State could forcibly borrow from transit and local government

What in particlar in regards to local funds, and what part of transportation, will be borrowed or taken? It really bothers me that the state can not balance it's budget without having to borrow or raid local cities. It is not fair to those of us that are very careful in working within our ciies revenues to meet the daily needs of our cities operating city budget. We try to have a healthy reserve in case of an emergency, that we can dip into. It is the money of the residents of our respective communities. By borrowing or raiding a cities coffers, cities will tend to lose staff, reduce services to their communities (in programs) and, cut public safrty. All of which help a community exist and run smoothly on a month to month bases. We always wait for the "big shoe" to drop on our heads, and wack us back to reality. A reality that has become a nightmare, year afeter year. We all wait, listen, and anticipate what awaits us in the long run. Hoping for the best, while praying for a solution.

Arnold is a fool, Nunez is a fool, Perrata is a fool, I only hope that the new assembly speaker's call for a commission to do a structural reform of California finance (and borrowing?) is heeded. This is and has been unacceptable. Raiding the transportation and local government funds further weakens the economy and reduces investment in our future. All these three idiots seem to think about is how their hair looks on TV, and how many perks they get. This administration has been a disaster, and so has the outgoing legislative leadership.

What Bob said. ;D Californians have no one but themselves to blame for the mess they're in. Replacing Grey Davis with Arnold Schwarzenegger? We're in the same boat now as we were in 2003, except now we have an extra $20 billion or so in bond debt to deal with. And most of that new bond debt was to finance making the VLF cut permanent.