My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2F Business 2008 0728
CityHall
>
City Clerk
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2008
>
Packet 2008 0728
>
2F Business 2008 0728
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/25/2008 9:11:06 AM
Creation date
7/25/2008 9:11:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CM City Clerk-City Council
CM City Clerk-City Council - Document Type
Staff Report
Document Date (6)
7/28/2008
Retention
PERM
Document Relationships
_CC Agenda 2008 0728
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Agenda Packets\2008\Packet 2008 0728
Reso 2008-097
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Resolutions\2008
Reso 2008-098
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Resolutions\2008
Reso 2008-099
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Resolutions\2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
72
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Emergency Communication System Access Fee -July 21, 2008 <br />BACKGROUND <br />Originally adopted by City Council in 2004, the City's 911 Fee ordinance charges a fee to <br />support the operation of the City's 911 communication system. The fees for fiscal year 2008-09 <br />are $2.06 per single access line, $14.41 per trunk line and $50.44 per super trunk line, per month. <br />Revenues generated by the 911 Fee on an annual basis total approximately $2.5 million. The <br />911 Fee was amended once since its introduction in 2004 and increased 2.9% on July 1, 2006. <br />This revenue source is, however, at risk due to technological changes over the years in the <br />telecommunication industry and ongoing legal challenges to the 911 Fee. More specifically, <br />certain types of modern and expanding telephony may not be taxed due to outdated definitions <br />contained in the current ordinance. Additionally, there is pending litigation against other <br />California cities, with similar 911 Fees, asserting that the 911 Fee is a "tax" as defined by <br />Proposition 218 and not a user fee. If this litigation is successful then existing "fees" would be <br />invalidated, including San Leandro's 911 Fee. <br />Legal Issues <br />Many California cities, including San Leandro, are of the opinion that the 911 fee is a user fee <br />and can be authorized by the City Council. In April of this year, the Court of Appeal upheld a <br />trial court decision that the City of Union City's 911 Fee was in fact a "special tax" and as such <br />was void because it was enacted without a vote of the electorate pursuant to Proposition 218. <br />This case is now being appealed to the California Supreme Court. If the case is heard by the <br />Supreme Court and the lower court's decision is overturned, then San Leandro's 911 Fee will not <br />be impacted. However, should the case not be heard, or the lower courts are upheld, then the <br />City will lose this revenue source. <br />911 Services are Critical to Public Safety and Welfare <br />The City's 911 communication system directs critical police, fire and medical resources to calls <br />for emergency services. The City's 911 program provides equipment, software, facilities and <br />personnel staffing to operate an important and needed public service. In order to ensure and <br />provide for the continued improvement of this service the City enacted an Emergency <br />Communications System Access Fee Ordinance in 2004. The funds raised by the fee are <br />restricted to the 911 program and cannot be used for other government services. As noted above, <br />this funding source is now at risk of being lost. Should this occur, it will be necessary to reduce <br />or eliminate other services in order to continue funding for the 911 program. <br />A Potential Solution <br />Given the legal challenges to the 911 Fee and the need to modernize the current ordinance, as <br />noted earlier, staff believes it appropriate to place the question before the voters. More <br />specifically, staff is recommending that an Emergency Communication System Access Tax <br />Ordinance be placed before the voters at the upcoming November 4, general election. Since the <br />tax is restricted as to its use, the tax would be a special tax and would require a 2/3 favorable <br />vote for adoption. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.