SR-201-004 (2)
e
e
Santa Mon1ca, Cal1fornia, December 26, 1980
:2tJ/-()Oq
qil
To:
Mayor and City counc1l
From:
Cl ty Staff
JAN 1 3 193\
Subject: Gann Appropriations Limit
Introduction
This report requests approval of the attached resolution, which establishes
the City.s appropr1ations limit for the fiscal year 1980-81 at $23,286,550.
Background
Senate Bill No. 1352 (Marks) becomes effective January 1,1981. In this bill:
The Legislature finds and declares that Article XIIIB
of the California Constltution 1S intended to provide certain
limitations and controls on government in the State, but these
restrictions are intended to be applied in a reasonable and
practlcal way, so as to permlt flexibility in meeting the
constantly changing conditions and needs of the people for
governmental services.
Senate Bill No. 1352 also provides that:
Each year the governing body of each local jurisdiction
shall, by resolution, estab11sh its appropriations llm1t for
the follow1ng fiscal year pursuant to Article XIIIB at a
regularly scheduled meeting or notlced special meeting.
Fifteen days prior to such meeting, documentatlon used in
the determination of the appropr1ations limit shall be
available to the public. The determinatlon of the appro-
prlat10ns lim1t is a legislat1ve act.
In October of 1980, the League of California C1ties published revised IIUniform
GU1de11nes for the Implementation of Art1cle XIIIB of the California Constitut1on".
The League had previously publ1shed guidelines in April, 1980. The October
revision updates the preV10US guidelines for 1mplementing legislation passed
in the 1978-80 1eg1s1ative session and responds to certa1n quest10ns of inter-
pretatlon.
qll
JAN 1 3 1981
i
e
To: Mayor and City Council
- 2 -
e
December 26~ 1980
Discussion
1980~81 Computation of Appropriation Limit
Staff has rel1ed heavily on the League of California Cities' advice in preparing
the proposed 1980-81 approprlations limit. The summary calculations are shown
in Attachment IAI. As required by law~ the documentation used ln the determ1nat1on
of the proposed appropriations limit has been available to the public for fifteen
days pr10r to this meeting.
Changes from Preliminary Estimate of Appropriation L1mit
Staff, prlor to the adoption of the 1980-81 budget, estimated the gap between
the approprlation limit and the appropriatlon subject to limit to be $4.3 m111ion.
If the proposed appropriation 11mit is adopted, the unused appropriation authority
w111 be $1.5 mill10n. There are a number of factors which caused this gap to
shrink. The major factors caus1ng the change are as follows. First, the cost
of living and population factor changed from the preliminary estimate of 1.2285
to 1.1867. Second, certain revenues, such as gas tax, have been reclassified
from proceeds of taxes to nonproceeds of taxes. Thlrd, enterprise funds have
been excluded from the computation. Fourth, the City has appropriated $243,000
from proceeds of taxes since the in1tlal adoptlon of the 1980-81 budget.
Unused Appropriation Authority
The unused 1980-81 appropr1at1ons author1ty is $1.5 million. $1.5 million is
approx1mately 6% of appropriat1ons subJect to the limit. It is desirable to
maintain a reserve of unused appropriations authority of at least 5%. A 5%
reserve 1S necessary to offset uncertainties which are inherent in the budgetary
process. More specifically, if actual revenues exceed estimated, the excess
may be appropriated to reserves to the extent that there lS unused appropr1ations
authorlty. Excess revenues which are not appropriated are required to be returned
To:
. --1
Mayor and C1ty CounCl
- 3 -
e
December 26, 1980
IIby a rev1sion of tax rates or fee schedules within the next two subsequent
fiscal yearslt. On the expenditure side, the unused approprlations authority
gives the Council "flexibility in meeting the constantly changing conditions
and needs of the people for governmental servicesll.
1981-82 and Future Years
In computing the 1980-81 appropriations limit, $3.6 million is withdrawn from
reserves. This withdrawal is not an appropriation subJect to 11mit. Assuming
that taxes and expenditures keep pace with changes in cost of l1ving and
population, then in 1981-82, an additional $3.6 million will be required to
be wlthdrawn from reserves if service levels are to be maintained. The C1ty
currently has $4.9 million in reserves ln the general fund and $1.5 m1llion
in the capital improvement fund. Therefore, it appears that a $3.6 mlllion
withdrawal from reserves 1n 1981-82, will not present a problem. However,
in 1982-83, and future years, there may not be sufficient reserves to continue
operations on a status quo basis.
The above analysis assumes that revenues will change at the same rate as the
cost of living and population. This assumption may not be valid. The City
currently receives more than 25% of its tax revenue (proceeds of taxes) in the
form of subventions from the State. The State's current and projected finanClal
difficulties have been well publicized. It is likely the State will solve its
financial problems, in part, by cutting back subventions to cities. Such
reductionsin tax l~evenue will help the City stay within its Gann appropriation
limit. These reductions in revenue can, of course, cause other budgetary
problems.
To:
Mayor and Clty COU~l
- 4 -
e
December 26, 1980
On the other hand, certain revenues may lncrease faster than the change in cost
of livlng and population. One of these lS lease revenue. If the City proceeds
with development of the properties at the Santa Monlca Airport, the City will
receive substantial lease revenues. How these lease revenues will affect the
City's Gann appropriation limit depends on whether these revenues are classified
as proceeds of taxes or nonproceeds of taxes. This lssue has not been
specifically addressed by either the legislature or the courts. See Attachment
ISI for analysis by the State Legislative Analyst and the State Legislatlve
Counsel. These analyses relate to the sale of public property, but presumably
the issues are similar to those of leasing public property.
In the absence of specific directlon by either the legislature or the courts,
the Councl1 may leglslatively determine that lease revenues are non proceeds of
taxes. In WhlCh case, the lease revenues would be exempt from the Gann appro-
priations limit. This determ1nation could be challenged. In this regard,
Senate Bill No. 1352, provides that:
For the 1981-82 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter,
any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside,
vOld, or annul the action of the governing body taken pursuant to
this section shall be commenced within 45 days of the effective
date of the resolution.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the attached resolution, which establishes the Cityls
appropr1ation llmit for the fiscal year 1980-81 at $23,286,550, be approved.
Prepared by: N1Ck Rives
Bob Tompkins
Attachments
1978-79 Base Year
e
e
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
PROPOSITION 4 COMPUTATION
1980-81
$19,622,946
Mu1tlp1led By Cost of Llvlng
and Popu1atlon Factor
1980-81 Budget Llilllt
1980-81 Budget
Budget Under Llilllt
1.1867
$23,286,550
$21,812,860
$ 1,473,690
Attachment A
e
e
CITY OF SANTA HONICA
PROPOSITION 4 COMPUTATION
BASE YEAR 1978-79
Sub-Amounts
Total Amounts
Total Actual Revenues of C~ty
From F~nanc~al Statements and
Aud~tors Report - Year Ended 6/30/79
$27,723,004 *
Less: Nonproceeds of Taxes
Exempt Revenue
$7,251,514
$3,314,728
Total Nonproceeds of Taxes
($10,566,242)
Subtotal
$17,156,762
Plus User Fees Exceed~ng Costs
$ 1,442,761
Subtract Actual Debt Serv~ce
- 0 -
Total Proceeds From Tax
$18,599,523
Total C~ty Appropr~at~ons From
Flnanc~al statements and Audltors
Report - Year Ended 6/30/79
$28,746,427 *
Less: Nonproceeds of Taxes
($10,566,242)
Appropr~at~on From Proceeds of Taxes $18,180,185
Less Debt Servlce Approprlatlons, and
Other Appropr~at~ons Not SubJect To
Llmltatlon - 0 -
Add User Fees Exceed~ng Costs $ 1,442,761
Total Approprlatlons SubJect To Llmlt
1978-79 $19,622,946
* Includes general and speclal revenue funds. Enterprlse funds are excluded.
Attachment A-I
e
e
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
PROPOSITION 4 COKPUTATION
1980-81
Sub-Amounts
Total Amounts
Total Estlmated Revenues for Clty
$38,277,817 *
Less: Estlmated Nonproceeds of Taxes
Estlmated Exempt Revenues
$ 6,608,997
$10,585,260
Total Estlmated Nonproceeds of Taxes
($17,194,257)
Subtotal
$21,083,560
Plus Estlmated User Fees In Excess of Cost
$
729,300
Subtract Estlffiated Debt Servlce and Other
Approprlatlons Not SubJect To Llmltatlon
$ 3,636,046 **
Total Proceeds of Tax
$18,176,814
Total Clty Approprlatlons Per 1980-81 Budget
$41,913,863 *
Less: Nonproceeds of Taxes
($17,194,257)
Approprlatlon From Proceeds of Taxes
$24,719,606
Subtract Estlmated Debt SerVlce
Approprlatlons and Other Approprlatlons
Not SubJect To Llmltatlon
($ 3,636,046)
**
Add Estlmated User Fees Exceedlng Costs
s
729,300
Total Approprlatlo~s SubJect
To Llmltatlons, 1980-81
$21,812,860
*
Includes general and speclal revenue funds. Enterprlse funds are excluded.
**
Represents Estlffiated flnanclng from reserves per
June 11, 1980.
1980-81 budget adopted
Attachment A-2
z
0
-
t-
<(
Z
~ (/)
0:: 0- C
W r 0
l- e- ot-
W 0
0 I
W ~
I r- a.
~ () 0 I
I
)... (/)
LL n ~
x
Z 0 0- r;! C ~1
8..-l+>
0 <[ tI)
'H+,o
- oot..>
l- ~
rl) ~
'Ow 0
(f) a:I C!.l
C!) 0 r:l
0 up... rfI
0 4.l
H H tJ
CL p..ox
0 f.I)~
S:::~
0:: 0
z
a..
11.1
::t
s:::
(!J
~ CD~- g
.... (! Q
(fJ ~- ~
rl
c:l
~
e :e-
O
\'I')P::;
d r=.
-~ CIl
i \J-) Ui~-
....Q
fJr::l
fT" r4 E-t
to u
orJ" 0
- ~
~ p..
fQ II
0...
W
r-
OO
r/'.I
+'
C CIl
...... 0
t..>
tl)
(l)'H
o 0
J;:.
O'l
H ~')
(l) (l)
fa 0
::> X
r=l
UI
<d
III ~')
ctl (!)
tJ X
o ~
s....8
p..
'H
s::: 0
o
Z
~
o
r/) tl)
'tiC!
C!.l X..
C!.l ('j
uE-t
o
H
p..
k
III
Z ~
0+)0
o-..c
a:I-oZ#
<:) s:: rJ
or-! tiS tI) #1
> c..;
H .. 0 E
11.1 t!I ...c -r-!
(/) s:: ~ H+
.p~ .~ o.
.g.j.J l-l +J~
~.~ go +11
(/)HHO
~')~8:~
.3 ~ ,:;; .gt
P. tf.I
I(
rt.I
(tJ rtl
X +>
d ID rIJ
E-tuO
(.It..)
l1 ~ .0
o li-i ~
H H 0
~C!.l
rf.I 1,1)
rIl~ rIJ
ro a>
a> w u
C!.I ::I X
ur-lM
on.
s.. s:::
p.. or-!
rJ)
.-...0 Z 0
::r- 2....
a::- E-J 8
-_ -< (.) 8
........ HC=.lH
<r,p:;~:;;::
0. p.. p:j H
......00::>...:1
tr- g: CO
...;~
a
i
(/)
tl) lIJ
III C!.I
o C!.I
><~
l:=::J
s..
'1j C!.l
'1j Ul
.q;::>
a
o
OM
mop
o'dCoJ
~ a -~ ti
> ~ a
s.. .. ld 'r!
IUtI)'MH -
WQs..
o Po 0
.p'n 0 OP
.oops..
Cl) d AOP
A-rlAO
s... -< Cl)
O'lPo ..-;,
WOM,o
(l) H C!) ;:j
...:I P,..c: Cf.l
Po+>
<cop.
a
~
Ul r;]
C'd
o (l)
.r-! <.I tIl
tIl~ g ~
!U'r-! s.... d
:JHP-'8
tJ' go El .....
~ J-t 0 0
Po,",
P,......
<
t:l
'd -
(lJ W
C!.l <:)
(J'l (J X
III 0 cd
OS-,8
HP-.
r......
C 0
o
z
t<I
r::
r-I 0
rl .r-!
<.p
d
rl On
d J.<
.pp.,
00
8s....
~
A1;.tachment A-3
"
V
a..
w
t-
(fJ
"
z e ~
0
0 ~
~
- :T" u.l
t- - ro'~-
r CoQ
<{ -.a- ~
,... ~ E-l
Z _u
0.0....0
- p::;
~ "9.. p..
0:: C/)
W 0Q C to II
t- p- O a...
'"
W - .,... W
I 0 i-
n (/)
0 '-
J ()o C1.
~ er- 0 I
I
).. tIl
LL n (!.J
><
z 0 0- d s:: III
E-t orl -p
0 <( III
~~O [;)
- oou .p
}- z s::: tI1
tI1 ~ 0..-1 0
OOtll 0 U
(J) Q) (lJ If.I
CJ Q) !I] CJ~
0 u rx. tIl (!) 0
0 cu Po,
CL J.;J..to 1lI
p...Cl>X J.; l.~
0 to&il CJ l!l
S::~ t'l ()
a: 0 ~ x
Z ril
0...
IIJ
~
s:::
11>
-CD>
Cl.. ~_ ~
W r-
r- '"\. lI.I
(J) 00 t-l
'T, >>
rl
III
!i!
rfl
tel
III to1
Cl> (!)
o X
o t;j
t:E-t
~
l:l 0
o
z
~
o
tIl D'l
'dCJ
CJ ><:..
t.I d
uE-i
o
H
Po.
~ - t
~ 4l gj
O'r!
g't:l Z+l
~ m
~ r.l ~".JJt
H ~ 0 g;
CJtI'l-n"..-I~
ill t:: +lH:
o (j
.p or! or{ 0
.g +l H +l~
A -~ go-l-l1
to 1-1 l-lO
0. 0., /!)
D'l 0 p,,-n
~ M ~ .go)
~ 001
~ Ol ~ i
E-iCllO
(1)0
g r:r.. CH . ~
H s... 0 ~
~ t>
UI tIl
tt)~ [f.l
'd C!J
(!J t'l tJ
!I) ~ x
tJrlP:l
op..
H Q
p.. ...-I
({)
e~ ~g.
88
<.08
Ccl H r~ H
r:::J-o:>~
rC~~~
00 g: tf)
- p..
;<<<<; <:(
~
II
CD'-'
".,
(;"""-
r(
r
I
II)
to') 00
lU lU
tI (l)
xr:r..
r4
H
<Ql!.I
r;:f l/}
<:(:::>
~
o
-..-I
ro+:>
41 'CI J:: c1
ul::O-p
"..-I aJ or! ori
>- .p I'!
H .. cG or!
Q) (I) 'n ~
Wl.1k
o P. 0
-P or! 0 .p
,o-pJ..t
l!.l ~ p.;->
Q"rl P. u
S-,<((U
to~ Po or;)
CllOJ..t,o
CJ J... (!J ;j
...:l p...c:trJ
Po+>
<(Oop
o
Z
[Q to')
s::1<tl
o lU
-n Cl> II)
trl~ g ~
-'M $... III
'''MIl.. 8
&A
~o E ~
,.. 0 0
p.,.,
Per...
<<:
tIl
ro .
(!) II)
III U
Vl 0 X
m 0 oj
tJJ...8
...:lp.,
140-0
s::: 0
o
:<:;
en
s::
.-10
rl ......
~.p
a;
rl ort
d s...
-PPt
o 0
E-l ,..,
P-
It
Attachment A-4
v
n.
w
t-
oo
I
_ i
"
'-r..-...... ,... .....u-rv~
RA) H. WHI rAKER
c.....u::F" DEPUYIE:S
2!t,gislutiu.e QIlluusl
of QIalifl1mia H,. r.
KE.I'IJT L DEC~A~BEAU
ST"'N\..EY M LO"'RI~ORE
EOW"'RD F Now...1C
F"W...RD K pu..c;rLL
ItY L B"'''''IiTT
H.....vU..J FOsTEIl
RO"ElIT 0 GRONICI':
6w..A!W'.... C M...cKENZII!' JR
A....,.. MACKEY
.,.....CY 0 POWELL II
RUSSELL L. SPIIo..UNCl
JOHN T STtlcr","'I(EOI
"II,NCI"AL DEPUTIES
~{r ot_..,
Jli...i t
BION M. GREGORY
3021 ST"'YE C"PITOL
B..CIt.......NTO 95814
(1"6) 445-3057
eon ST"'TE BUIL.OINCl
107 sau'n' 8ROAOW"'''
LO$ ANGEL.... 90012
(213) 620.2550
Sacramento, California
July 6,
......~. .... .. ...
... . ~ I I'
19?,.9-,,-,,,:~,_'.L -~'_ ,
,,, ,. ....
,...,/ ( v'
v f r- J- . V.
- C....y"'''-._J 1- . \.- '
" <-..~
'-
Mr. William G. Ha~~
Legislative Analyst
925 L Street, Suite 650
Sacramento, CA 95814
JUL 051979 :0-
...".. ....
~
Gann Initiative
Dear Hr. Hanun:
Pursuant to your request, we have prepared and
enclose a discussion of a question presented to us on a
new initiative constitutional amendment proposed by ~1r.
Paul Gann. The measure would place appro9riation and
revenue limits on state and local governments.
"""~I'lIA",,,, .......,!s3, '"...,....._~
D~yu;) D ALVES
M...f=t'T~pf L A"'O-E:JilSO~
PAUL .A",T J LLA
CHAm..~S C A'S8-~t.\.,
JAMES- L ASHF"O~O
.J"N cc R BRawN
AL1CE V COLL.'~'
JOHN C:OIII:tI-NE
B~.. E 0....1:
CLINTON..J DCW.TT
C OAY10 DU;KER50N
FR"NC~~ S DORSi....
ROBERT CULl.E:"N DUFFY
LAWREN.CE K F'E,N
s....."o.. R FI...EIl
JOHN FO'!IETTE
CL..." FULLE"
KA....HL.I!:!:N E GNEKOW
ALVIN D GRESS
""""E$ W HEIN..ER
THO...... R Ht;UER
.....c.. I HOIlTO..
:E.LI::lttoi I( JENI<INS
MJC;t.fA~L J KERSTEN
L DOUGLAS KI~"'EY
'VICTOR Ko:r:~EL5KI
RO"ULO I l.opu.
JAMES A MARSALA
PETER' F MELP'-IICOe:
ROat::"T G M-~ LL~Pt
.JOHN A MOCER
VI[RN~ L OLIVf::."
- EUGENIE L PAINIt
M..RCUt;I>lTE ROTH
2~""" SH...W
'YVILLIAM K ST"'~I(
j.4IC......EI. H Up50....
IC"RISTO....".... WI!:I
, :t ~ D........IEL A Wi!:rTZ.......H
~ T""'QMAS D WHiE:L.AN
.JIM"'E. W~HG
CI'oIRISTOPI1ER 'ZIRKLE
DE:PUTlE5
The conclusions reached have been without benefit
of the ballot summary and arguments and analysis which are
presented to the electorate in connection with a particular
measure. A court could use such statements in determining
the intention of the framers and electorate and hence the
meaning of uncertain language {see Araador Valley Joint
Union High Sch. Dist. v. State Bd. of Equalization 1 22
Cal. 3d 208~5-246j . --- --
Very truly yours,
Bion }1. Gregory
Legislative Counsel
BY~' ;u'~ }/~w-u---
J c I. Horton
Dep ty Legislative Counsel
JIH:sms
co: Honorable Walter w. Stiern
Chairman, Joint Legislative Budget Committee
~
Attachment B
e
Mr. William G. Hamm - p. 4 - #7981
e
These distinctions regarding fees and charges are
reflected in subdivision (c) of Section 8, which would include
as "proceeds of taxes" proceeds of fees and charges to the
extent such proceeds exceed the costs reasonably borne by an
entity in providing the regulation, product, or service. We
think that, in context, this provision would be construed as
excluding from uproceeds of taxes," user charges and fees
which do not exceed the costs of the entity and, more gener-
ally, as we stated above, t'l1e think that the term IIproceeds
of taxes" would be limited generally to tax revenue.
with these principles in mind, we turn to the
sources of revenue at issue here.
(1) Penalties and fines for traffic violations
and criminal convictions.~e think it is ciear-that penal-
ties and fines for traffic violations and criminal convic-
tions are true penalties in the sense of a pecuniary punish-
ment for the performance of an unlawful act. As such they
have been held not to constitute a tax (see Sawyer v~ Barbour,
l42 Cal. App. 2d 827, 834-836); and, in fact, a "tax" and a
"penalty" have been stated to be mutually exclusive (see
United states v. La Franca, 75 L. Ed. 551, 555). We con-
clude, accordinglY; that penalties and fines for traffic
violations and criminal convictions would not be considered
the "proceeds of taxesll under subdivision (e) of Section 8.
(2) Proceeds under the Unclaimed Property Law.
The Unclaimed Property Law (Ch. 7 (commenc~ng with Sec.
l500), Title lO, Pt. 3, C.C.P.) provides for the escheat
to the state of various kinds of unclaimed personal prop-
erty. These proceeds are not tax revenue (c.f. Estate of
Lindquist, 25 Cal. 2d 697, 702-703) and, we think, woula-not
be treated as the "proceeds of taxes" under subdivision (c)
of Section 8 oE the measure.
(3) proceeds from the sale of state property.
Obviously, the proceeds from the sale of state property are
not themselves "taxes." On the other hand, in some, but not
all cases, the property sold will have been acquired initially
with state tax revenues and it might well be argued that in
such cases the proceeds of the sale should be included under
subdivision (c) of Section 8 as proceeds from Itthe investment
of tax revenues.1t
Attachment B-1
e
Mr. William G. Hamm - p. 5 - 17981
e
However, this approach could produce some unfor-
tunate results. For exaMple, suppose the state, after the
effective date of the measure, each year, for 10 years,
appropriated $100,000 of tax revenues to a capital outlay
fund for the purpose of constructing a particular facility.
It would be clear, under the measure, that such amounts would
be appropriations subject to limitation in the year they are
appropriated, but the $1,000,000 accumulated in the fund
could be expended without being subject to the appropriations
limitat10n which would be provided by the measure (see Sec.
5). Suppose the state does expend the accumulated $1,000,000
for a new facility, uses it for a per10d of time, and then
wishes to sell the property and return the proceeds to a
capital outlay fund. If such proceeds are treated as "proceeds
of taxesU and are subsequently reappropriated to a capital out-
lay fund for the purpose of providing another facility, such
appropriation would have to be made within the appropriations
limitation of the state (see Sec. Ii subd. (a), Sec. 8).
This may be dlfficult--indeed, in the case of a local entity,
if we apply the same prlnciple, it might make it impossible
for the local entity to take such action--and seems unneces-
sary. The California courts have held that constitutional
enactments must receive a liberal, practical cornmon-sense
constructlon which will meet changed conditions and the
growing needs of the people. (Amador Valley Joint Union
High Sch. Dist. v. State Bd. of Equalizat1on, 22 Cal. 3d
i08, 245). Applying this principle here, we think the
measure would not require that the proceeds from the sale of
state property be treated as the "proceeds of taxes" under
subdivision (c} of Section 8.
summarizing our conclusions above, it is our
opln1on that none of the sources of revenue listed above--that
i~, penalties and fines for traffic violations and criminal
convictions, proceeds under the Unclaimed Property Law, and
proceeds from the sale of state property--would-be included
as "proceeds of taxesll under subdivision (c) of Section 8.
Very truly yours,
Bion M. Gregory
Legislative Counsel
By(Luk 0 U~-
J~~I. Horton
Deputy Legislative Counsel
JIH: sms
cc: Honorable Walter w. Stiern
Chairman, Joint Legislative Budget Committee
Attachment B-2
rl
e
e
AN ANALYSIS Of PROPOSITION 4
THE GANN nSPIRIT OF 13u INITIATIV~
..
-~
DECENBER 1979
-~ -- ----- -~~~--- ,....
~-"-lEGIStATIVE ANALYST ~
~...~-.- ...........- ~ -~~---~~~
STATE 01= CAUFO~NIA
925 l STREET, SUITE 650
SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 9581.4
79-20
Attachment B-3
e
e
on property. G d1S~-~~:~~n recently validated by a state appellate court
rul1~9.1 For tne pur~Jses of Preposition 4> the~> these assessmen:s shoulc
nc: be conSlderec proceeds of taxes.
:;:S:-:~'J:}~eS~~'la::Penalt:1es. Ler,ls1atlve Counsel hd5 lnfor;;]ed US that
....---
~ -~~ --- ~
trere lS c cleG~ 1eg21 dlS:1~Ct1op be:wee~ f1nes and Der.al:ies (w~ich are
..,
~onetary Dur.lshnen~s for urlawful acts) and taxes.L
-;?T:~:Ocee-aS~r~lnj:f1e'::5a 1 eo -of .-St-ate":<Prcl'ertJ.:_ - Leg's 1 at i ve Co unse 1
:--- -- .....---------- --- - - - - .-..
hcs stated that proceeds from the sale of goverrr.ent proDe~~y are not tax
man1es.3 However. 1~ 15 not clear whether a ccpital ?aln rea11zed by an
en:lty or. the sale of prcnerty originally purchasec w1:h tax revenues would
be sU~Ject to t~e lnves:8en~ provls1ons of Sectlon 8(c). For lnstance. if
tne ~:ate purchased wltn proceeds of taxes a plece of land for $100.000 In
1955 and sold It 1r. 1975 Tor $150,ODO. would the $50,000 gain constitute
proceeds from the lnves:~en~ of revenues?
The lnlt1c~lve exoresslv defInes lncome from tr.e 7r.vest~ent of tax
. ,~
, .
revenues as the "proceeds of taxes." We 1nterpret thlS to refer to the
In:erest earn7ngs of te~~orar11y Idle cash balances and not to the increase
1n book va1ue of an entlty's fixed assets. Consequently> we belleve that a
gain realized from the sale of public property should not be consiaered
~roceeds of taxes.
_.:=...9~~T;Pro1:€~o~f'cm-JJnd.ir.t.med-Pr.on~ Counsel has a1 so conel uded
~-~-- ":. . - - -----~ --- .~~~~
that escheat tu the s~ate of unc1almed personal property would not be con-
sidered tax revenue.4
I. Countv of Fresn~ v. Mael~from.
2. Leg1s1atlve Counsel Opln1on #7981, page 4.
3. Ibld.
~. Ibld.
-18-
Attachment B-4
'.'
e
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(20155 C C P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
County of Los Ar"1geles,
I am a citizen of the United States and a
resident of the County afores03ld, I am over
the age Of elqhteen ye~rs, and not a party to
or Interested In the above-entItled matter 1
am fhe principal clerk Of the printer of the
EVEN ING OUTLOOK
a newspaper Of general cIrculation. prtnted
and puhllshed . . ?~i?-:y. e~~~.p~. .~~~?'....
. SANTA MONICA
In the City of ......... .... ... ..........
County of Los Angeles, and whIch
newspaper has been ad i udged a newspaper
of general cIrculatIon by the Superior Court
of the County of Los Angeles, State of
California, under the date of.~.~~..~~ 19 .~;,
C 314319. h th
ase Number ..... . ........' t at enot.ce,
of which the annexed IS a printed copy (set
In type not smaller than nonpareil L has
been publlshed In each regular and entIre
Issue of said newspaper and not In any
supplement thereof on the follOWing dates,
to-WIt
Dee 21
atl In tlie year 1980
t certify (or declare) under penalty of
perlury that the foregOing IS true and
correct
Dated at
SANTA MONICA
horla'thls
...Y~ ..
1980
blank form may be securea from
CALlFC~N IA NEWSPAPER SERVICE
BUREAU, INC.
Legal AdvertiSing Cleanng House
South Spring St., Los Angeles, CalIf. 90012
Telephone: 625.2141
Please request GENERAL Proof 01 PubHutlon
when orderIng thIS lorm
~ ", '.
e
ThIS space is for the County Clerk's Fll!ng Stamp
~.
,,,
Proof of Publication of
~.......~.....+.~t_...~.......................~...~......,
PUBLIC NOTICE
Pursuant to Article XllIB, California COnstitu-
tion, at Its regular meetmg on Tuesday, January 13,
1981, at 7 30 PM. the CIty CouncIl will diScus!! a
resolutIOn for detenmnahon of the Gann appropri-
ation hroit for Fiscal Year 1980-81 COpIes of docu-
mentation used In detennmat.:on of t.i.e limit is on
hie in offIces of !Ytayor and ~Ity Clerk, City Hall,
1585 Mam Street, Santa Momca
A;\[~ M SHORE,
Cltv Clerk
CITY OF SANTA !\-!O;'>;ICA
Pub, Dee 27-1980.
. -...,
DATE:
e
/2 -z7"-__ft1
e
#
TO:
Mary Lennon, Santa Monica Evening Outlook
FROM:
City CJerk (393-9975, Ext. 211), Santa t.lonica City Hall
SUBJECT: REQUEST TO PUBLISH LEGAL NOTICE
-,
Please
publish the attached /Zd.&~~
~ 2b /9'/0
(
s
C)
A'--A
~-
Ii
L;ccd:.1.Z4..'
on
and return
proofs of publication to the City Clerk's Office.
Thanks for your assistance,
---
--"-;-;'~:~tJ~'".;~ - ;'1-
I
-~ I
Jeanette ShlCf, City Clerk's Secrctar
/f)Ll')~_ .~~
L C . ~~LL ~ -
2~
f.ub uec,~26-i9RO
,oF CULVER tITY
,
e
e
PUBLIC ~OTICE
Pursuant to ArtIcle XIIIB, CalIfornIa ConstitutIon, at Its regular
meetIng on Tuesday, January 13, 1981, at 7:30 P.M., the CIty
CouncIl wIll dISCUSS a resolution for deter~Ination of the Gann
approprIatIon limit for FIscal Year 1980-81. CopIes of documentatIon
used in determination of the limIt IS on fIle In offices of Mayor
and CIty Clerk, CIty Hall, 1685 ~~In Street, Santa MonIca.
Ann ~. Shore, City Clerk
CITY OF SANTA MO~ICA
Publlsh~ December 26, 1980
~
~
e
RESOLUTION NO. 6175
(CITY COUNCIL SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA MONICA ESTABLISHING AN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1980-81.
WHEREAS, the City Council is required by Government Code
Section 7910, to establish its appropriations limit by resolutiDn; and
WHEREAS, documentation used 1n the determination of the
appropriations limit has been available to the public for flfteen days
prior to this meeting;
NOW THEREF0RE~ THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS;
SECTION 1. The City of Santa Monica appropriation l1m;t for
the fiscal year 1980-81 shall be $23,286,550.
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of
this resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full
force and effect.
,.
Approved as to form:
5t~ ~t. Stk.
Stephe~ Shane Stark .
Acting City Attorney
r--,
'.
~
- -----
RESOLUTION NO. 6175
(CITY COUNCIL SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA MONICA ESTABLISHING AN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1980-81.
WHEREAS, the City Council is required by Government Code
Section 7910, to establish its appropriations limit by resolution; and
WHEREAS, documentation used in the determination of the
appropr1ations l1mit has been available to the public for fifteen days
prior to thlS meeting;
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City of Santa Monica appropriation limit for
the flscal year 1980-81 shall be $23,286,550.
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of
this resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full
force and effect.
.
Approved as to form:
St. ~f. Stk
~tepne~ Shane Stark
Acting C1ty Attorney
"
..
e
e
DISTRIBUTION OF
RESOLUTION it 0 {7j-
Da t e . 'P-&,.""J;C ;f .
9~)1- b ~cL~
ORDINA1\lCE it
Council Meeting
Subject
Introduced
Agenda Item It
Was 1t amended?
, Adopted
t;rc:- A.?:Yl /~ ~I ~--n~
~W,l ;
ld~
k-)~-r--
, -,
VOTE: ftfflrnatlve:
NegatIve:
Abstain:
Absent;
DISTRI:aUTIO~;
ORIGINAL to be signed, sealed and filed in Vault.
~IWSPAPER PUBLICATIO~ (Date: )
Department originating staff re;Jort ( *--?lc::z.~)
City Attorney (re~eives ~~~af~Bihi egd~hRuffib~}t~nthp~I~ft)
Agency ment10ned in document or staff report
1
-f
(certifIed?)
1/
Subject file (agenda packet)
Counter file
1,
Others:
Airport
Parking Auth.
AudltoIum
Personnel
BU1lding Dept.
Planning
Police (en-
forcement?)
EnVIron. Servo
FInance
Purchasing
FIre
Recr/Parks
General Servo
Transportat1on
LIbrary
Treasurer
Manager
/
SEND ~ COPIES OF ALL ORDINANCES
TO CODED SYSTEMS Attn Peter ~learie
PROFESSIO~^L 'CEXTERlotal
ROUTE 71
BRIELLE, ~EW JERSEY 08730
Others:
TOTAL COPIES .~
1