Loading...
96-092 RESOLUTION NO. 96R-92 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1996/97. WHEREAS, the voters of California on November 6, 1977, added Article XIII B to the State Constitution placing various limitations on the appropriations of the state and local governments; and WHEREAS, Article XIII B of the State Constitution provides that the appropriations limit for fiscal year 1996/97 is calculated by adjusting the 1995/96 fiscal appropriations limit for changes in the cost of living and population except as otherwise provided in said Article XIII B; and WHEREAS, the information necessary for making these adjustments is attached in Exhibits A through G; and WHEREAS, the City of Anaheim has complied with all the provisions of Article XIII B of the State Constitution in determining the appropriations limit for fiscal year 1996/97. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Anaheim that the City of Anaheim appropriations limit for fiscal year 1996/97 be established in the amount of $409,215,824.00. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Anaheim, by recorded vote of the City Council adopting this resolution, hereby determines and selects that, with regard to fiscal year 1996/97 and the calculations specified herein for such fiscal year, the term "change in the cost of living" for purposes of Section 8(e) (2) of Article XIII B of the Constitution of the State of California shall mean the percentage change in the California per capita personal income from the preceding year. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Anaheim, by recorded vote of the City Council adopting this resolution, hereby determines and chooses that, with regard to fiscal year 1996/97 and the calculations specified herein for such fiscal year, the term "change in population" for purposes of Article XIII B of the Constitution of the State of California and Division 9 of Article 1 of the Government Code of the State of California shall mean the change in population within the City of Anaheim. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said appropriations limit herein established may be changed as deemed necessary by resolution of the City Council. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Anaheim this 11th day of June , 1996. MAYOR OF THE CITY OF A~HEIM ATTEST: CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM O019051.01/EEGAN/Ma¥ 20, 1996 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY Of ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, LEONORA N. SOHL, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 96R-92 was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting provided by law, of the Anaheim City Council held on the 11th day of June, 1996, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Tait, Zemel, Feldhaus Lopez, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None AND I FURTHER CERTIFY that the Mayor of the City of Anaheim s~gned said Resolution No. 96R-92 on the 11th day of June, 1996. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Anaheim this 1 lth day of June, 1996. CITY CLERK Of THE CITY Of ANAHEIM (SEAL) I, LEONORA N. SOHL, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing is the odginal of Resolution No. 96R-92 was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Anaheim on June 11th, 1996. CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM EXHIBIT A 1996/97 APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT CALCULATIONS AND COMPARISON OF APPROPRIATIONS SUBJECT TO LIMIT FY 1995/96 Adopted Appropriations Limit $388,664,958 Adjustment Factor 1.0529 FY 1996/97 Appropriations Limit $409,215,824 FY 1996/97 Appropriations Limit $409,215,824 FY 1996/97 Appropriations Subject To Limit 143,645,409 FY 1996/97 Appropriations Limit Margin $265,570,415 FY 1996/97 Appropriations Limit Margin, As a Percent of Limit 64.9% EXHIBIT B 1996/97 APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT ADJUSTMENT FACTORS POPULATION - Selected Factor: City Povulation Growth Population count provided by the State Finance Department 293,245 Population percent change pursuant to Sections 2227 and 2228 of the Revenue and Taxation Code 0.59% CHANGE 1N COST OF LIVING - Selected Factor: California Per Capita Personal Income Growth 4.67% POPULATION AND PRICE FACTOR CONVERTED TO AN ADJUSTMENT FACTOR A) Population - City, Converted to a factor 1.0059 B) Cost of Living - Calif. Per Cap Income, Converted to a factor 1.0467 Ratio of change: A X B = 1.0529 EXHIBIT C 1996/97 APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT APPROPRIATIONS SUBJECT TO LIMIT CALCULATION Totals Total All City Revenues $641,351,803 Reduce by Non-Proceeds of Taxes 495,310,020 $146,041,783 Add User Fee Revenues in Excess of Costs 0 146,041,783 Add User Fees in Replacement of Taxes 4,647,984 150,689,767 Subtract Revenues Supporting Federal Mandates (FLSA) 165,904 150,523,863 Subtract Qualified Capital Projects 2,300,000 148,223,863 Subtract Debt Service Appropriations 703,000 $147,520,863 Total All Expenditure Appropriations $641,351,803 Reduce by Non-Proceeds of Taxes 495,310,020 $146,041,783 Subtract Debt Service Appropriations 697,697 145,344,086 Subtract Revenues Supporting Federal Mandates (FLSA) 165,904 145,178,182 Subtract Qualified Capital Project Expenditures 6,180,757 138,997,425 Add User Fees in Excess of Costs 0 138,997,425 Add Expenditures for Functions Formerly Tax Supported 4,647,984 $143,645,409 EXHIBIT D 1996/97 APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT PROCEEDS OF TAXES CALCULATION PROCEEDS NON-PROCEEDS OF TAXES OF TAXES TOTAL Taxes $122,660,779 $122,660,779 State Subventions 7,544,675 7,544,675 Service Charges 3,408,720 49,861,882 53,270,602 Permit Fees 5,031,393 5,031,393 Fines and Forfeitures 2,251,960 2,251,960 Rentals 31,082,460 31,082,460 Sales 11,349,000 279,644,581 290,993,581 Refunds and Reimbursements 12,009,673 12,009,673 lntemal Service Charges 75,707,331 75,707,331 Federal and County Subventions 13,329,058 13,329,058 Contributions 11,745,625 I 1,745,625 Subtotal $144,963,174 $480,663,963 $625,627,137 lnterest 1,078,609 14,646,057 15,724,666 Total All City Revenues $146,041,783 $495,310,020 $641,351,803 Use of(Contribution to) Fund Balances 20,219,815 Mello-Roos CFDs (Separate Limits) 4,106,300 Redevelopment Agency 35,139,773 Housing Authority 39,568,243 Grand Total 740,385,934 FD EMF~RG RESPONSE RECVRy EXHIBIT F ~'EXT Or: C;,ANN SI'I~N L)IN(;-I,|MIT,\TION INITIA FiVF: LIMITATION OF GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAl, AMENDMENT. E~tabli~hes and defines ennLml appropr~ntion lilltlts on stilt(: ~llld Ioc~H governmental entitles based on annuul appropriations for prior fiscal year. Itequlrcx adjustments for changes in cost of living, population and other specified faCtors. Appropriation limits may be established or temporarily changed by electorate, Require~ revenues received in excess of appropriations permitted by this measure to be returned by revision of tax rates or fee schedules within two fiscal years next following year excess created. With exceptions, provides for reimbursement of IoeaI governments for new programs or higher level of services mandated by state. Financial Impact: loderetainable. ARTICLE XIII B. See. 1. The total annual appropriations subject to limitation of the state and of each local government shall not exceed the appropriations limit of such entity of government for the prior year adjusted for changes in the cost of living and population excci)t as otherwise provided in this Article. See. 2. Revenues received by any entity of government in excess of that amount which is appropriated by such entity in compliance with this Article during the fiscal year shall be returned by a ~evision of tax rates or fee schedules within the next two subsequent fiscal years. See. 3. The appropriations limit for any fiscal year @utsuant to See. I shall be adjusted as follows: (a) In the event that the financial responsibility of providing services is transferred, in whole or in part, whether by annexation, incorporation or otherwise, from one entity of government to another, then for the year in which such transfer becomes effective the appropriations limit of the transferee entity shall be increased by such reasonable amount as the said entities shall mutually agree and the appropriations limit of the trunsferor entity shall be decreased by the Same amount. (b) In the event that the financial responsibility of providing services is transferred, in whole or in part, from an entity of government to a private entity, or the financial source for the provision of services is transferred, in whole or in part, from other revenues of un entity or government, to regulatory licenses, user eharEes or user fees, then for the year of such transfer tile appropriations limit of such entity of govermnent shall be decreased accordingly. (el In the event of an emergency, tile appropriation limit may be exceeded provided thut the a@proprietion limits in the following three yeurs are reduced aeeordingty to prevent un aggregate increase in appropriatior~'~ resulting from the emergency. Sec. 4. The appropriations It,nit imposed on any new or existing entity of government by Uus Article may be established or changed by the electors of such entity, subject to and in conformity with constitutionnl end statutory voting requirements. The durutlon of uny 5ueh ehunge shall I)c us determined by said electors, but shall in no event exceed four years from the most recent vote or suid elector5 creating or continuing such ehungc. conlributtons are derived from '.he proreedS O~' ~.axe.~, sh**lI for purpo'~es of th~x Art,eta See. ~. Whenever the Ec~lature n~ any ~l~le a~eney mantillas a new pro[r~m h~[her level of service on ~n~' local [0verfiln~lll, [ll~ ~[at~ sh~11 provide ~ subvention ~llndS [~ teJmbHrse 5uRh JoclJ ~ovctfimefit ~r Ih~ e~st5 c,~ such pro.rum or Jncre~sed J~v~J ~,~ ser¥;,:e, except that the [~sl~Lure me'/, bl~, need not, gr.,vide suRh ~ubvention ~u~G ~or the [ollowin~' (a) Le~islalive mandates requested by the loewi ~[eney .flatted; (b) '~c[isl~Lion demihint a new crime or ehan~in~ an existin[ de[initi~n o~ (e) l.c~l.~ive m~nd~tes enacted ~rior Io ,January l, J975, or executive orders or te[ul.tion~ initi~il~ ilnplementm[ legislation enacted prior to Jsnuery I, S~e. ?. Nothint in Ibis Article shall be co~ttued to impair the ~bJility of the or of any local government to meet its obligatio~ with res~et to existin~ or future boodad i~debtedne~. Sec. 8. As u~d in this Article and except as othe~wi~ expre~ly provided ~rein: (a) "A~r~riatio~ subject to hmitation" of the state s~ll mean any authorization to ex~nd duri~ a ~iseal year the p~ocee~ of taxes levied by o~ for t~ state, exclusive of state subventio~ for the ~e al~d ~ation of toeat [ove~t~ment (othe~ than subventions m~de gumuan[ to ~etion 6 of this Article) and fu~the~ exe!~ive refun~ of laxes, ~nefit payments from retirement, unemployment i~u~anee and disability ir~u~ance fun~; (b) "Appropriatio~ subject to limitation" of an entity of local Kovernment sh~JJ mean any authorization to ex~nd during a fiscal year the procee~ of taxes levied by or for that entity and the proceeds of state subventio~ to that entity (othe~ than subventio~ made pursuant to ~ction 6 of this Article) exclusive of refunds of taxes; (c) "Proeee~ o~ taxes" shall include, but not be restricted to, all tax revenues end the proeee~ to an entity of [ovecnment, from (i) regulatory liee~es, user charles, and user fees [o the exteut that such proeee~b exceed [he costs reasonably ~rne by such entity in providing the r~uletioc, product, or ~vice, and (it) the investment o~ revenues. With re~et to any local government. "proeee~ of taxes" shall inclu,te ~bve~t~o~l~ received from the ~t.te, other [hun gur~i~l to Section 6 of this Article, with ~cspect to the state, pc~ee~ of tax~s ~h~Jl excJude such subve~itions; ~l) "l~cnl ~(~w:rnmen[" shrill marin ~liy eity,.county, city and cmmty, ~ch~l di~trlct, sfmc~ol dislric[, ~ulhu~tty, or other pohtic~I ~uhdlvision of o~' within the state: (~.) "~g~[ ~)[ living" ~hull mc~in Ihe t.~onsume*' Price Index fur the United States aS ~eportc. d hv II.' gnilcH 5t~lle~ IJepnrlmcnl ~f Labo~, or sue,:essgr ~gency of tile b~lited ~[aics (;ovcrlunclll; pruvi,lcd, however, IJt~[ for pul'pO~C~ of ~cLJoll J, the chiln~C Jf~ cost ,~f I~vin~ fr.n, Ihc preceding yeur ~h. II in no cv~lit ex~eed the ch.n~e in (:eliforni~ capita pctsa~lol .~c'umu from ~id pr['('cdH~ y~t~,r; 2of 3 daily altenda~l(:~: as deterlnmed by ~* method prcser~hed hy the I.ct::l~luture; (t]) "l)ebl service" slmll mean uJ~propr~Htmn~ required to puy lite eu~t of interest and redemption ehur~es, ineludm~ the fundin~ of ~ny reserve or sink~n~ fund required in connection therewith, on indebtedness existing or legally authorized as January I, 1929 or on ~nded indebtednes~ thereafter approved according to law by a vote of the electors of the issuing entity voting in an election for such pur~. (h) The "appropriations limit" of each entity o~ government ~or each year shall be that ~mount which total ~nnual ~pptogriations subject to limitation may not exceed under Section I and Section 3; provided, however, that the"apgrop~iations limit" o( each entity of government got fiscal year 1978-~9 shall be the total of the agp~opriatiolm subject to limitation o[ such entity for that ~isea[ year. For ~isea] year 1978-79, state subventions to local ~overnments, exclusive of [edersl grants, she~ be deemed to have ~en ~rived from the procee~ o[ state rexes. apgrogrletio~ subject to (i) Except as otherwise provided in Section 5," ' limitation" shall not include local agency loan fun~ or indebtedne~ fun~, inv~tment (or ~uthori~atio~ to invest) [un~ o~ the state, or o~ an entity of I~al ~overnment in accounts at banks or ~vinKs end loan as~ci~tio~ or in liquid ~eurities. See. 9. "Appropciatio~ subject to limitation" for each entity o~ government sh~ll ~t inclug: (a) Debt service. lb) Appr~ri~tio~ required got pur~ses of eompiyi~ with mandates o~ the courts or the federal government whieh~ without discretion, require an ex~nditure for additionul ~erviees or which unavoidably make the providi~ o~ existi~ ~rviees more costly. (c) Appr~riations o[ ~ny special district which existed on J~nuary and which did not as o~ the 1977-78 ~iscal year levy an ad valorem tax on gro~rty excess of I~J cents ~r $100 o( as~ed value; or the approgri~tio~ o[ any s~eial district then existing or thereafter cre~ted by a vote of the ~ople, which ~ totally funded by other thun the proeee~ o~ taxes. See. 10. 'l'bis Article shall be effective commencing with the ~irst ~y of the [iscal yeur followm~ it~ .~tion. See. II. If u~ly .ppropriut,on e~[eKury ~h~11 be added to or removed [rom ~ppropriuli~c~ subject t~ limit.lion, pursuunl to fmul judgment of any court of competent juri~d~<.t~<m ,u,d .ny upl~J~l therefrom, the ~pprop~'mtio~L~ limit shah be adjusted accordui[Jy. 1~ i~uy ~c. ell~}ll, j)~rt, el.u~e or phru~e in thi~ Article is got any rcuson held invalid or uueolt~tl[utiumH, the remuininK ~rt[oli~ of thi~ Acticle shrill not be ~f[ected but ~l,:lll rcmuin in full force .rid elf eel. ST^T~ OF CAU,:ORNIA EXHIBIT G DEPARIMENT OF FINANCE .~ 915 L STREET SACRAMENTO, CA 95814-4998 May l, 1996 PRICE AND POPULATION DATA FOR LOCAL JURISDICTIONS Appropriations Limit Article XIII B of the California Constitution specifies that appFopriations made by State and local governments may increase annually by a factor comprised of the change in population combined with either the change in California per capita personal income or the change in the local assessment roll due to local nonresidential construction. The Department of Finance is mandated to provide the populatiofi and California per capita personal income change data for local jurisdictions to calculate their appropriation limits. The change in the local assessment roll due to local nonresidential construction may be obtained from your county Assessor. The enclosures contain price and population factors for setting your 1996-97 appropriation limit. Enclosure I provides the change in California's per capita personal income price factor. An example of how to utilize this price factor and the population percentage change factor in calculating your 1996-97 limit is included. Enclosure II provides the population percentage change factors for cities and counties. Enclosure IIA provides the population percentage change factor for counties and for the total incorporated population of each county. These population percentage changes were prepared pursuant to Sections 2227 and 2228 of the Revenue and Taxation Code and are calculated as of January 1, 1996. Section 2227 specifies that state mental institutions, federal military bases and state and federal prisons be excluded from the percentage change calculations. Population Factors for Cities and Counties The Demographic Research Unit has adopted a new method of estimating population for the cities and counties. This new method was used for the numbers presented here. The effect is to lower population for the State and most jurisdictions. The new method was used to revise city and county numbers for earlier years in the 1990s. The revisions are available on request. Cities and counties should consult Section 7901 of the Government Code for the various population factors that may be used for purposes of change in population. 1 of 5 EXHIBIT G Enclosure I A. Price Factor: Article XIII B specifies that local jurisdictions select their cost-of-living factor to compute their appropriation limit by a vote af their governing body. Local jurisdictions may select either the percentage change in California per capita personal income or the percentage change in the local assessment roll due to be addition of local nonresidential new construction. If the percentage change in per capita personal income is selected, the percentage changes to be used in setting the 1996-97 appropriation limit are: Per Capita Personal Income Fiscal Percentage change Year 0FY) over prior year 1996-97 i 5.21 B. Following is an example using sample population changes and the changes in Califomia per capita personal income as growth factors in computing a 1996-97 appropriations limit.* 1996-97: Per Capita Change = 5.21 percent Population Change = 1.06 p~rcent Per Capita converted to a ratio: 5.21 + 100 = 1.0521 100 Population converted to a ratio: 1.06 + 100 = 1.0106 100 Calculation of factor for FY 96-97: 1.0521 x 1.0106 = 1.0633 * Conversion of the factor to a ratio eliminates minus numbers. 2 of 5 EXHIBIT G ENCLOSURE II ANNUAL PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN POPULATION MINUS EXCLUSIONS* JANUARY 1, 1995 DATE PRINTED TO JANUARY 1, 1996 AND TOTAL POPULATION JANUARY I, 1996. 04/30/96 POPULATION MINUS EXCLUSIONS ~ POPULATION ~NNUAL TOTAL COUNTY PERCENT CHANGE POPULATION CITY 1995 TO 1996 1-1-95 1-1-96 1-1-96 ORANGE ANAHEIM 0.59 291,536 293,245 293,245 BREA 0.80 34,527 34,802 34,802 BUENA PARK O.11 72,617 72,700 72,700 COSTA MESA O.11 101,155 101,269 102,O84 CYPRESS 0.50 46,167 46,397 46,397 DANA POINT 0.85 35,679 35,984 35,984 FOUNTAIN VALLEY O.13 54,239 54,311 54,311 FULLERTON 0.35 121,630 122,O59 122,O59 GARDEN GROVE 0.09 151,247 151,376 151,376 HUNTINGTON BEACH 0.32 186,587 187,180 187,180 IRVINE 4.45 120,474 125,836 127,220 LAGUNA BEACH 0.89 23,581 23,790 23,790 LAGUNA HILLS 0.32 24,940 25,O21 25,O21 LAGUNA NIGUEL 1.43 54,778 55,561 55,561 CA HABRA 0.25 53,980 54,117 54,117 LAKE FOREST O.10 57,571 57,631 57,631 LA PALMA -0.06 15,513 15,504 15,504 LOS ALAMITOS 0.75 11,422 11,508 12,307 MISSION VIEJO 1.79 88,323 89,906 89,906 NEWPORT BEACH 0.22 68,920 69,O69 69,O69 ORANGE 1.39 118,105 119,742 119,742 PLACENTIA 0.96 44,575 45,OO3 45,oo3 SAN CLEMENTE 1.38 45,972 46,607 46,607 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO 1.11 28,629 28,948 28,948 SANTA ANA -O.17 306,327 305,800 305,800 SEAL BEACH 0.09 25,646 25,668 26,366 STANTON 0.07 31,861 31,882 31.882 TUSTIN 3.73 56,82) 58,940 63,619 VILLA PARK 0.46 6,336 6,365 6,365 WESTMINSTER 0.80 81,879 82,536 82,536 YORBA LINDA 0.96 57,O84 57,632 57,632 UNINCORPORATED 5.40 165,624 174,570 179,571 ORANGE COUNTY 1.O5 2,583,745 2.610,959 2,624,335 * EXCLUSIONS INCLUDE STATE MENTAL INSTITUTIONS, FEDERAL MILITARY BASES AND STATE AND FEDERAL PRISONS. PAGE 1 3 of 5 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EXHIBIT G PETEWILSON, Governor DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE ~'~i~ 915 L STREET SACRAMENTO, CA 95§14-3706 May 13, 1996 REVISED APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT DATA FOR LOCAL JURISDICTIONS This letter is to inform you that the Department of Finance has corrected the Price Factor, that is, the percentage change in per capita personal income, to be used in setting the 1996 - 1997 appropriation limit. The revised Price Factor is lower than the Price Factor g/ven in Enclosure I of the letter, Price and Population Data for Local Jurisdictions sent to you on May 1, 1996. The old Price Factor was 5.21 percent. The new Price Factor is 4.67 percent. We have revised Enclosure I to reflect the new Price Factor and to show how the new price factor and population factor are used in computing an appropriations limit. We apologize for any inconvenience this revision causes. But we do ask that you notify any affected offices within your jurisdiction of this revision. If you have any questions, please call us at (916) 323-4086. Sincerely, %inda Gage, ~hiefO~ Demographic Research Unit 915 L Street, 8d~ Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 4 of 5 EXHIBIT G May 13, 1996 Revised Enclosure I A. Price Factor: Article XIII B specifies that local jurisdictions select their cost-of-living factor to compute their appropriation limit by a vote of their governing body. Local jurisdictions may select either the percentage change in California per capita personal income or the percentage change in the local assessment roll due to the addition of local nonresidential new construction. If the percentage change in per capita personal income is selected, the percentage changes to be used in setting the 1996-97 appropriation limit are: Per Capita Personal Income Fiscal Percentage change Year (FY) over prior year 1996-97 4.67 B. Following is an example using sample population changes and the changes in California per capita personal income as growth factors in computing a 1996-97 appropriations limit.* 1996-97: Per Capita Change = 4.67 percent Population Change = 1.58 percent Per Capita converted to a ratio: 4.67 + 100 = 1.0467 100 Population converted to a ratio: 1.58 + 100 = 1.0158 100 CalculationoffactorforFY96-97: 1.0467 x 1.0158= 1.0632 * Conversion of the factor to a ratio eliminates minus numbers. 5 of 5 STAT~ OF CALIFORNIA EXHIBIT G PETE W1LSON, Go~mor DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE ..~ 915 L STREET SACRAMENTO, CA 95814-4998 May I, 1996 PRICE AND POPULATION DATA FOR LOCAL JURISDICTIONS Appropriations Limit Article XIII B of the California Constitution specifies that appropriations made by State and local governments may increase annually by a factor comprised of the change in population combined with either the change in California per capita personal income or the change in the local assessment roll due to local nonresidential constraction. The Department of Finance is mandated to provide the populatiofi and California per capita personal income change data for local jurisdictions to calculate their appropriation limits. The change in the local assessment roll due to local nonresidentiai construction may be obtained from your county Assessor. The enclosures contain price and population factors for setting your 1996-97 appropriation limit. Enclosure I provides the change in California% per capita personal income price factor. An example of how to utilize this price factor and the population percentage change factor in calculating your 1996-97 limit is included. Enclosure II provides the population percentage change factors for cities and counties. Enclosure IIA provides the population percentage change factor for counties and for the total incorporated population of each county. These population percentage changes were prepared pursuant to Sections 2227 and 2228 of the Revenue and Taxation Code and are calculated as of January 1, 1996. Section 2227 specifies that state mental institutions, federal military bases and state and federal prisons be excluded from the percentage change calculations. Population Factors for Cities and Counties The Demographic Research Unit has adopted a new method of estimating population for the cities and counties. This new method was used for the numbers presented here. The effect is to lower population for the State and most jurisdictions. The new method was used to revise city and county numbers for earlier years in the 1990s. The revisions are available on request. Cities and counties should consult Section 7901 of the Government Code for the various population factors that may be used for purposes of change in population. 1 of 5 EXHIBIT G Enclosure I A. Price Factor: Article XIII B specifies that local jurisdictions select their cost-of-living factor to compute their appropriation limit by a vote af their governing body. Local jurisdictions may select either the percentage change in California per capita personal income or the percentage change in the local assessment roll due to the addition of local nonresidential new construction. If the percentage change in per capita personal income is selected, the percentage changes to be used in setting the 1996-97 appropriation limit are: Per Capita Personal Income Fiscal Percentage change Year (FY) over prior year 1996-97 ' 5.21 B. Following is an example using sample population changes and the changes in California per capita personal income as growth factors in computing a 1996-97 appropriations limit.* 1996-97: Per Capita Change = 5.21 percent Population Change = 1.06 Percent Per Capita converted to a ratio: 5.21 + 100 = 1.0521 100 Population converted to a ratio: 1.06 + 100 -- 1.0106 100 Calculation of factor for FY 96-97: 1.0521 x 1.0106 -- 1.0633 * Conversion of the factor to a ratio eliminates minus numbers. 2 of 5 EXHIBIT G ENCLOSURE II ANNUAL PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN POPULATION MINUS EXCLUSIONS* JANUARY 1, 1995 DATE PRINTED TO JANUARY l, 1996 AND TOTAL POPULATION JANUARY l, 1996. o4/3o/96 POPULATION MINUS EXCLUSIONS POPULATION ~NNUAL TOTAL COUNTY PERCENT CHANGE POPULATION CITY 1995 TO 1996 1-1-95 1-1-96 1-1-96 ORANGE ANAHEIM 0.59 291,536 293,245 293,245 BREA 0.80 34,527 34,802 34,802 BUENA PARK 0.11 72,617 72,7o0 72,7oo COSTA MESA O.11 IO1,155 101,269 102,O84 CYPRESS 0.50 46,167 46,397 46,397 DANA POINT 0.85 35,679 35,984 35,984 FOUNTAIN VALLEY 0.13 54,239 54,311 54,311 FULLERTON 0.35 121,630 122,059 122,059 GARDEN GROVE 0.09 151,247 151,376 151,376 HUNTINGTON BEACH 0.32 186,587 187,180 187,180 IRVINE 4.45 120,474 125,836 127,220 LAGUNA BEACH 0.89 23,581 23,790 23,79o LAGUNA HILLS 0.32 24,940 25,O21 25,O21 LAGUNA NIGUEL 1.43 54,778 55,561 55,561 LA HABRA 0.25 53,980 54,117 54,117 LAKE FOREST O.10 57,571 57,631 57,631 LA PALMA -0.06 15,513 15,504 15,504 LOS ALAMITOS O.75 11,422 11,508 12,307 MISSION VIEJO 1.79 88,323 89.906 89,906 NEWPORT BEACH 0.22 68,920 69,069 69,069 ORANGE 1.39 118,105 119,742 119,742 PLACENTIA 0.96 44,575 45,OO3 45,OO3 SAN CLEMENTE 1.38 45,972 46,607 46,607 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO 1.11 28,629 28,948 28,948 SANTA ANA -O.17 306,327 305,800 305,800 SEAL BEACH 0.09 25,646 25,668 26,366 STANTON 0.07 31,861 31,882 31,882 TUSTIN 3.73 56,821 58,940 63,619 VILLA PARK 0.46 6,336 6,365 6,365 WESTMINSTER 0.80 81,879 82,536 82,536 YORBA LINDA 0.96 57,084 57,632 57,632 UNINCORPORATED 5.40 165,624 174,570 179,571 ORANGE COUNTY 1.O5 2,583,745 2,610,959 2,624,335 * EXCLUSIONS INCLUDE STATE MENTAL INSTITUTIONS, FEDERAL MILITARY BASES AND STATE AND FEDERAL PRISONS. PAGE 1 3 of 5 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EXHIBIT G PETEV~LSON, Governor DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE ..~ 915 L STREET SACRAMENTO. CA 95814-3706 May 13, 1996 REVISED APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT DATA FOR LOCAL JURISDICTIONS This letter is to inform you that the Department of Finance has corrected the Price Factor, that is, the percentage change in per capita personal income, to be used in setting the 1996 - 1997 appropriation limit. The revised Price Factor is lower than the Price Factor given in Enclosure I of the letter, Price and Population Data for Local Jurisdictions sent to you on May 1, 1996. The old Price Factor was 5.21 percent. The new Price Factor is 4.67 percent. We have revised Enclosure I to reflect the new Price Factor and to show how the new price factor and population factor are used in computing an appropriations limit. We apologize for any inconvenience this revision causes. But we do ask that you notify any affected offices within your jurisdiction of this revision. If you have any questions, please call us at (916) 323-4086. Sincerely, Linda Gage, Chief Demogn'aphic Research Unit 915 L Street, 8th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 4 of 5 EXHIBIT G May 13, 1996 Revised Enclosure I A. Price Factor: Article XIII B specifies that local jurisdictions select their cost-of-living factor to compute their appropriation limit by a vote of their governing body. Local jurisdictions may select either the percentage change in California per capita personal income or the percentage change in the local assessment roll due to the addition of local nonresidential new construction. If the percentage change in per capita personal income is selected, the percentage changes to be used in setting the 1996-97 appropriation limit are: Per Capita Personal Income Fiscal Percentage change Year (FY) over prior year 1996-97 4.67 B. Following is an example using sample population changes and the changes in California per capita personal income as growth factors in computing a 1996-97 appropriations limit.* 1996-97: Per Capita Change = 4.67 percent Population Change = 1.58 percent Per Capita converted to a ratio: 4.67 + 100 = 1.0467 100 Population converted to a ratio: 1.58 + 1 O0 = 1.0158 100 Calculationof factor for FY96-97: 1.0467 x 1.0158 - 1.0632 * Conversion of the factor to a ratio eliminates minus numbers. 5 of 5