Although council members declined to take a position on either Proposition 57 or 58, at their Feb. 17 meeting, they unanimously voted to support a petition that could control the state's reliance on local government funds.

Joining other cities across the state, the council lent its support to Local Taxpayers and Public Safety Protection Act 2004. The act aims to restrict the state's future access to city and town revenues.

Proponents of the act are working to collect the required signatures for the measure to make the November 2004 ballot. With an April 15 deadline looming, supporters are fanning out throughout the state to garner endorsements from city councils as well as support from California citizens.

If passed, the act would require that the state seek authorization from local taxpayers before borrowing funds from its cities.

The League of California Cities, which represents all the cities in the state, is sponsoring the petition. The California State Association of Counties and the California Association of Special Districts are also backing the proposal. The league hopes to get more than a million signatures for the measure over the next six weeks.

Supporters say the act sends a clear message to Sacramento about fiscal responsibility at the state level and would give local governments more control over their money.

"The Local Taxpayers and Public Safety Protection Act will restore balance and fairness to the system by allowing residents to decide what the state can take," said Rebecca Elliot, a regional representative from the League of California Cities. "If you are looking to local government to solve the state government's problems, you can do so, but you can only do so with the support of taxpayers."

In the past few months, cities and towns have faced a constant threat that Sacramento will take part of their local revenue to ease the state's budget woes. Income from property taxes, as well as redevelopment funds, has been targeted as potential revenue sources for the state.

Under Gov. Schwarzenegger's current proposal, Los Gatos could lose as much as $400,000 in property-tax revenues to the state this year. This would be in addition to an existing loss of a half-million dollars in property taxes as well as a potential loss of almost $3.2 million in vehicle license fees.

As a solution to the state's budget crisis, the governor has proposed Propositions 57 and 58, both on the March 2 ballot. Prop. 57 calls for a $15 billion bond measure to raise revenue for the state, while Prop. 58 requires the state legislature to pass a balanced budget every year. The propositions must be passed in tandem to be implemented.

The council did not take a position on either proposition during last week's meeting, calling the decision a private matter.

"I have my personal feelings about [the propositions], but I don't feel comfortable about it, trying to persuade the electorate one way or another on it," said Councilwoman Diane McNutt.

While McNutt reserved judgment on both propositions, she spoke generally about the state of affairs in Sacramento.

"I very much think that there are some substantial changes that need to be made in the state government," she said. "And I also firmly believe that we need to be looking at ways to protect the revenue that comes to the town and other cities."

Mayor Steve Glickman was the only council member who offered his position on the propositions, saying that he would support the measures but that he did so with much reservation.

"Out of town interests—although I'm not a great fan of solving budget problems the way the state proposes to do it—I'm also very cognizant of the fact that if these bonds don't pass, we will be hurt," he said.

"We will be a good deal worse off if these don't pass than if they do."