Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990 Ordinance No. 055C OODINANCE NO. 5 :J SElUES OF 199_0_ BY Al1I'HORITY CXXJNCll. BILL NO. 5 7 INrnOllUCED BY CXXJNCll, ME?-!l!ER o:.A"ffl:N AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN INl'ERGOVFRNMEN /\GREEl-lENT CCNCERNING INTERCITY CLl\lM.S FOR RBXJVERY BfilWEEN THE COLORADO MUNICIPALITIES OF: MWMJA, CXM1ERCE CITY, FORT CCI.LINS, GOW~, GRmMJOO VILLI\GE, LITlll:l'CN, NCRI'IG.EliN, '!'HORNI'a,, AND l,ES'J}~STER. WHEREAS, an Agreement shall be entered into by and between the following rmmicipalities: Arvada, Cam'erce City, Fort Collins, Golden, Greenwood Village, Littleton, Northglenn, Thornton, and Westminster. All parties wi ll be referred to together as "Cities"; and \'1HERE.l\S, Article XX of the Colorado Constitution grants plenary pc,,,er to hare rule cities to levy and collect taxes within their respective City limits; and NllERE.l\S, each City acrnini sters and collects t.liese taxes p,rsuant to provisions independently established by their gc:,verning bodies; and WHEREAS, because of discrepancies between post office addresses and actual City boundaries and the delivery of goods fran one City into an other, there are ir,stances where sales and use tax are erroneously remitted to the wrong taxing j urisdiction . In rrost of these situations, the purchaser has, i.~ good fait.li, ?aid tax to t.'le vendor and the vendor has, in good faith, remitted such tax to a taxing authority; and Wl!ERE.>.S, the Cities are in agreement t.liat, in order to prevent the undue burdening of businesses, remedies should be available to allow for "corrective payrrents" to be made between Cities so that each jurisdiction may recover the ta··. rightfully due to then; and WHERE.l\S, the Cities are authorized to rrake the nost efficient and effective use of their pc,,,ers and responsibilities by cooperating and ccnt.racting with each other to pr0vide a lawfully aut.liorized function or ser,ice pursuant to Article XIV, Section 18, of the Colorado Constitution and Part 2 of Article l of Title 29, C.R.S. llm, THEREFORE, PURSUANT TO BE IT ORDAlNED BY THE CITY CXXJNCll. OF THE CITY OF i'Nl;LEl•!'.X)!J , COLORADO, AS ro=s: Sectio,, 1. The City shall have the authority to enter into an agreement which cooplies with the provisions set forth generally as follows : -l - 1. Pursuant to the authority granted to hare rule cities in Article n xx of the Colorado Constitution an ::he authority granted to such cities by the Colorado Cons t hution a~d state stat ute to enter into intergove.rrirrental agreements , and in =~sideration of the rutual pranises set forth, th<i Cities, desiring to establish standard procedures for the recovery "' ~ales and use taxes paid to the wrong taxing authority. 2 • ~/hen it is determined by the Director of Finance or other prq:,er authority of one of the Cities that sales and use tax has been reporte and paid to the wrong City, the provisions of the Agreemer,t shall apply. 3. The intent of the Agreernent is to streamline and standardize procedures related to situations where tax has been remitted to the incorrect City. It is not intended to reduce -,,: eliminate the responsibilities of the taxpayer or vendor to correctly pay, collect , and remit taxes in accordance with the pr,:visions of the applicabl<: r <ty. Tho Agrement is intended to de s c r ibe rights and responsibilities only as between the nan-ed parties thento. It is not intended to a.,d shall not be deened to confer rights to any ;.'lrsons or entities not nrured as parties thereto . 4. The Agreerrent shall remain in effect as to each respective City until such City decides to no longer be a party to the Agreerrent and terminates its obligations thereunder by giving niJlety (90) days advance written notice to each of the other parties. 5. Renedies for default. Should any City fail to cx:11ply with the pl"Ollisions set forth in Paragraph 2 of the Agreenent, the aggrieved City sh!!.ll notify the nonCCI!l?lying City of the default. If the noncarplying City has not renedied the :lefault within ninety (90) days after receipt of the notice of defaul.t, the, aggrieved Ci t·· rMY, at it~ q,tion, maintain an action in a court , carp,tent jurisdi,. Linn for specific perf=nance, cleclaratory judgrrent, injunctive relief or any other apprq,riate relief. In the event .:if litigation to enforce this Agreenent, each City shall be responsible for its o,n costs, includi.,g attorney fees. 6. The Agreenent contains the entire agreerrent between the parties. Statenents, pranises , or inducemants made by a party or agent of a party that are not contained in the written agreement s.'lall not be valid or binc" .. ,:q. The Agreemant rey not be m:xl.ified except in writing, signed by the panies . A municipality may elect to becare a party to t.'le Agreemant subseque.,t to t.'le ini t i al execution of the Agreement . Th is may be acca,plished by the a&i.tion of the City to the list on Exhibit "A" and by the execction of a signature page. The anended Exhibit "A" and copies of the signature page s.'lall be sent to all parties . The Addition of an additional party shall not be co,,s idered a m:xl.ification of the Agreenent so long as no other terms or conditions have been changed. Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 19th day llovent>er, 1990. -2 - C ,,... Published as a Bi ll for an Ordinance ai the 22nd day of NovSlber , 1990 . Read by title and passed on final r eading era the 3rd day o f Decenber, 1990. Published by title as Ordinance No. !ifi' Seri es of 1990, on the 6th (jay ?f Decerrber I 1990 • ~/(#er~ Patrcia H. Cro,,,C;ty Clerk I , Patricia H. Cra,,, City Clerk o f the City of Ehglewood, Colorado, hereby certi fy that the above and foregoing i s a true OC1p'f of the~dinance passed on f inal reading a.~d published by title as Ordinance No. r.2i,2, Series of 1990. -3 - INTERGOVl:R NMEN TAL AGREEME NT CONCERNING INTERCITY CLAIMS FOR RECOVERY THIS AGREE MENT is entered into by and between the Colorado municipalities listed on Exhibit "A". All parties will be referred to together as "Ci ties ." WHEREAS, Article XX of the Colorado Constitution grants plenary power to home rule cities to levy and collect taxes within their respective City limits; and WHER E S, each City administers and collects these taxes pursuant to provisions independently established by their governing bodies; and WHEREAS, beca use of discre1 ~c ies betwee n post office addresses and actual City boundar: •s and the delivery of goods from one City into another , ,h ere are instances where sales and use tax is erroneously r, .nitted to the wrong tax"n g jurisdiction. In most of these situations, the purchaser has, in good faith, paid tax to the vendor and the v endor has, in good faith, remitted such t a x to a ta xing authority; and WHEREAS, the Cities are in agreement that , in order to prevent the undue burdening of bu .;inesses, :remedi es should be available to allow for "correcti,•e payments" to be made between Cities so that each jurisdiction may recov er t h e tax rightfully due to them: and Wl lelUlflS. t he Cities· ora aut ho ri zed t o make tha most efficient and effective use of their powers and respons i bilities by cooperating and contracti ng with each other to provide a lawfully authorized function or s~rvice pursuant to Article XIV, section 18, of the Colorado Constitution and Part 2 of Article l of Title 29, c.R.S. NOW, THEREFORE, pursu.int t ·o the authority granted to home rule cities in Article xx of the Colorado Constitution and the authority granted to such cities by the Colorado Constitution and state statut3 to enter into intergove rnmental agreements, and in consideration of the mutual promises set forth below, the Cities, desiring to establish standard procedures for the recov ery of sales and use ta xes pa i d to t h e wron! ta xing authority, agree as follows : l. As used in this Agreem en t, the following terms shall mean: A. "Assessing City" means the City claiming that sales · and/or use tax was properly due tc• it . C vendor or taxpayer, the check shall be made to the parties jointly. Denial o f a Claim for Recovery may only be made for good cause. D. A City receiving a Claim for Recovery pursuant to this Agreement may deny the Claim on t he grounds that it has prrviously paid a Claim for Recovery pursuant to this Agreement arising out of an audit of the sa1ne taxpayer. E. Tl,e period subject to a Claim for Refund shall b~ limited to the thirty-six (36) month ~eriod prior to the date the City that was wrongly p.,id the tax receives the Claim for Recovery ; F. The City receiving a Claim for Recovery may request an extension of time to inves.tigate the Claim for good cause, and approval of t he extension by the Assessing City shall not be unreasonably wi ·;hheld. 3. Intent . The intent of this Agreement is to streamline and standardize procedures related to situations where tax has been remitted to the incorrect City. It is not intended to reduce or eliminate the responsibilities of the taxpayer or vendor to correctly pay, collect , and remit taxe s in accordance wi th the provisions of the applicable City. This Agreement is intended to descri be rights and respons ibi lities only as between the named parties heretu. It is not intended to and shall not be daemed to confer rights to any persons or entities not named as parties hereto. 4. Term. This Agreement shall remain in effect as to each respective City until such City decides to no longer be a par ty to this Agreement and terminates its obl~gations hereunder by giving ninety (90) days advance written notice to ~~c~ of the other parties. 5. Remedies for Default. Should any City fail to c ,,mply with the provisions set forth in paragraph 2 of this A~reement, the aggrieved City shall notify the noncomplying City of the default. If the noncomplying City has not remedied the default within ninety (90) days after receipt of the notice of default, t h e ag g rieved City may , at its option, maintain an action in a court of competent jurisdiction for specific performance , declaratory judgment , injunctive relief or any other appropri ate relief. In the ,,vent of litigation to enforce this Agre eme nt, each City shul t be responsible for its own costs, including attorney fees. -3- lHTEROOVERNMINTAL AOR!EHEN'l' CONCEIINlHO INTERCITY CLAIHB FOR R!COVERY IXHIBIT A (Currant aa of October 25 , 1990) The Agreement named above ie entr .~d into by and betwe•n the Colorado municipalitie ■ li ■ted '•low: Arvada , ~ Dyl -~ Titi C · I COUNCIL COMMUNICATION DATE November 19 , 1990 INITIATED BY AGENDA ITEM 11 (g) Departm~nt of Finance SUBJECT lntergovenunental Agreement Ordinance STAFF SOURCE Linda Martin , Acting Director of Finance ISSUE/ ACTION PROPOSED Adopt an ordinance approving Englewood's entran ce Int o an Intergovernmental agreement \vlth the munlclpallties of Arv;,--l a , Conunerce City , Fort ColJt ns . Golden. Greenwood Village, Littleton, Northgler i'hornton, and Westminster concerning intercity claims for recovery. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION None . STAFF ANALYSIS The City currently Issues refunds In cases where tax has been pald to us which belongs to a11other Jurisdiction . When we receive checl1s from companies located outside of Engl ewood th at h ave not done business In the City , we return their checks with a map of the City ltmtts. When other co nununlttes a udit companies a nd find that Englewood has received sales tax revenue In error. we check their audit results and return the reve nue to the company . The companies, In turn . remit the ta..._es to the appropriate Jurisdiction . The ag,·~eruem may also help to forestnll further proposals to Implement state- collected tax by sho,v1ng the Ctty·s 1111I1n gness to cooper at e witl1 other nmnlclpaltlles and to ease the burden on the ta.,-p ayer . FINANCIAL There is 1.0 fores een fin a ncial Impact to the City .