HomeMy WebLinkAbout4006 - Proposition 100
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
X18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
-n�SUT,UTIOrr No. y� G
I. -TI '.Etgi S: Proposition 140. 10 would prohibit the proper and
econoricel use of public funds ftar obvL -m) public purposes by the
Joint action_ of all or the eitiMs and ot?zer r u,.lic agencies cc
California; and
1117:M' 87 Pro ^osition 110. 10 do c3 not prohibit t %ie separate
expenditure of public funds to urge icgialation of intezest to the
City of Nevcort Peach but merely prevents the Cit, of Nmr,ort Zeacb
from, ,dth sister municipaltities in urging the ar?ortion of
state and federal legislation of intorest to all cities or opposing
the enactrent of measures vhioh wo 'ld be im- ediately h� mlful to oil
residents; and
T�.I ERMSs Proposition VTo. log which in no .ray relates to
pensions., is advance ^, lrf pension pro_oter George icLain to punish
those who op osed and defeated a former ncLain pension program;
I :HMIIAS, Proposition 'No. 10 does not prohibit private int-
erests from influencing legislation on a collective basis but only
prohibits coilect`.ve rapresent,�.tion of n tblio Interests -:nu.
and
VH HEASs Proposition ^o. 10 permanently destroys or
damages a countless nuynber of quasi - public agencies whose only pur-
pose is the advancement of good govern -aent anO the public interests
such as the League of California Citics, the Shoreline :'fanning,
District Attorneys s Irrigation Districts, .lire Ch1 efs s Su-pervisors,
School Trustees and Sehool kdmin"istrstors kssockt:izns, anc& the
California Conrcrenae of SocLGl 'whemsy and
!TT R'A5, Proposition 10. 10 vo--ld cause the wasteful and
extravagant expenditure of pul:lic fnsads to do inuivleaml.ly 1.,hat may
nmr be Pe`l?eved econo?s,ically jointly y cities and other public
agencies of California, including tie state and! its dopartments and
agencies; pout t1lie-refores
i
11
• 2)
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MM
27
28
• 29
30
31
32
F
(2)
TIM CITE' COII_:CIL OF TI^ CITY 0" M: Or
MACH DM E iOLVE
AS FOLLOMSt that it is opposoc to the zdortion of Prorosition Ito.
10 because it would cause untold hares to the cities o5' California
an their citizens and urges the electors Of the City Of Yciln-ort
Beach to vote "No" on Propositicm !:o. 10 r:t tho "moven"bor l +thy
lMt election.
I lte.,teby certify that the aaova and foregoing resolution
was duly and regularly sassed and adc ;tsd by 1i;Lm City Council of
the GiVr of NesDort Beach at an adjourned rcgular meeting thereof
held on t.:c 6th day of October' 19527 I3;- the fo?loving Grote, to-
Vitt
City Clerk
AYTno3 C0T! -03. n'Y. —✓w J, o` i`a / /,�i Kelp �•l��
NOES, C07 CIL.M 4z --
ABSEidT CJiT_'CIL° idz %'�
f mayor
F- -I
La
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH )
I, MARGERY SCHROUDER, City Clerk of the City of Newport
Beach, California, do hereby certify that according to the records
of the City of Newport Beach filed and maintained in my office,
the foregoing Resolution No 4006 was duly and
regularly adopted, passed, and approved by the City Council of
adjourned
the City of Newport Beach, California, at a regular /meeting of said
City Council held at the regular meeting place thereof, on the
6th
vote, to wit:
day of ` October
AYES, COUNCILMEN
NOES, COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT, COUNCILMEN:
- \;Dated this
•
, 1952, by the following
Smith, Finch, Isbell, Bennett, Miller
None
None
8th day of October ) 1957.
k
C ty nd EX-_Officio Cler
of the City Council, City of
Newport Beach, State of California.