My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
03
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2008
>
011508
>
03
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/8/2008 4:48:18 PM
Creation date
1/8/2008 4:34:23 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
1/15/2008
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
03
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Section 911.2 of the Government Code provides that refund claims for disputed taxes <br />must be filed within one year from accrual of the cause of action. Currently, the City's <br />code allows persons up to 3 years to file a claim against the City seeking a refund of the <br />transient occupancy tax. The proposed code amendments would require persons to file <br />a claim within one year from having paid the disputed tax. This provision would only <br />apply to the City's business license tax and transient occupancy tax (hotel tax). <br />The Code Amendments Establish a Process for Filing Claims: <br />The proposed code amendments will establish a uniform procedure for persons wishing <br />to file claims for refunds of the transit occupancy tax or the business license tax. For <br />example, all claims must be made in writing and verified by the claimant or his or her <br />guardian, conservator, executor, or administrator and must contain the information set <br />forth in Government Code Section 910. <br />The Code Amendments Bar the Filing of Class Action Claims Unless Verified by Each <br />Claimant <br />Perhaps most significant, the code amendments state that no claim may be filed on <br />behalf of a class of persons unless verified by every member of that class. This would <br />prevent the following scenario from occurring. Currently under the City's ordinance, a <br />plaintiffs lawyer could file a refund claim on behalf of "all persons who have lodged in a <br />hotel or motel in Pleasanton" and assert that the City's transient occupancy tax was <br />somehow unlawful. After the code amendment, a plaintiff s lawyer could not simply <br />assert that he/she represented a group of unnamed persons (in the hundreds, <br />thousands, or tens of thousands). Rather, in order to file a valid claim on behalf of a <br />group of persons, the plaintiffs attorney would need to actually find persons who were <br />"illegally charged or overcharged" and have each of them sign and verify the claim. <br />Submitted by: <br />Approv by: <br />Michael H. Roush <br />City Attorney <br />Attachment: <br />Proposed Ordinance <br />Nelson Fialho <br />City Manager <br />Page 3 of 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.