Posted on 11/11/2010 2:55:27 PM PST by calcowgirl
The plan to sell California state office buildings contained in this year's budget will cost taxpayers $1.4 billion over 35 years, the nonpartisan legislative analyst said Wednesday.
The analysis released this week says the state will pay an effective interest rate of 10.2 percent to lease back the parcels, which include 24 separate buildings, from the new owner. That is about double what the state pays on existing bonds used to build its offices.
"There are long-run costs and short-term benefits," said Mark Whitaker, who wrote the 12-page analysis for the Joint Legislative Budget Committee. "It's going to cost a lot more in the long run. Then again, it helps us get through the current year and our budget problem now."
The proposal to sell state assets, including the Ronald Reagan building in Los Angeles and the San Francisco Civic Center, has been promoted by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and won approval in the Legislature.
The Department of General Services announced last month it will sell the properties for $2.3 billion to California First LLC, a partnership led by a Texas real estate firm and a private equity firm based in Irvine. That will generate more than $1.2 billion in the current fiscal year for the state's general fund.
About $1 billion from the sale will be used to pay off bonds on the office buildings.
Department of General Services spokesman Eric Lamoureux said the long-term trade-off was needed to avoid tax increases or deeper cuts to services in the state's current budget.
"The whole purpose behind the sale was to generate immediate revenue to help shrink the state deficit," he said. "We will have accomplished that."
(Excerpt) Read more at businessweek.com ...
And here's where the 43 billion infrastructure bond money went (among other places). I wonder how much Mr. Mayo & Co. might have received.
(n) Six hundred fifty million dollars ($650,000,000) shall be
deposited in the Regional Planning, Housing, and Infill Incentive
Account, which is hereby created in the fund. Funds in the account
shall be available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, and
subject to such other conditions and criteria as the Legislature may
provide in statute, for the following purposes:
(1) For grants for preservation of open space, acquisition of
wildlife habitat, and easements on agricultural land consistent with
mitigation and growth policies contained in a regional growth plan.
(2) For infill incentive grants for capital outlay related to
infill development, including, but not limited to, all of the
following:
(A) Urban park creation, development, or rehabilitation.
(B) Water, sewer, or other public infrastructure costs associated
with infill development.
(C) Transportation improvements related to infill development
projects.
(D) Traffic mitigation.
(3) For brownfield cleanup that promotes infill development
consistent with regional and local plans.
Hundreds of millions would be my guess. They might as well sell the Capitol building to China, at this rate.
It was in the Agenda21 in 1992, the President's Council on Sustainable Development came soon after.
I believe it wasn't until the mid-70s that LAFCO started allowing formation of redevelopment agencies with powers of eminent domain pursuant to a change in State law, but I haven't found it yet. Sounds like a Gerry Brown deal, doesn't it?
Yep, I realized that.
I was just recalling that Arnold was touting it during his campaign and quietly implementing it thereafter.
LOL. Do you do that on purpose?
FYI - my first reaction was "well, let me go see if I can find out!" But I'm tired tonight. ;-)
Put what's left of the bureaucrats in double wide offices just outside Fresno....Rent the state building in Sacramento to private sector producers.
Emergency measures...Eliminate 60 percent of everyone working of the state in Sacramento, LA and SF...
Pay what's left pay them minimum wage for the privilege of serving the people..
Like those in the private sector, tell them their lucky to have jobs.
I think I found a case in Los Angeles in 1951.
groundcover has email.
Will you be on the ballot in 2014?
Ya got my vote!
Look at it this way, when people ask me, "Why do things go this way?" what do you think I do? Don't you think that's like waving a red flag in front of me? If you think I'm not intentionally fed such stuff from time to time, well... sometimes they even have the decency to call me first to see if I have the time.
So, yes, from time, I do the same with you, but only when I think it might truly interest you and I thought this might be such a case in that the gambits with which a Brown administration of the past instituted such massively corrupt and far-reaching institutions helps us project what his recent reelection might portend. We need only identify the players as you have so neatly done with B'rer Wilson and crew. N'est ce pas?
Look at it this way, when people ask me, "Why do things go this way?" what do you think I do? Don't you think that's like waving a red flag in front of me? If you think I'm not intentionally fed such stuff from time to time, well... sometimes they even have the decency to call me first to see if I have the time.
So, yes, from time, I do the same with you, but only when I think it might truly interest you and I thought this might be such a case in that the gambits with which a Brown administration of the past instituted such massively corrupt and far-reaching institutions helps us project what his recent reelection might portend. We need only identify the players as you have so neatly done with B'rer Wilson and crew. N'est ce pas?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.