^[PDF] Overview of the May Revision 1993-94

The most problematic part of the budget plan is the proposed $2.6 billion property tax shift from local governments to schools. The Adminis- tration proposes that the counties offset a portion of their $2.1 billion loss by increasing local sales taxes, obtaining relief from state-mandated programs requirements, and using transferred special district property tax revenues.
https://lao.ca.gov/1993/Overview_May_Revision_176_0593.pdf

^[PDF] California Update: 1993-94 Budget Enacted

This overall gain reflects better- than-expected performance in personal in- come tax receipts from this spring. Specifi- cally, personal income tax receipts are ex- pected to be $450 million above the January forecast.
https://lao.ca.gov/1993/reports/cal_update_0793.pdf

^[PDF] California Update: Superior Court Invalidates Proposition 98 Funding Shifts

Offsetting this loss was an $82 mil- lion gain in personal income tax revenues. The majority of this gain, however, is attrib- uted to continued processing delays of tax refunds atthe Franchise Tax Board, and should be offset in the coming months.
https://lao.ca.gov/1993/reports/cal_update_superior_court_invalidates_prop_98_59_1193.pdf

^[PDF] Local Government Property Tax Transfers

While cities and counties could increase the total revenues from these sources somewhat by raising the tax rates, many of the tax rates are at (or near) their practical or legal limit. Finally, California counties have authority to impose a half-cent increase on the sales tax.
https://lao.ca.gov/1993/reports/local_gov_prop_tax_transfer_151_0293.pdf

^[PDF] Trial Court Funding

In recent years, the state's support of the Trial Court Funding Program has become increasingly dependent on revenues transferred to the state from local governments, which, in turn, have been redistributed back to counties.
https://lao.ca.gov/1993/reports/trial_court_funding_0393_reprint.pdf

MAJOR FEATURES OF THE 1994 CALIFORNIA BUDGET

AB 860 Pringle (Ch 155/94) * County property tax adjustments. AB 973 Bornstein (Ch 142/94) * 1993-94 community college property tax backfill. AB 2377 Hannigan (Ch 147/94)   * Disproportionate share payments and county Medi-Cal administrative claim monies. * Prescription drug savings.
https://lao.ca.gov/1994/94budget.html

^[PDF] Bonds and the 1994 Ballots

For example, San Diego County recently constructed a 1,000-bed jail and was unable to open it because of the lack of funds for operating expenses. Moreover, the state has postponed the opening of several prisons because of operating budget constraints.
https://lao.ca.gov/1994/Bonds_and_1994_Ballots.pdf

THE PRESIDENT'S WELFARE REFORM PROPOSAL:

This change, in conjunction with the fact that nonsubsidized jobs generally will provide more income to recipients than will WORK slots (due largely to differences in how the income disregard discussed below and the Earned Income Tax Credit are treated), could lead to a significant increase in the incentive for recipients to obtain nonsubsidized jobs.
https://lao.ca.gov/1994/clinwelf.htm

Redevelopment After Reform: A Preliminary Look

(We note, however, that no monies from the fund may be spent without the agreement of the County--and that a ny excess money at the end of the redevelopment project reverts to the County. Thus, all the excess tax increment money is effectively controlled by the County.)
https://lao.ca.gov/1994/redevelopment_after_reform.html

^[PDF] California Update: The 1995-96 Budget Outlook

case-management funds 0.4 Offset unpaid state taxes against federal refunds 0.1 Restrictlegai immigrants' eligibility for welfare benefits 0.1 Pending Litigation CTA v. Gould invalidating Proposition 98 loans $3.0 PERS v.
https://lao.ca.gov/1994/reports/cal_update_95-96_budget_outlook_265_1294.pdf