My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SR0087014_SSNL
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
C
>
CARROLTON
>
18163
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
SR0087014_SSNL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/23/2024 9:12:12 AM
Creation date
8/17/2023 1:11:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
FileName_PostFix
SSNL
RECORD_ID
SR0087014
PE
2602
STREET_NUMBER
18163
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
CARROLTON
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
RIPON
Zip
95366
APN
24538026
ENTERED_DATE
8/1/2023 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
18163 S CARROLTON RD
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
005
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\sballwahn
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
353
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
122 Part I California Water <br /> a broad public purpose may now be considered taxes, subject to a two-thirds <br /> vote of the state legislature(up from a simple majority).Local governing bodies, <br /> which could approve these fees without a vote of the general public, would <br /> also be required to seek a two-thirds vote of the general public for such fees. <br /> Although the text of the new amendment is uncertain in some respects and will <br /> certainly be tested in litigation,Proposition 26 is likely to substantially restrict <br /> California's ability to address the current gaps in resources for broad public <br /> purposes,including environmental stewardship and water resources planning. <br /> Is There Enough Money to Pay for California's Water System? <br /> Restrictions on state and local funding,along with the budget woes of federal <br /> and state governments,naturally raise the question of whether California can <br /> maintain, let alone enhance, its current water operations and infrastructure. <br /> Water managers in all sectors tend to answer with a resounding"no."But the <br /> answer is more nuanced than is commonly believed, reflecting the roles and <br /> responsibilities of different levels of government in water system management <br /> and differences in funding rules. <br /> Utilities <br /> Urban water and wastewater utilities,which are responsible for the vast major- <br /> ity of spending on water supply and wastewater infrastructure and operations, <br /> appear to be in relatively good financial shape.Every four years,these utilities are <br /> required to submit estimates of their long-term capital needs to the EPA,which <br /> tracks investment needs nationwide.The most recent assessments,from 2007 for <br /> water and from 2008 for wastewater,indicate that California's 20-year spending <br /> needs for publicly owned utilities are on the order of$40.7 billion and$24.4 bil- <br /> lion (2008 $), respectively, or roughly$2 billion and $1.2 billion per year.55 An <br /> additional estimated$3.9 billion over 20 years($194 million per year)is needed <br /> for managing stormwater and nonpoint source pollution,some of which is also <br /> handled by wastewater utilities. <br /> In 2007,capital spending by these utilities was substantially higher.According <br /> to estimates from the State Controller's Office, publicly owned water utilities <br /> invested roughly$3.6 billion and wastewater utilities roughly$2.2 billion(2008$). <br /> (U.S. Census of Governments estimates put total capital outlays for water in <br /> 55. U.S.Environmental Protection Agency(2008,2009).Estimates of both needs and capital outlays reported in the <br /> text exclude interest payments. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.