HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 4.3 Opppose Prop 166 & 167~ ~
CI'I'Y OF DUBLYN
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 28, 1992
SUBJECTa
EXHIBIT3 ATTACHED:
Opposition to Propositions 166 & 167
(Prepaxed by: Bo Barkes, Manaqement Assistant)
io Resolution oppos~ng Pxoposition 166
2e Resolution opposinq Psoposition 167
RECOMMENDATION:~p Au horize the Mayor to sign the resolutions
posing Eropositions 166 and 167 and send them to
commit~ees opposinq these measures.
FINAi~TTCIAL STA~EMENTs The Propositions could have a neqative effect on
the local business and economic development
DESCRIPTION: At the September 14, 1992 City Council Meeting, Staff was
directed to develop resolutions in opposition to Propositions 166 and 167.
These two measures are scheduled to be voted on in the November electione
The League of California Cities has issued a position of °'No Support°' on
the two issueso
Proposition 166
This Proposition is being sponsored by the California Medical Association
(CMA), the lobbying organization for medical doctors in California. The
measure is being touted by its organizers as health care reform.
Proposition 166 will mandate that employers must provide a health care
package for all employees who work 17.5 hours per week or 70 hours per
month by 1997. Employers must pay at least 75% of the premium for these
employees and their dependents.
The arguments against Proposition 166 are compelling.
1. Part-time and seasonal workers, the unemployed and those who are
retired will not receive benefits. Those most in need will not
be covereda
2. The initiative does nothing to control rising physician fees and
other medical costs. Medical costs and insurance premiums will
continue to increasee
3e This Proposition will force small businesses to pay for a system
that is already ill. The measure will cost businesses billions
of dollars each year. The high cost of doing business in
California is already a deterrent for business to be in the
State. Further burdens will only increase the number of
businesses leaving the State or convince businesses not to come
to California in the ~irst place.
4, Jobs will be lost due to these increasing burdens on businesses.
5. The commissions and boards which will oversee the implementation
of the Proposition will be influenced by the same individuals who
benefit from the Proposition, the physicians.
Under the Proposition, part-time employees are classified as those working
17.5 hours per week or 70 hours per month. The measure would have its
greatest impact on the Recreation Department, where a potential of 40 to 50
part-time employees work about 20 hours per week. The impact could
potentially be significant as the City may be required to provide health
benefits to the employees working at least 17s5 hours per week or 70 hours
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
co~zES moa CITY CLERK
y~~ ~°' FILE ~ ~ ~
~
• ~
•
a month. The Proposition could create a severe strain financially and
administratively.
Overall, the Proposition will not only have a major impact on the City's
operations, it would also be detrimental on California's economy through
the increased financial regulations placed on businesse
Proposition 167
This Proposition includes more than a dozen tax increases and changes.
Business and consumers will feel the impact of these tax increases on
personal income, small business taxes, worker's compensation rates,
insurance premiums and property.
Specifically, the tax increases wouldo
1. Increase property taxes on business by reassessing properties at
the change of ownership.
2a Increase Bank and Corporate income taxes by 1%.
3. Impose New Oil Severance Taxes of barrels of oil extracted in
California.
4. Revoke the so called, "Sub-chapter S Status," tax credit on
business.
5. Increase personal income taxes for those making more than
$100,000 per year.
6. Increase Insurance Premium Taxeso
7, Allow Bank deposits and loans to be taxed.
Tax reductions in this Proposition would:
1. Repeal the temporary State sales tax imposed last year from
January 1, 1993 to January l, 1994..
2. Reinstate the sales tax exemptions for snack food, bottled water,
newspapers and magazines.
3. Extend renters credit to all income brackets.
There is no guarantee that any additional tax revenue will remain in the
cities or counties. The Proposition does not earmark the new funds for
specific purposes, allowing the legislature to shift funds back to the
S~ateo
Small businesses already feel the pinch of numerous regulations in
California and this increases the burdens on them. These types of tax
increases are not conducive to generating local sales and business
developmente
The State°s independent legislative analyst states, "This measure would
result in roughly a 20 percent increase in the total amount of income taxes
paid by businesses in California, and a 10 percent to 20 percent increase
in the amount of property taxes imposed on business activities or their
investments in neca plant and equipment in California. Business may find,
for example, that they would be more profitable operating in nearby states
that have lower business taxes. To the extent that this occurs, this
measure woulc~ reduce the future growtn in tax revenues.QO
The Proposition is not in the best interests of the City of Dublin, as it
will deter business and economic development.
Recommendation
Authorize the Mayor to sign the resolutions opposing Propositions 166 and
167 and direct Staff to forward them to committees opposing these measures.
BB asPRP167,bo#2
•
RESOLIITION NO. - 92
~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COIINCIL
OF THE CITY OF DIIBY~IN
OPPOSING PROPOSITION 166
WHEREAS, the current health care system is in need of reform;
and
WHEREAS, the sole sponsor of Proposition 166, the California
Medical Association, has designed a health care reform which actually
only benefits doctors; and
WHERE~i~, the proposition does nothing to control the major
problem of spiralling health care costs; and
WHEREAB, small businesses will be forced to pay for a system
that is already ill; and
WHEREAS, the high cost of doing business in the State of
California is already a deterrent for businesses to locate here; and
WHEREA~, real reform to the health care system needs to be
accomplished through other methods; and
WHEREAB, Proposition 166 will be detrimental to and will hurt
California's economyo
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLV D that the City Council of the City
of Dublin opposes Proposition~ I~~
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of September, 1992.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINo
ATTEST:
Mayor
City Clerk
~XNI~I~' ~
~
i
RESOLUTION NOe - 92
•
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COIINCII~
OF THE CITY OF DIIBLIN
OPPOSING PROPOSITION 167
WHEREAS, the current economic times have resulted in high
unemployment and an uncertain future for working Californians; and
WHEREAS, the State should be doing everything possible to
encourage employers to stay in California, not giving them more
reasons to eliminate jobs or leave; and
WIiEREAB, Proposition 167 includes more than a dozen separate tax
increases - including property taxes, personal income taxes, taxes on
smal~ businesses and insurance premiums; and
WgiEREAS, it would drive more businesses and jobs out of
California potentially costing over 100,000 jobs; and
WHEREAB, it would result in a host of unwanted consumer price
increases, including insurance premiums, residential and office rents,
gasoline prices, utility bills, banking costs; and
WHEREAS, the initiative does not earmark these new funds which
would therefore allow the State to divert the funds for their
purposes; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 167 would cause damage to California's
economic livelihood.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City
of Dublin opposes Proposition 167.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of September, 1992
AYESe
NOESs
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Mayor
City Clerk
EXNIB~' ~