Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11993 RESOLUTION NO. 11993 A RESOLUTION OPPOSING PROPOSITION 101, AMENDMENT 60 AND AMENDMENT 61 AND URGING THE REGISTERED ELECTORS TO VOTE AGAINST ALL THREE MEASURES WHEREAS, state voters have the opportunity at the November 2, 2010 statewide general election to protect the fiscal health of local government by defeating Proposition 101, Amendment 60, and Amendment 61; and WHEREAS, during this current economic downturn Pueblo has already had to reduce services and budgets; and WHEREAS, these measures individually and collectively significantly reduce or otherwise restrict both state and local revenues in a number of different ways including but not limited to: specific ownership taxes, telecommunication taxes, state income taxes, state-shared revenues to assist municipalities with local street and transit improvements, other state grants and loans to help local government, and property taxes; and WHEREAS, the ability to finance long-term capital improvements like water and wastewater treatment plants, recreational projects, fire stations, and other public facilities are dramatically impaired by the restrictions on debt financing as proposed by Amendment 61; and WHEREAS, should these measures pass, additional services and programs in Pueblo will likely be limited or curtailed because of the numerous restrictions and revenue reductions proposed by these three measures; and WHEREAS, City Council is concerned about the impact these three measures will have on our ability to work effectively with other local governments in the form of intergovernmental agreements; and WHEREAS, a number of prominent individuals, newspapers, and organizations including the Colorado Municipal League are voicing opposition to these measures as not being in the best interests of Colorado and of local communities; and WHEREAS, C.R.S. §1-45-117(1)(b)(III)(A) authorizes City Council to adopt a Resolution taking a position against proposed ballot measures; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PUEBLO, that: SECTION 1. The Pueblo City Council opposes Proposition 101, Amendment 60 and Amendment 61. SECTION 2. The Pueblo City Council urges the voters at the statewide general election on November 2, 2010 to vote against Proposition 101, Amendment 60 and Amendment 61. SECTION 3. This Resolution shall become effective upon final passage and approval. INTRODUCED: September 27, 2010 BY: Ray Aguilera COUNCILPERSON Background Paper for Proposed RESOLUTION DATE: AGENDA ITEM # Q-1 September 27, 2010 DEPARTMENT: City Council Ray Aguilera, Councilman TITLE A RESOLUTION OPPOSING PROPOSITION 101, AMENDMENT 60 AND AMENDMENT 61 AND URGING THE REGISTERED ELECTORS TO VOTE AGAINST ALL THREE MEASURES ISSUE Should City Council adopt a Resolution opposing Proposition No. 101, Amendment 60 and Amendment 61 and urging voters to vote against these measures at the statewide general election on November 2, 2010? RECOMMENDATION Councilman Aguilera recommends approval. BACKGROUND The statewide general election ballot for November 2, 2010 will contain 3 initiated measures: Proposition 101, Amendment 60 and Amendment 61. Proposition No. 101 would virtually eliminate specific ownership taxes which are collected and distributed to local governments, including the City of Pueblo, in lieu of a property tax on vehicles. It will also eliminate local telecommunications charges other than the E911 surcharge. Amendment 60 would require enterprises, such as the City's Sewer Enterprise, Stormwater Enterprise and Honor Farm Enterprise, to pay property taxes, would prohibit such enterprises from levying fees or taxes on property, and would limit the period of tax rate increases granted by the voters. Amendment 61 would treat all traditional forms of municipal leasing as debt requiring prior voter approval; would require voter approval for revenue bonds and enterprise borrowing, and would limit the term of any borrowing to not more than ten years. Taken together, these measures would substantially decrease municipal revenues and make it extremely difficult for the City to provide municipal services and to finance public projects or infrastructure. This Resolution is authorized under C.R.S. §1-45-117(1)(b)(III)(A), a provision of the Fair Campaign Practices Act. FINANCIAL IMPACT This Resolution has no fiscal impact.