Laserfiche WebLink
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PI. EASANTON <br />ALAMEDA COUNTY~ ALAMEDA <br /> <br /> RESOLUTION NO. 03- OO9 <br /> <br />A RESOLUTION URGING THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE TO REJECT THE GOVERNOR'S <br />PROPOSED SHIFT OF LOCAL VLF REVENUES AND TO HONOR <br /> THE 1998 COMMITMENT TO RESTORE THE VLF <br /> <br />WHEREAS, prior to 1935, cities and counties collected property taxes on motor vehicles to fund <br /> essential local public health and safety services; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, <br /> <br />in 1935, the Legislature first enacted the Vehicle License Fee (VLF) Act, replacing <br />the property tax on vehicles with a 1.75 percent fee charged against the value of the <br />motor vehicle; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, in 1948, the rate of the VLF was increased to 2 percent of the value of the vehicle; <br /> and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, in 1986, the voters voted overwhelmingly to constitutionally dedicate the proceeds <br /> of the VLF to fund city and county services; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, <br /> <br />in 1998, a period of strong economic growth, the Legislature approved the use of a <br />portion of the rapidly growing state General Fund to reduce the VLF payments of <br />vehicle owners. This amount, known as the *offset~, grew in future years to a 67.5 <br />percent offset against the amount owed. The amount paid to local governments in <br />lieu of the reduced VLF payment is known as the "VLF backfillS; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, <br /> <br />the 1998 legislation and subsequent enactments contain clear provisions that when <br />insufficient funds are available to be transferred from the General Fund to fully fund <br />the offsets and backfill amount that the VLF offset shall be reduced and VLF <br />payments increased; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, <br /> <br />VLF and backfill revenues constitute 15 to 25 percent of typical city and county <br />general-purpose revenues. On average, more than 60 percent of city general fund <br />spending and more than half of county general funds go to front line law <br />enforcement, fire, emergency medical services, and health care programs. <br /> <br />WHEREAS, <br /> <br />If the State were to cut the VLF backfill to the City of Pleasanton, the amount would <br />be about 67*/, of the $3.5 million we receive annually, or about $2.3 million per <br />year. If approved by the Legislature, the City of Pleasanton could see a loss of $1 <br />million in the current operating budget, and in next fiscal year, beginning in July; <br />the losses could be $2.3 million. These cuts come on top of the nearly $5 million <br /> <br /> <br />