CORRESPONDENCE - 75A - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

SANTA ANA'S PROPERTY BASED IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT assessment chargeable to the entire district, the amount chargeable to the record owner's parcel, the duration of the payments, the reason for the assessment and the basis upon which the amount of the proposed assessment was calculated, and the date, time, and location of a public hearing on the proposed assessment. Each notice shall also include, in a conspicuous place thereon, a summary of the procedures for the completion, return, and tabulation of the assessment ballots required pursuant to subdivision (c), including a statement that the assessment shall not be imposed if the ballots submitted in opposition to the assessment exceed the ballots submitted in favor of the assessment, with ballots weighted according to the proportional financial obligation of the affected property. "6 At the conclusion of the public hearing conducted pursuant to subdivision (d an impartial person designated by the agency who does not have a vested interest in the outcome of the proposed assessment (emphasis added) shall tabulate the assessment ballots submitted, and not withdrawn, in support of or opposition to the proposed assessment. For the purposes of this section, an impartial person includes, but is not limited to, the clerk of the agency. If the agency uses agency personnel for the ballot tabulation, or if the agency contracts with a vendor for the ballot tabulation and the vendor or its affiliates participated in the research, design, engineering public education, or promotion of the assessment, the ballots shall be unsealed and tabulated in public view at the conclusion of the hearing so as to permit all interested persons to meaningfully monitor the accuracy of the tabulation process.. "7 Furthermore, in 1996, the voters of the State of California passed Proposition 218 (Cal. Const., art. XI11 D). Considerable interpretation was given to this provision in 2008 by the courts: "Before Proposition 218 became law, special assessment laws were generally statutory, and the constitutional separation of powers doctrine served as a foundation for a more deferential standard of review by the courts. But after Proposition 218 passed, an assessment's validity, including the substantive requirements, is not a constitutional question. There is a clear limitation however, upon the power of the Legislature to regulate the exercise of a constitutional right. All such legislation must be subordinate to the constitutional provision, and in furtherance of its purpose, and must not in any particular attempt to narrow or embarrass it. Thus, a local agency acting in a legislative capacity has no authority to exercise its discretion in a way that violates constitutional provisions or undermines their effect. ,8 The court further states that: "Under the plain language of Proposition 218 (Cal. Cont., art. AW D), a special benefit must affect the assessed property in a way that is particular and distinct from its 6 California Government Code section 53753(b) 7 California Government Code section 53753 Subsection (e)(1): Silicon Valley Taxpayers' Assn., Inc. v. Santa Clara County Open Space Authority. 44 Cal.4'" 431. 7 Ibid 8 Ibid 2011-2012 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY Page 218