CCMIN111897 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Ayala asked staff to explain how Proposition 218 affects property in Pleasanton. Mr. Lum said that generally there are protest provisions under Proposition 218 that would apply in this case, however, because this District is being formed by unanimous consent of all the property owners, the District can be formed. If in the future assessments exceed a certain amount, than that amount would be subject to a Proposition 218 vote. Mr. Roush said assessment districts can be formed in several different ways. Usually before an assessment district is formed, it must go to the vote of the people. In this particular case there is only one property owner who wished to form the assessment district. As long as the assessment remains the same, it will not have to be submitted for a vote. If in ten or fifteen years, the assessment increases above the annual escalator then that would need to be submitted to the property owners. If there is a majority vote not to increase the assessment, then the additional assessment could not be levied. He mentioned that forming this type of assessment district would not become routine but with the Geological Hazard Abatement District there are enough advantages to having one, notwithstanding the potential problems caused by Proposition 218. Ms. Acosta said the City has been very careful over the years with taxation issues. When Proposition 218 was passed, it was passed because many voters believed that the government had tried to get around Proposition 13. There have been very few assessment districts adopted in Pleaanton. The few lighting and landscaping districts that were done were adopted on the basis that it was a positive thing for the neighborhoods. The City is very sensitive to the issues that are involved with creating assessment districts. The few districts the City has could be in jeopardy because the neighborhoods in the future may not support them. The City staff has discussed going to the neighborhoods and explaining what would happen if the assessments districts were not in place. Mr. Lure said the City has started the process to meet with homeowners within the districts to explain why the districts were formed and the benefits. Ms. Michelotti asked if an increase in assessments is necessary, would it be put to the vote of the people? Ms. Acosta said only if the increase was over and above the inflation escalator. Mr. Lure said the reason for the formation of this district is for prevention purposes. Mayor Tarver declared the public hearing open. Kathleen McDonald, 1331 N. California Blvd, Walnut Creek, 94596, an attorney with McCutchen, Brown, Emersen & Doyle representing Presley Homes, supported the staff report and requested the formation of the Geological Hazard Abatement District. Pleasanton City Council 5 11/18/97 Minutes