The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2003-01-24 Packet CITY OF U KIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 JANUARY 24, 2003 5:00 p.m. RESUME 1. ROLL CALL (Absent: Councilmember Smith) 2. NEW BUSINESS a. Consideration and Approval of Letter and Adoption of Resolution to the California State Legislature Rejecting the Governor's Proposed Shift of Local Vehicle License Fee (VLF) Revenues and to Honor the 1998 Commitment to Restore the VLF M/RC (4-0) directing Staff to submit a letter, under the Mayor's signature, and Adoption of Resolution to the California State Legislature rejecting the Governor's proposed shift of local Vehicle License Fee (VLF) revenues and to honor the 1998 commitment to restore the VLF Mayor Read 3. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS The City Council welcomes input from the audience. If there is a matter of business on the agenda that you are interested in, you may address the Council when this matter is considered. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on this agenda, you may do so at this time. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments in which the subject is not listed on the agenda. 5:12 p.m. 4. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 JANUARY 24, 2003 5:00 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL 2. NEW BUSINESS a. Consideration and Approval of Letter and Adoption of Resolution to the California State Legislature Rejecting the Governor's Proposed Shift of Local Vehicle License Fee (VLF) Revenues and to Honor the 1998 Commitment to Restore the VLF 3. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS The City Council welcomes input from the audience. If there is a matter of business on the agenda that you are interested in, you may address the Council when this matter is considered. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on this agenda, you may do so at this time. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments in which the subject is not listed on the agenda. 4. ADJOURNMENT AGENDA 1TEM NO: 2a MEETING DATE: .lanuary 24, 2003 SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: CONS]:DERA'I-[ON AND APPROVAL OF LETTER AND ADOP-I']:ON OF RESOLUTION TO THE CAL]:FORN]:A STATE LEG:[SLATURE REJECTING THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSED SHIFT OF LOCAL VEH:[CLE L]:CENSE FEE (VLF) REVENUES AND TO HONOR THE 1998 COIVlM1TIVlENT TO RESTORE THE VLF Mayor Larson has requested that the Council consider and approve a letter and a resolution to the California State Legislature, supporting restoration of Vehicle License Fees (VLF). These documents urge the legislators to uphold their 1998 legislation, which stated that if the State could no longer afford to fund the VLF reduction, the VLF would be restored so vital city and county public health and safety services would not be threatened. Nonetheless, Governor Davis' proposed budget includes the diversion of $4 billion in local VLF backfill payments over the next 17 months, which would significantly impact the City of Ukiah. The draft letter and resolution, attached for your review, were provided by Assembly IVlember Berg's office, and will be sent to the legislators and Governor Davis, who support the proposed shift of local Vehicle License Fee Revenues. The list of recipients (names noted with asterisks) is enclosed. Also attached for your information is the .lanuary 17, 2003 letter that IVlayor Larson sent, also regarding the VLF, to Assembly Member Berg and Senator Chesbro. RECOMMENDED ACTI:ON: Approve letter and adopt resolution rejecting the Governor's proposed shift of local Vehicle License Fee revenues. ALTERNAT]:VE COUNCTL POU:CY OPT]:ONS: Consider revisions to letter and/or resolution and provide direction to staff. Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Eric Larson, Mayor Shannon Riley, Executive Assistant Kathy Kelly, Assistant to Assembly IVlember Berg and Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Proposed letter to legislators . 2. Proposed resolution 3. List of intended recipients 4. 3anuary 17, 2003 letters from Mayor Larson to Senator Chesbro and Assembly Member Berg Approved: ~ey~ .~ Manager 1 4:CAN/ASR.VLF.12403 ATfA01~IENT / January 24, 2003 Honorable < <Name of Legislator> > California State < <Senate or Assembly> > State Capitol Building Room # < <Number> > Sacramento, CA 95814 Re: Reject Proposed Vehicle License Fee Raid; Keep VLF Promise Dear < <(Senator/Assembly Member) Last Name> >: ! am writing to urge you to keep a promise---one the legislature made to the people of California and its cities and counties five years ago. !t was made in 1998 when the VLF reduction was enacted during better economic times. The promise was simple: if the state could no longer afford to fund the VLF reduction, the VLF would be restored so vital city and county public health and safety services would not be threatened. Since 1935, cities and counties have received the VLF in lieu of locally collected property taxes on vehicles. VLF revenues constitute an average of 15-25% of city and county general purpose revenues. On average, more than 60 percent of city general fund spending and more than half of county general funds go to police, fire, emergency medical and health care programs. The VLF, therefore, is a critical component of funding these vital services. !n 1986 the voters by an 81.8% margin passed Proposition 47, pledging the proceeds of the VLF to funding local government services. The 1998 law that created the VLF tax holiday did not change this policy; it simply committed the state general fund to financing an offset against the VLF payment obligation of a vehicle owner. The same law provides for the restoration of the VLF if insufficient funds are available in the state general fund to afford the VLF "offset". By all indications, that time has come. In the near future, you will have the chance to keep the promise made by the 1998 legislature and found in state law. ! strongly urge you to reject the Governor's proposed raid of more that $4 billion in Vehicle License Fee (VLF) backfill payments to cities and counties and to support legislation to restore the VLF if the state general fund can no longer afford the VLF tax holiday. We recognize that during these difficult times, sacrifices are necessary. But raiding more that $4 billion in VLF backfill funds would disproportionately shift the state's fiscal problems onto our local governments and would jeopardize essential locally delivered public health and safety programs and services. Clearly, a state grab of VLF funds will 300 SEMINARY AVENUE UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 PhoneC¢ 707/463-6200 Fax'# 707/463-6204 Web Address: www. cityofukiah.com leave many localities with no option but to take police officers and firefighters off the street or reduce public health and safety programs, services and equipment. !n our city it could mean significant cuts to our budget and difficult choices as to which services we would have to reduce or eliminate. !n the five years of state budget surpluses, local governments did not receive a proportionate benefit or any significant funding increases. !nstead, local governments and our local services continued providing more than $4 billion each year to fund state obligations. Raiding an additional $4 billion in VLF backfill payments over the next :~8 months is neither equitable nor fair. No state program or department has been asked to shoulder such a disproportionate share of the budget pain. !n light of the state's current economic climate, ! urge you to support legislation to restore the VLF. !t's the right thing to do, and it keeps the promise made in 1998. Sincerely, Eric Larson Mayor, City of Ukiah RESOLUTION 2003- A RESOLUTI'ON URG]:NG THE CALI'FORN]:A LEG:[SLATURE TO RE3ECT THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSED SH]:FT OF LOCAL VEHI'CLE L]:CENSE FEE (VLF) REVENUES AND TO HONOR THE 1998 COMM]:TMENT TO RESTORE THE VLF WHEREAS, prior to 1935, cities and counties collected property taxes on motor vehicles to fund essential local public health and safety services; and WHEREAS, in 1935, the Legislature first enacted the Vehicle License Fee (VLF) Act, replacing the property tax on vehicles with a 1.75 percent fee charged against the value of the motor vehicle; and WHEREAS, in 1948, the rate of the VLF was increased to 2 percent of the value of the vehicle; and WHEREAS, in 1986, the voters voted overwhelmingly to constitutionally dedicate the proceeds of the VLF to fund city and county services; and WHEREAS, in 1998, a period of strong economic growth, the Legislature approved the use of a portion of the rapidly growing state General Fund to reduce the VLF payments of vehicle owners. This amount, known as the "offset", grew in future years to a 67.5 percent offset against the amount owed. The amount paid to local governments in lieu of the reduced VLF payment is known as the "VLF backfill"; and WHEREAS, 1998 legislation and subsequent enactments contain clear provisions that when insufficient funds are available to be transferred from the General Fund to fully fund the offsets and backfill amount that the VLF offset shall be reduced and VLF payments increased; and WHEREAS, VLF and backfill revenues constitute 15 to 25 percent of typical city and county general purpose revenues. On average, more than 60 percent of city general fund spending and more than half of county general funds go to front line law enforcement, fire, emergency medical services, and health care programs. WHEREAS, revenues derived from the VLF and backfill are of critical importance in funding vital local public health and safety services; and WHEREAS, any failure by the Legislature to maintain the VLF backfill or restore the VLF will cause widespread disruption in local government services essential to the well- being of California citizens and their cities and counties; and Resolution No. 2003-_ January 24, 2003 WHEREAS, Governor Davis' proposal to divert $4 billion in local VLF backfill payments over the next 17 months fails to honor the 1998 commitment and is a direct assault on local services that will be felt by every California resident; and WHEREAS, shifting $4.2 billion in locally controlled revenues for local services is neither equitable nor fair. No state program or department has been asked to shoulder such a disproportionate share of the budget pain. These cuts come on top of the nearly $5 billion each year that is transferred from local services to fund state obligations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CZTY COUNCI'L OF UKIAH, CALIFORNIA, that if the state General Fund can no longer afford the expense of part or all of the VLF "backfill" that the Legislature and Governor of California are hereby respectfully urged to implement the provisions of current law providing for the reduction of the VLF offset in bad economic times and to restore the VLF in an amount necessary to reduce the VLF backfill; and RESOLVED FURTHER, that the City of Ukiah hereby expresses its appreciation to the legislators who support such VLF restoration legislation. profound PASSED AND ADOPTED on this 15th day of January 2003, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Eric Larson, Mayor Marie Ulvila, City Clerk Resolution No. 2003- January 24, 2003 RoOM 6031 2!37 5135 3098 ~ 2-I79 6027 ~ 2141 11-(D) 3160 16 (D) 5150 57. (D) 214-8 ¢9 (D) 411.7 ~ 25 3!7.3 2~. (D) 4126 11'8 (.D) 6025:69 (.D) 3104 ~ 05 ('R~ 215'8 ~ 72 (n.) 2136 2.3 (D) 309-1 20: ('D) 3147~ 63' (R) 3132 52 (D) 319 50 (D) 6005 43 (D) 4 t'02~t 80 (R) 2003 45 ('D) 4139 14 (D) 5158 ,I~ 67 4.158~ 66' 2'1.63 51' '(D) 5-126 ~ 78; (R) 4208 ~,, 15 (R) 4140 35 (D) 5160 ~ 03'"(R)' 3152 76 (D) 2176 42 (D) 4177 ~ 02 (R) 2016 ~, 77 (.R) 2196 27 (D) 3146 1.3 ('D) ,! , A:S'S g M:B'Iz Y 8'T,A ~E... C~IT0'L.... a hd.; %fi Oi ~ EA. Ti:V...p~: 0'p.F.,rGiE.:B;Ui.L. D IN'O: .ROSTER -.. ,';~:'...:.~,.z;.- 7 ,. . ..~.;(',.7;:h:,..:.".:' ~. :.. '. . . .. ,.. '~ ..... ;.. "..: ;:: '..~.".:;?:. .',~.:¢.,?~67]:. :'31.~..:~ .-: '7['.' · . .:';~',~m.50'84 - 319.2514 · . ...71.~.,... .. ' ....... ,..c':,.,. ..... · .;......:.....::.~:'.',:... .,.:. , . . 004 73 iR)'..B~:fes~.'~'~'~id'cia:.C:" -."7 (;B};{'9¢'~¢~8~ ..:~,601~t'i.1....':..'~:)}¢~ ',LeV'ine',.;~.iogd;..g, 319,2040 .64 (R) Ben°lf,{johh..j. '"~ ?.'L:.~i,,;:~'~'.~:' '."~'i'62~]',..~?;~5, l~i'eber,. S~'l.ty J. 319.2022 56 (D) Berma0ez., Budy. '.., .: 'g:;r~9,.:2os}s':: .:/s¢~.2:s:..::. · B,~,.~(B).,: .~;L'ong:ville,. J'~hn. 319.2062 65 ('R) Bogh; ~u~.s. · ".."; :' (. '.:~:{~;2'0'~5~;~.-.~';~,]~.161 ":..,~:~:':~:).? .'U0~en~hat.':Alan 319.2054 :'/':':S0~6::":'.."':,~',i'.:'i:~'J' :'-M6Leod,' Sloria Ne.grebe :,:':::'!;.~!i'f4"47':'. :".':.~.~:i:~'i;;:'.' ::~°nfafiez,. Cindy :'...':::~li~;}:..~.i ~'j'~'.g): '.... ti/!. ounl~joy: D:enriis' ';;2'~'~,~J:'::' ""!"': ~::!.:(D'i'/I ]:.Mul.lin, .'d~ne ',,§~Z'5:,~' [:.~.ii~) '~ Nakani.~hi,.A, lan - "' :'"'"': ' .... }a?D.') '~. :B!.akano, George ;:i. ia0%'' . '""' "' · "'.i :." ':...' ' ' .' ..,,. ,:: . ,:. ,,, . :., .:.5iI'641'~.'- 601'i}(,R':)'" P. acheco,' Robert · 3~L2811,' '{',i.".(D)....P..a.vley,- F'~an Frommer, Dali0 Garcia~.:.l~bnnie: · Go Id. berg, ::Jai:Ei'~. Han'~be:k,-Loni: H arman'i!.Tom' i '~': Runner,. Sl~arori. · ' ' ' '" ' ' .. ' '::"i.:...:,..' '"." .:"... '~'.,'" :'" ' 'Ha.yfies.,.-Ray:' .-...'"}:'3il;'~i:20i3d?.:15' al:ifii~- -, · ~.....:, ;' ..'-.. ·.. , ...'..v .5.. ~ .5;,.....::~....;.. vi - .7~r.., --'.-,,v,,. . Horton,."Jer0'me '. :' .' ".':aI:9;:20S'.[~::I"_ ~.~e. iia:~· Rf~vo-. N ,...., . .... : ,.' .~.'~:,:,. ,. · . . - .. .... . . . , · Horton S~ldey 319 20~8 ~I19, -2 ..... ."~i~.~ '" . '. ". '..' :i.. 'i". , ' ...... : .'."~ .'), . ' ~' rD:}.::" .Slml.~._,., Sou' to,, OuY.S.'' '...' .:.'', }:~:pi~Z'O~,"Wo'dd· Jackson.,'H~nna.h-.B~t'h:?S~9:::~'~'~5 :}'. ',".<~'l'r4' .' ~0[,5~{~'))~::::Sgeinberg, Darrell Keene, Rick '3.191)20031 ,::. 4:~'98 ~ .87.".(R)' '$-wick,l:and', Tony -Kehoe, Christine ' 'a':}'9,'.~'.0Z~':' '.'.'r'~0;!3' *9"('D):" Vargas,. !uan ~o~tz, Vau~ :,,:.a-r,9,~20':21";" ~2.i19 ~"147'(D') Wesson Herb -V :71: .1 . · .. . , · La Mhlfa, Doug 3~1,0.~.2'00'2'~ '::~'0{~' 07.'(D): ~iggins, PA'tricia k.a Sue~, ,$~v ',a.~9,~2~¢~',. .~' 6oi.~ . ...o}~"~j..W01~, kois · .: ~:'( . , ' .~,i' · .... ' 319.2068 319,2033 319,2017 319,2034 319,2032 319,2061 319,2039 3!9,2059 319,2019 319.20!0 319,2063 319,2006 319,2046 319,2055 3 i 9,206O 319.2030 319.2041 319,2075 319.2031 319.2038 319.2048 319.2036 319.2028 319.2029 319.2021 319.2071 319.2009 319,2037 319..2079 319.2047 319,2007 319,2008 319,2074 319.,2012 ROOM 'SENATOR. . . D~¢.~.~ b~e r~;2,; .. 2,.0 0:2 .... '(temporary) '. :DISTRICT ..LOCA:L . ASS!STA, NT · 5061 4066 4035 5050 406'1 3076 4040 3O5 2O5 3048 4081 3056 5100 2O8O 5080 2057 4090 4062 306'3 5O66 50'82 4'O32 3O86 3o8.2. '3070" J~2054 4048 4O82 2048 5114 313 5087 50'51 5064 2082 407-4 2032 2068 5108 5052 t AANESTAD, Sam,,,,'.., ...... .,.;R~.'O4.'.... ........ ,44:5;~3353 .......... Reublr~ William~ ACKERMAN,'Dick, ........ ; ..... ,.~...R:'.33.. ...... , .... 44~5~:264,, ....... susie. E~lamey ALARCE)N~ Riahard ........ ; ...... ',':D'.'20:. ' ........ 1'44!5'.-."-'7.92'8. ....... , MicheHe Duke ,.,-" AL',PER~;;De:de: ..... ";D+'39 . .,' ..... 4;4~"~,39'.52.,, .... ...'uoriica..Smiley ' · .... . ,. ,.... , tl'llllill.llill ..... · t . . . . AS:HBURN,,' ROY., ............ ~ ..... ;~-R~:1.8',.....,,,..,:.; 44!5~5405 ......... 'Meli~s,.a Martinez BATTIN; .J~m ..... '...-,.; .... ,..,..;.;;,.,R¥371.....:....,....4.4~5~5:§i&'I .......... Alison 'Thomas 'BOWEN,.Debra' ...., .......... . .... ,'..i';D,"28 .... ' ....... '. 4'45';S~3:..- ....... va'letie~ Vesci BRULTE. James L..., ........ . ..... '.,R-31 '. .... ,..,..... 4. i4~5~8688'. ......... Susan 'Mejia BURTON..John..-.., · .......... .~,,.~'.D;-;'0:3 ..4'4'~.'1:4:1'2....; ..... 'Linda ,'Yip · CEDI.LLO~ 'Gilbert.. ..:,.;D~22.. ,; 44',5.:3~456 ......... Jan SChrenier CHESBRO, .Wesley '. ............ :D-02 ............. 445-31375.. ........ ,~u?,J~ ¢. DENHAM. Jeff ' . .............. R-12.' .' 44'5-1392 ......... DUCHEN¥..Denise Moreno .... ;'D'.-4:0., .... . ...... .4'4'~,6767 ......... :Phyllis. Chow DUNN. JosePh ....... i ................ i.D.;34".;.' ......... 44:~;.5831.,, ....... Deed ee Bunnell ESCUTIA, Martha .......... ' .... iD~30 ,..; ......... 445~-3.O9'0 ......... .Lisa,.s chmidt 'FIGU'E.ROA, biz ................... ;....D,,ti0 ....... ' ...44'$-,6671 ...... . ..... .Lysa..:Markey FLOREZ,:.Dean ..... . ............... ~,..'.:'D-1;6',. ',.....,'.44~.'4:64i .... ·MiChael Rub[o 'FIOLLi:N.G'sWORTH,:Den~is......;R~36....,., .... '445;9':78i'.,' ........ 'Linda''Turner JOHNSON, R0ss:...: ...... : .... ~ .... ;R,3'5...; ..... ,...,44'.~:96'.i ......... 'Del~orah. Reussou KABNETTE,'Be. tty.i...,.: .... : ....... .ib{2.7;:.:;'..;i ..... ,:4~6447..:: ...... Chris Cre'ech KNIGHT, Wm...J. "Pete"' ......... :!R;'1:7. '. ........ -44,~-6637. ........ 'Cathy 'Herzig KUEHL; Sheila. ......... - ........ ,:D,~2'3 ............. 4:4'5'-1353· .Cathy Cruz 'MA C HA D'O, :E/like,. ............... , ~Dt05 ............ · Zl,4.5, u24'0.7 ...., ..... · MARGETT, BOb ..... i.... ........ "".,':R:29..; .......... 4'4.5'i28~'!8 ,', McCLINTOCK';;Tom,.' ...... ' ...... ,'R-.i9:,.;.. ......... :4~,~'8;87.'3 :.: ....... MCPHER.SON;"Bruce~ ............ R:.i~5'. .... . ......... 4~,~-~8'zl:3:, ..... MORROW: Bill ........................ R-38 ............ 4.4~.~373.1 ......... MURRAy, Kevin ..................... 'D,26.. ........... ;.:4.4'~-8'8'00 ....... OL, J, ER, Rico ................ : ........... R;Ol '. ............ 44~.-.5.~88,.' ....... ORTIZ, Debo'rah .................... 'D;0'6': ......... ' 44~.7:B07........ .... PERATA, Don ........ , ............... 'D".'09. ..... : ...... '~445;.~6:5'?!.7.'..; ...... POOCHIGIAN, C h a rles.:,., ;...i.,,R~.'1':4;;i ........... 4:45~;'96.00 ......... ROMERO, 'Gloda ................ ;..'D'"'.'2':4 ' ' .... . ..... '. SCOTT, Jack... .... ' ........... : .... D'2:i' . ..'.445':597.~'.'.:.. · lee. SHER, Byron D ............... ....... :D~1-1-' ..... ; .... ,44.~!~67~4,7 .......... SOTO, Nell .......................... ...D,3.2, ..... .. ...... .4:.4"5L6868 ......... .S PEI E R..~laCkle .,... ............... . .... .D;08'.' ............ ..4.4'5,~0§03....: ...... · . TORLAKSON,'Tom .; ..... ',...:.. .,'.', D.-07 ............ .4z15~,6083..,,, ..... VASCONC'EELOS; John ....... .. D~.i3'; ......... -.. 44'5~97~,0'. ........ VINCENT, Edward .................. D:2§ ............. 445'.210'4 ......... Kathy .Smith Diana Fran'scella Canda¢e..Amundson Alicia Belmontes Damon Conklin Beatrice .Broussard Ru~ti"G-randinetti LYnda. Dobson · Nancy. Lynott Cindy Wee'ds. Patty.'Rodgers Judy'Riddle ' Julie IMamalis Roxanne Thompson lnez Yaylor Missy Lundgren Oherita 'Roemmich Anne G'arcia ATTACHMENT January 17, 2003 Honorable Assemblywoman Patty Berg State Capitol, Room 2137 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Honorable Assemblywoman Berg, This letter is to request your support for legislation to restore the Vehicle License Fee (VLF). As you are aware, the VLF has, since 1935, been a source of funding for local government programs, particularly public safety. In 1986, the voice of the people, the state electorate, overwhelmingly approved Proposition 46, which constitutionally dedicated the VLF to city and county governments. The State legislature's reduction of the VLF in 1998, while providing "backfill" to local governments, was a commendable action to aid statewide constituents while retaining some of the ability for cities and counties to meet local financial commitments with a dependable revenue source. The reduction of the VLF was a positive statement to the taxpayers that government was accountable. The current proposal by the Governor to not backfill and not restore the VLF is contrary to his statements that revenue sources with less fluctuation are necessary for government funding. Use of an existing fee, which was approved by the voters and has operated appropriately for many years, should not be considered discretionary. The VLF "Backfill" funds normally distributed to the City of Ukiah are 10% of the City's general fund revenue, a significant amount for which alternative replacements are not available. Previous electorate and legislative actions have dictated how VLF revenue is to be managed. Maintaining the integrity of this procedure is critical in this time of economic uncertainty and declining governmental credibility. It is a time for leadership in addressing the issue of funding for all forms of government and creating greater responsibility at the State level. The City of Ukiah believes the restoration of VLF is appropriate at this time as one method of positively impacting the budget crisis and preserving previous legislative commitments. We strongly urge your support of legislation to return the VLF to appropriate levels. Please be assured that the City of Ukiah continues our dedication to the cost conscientious delivery of government services and will champion the issues facing local residents. Sincerely, Eric Larson Mayor mfh:letters03 0117VLF January 17, 2003 Honorable Senator Wes Chesbro State Capitol Building, Room 5100 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Honorable Senator Chesbro, This letter is to request your support for legislation to restore the Vehicle License Fee (VLF). As you are aware, the VLF has, since 1935, been a source of funding for local government programs, particularly public safety. In 1986, the voice of the people, the state electorate, overwhelmingly approved Proposition 46, which constitutionally dedicated the VLF to city and county governments. The State legislature's reduction of the VLF in 1998, while providing "backfill" to local governments, was a commendable action to aid statewide constituents while retaining some of the ability for cities and counties to meet local financial commitments with a dependable revenue source. The reduction of the VLF was a positive statement to the taxpayers that government was accountable. The current proposal by the Governor to not backfill and not restore the VLF is contrary to his statements that revenue sources with less fluctuation are necessary for government funding. Use of an existing fee, which was approved by the voters and has operated appropriately for many years, should not be considered discretionary. The VLF "Backfill" funds normally distributed to the City of Ukiah are 10% of the City's general fund revenue, a significant amount for which alternative replacements are not available. Previous electorate and legislative actions have dictated how VLF revenue is to be managed. Maintaining the integrity of this procedure is critical in this time of economic uncertainty and declining governmental credibility. It is a time for leadership in addressing the issue of funding for all forms of government and creating greater responsibility at the State level. The City of Ukiah believes the restoration of VLF is appropriate at this time as one method of positively impacting the budget crisis and preserving previous legislative commitments. We strongly urge your support of legislation to return the VLF to appropriate levels. Please be assured that the City of Ukiah continues our dedication to the cost conscientious delivery of government services and will champion the issues facing local residents. Sincerely, Eric Larson Mayor rnfh:letters03 0117VLF