SR 05:200 - Laserfiche WebLink

Beginning in 1997, because of concerns generated by Proposition 218, the County Auditor required the requesting agencies to certify that the taxes and assessments that were to be placed on the tax roll meet the requirements of Proposition 218. The County also required that the requesting agency indemnify the County should there be a challenge to the tax or assessment on grounds that it doesn't comply with the requirements of Proposition 218. The Council has annually authorized the City Attorney to sign a Certification and Mutual Indemnification Agreement with the County concerning Pleasanton's taxes and assessments. The County Auditor has again this year (and we expect this to occur yearly) requested that the City certify that the assessments that the City wants placed on the 2005/2006 tax roll comply with the requirements of Proposition 218 and that the City Council authorize the City Attorney to sign a Certification/Indemnification to that effect. DISCUSSION Of the sixteen special assessments and fees identified on Exhibit A to the Certification, four represent bonded indebtedness for the improvements within the North Pleasanton Improvement District and technically are outside the scope of Proposition 218. The remainder - the landscape and lighting districts, the GHAD's, the urban nmoff fee - were evaluated at length by staff for compliance with Proposition 218. We have concluded that these various assessments do comply with Proposition 218 and there are no legal challenges pending suggesting otherwise. Accordingly, we believe that based on our current understanding of the law, the assessments that the City will request the County to place on the tax rolls meet the requirements of Proposition 218. FISCAL IMPACT If one of the assessments were challenged, the City would incur legal costs to defend the challenge; we would also be responsible for any judgment imposed on the County as a result of the City's failure to comply with Proposition 218. In that staff believes the City has complied with the law and that staff is not aware of any challenge to any of the City's assessments, there should be no fiscal impact as a result of this certification. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Council adopt the attached resolution certifying to the County that the taxes, fees and assessments that the City will request the County to place on the 2005/2006 tax roll meet the requirements of Proposition 218. Resl~ectfullv Submitted ~, ~ Michael H. Roush Nelson Fialho City Attorney City Manager Attachment SR:05:200 Page 2