My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
R-043-23 Preliminary Approval of the Engineer's Report
Colton
>
CITY CLERK
>
City Council Resolutions
>
2020-2026
>
2023
>
R-043-23 Preliminary Approval of the Engineer's Report
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/7/2023 5:21:05 PM
Creation date
6/7/2023 5:21:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Agenda Type
City Council
CC - Doc Type
Resolution
Date
6/6/2023
Resolution No.
R-43-23
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
approved will be submitted to the San Bernardino County Auditor/Controller to be <br /> included on the property tax roll for each parcel. <br /> B. COMPLIANCE WITH CURRENT LEGISLATION <br /> On November 5, 1996, California voters approved Proposition 218. The <br /> provisions of Proposition 218 are now contained in the California Constitutional <br /> Articles XIIIC and XIIID. <br /> Pursuant to Article XIIID Section 5, certain existing assessments (those that <br /> existed on or before November 6, 1996) are exempt from the substantive and <br /> procedural requirements of Article XIIID Section 4 and property owner balloting <br /> for the existing assessments is not required until such time that such <br /> assessments are increased. Specifically: <br /> • The improvements and the annual assessments for maintaining local <br /> improvements within Zones 2, 4, 5, and 8 were part of the original <br /> conditions of development and approved by the property owner of record at <br /> that time. Therefore, pursuant to Article XIIID Section 5(b), the existing <br /> assessments were approved by all the property owners at the time the <br /> assessment was created (originally imposed pursuant to a 100% landowner <br /> petition) and as such, the existing assessment amounts are exempt from <br /> the substantive and procedural requirements of Article XIIID Section 4. <br /> • The City's legal counsel also determined that the District's existing <br /> assessments for Zones 2, 4, 5, and 8 were for the maintenance of specific <br /> street related improvements (median and parkway landscaping and street <br /> lighting) and these improvements are part of the overall street <br /> improvements. Therefore, pursuant to Article XIIID Section 5(a), the portion <br /> of the existing assessment used exclusively for street maintenance are also <br /> considered exempt from the substantive and procedural requirements of <br /> Article XIIID Section 4. <br /> In compliance with the provisions of the Article XIIID, the City conducted a <br /> property owner protest ballot proceeding for the annexation of Tract 16912 and <br /> the proposed levy of a new assessment range formula for Zone 3. In <br /> conjunction with this ballot proceeding, the City Council conducted a noticed <br /> public hearing to consider public testimonies, comments and written protests <br /> regarding the formation of the District. Upon conclusion of the public hearing, <br /> property owner protest ballots received were opened and tabulated to determine <br /> whether a majority protest existed (ballots were weighted based on assessment <br /> amounts). <br /> Since a majority protest did not exist for the proposed assessments and the <br /> assessment range formula presented and described herein, the City Council, by <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.