Loading...
Item 19 - Support for Prop A - San Diego County Regional Justice Facilities FinancingAGENDA REPORT CITY OF POWAY T0: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FRii'4: Councilmember Mary Shepardson DATE: September 30, 1986 SUBJECT:: Support For Proposition A - San Diego County Regional Justice Facilities Financing BACMGROUND State legislation has authorized the County of San Diego to place Proposition A on the November 4, 1986 ballot. Proposition A imposes a one-half of one percent (l/2) sales tax on County-widetransactions for the financing of regional justice facilities and increasing the constitutional appropriation limit for San Diego County. priNcerz The major elements of Proposition A are as follows: 1 Impose a 1/2 percent sales tax in the County of San Diego for a period not to exceed five years. . Requires the proceeds of the tax to be deposited into the San Diego County Regional Justice Facilities Fund. Limitsthe use of the proceeds of the tax to activities relating to the financing of regional justice facilities. Requires that rhe proceeds of the tax can be used to finance regional justice facilities after the Board of Supervisors has developed a plan and only after State and. Federal funds received for such purposes have first been expended in accordance with the plan. ACTION: SEP 30 1 :6 ITEM 19 Staff Report September 30, 1986 page 2 Increases the County appropriation limit in an amount equal to the tax to be collected. This proposition will become effective only if approved by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the electors voting on November 4, 1986. Attached for your review is a copy of the Proposition and County Counsel's impartial analysis. RECCMMENDATIorr It is recommended that. the City Council adopt the attached resolution supporting Proposition A on the November 1986 ballot.: 14S:% Attachments: Resolution County Counsel's analysis SEP 3Q 1986 ITEM 19 RESOLUTION NO. 86- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POWAY, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING PROPOSITION A JUSTICE FACILITIES FINANCING ON ' THE; NOST.IBER. 1986 BALLOT WHEREAS, more than 2,000 criminals are arrested and then turned loose each month because our jails are overcrowdedand the Courts backlogged; and WHEREAS, money invested in a speedier court system would save both detention costs and improve our justice system; and WHEREAS, Proposition A would add a half -cent to our sales tax for only five years and raise $400 million to build additional jails and courts; and WHEREAS,- the citizens of San Diego County have asked for more police, tougher judges, stricter laws, and stiffer penalties; and WHEREAS, without the revenues from Proposition A, the County cannot give the police, deputy sheriffs, and judges the tools they need to do their jobs. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council does hereby support Proposition A on the November, 1986 ballot and urges our residents to vote for, Proposition A. PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED, by the City Council of the City of Poway,, California, at a regular meeting thereof this 30th day of September, 1986. f i 0 Marjorie K. Wahlsten, City Clerk Carl R. Kruse, Mayor SEP 3 0 1986 ITEM 19 ;d COU14 V:..i SAID DIEGO = Proposition A (This proposition will appear on the ballot in the following form.) A SAN DIEGO COUNTY REGIONAL JUSTICE FACILITIES ~ FINANCING ORDINANCE AND AN INCREASE IN THE APPROPRIATION LIMIT OF THE COUNrf Or SAN DIEGO. Shah approval be given to (1) an ordinance of the County of San Diego imposing a one-half of one: percent transactions and use tax for a term Rem not to exceed five years to be used solely for the purposes' of improving, ; t expanding, constructing or acquiring sites for regional justice facilities to SEP 2 21986. the extent state or federal funds are not made, available to the County of San Diego specifically for such purposes, and (2) an increase in the ire appropriation limit of the County of San Diego in the amount equal to the cr$ I "Tanatfluat J amount of such tanto be collected?' ORDINANCE NO (NEW SERIES) AN ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 1.5 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 22.150) TO DIVISION 2 OF THE SAN' DIEGO COUNTY CODE OF REGULATORY ORDINANCES RELATING TO THE FINANCING OF REGIONAL JUSTICE. FACIUTIES, IMPOSING A COUNTYWIDE TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX, AND INCREASING THE COUNTY CONSTITUTIONALAPPROPRIATIONS LIMIT The Board of Supervisors of the County of Sart Diego ordains as follows: Section 1. Chapter 1.5 (commencing with section 22.150) is hereby added to the County Code of Regulatory Ordinances to read as follows: CHAPTER 1.5 . SAN DIEGO COINW REGiVNAL JUSTICE FACILITIES FINANCING ORDINANCE Sec. 22.150. PURPOSE. AND INTENT. The County of San Diego as,a regional government is required to provide justice facilities such as courts and jails for all the people of the County of 'San Diego in order to promote their health, safety and welfare. The purposes of this ordinance are to impose a one-half of one percent (1/2%} countywide retail transactions and use tax, limit the collection- of such tax: to the, absence of state or federal funding for the same purposes, establish the duration of such tax, and increase the constitutional appropriations limit for the County of San Diego. T Sec. 22.151. COUNTYWIDE TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX: (a) in addition to any other taxes authorized by law, on the operative date of this ordinance there is hereby imposed in the incorporated and unincorporated territory of the County of San Diego, in accordance with chapter 13.5 (commencing with Section 26250) of part 2 of division 2,1 of title 3 of the Government Code and part 1.6 (commencing with Section 7251) of division: 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, a retail transactions and use tax at the rate of one --half of one percent (1/2'/0) in. addition to any existing or future authorized state or local sales tax or transactions and use tax. 4' PR -013.1 C=3001 4 of 1 SEP 3 0 1986 ITEM 19 (b) The proceeds of the tax imposed by thi._ durance shall be deposited into the San Diego County Regional Justice Facilities Financing fund and its uses shall include, but not be limited to: (1) site acquisition. capital acquisition, construction, reconstruction, expansion, improvement,. maintenance and financing of regional justice facilities; (2) he administration ltdmplementation of this chapter, including costs of legal proceedings relating to this ` "ordinance and (3) costs related to planning, environmental review, engineering, design and right-of-way acquisition of any regional justice facility. The proceeds of the tax shall not be used for the operation of anyregional justice facilities. , (c) dor purposes of" this ordinance, the term "regional justice facilities" shall include, but not be limited to, jails; women's centers, juvenile hails; or any other typeof detention facility for the confinement of persons accused, convicted or sentenced regarding a criminal offense; and courts or courtrooms. ; (d) The County of San Diego shall contract with the State Board of Equalization to perform alt functions incident to the administration and operation of thin ordinance, including the collection of the additional. tax imposed by this ordinance. (e) The proceeds of the tax deposited into the San Diego County Regional Justice Facilities Financing Fund shalt be used in accordance with the San Diego County Regional Justice Facilities Pian adopted, and as may be amended from time to time, by the Board of Supervisors. The Board of Supervisors shall utilize such proceeds in accordance with the - ,1 following priority: (1) Federal or state funds made available to the County of San Diego specifically for financing regional justice facilities subject to the Plan; (2) Proceeds of the tax imposed by this Ordinance. Sec. 22.152'. EFFECTIVE AND OPERATIVE DATES: This Ordinance shall become effective on November 4, 1986 only if two-thirds (213) of the electors voting, on the measure at the election held on November 4, 1986 vote to approve the ordinance. If so approved, the provisions of this ordinance shalt become i' operative on, and the taxes authorized by this ordinance shall be imposed commencing. on April i, 1987t the first: day of the first calendar quarter commencing more than 120 days after November 4,1986. Seca 22:153. DURATION OF TAX. The provisions of this ordinance shall no longer be of any force and effect, on or after five (5) years. following its operative date, unless extended by a vote; of two-thirds (213) of the electors voting at an election called for that purpose : by the. Board of Supervisors; or unless earlier repealed by the Board of Supervisors based upon a finding by the Board of Supervisors that"sufficient funds have been generated by the tax or other revenues to solve- the need for regional justice facilities in the County of, San Diego. Sec. 22.154, IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCES. Upon approval of this ordinance by the voters, the Board of Supervisors shall . enact such other ordinances and . take such other actions as may be necessary for the implementation of this ordinance and the collection of the one-half of one percent (1121.) transactions and use tax authorized by this ordinance. PR -013.2 { 1 C=3004 a]j( SEP 30 1986 !TEM 19 5 -Of 10 Sec. 22.155.INCREASE IN APF ` IATIONS LIMIT. The appropriations limit imposed on San Diego County by Article XIIIB of the California Constitution is hereby increased by the amount of taxes generated by the transactions and use tax imposed by this ordinance, for the next four fiscal years following the operative date of this ordinance. Sec. 22.156. AMENDMENTS. .. This ordinance may ba amended or repealed by either of the procedures set forth in this section. if any portion of subdivision (a) is declared invalid, then subdivision (b) shalt be the exclusive means of amending or repealing this ordinance. (a) This.ordinance may be amended or repealed to further its purposes by ordinance; passed by roll -call vote entered in the minutes, four-fifths of the Board ' concurring, if at least'. 20 days prior to passage, the ordinance as proposed has been publicly noticed in a newspaper of generai circulation within the County of San Diego.. (b) This ordinance may be amended or repeated by an ordinance that becomes effective only when approved' by the electors at a special election called by the Board of Supervisors for such purpose. Sec. 22.157. SEVERABILITY. If any section, part, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional, the remaining portions -shall not be affected but shall: remain in full force and effect. COUNTY COUNSEL'S IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS You are asked to vote on the San Diego County Regional Justice. Facilities Financing Ordinance which imposes a one-half of one percent (11VIo) Countywide transactions and use tax for the financing of regional justice. facirdies _and increasing the constitutional appropriation limit of San Diego County. The major elements of the Ordinance, which have been authorized by state legislation, are as follows. 1. Imposes a transaction and use tax of 1/2 percent in the. incorporated and unincorporated territory of the: County of San Diego for a period not to exceed five years; 2. Requires the 'proceeds of the tax to be deposited into the San Diego -`County Regional Justice Facilities Fund; 3. Urnita the use of uhf proceeds of the tax to activities relating to the financing of regional justice facilities, which are defined as jails, women's centers, juvenile halls, or any. other type of detention facility for the confinement of persons accused, convicted or ` sentenced regarding a criminal offense, and courts and courtrooms. ' 4. Requires that the proceeds of the tax can be used to finance regional justice ` facilities after the Board of Supervisors has developed, a plan and only after state or federal funds received for such purposes have first been expended in accordance with the plan; and f S. Increases the County's appropriation limit in an amount equal to the tax to be collected. Article Xlll B of the California-. Constitution limits the County's total annual appropriations unless such limit is increased by a two-thirds vote of the electors voting. Passage of the Ordinance will ensure that the taxes collected may be appropriated for the purposes enumerated; in the. Ordinance. This. Ordinance will become effective only if approved by atwo-thirds (213) vote of the electors voting on the Ordinance. It the Ordinance is approved, it becomes effective on November 4, 1386 and the taxes authorized by the Ordinance will be imposed commencing on April 1, 1987. > PR -013.3 C;300f SEP 30 1986 ITEC 19 of io ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION A YES ON A More than 2,000 criminals -- drug addicts, drug pushers, prowlers, prostitutes, 'Vandals and drunk drivers -- are arrested and then turned looses each month because our 33 jails and courts are jammed. Many are back on the streets even before the arresting officer has_ completed the necessary reports. Our streets have become our jails! This crisis threatens the safety of ever; man, woman and child and we need action. "I've seen what they turn loose from the jails," says Norma Phillips, President of Mothers Against Drunk Driving. "It's scary!" Proposition A isthe help we need. It wouldadd a half -cent to our sales tax for only five: years and raise $400 million to build additional jails and courts. The revenue raised could only be used to provide facilities. This tax could not be extended beyond five years without another 2/a vote of the electorate. Futher lore : if more state or federal funds for jails and courts become available,the tax will end sooner. Why use a sales tax? Because it's fair to all and Ws smart for taxpayers. The jails and courts would. be paid for without burdening our chitdren and grandchildren with debt. Proposition A is a grass roots campaign supported by a broad coalition including: organizations such. as. MADD, Greater San Diego Chamber of Commerce, Neighborhood Watch groups, the media, police chiefs in every city in our county, school readers, the clergy, and community leaders county -wide. San Diego- County is in a race against time and crime which we cannot afford to lose. Lers get criminals off our streets and provide speedy trials. Protect your neighborhoods and the public safety. Vote Yes on A -- to scam the door on crime in San Diego County! TAXPAYERS AGAINST CRIME Clair Burgener Lionel Van Deerlini - Former Congressman Former Congressman Sheriff John Duffy Police Chief Bill Kolender County of San Diego CityFof San Diego Norma Phillips, President Mothers Against Drunk Driving PR -013.4 C=3001 of 10 SEP 30 1986 ITEM le REBUTTAL TO THE ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION A { We question the need to jail people who harm only themselves. over 30% of the prisoners in jail are there for victimless "crimes" --prostitution, drugs,. gambling, etc. We feet it's time we stopped prosecuting peatefut activity among consenting adults and concentrate efforts an'jaiiing the real criminals who robs; rape, burglarize and kill innocent victims. But for discussion;. let's agree that there is indeed a need for more jails. Unfortunately, we have been paying for more jails since we first started paying our taxes in San Diego County years ago.. So where arethe jails? The very, first obligation of government is to protect its citizens with the very first tax dollars collected.. Let's get our priorities straightened out if the county government wishes Jo raise the; sales taxi then let the people vote regarding higher taxes to support tow income people in brand spanking new housing, for instance, and use the millions of d©Kars currently spent on publichousing for the jails that should: have been built long ago.. ; 'it takes enormous gall to ask us to tax. ourselves more to pay, for essential government services. Lets vote on the frivolous government spending-- things such as welfare,, public .art objects, and public housing and then start building. our jails today with the tax dollars that have: been collected today. The final. irony is that politicians arae pushing for a safes. tax Increase at the very } moment that the federal 'tax reform" law. is disallowing, the deductibility of such taxes. PAT WRIGHT, Chairman BETSY A. MILL Libertarian Party of San Diego Libertarian Candidata State Senate, District 38 FRED SCHNAUSELT DICKRIDER Former San Diego City Councilman Libertarian Candidate ' 41st Congressional District r j I PR -`013.5 C=300 SEP 3 0 1986 ITE 19 ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION A NO ON PROPOSITION . It seerns that in every electionwe're asked to vote for more spending on jails. Now were being told that the criminals will run wild in the streets unless we raise the sales tax. Notice that the politicians didn't come to us urging, a higher tax to pay for the many frills and inefficiencies buried within the county's billion dollar budget. They know .we need jails. The prime responsibility of our government Is to protect the citizens. So shouldn't the politicians pay for the jails, and put the frills up for a vote? This 'temporary" sales tax increase (does anybody believe this increase is temporary?) is regressive in that it falls most heavily upon the poor. The California sales tax is too high as it is. Private contractors, experts in the corrections field, can run jails at a savings of 10°lo, to 25%. Yet the county has not moved in this direction. The state of California has begun limited private contracting of its correctional' facilities, and we should follow suit. There are alternatives to jail for the fess dangerous non-violent offenders. One inexpensive innovation is electronic home detention wherethe prisoner is not housed at taxpayer expense. Another alternative is to emphasize offenders working .to pay restitution to the victims or performingcommunity service instead of serving time. Since many of the county pruners are awaiting trial, money invested in a speedier court system would both save detention costs and improve our justice system in general. Next year they will have on the .ballot yet another proposal to raise the sales tax, this time for roads. Its time to demand that government provide essential services without tax increases.- We can all protect our earnings and: force the county to budget our money responsibly, with a decisive "NO" vote on Proposition A. PATWRIGHT, Chairman Libertarian Party of San Diego FRED SCHNAUSELT President Frederick. Schnaubelt & Sons, Inc. PR -013.8 C.3001! BETSY A. MILL Libertarian Candidate State Senate, District 38 JACK R. SANDERS Libertarian Candidate Board of Equalization DICK RIDER Libertarian. Candidate 41st Congressional District f 10 SEP 3 0 1986. TEM 19 REBUTTAL TO THE ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION A Don't be, misled by the Ubertarians! The proposed half cent sales tax will end! The five year termination is in the ballot language and. cannot. be extended without another vote of the people.. .. y . Yes,, there are alternatives to jail and the County of. San Diego has 30 such programs new. working --< more than any county in Calitornial - Electronic home detention, cited by the I libertarians as one sucit alternative, is already being used by San. Diego County: However. ,sortie -criminals nxtst be punished, ft]1 tl, and, not. alternatives. The real Libertarian issue: they support legalization. of drugs. Prisoners in this: county did provide over. 65,000 days of community service work during 9985. The clean-up crews you see on our roadways are prisoners. The: libertarians recommend a speedier court system: to relieve- the jails. Had' they ; read Proposition A, they would know that the °revenue will be used to construct more courtrooms as well'as. jails. The average cost per county' resident: of theft In 1985 was' $79:24 the average cost of theft for each business was $1,386:00. The additional halt cent will only, amount to an average :$38:op,per resident each year. Proposition A is a good investment in public safety! . The voters= have asked for morepolice, tougher judges; sticier taws and stiffer penalties. Without new revenue, the County cannot give the police, deputy sheriffs and judges the ,tools -they need to cWthe; job., Vote: 'YES! on Prsposit on. At TAXPAYERS AGAINST CRIME Clair Burgener !tone! Van Deertin Fortner Congressman,Former Congressman Sheriff John< `uffy, . Police Chief Bilt Wender County of ;ion Diego City of San Diego e Norma Phillips. President Mothers Against Drunk Driving' PR -013:7 1 SEP 3 Q 1986 ITE '19 of 10,