Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08281990 - 1.68 1L.068 ro TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 5 ..... _ Contra FROM: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator Costa DATE: August 23 , 1990 �a-:. -- -iT�¢ County PROPOSAL THAT CSAC ADOPT A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING LEGISLATION SUBJECT: TO IMPOSE A SALES TAX ON ANIMAL PRODUCTS SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the County Administrator to submit the attached proposed Resolution to CSAC for their consideration at their Annual Meeting this November. BACKGROUND: The City of Los Angeles Department of Animal Regulation has proposed legislation which would impose a 2% "sales tax" on such products as dog and cat food and veterinarian supplies with the proceeds of the tax to be distributed to cities and counties on a per capita basis. The attached Resolution and Statement of Need describe the details of the proposal. CSAC requires that all Resolutions to be presented at the Annual Meeting be received at CSAC by September 1. The appropriate Policy Committee will consider the Resolution on October 3, 1990 and hopefully will recommend that the Resolution be presented to the Annual Meeting in November. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENTXeS YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR _RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE _OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON August 28, 1990 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS �f� I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE UNANIMOUS(ABSENT -4 7 ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. AUG 2 8 1990 CC: ATTESTED County Administrator PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF Animal Services Director SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CSAC (Via CAO) BY ,DEPUTY M382 (10/88) BEFORE THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE COUN'T'Y SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA Resolution Concerning a Sales Tax) RESOLUTION PROPOSED BY on Animal Product Containers ) CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WHEREAS, the City of Los Angeles has requested the League of California Cities to seek a State "sales tax" of 2% on every dog and cat product container sold in California by a distributor to a dealer or retail outlet; and .WHEREAS, this proposed legislation would have the effect of providing additional revenue for city and county animal control agencies; and WHEREAS, the overpopulation of unwanted dogs and cats is a growing problem of State concern and a threat to the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of this State; and WHEREAS, unrestrained and unwanted dogs and cats roaming our streets pose a hazard to the physical well-being of the public, cause serious injury to persons and animals, create a hazard to vehicular traffic on all roads and freeways, and increase the cost of removing, sheltering and making disposition of these animals at an increasing rate; and WHEREAS, additional funds are needed to increase enforcement activities, humane investigations and improve the quality of life for impounded animals and provide necessary rescue, shelter, care, and humane disposition of unwanted animals and to promote and support the sterilization of dogs and cats in order to alleviate the dog and cat overpopulation problem; and WHEREAS, the monies raised by this tax may be used by local governmental animal care and control agencies to augment established programs and activities and may be used for the acquisition, construction and maintenance of land and capital improvements and the purchase of equipment, services, furnishings in support of such activities, for improving veterinarian care and treatment, and for subsidizing the spaying and neutering of dogs and cats; and WHEREAS, it has become increasingly difficult for cities and counties to provide adequate funding for animal control activities; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the County Supervisors Association of California that the Association supports the legislation sponsored by the City of Los Angeles and/or supports similar legislation which will provide for a sales tax of 2% at the distribution level on dog and cat product containers sold in California, the revenue from which would be used for the support of city and county animal control activities. ADOPTED this day of November, 1990 by the General Assembly of the County Supervisors Association of California. WILLIE KENNEDY, PRESIDENT STATEMENT OF NEED Resolution Concerning a Sales Tax on Animal Product Containers The City of Los Angeles, Department of Animal Regulation has proposed that legislation be pursued which would impose a "sales tax" on animal products, most of which are currently exempt from the sales tax, with the revenue to be dedicated to city and county animal control agencies and programs. A number of past efforts to impose a sales tax on, for instance, dog and cat food, have been unsuccessful at the retail level because of the additional cost and administrative problems. The proposal here would avoid that problem by imposing the tax at the wholesale level. The proposal would provide that the proceeds of the tax, rather than being distributed based on the site of the sale, as is true with sales taxes, would be distributed to those agencies which provide animal control services in each county on a per capita basis. For instance, in Contra Costa County, the City of Antioch provides its own animal control services to the residents of the city. The County Animal Services Department provides animal control services to the residents of the remainder of the County. In this case, the City of Antioch would receive its per capita share of the revenue and the County would receive the rest of the revenue for the County since it provides animal control services to the balance of the County. The Contra Costa County Animal Services Department currently has a budget of about $2. 9 million annually, with a net General Fund cost of $821, 500. The County General Fund contribution to the department' s budget has been cut by about $500,000 over the past five years and services have suffered correspondingly even though fees have been increased and the cities have been asked to contribute to the cost of providing animal services to their residents. The City of Los Angeles estimates that if the tax were applied to all animal related products the tax should produce revenue for animal control agencies of between $0.75 and $1. 16 per capita. If we were to assume that the tax produced approximately $1 . 00 per capita, in Contra Costa County, the tax would provide the County' s Animal Services Department with additional revenue of about $750, 000 a year. This might allow the County to remove some of the current General Fund support from the Animal Services Department and use the balance of the new revenue to improve the level of services. This seems to be an ideal "user fee" where those who purchase animal products pay the tax while those who do not purchase such products do not share in the cost of the tax. As long as there is no absolute maintenance of effort requirement in the proposal, counties would be able to improve the level of services at no cost to the General Fund and/or reduce the department's reliance on the General Fund. One potential problem is that if Proposition 136 on the November 61 1990 ballot is passed, it could well require voter approval of any such tax.