HomeMy WebLinkAbout96-046 CC Resolution RESOLUTION NO. 96-"
A RESOLUTTON OF THE CITY COUNCIIL OF THE CITY
OF TEM[ECULA SUPPORTING @ODUCTION AND
ADOPRION OF VALI]DATING ACT IN RESPONSE TO
SANTA CLARA COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION
AUTHORITY VS. GXJARD@
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE
AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, the California Supreme Court recently issued a decision in the case of
Santa Clar-A Local TranspQrtation Authority vs. Guardino, the effect of which decision is to
require voter approval for the imposition or increase of a special or general tax as set forth in
Proposition 62 (Government Code Section 53273); and,
NMEREAS, the Guardino decision reverses prior court decisions which previously
found that the voter-approval requirements of Proposition 62 were unconstitutional; and,
VMEREAS, if the collection of new taxes or tax increases adopted by elected boards,
subsequent to the effective date of Proposition 62 and prior to the effective date of the
Guardino decision, is prohibited and /or, if the retroactive refund of tax collections is
mandated, a large number of local governments will experience severe financial crisis,
necessitating major reductions in public safety and other vital public services, negating
contractual commitments, and quite possibly, leading to default on credit obligations or, at the
very least, substantially reducing the credit-worthiness of local governments; and,
VMEREAS, extensive costs, fiscal uncertainty and a major threat to public services
are certain to arise from retroactive application of the Guardino decision and from the
confusion that will result if clear and timely policy direction is not forthcoming from the state
in the aftermath of the announcement of the Guardino decision, thereby decimating services
provided through the City's general fund; and,
VMEREAS, a bill has been introduced in the California State Senate, SBI590
(O'Connell), which would provide for the perspective application of Proposition 62, so that it
does not apply to taxes instituted without voter approval between the date of adoption of
Proposition 62 and the date it was validated by the California Supreme Court, December 14,
1995.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that
Section 1: The City Council does support that the California State Senate and the
California State Assembly, and in particular, State Senator Pay Haynes and State
Resos\96-46
Assemblymember Bruce Thompson, are urged to actively support the passage of SB 1590 or
any similar legislation requiring that the Guardino decision be applied prospectively; and
That the passage of SB 1590 or similar legislation be adopted as soon as possible; and
That the City Clerk is directed to forward this Resolution to State Senator Ray Haynes
and State Assemblymember Bruce Thompson at the earliest date possible after its adoption and
to distribute copies to the Senate Local Govemment Committee.
Section 2: The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.
PASSED APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula
at a regular meeting held on the 9th day of April, 1996.
el F. Lindemans, Mayor
ATMT:
J@@Greek, CMC
City Clerk
Resos\96@ 2
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA)
1, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, Califomia, do hereby ce@ that
Resolution No. 96-46 was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 9th day of April, 1996 by the following
vote:
AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Ford, Roberts, Lindemans
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Stone
June S. Greek, CMC
City Clerk
Resos\96-46 3