21 of 1981 - RESOLUTION TO THE GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF UTAH ASKING HIM TO VETO House Bills 227 and 228 relating / •
RESOLUTION
TO: THE GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF UTAH
WHEREAS, the 44th Legislature of the State of Utah passed
House Bills 227 and 228 relating to the distribution of the local
option sales tax revenue, distributing a portion thereof on a
population basis; and
WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Council has received legal advice
that said bills are constitutionally defective in that, among
other reasons, they require the local units of government, as a
condition to maintenance of an existing tax, to allow the
redistribution of a portion of the receipts therefrom to
jurisdictions outside their boundaries; and
WHEREAS, the principles of Article XIII, Section 5 of the
Utah Constitution prohibit the State from imposing taxes for the
purpose of any county, city, town or other municipal corporation
and prohibit political subdivisions of the State from taxing
themselves to provide services in other jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, the constitutional provisions found in Article
XIII, Section 5, Article XIV, Section 6, and Article XI, Section
28 prohibit the State legislature from imposing taxes for the
purpose of a local jurisdictions; prohibit the State from
assuming the debt of the local jurisdictions; prohibit the State
legislature from appointing commissions or associations to
perform any "municipal function"; and
WHEREAS, these constitutional provisions have been
interpreted by the Utah Supreme Court as guardians: "to hold
inviolate the right of local self-government", but which sound
principles are violated by House Bill 228 in its declaration that
local government is merely a "conduit" for performing State
functions and that virtually every function heretofore performed
by cities are designated as matters of State interest and,
thereby, State functions to be partially financed through the
auspices of the sales tax distributed as the revenue sharing
basis of a population distribution; and
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council finds that said bills
are conceptually wrong in that, among other reasons, the commuter
and tourist impacted areas of the State will lose substantial
revenues needed to fund services for tourists, convention and
conference visitors, and tax-exempt institutions within their
jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, some cities of the State have no alternate sources
of financing and will default on bonds, issued in reliance on
repayment from local option sales tax; and
WHEREAS, Salt Lake City is the cultural, economic, and
tourist center of Utah and therefore must impose one of the
highest tax burdens on its residents and stands to lose
approximately $850,000 in the next fiscal year, thereby requiring
the drastic reduction of services or the inequitable imposition
of additional taxes on its residents to service commuters into
its jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, the proper manner by which to address the tax base
needs, if any, of bedroom communities is not to invade the
existing tax base built up by urban communities;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Salt Lake City Council
that it hereby requests the Governor of the State of Utah to veto
House Bills 227 and 228, as improvident, unlawful and ill advised
legislation, which deprives urban areas of needed revenues,
rather than providing bedroom communities with an alternate and
independent source of funding.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor be requested to
personally deliver this resolution to the Governor and
communicate to him the Capitol City's justifiable reliance on its
sales tax base to meet its present and future needs.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this
17th day of March, 1981.
)Wif/61,1_,
MAYOR
SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
///�. ��/��/�� ATTEST:` _ �/ Q
By r4(J 4 ,.�^ )' `�/V ucu l vit. O U
C IRMAN ACTING CITY RECORD
COUNC MEM R
Oen P-Y-c-J COUNCI LM R
POUNCILMEMBER
AAA.k� eG#.JP_QJL/
COUNCILMEMBER
UNCILMEM ER
—tinNC LMEMBER
-3-
MAYOR WIL50N
✓ S�D
e± _ ,
•
TO: The Governor of the State of Utah
RESOLUTION (/
WHEREAS, the 44th Legislature of the State of Utah passed
House Bills 227 and 228 relating to the distribution of the local
option sales tax revenue, distributing a portion thereof on a
population basis; and •
ko pow
WHEREAS ASalt Lake City Council^>rli that said bills are
cnnc'P * 1 n^- -nd constitutionally defective in that, among
ua a ce 1+'.
other reasons, they requireAthe local units of government ili
Cd p¢8ev- -flu hCdfSf rtbut,fH D,P,A,pvrtia o P "�.
ifa}aoSP to jurisdictions /J.,r .-,
outside their boundaries; and rh
F
WHEREAS, the principles of Article XIII, Section 5 of the Gy,
Utah Constitution prohibi/the State from imposing taxes for the
purpose of any county, city, town or other municipal corporation
and prohibit political subdivisions of the State from taxing
themselves to provide services in other jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, the t - a F constitutional provisions found
in Article XIII, Section 5, Article XIV, Section 6, and Article
XI, Article 28 prohibits ;the State legislature from imposing
taxes for the purpose of`k local jurisdictions; prohibits the
State from assuming the debt of the local jurisdictions; prid.
prohibit$ the State legislature from appointing commissions or
associations to perform any "municipal function"; and
WHEREAS, these Nt4354 constitutional provisions have been
interpreted by the Utah Supreme Court as guardians: "to hold
inviolate the right of local self-government", but which sound
principles are violated by House Bill 228 in its declaration that
local government is merely a "conduit" for performing State
functions and that virtually every function heretofore performed -
by cities are designated as matters of State interest and,
thereby, State functions to be partially financed through the
auspices of the sales tax distributed as the revenue sharing
basis of a population distribution; and
L , _` 7 _and 228 plate--ice- eto do e
i
, econo is v ili of_the Utah Transit A0thUr tSi
'�"""o"`. Hottsu Dill 2 2 .7 I 11-1- t b 11 r
WHEREAS,Athe commuter atfd tourist impacted areas of the
State will lose substantial revenues needed to fund services for
tourists, convention and conference visitors, and tax-exempt
institutions within their jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, some cities of the State have no alternate sources
of financing and will default on bonds, issued in reliance on
repayment from local option sales tax; and F
...-- mo.WHEREAS, Salt Lake City • • --;"
, ._ ..... • .+. t,_
t
stands to lose approximately $850�,..000 in the next 1.
"A, It.
fiscal year, thereby requiring the drastic e,.,tail -of services k
or the -urrfi5.r imposition of additional taxes on its residents to }
service commuters into its jurisdiction; d
0
a
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Salt Lake City Council o
that it hereby requests the Governor of the State of Utah to veto
House Bills 227 and 228, as improvident, unlawful and ill advised
legislation, which r,SA' L•.urban areas of needed,_revenues)
rather than providing bedroom communities with an alternate and
independent source of funding.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor be requested to
personally deliver this resolution to the Governor and
communicate to him the enr
Capitol City's er4T-1-7
..p-144114---attagads, justifiable reliance on its sales tax baser- rr'-t
1 ;.X) '�i."✓-.m,�t Cv4d "`- j`_� `
l ,p .
1 t passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this
17th day of March, 1981.
} SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
y ,
1
f
! By
t t CHAIRMAN
.
ATTEST:
1
( ACTING CITY RECORDER I
t ,1.-.1. ''�> Y'.0 i rr.r f�ti % C 9�+�.+u.,..G q • Md Y`� 'C" ✓,
I 1
ti l
Pr
Resolution No.
•
By City Council
Requesting Governor Matheson veto
House Bills 227 and 228 relating to the
distribution of the local option sales
tax revenue, distributing a portion
thereof on a population basis.