03/12/1980 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Ms. Schue stated she agrees with Mr. Delay's statement regarding the two-thirds Budget Committee vote. She stated all of the "goodies" wi 11 come in the supplemental budget where the voters will have an opportunity to make their wishes known. She felt that the charter amendment should be placed first and the tax base second. Mr. Delay asked if something could be done with the ballot measure titles to make them more clear. He stated the tax base does not make any reference to the charter amendment and wondered whether wording could be incorporated tying the two together. Mr. Henry introduced Orval Etter, City Attorney's office, who said the State statute does not describe the wording but does limit the number of words for a title. The attorney's office was apprehensive about incorporating a condi- tional proposition. They did not want to state that the tax base approval is conditional on the passage of the charter amendment. Councilor Delay indicated he did not want to make it conditional but asked if language could be inserted into the title to state that the tax base would enable the charter amendment to go into effect. Mr. Etter explained that there are wording limits for the various sections of a ballot measure, and in the last statement in the explana- tion, mention is made of the charter amendment. He read the last sentence of the explanation, "In proposing a new base, the Council does not intend to immediately levy taxes to the full amount possible under the new base, but instead intends to be limited by the charter amendment submitted as measure No. 52," or this could be measure No. 51, depending upon the order in which they were placed on the ballot. Mr. Delay felt that this was sufficient. e Mr. Lieuallen asked if what is currently before them is the new tax base, the two-thirds vote on the tax base, majority vote on a supplemental budget, the order of the ballot measures, and the sunset clause which applies to the two- thirds vote at the Budget Committee level. He stated he wanted to include a sunset clause for the two-thirds vote to enable a clear review at the end of the two-year period. He stated he would like to amend the motion so this item could be voted on separately from the rest of the package, as he does not want to appear to be against the rest of the package. Mr. Delay stated he woul d 1 ike discussion prior to the motion as to whether the sunset clause should be included or not. Ms. Schue stated she was becoming confused, especially in reqard to the sunset clause. She stated that her impression was that the charter amendment was to sunset at the end of two years, which now is three years, and now it seems that the sunset applies only to the two-thirds vote, and requested .clarification. Mr. Henry stated that a sunset clause is not included in this memo of March 12. from Orval Etter and that a two-thirds vote woul d al wa.ys be requi red if the sunset clause was not included. Ms. Schue said she felt that changed the intent of what was stated previously in the Budget Committee meeting. They were talking about using the State A maximum to base figures on. She said this would enable the Council to levy whatever they wish, as long as it was approved by two thirds of the Budget Committee. " 3/12/80--11