Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Res 4846 2000-10-09 RESOLUTION NUMBER IB~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCil.. OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH IN OPPOSITION TO PROPOSITION 37 I WHEREAS, Proposition 37, the "Two-Thirds Vote Preservation Act of2000," which has been placed on the November 2000 ballot as an initiative, seeks to overturn the California Supreme Court's "Sinclair Paint Case" decision; and WHEREAS, in the Sinclair decision, the California Supreme Court unanimously declared that a fee on manufacturers of lead-based paint contributing to environmental lead contamination and used to pay for a State-program that evaluates, screens and provides medically necessary follow-up services for children deemed potential victims ofIead poisoning, is a valid regulatory fee and not a tax; and WHEREAS, many state and local government fees imposed on businesses have been found to be proper and legitimate means with which to ensure that persons responsible pay their fair share of the cost of mitigating the impacts of their businesses; and WHEREAS, Proposition 37 would transform these proper state and local fees into taxes and thus subject future enactment to a two-thirds vote of the Legislature or local government electorate, as appropriate, thus making it more difficult to protect communities by raising revenue to. mitigate the societal and economic impacts of these businesses; and WHEREAS, future enactment of the following types of fees now imposed by the state or local I government, if not a part of an overall regulatory program, would become taxes under Proposition 37: . Fees charged to alcoholic beverage licensees to mitigate the effects of public nuisances associated with these businesses. . Fees imposed at landfills on waste haulers based upon tonnage to encourage recycling. . Fees on MTBE production to pay for cleanup of polluted groundwater. . The state's Oil Spill Prevention Fund (ifit had been enacted after July I, 1999). . Fees on substandard housing to pay for the cost of inspecting and mitigating the effects of the substandard housing. . Downtown Business Improvement District assessments; and WHEREAS, Proposition 37 will also result in costly litigation to determine its ultimate application; and WHEREAS, Proposition 37 is supported by the oil, tobacco and alcohol industry and other business groups who currently pay fees to mitigate the societal impacts of their products and activity; and WHEREAS, existing law already clearly distinguishes between fees and taxes imposed by I local governments and requires different procedures to be used for adopting each; and WHEREAS, Proposition 37 will interfere with the ability of the City of Seal Beach to legitimately impose fees to mitigate the specific and particular local impacts of businesses on the community and instead, shift the burden to taxpayers. I I I Resolution Number ~ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Seal Beach opposes Proposition 37. AYES: Councihnember NOES: Councilmembe ABSTAIN: Councilmembers YJ~,4 /!fl,~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF SEAL BEACH ) I, Joanne M. Yeo, City Clerk of Seal Beach, califom~ hereby certity that the foregoing resolution is the original copy of Resolution Number VG:,on file in the office of the City Clerk, passed, approved, and ado by the City Council ~~~each, at a regular m . hereofhel on the day of .2000.