Among
the critical issues facing Yorba Linda are a few associated with the
Landscape Maintenance Assessment District, including expensive water
use, aging infrastructure and an increasing reliance on the city's
general fund to cover deficits in several special benefit zones.
Two
actions regarding the district were taken at a recent City Council
meeting – one routine on a 5-0 vote and one with
far-reaching implications on a 4-1 vote (Craig Young dissenting).
The
routine vote initiated the process to levy 2015-16 assessments for 43
benefit zones: 29 for local landscaping, nine for arterial (major
street) landscaping, three for traffic signals, one for arterial
street lighting and one for local street lighting, all to be
collected with property taxes.
Assessments
on single-family homes this fiscal year ranged from $45.70 to $473.50
for local landscaping for about half of the city's parcels, plus
$52.21 for arterial landscaping, $1.38 for arterial lighting, $17.85
for local lighting on most parcels and $3.13 to $7.62 for traffic
signals.
The
second vote stated an intent to stop general fund subsidies for zones
with expenses exceeding revenue from assessments and the city's
“general benefit” contribution, if a vote on increasing
assessments is scheduled.
Added
general fund contributions were required in 11 of the 33 zones in
existence in the 2013-14 fiscal year, according to a
report by Mike Wolfe, director of public works.
“One
of the potential solutions to these deficit zones would be a
successful Proposition 218 vote,” Wolfe stated, noting “a general
concern” that without “negative consequences” for a failed
vote, “there is no incentive for residents to vote to increase
their own assessments.”
Approved
by state voters in 1996, the proposition requires a majority of
property owners to approve assessments local governments have been
using to boost revenue after Proposition 13 limited property taxes
in 1978.
A
mail ballot of the city's property owners in 1997 resulted in 83
percent approval for the district's assessment rates, plus an annual
consumer price index adjustment, but a modest arterial
landscape hike drew a 75 percent “no” vote in 2008.
The
district maintains more than 580 acres of irrigated landscaped area,
according to a November 2014 report from Wolfe. He noted the major
increase in expenses has been for water, which totals, on average the
past six years, some 550,000 billing units (411.4 million gallons).
Water
costs have added $500,000 to expenses since 2008-09, due mainly to a
palette of high-water use landscaping installed 20 to 30 years ago,
Wolfe noted, also pointing to irrigation systems “outdated and
inefficient compared to systems today.”
And
changing to a drought-tolerant palette would add capital costs for
plants and a “significantly different” irrigation system “often
times higher in life-cycle maintenance costs.”