Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout26-Council Office CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION From: Council member Wendy McCammack Subject: Consideration of reduction in Utility User's Tax rate Dept: Council Office ORIGINAL Date: April 7, 2004 Synopsis of Previous Council Action: July 2001: Council adopts Resolution 2001-239 establishing a formula for the reduction of the utility user's tax April 7, 2004: Ways and Means Committee recommends adoption of a new formula for the reduction of the utility user's tax Recommended motions: A. Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council authorizing enactment of an immediate reduction in the utility user's tax rate and a formula for the reduction of the utility user's tax in subsequent years, and repealing Resolution No. 2001-239 Motion: Adopt resolution B. An Ordinance of the City of San Bernardino amending Chapter 3.44 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code reducing the amount of the Service Users Tax to 7.93 percent. FIRST READING Contact person: Councilmember McCammack Phone: 384-5068 Supporting data attached: Staff report, other materials Ward: All FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: None by this action; UUT reduction will result in loss of $178,200 in General Fund revenue for FY 04/05. Source: (Acc!. No.) (Ace!. Description) Finance: Council Notes: Agenda #J~ sJoj!Jf.J l')i1..6 1I:-1l'\G.- (113 STAFF REPORT Subiect: Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino authorizing enactment of a formula for the reduction of the Utility User's Tax in the city of San Bernardino, and repealing Resolution 2001-239. Backl!round: In January 2001, Mayor Valles and the Ways and Means Committee began discussions concerning the impact of utility rate increases on the City's utility user's tax (OUT) revenues. Over the ensuing months, a number of Ways and Means Committee meetings were held to evaluate options for addressing this issue, including a proposal by the Inland Valley Manufacturer's Council for a utility user's tax rebate program. Information was also obtained from the City of Rancho Cucamonga concerning its utility user's tax rate reduction formula, which was established by resolution in 1995. In May 2001, Mayor Valles proposed that the Ways and Means Committee consider establishing both a UUT rebate program for July and August of 2001, and a formula for reduction of the UUT. On June 26,2001, the Ways and Means Committee recommended that a proposed UUT rate reduction formula be adopted by the Mayor and Council. This formula was generally based on the model used by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. In July 2001, Resolution 2001-239 was adopted to establish this formula. Adoption of this UUT rate reduction formula was the first major step toward the eventual elimination of the City's utility user's tax. As it was originally written, Resolution 2001-239 established an annual cycle for the evaluation of the City's financial condition and the application of the rate reduction formula. In March of each year, growth in major General Fund revenue categories was to be evaluated, and a portion of that growth used to reduce the current UUT rate. Revenues were to be adjusted for anyone-time gains (for example, one-time revenue increases as the result of UUT or sales tax audits). Any rate reduction would then be made by amending the City's UUT ordinance to reflect the new rate effective July 1. While the resolution established this systematic examination of the City's UUT rate, it also provided the Mayor and Council with a mechanism to evaluate the possible rate reduction in light of appropriate financial information, such as state and federal mandates. The UUT rate reduction would not take effect automatically; in any given year, the Mayor and Council may have elected to maintain the current UUT rate. When the calculations outlined in the resolution were made in 2002 and 2003, the Mayor recommended that no rate reduction be enacted. In her memos to the Council, the Mayor cited a number of reasons, including the State's financial uncertainties and the City's own financial condition. If the 2004 calculation were implemented, it would lower the rate to 7.74% and result in a loss of $675,000 to the General Fund. In a year in which the City is facing a significant budget shortfall, it is clear that a new approach is needed that will lower the utility tax rate over time, but in a fiscally responsible manner. Proposed Formula Modffications: As it has been discussed at the Ways and Means Committee, the proposed new resolution would make a number of changes to the utility tax rate reduction formula. These changes are being recommended in order to correct a number of flaws in the existing formula that have now come to light. The following is a summary of the key changes: . In the definitions of revenue indicators, intergovernmental revenues have been added in order to capture any changes in revenues subvented by the State. The previous formula did not take into account State take-aways. . The definitions sections have also been amended to reference the current fiscal year and the previous fiscal year, rather than the years further in the past that were in the original formula. Because the original formula examined revenues from several years past, the formula did not take into account any more recent changes in State revenues or other revenues. . In Section 1, the formula calls for a reduction of the utility tax rate from 8% to 7.93% effective July I, 2004. In a companion item on the April 19 Council agenda, the Council will have the opportunity to have the first reading of the ordinance implementing this tax reduction. . In Section 2, a modified formula is proposed for the calculation of future rate reductions. Beginning in November 2004, the calculation will be made using the current year's budgeted revenues and the prior year's actual revenues. If revenue growth has exceeded expenditure growth by an average of 3.5% over the previous 5 years, the UUT rate will be reduced pursuant to the formula (see Section 2 C (3) of the resolution). No reduction would be made if the City had used borrowing, refinancing, or reserves to balance the budget, since any of those actions would indicate a financial difficulty. . All references to a "possible" rate reduction have been removed. If the thresholds in the new formula are met, the utility tax rate will be reduced. At the April 7 meeting of the Ways and Means Committee, the Committee recommended approval of this resolution and the companion implementing ordinance, subject to final review and possible modification by the Chair. Subsequent to the Committee meeting and upon further review of the draft, several additional changes have been made to the revised formula. These changes include a 3.5% differential between the five-year average between revenues and expenditures; the earlier draft required a 5% differential. Other minor changes in wording have also been included. Financial impact: The reduction in the UUT rate to 7.93% effective July 1, 2004, will result in an estimated loss of $178,200 in utility tax revenues to the General Fund. The future reductions in utility tax revenue will vary from year to year as the rate gradually decreases over time. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and Council adopt the resolution. , corv I ORDINANCE NO. 2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AMENDING CHAPTER 3.44 OF THE SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL CODE REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF 3 SERVICE USERS TAX TO 7.93 PERCENT. 4 THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DO 5 ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: 6 SECTION 1. Subsection A of Section 3.44.030 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code is 7 hereby amended to read as follows: 8 9 10 II 12 13 "A. A tax is imposed upon every person in the City using telephone communication services, including services for intrastate, inter-state, or international calls, and using any teletypewriter exchange services in the Ci~y. The tax imposed by this section shall be at the rate of 7.93 percent (7.93%) of'the charges made for such services and shall be paid by the person paying for such services. Interstate calls shall be deemed to include calls to the District of Columbia." SECTION 2. Subsection B of Section 3.44.040 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "B. The tax imposed in this section shall be at the rate of 7.93 percent (7.93%) 14 and shall be collected from the service user by the person providing the video services. The amount of tax collected in one month shall be remitted to the Director 15 of Finance on or before the twentieth day of the following month." 16 SECTION 3. Subsection A of Section 3.44.050 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code is 17 hereby amended to read as follows: 18 "A. A tax is imposed upon every person in the City using electrical energy in the City. The tax imposed by this section shall be at the rate of 7.93 percent (7.93%) of 19 the charges made for such energy and shall be paid by the person paying for such energy." 20 21 22 SECTION 4. Subsection A of Section 3.44.060 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "A. A tax is imposed upon every person in the City using gas which is delivered 23 through mains or pipes. The tax imposed by this section shall be at the rate of 7.93 percent (7.93%) of the charges made for such gas and shall be paid by the person 24 paying for such gas." 25 SECTION 5. Section 3.44.065 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code is hereby amended 26 to read as follows: 27 28 I ~o, 13 B ~llqloct , I 2 3 4 5 6 III 7 III 8 III 9 III 10 III 11 III 12 III 13 III 14 III 15 III 16 III 17 III 18 III 19 III 20 III 21 III 22 III 23 III 24 III 25 III 26 III 27 28 "The 7.93 percent (7.93%) users tax imposed on telephone communication services pursuant to section 3.44.030, on CATV service pursuant to section 3.44.040, on electrical service pursuant to section 3.44.050, and on gas service pursuant to section 3.44.060 shall be imposed only upon charges made for consumer services. The 7.93 percent (7.93%) users tax shall not be levied upon any state or federal tax, fee or surcharge which is separate from the users service charges. This section is intended to clarify existing law; it does not propose any change in the method of calculation of the utility users tax." SECTION 6. This ordinance shall take effect on July 1,2004. , " , . 2 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 3 4 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AMENDING CHAPTER 3.44 OF THE SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL CODE REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF SERVICE USERS TAX TO 7.93 PERCENT. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance was duly adopted by the Mayor and 5 Common Council of the City of San Bernardino at a meeting thereof, held on the _ day of , 2004, by the following vote. to wit: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT 6 COUNCIL MEMBERS: 7 ESTRADA 8 LONGVILLE 9 MCGINNIS 10 DERRY 11 KELLEY 12 JOHNSON 13 MC CAMMACK 14 15 16 17 .. .....- City Clerk The foregoing Ordinance is hereby approved this _ day of ,2004. JUDITH V ALLES, Mayor City of San Bernardino Approved as to form and legal content: JAMES F. PENMAN City Au rney 'J 3 - 'f,.1~ . ."..,< " _" r.xlU.D1.1: A :'..,F9ROFFICE USE ONLY - NOY.A PUBLlC'DOCUMEHTu./~'- . .,~. .' ~_:'~ -:'~..__~_<~,.,'i,','.,,""'..',-:,' :~~'a:_".~"'".j.;_'::;'.',,, ":.;~:!'~tP.€~F- .. ,_5'.~c~:~'::~;:;.::';'1.:~, '~':.;'~'-r.:'_~~Jk~~~.;t~:'..";-:!:::t;/iR:-' ,'_,',..'?_,.,.;..,....r",,:..,_.'~.,:,'_~'....~,._.:~.::,.'.',:,-~i:;"-~': _. _ ~~.."...... '.' , ,.. ,..~" " ......;~~~.,.... -., ~ " ',_ "','~'~' n:~,-,.,., ,,~~.~~:-,-..:,_ _r!..<,,,;l.;fI';~-'-" -~_,_;,,;- J-,.::,>' '~-,'-v::~$..""''l4;}",,;:;*<::j;-{.:;:' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO :'CIlY CLERK'S OFFICE -~-,-~,~~~'" RECORDS &. INFORMATION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM .";.-,,,.,..; .... .,.~.-, ....~- ;....,,;.. ",.,," .~ .->- Effective Date: AGENDA ITEM TRACKING FORM 5,/~/ 0'( ;11c - 117:3> ?IIi 0 l/ Ayes: ~ 5 ~ s- 7 ~I Abstain: .J;..L Date Sent to Mayor: 5/~/ 0'/ Date of Mayor's Signature: 5' /?,I o~ 0... s.mm.., "''' ~ ~ -kliI4'/ Date .pubIiShed: ~o Meeting Type: _~ Continued Fro~ &. Item No. Item No. Meeting Date/Date Adopled: Resolution/Ordinance No. <"""'-- Ordinance Urgency: Yes T enn i nation/Sunset Date: Nays: Absent: G ~ Vote: Date Returned from Mayor: __~I ~/ Of.{ Date of Clerk's Signature: t::,- / S / 0'1 / I Date Summary Returned from Attorney: S-V-o y Date Seal Impressed: Date Sent for Signature: Expiration Dale: Copies Distributed To: VV Exhibits Complete &. Attached to Resolution/Ordinance: Reminder Letter Sent: Reminder Letter Sent: Reminder Letter Sent Request for Council Action &. Staff Report Attached: Yes Notes: f~~~/~~- c;jC-/nl.( 1.~~ To Whom: J No Ready to File: I fJ~{:1 Date: ~/ ~/ ell( [X)ClJMfNT lOCAT1ON: FODISIAIIfIda .... T.-ddItI Fomt .cc Fornt NG. 111. Lac UoduId: lVD411996