My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
04 ATTACHMENT 3
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2019
>
052119
>
04 ATTACHMENT 3
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/15/2019 5:07:27 PM
Creation date
5/15/2019 5:07:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
5/21/2019
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
Document Relationships
04
(Message)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2019\052119
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
34
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
PAGE 20 <br /> be paid from non-assessment revenues. Similarly, City staff hours dedicated to the <br /> administration of the assessment is estimated to be at least$1,800 per year. However,since <br /> the budget only accounts for $600, the $1,200 difference is another monetary contribution <br /> from the City's General Fund. The total of these two amounts, $7,312, also helps offset any <br /> general benefit provided by the Improvements, in addition to the City non-monetary <br /> contributions described above. <br /> Source of Contributions from Other Funds to Satisfy 10.0% Requirement <br /> City non-monetary contributions: <br /> 10.0% (Curb and gutter) <br /> + 10.0% (Storm drainage system) <br /> + 10.0% (Public roads) <br /> + 20.0% (Amortized value of initial construction) <br /> = 50.0% (Total General Benefit paid from other funds) <br /> City monetary contributions: <br /> $6,112 General Fund payment for Prop 218 assessment increase review <br /> + $1,200 General Fund contribution for City staff assessment administration <br /> = $7,312 City of Pleasanton General Fund contribution <br /> ZONES OF BENEFIT <br /> The boundaries of the Assessment Area are carefully drawn to only include the properties <br /> that are proximate to the Improvements and that would materially benefit from the <br /> Improvements. <br /> In SVTA, the court noted that even a local agency-wide assessment district is appropriate <br /> under the right conditions: <br /> "Thus, if an assessment district is narrowly drawn, the fact that a benefit is <br /> conferred throughout the district does not make it general rather than <br /> special. In that circumstance, the characterization of a benefit may depend <br /> on whether the parcel receives a direct advantage from the improvement <br /> (e.g., proximity to a park) or receives an indirect, derivative advantage <br /> resulting from the overall public benefits of the improvement(e.g., general <br /> enhancement of the district's property values)." <br /> The court therefore acknowledged the appropriateness of a District-wide assessment so <br /> long as each parcel receives a direct advantage from the assessment-funded improvement <br /> CM/OF PLEASANTON <br /> LIGHTING&LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1993-1,WINDSOR SCIConsultingGroup <br /> ENGINEER'S REPORT,FISCAL YEAR 2019-20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.