Yorba Linda Essay

For example interest rates, the cost of raw materials including fuel, the number of sales or orders that we make and in turn all of these rely on other factors. The best therefore that can be done when developing a budget is to look at all the factors that are likely to affect the budget and decide how to take account of each one. If there is a previous budget (last year or last month) then it is sensible to look at how this has been achieved or not as the case may be, and what factors affected the outcome. If we are looking at monthly budgets it might be a better comparison to look at the same month twelve months ago as well as the previous months. The more factors we take into consideration when estimating a budget, the more accurate our budget will be.

For instance, under handed tactics were used to distract the people from the real issues. Gimbaling and the right to vote were a few of these discretionary issues. Although officials gave there best attempt to convince its citizens of the benefits the new charter would usher in, it was defeated in a two to one margin. One of the current governors at the time played a hand in assisting with the defeat of the proposed charter. He aided the defeat of the bill because he feared it would cause tax increases, government expansions, and job loss. (Newell, Charldean, David F. Prindle, James W. Riddlesperger, Jr., Todd Donovan, Christopher Z. Mooney, and Daniel A. Smith, 2013, p.

The budget process is a powerful planning tool for government to make important resource decisions. According the Carney and Schoenfeld‘s article on How to read a Budget, an operating budget is a reflection of government’s financial plans. When a budget is

But, Johnson said council manages Boggs, and it should not be managing payroll for every city

Significance: This allows the state/city governments to use the money in a general sense, so they can spend it where they need to.

The Clearview Township is a suburban community of 25,000 individuals. Bill Harper, the newly appointed manager of the Clearview Township. Mr. Harper had made some very fruitful recommendations: The financing of all future capital improvements in cash during the fiscal year in which the work would be done, would be considered a great idea considering the state of the community’s finances. One thing that may hinder this plan would depend on the form in which the community accepts the increase in taxes. This would and could also result negatively with the community during the next upcoming election. Individuals in a community would not vote for an individual that has raised their taxes and not increases services offered in the community.

Supreme Court found that an economic development plan was indeed “public use” and therefore all of the City’s takings were constitutional. Justice Stevens issued the majority opinion of the Court, he began his writing by stating “the City would no doubt be forbidden from taking petitioners’ land for the purpose of conferring a private benefit on a particular private party… nor would the City be allowed to take property under the mere pretext of a public purpose” (Kelo v. New London, 2005, pg. 478). Justice O’Connor, Justice Scalia, Justice Thomas, and the Chief Justice all dissented. Justice O’Connor wrote the dissent starting with a segment of Calder v. Bull, 3 Dall. 386, 388 (1798) which held that there should be no Act of the Legislature or law made where it would be acceptable to take property from A and give it to B is a breach of the first principles of the social compact and is against all reason. Justice O’Connor then stated “Today the Court abandons this long-held, basic limitation on government power. Under the banner of economic development, all private property is now vulnerable to being taken and transferred to another private owner, so long as it might be upgraded - i.e., given to an owner who will use it in a way that the legislature deems more beneficial to the public- in the process” (Kelo v New London, 2005, pg

The argument was toward the challenge of the Defense of Marriage Act, which was an issue between the states Federal sales tax. The argument throughout the representatives, in a sense, was questionable and logical. During the argument, Paul Clement, an Attorney for Bipartisan, and Justice Sotomayor, a Supreme Court of Justice Lawyer, were fighting to what local states define same-sex marriage and how the federal laws pertaining to the taxes define whom the client of a spouse should pay the sales & property taxes. It was until more of the representatives and lawyers to comment into this argument about this situation.

In terms of the ballot questions, voters voted no to Ballot question No.1 , which according to the Committee of Seventy, would have enabled “the state legislature to pass a law allowing local school boards, municipalities and counties to exclude the entire value of each primary residence (homestead or farmstead) in their jurisdictions from taxation if they chose to do so,” meaning property taxes would be “significantly” reduced or eliminated in “those jurisdictions.”

Proposition 13 is a prominent initiative seen as having drastic effect on California, for it placed a cap on property tax, which decrease the source of the state’s revenue. A more lasting consequence of Proposition 140 is it created a two-thirds majority rule in the legislature to create new revenues. Having such stipulation hindered the legislature to efficiently do their jobs. A similar proposition that created fiscal constraints was Proposition 58, which created an “$8 Billion rainy day reserve fund, and prohibited future barrowing to cover deficits.” As we see in fiscally related propositions, they make the job of the legislators harder by mandating certain things or creating

FCB’s financial success was limited since “the Control Board implemented to resolve the city’s crisis was not designed to address each of these root causes equally” (Kobes 2008, p.259). While it altered D.C.’s standing on the market and improved its standing with Congress, “the fiscal crisis did not spur residents to resolve local democracy failures. Rather, no major reforms in the basic structure of the District government were enacted beyond the public schools” (Kobes 2008, p.256). In 2011, a D.C. Council member stated that “it (FCB) was able to do some things that needed to be done, that, politically, I would not do…” (DeBonis 2011). Additionally, different officials refer to the FCB as the “most humiliating episode in the city’s 36-year home rule” (DeBonis 2011). In terms of the initial hypothesis, while the D.C. FCB reformed the legal structure of its jurisdiction, the fact that it failed to incorporate citizen participation and the evolving social factors serves as an example of an FCB that was not highly efficient. Despite changing the legal framework, several issues such as taxation were left unresolved, which serves to show that the issues not addressed by the Revitalization Act are currently affecting D.C. Thus, while it was effective in stabilizing the economy, failing to address other factors might put D.C. at risk of financial crisis once

California is a highly dynamic state whose needs are in the eternal realm of changing and adjusting because of the diversification and growing population. Likewise, every county experiences different problems, and most of those problems require strategic problem solving because there is no one fit solution for all. This is the essence of California’s political system. The counties are legal entities responsible for governing and protecting segments of the population. Whereas, the state is responsible for the oversight and compliance, as well as, reimbursement of taxes and federal money. Baldassare (1998) illustrated three conditions: political fragmentation, voter distrust, and state’s fiscal austerity that explain current political environment,

Jim Wells, Director of the Governor’s Finance Office, presented the Governor's recommendations for Statewide Initiatives for the 2017-2019 biennium. In decision unit M-100, Chair Woodhouse asked why the monthly vehicle rates significantly decrease over the next biennium. Evan Dale, Administrator for the Administrative Services Division, responded that the Office was charging more than what was originally needed for that operation and therefore they are using those extra funds to reduce rates for the next biennium. In M-107, Wells stated that there are proposed changes to the Attorney General Cost Allocation Plan (AGCAP). AGCAP allocates the Attorney General’s Office budget to the agencies who use their attorneys for their support. For example,

With this in mind the peers did not want to be seen as weak in the eyes of the voters, so in order for them to appear strong they had to reject the budget, showing that they would not fall for the Liberals tricks. So the rejection of the People’s Budget could be seen as an act of strength by the House of Lords.

Los Angeles was the first product off the assembly line of American urban planning. Turned on in the late 19th century, the city-making machine was fueled by an immense immigration of people who sought to create a new type of city out of the previously quaint pueblo. They also strove to craft the first major city developed primarily by Americans and outside of European archetypes. As a result, Los Angles is not only incredibly diverse, but also nearly impossible to define. Since it is a product of the American machine, understanding the community of Los Angeles becomes vital to understanding the United States. But to fully comprehend the present Los Angeles, one must look at the process that created it. Specifically, Los Angeles was