Laserfiche WebLink
CITY C0~UNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASA_NTON <br /> <br />WHEREAS, <br /> <br />WHEREAS, <br /> <br />A~AMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA <br /> <br />RESOLUTION NO. 80-74 <br /> <br />A RESOLUTION APPROVING COUNTY-WIDE METHOD FOR <br />REDISTRIBUTION OF PROPERTY TAX REVENUES FOLLOWING <br />ANNEXATION OR CERTAIN OTHER JURISDICTIONAL CHANGES. <br /> <br />Section 99 of the Revenue and Taxation Code (AB-8) <br />provides, among other things, that no local agency <br />jurisdictional change (other than a city incorporation <br />or a formation of a district) can be completed without <br />the agencies affected by such change first having agreed <br />upon a redistribution of property tax revenue from <br />such area between and among said agencies; and <br /> <br />the Alameda County Mayors"Conference on March 12, 1980, <br />reviewed and endorsed as equitable a policy proposal <br />submitted by the Alameda County Administrator which, <br />in pertinent part, calls for a redistribution of pro- <br />perty tax revenues currently derived from an unincorpo- <br />rated territory which is proposed to be annexed to a <br />city, in the following manner: <br /> <br />In all annexations involving developed or developing <br />residential territory, as well as mixed residential/ <br />commercial areas and vacant or underdeveloped in- <br />dustrially zoned areas, the City would automatically <br />be entitled to receive an allocation of the County's <br />general fund c~mputed property tax revenue from that <br />area equal to the City's/County existing allocation <br />percentage ratio within its corporate limits; <br /> <br />Should a substantial portion of any annexation include <br />a developed commercial area, the County will under- <br />take an analysis of nonproperty tax revenues vs. <br />County service costs in determining what portion, if <br />any, of the County allocation is redistributed; and <br /> <br />In the event that a City assumes full responsibility <br />for a service or services presently provided by a <br />separate County taxing agency or special district within <br />a territory proposed to be annexed, pursuant to Revenue <br />and Taxation Code Sec. 99(b), the County will endeavor <br />to transfer to the City the entire computed property <br />tax revenue presently allocated to such County agency <br />or district from said area. <br /> <br />NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON RESOLVES <br />AS FOLLOWS: <br /> <br />Section 1. That the aforementioned policy represents a method <br /> by which Constitutionally-limited property tax revenues <br /> can be rationally and fairly redistributed among agencies <br /> affected by an annexation. <br /> <br />Section 2. This resolution shall become effective immediately <br /> upon its passage and adoption. <br /> <br />THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED MARCH 25, 1980 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: <br /> <br />AYES: Councilmembers - Butler, Mercer, Wood and Mayor Brandes <br /> <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: Councilmember Kephart <br />ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br />ATTEST: N/K~G '.~D~ES,~~;~ ' <br />~ames R. Walker, City Clerk ~ ' ' <br />By Doris George, Deputy City Clerk <br /> <br />APPROVED AS TO FORM <br /> <br /> <br />