The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Modification CITYOF Interoffice Memorandum Engineering Division WASHINGTON To: Public Works Committee From: Dennis Selle, City Engineer/Assistant Director CC: Mayor City Clerk Councilmembers - Dennis Dowdy, Public Works Director. Ingrid Gaub, AssistantCity Engineer Date: September 3, 2010 Re: , Agenda Modification for fhe September 7, 2010 Meeting This modification transmits the addition of the following agenda, item: IV. DISCUSSION AND INFORMATION ITEMS F. RESOLUTION NO. 4639 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, EXPRESSING ITS COLLECTIVE POSITION, OPPOSING INITIATIVES 1100 AND 1105 Initiative Measure No. 1100 concerns liquor (beer, wine and spirits) This measure would direct the liquor control board to close all state liquor stores; terminate contracts with privafe stores selling liquor; and authorize the state to issue licenses that allow spirits (hard liquor) to be sold, disfcibuted, and imported by private parties. It would repeal uniform pricing and certain other requirements governing business operations for distributors and producers of beer and wine. Stores that held contracts to sell spirits could convert to liquor retailer licenses. Initiative Measure No. 1105 concems liquor (beer, wine and spirits) This measure would direct the liquor control board to close all state liquor stores and to.license qualified private parties as spirits (hard liquor) retailers o-r disfributots. It would require licensees to pay #he state. a percentage of their first five years of gross spirits sales; repeal certain taxes on retail spirits sales; direcfithe board to recommend to fhe legislature a tax to'be paid by spirits distributors; and revise other laws cbnceming spirifs. Interesfed persons will be afforded an opportunity to express opposing views. Page 1 of 1 A[]$URN * MORE THAN YOU 1MAGINED C17Y OF AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM WASHINGTON < Agenda Subject Resolution No. 4639 Date: September 1, 2010 Depairtment. Attachments: ResolUtion No. 4639 Budget impacC L al Atlmintstrattve Recommendation: • Ci.ty Council adopt:Resolution No. 4639. . • Background Sumrnary: . There are iwo inltiatives, both relating to liquor sales in state run liquor stores that are going to be- before the voters this fall, namely initiative 1105 and inWative 1100, both"of which would dose the state liquor stores and allow hard Iiquor sales in private stores. • The ba.llot titles for both initiatives. sound very similar, attlhough their efrects have some differences. Initiative 1100 favors tiig .reta.ilers, and was badced by Costco stores, and would for the first Ome allow retailers to purchase Fiard liquor, beer and wine directly from manufacturers. On the 'other hand, Initiative 1105 was the distributors' proposal, and it preseerves a business monopoly for liquor distributors. • There a*differenc8s in the tvration sbuctures imposed by the two initiatives: But they have one tiig point in common. Both, would.repeal the state's marlcup on alcoholic beverages. B.ecause both initiaatives will be on the. ballot, if both are appmved by the voters, it will raise the- . question :of which initiafive language will control. The secretary of state's office, has been trying lo answee that one.ever since campaigns were mounted to support the two infiatives. Iniliative. 1105 would modify fhe existing language of. the:.statutes, while Initiative 1100 would; eliminate existing statutes and -reptace-them with new ones. The .language of the infiatives may be-sufficierrtly unclear so that the courts may ut6mately.have to aedide W,ich Wiu controi. . . A0907-1 • . . A3.4 . . "Revteyred by'Courial 8 Coeemittaes: Revtewed by'Depar6nents 8 DIvWonsr • [3 Arts Commissicn COUNCIL COMMITTEES: ❑ Buildln0 [3 M8A . * Airport ❑ Finan6e Q Conmm 13 Mayror . ❑ Iiearing.Examiner ❑ Munidpal Serv. O Fronce 0 Parks p Humari•Servioes p Planaing & CD ❑ Flre • ❑ Planrung p Park:Board pPublicWorks ❑ Legsl O Poliae . ' , ❑ Planning Comm. p Other ❑ Public Worlcs ❑ Human Resouroes . Aetlon: . Committee Approval: DYes QNo . councii np~rovsi: OYes ONo cea lor Heaftg Referrea co uMn J._J_ . Tables . uMif J. • . . . . C6unc7lmemb.er. Badcus • " . Sge. Heid . . Meetin Date: Se -bember 7, 2010 Item Nutntier: ~ VlII.B.3 ALj$URN MORE THAN YOU 1MAGiNED Agenda $ubJect: Resolution No. 4639 Date: Sepbember 1, 2010 . ~ There :are two ways to interpret confGcting initiatives when they both pass. The courts might dedde . that where the two infiatives coniGct, the initiative that got ttte most vofes prevails: Altematively, the courts may deade that the voters intended to pass both measures and that botfi car.ry equal weight in which case'it might come down fo the actual virocding and interpr+etation of tthe measures. More critical to aties, .including Aubum, is the fad that these initiatives. if. passed, would reduce monies received tiY the "Y fhat it` uses fo fund police and .law enforoemerrt activifies. The effect of these inillatives, if passed; woutd be to reduce taxes and Gquor sales revenues to tfie city of Aubum - Wan amount of over $800,000 per.year. • - " While aloohol may be a legai coinmodity for cerhain inembers of the population, there are significanf impacts to law enforoemeM and `the commun'y that result fr+om -its misuse and e5c_oess use. It appears that- sorne of the revenue that tias been directed: -to loca[ communities thafi -affotds some measure of funding for tFie law enforcemerrt would be eliminated if the initiatives were passed. Per state law, the City Counql may, but Js not required to, express support for or opposition to ballot. prppositions so Jong as oertain requirements are7met The statirtory r+equinemerrts are1ound in RCIN 42.17.130, the text of wfsich is sef forth below. These requirements include rtmakmg sure that the . ballot proposihon 'is sufficiently referenoed and that membeirs of the City Couna'I and/or pubCc are afforded an opportunity of approximatelyequalfime to exPress.oPposin9 visws. 42.17.130. Forbids use of publiG office or agency tadlitles in campaigns. ' : No elecaye official nor arry empioyee of his affice nor any person appointed to oc employed by any public office or :agency may use or authorize the use of any of the facilifies of a public. ofFioe or agency, direcUy or indi.redly, for the purpose of assisting a campaign for election of any person to any offioe or for the promotion of or opposition to any ballot propositiion. Facilities of public offioe or agency indude, but are no~t limited to, use of staOonery; posfage, machines, and equipment, use of employees of the office or agency duri ng working hours, vehides, office spaoe, publications of the offce or agency, and dienfete Gsts of persons 6erved by the office cr agency: PROVIDED, That the foregoing provisions of thfs sedion shalF not appty to the following activities: (1) Adlon taken at an open public meeetinng .by members of an etected legislative body to express a coliecdve decision, or tD acCually vote upon a motion, prvposat, nesolution, oMer.- or ordinance, or to support or oppose a ballot propasigon so long as (a) any c+equir+ed not~e of the meeting includes the titie and number of the batlot proposition, ~and (b) members of ttie legisiatirre body or members of the public are afForded an approximately, equai opportunity for the expnession of an opposing view; . . • . (2) A stafiement by an elected otfiaal in support of or in opposition to any balfot proposition at an open press coMerenoe or in response tp a specific inquiry;. . (3) Acdvities which are part of the nortnal and regular ccndud of the affioe or agency Page 2 of 3 . = RESOLUTVON NO. 4 6 3 9 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON; EXPRESSING - !TS COLLECTtVE POSITION, OPPOSING INITIATIVES 1100 AND 1105 . WHE:REAS; Infiatives 1100 and 1105 are being :presented to the voters this falf, both of which seek to close down the state run liquorstores; and WHEREAS, if passed; the Secretary of State would have to grapple with the question of how to determine what the-two initiatives mean, and WHEREAS, aside from the practical question$'to be addressed by the state; financial questions- thatWould need to be addressed by the City of Aubum and the other cities ackss the: state are how they can continue to fund law enforcemenf activities in light of the revenue losses that would result from these infiatives, or either one of them; and WHEREA$, atthough alcoholic beverages:. may-be a Iegal commodity for certain members of the. population, there are signficant impacts to law . ' enforcement and the community that -result from its misuse, and excess use; and , WHEREAS, it appears~ tf:iat: some of the revenue that has been directed to Iocal communities that affords some measure.of funding for the law enforcement - would be eliminated if the initiatives were'passed; and WHEREAS, for the City of: Auburn, if these initiatnres passe,d, the City will see a reduction in liquor .tax. and lee revenues in - the ~ amount of :$800,000 per, . . ~ . year, which monies have traditionally been delegated to help defray the costs of police and !aw enforcemerrt: " . " Resolufion No..4639 . . Septemberl, 2010. , Page 1 ofi2 - NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL. OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, HEREBY RESOLVES as follows: Section 1. The City Council expresses- its collecctive position and. opposes Initiafives 11D0 and 1105 for the reasons set forth above: Se 'on 2. . That the -Mayor is - authorized to implement such . . administrative procedures as may be necessa.ry fo ca.rry out the dinectives of thisv.,. . . . , legislation. . . Sectian 3. That ttiis Resolution .shal.l take . eflied and be in fiill .-force . upon passage and signatures hereon. • . bated and Signed this day of . 2009. . CITY OF AUB.URN . PETER B. LEWIS . MAYOR . ATTEST: . . . - Danielle E. Daskam, City Cl..erk AP iel B. k ; itY Attomey, - Resolution No. 4639 September 1, 2010 . Page 2 of 2