Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Res 781 1952-10-07 1 I I J' ....~w.... . , ' .. f. .. . . ~ 1 2 RESOLUTION NO. 781 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH PROTESTING THE PROPOSED 4% STATE SALFS TAX. 3 4 The City Council of the City of Seal Beach does resolve as 5 follows: 6 WHEREAS, there has been presented for consideration a pro- 7 posal of the County Supervisors Association, supported by the 8 California Retail Merchants Association, to provide for a 4% State 9 Sales Tax with 3% to go to the State, 3/4 of 1% of the amount 10 collected within the incorporated cities to the cities, 1/4 of 1% 11 collected within the cities to the counties and 1% collected within 12 the unincorporated areas to the counties; end 13 WHEREAS, it is contended that such a sales tax plan would l~ bring desirable uniformity to sales tax collection methods and pro- 15 cedures as well as provide revenues to county government; and 16 17 WHEREAS, presently the unincorporated areas of many countt s have both a property and sales tax advantage over the cities within , . 18 said counties; 19 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Seal Beac 20 actively opposes this proposal of the County Supervisors Associatio 21 for the following reasons: 22 1. This proposal would, in effect, force a local sales t 23 upon the City of Seal Beach, which it does not now have nor does 24 it desire to have. 25 2. This proposal would deprive cities of hard-won local 26 autonomy over a strictly local revenue source. 27 3. This proposal would constitute an invasion of heretofo e 28 29 30 31 32 DANA R. WILL,IAMS ATTO"NEY A.T LAW ca.... 8KUBITY BLDG. LONG BuGH 2. CALI". 'hJ.I.I'IiON.18.S,.. exclusive state and municipal taxing areas and could lead to any number of additional county taxes on business operations within cities. 4. This proposal would accentuate rather than reduce the problem of financing urban communities in unincorporated areas to -1- I I I .0 " ,. .... "). . Resolution Number , . ' .' , 1 the further disadvantage of the cities. 2 5. This proposal would place additional city funds and 3 taxing power'at county disposal, whereas we believe that as the pop 4 u1ation of a county grows, local self-government as represented by 5 municipalities should expand and increase, while remote, non-munici 6 pal government as represented by counties should be held in check. 7 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any desired or essential 8 un1formi ty in sales tax methods and procedures can best be accom- 9 p1ished by voluntary action between cities; and 10 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Seal Beach would 11 interpose no objection to either a special county property tax or 12 a county sales tax in unincorporated areas only for the purpose 13 of rai sing aIIY a4-d1tional funds they may need; and 14 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this city vigorously opposes th 15 aforementioned proposal of the County Supervisors Association, and 16 the City Clerk be and he is hereby instructed to send a 'copy of thi 17 resolution to other incorporated cities of the State, the Honorable 18 Earl Warren, Governor of the State of California; members of the 19 State Senate and Assembly and to the League of California Cities. 20 21 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Seal Beach, 22 California, this 7th day of October, 1952. 23 24 25 26 27 ... '!. ~. CITY C ERK ~ '... ..;:: ~:' ..1..t: ~~;;,or _ '11'" ...~ 28. ~~., " ~It 't" r:.. ...,' ~ q I~ '...t' \. . . :29 -, . f:..., ~J .~... Co'!:i ~:.= . "'02 .' ,-- -::.'" "'I . ~- - ..~ "f;'"" 'I- " ;Ir:~' ~ !i'A:.. .. ... c_ '2.1" '..~- -- . :~'" "'.. p;" " J"":... '" .,' al~"'~~ . " 32 ~..-( , /' //~~ MAYOR DANA R, WILLIAM. ATTORNII" AT LAW ..,-1: 8ac:UIIITY aLD.. .LaNGlIlIlACH &. CALI.... TnIlPHONI: .a.8'.. . . -2- I 1 I ..r . .'.:" Resolution ,Number ~ . ~ . . .' , 1 2 ;5 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF SEAL BEACH ) I hereby certify that the above and foregoing Resolution 4 was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of 5 the City of Seal Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 67th day of October, 19,2, by the following vote, to wit: 7 AYES Councilmen 8 9 10 11 NOES Councilmen ABSENT Councilmen ~ . "'\ ';, :.. olt..r...!,.. .... 12 ~ '.-::~~-f'.. "".;.... ~ ..c:.",'l'," ..:.,...,...... "~--'_.. ... "(/., ,'-".....'1. ~3~ .. '" " ...;::. '!;' ,. ~;: l~ ~~== -- ~ ,a ~_ ~_F';: #' ~ -~ -,(c.-. 15~ ;" ':',~ t-.,(,..~- ~ ~~ -;- .. '~\.~ 16 ..", "1:',.- 7~),,~ ' ~... ....~ 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 " DANA R. WILLIAMS ATTORNEY "'fLAW ..I..a 8SCURITY IILD., LON. BIlAGH a. CALIF. ftl.l!JIHONI: ........ -3-