| Public Participation |
|
|
Some
of the questions submitted by audience members included the
following:
-
Why
not negotiation and collaboration instead of a state-imposed
mandate?
-
If
sales tax sharing were not an option, are there other regional
solutions?
-
Could
AB 680 worsen the fiscalization of land use?
-
What
if sales tax revenue forecasts change?
More 
|
|
|
"The
region does not support this bill. (AB 680 is) Sacramento’s
version of solutions at the point of a gun. It doesn’t
achieve a cooperative atmosphere."
- Tom Cosgrove, Lincoln City Councilman
|
|
| The
Bill |
|
|
To
find out information on the bill click the button at right, or visit
http://www.assembly.ca.gov
and
click on "legislation". Enter "680" (without
the quotes) under "bill number" and hit submit.
|
|
Here
you will find the text of the bill, amendments, votes, analysis and future
votes. You can also make comments on the bill from that page, or click
here to send your comments to
Assemblyman Steinberg.
|
|
|
"Any
region that does smart growth ought to be rewarded by the state"
- Assemblymember
Darrell Steinberg, (D) Sacramento
|
|
| Important
Upcoming Dates |
|
|
Here
are some important dates:
June
15:
the Legislature must pass a budget by midnight (important
but not intrinsic to AB 680, since its implementation has been
pushed back to 2004).
June
28: the last day for committees centered on policy to pass
bills in the current session.
August
16:
the last day for committees centered on fiscal issues to
pass bills in the current session;
August
31: the final day of the session and the last opportunity for
both the Senate and Assembly to pass a bill.
|
|
|
| For
More Information |
|
|
For more information visit the
following:
Thanks to the League of Women Voters of California for
supplying many of the above links
|
|
|
|
About CPF |
|
The California Policy Project seeks
to create
opportunities for California citizens and
leaders to meet, discuss, and find common ground on sensible
long-term reforms to the state's land use, fiscal, and
governmental policies, and to educate and engage policy-makers in
collaborative efforts to implement these reforms.
California Policy Forum Network
Partners
|
|
|
|
| Foundation
Supporters |
| The
California Policy Forum (CPF) is made possible through the generosity of the
James Irvine Foundation and the William and Flora Hewlett
Foundation. To
learn more about CPF, please visit www.calpolicyforum.net.
We encourage widespread
distribution of this eSummary.
Please Forward it to a Friend
|
|
|
|
Should
local governments’ share of sales tax revenues be altered to stimulate
smarter growth in the six-county Sacramento region? Newcomers to regional dialogue met local fiscal policy watchdogs to
debate this issue at a California Policy Forum event co-sponsored by Valley
Vision and the Sacramento Metro Chamber on Jan. 16. At least 180 people
attended.
Following
the CPF forum, Assemblyman Steinberg modified his bill to implement the tax
sharing provisions of the measure in 2004 instead of 2003, which
will allow local communities an opportunity to come up with an
alternative plan. Additionally, local governments can now opt out
of AB 680 if they adhere to spelled-out smart growth principles.
