The State of California has not always recognized redevelopment’s contributions in its economy. Confronted with a budget out of balance, the State legislature established the Education Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) in 1992 which required a portion of the tax increment to be allocated to public schools. The State has taken away funds from redevelopment agencies in 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, and 2003. The State is expected to take approximately $135 million in 2004 from redevelopment agencies or approximately 25% of their respective property tax increment revenue. As a result of these take-aways, adjustments of at least 25% will have to be made to the Paint Is Free Program in the form of either a 25% decrease in the amount subsidized or cutting the cost of the contractors’ fees by 25% to compensate for the State’s budget deficit primarily caused by over zealous legislators.

e tax increment bonds without using general fund monies or raising taxes.

When comparing marginal cost to marginal revenue, maximum profit occurs when price is equal to

Some topics in this essay:
Free Program, Maintenance Agreement, Redevelopment Association’s, Fund ERAF, Angeles County, Arts District, North Hollywood, Redevelopment Act, redevelopment agencies, tax increment, Redevelopment California, Redevelopment Project, paint free, paint free program, free program, program’s product cycle, community redevelopment, increment revenue, marginal cost, product cycle, redevelopment agency, tax increment revenue, free paint,