51st Legislature, Second Regular Session: Briefing to Gila County
Craig A. Sullivan Executive Director August 5, 2014
51 st Legislature, Second Regular Session: Briefing to Gila County - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
51 st Legislature, Second Regular Session: Briefing to Gila County Craig A. Sullivan Executive Director August 5, 2014 County Supervisors Association CSAs Purpose: CSA is a non-partisan forum for Arizonas 61 county supervisors to
Craig A. Sullivan Executive Director August 5, 2014
CSA’s Purpose:
address important issues facing local constituents, providing a mechanism to share information and to advance a proactive state and federal policy agenda
Core Goals:
efficient, responsive constituent services
making
All 61 county supervisors from Arizona’s 15 counties CSA Executive Committee CSA Legislative Policy Committee
Barry Weller, Apache Ann English, Cochise Mandy Metzger, Coconino Tommie Cline Martin, Gila David Gomez, Greenlee D.L. Wilson, La Paz Mary Rose Wilcox, Maricopa, (R. 5/27/2014) Gary Watson, Mohave David Tenney, Navajo Sharon Bronson, Pima Pete Rios, Pinal Manny Ruiz, Santa Cruz Tom Thurman, Yavapai Lenore Stuart, Yuma Jim Palmer, Graham, CSA President
CSA Board of Directors
President
Graham County President Elect Vacant Large County First Vice-President
Coconino County Second Vice-President
Gila County Immediate Past President
Yuma County Third Vice-President
Pinal County
Agencies
FY 2013-2014 Association Report Includes select outcomes, information products and support services. CSA Legislative Summary Annual summary document is now available on the CSA website: www.countysupervisors.org
The general effective for bills was July 24, 2014, 90 days after sine die.
County Directives to CSA Staff
Sexually Violent Persons (SVP) population
Arizona counties
services or authorities
5
6
to communicate priorities
conversations with decision-makers
legislators and stakeholders hear a consistent, resounding message
7
6On April 11, 2014, the Governor signed a budget, but she chose to line-item veto eight provisions, including one that offset TPT revenue losses to counties.
to be distributed to 13 counties under 900,000 persons.
approximately 34% of costs. Includes "flexibility language" allowing counties to pay via any county resource.
source of county revenue to meet a county fiscal obligation for FY 2015.
FY15 FY16 FY17
Ongoing Revenues
$8,720 $9,069 $9,486
Ongoing Expenditures
$9,564 $9,774 $10,074
Structural Balance/ (Deficit)1
$(844) $(706) $(589)
Carry Forward
$596 $0 $(220) $0 $(932)
One Time Revenue
$52 $(6) $0
One-time Capital Outlay
$24 $0 $0
Ending Balance / (Deficit)
$(220) $(706) $(932) $(589) $(1,520)
Notes: a) Figures are taken from JLBC K-12 Inflation Funding Lawsuit Update Table 4, based on the April FAC forecast; b) Figures only reflect projected balances due to the K-12 inflation reset, if back payments are required the FY16 ending balance could reach $(1.4) billion. c) some figures may not add due to rounding
1 Excludes one-time revenues and expenditures and does not account for $460M in “rainy day” fund
In Millions 9
Enacted into law:
( Brophy McGee)
Did not advance through the process:
11
Enacted into law:
Did not advance through the process:
12
CSA supported other partners efforts, including:
13
General Government
Public Health
Natural Resources
prevention
Criminal Justice
Public Finance & Special Districts
14
Bills favorably amended, to address county concerns:
15
CSA opposed the following bills:
Vehicle/ SB 1176 change of venue; guardianship (Crandell)
16
CSA opposed the following bills:
____________________________________________________________
SB 1483: county supervisors; pop. threshold; membership (Griffin) Vetoed
17
Incremental progress on financial objectives resulted in $10 million in HURF relief for counties in FY15.
Lawmakers exercising caution when funding new items or addressing cost shifts due to projected structural deficits.
K-12 inflation) and child welfare crisis Improved operating environment with many new legislators taking an interest in county issues.
Major changes on the horizon.
18
19
waters of the U.S. under the Clean Water Act
*Comment period extended to October 20, 2014
20
due to the tax-exempt status of federal land, and to partially reimburse counties for the costs of services provided on, or associated with federal public lands.
a mandatory classification and authorized the program through
extended mandatory spending for PILT to FY2013. Though a one-year extension of PILT funding was included in the Agriculture Act of 2014, the future of the program remains uncertain.
private (taxable) land
PILT payments this year
21
Connect with counties, stakeholders & legislators in preparation for 2015:
Monitor the state & federal fiscal situation:
Conduct interim research and participate in stakeholder activities, including:
22
23