Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Named after its legislative sponsors, the Marks-Roos Local Bond Pooling Act (California Government Code §6584-6599.1) is a law enacted by the California Legislature in 1985. [ 1 ] [ 2 ] The main purpose of this statute is to allow local California governments to work together to get financing in a way that will conceivably lower borrowing costs.
In 2000, Proposition 39 reduced the supermajority to 55% to approve taxes for local school bonds. [4] According to the California Policy Center, a conservative think tank, since Proposition 39 was passed, voters in California have decided on almost 1,150 school bond measures and have approved 911 of them. [5]
That perception could thus potentially allow a local government to borrow at a lower interest rate, saving its taxpayers' money over the life of the bonds. Despite that advantage, many states, such as California under Proposition 13, do not allow local governments to issue unlimited-tax general obligation debt without a public vote.
Proposition 5 will lower the voter threshold required to pass local affordable housing and transportation bond measures. Your guide to Proposition 5: Making it easier to pass local housing, road bonds
Bond rating company Moody's (MCO) has downgraded the State of California's general obligation (known as "GO") bonds to Baa1, from a level of A2. The new rating is three notches above "junk" status.
Municipal bonds agencies, also known as bond banks or local government funding agencies, exist in other countries, such as Sweden and Finland. [42] In New Zealand, the Local Government Funding Agency (LGFA), is the second-biggest issuer of New Zealand–dollar debt behind the government.
Construction of the Pentagon, 1942.. The Miller Act (ch. 642, Sec. 1-3, 49 stat. 793,794, codified as amended in Title 40 of the United States Code) [1] requires prime contractors on some government construction contracts to post bonds guaranteeing both the performance of their contractual duties and the payment of their subcontractors and material suppliers.
California taxpayers would pay the bond back with interest. A legislative analyst estimated it would cost the state $650 million a year for the next 30 years or more than $19 billion.