Loading...
SR-507-000 (57) EPWM: CC:AA:DB:JC:F:\DATA\SPFILES\SP1890\Assessment Process\CC1890-Hold Hearing-Revised.doc City Council Meeting: October 22, 2002 Santa Monica, California TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: City Staff Recommendation to Hold a Public Hearing for the Formation of Street SUBJECT: Light Assessment Districts in Conformance with Proposition 218 Introduction This report recommends that the City Council hold a public hearing regarding the formation of assessment districts for the installation of new streetlights in conformance with Proposition 218, enacted as Article 13 D of the California Constitution, ?Assessment and Property Related Fee Reform.? Background On August 13, 2002 City Council accepted petitions and set a public hearing for the formulation of Street Light Assessment Districts for the following streets: District ?A? Princeton Street - Montana Avenue to Washington Avenue District ?B? Washington Avenue - Princeton Street to Harvard Street Notices of the City?s intent to form assessment districts and hold public hearings were mailed to eligible voters forty-five (45) days in advance of the time and place of the public hearing in accordance with State law. In addition to the notice, eligible voters were sent a ballot and return envelope for the purpose of voting for or against the assessment. 1 A public meeting was held between City staff and affected property owners and residents on September 25, 2002 to discuss the location, type, and approximate cost of the streetlights for these districts. In accordance with Article 13D, an Engineer's Report was prepared for this project, which determined the general and special benefits of streetlight installation. General benefits enhance the public as a whole, while special benefits enhance a particular parcel. A copy of this report is available in the offices of the City Engineer and the City Clerk. According to Article 13D, parcels may only be assessed for the special benefits or any portion thereof. The report presents the Engineer's determination that the special benefit of streetlight installation is 80% of the total benefit for residential properties and 81% of the total benefit for non-residential properties. Consistent with past City policy, staff recommends that residential property owners be assessed 50% of the total cost and non-residential properties be assessed at 80% of total costs. Assessments for non-profit organizations, which can provide evidence of receiving a welfare exemption from the Los Angeles County Tax Assessor, are waived, and the City will fund these costs. Discussion All properties are assessed for streetlighting based upon the parcel front or side footage. If the legal address of the assessed parcel is on the street receiving streetlights, the parcel will be assessed at the front footage rate. If the legal address of the parcel is on the cross street of the street receiving streetlights (i.e. some corner parcels), the parcel will be 2 assessed at the side footage rate. In accordance with past City policy, the proposed assessment spread for streetlights is: TYPE OF TYPE OF CITY PROPERTY PROPERTY FOOTAGE SHARE SHARE RESIDENTIAL FRONT FOOTAGE 50% 50% SIDE FOOTAGE 80% 20% NON-RESIDENTIAL FRONT FOOTAGE 20% 80% SIDE FOOTAGE 60% 40% These proposed assessment amounts are equal to or less than the special benefit cost of streetlighting as identified in the Engineer?s report and are therefore in compliance with Article 13D. Ballot Results Ballots are accepted until the close of the public hearing. At the hearing, the City Council will hear all objections and protests, if any, to the proposed assessment. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the assessment ballots submitted and not withdrawn, in support of or in opposition to the proposed assessment will be tabulated. No assessment will be imposed if there is a majority protest. A majority protest exists if, upon the conclusion of the hearing, ballots submitted in opposition to the assessment exceed the ballots submitted in favor of the assessment. Tabulation of the assessment ballots is weighted 3 according to the financial obligation of each affected property. The City Clerk?s office will tally the votes and present results at the Council Meeting of November 12, 2002. Budget/Financial Impact There is no financial impact to holding the public hearing. Staff will present the budget and impacts of financing the assessment districts at the November 12 Council meeting. Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Open the public hearing; 2. Hear comments and protests; 3. Close the public hearing; 4. Continue the item to November 12, 2002 to receive the certified results and take action on proposed assessment districts. Prepared by: Craig Perkins, Director of Environmental and Public Works Management Anthony Antich, P.E., City Engineer Dave Britton, P.E., Principal Civil Engineer Renee Cowhig, Maintenance Manager Ruth Firestone, Engineering Support Services Supervisor James Creager P.E., Civil Engineer 4 5