Sierra Madre Mayor John Buchanan reacts to passage of CA budget, see below. News Net file photo
The L.A. Times is reporting that California Democratic lawmakers have passed a budget – over Republican objections – that is “balanced with a blend of taxes, cuts and clever accounting.” According to the Times, the budget avoids many of the severe reductions that were expected to be needed for a balanced budget by “returning to old strategies that have papered over California’s deficits for years: delaying the payment of billions in bills, skipping debt repayments and penciling in money that may not materialize.” The plan would also cut deeply into higher education, the courts and local law enforcement. Today was the deadline for passing a budget, and if lawmakers had failed to pass the budget by today, they would have faced a loss of wages themselves.
As reported by the Times, one controversial component in the budget is the phasing out of redevelopment agencies, which “use tax dollars to improve blighted areas, by forcing them to join a new program and pay the state $1.7 billion for the privilege.” This action will impact cities throughout the state, including Sierra Madre.
Gov. Brown has not indicated whether he will sign the budget as passed.
Assemblyman Tim Donnnelly, who represents the 59th district that includes Sierra Madre, issued the following statement following the budget’s passage:
“The Democrats made a mockery of the people’s voice today by passing what amounts to the Legislative Paycheck Protection Act.
“Last year, the California State budget plan was 100 days late, wreaking havoc on budgets for schools and school vendors, prisons and park districts, cities and counties across the state. The people sent a clear message that they want legislators held accountable for passing a balanced budget on time when they approved Prop 25, which would temporarily stop Legislators from collecting paychecks if the budget was late again.
“To protect their paychecks, the majority party passed a budget that relies on a dangerous realignment plan, which will send thousands of inmates into already crowded county jails, slating them for early release onto the streets.
“There was one small victory for the people; the Republicans stood strong as the loyal opposition to increased taxes. Still, the Democrat’s plan raided local funds and saddled the people with illegally passed taxes that are sure to land us in court.
“The gimmick-filled budget includes nothing to tackle the biggest drains of taxpayer dollars such as massive pension debt, an illegal immigration crisis, and the State’s regulatory attack on businesses, but the Democrats walked away smiling knowing that at least their paychecks will come in next month.”
Mayor John Buchanan, in an e-mail to SierraMadreNews.Net, had this to say about the budget:
“While this budget makes deeper cuts than past efforts, the absence of responsible compromise has unfortunately left us with a budget that still has to rely on accounting gimmicks, overly optimistic economic projections and one time solutions that do not fully address the structural problems with California’s finances.
At the local level we need to study this budget carefully, but the proposed elimination of redevelopment agencies is obviously the most disconcerting to cities and, I think, a short sighted approach that does little to resolve the structural budget problems associated with California’s budget. There is a companion bill that allows agencies to survive if they make “voluntary” contributions to schools, fire protection districts and transit agencies but how much that requires from each agency is not clear. Assuming the Governor signs these bills, there will almost certainly be legal challenges to this scheme.
Nonetheless, Sierra Madre had the foresight to set aside some of its agency money to give it the flexibility to make these survival payments, and thereby avoid greater financial hardship, if these bills somehow survive legal challenge. The devil is in the details, however, and we will be studying the provisions of this legislation to determine how much our CRA might owe if it decides to try to stave off elimination.”