My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
04
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2013
>
052113
>
04
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/14/2013 12:10:07 PM
Creation date
5/14/2013 12:09:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
5/21/2013
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
04
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Effects of Proposition 218 <br /> Proposition 218, commonly referred to as the "Right to Vote on Taxes Act," was passed <br /> by the voters on November 5, 1996. The Proposition amends the State's Constitution <br /> by adding Articles XIII(C) and XIII(D) to do the following: <br /> Limit the authority of local governments (including cities, counties, special <br /> districts, school districts, and redevelopment agencies) to impose taxes and <br /> property related assessments, fees, and charges. <br /> Establish procedures for implementing annual assessments which includes <br /> benefit assessments, special assessments, and maintenance assessments, etc. <br /> The procedures include a requirement that the City develop an engineering <br /> report which identifies the benefit that will accrue to each individJai property as a <br /> result of the assessment. Further, subject to certain exceptions, it establishes <br /> that the majority of the property owners in the assessment dislrict must vote in <br /> favor of the assessment for it to be implemented each year. Fees or charges for <br /> sewer, water, and refuse collection services are exempted from the Proposition. <br /> Further, general tax assessments for police, fire, and emergency medical <br /> programs are prohibited. <br /> If the District was formed prior to Proposition 218 and pursuant to a petition signed by <br /> the property owner(s) of all the parcels subject to the assessment, the District is exempt <br /> from the requirement that a majority of the property owners must vote each year in favor <br /> of the assessment. Here, all the existing Lighting and Landscape Assessment Districts <br /> were formed pursuant to such a petition prior to the passage of Proposition 218. <br /> Accordingly, as none of the assessments are proposed to be increased, no vote is <br /> required of the current property owners. Should an increase in the annual assessment <br /> be required in the future, the City will follow the process set forth in Proposition 218. <br /> Existing assessment districts must comply with Proposition 218's requirement that only <br /> special benefits, not general benefits, may be assessed when evaluating lighting and <br /> landscape maintenance districts. The definition of a special benefit is "a particular and <br /> distinct benefit over and above general benefits conferred on real property located in the <br /> district or to the public at large." General enhancement of property value does not <br /> constitute "special benefit." To the extent an assessment provides both general benefits <br /> and special benefits, the City must separate the general benefits from the special <br /> benefits and pay for the general benefits out of another revenue source, typically the <br /> City's General Fund. <br /> With these adjustments for Proposition 218, staff believes that the existing Lighting and <br /> Landscape Districts should continue. The landscaping being maintained under each <br /> district is of specific benefit to the property owners comprising each district, and the <br /> Lighting and Landscaping Assessment process provides an efficient and effective <br /> means for maintenance to be assured. <br /> Page 3 of 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.