HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdoption of Tax Rate 1994/95 - Res. 6626 - Approval of Draft REQUEST_ OR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL
19_L
DATE: August 15, 1994
c ry c oi-
SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
SUBMITTED BY: MICHAEL T. UBERUAGA, City Administrator4VOW4
PREPARED BY: ROBERT J. FRANZ, Deputy City Administrator */
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF TAX RATE FOR 1994/95
Consistent with Council Policy: [ ✓ ] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception
Azioe&G A(p
Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments
STATEMENT OF ISSUE: The City Charter states that " There shall be levied. . ., if no other
provision for payment thereof is made,. . .a tax sufficient to meet all obligations of the City
for the retirement system in which the City participates, due and unpaid or to become due
during the ensuing fiscal year."
The 1994/95 proposed budget includes estimated revenue of $6,250,000 from a
continuation of this tax to fund 67% of the retirement costs of the City. The balance of the
retirement costs are proposed to be paid from other City revenues.
RECOMMENDATION:
A. Adopt Resolution 6`266 setting the tax rate for Charter approved indebtedness.
B. That the Council approve the final form of the draft letter to the Auditor Controller which
is attachment#9 and authorize the Mayor to sign.
ANALYSIS: Article 13-A of the California Constitution allows cities to levy property taxes for
voter-approved indebtedness. In past years, the City levied two rates, one for bonded
indebtedness and one which pays for a portion of Charter approved employee retirement
costs. For 1994/95 there will be sufficient funds in the 1970 Park Bond Fund to pay all of
the remaining debt service on these bonds. Therefore, no additional levy will be required
this year or in future years for the 1970 bonds. The only levy required by the Charter in
1994/95 is for employee retirement indebtedness costs. This levy (maximum) is limited to
the amount levied in 1983/84. In our case, the levy has not changed since 1983/84. The
levy currently covers about 67% of the City's estimated retirement costs for 1994/95. During
the past three fiscal years the property tax share for the City has been reduced from 19.50
on each dollar to 14.50 on the basic tax levy. This has resulted in a loss of approximately
$5.3 million of property tax to the City of Huntington Beach. This is a 26% reduction in the
property tax revenues.
Attachment 6
Property Taxes and Assessments -
Additions to Basic Levy
------------------------------------------------
Placentia
Laguna Beach
Tustin
San Clemente
----------------------
Yorba Linda
---------------------
Stanton
------------------------------
Irvine
Bre EM
a
\w\ -----------------------------
San Juan Capistrano
. ..��. Cypress
Garden Grove
La Palma
Huntington Beach Hu n ing o Beach
.... . ...........................
Orange
Costa Mesa
:>'•< `• k Anaheim
{ Westminster
Los Alamitos
Seal Beach
Santa Ana
Newport Beach
Villa Park
Fountain Valley
La Habra
Fullerton
Buena Park
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
1993/94 Additional Levy as a % of Total Property Tax Bills
All Orange County Cities except those incorporated since Proposition 13 (1978)
Iiff� CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION
HUNTINGTON BEACH
TO: MICHAEL T. UBERUAGA, City Administrator
FROM: ROBERT J. FRANZ, Deputy City Administrator
SUBJECT: ALTERNATIVES - TAX RATE LEVY FOR EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT
COSTS
DATE: AUGUST 4, 1994
The current property tax levy to pay for employee retirement indebtedness costs
generates $6,250,000 (estimated) for 1994/95. If this levy were phased out over a
period of ten or twenty years, the reduction to General Fund revenue would be
$625,000 per year reduction for a ten year phase out, or $312,500 reduction per year
for a twenty year phase out. These 'annual reductions are based on the current
assessed valuation.
The impact of such an action to phase out the property tax rate would be to reduce
General Fund revenues. The revenue reduction could be dealt with by reducing
expenses, increasing other revenues, or by use of General Fund reserves. If expense
reductions through reducing services to the community were the method selected, a
ten year phase out is the equivalent of reducing city staffing by 7-8 full time positions
per year. A twenty year phase out is the equivalent of a reduction of about 3-4
positions per year. In either case, the total reduction in terms of reducing the number
of full time positions would be to reduce the General Fund workforce by about
seventy-five positions.
The presentation made to the City Council on August 2, 1994 identified how the staff
would propose to reduce services if the reductions were to occur through service level
reductions. A copy of the total reduction by department and the estimated impact on
services is attached. The primary caution on reviewing these potential reductions are
that the reductions were prepared by departments on a short time frame of two to three
days and were done on a equal percentage reduction for each city department.
We have not attempted at this point, to determine how reductions would be
implemented over a ten or twenty year phased period of time. The best information we
have is the attached description of program reductions . We would need to work with
departments and City Council to develop a multi-year phased reduction.
The staff believes that there will be continued.pressure from the community for new or
expanded programs such as police services, senior citizen program staffing, pier
liaison, day care programs, arts/cultural programs and others. Therefore it is very
ALTERNATIVES - TAX RATE LEVY
FOR EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT COSTS
difficult to present a 10 or 20 year program of reductions that is realistic. Priorities
would need to be set and some lower priority programs would be eliminated or phased
out.
4OB J.
Deputy ity�IkANZ
dministr or
RJF:skd
Attachment
0005007.01 -2- 08/04/94 1:44 PM
Attachment
Alternatives if Property Tax
Levy is Phased Out
.:. ♦ Expense Reductions:
" k'" ♦ Salary/Benefit Reductions (Following
requirements of State Law-MMBA)
♦ Service Reductions
♦ Revenue Increases:
♦ New or Increased Fees
♦ New or Increased Taxes
♦ Use Reserves (One-time Funding Source)
♦ Combination of Above Actions
Slide 1
$6,250,000 Service Reduction
Option A - Including Police/Fire
City Council $16,135
City Attorney 92,143
City Clerk 31,752
"' ''''"' City Treasurer 47,947
Administration 63,498
Administrative Services 274,470
Community Development 228,628
.:? Fire Department 1,037,654
.
Police Department 2,061,287
Community Services 444,242
Library 204,463
Public Works 1,017,820
Non-Departmental 729,960
TOTAL $6,250,000
Slide 2
Attachment
Impact of Service Reductions
Option A
Af<r ::.:>., ♦ Police Department $2 061 287
♦ Eliminations:
♦23.5 Full Time Positions
as
♦ Helicopter Service
« »» ♦Crime Lab
♦ Neighborhood/Business Watch
♦Dare Program
♦ Program Reductions:
♦Gangs, Training, Narcotics,Vice
Slide 3
Impact of Service Reductions
Option A
r"" ' ♦ Fire Department $1,037,654
r..:i:i'ii:...i~�l)
_.�....:_x<
'ti'"` '` ` ♦ Alternative 1:
•Eliminate HAZMAT
♦Eliminate Fire Prevention
<« `«<` ♦ 10 Safety &4 Non Safety Positions
,r f f ♦ Alternative 2:
♦Eliminate one HAZMAT Engine
♦ Eliminate 3 Battalion Chief Aide Positions
♦ 12 Safety Positions
Slide 4
Attachment
Impact of Service Reductions
Option A
♦ Public Works $1,017,820
`` ♦ Eliminate 12 Full Time Positions
♦ Delays in Inspections
♦ Eliminate Park Lighting Maintenance-31 Parks
♦ Reduce Street Patching and Cleaning
♦ Reduce Beach Parking Lot Maintenance
4 ♦ Remove(vs. replace) broken Playground Equipment
♦ No Replacement of Street Trees
♦ Lengthen Maintenance Cycles/Reduce Maintenance:
• Parks, Medians, Lights,Vehicles, Buildings
Slide 5
Impact of Service Reductions
Option A
>. ♦ Community Services $444,252
♦Eliminate 10 Full Time Positions
♦Eliminate Cultural Services Division
♦ Reduce Sr. Outreach Program
w t{mot;:0: ♦ Library $204,463
;:%%f
♦Eliminate 2 Full Time Positions
♦Close 2 Branch Libraries
♦ Reduce Book Budget
Slide 6
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
ADOPTION'OF TAX RATE FOR 1994/95
.......... ......... ............ .......... ........ - .............---........................
........ ........._ ......... ... ... - __............__....._.... ... .....-
.... ....... .... ......... .........._.... .. ........ .... . ........ .... ....... ...............
1993/94 Actual 1994/95 Recommended
x T Revenue Rat Revenue............e.R. ................ .......
..a T a ............ ..... ......... ........ ..............
.
....... . ...... . . .... .... ......... . ...... . ............
....... . . ....... ....... .._.............. ....... . ._. ._........_
.... _ ..... .. .....-
........... .................._........................-.......... .........._. ...................................
.......... ....... ......_.............—.............- ..... .................. _...............................................................1970 Park Bond 0.0039% $ 536,861 0 0
Retired Indebtedness 0.0493% $ 6,254,330 0.0493% $ 6,250,000
Totals 0.0532% $ 6,791,191 0.0493% $ 6,250,000
*Rate expressed as a percentage of Assessed Value.
FUNDING SOURCE: The revenue generated from the recommended levy is $6,250,000 of
the General Fund estimated revenue of $94,256,887 for fiscal year 1994/95.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS (See attached memorandum providing additional information on
alternatives):
1. Do not levy a tax to fund retirement indebtedness costs. The revenue loss would
be over $6 million in revenue in the General Fund for 1994/95.
2. Levy an amount less than the recommended levy.
Note: To be consistent with Charter requirements, alternative 1 or 2 can be selected
only if the City makes ". . .other provisions for payment. . ." of the obligations for
employee retirement costs. The proposed budget for 1994/95 makes no
provision for payment of these obligations other than use of the $6,250,000
estimated revenue from a continuation of this proposed levy. Therefore, if either
Alternative 1 or 2 is selected , action needs to be taken to determine how to
make provision to pay the City's retirement costs in 1994/95 and future years.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution
2. Typical Property Tax Bill
3. Tax Rate/Levy History
4. Retirement Tax Levies - California Cities
5. Orange County Cities - Levies/Assessments
6. Chart - Tax Levies and Assessments
7. Charter Sections 606 and 607
8. Alternatives
0004746.01 -2- 08/08/94 8:26 AM
REQUEt FOR CITY COUNCIL. ACTION
ADOPTION OF TAX RATE FOR 1994/95
9. Proposed letter to the Auditor Controller requesting that the language on the
property tax bill be changed
0004746.01 -3- 08/08/94 8:26 AM
RESOLUTION NO. 6626
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH FIXING THE FISCAL
YEAR 1994/1995 TAX RATE
WHEREAS, the City of Huntington Beach will be receiving a pro-rata portion of the one
dollar($1.00) Basic Property Tax Rate levied by the County Board of Supervisors as a means
of providing revenue for the operation and support of various city departments, offices and
activities; and
The tax rate herein is levied pursuant to Section 93 of the Revenue and Taxation Code
for the purpose of paying voter approved indebtedness of the City of Huntington Beach;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Huntington
Beach that the rate of taxation for said city for fiscal year 1994/95 be fixed at zero and
.04930/100ths dollars ($.04930) per$100 of assessed property value in said city. The said
rate shall be applied as employee retirement costs.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a
regular meeting held thereof on the 15th ay of august , 1994.
Mayor
ATT T:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Clerk
City Attorney 2a/�
REVIEWED AND APPROVED 7-Ze -It"-1
c� E ,
City Adfffinistrator
ector o istra ve Servic
3/maxrate/7/20/94
Res. No. 6626
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss:
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH )
I, CONNIE BROCKWAY, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of
the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said
City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of
the City of Huntington Beach is seven;that the foregoing resolution was passed
and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said
City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 15th day of August.1994, by
the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers:
Bauer, Robitaille, Winchell, Leipzig
NOES; Councilmembers:
Moulton-Patterson, Sullivan
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
Silva
City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk
of the City Council of the City
of Huntington Beach, California
Attachment 2
Background: A separate property tax levy for retirement indebtedness was authorized by City voters
in 1966. The tax levy pays for a portion of the City's retirement costs. 70% of the costs were covered
in Fiscal Year 1977/78. 42 to 68% of the costs have been covered by the levy in the years since
1977/78.
Huntington Beach Property Tax Levy - Retirement Indebtedness
1977/78 - 1994/95
Tax Levy Property Tax Refirement Revenue as
Fiscal Year Per$100 A V Revenue Costs °lo of.Cost
1977/78 0.16610 $1,418,858 $2,026,098 70.0%
1978/79 0.13650 1,135,385 2,509,196 45.2%
1979/80 0.14330 1,338,341 3,193,121 41.9%
1980/81 0.14330 1,607,826 3,584,726 44.9%
1981/82* 0.03729 1,978,715 4,028,308 49.1%
1982/83 0.04930 2,792,077 4,329,797 64.5%
1983/84 0.04930 2,994,942 4,543,000 65.9%
1984/85 0.04930 3,299,596 6,870,908 48.0%
1985/86 0.04930 3,440,683 6,911,625 49.8%
1986/87 0.04930 3,773,584 7,097,000 53.2%
1987/88 0.04930 3,929,922 7,134,000 55.1%
1988/89 0.04930 4,592,276 6,817,910 67.4%
1989/90 0.04930 4,867,552 7,375,289 66.0%
1990/91 0.04930 5,230,891 8,162,283 64.1%
1991/92** 0.04930 6,116,356 8,949,277 68.3%
1992/93 0.04930 6,118,857 9,833,755 62.2%
1993/94(est) 0.04930 6,254,330 9,745,290 64.2%
1994/95 (proposed) 0.04930 6,250,000 9,300,000 67.2%
* Rates were reduced in 1981/82 due to the County changing Assessed
Value to equal 100% of market value. Prior to 1981/82 Assessed Value
was set at 25% of market value.
** Revenue prior to 1991/92 excludes delinquent payments, interest,
and miscellaneous revenue categories.
RETRMT.XLW 8/4/94
Attachment 3
Typical Property Tax Bill
Huntington Beach Homeowner
Assumptions:
Tax Rate Area: 04-007
Assessed Value $197,184
Homeowners Exemption $7,000
Net Taxable Value $190,184
Amounts Levied By Taxing Agencies:
Recommended Action
AGENCY 1993/94 LEVY 1994/95
........X..........X.........................
.................................................................................................-........X....
..'..:
...............
E......s......t.........i.m.......a......t..
..e......s
......................................... a .
Amount ft. . . Amount A. T.
..
..
N
........ O
............
..........................................
..........................................a . ............
..... .......
.. ... ... ...
.......................................
Basic 1.00% Levy $1,901.84 .................... $1,901.84 2.1542
X.,....................................
............................... .................... .........
.......................................... .....................................
......................................... .............................................................................. ..........................................
................................. ..........................................
.......................................... . ................................
......................................
........................................
...................
.. .....................................
..................
City Indebtedness: .................. .........
........... ......................................... ...................................
..... .......................
..................................... ....................
....... .....................
..........................................
..... ..........
................
.7
Retirement Indebtedness(0.0493Yo) 93.76 93.76 .... ..'9
.. ............................. ...........................
........................................ .................................................................. ....................
... ......................................... . ... ..................... "...........................
1970 Park Bonds(0.0039Yo) 7.42 0.00
.............
....... .........................
Total 101.18 ......0.
...........................
...............
93.76 .... ..........
...................................................... ... ................................
.................... ....... .......... ............... ..%
......................................... . . ......................
.....................................
...............................
.......................................... . ................................
......................................... ........................................
.......................................... .........................................
......................................... ............................... -
.......................................... ..........................................
..... .............
... .... .........
............
................
................. .........
........... .........
0:
.................Ocean View School District-Building Aid 80.26 80.26
........... .........................
...............
......................................... ..................... .........
......................................... .................................................................................... .....................
......................................... ............................................................... ....................
......................................... .................
.......................................... ...............
.................................................%
...............
............
................. ......................... X
....... ..........................
................. .......................... .
Orange County Sanitation District Fees 60.37 60.37
.... ......... .....
.......................................... .....................
................ .........
....................................... .................................................................. .. ..............
q ....... ...... ...................
d....
...........
.................. .......
M W D: Water . .............
.0 St andb y Charge 10.08 ............. ........................ 10.08
..................... . ............. ..........
... ................................... .......................................
........................................
.......................... ..
........................................ ............. ................................................
.......................... .......................
.....................................
........................
16.92
................ :::::: ... ....
........................ OX,
...... .........%.......
............................
M W D: Other 16.92 0
.........................................
.. .............................................................................
.......................
...... ......................
. ..................
.........................
. ...................
...................
0.,..................
.0.................:Vector Control Assessment 3.18 3.18 0.0............................................ .........
.................... .................. .........
.......................................... ........
........................................ .........
.......................................... .........
........................... ........... .......
........................................... ........
.. .......................... .......
.......... ............................. .................I............................... .......
a.......
.......................
.... ... ...
0.
High School-Building Aid 1.41 1.41
................................................................................... ........
........................................ .......................... ....................... .......
............................. .........
.............
.........................
.... ........
................................
..... ...... ....
.................X
Flood Control Bonds 1.29 ..... 1.29 .................. ......
.................X...... ............
.............................
........ ............................... ..... ......................
..........................................
...........................................
....... .............................. ...........
.......................................... ................
......................................... ......
............. ..................................................... ........... ....
..... ................. ............. .. ....
..............
.......................
County Improvement Bonds 0.25 0.25 ....... .......
............................0 ............%.................
..............
................................ ...........
.... .
.............
................ ......... ...
....................
........... ........................ .......................... . .......
........ ............
......................................... ...................... ........................................................ .........................................
......................................... ....
....... ......................................... ....
$2,176.78 $386.45 $2,169.36 $379.03
RETRMT.XLW 8/4/94
Attachment 4
California Cities Having a Property Tax Levy for Retirement Indebtedness
Albany Monrovia
Oakland Montebello
Richmond Monterey Park
Coalinga Redondo Beach
Fresno San Fernando
Eureka San Gabriel
Alhambra South Pasadena
Bell Whittier
Beverly Hills Fairfax
Burbank San Anselmo
Compton Huntington Beach
Culver City Riverside
El Monte Sacramento
El Segundo Rialto
Glendora La Mesa
Huntington Park Stockton
Inglewood Santa Barbara
Long Beach Watsonville
Los Angeles Cloverdale
Lynwood Santa Rosa
Manhattan Beach Oxnard
Maywood
Source: State Controller's Office publication: Ad Valorem Property Tax Rates Levied in
Excess of the 1% Tax Rate Limitation -Fiscal years 1985/86- 1987/88
(No longer published)
taxret.doc 08/04/94
Attachment 5
Property Tax Levies in addition to the 1% Basic Levy (1993/94)
Orange County Cities
Background: Proposition 13 limits property tax levies to 1%of Assessed Value,with some exceptions. The 1%Basic Levy is shared by
all pre-Proposition 13 taxing agencies,primarily cities, counties,and school districts. The City of Huntington Beach receives 14.8%of
the basic levy. In addition,cities can levy taxes above the 1%levy,or levy assessments on property,by following procedures outlined in
State law. Following is a chart listing taxes and assessments levied by Orange County cities in 1993/94. (Does not include taxes or
ssessments levied by and paid to the county, school,orspecial districts.)
Taxes Assessments
Cities listed from high to low in terms of
amount of levies and assessments above 1%
m N basic levy per $100 Assessed Valuation.
w o m c A.
d V ° a m c
E ° to rt
cityE.
" ° '� m °f m m m ° Annual Revenue Per $100 A.V. Per Capita
Cc m a 3 Cc _, L) m o P
Placentia OF i € '. _€ _ i S.4,543,155 0.238 $108.61
Laguna Beach >h € jlc jlc 7.. 80,198 0.233 $300.01
...................._.........,........., _.. ...............
Tustin ._ 6,523,255 0.221 $1 19.17
.. .. .....:........
San Clemente jlc _ s jlt 5,295,360 0.142 $125.59
Yorba Linda Mc 4 615;800 0.134 $88.14
........,...................:.......... :...................s.. r........:.........4........:...
Stanton € �C 1,054,.828. 0.121 $33.65
.........:.........e.................., ,........
Mission Viejo ? I .e.. _;........ 6,393568. 0.108 $84.68
...................:..
Irvine ; .;. 14 225 349 0.102 $138.90
:.................:.................. .... ...
Laguna-Niguel i ' 4785681 0.093 $70.65
.................... ,............................;.........;.........;......... .... ... ... .... .
o... ....:.... ...;... ...
Brea [ i '•. 1 404 606 0.087 $41.87
.........:.........:.........;..........
San Juan Capistrano i jlc 1,689,853 0.078 $62.35
Laguna Hills - 1,667,353 0.074 $72.69
Cypress ? 1,728,351> 0.074 $39.09
,.........:.........;........
..:.........
Garden Grove € * i € jlc : 3,211,003_ 0.069 $21.69
.........:...................;.........a .:...........
La Palma ;:::454 580: 0.064 $29.55
.............................,........., ,.........;...................i.........;.........i.........
Huntington Beach I € "6 371,9.53. 0.056 $33.25
:..................._........„.........;
Orange I € _ 2 80T 1,92: 0.045 $24.90
Lake Forest >h 1 351'698.. 0.039 $23.31
>.............................,........., ,.........:...................:............................................................,.......... .::.........--.--.. ..,...............
Costa Mesa : : jlc >k 1 834,256: 0.029 $18.61
Anaheim 39988: 0.025 $12.80 3
Westiminster551,810 0.020 $6.90
Los Alamitos 109 184 0.015 $8.96
Seal Beach : : '. 139,937 0.008 $5.58
..............................,.........<
Dana Point �t € 272,Z14` 0.008 $8.53
Santa Ana : -0... _..........., 39.56..25 0.005 $1.30
Newport Beach : € _ 262 936 0.002 $3.71
Villa Park :>: 7,;176, 0.001 $1.13
.........:............................,
Buena Park .,....... .... .. 12 457 0.000 $0.18
..................._.........;........... ..........,.........;.........;.........
Fullerton € : : : : : : : 9,537 0.000 $0.08
La Habra 3,482` 0.000 $0.07
>.............................,........., ,......
Fountain Valley 0. 0.000 S0.00
.................... ....................:....................:........................... _.
Average 0.068 $47.93
Huntington Beach compared to Average -17% -31%
Note : Revenue is for Secured Tax levy only, which represents 90% of the total Property tax levy, on the average.
RETRMT.XLW 8/4/94
Attachment
Impact of Service Reductions
Option A
♦ Community Development $269 748
♦Eliminate 4 Full Time Positions
♦Sr. Planner, Code Enforcement, Plan
Checker, Chief Inspector
`` - ♦ Administration $63,498
♦ Transfer 1/2 Position to Air Quality
♦Eliminate all Temporary Employees
♦ Reduce Contracts,Conferences,Training
Slide 7
Impact of Service Reductions
Option A
>, k:,,, ♦ Administrative Services $274,470
♦ Eliminate 5 Full Time Positions
•Accounting (2)
♦Real Estate (1)
• Information Systems (2)
, ♦ Non Departmental $729,960
♦ Eliminate Conference Bureau Expense
♦ Water Fund Pay for City Water Usage
♦ Reduce Electrical Consumption
Slide 8
Attachment
Impact of Service Reductions
Option A
k.,:::..:..:..:..:,. City Treasurer $47,947
♦Eliminate one Full Time and all
Temporaries
♦ Revenue Losses
♦Limit Business Hours/Phone Responses
♦ Reduced Recordkeeping
Slide 9
Impact of Service Reductions
Option A
< ` <` `>` ♦ City Council $16,135
"'"""''' ♦ Dues, Memberships, Travel/conferences,
or Compensation (Committee would
Review)
`'' ♦ City Attorney $92143
gut%f.:f•<:;•.
♦Eliminate One Attorney
♦ City Clerk $31,752
Slide 10
• MAYOR
) city
Linda Moulton-Patterson
of Huntington $each
MAYOR PRO TEMPORE
P. O. BOX 190 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 Earle Robitaille
COUNCILMEMBERS
Ralph Bauer
Victor Leipzig
August 5, 1994 Jim Silva
Dave Sullivan
Neil Gruber Grace Winchell
Auditor Controller
COUNTY OF ORANGE
P. O. Box 567
Santa Ana, California 92702-0567
Dear Mr. Gruber:
The City of Huntington Beach would like to request that its property tax for
retirement indebtedness be listed differently on the tax bills that are sent to
Huntington Beach property owners.
In the past, the property tax bills have listed " City Debt" as the description of
the city's tax which has been levied in past years for both for bond indebtedness
and employee retirement costs. Beginning in 1994/95, we will no longer be
levying a tax for bond indebtedness since the bonds will be retired.
The remaining tax levy that the city can adopt this year and in future years is for
employee retirement indebtedness authorized by city charter provisions that
require such a tax to pay for employee retirement costs. As you know, the
Carmen v. Alvord case confirmed the authority of cities, under Proposition 13, to
levy this type of tax for retirement indebtedness.
A more accurate description of the city tax levy would be " City Retirement
Costs" . The city hereby requests that the listing on the tax bills be changed to
this language. Please let us know if anything further is needed from the city in
this regard.
Sincerely,
LINDA MOULTON-PATTERSON
Mayor
DRUG USE 0005031.01 08/08/94 4:41 PM
Is
TELEPHONE (714) 536-5553