City Council adopted tax exemption ordinances with retro-active effective dates, even though a Council resolution states that such ordinances must have a future effective date.
No response received from Mr. Baliles:
To: Jonathan Baliles <jonathan.baliles@richmondgov.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2013 11:52 AM
Subject: Baliles – Resolution 3013-R8 – Applicability
Dear Mr. Baliles,Can you explain the reasoning of the city attorney when he stated that the tax exemption ordinances 2013-89 through 2013- 94 are not subject to resolution 2013-R8?Resolution 2013-R8 states:
That the Council, to the extent permitted by law, hereby establishes a policy of the Council that (i) the patrons, whether the Mayor or one or more members of the Council, of a proposal that would result in the reduction of an existing revenue source must also identify an alternative revenue source to offset the proposed reduction and (ii) any proposal that would result in the reduction of an existing revenue source must have an effective date no earlier than the first July 1 falling at least 120 calendar days after the adoption of such proposal; provided that this policy shall have no application to revenue reduction measures proposed for the succeeding fiscal year in conjunction with the process for the adoption of the annual budget and appropriation ordinances pursuant to Chapter 6 of the Charter of the City of Richmond (20 1 0) as amended.Resolution 2013-R8 was adopted on March 25 2013 and took effect upon adoption.The tax exemption ordinances exempt specified properties from real property taxation for the tax year beginning Jan. 1, 2013, and all subsequent tax years contingent upon the continued use of the property in accordance with the charitable purpose of providing financial assistance to various organizations and individuals to combat poverty and hunger in impoverished communities in the Richmond area.Each ordinance states: “This ordinance shall be in force and effect as of January 1, 2013.”
The tax exemption ordinances have not yet been adopted by city council.At the March 18 2013 meeting of the Finance and Economic Development Standing Committee the city attorney made the following statements:1:36:59 Jackson – The resolution that most people refer to as the revenue reduction off-set policy was a resolution that was adopted as a policy of the council effective March 25th, 2013. Each of these ordinances, because they apply to the 2013 tax year take effect prior to the policy. And, so as a strictly matter of law, the policy doesn’t apply to any of them. But for the coincidence of dates the policy would apply and ordinarily would require an offset or a different effective date. But because of this coincidence it simply doesn’t apply.
1:37:54 Graziano: You and I had discussed making these go into effect on July 1st.
1:38:01 Jackson: But they can’t because it’s January 1st tax year by charter. They have to take effect on January 1st or in the one case February 14th when the owner acquired the property.
1:38:13 Graziano: Because the applications were made prior to….1:38:19 Jackson: Applications also were made prior to. But the critical issue is when the ordinances would become effective if adopted versus the date that the policy became effective.
There seem to be two problems with the city attorney’s statements. First, the resolution seems to specifically require a future effective date for ordinances. Second, even if the resolution had been silent on the issue, the tax exemption ordinances would become effective on the date of adoption. Only the application of the content of the ordinance would be retro-active. The ordinance itself would be subject to the resolution unless council overrides the resolution.Thank you,Copy: Council, Better Government Richmond, Press