Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.b. Update on State of California's borrowing ability through shifting of property tax revenues during budget crises Page 1 of 2 Item 5.b. CENTRAL SAN Y-109-ITMEN ME October 20, 2020 TO: ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE FROM: KENTON L. ALM, DISTRICT COUNSEL REVIEWED BY: ROGER S. BAILEY, GENERAL MANAGER SUBJECT: UPDATE ON STATE OF CALIFORNIA'S BORROWINGABILITYTHROUGH SHIFTING OF PROPERTY TAX REVENUES DURING BUDGET CRISES At the Board meeting held July 16, 2020, the Board requested an update on the State's ability to shift or borrow funds from special districts during budget crises, such as that occurring during the ongoing COVI D-19 pandemic. Following is information regarding the potential for a shift of property taxes from local governments to the state as previously occurred on at least one occasion when there was a severe state budget shortage. In November 2004, California Proposition 1 A, "Local Property and Sales Taxes to Remain with Local Governments," was adopted placing various State Constitutional limitations on shifting ad valorem and sales taxes from local governments to the state. The operative paragraph concerning ad valorem taxes is now Section 25.5 of Article VI I I of the State Constitution and that section reads, in part: (a) On or after November 3, 2004, the Legislature shall not enact a statute to do any of the following: (1) (A) Except as otherwise provided in subparagraph (B), modify the manner in which ad valorem property tax revenues are allocated in accordance with subdivision (a) of Section 1 of Article XI I I A so as to reduce for any fiscal year the percentage of the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenues in a county that is allocated among all of the local agencies in that county below the percentage of the total amount of those revenues that would be allocated among those agencies for the same fiscal year under the statutes in effect on November 3, 2004. For purposes of this subparagraph, "percentage" does not include any property tax revenues referenced in paragraph (2)• There was a limited exception provided for the State to borrow restricted ad valorem tax revenues from local governments in the Fiscal Years 2009-2010 with a repayment with interest to occur within three years. However, it does not contain other exceptions which on their face suggest that this limitation on shifting or borrowing of property tax revenues is permitted unless a State Constitutional amendment were to be adopted by a vote of the electorate. Subdivision (a) of Section 1 of Article VI I I A referenced therein contains the 1% maximum property tax limitation that was created by Proposition 13 in 1978. There are numerous other cross references to other tax code provisions and this Section 25.5 of Article VI I I was amended in 2010 by another proposition, but the operative limitation has remained intact. October 20, 2020 Special ADMIN Committee Meeting Agenda Packet- Page 27 of 30 Page 2 of 2 Central San is an enterprise district because it charges customers for their sewer services. Historically, there have been several attempts to remove enterprise districts from those local public agencies eligible for sharing in ad valorem taxes. It has been contended that since enterprise districts could replace the tax revenues through fees for services provided, they should not be eligible for ad valorem taxes. Accordingly, notwithstanding the constitutional limitation set forth above, one cannot be certain that there will not be other approaches proposed to involuntarily shift ad valorem revenues from enterprise districts to other local governments. October 20, 2020 Special ADMIN Committee Meeting Agenda Packet- Page 28 of 30