If you want to be a total pain in the ass return your ballot by certified mail. That way somebody at the city has to sign for it and you get a receipt.
Hey, it's so unfair that City gets to vote on all its parcels that won't be paying water tax, all those parcels without water meters, whoever owns them, will get to vote. This is taxation without representation. This should be regular property tax vote, required to pass by 2/3 majority.
It's not just the parks, vacant lots, and city hall that have a parcel number. Most streets have an underlying parcel number as well. Is it any wonder that they chose a parcel tax as a way to steal this prop? Who will vote for the city?
Excerpt from Article XIIID (Proposition 218)of the California Constitution:
SEC. 6. Property Related Fees and Charges. (a) Procedures for New or Increased Fees and Charges. An agency shall follow the procedures pursuant to this section in imposing or increasing any fee or charge as defined pursuant to this article, including, but not limited to, the following: (1) The parcels upon which a fee or charge is proposed for imposition shall be identified. The amount of the fee or charge proposed to be imposed upon each parcel shall be calculated. The agency shall provide written notice by mail of the proposed fee or charge to the record owner of each identified parcel upon which the fee or charge is proposed for imposition, the amount of the fee or charge proposed to be imposed upon each, the basis upon which the amount of the proposed fee or charge was calculated,...
Questions to the city: Did each mail ballot have the specific information for each specific parcel? Was the specific amount of the fee for each parcel number (APN) printed on each individual ballot? A $5 fee per active water meter generic statement doesn't tell the assessed property owner what is specifically owed on his/her property. Did each mail ballot show the basis upon which the fee for each parcel was calculated?
Why didn't the city put that information on the ballot?
Good idea. How much extra will this cost?
ReplyDeleteHey, it's so unfair that City gets to vote on all its parcels that won't be paying water tax, all those parcels without water meters, whoever owns them, will get to vote. This is taxation without representation. This should be regular property tax vote, required to pass by 2/3 majority.
It's not just the parks, vacant lots, and city hall that have a parcel number. Most streets have an underlying parcel number as well. Is it any wonder that they chose a parcel tax as a way to steal this prop?
ReplyDeleteWho will vote for the city?
Last time I sent a letter certified it was a buck fifty.
ReplyDeleteExcerpt from Article XIIID (Proposition 218)of the California Constitution:
ReplyDeleteSEC. 6. Property Related Fees and Charges. (a) Procedures for New or Increased Fees and Charges. An agency shall follow the procedures pursuant to this section in imposing or increasing any fee or charge as defined pursuant to this article, including, but not limited to, the following:
(1) The parcels upon which a fee or charge is proposed for imposition shall be identified. The amount of the fee or charge proposed to be imposed upon each parcel shall be calculated. The agency shall provide written notice by mail of the proposed fee or charge to the record owner of each identified parcel upon which the fee or charge is proposed for imposition, the amount of the fee or charge proposed to be imposed upon each, the basis upon which the amount of the proposed fee or charge was calculated,...
Questions to the city:
Did each mail ballot have the specific information for each specific parcel? Was the specific amount of the fee for each parcel number (APN) printed on each individual ballot?
A $5 fee per active water meter generic statement doesn't tell the assessed property owner what is specifically owed on his/her property. Did each mail ballot show the basis upon which the fee for each parcel was calculated?
Why didn't the city put that information on the ballot?