|
Voters Vote No,
Rigged Ballot Increases LLAD Tax Anyway
A solid majority of Oakland homeowners and other property owners voted against increasing the so-called Landscape and Lighting Assessment (LLAD) on property tax bills, but the city council rigged the vote and rammed through a big tax hike.
The mail ballot conducted in April and May gave each property owner a weighted vote. The general rule that votes must be weighted follows state law, but the City allocated huge votes to the Port of Oakland and the Oakland Unified School District.
The weighting is supposed to reflect the benefit derived from park maintenance, street lighting and tree trimming. The city council hired a firm it often uses, Francisco & Associates, to make sure the numbers favored the council's desire. The firm, eager to continue winning contracts from Oakland and other cities, dutifully rigged the weighting of votes.
We are asked to believe that the Port of Oakland deserves more votes than 10,000 single-family homes, because of Port enjoyment of parks and sidewalk trees! We are supposed to accept the Port's vote in favor of the tax increase as a voice of the people. In fact, the City of Oakland and the Port are symbiotic organs of one municipal government. In the City charter, the Port Department is established as just that, a department of the City government. The mayor and council appoint the port commissioners.
The City told its Port, vote to raise this tax on homeowners, and we'll help you keep the rest of your finances out of public view. The Port would much rather pay a LLAD assessment out of its huge revenues (forcing homeowners to bear three times as much taxation) than let the public delve into the books for the port and airport.
Homeowners rejected the increase 61 percent to 39 percent. Apartment owners, condos, churches, hotels, and more also voted no.
Real voters reject tax increase 61 to 39
|
City adds rigged votes to reverse the verdict
|
In 2006 the school district voted no on a similar LLAD increase proposal, and the proposal failed. This year the school district abstained. What deal did City Hall make with the district?
The overwhelming majority of real people in this vote understood the LLAD tax increase was built on lies. Nearly 80 cents of every new dollar will not even go for parks, street lights, or tree trimming! Instead, $9.8 million of the new $12 million will go into the general fund for unspecified pork projects, for anything except parks and such. This is a parks tax in name only.
The council simply arranged for the people's votes to be washed away with rigged votes. Without the Port, the LLAD increase would be defeated 61 percent to 39 percent, an overall ratio identical to the vote by single family homeowners.
But with the port, suddenly the vote becomes 53 to 47 percent in favor of taxing homeowners, apartment properties, and commercial real estate.
The same city council that brought you Measure Y taxes with the promise of more police did not deliver. Instead, the City is fighting a lawsuit by a resident who simply wants the money to be used as promised or the tax not to be collected. Instead, the council routinely authorizes the collection of the Measure Y parcel and parking taxes every year.
The same city council that sold you the Measure Q parcel tax has cut back on library staff and hours.
The same city council that dangled a long string of goodies for Lake Merritt has violated the Measure DD bond tax, which has no hope of ever delivering most of the promised improvements.
The same city council is now considering a Son of Measure Y for the November ballot, yet another tax for more police, piling failure upon failure.
The American colonies revolted against taxation without representation. Things have become more sophisticated. The LLAD vote is a case of taxation by rigged representation. We have some democracy left in the United States, but there is precious little of it in Oakland.
The City report is available here
|
– June 7, 2008
Reader's Comment
If this vote tally is accurate I'm pretty shocked. Clearly the will of the people was to reject the tax. It's hard to believe this procedure is legal.
Why does the Port of Oakland get to vote on this?
How come the Port gets nearly as many votes as all single family houses combined? (1.4 million vs. 1.5 million)
Will the Port be paying this new tax?
If so, will the tax it pays be more or less than the tax paid by all single family homes combined?
– Christopher
Answering Christopher's questions:
The City would say because the Port owns real property. We're not sure government property is allowed or must be given a vote under the law.
The council and its hired gun, Francisco & Associates, just decided that would be nice – and pretty much guarantee the tax increase. No real justification was published.
Yes.
The Port will pay a tax, but not as much as homeowners. Keep in mind that the Port voted all its votes, while perhaps a third of homeowners voted in the mail ballot. The tax obligation will now be laid on all parcels, and the total paid by homeowners will be far more than the Port pays.
You Scratch My Back, I'll Scratch Yours
We are unaware of a public record explaining how the Port arrived at its vote in favor of a LLAD tax hike. Sanjiv Handa stated that the commissioners voted four yes, two no, and one abstain. However, the Port cast all its votes for the tax increase. If the Port had simply cast its LLAD votes in a 4-2-1 breakdown, the tax increase would not have passed.
In any case, we have another good example of how governmental bodies gang up on the public. It comes from the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD).
EBRPD staff recommended not supporting the LLAD increase. "A similar though smaller increase (40%) was proposed but failed to receive property owner approval in 2006. At that time, staff was directed to attempt to negotiate an agreement whereby the City would grant back the amount of the assessment to the District." There it is in print – let's help them rig a vote but get our money back. However, negotiations failed. Staff admitted "the money the [East Bay Regional Park] District is being assessed provides essentially no benefit to the District." (EBRPD minutes, April 22, 2008 meeting)
However, EBRPD "director Sutter noted that it would be a mistake not to support this assessment ... He noted that the same advocates in Oakland for the LLAD are the same advocates that the District will be looking to for support of its bond measure." Again, there it is in print: two governmental bodies trade favors so both can raise taxes. They are entitled to their opinion, but to grant governments a vote on each other's tax measures, mixed in with votes of ordinary residents, subverts democracy.
Councilmember Runs for Cover of California Statute
Apparently, discontent with the rigged LLAD vote has caught the ear of councilmember Jean Quan. On June 17, 2008 her policy aide wrote to a newsgroup:
On behalf of Council Member Jean Quan ... I would like to clarify the misassumption that the City is somehow not being straight with voters in the way the LLAD election was handled.
As was explained in the ballot that was sent to all property owners, State regulations (Proposition 218) guide the voting process for benefit assessment districts, not the City. Each property gets one ballot with a vote value equal to the value of the benefit that the property gains from the services of the assessment district. Proposition 218, passed in 1996, added the requirement that all property owners – non profit, religious, and public – must be assessed, and therefore, also are eligible to vote. Those properties that do not pay property taxes, and therefore do not receive an annual tax bill, receive an invoice from the City for their annual LLAD assessment.
Thanks for the Cliff's Notes version of the state law, but that is not the problem. The problem is that the City's Port cast all its votes for the tax increase, and no one sees how the Port gets 1.4 million votes when these are supposed to reflect the benefit of park maintenance and such.
Twist and turn, the councilmember cannot get away from the fact that mixing the individual votes of single-family homeowners with the huge rigged vote of the Port, all without public discussion, is not democratic. The fact remains that the majority of real people in this balloting voted against a LLAD tax increase.
| 
