HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-03-12 - Resolution No. 81-02RESOLUTION NO. 81-02
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE YORBA LINDA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
SUPPORTING THE INDEPENDENT DISTRICT OF ORANGE COUNTY POLICY STATEMENT REGARDING
PROPERTY TAX ALLOCATION
WHEREAS, the Yorba Linda County Water District is a member of ISDOC, and
WHEREAS, the Yorba Linda County Water District has recently annexed certain
territory East of Yorba Linda, and
WHEREAS, in order to finance the back bone facilities in this newly annexed
area two (2) Improvement Districts were formed and Bonds were
sold to pay for said facilities, and
WHEREAS, the adoption of AB 8 has created a serious problem regarding the
allocation of property taxes,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THIS DISTRICT does support the policy
statement as adopted by ISDOC and said statement is set forth
as follows:
AB 8 - the law which implemented Proposition 13 - allowed a
loophole in the distribution of property tax revenues in annexed areas.
The County is planning to take advantage of this loophole by taking away
from the special districts all of their annexation tax revenues and keeping
them.
For years past, special districts have traditionally received a
modest share in property tax revenues. In future years, they are expected
to continue to share these revenues. But for a period of 2 J years - from January
1, 1978 to July 28, 1980 - property taxes in areas annexed to special districts
will be paid to the County, not to the districts. This is the loophole allowed
by the law.
This means that special districts will have to invest heavily in
facilities, equipment and people within these annexed areas to provide nec-
essary services - but they will receive no tax revenues in return.
The Independent Special Districts of Orange County protest this
unjust action by the County!
It is burdensome to our citizens because user charges will have
to be levied to compensate for the loss of legitimate property
tax revenues.
It is inequitable. because property owners in the annexed areas
will pay more than other people in the district who receive the
identical services.
It is discriminatory because neither the county, nor cities, nor
school districts, nor any other local government has been deprived
of these revenues - only special districts.
1b 0
It is unreasonable because the revenues are a very small
percentage of the total property tax going to the county,
but represents a major loss to the special districts.
We urge the Board of Supervisors to close the loophole. We urge the Board to
restore to special districts that same historical proportion of property tax
revenues in annexed areas that they have always received in the past.
Passed and adopted this 12th day of March 1981 by the following called vote:
AYES: Directors Lindow, Clodt, Korn, Cromwell and Knauft
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
President
ATTEST: ~j
Secret y