My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
RES 19-1078
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
2010-2019
>
2019
>
RES 19-1078
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/22/2019 10:13:50 AM
Creation date
4/22/2019 10:13:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
4/16/2019
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Attachment 1 <br /> Resolution No.19-1078 <br /> SUMMARY OF CASA ELEMENT CONCERNS AND CONSIDERATIONS RECOMMENDED APPROACH TVC POLICY FRAMEWORK <br /> KEY THEMES <br /> 9. Funding and Financing the CASA Compact Raise CONCERN STATUS: High. Though not included in the Oppose unless amended to eliminate any reduction in FUNDING AND RESOURCES <br /> $1.5 billion new revenue annually from broad Compact,the Governor has already suggested withholding SB1 'current property tax or transportation funding to cities <br /> range of sources including(but not limited to) funds from cities that do not meet their RHNA assignment. and amended as follows: <br /> property taxes,1/4-cent sales tax,head tax,and Most cities do not meet the RHNA assignment for at least low • Defined return-to-source funding formula at a city <br /> , General Obligation Bonds(reissued every 5 and very low units,mostly because such affordability requires <br /> ears Of the total$1.5 billion,$300 million level. <br /> years). significant local subsidies to even get built-the private market <br /> would come from local communities(former RDA simply won't build these units on its own. <br /> set aside and future tax increment). • Regional"fair share"housing assignment(RHNA <br /> CONCERNS process)is correlated to level of funding received <br /> New revenue allocation formula: • No"return to source"formula at the city-level,resulting in a (i.e.,the less regional funding a city receives,the <br /> - Up to 10"/for local jurisdiction incentives greater perception of some communities being"donor lower the regional housing assignment)(e.g.,we <br /> - Remainder to tenant protection,preservation, communities"without having resources to meet its assigned do not want to be donor cities). <br /> housing subsidies housing obligation. <br /> New revenue distribution formula: Support for the following funding sources: <br /> • Vacant property tax could be punitive to small property <br /> - 75%to county of origin("return to source") owners,particularly if vacancy is beyond their control. ; <br /> - 25%to regional program("revenue sharing") Potential unfunded mandate if responsibility for • Statewide voter-approved sales tax or General j <br /> enforcement falls upon local cities. Obligation bonds for affordable housing to pay for <br /> Revenue collection and disbursement would be <br /> housing initiative. <br /> managed by a new regional housing authority <br /> (described in Element 10). • Commercial fees/taxes maybe counterproductive if it <br /> drives employers out of the region and suppresses business <br /> retention. <br /> Objective:Fund elements of the Compact that l 1 <br /> requires public subsidy(e.g.,rental assistance,free • The property tax"set aside"is punitive to those cities whose <br /> legal counsel,financial incentives,etc.). tax base is largely from property taxes. <br /> • Wide range of new taxes and fees may limit a city's taxing <br /> capacity(limit its voters'appetite to pass local funding <br /> measures). <br /> Page 8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.