03 - Laserfiche WebLink

ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON FINDING A SEVERE FISCAL HARDSHIP WILL EXIST IF ADDITIONAL LOCAL PROPERTY TAX FUNDS ARE TAKEN AND ADDITIONAL UNFUNDED MANDATES ARE ADOPTED BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, the current economic crisis has placed cities under financial pressure and caused city officials to reopen already adopted budgets to make painful cuts, including layoffs and furloughs of city workers, decreasing maintenance and operations of public facilities, and reductions in direct services to keep spending in line with declining revenues; and WHEREAS, since the early 1990s the state government of California has taken over $8.6 billion of city property tax revenues statewide to fund the state budget even after deducting public safety program payments to cities by the state; and WHEREAS, in FY 2007 -08 alone the state tooki $895 million in city property taxes statewide to fund the state budget after deducting public safety program payments and an additional $350 million in local redevelopment funds were seized in FY 2008 -09; and WHEREAS, the most significant impact of taking local property taxes has been to reduce the quality of public safety services cities can provide since public safety comprises the largest part of any city's general fund budget; and WHEREAS, in 2004 the voters by an 84% vote margin adopted substantial constitutional protections for local revenues, but the legislature can still "borrow" local property taxes to fund the state budget; and WHEREAS, on May 5 the State Department of Finance announced it had proposed to the Governor that the state "borrow" over $2 billion in local property taxes from cities, counties and special districts to balance the state budget, causing deeper cuts in local public safety and other vital services; and WHEREAS, in the past the Governor has called such "borrowing" proposals fiscally irresponsible because the state will find it virtually impossible to repay and it would only deepen the state's structural deficit, preventing the state from balancing its budget; and WHEREAS, the Legislature is currently considering hundreds of bills, many of which would impose new costs on local governments that can neither be afforded nor sustained in this economic climate; and WHEREAS, state agencies are imposing, or considering, many regulations imposing unfunded mandates on local governments without regard to how local agencies will be able comply with these mandates while meeting their other responsibilities; and WHEREAS, the combined effects of reduced City property taxes, increased unfunded state mandates, and the revenue losses due to the economic downturn have placed the city's budget under serious fiscal pressure; and