Home East County Tonight: ECCFPD to Set Wheels in Motion for Benefit Assessment

Tonight: ECCFPD to Set Wheels in Motion for Benefit Assessment

by ECT

ECCFPD

Tonight, the East Contra Costa Fire Protection District Board will look at moving forward with a Benefit Assessment to help the cash strapped District based off a recommendation by the Finance Committee.

Should the Board approve the action, the District will begin working on an Engineers Report—a report that study the proposed improvements, estimate costs, diagram the proposed district boundaries, and calculate a fair allocation of the benefit assessments among the benefited parcels in direct proportion to the amount of special benefit each receives.

The benefit assessment can be used as a funding mechanism for obtaining, furnishing, operating, and maintaining fire suppression equipment or apparatus, and for salaries and benefits of firefighter personnel. The assessment must be based on a special benefit conferred on real property and must not exceed the cost of providing such benefit.

In a separate item should the Board move forward with development of a benefit assessment and calling for the engineer’s report, the Board will proceed to Discussion Item D-2, allowing the District to move forward with hiring a consultant to provide related services, including development of an engineer’s report.

If approved, the District will approve spending $114,000 with NBS Government Finance Group and True Ballot Inc. which is broken down as follows:

  1. Proposition 218 special versus general benefit analysis, assessment rates and methods of assessments (for a fee of $20,000);
  2. Assessment District formation services, including development of an Engineer’s Report, development of legal notices and ballots, and tabulation (for a fee of $9,500); and
  3. Annual assessment administrative services for one year (for a fee of $15,000), which would only be provided in an assessment is enacted.

Under the agreement with NBS proposal, True Ballot, Inc. would produce the ballots, ballot inserts and envelopes; handle all mailing and collection of ballots; register and tabulate votes cast; and certify results. True Ballot, Inc.’s services, including printing, postage and all other costs, would be provided at an estimated cost of $70,000.

What is also important to remember is that the Board approved a contract of $125,000 with TBWB Strategies for public outreach and education services—they have already spent close to $45,000 of that contract.

Proposed Timeline per the Staff Report:

July 2014:

  • The District receives draft Special versus General Benefit analysis and provides comments to the District’s consultant.
  • The District receives a preliminary engineer’s report and draft notice, instructions, envelope language and ballots and provides comments to the District’s consultant.
  • The Board of Directors considers a draft resolution, preliminary engineer’s report, notice, instructions, envelope language and ballot.

August 2014:

  •  Prior to August 8, 2014, the Board approves engineer’s report and sets public hearing date for benefit assessment.
  •  No later than August 15, 2014, the District’s consultant (or subconsultant) prints and mails notices, instructions, return envelopes and ballots.

October 2014:

  • October 6, 2014, the Board holds public hearing, after which the ballots are counted in a location open to the public.

November 2014:

  • November 3, 2014, the voting results are announced and, if property owners do not submit a majority of votes in protest, the Board can enact the benefit assessment.

August 2015:

  • If the Board enacts the benefit assessment, it is placed on the tax rolls by the County Assessor’s Office.

December 2015:

  • New revenue from the assessment enters the District.

 How Voting Works

Unless a majority of votes (50% + 1), weighted based on assessment amount, protests enactment of an assessment, the governing body may move forward.

But here is how the process works:

Local officials must mail to all affected property owners, a ballot to vote for or against the proposed assessment, and a notice containing the date, time, and place of the public hearing at which ballots will be counted, as well as specific information about the proposed benefit assessment. This information must include the purpose of the benefit assessment, the amount that would be charged to the owner’s parcel, how that amount was calculated, and the duration of the payments.

The ballot must carry the agency’s address or include a self-addressed envelope so that property owners can return their ballots by mail.

Ballots are weighted by the amount each property owner is to pay, with those paying more getting a larger share of the vote. In other words, the ballots are weighted in proportion to the amount of benefit each property receives from the benefit assessment. This means that a property owner that receives twice the benefit of another property owner would pay twice the assessment. ‘

The property owner paying twice as much would also have their vote count twice as much.

If the votes cast determine that the weighted majority of the voting property owners are against the assessment, then local officials must abandon the assessment.

If the assessment passes, local officials can still modify the plan in response to public comment. However, if substantial modifications are made to the assessment plan upon which landowners cast their vote, a new election may be required. The local agency cannot increase an assessment after the property owners approve it except as provided in the original assessment proposal.

For the full staff report and agenda, click here

If You Go:
Monday May 5, 2014 – 6:30 P.M.
Meeting Location: 3231 Main Street, Oakley

You may also like

8 comments

Jerry May 5, 2014 - 6:53 am

NO NO NO NO NO NO and NO!

Julio May 5, 2014 - 7:06 am

Mike, where are they getting the money to spend on this? Just like the money for the chief’s raise, where will that come from?

JimSimmons42 May 5, 2014 - 7:30 am

Good luck with the legal portion of this benefit assessment. Didn’t the prior board go against this because of fear of being sued? Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. I feel bad for the firefighters stuck in the middle who cannot say how they really feel.

Better off. May 5, 2014 - 8:14 am

Jerry
What do you propose the district do. Right now you receive five engines that cover 250 square miles. The district does this for a third of the cost that con fire does. The residents are getting a true bargain for fire protection. As of now twenty four of your current firefighters have applied to con fire for the upcoming lateral firefighter exam. The future here is so dismal for your current employes they are leaving. The lateral firefighter there makes 300 less per month than your veteran Captains here. Wake up people your losing all your experience here. This dept has become nothing but a training ground for other areas. Is that what you want.

Buy a Clue May 5, 2014 - 8:42 am

The sad fact is people out here are not going to get it until all hell breaks loose and there is no short and fast way out.

2 years post Measure S and most still don’t even understand how the department is funded or how much of a revenue hit they took from the Great Recession and property values tanking.

Everyone likes to compare to the private sector. Well here’s the comparison; when a private sector business loses 40% of it’s revenue as this department has, it lays people off, closes locations or just goes out of business.

For the naysayers here, pick your poison.

Pat May 5, 2014 - 9:31 am

Who has been hiring these firefighters?

Better off. May 5, 2014 - 10:43 am

Pat
Ten of the current firefighters were hired from a FEMA grant. The rest have been here for many years. Most started here as POC and became full time after many years. Of the ten from FEMA grant, eight have already accepted jobs elsewhere. The future here is so unstable. Last time there was station closure six of the firefighters left.They accepted jobs in Santa Clara were their starting salary is twice of the ones here. You have 45 line staff firefighters here that staff five stations 24/7. Without any future revenue the district will have no choice but to close stations again. The threat of closures is so great that many are trying to leave. Could any business be successful with constant turnover.

EastCountyToday May 5, 2014 - 12:58 pm

Better Off,

Can’t blame them for trying to get jobs that will be there. Such a shame we are losing top notch talent!

Comments are closed.