Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout141-96RESOLUTION NO. 141-96 OPPOSING PROPOSITION 218 ON THE NOVEMBER 5, 1996 BALLOT WHEREAS, Proposition 218 is on the state-wide ballot on November 5, 1996; and WHEREAS, Proposition 218, if enacted, would establish new property owner and voter approval requirements for all assessments and fees levied by cities, counties and other local governmental agencies for the stated purpose of limiting local government revenues; and WHEREAS, the Town of Danville has paid for two-third's of its maintenance budget, including parks, facilities, streetlights and roadside landscaping, through a townwide landscape and lighting assessment district; and WHEREAS, passage of Proposition 218 would make this source of revenue less stable and would make long term, rational planning for maintenance more difficult; and WHEREAS, Proposition 218 contains many ambiguous and poorly drafted provisions which will make its implementation more difficult and litigation more likely; and WHEREAS,Proposition 218 is opposed by a number of organizations, including the League of California Cities, the League of Women Voters, the California Police Chiefs Association, the California Fire Chiefs Association and the California Library Association; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, by the Danville Town Council that the Town Council opposes Proposition 218 on the November 5, 1996, ballot because of the Proposition's ambiguities, because of the unworkable balloting procedures required by the Proposition and because of the potential impact on the Town's ability to continue to provide high quality services to its residents. The Town Council urges the voters of Danville to familiarize themselves with the Proposition and its impact on the Town. APPROVED by the Danville Town Council at a Regular Meeting held on October 15, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Greenberg, NOES: Shimansky ABSTAINED: None ABSENT: None Arnerich, Doyle, Waldo , 4 MAYOR APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTESt. CITY CLERK