6621 FUNDING FOR REIMBURSABLE LOCAL COSTS
(Revised 5/98)
Pursuant to Government Code Section 17561(b)(1) (B), when a regulation involves reimbursable costs, it “...shall be accompanied by a bill appropriating the funds therefor or, alternatively an appropriation for these costs shall be included in the Budget Bill for the next succeeding fiscal year.” Use of the second alternative must receive prior approval of DOF. If an agency fails to provide appropriate funding, then affected local agencies are authorized to file claims for reimbursement with the Commission on State Mandates.
In order to prepare the “local mandate determination” required by Section 11346.5; i.e., a determination as to whether the regulation imposes a mandate on local agencies or school districts, it is necessary to first answer the following question:
Will the regulation require local entities to undertake a new program or to provide an increased level of service in an existing program?
If the answer to this question is “No,” then check either box 4, 5, or 6 in Section A of STD. 399. If the answer is “Yes,” it is then necessary to determine if the costs resulting from the mandate are nevertheless not state reimbursable because one or more of the specific statutory exclusions to reimbursability in Government Code Section 17556 which are summarized (a)–(f) under this Section do not apply in situations where the regulation either:
- Implements a federal mandate;
- Implements a court mandate;
- Implements a mandate in a ballot measure approved by the voters;
- Results from a documented request from the only local entity or entities affected;
- Provides (or fall within the purview of existing) revenue sources or other financing mechanisms; or
- Results in savings that are equal to or exceed any costs.
In addition to these statutory exclusions, the courts have held that costs of statutes and regulations are not reimbursable if they:
- Result from an action undertaken at the option of a local entity (County of Contra Costa vs. State of California, 177 Cal App 3d 62.79 (1986).
- Are not unique to local government, e.g., affect both the provate sector and the public sector (County of Los Angels vs. State of California et al, 43 Cal App 3d 46 (1987)).
If it is determined that the regulation does not impose a reimbursable mandate on local government, it is still necessary to include a specific statement reflecting that determination in the notice and to develop estimates of any nonreimbursable local costs. If it is determined that the regulation does impose a reimbursable mandate on local government, then it is important to state precisely what the mandate is. This is normally best accomplished by employing a statement, expressed in mandatory terms, which identifies both the affected local entity or entities by group and the activity that will be required of them, e.g., “county clerks shall provide each polling precinct worker with an American flag,” “school districts shall provide each student with a lunch box at no cost to the student,” “all local entities shall record on videotape all meetings of their governing bodies.” With the mandate so stated, it is then possible to proceed to develop an estimate of its cost to local government.
