Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
Portola, California, Special Parcel Tax, Measure B (June 2017)
| Measure B: Portola Special Parcel Tax |
|---|
|
| The basics |
| Election date: |
| June 6, 2017 |
| Status: |
 DefeatedMajority required: 66.67% |
| Topic: |
| California parcel tax Expires in: No expiration |
| Related articles |
| California parcel tax on the ballot June 6, 2017 ballot measures in California Plumas County, California ballot measures City tax on the ballot |
| See also |
| Portola, California |
A special parcel tax measure was on the ballot for Portola voters in Plumas County, California, on June 6, 2017. It was defeated.
| A yes vote was a vote in favor of repealing the existing special fire protection tax and establishing a new annual special parcel tax—a kind of property tax based on units of property rather than assessed value—to fund fire protection and emergency response services. |
| A no vote was a vote against repealing the existing special fire protection tax and establishing a new annual special parcel tax to fund fire protection and emergency response services. |
A two-thirds (66.67%) vote was required for the approval of Measure B.
Election results
| Measure B | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| No | 274 | 64.47% | ||
| Yes | 151 | 35.53% | ||
- Election results from Plumas County Elections
Text of measure
Ballot question
The following question appeared on the ballot:[1]
| “ |
Upon a 2/3 vote of approval shall the City of Portola be authorized and empowered to adopt Ordinance No. 345 establishing an annual special tax, for each parcel of real property within the City, to be collected and apportioned along with the County property taxes, without expiration commencing July 1, 2017, with an annual cost of living adjustment, to be used for providing and enhancing necessary fire protection, prevention and suppression services, emergency medical and rescue services and hazardous material emergency response services?[2] |
” |
Impartial analysis
The following impartial analysis of the measure was prepared by the office of the Portola City Attorney:
| “ |
The City Council determined that a new special tax is necessary for fire protection and emergency response services because the current revenue sources can no longer provide or enhance those services. The current source of funding has remained unchanged for 34 years. If approved, this measure will repeal the existing special fire protection tax enacted in 1983, which annually is $12.52 for improved parcels and $6.26 for unimproved parcels. The structure of the proposed tax is the same as the existing special fire protection tax. The special tax will be levied beginning in the fiscal year, July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018 and the maximum amount of the special tax for that year is set forth in the table below.  For each subsequent fiscal year, the tax may be increased by the City Council, but the increase may not exceed the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index – All Urban Consumers. The tax will be levied in perpetuity. The tax will be used solely for the purposes of providing and enhancing necessary fire protection, prevention and suppression services, emergency medical and rescue services and hazardous material emergency response services. A separate revenue account will be created into which the tax proceeds will be deposited and an annual report will be prepared detailing the amount of taxes collected and expended in that year. The tax will be collected at the same time, and subject to the same penalties, as the general property taxes by Plumas County. Plumas County may deduct its reasonable costs incurred for such services before remittal to the City. The special tax, together with penalties and interest, will constitute a lien upon the property upon which it is levied until paid and a personal obligation by the person who owns the property on the date the special tax is due. This measure was placed on the ballot by the City Council and must be approved by two‐thirds of those voting on this ballot measure in order to pass. A “Yes” vote is a vote in favor of authorizing the special tax for fire protection and emergency response. A “No” vote is a vote against authorizing the special tax for fire protection and emergency response and will leave in place the existing special tax. [2] |
” |
| —Portola City Attorney[3] | ||
Full text
The full text of the measure is available here.
Support
Supporters
The following individuals signed the official argument in favor of the measure:[4]
- Ron Jacobson, Jr., school principal LVCS
- Cal Patterson, retired
- William (Doug) Weaver, business owner
- Ray Donnenwirth, retired educator
- Richard John Bass, semi retired teacher
Arguments in favor
Official argument
The following official argument was submitted in favor of the measure:[4]
| “ |
We, the undersigned Portola citizens and taxpayers, support Ballot Measure B, a tax that will provide adequate funding for the City of Portola Volunteer Fire Department. The Department serves us all with: fire protection, prevention and suppression; emergency medical and rescue; hazardous materials and natural disaster emergency response. Although the proposed increase may sound irresponsibly high, the truth of the matter is that after years of an unrealistically low tax along with dramatic increases in the cost of equipment, supplies and services there is an urgent need to provide additional funding for the Portola Volunteer Fire Department. Measure B takes the responsible step forward to provide the revenues necessary for the City of Portola to ensure that quality services which meet current standards are provided to its citizens and visitors. Please join with us in supporting our emergency responders with a tax of only $0.41 per day. Vote FOR Measure B. [2] |
” |
Opposition
Opponents
The following individuals signed the official argument against the measure:[4]
- Leah Turner, property owner
Arguments against
Official argument
The following official argument was submitted in opposition to the measure:[4]
| “ |
My name is Leah Turner and I am a property owner in the City of Portola and I live at 280 W. Plumas Avenue with my husband Austin Turner. I am in agreement that the City of Portola needs to collect higher taxes to support the local fire department, but I believe asking for an increase to $150.00 from the current rate of $12.52 is an outrageous increase for such a depressed area, where most residents live at or below the poverty level. The majority of your residents are on fixed incomes and an increase of $150.00 might mean that person may not be able to afford food, rent, utilities, or medications for that month when the taxes are due. I believe this increase should be gradual and increase over a 5 year period, like the water rates were increased. I feel that our department needs proper training to give the community quality protection, but our residents, can’t afford this high of an increase all at once. I do not believe this measure will pass and the City will be wasting the tax payer’s money for a special election and you should reconsider this amount if you want it to pass and benefit the fire department and its residence. [2] |
” |
Path to the ballot
This measure was put on the ballot through a unanimous vote of the city council of Portola, California, on January 18, 2017.[1]
Recent news
The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Portola California parcel tax Measure B. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Plumas County Elections Division, "Resolution No. 2017-8224," accessed May 5, 2017
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ Plumas County Elections Division, "Special Tax for Fire Protection and Emergency Response Impartial Analysis," accessed May 10, 2017
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 Plumas County Elections Division, "Measure B Arguments," accessed May 10, 2017
| |||||
