PVE Community Newsletter

Serving Lunada Bay, Malaga Cove, Montemalaga and Valmonte

ARTICLES

• Parcel Tax to Bypass 66% voter Approval Requirement

• New Expensive Inefficiencies Advocated by Councilman

• Cost Savings relegated as “extreme” by Councilman

• Savings #3 - PV Land Conservancy offers to help get grants for Parkland

• Will Filling Vacant Police Positions Reduce Overtime?

• Q&A

• More reactions to the Tax Town Hall

• Details for: Initiative to by Bypass 66% voter Approval Requirement

Parcel Tax to Bypass 66% voter Approval Requirement?

Lacking sufficient support to triple taxes, Council discussed the use of a Citizen’s Initiative LINK to pass the tax which only requires 50% voter approval, rather than 66% voter approval.

What Happened:

• Council’s survey reflects a lack of sufficient support to triple taxes LINK

• VIDEO, a Planning Commissioner appointed by Council, has registered a resident political committee LINK

• The resident political committee website LINK states a “Citizen’s Initiative” will be used. This lowers the legal voter approval from 66% to 50% (50% + 1 vote) using a legal loophole.

• Council’s discussion to pass the tax using a Citizen’s Initiative VIDEO

• Should the City let the Residents know about this?

See subsequent article for further details and back up

Let’s all work together to find a solution the MAJORITY of residents support

The PVE Land Preservation Act was also a Citizen's Initiative - so how does this differ?

The PVE Land Preservation Act:

GAVE residents a voting RIGHT to vote on whether they approve rezoning Open Space, rather than just 3 Council members.

A Citizen's Initiative Parcel Tax:

ELIMINATES voting rights of many to choose on their taxes by lowering voter approval from 66% passage to 50%.

This is a Regressive tax (differing tax amount):

Some households will be forced to pay double or more than other households, regardless of similar consumption.

New Expensive Inefficiency Advocated by a Councilman

Councilman Lazzaro introduced an illegal and expensive new practice VIDEO to hire a new full-time pensioned Supervisor to micro-manage the daily activities of our contractor’s employees.

Standard and Effective business practices

Legal and effective contract administration requires the city to hold contractors to the delivery standard in the contract, thus contractors must supervise their own employees. It is not the city’s job to prevent contractors’ staff from wasting time weed whacking dirt, when an effective fixed-price contract will place that cost burden on the contractor.

The consequences of this Advocacy will:

• Duplicate the cost of services by hiring full-time pensioned Supervisors for the contractors’ employees. Contracts are fully loaded costs, which includes supervision.

• Subject our city to liability: providing supervision is treating contractors as employees thus gives them the right to sue for the compensation an employee would receive such as healthcare, pensions and escalated union wages. (Microsoft lost a similar case costing $97 MM LINK )

• Violate both State (SB5) and Federal IRS laws LINK, thus subjects PVE to penalties from both and provides a strong legal argument for contractor’s employees to sue our city and win.

• Increase our Legal expenses: the city’s legal costs increased from $200k to $2 million in only 2 years LINK. We need to make better decisions.

WASTEFUL SPENDING IS CAUSING DEFICITS 

Cost Savings Relegated as “Extreme” by a Councilman

Councilman doubles down he wants the tax increases to supplement development costs of some residents paid for by the rest of the residents.

COUNCILMEMBERS’ STATED POSITIONS: VIDEO

• CM Kemps: “ideally, let’s not have the rest of the residents that are not developing and are not building subsiding the residents who are"  ‘Fully capture the city's cost and align it to the fees developers pay for city services. ‘

• CM Lazzaro: “yes, but there is a very strong argument against that too which is that if we do not have new people coming into the city remodeling homes then everybody’s home values drop.  I have heard those voices and frankly I think those are extreme voices.  The lifeblood of the community is people moving in and remodeling homes.  If you make that too expensive, whether it is because HRGreen [city consultant] is too expensive or our fees are too expensive or some combination…  We are already one of the hardest cities in the whole country  to probably build in and the harder we make it, the fewer new people move in.  In the long run that is bad for the community.  So, I am really nervous about that concept.”

• CM Quinn: “I would increase the fees.” [to cover the cost to the city]

SUGGESTIONS:

• Compare our fees to other cities. If too high, implement efficiencies.

• After serving 8 years on the Planning Commission, Mr. Lazzaro should be able to suggest changes so PVE is no longer the “hardest city in the country to build in” by eliminating unnecessary obstacles and costs for residents.

• To ensure the cost is factually based, cite any studies that show home values correlate to any measurable increase/decrease in remodeling

• Fully charge the cost of consumption directly to the consumer instead of increasing taxes to spread the cost to others.

DEFICIT SPENDING IS CAUSED BY NON-ESSENTIAL SPENDING

Cost Savings Opportunity #3:

Accept PV Land Conservancy free offer to help to get grants for PVE Parkland

6/13/23: VIDEO: The PV Land Conservancy (PVLC) offered to help PVE obtain grants for PVE Parkland.

To Help our City, keep your suggestions coming

Send to Info@PreservePVE.org

Will filling 4 (of 11) Vacant Police Positions Reduce Overtime Costs?

Council advocates 4 new positions in the Police Dept LINK to reduce overtime.

PVE has 11 police officer positions assigned to patrolling and 1 assigned to detectives 2025 BUDGET (page 52 shown)

The consultant is funded by our taxes, so it is illegal LINK for them to advocate a tax even if buried in a survey.

If the survey ‘led you to a Yes vote’ this is illegal, because it is advocacy. Similarly, paid resources like Staff time, city communications and the use of city buildings and land can not be used for advocacy.

We appreciate hearing from residents: Info@PreservePVE.org

$28,000 LINK

No.

Dec 2023: The city’s consultant, Walker Construction, completed his investigation of the City Hall Complex and presented the results to Council VIDEO

Walker concluded that the buildings are not falling apart, but stated continued negligence would require more funding later to fix the neglected complex. He was asked by Council if new buildings were needed and he affirmed, repeatedly, that the structures were sound.

Walker estimated $7 million would be needed to fix the complex, including the safety concerns. The $7 million is included in the city’s current Capital plan LINK

Regarding any backup services: PVE pays the County to provide Dispatch services as part of the contract for Fire services LINK.

We encourage you to validate facts based on links and sources, rather than social media.

This is a practical approach for all sources, including social media, city appointees, news outlets and city statements. Your due diligence is important.

CM Lazzaro has not reached out to PreservePVE to correct or clarify information. Chief Hellinga and LBHOA have both reached out resulting in clarifications.

A community is best served by leaders who are able to consider information and views that differ from their own and bring the community together based on the community’s priorities, rather than their own.

Notice:

Some email services, like Gmail, will cut off the Newsletter. If you see a message like the one below after the Newsletter, you can click on it to see the rest of the Newsletter:

[Message clipped]  View entire message

More Community Reactions to Tax Town Hall

Anonymous reactions provide Council the opportunity to hear new voices and address concerns …

• I would find it more gratifying as a voter to consider more than one proposal, instead of one take-it-or-leave it 300% increase. The maintenance of police should still be identified and approved distinctly, and the other items could be segregated to some extent. What non-revenue options were considered? Why not consider reducing tax demands?

• Why didn’t the council survey residents about our priorities?  The survey given just asked residents how they can word the survey to get a “YES” vote.  It was self-serving.

• If an annual adjustment is added to the tax, it should be tied to Social Security increases, since that is what many residents receive.

• I agree with the City’s Tax consultant, that the expiration of the tax should be 9 years or less so the residents and city have time to reassess.

• Our pension liability is going to take our city into bankruptcy. Not sure there is a solution but our city is in a death spiral with our pension debt.

• When will Council tell us what all this taxation is needed to pay for?

• Why didn’t the council survey all the residents, instead of just a select few?

• Why build a new fire station when all it needs is mold remediation?

• Thanks for your latest newsletter. I attended the town hall tax meeting and I too was mostly bored and certainly disturbed with their sales presentation. My sewer has never been maintained and I’m wondering if it will be now anyway I’ll keep track of what’s happening and I appreciate your newsletter thanks [name redacted]

Details For - Parcel Tax to Bypass 66% voter Approval Requirement?

Text from the Resident Political Committee Website: LINK: