Laserfiche WebLink
<br />1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 GALLEY 12 - <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />. 44 <br />45 <br />46 <br />47 <br />48 <br />49 <br />50 <br />51 <br />52 <br />63 <br />54 <br />55 <br />56 <br />57 <br />58 <br />59 <br />60 <br />61 <br />62 <br />63 <br /> <br />.64 <br />65 <br />66 <br />67 <br />68 <br />69 <br />70 <br />71 <br />72 <br />13 <br />74 <br />75 <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />8 <br /> <br />Proof of Fobruary 16, 1978 <br /> <br />SANTA ANA-7923 <br /> <br />Bowne of San Francisco, Inc., 981-7882 <br /> <br />tinue to operate until an appropriate system, not in <br />violation of the California Constitution, can be <br />placed into effect. <br />Legislation has been enacted by the California <br />legislature in response to Serrano v, Priest, This leg- <br />islation significantly increases the amount of state <br />money supplied to public school districts having a <br />low local property tax basis, and provides for some <br />equalization of tax moneys by redistributing some <br />tax revenues of school districts having a high per- <br />pupil property tax basis to school districts having a <br />low per-pupil property tax basis" <br />It is likely that further litigation will result to <br />determine whether the enacted legislation satisfies <br />the constitutional requirement pronounced in Ser- <br />rano v, Priest, To the extent this decision and any <br />future legislative or judicial action required to im- <br />plement or enforce such decision may limit the <br />ab;lity of schools to continue to levy ad valorem <br />property taxes for the support of education, Tax <br />Revenues may be reduced, adversely affecting the <br />security of the Bonds, The total 1977/78 tax rate for <br />public elementary and high schools within the Proj- <br />ect subject to such decision is $3.5490 per $100 <br />assessed vaJuation, of which an undetermined por- <br />tion would be subject to such decision, <br /> <br />Proposed Property Tax Limitation, <br />Constitutional Amendment <br />The Agency has been made aware of a proposed <br />initiative measure entitled "Property Tax Limita- <br />tion, Initiative, ConstitutionaJ Amendment", com- <br />monly known as the "Jarvis Initiative," which has <br />qualified for a place on the ballot at the June 6,1978 <br />statewide election, <br />The office of the Attorney General has provided <br />the following summary of the measure: <br />PROPERTY TAX LIMITATION, INITIATIVE, <br />CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, Limits ad <br />valorem taxes on real property to I % of value <br />except to pay indebtedness previously approved <br />by voters. Establishes 1975/76 assessed valuation <br />as base value of property for tax purposes" Limits <br />annual increases in value, Provides for reassess- <br />ment after saJe, transfer, or construction" Requires <br />~ vote of Legislature to enact any change in state <br />taxes designed to increase revenues. Prohibits im- <br />position by state of new ad valorem, sales, or <br />transaction taxes on reaJ property, Authorizes <br />specified local entities to impose special taxes <br />except ad valorem, sales and transaction taxes on <br />real property, FinanciaJ Impact: Would result in <br />the loss of local property tax revenues of $7 bil- <br />lion to $8 billion annually and a reduction in state <br />costs of about $700 million in 1978179 and $800 <br />million annuaJly thereafter" <br />