HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010/08/17 Item 12
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
~\It- CITYOf
": 1 CHULA VISTA
August 17, 2010, Item~
ITEM TITLE: CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZATION BY CITY
COUNCIL TO SUBMIT TO THE CITY CLERK AN
ARGUMENT, AND REBUTTAL ARGUMENT, IF ANY, IN
SUPPORT OF THE MEASURE RELATING TO THE CITY'S
TELECOMMUNICATIONS USERS' TAX (RESOLUTION
NO. 2010-148) TO BE INCLUDED IN THE SAMPLE
BALLOT FOR THE NOVEMBER 2,20 I 0 ELECTION
SUBMITTED BY: CITY ATTORNEY 4#'
4/5THS VOTE: YES D NO I X I
SUMMARY
On June 8, 2010, the City Council voted to place on the November 2, 2010 election a
measure related to the City's Telecommunications Users' Tax (Resolution No. 2010-
148). The California Elections Code permits the City to submit an argument and rebuttal
argument, if any, in support of the measure. This Agenda item is to authorize the
submittal of an argument and rebuttal argument, if any, in support of the City's
Telecommunications Users' Tax (Resolution 2010-148) and to designate the Mayor
and/or Councilmember(s) to draft and file such arguments.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed actIvIty for
complianee with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined
that the aetivity is not a "Project" as defined under Seetion 15378 of the State CEQA
Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to Section l5060(e)(3) of the Stale CEQA Guidelines the
activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is necessary.
RECOMMENDA nON
It is recommended that City Council take action as it deems appropriate.
PREVIOUS ACTIONS RELATED TO TELECOMMUNICATIONS USERS' TAX
On June 8, 2010 the City Council voted unanimously (5-0) to place on the November 2,
2010 election a measure related to the City's Telecommunications Users' Tax.
(Resolution No. 2010- I 48)
12-1
AUGUST 17, 2010, Item~
Page 2 01'2
DISCUSSION
Elections Code section 9282 authorizes the legislative body, or any member of the
legislative body authorized by that body, to file an argument for or against a City measure.
Elections Code section 9285 permits the tiling of rebuttal arguments. As a result, the
Elections Code pennits the City Council to designate the Mayor and/or Councilmember(s)
to draft and file arguments in support of the measure related to the T elecommlmications
Users' Tax (Resolution 2010-148).
Should more than one argument be submitted to the City Clerk, the Elections Code provides
for a preference and priority to arguments submitted in support of a measure. Under
Elections Code section 9287 the City Clerk shall give preference and priority, in the order
named, to the arguments of the following:
I. The Mayor and/or mcmber(s) of the City Council;
2. The individual voter, or bona tide association of citizens, or combination of voters
and associations, who are the bona fide sponsors or proponents of the measure;
3. Bona fide associations of citizens; and
4. Individual voters who are eligible to vote on the measure.
As a result, if the Council does not authoriie and designate the Mayor and/or member(s) of
the City Council to draft and file an argument in support of the measure, the City Council
will lose the above preference and priority in the filing of the arguments.
The City Clerk has set August 18,2010 as the date by which to tile arguments for or against
the City measure. The City Clerk has further set as August 26, 2010 as the date by which to
file rebuttal arguments.
DECISION MAKER CONFLICT
I
Staff has reviewed the decision contemplated by this action and has determined that it is not
site specific and, consequently, the 500-foot rule found in California Code of Regulations
Section 18704.2(a)(l) is not applicable to this decision.
CURRENT FISCAL IMP ACT
There is no impact to the General Fund associated with this agenda item. Funds to cover the
cost of the November 2, 20 10 election have previously been allocated as part of the fiscal
year 2010-2011 operating budget.
Prepared by: Simon Silva, Deputy City Attorney
12-2