2005 Initiative Analysis: The California Live Within Our Means Act (version 5)

The measure requires tha t any such mandate claims outstanding as of June 30, 2006 be paid within 15  years. The measure also states that Proposition 98 funds allocated to schools “shall first be expended . . .to pay the costs for state mandates incurred during that year.”
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050109.htm

^[PDF] "The California Live Within Our Means Act"

The measure requires that any such mandate claims outstanding as of June 30, 2006 be paid within 15 years. The measure also states that Proposition 98 funds allocated to schools “shall first be expended . . .to pay the costs for state mandates incurred during that year.”
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050109.pdf

2005 Initiative Analysis: The California Live Within Our Means Act (version 8)

Payment of Past Mandate Claims In past years, the Governor and Legislature have deferred payments for mandate claims filed by local school districts and noneducation local governments. The measure requires tha t any such mandate claims outstanding as of June 30, 2006 be paid within 15  years.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050110.htm

^[PDF] "The California Live Within Our Means Act"

Payment of Past Mandate Claims In past years, the Governor and Legislature have deferred payments for mandate claims filed by local school districts and noneducation local governments. The measure requires that any such mandate claims outstanding as of June 30, 2006 be paid within 15 years.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050110.pdf

2005 Initiative Analysis: The Tax Reduction and Taxpayer Equity Act of 2005

This could be accomplished by increasing the CT rate, decreasing the PIT rate, or through some combination of the two actions such that the revenues raised by each of the two taxes was equal i n each fiscal year.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050111.htm

^[PDF] "The Tax Reduction and Taxpayer Equity Act of 2005"

This could be accomplished by increasing the CT rate, decreasing the PIT rate, or through some combination of the two actions such that the revenues raised by each of the two taxes was equal in each fiscal year.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050111.pdf

2005 Initiative Analysis: Affordable and Safe Prescription Drugs for All Californians Act

In the aggregate, on an ongoing basis, the PERS board and Board of Pharmacy costs would probably amount to less than $10  million annually so long as outreach was limited, as the initiative provides, to $1  million per year.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050126.htm

^[PDF] The Affordable and Safe Prescription Drugs for All Californians Act

Bill Lockyer 4 March 2, 2005 so long as outreach was limited, as the initiative provides, to $1 million per year. Thus, the ongoing new revenues generated under this measure would probably be sufficient to pay ongoing program costs.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050126.pdf

2005 Initiative Analysis: Affordable and Safe Prescription Drugs for All Californians Act (version 2)

In the aggregate, on an ongoing basis, the PERS board and Board of Pharmacy costs would probably amount to less than $10  million annually so long as outreach was limited, as the initiative provides, to $1  million per year.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050127.htm

2005 Initiative Analysis: Affordable and Safe Prescription Drugs for All Californians Act (version 3)

In the aggregate, on an ongoing basis, the PERS board and Board of Pharmacy costs would probably amount to less than $10  million annually so long as outreach was limited, as the initiative provides, to $1  million per year.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050128.htm