SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF BALLOT LANGUAGE
RELATED TO THE PROPOSITION 218 ELECTION REQUIRED TO ALLOW THE BUENA VISTA NO.
1:
ANNEXATION OF APPROXIMATELY 38 GROSS ACRES GENERALLY BOUNDED BY WEST
SAN CARLOS AVENUE, SCOTT STREET, CHIECHI AVENUE; AND MERIDIAN AVENUE AND
PARCELS ON BOTH SIDES OF BUENA VISTA AVENUE
The
Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement recommends that the City
Council approve the proposed ballot language for the March 2002 General
Municipal Election, related to the imposition of additional taxes and fees
associated with the annexation to the City of San Jose of the unincorporated
lands described as Buena Vista No. 1.
BACKGROUND
On
December 19, 2000, the City Council conditionally approved the annexation of
area referred to as Buena Vista No. 1 and the detachment of this area from the
appropriate special districts including: Central Fire District, County Library
Service Area, Sunol Sanitary District,
Burbank Sanitary District, and County Lighting District. Included in the approval was a condition
that the recordation of the annexation resolution be deferred contingent upon a
subsequent Proposition 218 election, to be held at the next general election
(March, 2002), with eligible voters agreeing to accept new or increased
property based taxes commensurate with those collected for parcels already
within the incorporated City limits.
History of Subject Annexation
In
1999, the Buena Vista Neighborhood Association (BVNA), consisting of both city
and county residents, requested (former) Vice Mayor Fiscalini's office for a
City Council Initiated Annexation of this county pocket. Many residents within
and adjacent to this neighborhood had longstanding concerns related to blight,
crime, public services, and the quality of the infrastructure for this
neighborhood. The neighborhood association felt that greater attention by the
City and ability to utilize City services would be beneficial to improving the
quality of life in this area (See original Staff Report, attached, for more
detailed discussion).
As
indicated above, the Council approved this annexation, contingent upon an
election on the City’s taxes and property related fees. Inhabited annexations
sites that do not have 100% consent or support, such as this, are potentially
subject to elections prior to approval.
In this case, however, only one (1) protest, well below the required
number of formal written protests from either property owners and or registered
voters to trigger an election, was received.
Therefore an election on the subject of the annexation itself was not
required in this instance.
Proposition
218, approved by voters in 1996, was intended to ensure that all taxes on
property owners be subject to voter approval. While the Attorney General has
concluded that Proposition 218 does not apply to annexations, the Office of
Legislative Counsel has reached the opposite conclusion, leaving no dispositive
resolution of this issue. The City had
decided to follow a prudent course of action regarding the applicability of
Proposition 218, and therefore had recommended at the time of the annexation
the action that the subject annexation not be recorded unless the registered
voters residing in the subject area were willing to accept the additional taxes
and fees that typically and historically accompany annexed properties.
Recordation
of the conditionally approved Buena Vista No. 1 Annexation has been made
contingent on a successful outcome of the subject ballot item. The resolution
to submit this measure to the general municipal election in March, 2002 has
been drafted and is ready for adoption by the Council. The ballot language
includes a comprehensive list of all taxes and applicable fees that must be
collectively approved by the voters.
The applicable fees and taxes are aggregated into one ballot measure
because the annexation is conditioned upon approval of all of the charges in
order to be consistent with the taxes and fees paid on all other parcels in the
City. Since some of these fees and
taxes require a 2/3 vote, such as the recently passed taxes to secure the
General Obligation Bonds for parks and libraries, this measure will require a
2/3 vote to pass. The ballot language
should read as noted below:
|
To
allow annexation of Buena Vista |
|
YES |
|
|
Neighborhood
from County of Santa Clara into City of |
|
NO |
|
|
San
Jose, shall residential properties in that neighborhood be relieved of certain County fees/ taxes and
become subject to existing and proposed City taxes/ fees: Sanitary
Sewer: $227/year Storm
Sewer: $40.68/year Utility
Tax: 5% of bill Library
Assessment: $25/year Business
Tax: $150/year Garbage Fees: $14.95 - $59.80/monthExisting and Proposed General Obligation
Bonds: $59.38/$100,000 Assessed
value |
|
|
|
Fees
and taxes associated with annexed properties are slightly higher than in
unincorporated county pockets. Specific
information about such fees and taxes were provided to area residents and
property owners in the form of an “Annexation Answer Book” prepared as part of
a joint effort between the City and the County May, 1999. The Annexation Answer Book contains a
comparison of various City and County services, taxes and fee information
related to the annexed properties. A
copy of the Annexation Answer Book is attached to this report. It should be noted that the Library and
Parks Bond Measures (Measures O & P) were approved by the voters after the
Annexation Answer Book was produced.
Additionally, elsewhere on this Agenda is the proposal to submit a
general obligation bond measure for public safety facilities for the voters’
approval at this same election.
Assuming a more conservative interest rate of 7% for both the parks and
libraries general obligation bonds and the proposed public safety general
obligation bonds, the tax impact would be $59.38 per $100,000 of assessed
valuation. While obviously these more
recent measures are not a part of the Annexation Booklet prepared in 1999, an
update of the annexation book is not expected at this time since the majority
of the taxes and fees outlined in the book, with the exception of the General
Obligations Bonds, have not changed since the initial preparation and
publication of the Annexation Answer book.
Upon
a successful election, the subject area will become eligible to receive a
variety of city services as described in the Annexation Answer book. Additionally, such services will likely
include stepped up efforts regarding neighborhood improvements as a result if
the City’s Strong Neighborhood Initiative (SNI).
The Department of Planning Building and Code Enforcement has coordinated this item with the City Clerk’s Office, the City Attorney’s Office and the County Department of Planning and County Counsel’s Office.
JOSEPH HORWEDEL, ACTING DIRECTOR
Planning,
Building and Code Enforcement