...
for accuracy by any official agency
is printed on this page ar
Argumene the opinions of the authors and have not been checked
pg0 p 11
sk
UVS()H
Ic
111&108
TNERES A LOT RIO NG ON IT!
The Passenger Rat and Clean Air Bond Act
Moving California into a New Era of Rail Transit
Proposition 108 is the rail transit bonding portion of the comprehensive transportation blueprint
outlined in Proposition 111 » the Traffic Congesdon Relief and Spending limitation Act.
As required by this visionary package, over the next four years, voters will be asked to approve three
separate S 1 billion rail transit bond measures, totalling S3 billion. Proposition 108 on the June ballot'
is the first of these measures.
Although the law requires that Proposition 108 — because it is a bond measure -- appear separately
on the ballot, it will NOT go into effect unless BOTH Propositions 111 AND 108 receive voter
approval in June.
Proposition 108 will fund high priority capital outlay rail projects on intercity (Amtrak), commuter
and urban corridors throughout the state. (Eligible corridors are listed on the reverse side.)
Proposition 108 will usher California into a new era of rail transit. It will:
• Provide frustrated commuters and everyday citizens with real, and safe, alternatives to battling
traffic. I
• Remove thousands of automobiles from our congested streets and highways. In fact, experience
shows that every rail car removes 75 to 125 automobiles from traffic.
• Reduce dangerous pollution levels in the air we breathe.
• Prove cost-effective, light rail can be but7t at one-tenth the cost of highways.
• Keep California prosperous. According to fiscally conservative State Treasurer Thomas Hayes,
"Proposition 108 is exactly the kind of Investment we should be making and is vital to keeping
the California economy healthy and prosperous%
Join the movement toward a SAFER, CLEANER and MORE EFFICIENT
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM! VOTE YES on 108 and YES on 111!
a
m ®®® Ar
PROPOSITIONS 111 AND 108.
1�®®� RECEIVE
to®®®
®®®® a MAY 0 8 1990
IBM= PUNL i:'1YUtiKS UEPARTMEt
C : V C= SANTA CLARJA
The
League Of A weekly Newsletter Published by the League of
California California Cities on the Impact on Cities by
Cities Propositions 111 and 108.
Friday May 4, 1990 No. 3
What Are Propositions 111 and
708? Here's The Scoop
Appearing on the June 1990 ballot will be Proposition 111 (titled "The Traffic
Congestion Relief and Spending Limitation Act of 1990" and formerly known
as SCA1). It contains three elements:
- It revises the spending limit calculations for local government and the state.
The revisions will allow for your appropriations limit to be adjusted annually at
a rate to keep pace with the economic growth in your city.
- It allows for increases in vehicle fuel taxes and truck weight fees to fund
Caltrans, county and city transportation improvements. These new funds,
which come from increases in the gas and diesel tax and commercial vehicle
weight fees, would be exempt from and confirms state and local appropria-
tions iimits.
- It revises the school funding initiative passed in 1986 to balance the state's
educational needs with the needs of other state services.
Impact on: Spending Limit
How would setting my city's limit be different?
Currently, cities adjust their limits based on the change in the cost -of -living
only. If Prop. 111 is passed, a city would adjust its "Gann Limit," or spending
limit, by either 1) the change in California's per capita personal income or 2)
the percentage change of growth in total assessed value due to non-residen-
tial construction.
In addition, cities currently may adjust their spending limits based on changes
in population within the city. Legislation currently being negotiated (Senate Bili
88) to implement Proposition 111 would allow for one of two methods to
change the limit based on population increases: either 1) changes in popula-
tion in the city, or -2) the percentage increase in population for the entire
county.
continued on Page 4
This Is•A Weekly:
Every
One In City Hall
Needs To See It
Every citizen needs to understand
the impact that Propositions 111
and 108 will have on cities, including
city employees. In addition to takine
a position on these measures -- they
State League Board of Directors has
voted to support Props. 111 and
108 -- tell the news medic about
your position and find ways to tell
your citizens and employees.
One easy step every city can take is
to ensure all employees get a copy
of this weekly newsletter that is
prepared by the League of Califor-
nia Cities and distributed with the
weekly Legislative Bulletin.
One other easy step for every
employee to take is to tell his or her
neighbor about what this measure
does and what the impact will be on
cities (see the related article that
described what the measures do).
Every city official can take a moment
to write a letter to the editor of the
local newspaper informing them of
the impact the measure will have on
cities.
More information about these
activites is available by calling the
League office at 916/444-5790. a
List Of Supporting
Cities and Their Role With Ballot Measures
Organizations; Contin-
ued From Last Week
with the June election approaching quickly and with two measures -- Proposi-
tions 111 and 108 -- that affect cities so greatly, the League has prepared a
California State Student Association
guide to help cities know what role cities, elected officials and employees can
play in the initiative and referendum process.
Cal. State Univ. Board of Trustees
-
California Taxpayers' Association
California Tax Reform Association
The following series of questions and answers are excerpted from the
California Transit Association
League's Guide which is being mailed to all cities. A city official should always
Cal. Transportation Commission
consult with the city's attorney concerning the propriety of any given course of
conduct.
Cal. Union of Safety Employees
Cal. for Better Transportation
Californians-for Higher Education
USE OF CITY RESOURCES ON BALLOT MEASURES
Children Now
Coalition for Project Delivery
May cities and the League of California Cities analyze the effect of
Congress of California Seniors
ballot measures on cities and publicize this-information? ._-.--- .
Consulting Engineers Assn of Cal.
Yes, cities and the League may use public resources to objectively evaluate a
County Supervisors Assn of Cal.
ballot measure's impact on municipal government. The results of such fair
Faculty Association of California
and objective analysis may be then made available to the newspapers,
Community Colleges
advocacy groups and others, who may make use of the information if they
Health Access of California
choose.
Japanese-American Republicans
Jewish Public Affairs Committee of
May cities contribute public funds to ballot measure campaigns
California
which have already qualified for the ballot?
Laborers' International Union of
No, the courts have determined that allowing government to "take sides" in
North America
ballot measure campaigns gives one side an unfair advantage which might
League of California Cities
League of Women Voters of Cali. I
distort the electoral process. Also, using public money to support a given
position on a ballot measure may result in a taxpayer's money being used to
Lutheran Office of Public Policy -
support a position with which the taxpayer does not agree. This kind of
California
"forced speech" may run afoul of the first amendment.
Motor Vehicle Conference
National Association of Social I
May cities use city staff, equipment and supplies to .generate
Workers - California ChapterI
Off-Highway Motor Vehicle
promotional materials on behalf of ballot measures which have
Recreation Commission I
already qualified for the ballot?
Women's
Older t :omen's League of California
No, this approach suffers from the same infirmity as contributing
n' g public mope}
Professional Engineers in
I
to a ballot measure campaign: it uses public resources to give one side an
unfair advantage in the
Cal.Government
campaign.
Project 90, A Coalition of Business,
Labor & Health
May the League of California Cites contribute money or use its
Retired Public Employees Assn
staff resources to advocate support for or opposition to ballot
State Building and Construction ;
measures?
Trades Council of California
The coups have not sper;ific2liy ruled on this issue, however, the California
Statewide University Policy
Legislature's a,torney has concluded 1112; allowing the League to play this role
Association
Triple A Council of California
would impermissibly permit cities to do indirectly what they cannot do directly,
The League makes it a practice to follow the same rules cities must follow.
UAW Region 6, International Union, I
United Automobile, Aero
What is the difference between impermissible "promotional" and
space and Agricultural I
permissible "informational' material?
Implement Workers of
There is no hard and fast rule for judging whether a communication is
America I
promo-
tional rather than informational. Material which exhorts voters to "vote yes" is,
United Domestic Workers of I
of course, promotional; however, documents which do not contain such
America
United Way of California I
exhortations may nonetheless be considered promotional. Some of the
factors courts look at in determining whether a publication is a "fair presenta-
University of California Board of
tion of the facts are the publication's style, tenor and timing. The standard is
- Regents
University of California Student
a strict one: the publication must be 2UE!2!y informational to pass legal muster.
When in doubt, leave any questionable language out.
Association
continued on next page
.J t
Ballot Guide - Continued
Do the courts distinguish between the use of public resources to
develop a measure for the ballot and the use of public resources
to support a measure once it has qualified?
One appellate court has allowed Los Angeles County to use public resources
to develop a criminal justice measure for the ballot. The measure was pro-
posed by a committee formed by the county to study certain procedural
changes in the criminal justice system. The court determined that, as long as
the activities did not involve advocacy of a single viewpoint with the object of
influencing voters on the issues, public funds could be spent formulating and
drafting the initiative and obtaining sponsors for it.
Although the decision was good news for the county, some attorneys have
expressed reservations about relying on -the decision for the proposition that
local public entities may use public resources to develop a measure for the
ballot.
May a city council pass a resolution supporting or opposing a
ballot measure?
The courts have not specifically ruled on this issue either, however, it appears
that the first amendment would protect a city's right to do so.
INDIVIDUAL ELECTED OFFICIALS
May an individuai elected official take a position on a ballot meas-
ure? -
Yes, a public official does not give up his or her first amendment riahts to
speak out on governmental matters upon being elected to office. However, an
elected official should not use city resources to "campaign" for or against a
given ballot measure. At least one city attorney believes, however, that it
would not be impermissible "campaigning" for a city council member to
express his or her views on a ballot measure in correspondence with constitu-
ents. That city attorney also cautions his council members to keep Proposition
7:;'s provisions on mass mailings in mind whenever the council members
communicate with their constituents.
May an elected official use his or her campaign funds to contrib-
ute to aualiNr, support or oppose a measure for the ballot or
support or copose a qualified initiative?
The state Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) says that an elected
official may contribute his or her campaign funds to quality, support or oppose
a ballot measure, as long as the initiative campaign committee is not "con-
trolled" by another candidate.
Does it matter when the campaign funds were collected?
According to the FPPC, the propriety of contributing campaign funds to a
committee to qualify, support or oppose a ballot measure does not depend on
when the c2mp2ign funds were raised.
How should such contributions from campaign funds be re-
ported?
The FPPC says the recipient of the funds (the ballot measure campaign
committee) shouid report the receipt of funds as contributions received; the
local elected official's campaign committee should report the contribution as
an expenditure made.
Future editions of Update will include additional information on this subject.
Majority Of
Newspaper
Editorials
Supporting
Measures
The following newspapers
have editorialized in support of
Propositions 111 and 108
Clearlake Highlands
Observer -American
Fresno Bee
Gilroy Dispatch
Los Angeles Times
Modesto Bee
Sacramento Bee
San Bernardino Sun
San Diego Union
Ukiah Daily Journal
Vacaville Reporter
I i The Orange County Register I
�I is the only paper known by the �€
91 League to be in opposition 2t jf
this time.
Sampie Resolu?ions
Available Frohn
League Office in
Sacramento
Cities wishing to take a position on
Propositions 111 and 108 can
contact the League at 916/444-5790
to obtain copies of resolutions
adopted by other cities and drafts
that can be used as a model.
Cities who have adopted a resolu-
tion either supporting or opposing
either ballot measure are asked to
forward a copy to the League office,
1400 K Street, Sacramento, 95814,
or by faxing a copy to 916/444-8671.
0
i
What Props. 171 & 108
Finally, Prop. 111 would exclude
from the spending limit any appro-
priations for certain capital ex-
penses, defined as land, capital
improvements or equipment that
exceed S100,000 and have a life
expectancy of ten years or more. It
would also exclude from the limit
any future increases in the gas tax
or truck weight fees.
Impact on: Transportation
What does Prop. 111 do to
relieve congestion?
In conjunction with Prop. 108, a rail
bonds measure, $18.5 billion will be
provided over the next ten years to
do the following:
o Funding the 1988 State Transpor-
tation Improvement Program (STIP)
shortfall - $3.5 billion. Projects to be
funded are in the current 1988
project plan.
o Subvention to cities and counties
- $3 billion. Half the fund is for cities
and half for counties, to be distrib-
uted to cities based on population.
Cities will have to maintain their
local contributions to the transporta-
tio . system and in counties with an
urbanized area of 50,C00 or more,
develop a Congestion Management
Plan in order to receive the funds.
Cities can expect to receive an
&vera :e o' 56.66 p r capita annually
once the full tax increase is in place.
T',e flrst year vlill result in about half
A.at amount, with the subvention
increasing each year until it reaches
the fuil amount in five years.
o Flexible Congestion Relief Pro-
gram - S;, billion. Highways, local
roads and transit guideway projects
are eligible for funds under this
program. Funds would be spent on
the most cost-effective project
designed to reduce congestion as
determined by the California Trans-
portation Commission.
Will Do For Cities, Counties And The State
o State -local transportation partner-
ship program - $2 billion. The
money in this fund can be used
entirely by local government for
local highway, local road or transit
guideway projects, and must be
matched at least on a dollar -for -
dollar basis with local funds.
o Intercity rail, commuter rail and
urban rail transit - $3 billion. Also on
the June ballot is Proposition 108,
which authorizes the sale of $1
billion in general obligation bonds to
be used for mass transit guideways,
on specified rail corridors, including
urban rail, commuter rail and
intercity rail. Two additional $1
billion bond measures for the same
purposes are scheduled to go
before the voters in November, 1992
and November, 1994. Fifteen
percent of the $3 billion is specifi-
cally allocated for intercity rail
projects.
o Inter -regional roads - $1.25 billion.
This would be for specified state
highway routes primarily outside
urban areas.
o Traffic system management - $1
billion. For use on transportation
systems management projects on
state highways and local roads
designed to increase carrying
capacity without increasing lanes,
as determined by the CTC.
o Retrofit soundwalls - $150 million
To complete all remai; ting sound-
walls designated in the current
I soundwail program.
o Environmental enhancement and
mitigation - $100 miilion. For use on
urban reforestation and other
environmental mitigation measures
to ease the environmental effects of
transportation facilities.
o Transit'operation and/or capital -
$500 million. This would fund the
State Transit Assistance Program
and would be apportioned to
all areas of the state with half
the apportionment based on
population and half on transit
operator revenues.
o Maintenance and rehabilita-
tion of state highways - $1 .
billion. To be used on addi-
tional state highway mainte-
nance and rehabilitation costs. m
How Does
Proposition 108
Enter Into All This'?
Prop. 108 would authorize the
state.to sell the first $1 billion
Of a total of $3 billion in general
obligation bonds to raise
funding for passenger rail
transportation. The second $1
billion bond authorization will
be placed on the November
1992 general election ballot
and the third on the November
1994 general election ballot.
This total of S3 billion is pan of
the $18.5 billion to be raised in
total for all the projects
planned as part of Proposi-
tions 111 and 108. i3
Po)ect Lis — r�
i,� I'
'Nay To City Hells
Beginning next week, the League
will be distributing to all cities the
transportation projects that will be
funded should Propositions 111 and
108 pass in the June election.
The projects were developed by the
state and by counties and does not
include city projects to be funded by
the funds that flow directly to cities
from the measures.
The projects are listed by county
and each city in the county will get
that area's project list.