To rectify County Fire budget, supervisors eye parcel tax - FP-5

[Elk]

"Brief recess"

?? We will see just how brief it is. Sounds like it may take a bit of time to finish tabulating the numbers based on the comments by a clerk when asked by Lovingood.

[Elk]

"Brief recess"

Tick, tock, tick, tock... 45 minutes and still waiting...

[tcaarabians]

This could stretch out a lot further. They have to calculate the "value" of the property, the proportion of that value per vote, verify, etc. etc.  Cheryl o7o

[Wrightwood]

Restarted the hearing 5 min ago

[Wrightwood]

Supervisors voted 3 to 2 in favor

[KW]

Not going to a vote? Really appreciate the day-long updates.

[Wrightwood]

3.8% protests after calculations and needed 25%

[Moose]

Thank you to the 3.8% that took the time to send in a protest.  To the others - No more complaining about any new taxes/fees.  Period.

[Cheapskate]

Process was rigged to produce a low percentage.  Funny how the majority of Supes that voted to impose this don't represent the residents affected. I won't complain,  but I will hope a legal challenge succeeds and I will vote against Lovingood (I'm aware he voted against it,  but he's the only Supe I can punish at the polls. And I can do it without having to download a form)

[ezzpete]

Process was rigged to produce a low percentage.

Exactly, no form in the mail like promised.
It's the same with prop 6. The crooks worded it in their favor. All you have to do is look at the organizations that support these taxes and "fees" and it becomes obvious what the money will be used for. Follow the money.

[lwt42]

I don't know how much you all dig into this stuff, and certainly IANAL.

I don't think the procedure was rigged, because it was done as required by state law.

Several of the documents that have been posted lately suggest that the procedure applies to Local Area Formation Commissions only.  As the SBCFPD isn't a LAFCO type agency, they may have chosen the wrong process -- and if the process was incorrect, the result is moot.

That's something for the courts to decide.

There are at least two cases that are ongoing.  Seems that the San Antonio Heights case has merit, and there is a hearing in December.  I don't know if they're arguing that the original Helendale FP-5 vote included "no expansions" but if San Antonio Heights was annexed and the judge rules, then it follows that the rest of us are out of reach.

The Red Brennan Group and their case has also been discussed here.  I also don't know what the basis of their case might be.

It will be interesting to see how these two cases move forward. 

[tcaarabians]

I agree with lwt42 and also think the Austin v case was interesting. A lot of jurisdictions will be looking at this decision as guidance for their own efforts to increase taxes/assessments. If Austin prevails, it would likely be appealed. Regardless of how it all falls out - the question of sufficient budget allocations remains. Let's not lose that fact in the mix. Cheryl o7o

[KW]

lwt42, while it may not have been rigged, it was not handled in the way we were promised at the multitude of meetings. They said a protest form would be included and it was not. That in itself was probably the biggest factor in producing so few protests. If it's not easy, people won't do it....and they knew that.

[lwt42]

lwt42, while it may not have been rigged, it was not handled in the way we were promised at the multitude of meetings. They said a protest form would be included and it was not. That in itself was probably the biggest factor in producing so few protests. If it's not easy, people won't do it....and they knew that.

There were mistakes in how the process was handled.  The question is, would it have changed the result?  We needed 8 times the number to trigger a vote.

Let's say they provided a form, filled out.  People would still need an envelope and a stamp.  I don't know about you, but it always takes me time to find a stamp.

The question is: did they follow the relevant law? 

I believe they followed the statute, and it produced the result that is always produced -- historically, these types of protests nearly always  fail.

There are three lawsuits that I know about.  The lawyers and backers believe that the law behind the protest was mis-applied -- that the protest method isn't available to SBCFPD because they aren't SBLAFCO, or because FP-5 is too specific to Helendale, or possibly because this is a "new tax" -- which pretty much would void decades of annexation law in California.

It's going to be interesting, and it's not over.

[tcaarabians]

However the whatever - I say we should start looking into annexing Vegas. That would solve our budget problems too. 

And, we should all realize that if this matter went to a full vote of all affected - it would likely fail.  Soft as our hearts are towards the fire dept. I'd like to focus on the budget and how revenues could be enhanced or various other changes.  Example:  Does the allocation process for ambulance services spread the costs of those services appropriately across all populations served?   Cheryl o7o

[Wrightwood]

[thehallmarks]

[Wrightwood]

Hank,
Do you know the date of the article and the source?

[thehallmarks]

It was sent to me today by the RBG.

I got his permission to repost it!

BTW  In the interest of transparency, I need to disclose that I am one of the plaintiffs in the Red Brennan Group's lawsuit against SB Cty pertaining to FP-5!

How do I edit my original post to insert this "disclosure"?

[Wrightwood]

Your post just disclosed that and should be fine.