Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution_18-89/90_09/27/1990 RESOLUTION NO. 18 -89/90 • A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, URGING ITS CITIZENS TO SUPPORT THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT NO. 3 ON THE NOVEMBER 6, 1990 BALLOT LIMITING UNFUNDED STATE MANDATES ON CITIES AND COUNTIES. WHEREAS, since 1981, the Florida Legislature has placed over 330 unfunded mandates upon cities and counties in Florida with over 86% having an undetermined fiscal impact on cities and counties; and I WHEREAS, "unfunded mandates" are governmental actions required of cities and counties by State Law without adequate funding resources; and WHEREAS, cities and counties are continuously forced to i adjust local service priorities, and raise local taxes and user fees to pay for such unfunded state mandated programs; and WHEREAS, cities and counties are forced to pass these increased costs of delivery of state mandated programs to the citizens; and WHEREAS, the Florida Constitution preempts all taxing sources to the State (except ad valorem property taxes), it becomes irresponsible for the State government to require and mandate programs to other governments without sharing the fiscal responsibility and political consequences of their actions; and WHEREAS, there can be no certainty and predictability in the growth planning process if the State can continue to mandate new and expensive programs without regard to adequate funding; and WHEREAS, the priorities and programs of local citizens of cities and counties have often been curtailed when limited local funds have to be diverted to pay for a state mandated i program; and WHEREAS, the State Constitution "preempts" all taxing powers to the State (other than local property taxes) and the State has been unwilling to allow sufficient local discretionary taxing powers directly to municipalities and has refused to adjust unfair and antiquated formula allocations of revenue - sharing programs; and WHEREAS, unfunded mandates are not fair to the local property owner or the locally elected official who is trying to address local priorities and problems with a limited amount of g financial resources; and WHEREAS, during the 1988 Legislative Session, nearly 100 members of the Legislature co- signed or supported a proposed Constitutional Amendment to limit the Legislature's ability to 3 mandate programs and costs to city and county governments; and WHEREAS, during the 1989 Legislative Session, a proposed ! amendment to the Constitution was passed to give Florida citizens an opportunity to vote in 1990 on a proposal that would limit unfunded state legislative mandates on cities and counties. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: i . - 2 - Section 1. That the Village Council of the Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, call upon all citizens of Tequesta to become aware of the seriousness of unfunded mandates and to be prepared to support and vote "yes" for Amendment No. 3 of the Florida State Constitution appearing on the Ballot on November 6, 1990. Section 2. That a copy of this Resolution be sent to the head of each Homeowner Association within the Village of Tequesta for the purpose of disseminating information relative to this important subject. Section 3. That a copy of this Resolution be sent to the Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners and the cities that are members of the Palm Beach County Municipal League and each body is requested to adopt similar resolutions and positions so their views may be available to every citizen in Palm Beach County. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was offered by Councilmember Earl L. Collings who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Councilmember William E. Burckart and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: FOR ADOPTION AGAINST ADOPTION William E. Burckart Earl L. Collings Ron T. Mackail The Mayor thereupon declared the Resolution duly passed and adopted this 27th day of September , A.D., 1990. MAYOR OF TEQUESTA a P Q aA Vice,Mayor For :Joseph N. Capretta ATTEST: I Bill C. a avelis Village C erk I I NO. 3 CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT 1 ARTICLE VII, SECTION 18 ARTICLE VII U FINANCE AND TAXATION SECTION 18 laws requiring counties or municipalities to spend funds or limiting their ability to raise (d revenue or receive state tax revenue. — (a) No county or municipality shall be bound by any general law requiring such county or municipgliN I to spend funds or to take an action nequi2. the expenditure of funds unless the legislature has determined that such law fulfills an important state interest and unless funds have been appropriated that have been estimated at the time of enactment to be sufficient to fund such expenditure; the legislature authorizes or !� has authorized a county or municipality to enact a funding source not available for such county or municipality on February 1, 1989, that can be used to generate the amount of funds estimated to be sufficient to fund such expenditure by a simple mori vote of the governing body of such county or municipality the law requiring such expenditure is ai app roved by two- thirds of the membership in each ♦ house of the legislature the expenditure is required to comply with a low that applies to all persons A similarly situated including the state and local governments • or the law is either required to comply with a federal requirement or required for eligibility for a federal entitlement, which federal requirement specifically contemplates actions by counties or municipalities for compliance. . ( (b) Except upon approval of each house of the IegislaNre by hvo thirds of the rrrembership. Mre legislature may not enact amend or retxal any general law if the anticpated effect of doing so would be to reduce the authority Chas municipalities or count es have to raise revenues in the oggregate, as such 11 authority exists on February 1, 1989. (c) Except upon approvol of each house of the kgislr a by two- thirds of the membership, the legislature may not enact, amend, o r repeal aav aeaeral law if the anticipated effect of doing so would be k to reduce the perce of a state tax shared with counties and municipalities as an opgregaie on February 1, 1989. The provisions of This subsection shall not apply to enhancements enacted after Februory d 1 1989 to state tax sources or durino a fiscal emer declared in a written Witt Proclamation issued by the president of the senote and the speaker o the house of representatives, or where the legislature provides additional state - shored revenues which are anticipated to be sufficient to replace the anticipated ciagregate loss of state- shored revenues resuMing from the reduction of the percentage of the state tax shared with counties and municipalities, which source of re locement revenues shall be sub ect to the some requirements for repeal or modification as provided herein for a state - shared tax source existing on February 1, 1989. (dj Laws adopted to require funding of pension benefits existing on the effective date of this section, criminal la s election lows the general appropriations act special pppropri ons acts laws reauthorizing but not expanding then- existing statutory authority laws hawng msigmficant fiscal impact, and laws creating modifying or repealina noncriminal infractions are exempt from the requirements of this section. (el The legislature may enact laws to assist in the implementation and enforcement of this section. —.16- s,.e„ .W snllowina enrh general election the legislature •