Budget votes, originally scheduled in the Legislature for 2:00, have now been pushed back multiple times. The lastest word we have is 7:00 or 8:00, according to Karen Bass.
One major hurdle seems to be the securitization of redevelopment agency funds, which would net about $7.4 billion dollars over the life of the borrowing. Yesterday, Mark DeSaulnier described that provision to me as both “insane” and “illegal.” Insane I expect, but illegal would mean that it could not be enacted tonight. And we are now hearing from several sources that the redevelopment legality is throwing a wrench into the budget package.
Remember, this is something that City of Industry lobbyists have been seeking for years, primarily so they can fund an outdoor stadium and attract an NFL franchise. The way that it’s been structured, according to reports, is that this borrowing maneuver, which would tie up about 10% of total property tax revenue for up to 30 years, would replace the seizure of local government funds through Prop. 1A and HUTA (the gas tax). If the redevelopment securitization gets shot down, the borrowing would come from the above.
This was described to me last night by DeSaulnier as a shadow play, so Dennis Hollingsworth and his buddies can say they tried not to take from local governments. But it’s completely unclear whether anyone would vote to take those funds through Prop. 1A and HUTA, which would blow enough of a hole to scuttle the deal.
…The State Senate is in session right now. You can watch at CalChannel.
They’re voting to suspend the rules to allow votes to happen tonight. It went through unanimously except for Wyland (R).
…The first bill of the series is the prison bill, which just allocates the reduction in funding. Denham has a poison pill amendment to actually set out the policy, which the Yacht Party kicked and screamed that the Democrats were trying to do. The amendments got tabled. What nonsense.
I’ll start a new thread.
It looks to me like the whole mess is just riddled with gimmicks that may very well not stand up in court. There is just no way that this arrangement could see the state through the fiscal year. That pretty well shoots down the argument for passing it to keep the state running.