We don’t agree with increasing taxes for the Parkway for three reasons:
1) Property owners are already taxed for parks;
2) Taxing only adjacent property owners is unfair as many who will be taxed do not use the Parkway and many who do will not;
3) There is no guarantee the funds raised will be used strictly for the Parkway, or that existing parkway funding won’t be cut in proportion to the new tax.
But the most important reason is that there is a better way, see our news release (Guest Editorial, second post down) at http://www.arpps.org/news.html
Q&A: Why parkway might need property levy
Survey has sampled how county could finance cost of the popular ribbon along American River
By Ed Fletcher - efletcher@sacbee.com
Published 12:00 am PST Monday, December 3, 2007
Property owners near the American River Parkway may be asked to authorize a special assessment to maintain and protect the recreational area.
Under one plan, property owners within a half mile of the parkway would be assessed between $18 and $48 annually, and property owners between a half mile and three miles away would pay half that amount.
The Bee reported that a mail survey of property owners found at least majority support, which prompted these questions.
Q: I read that 3,800 of 21,500 property owners responded to the survey. How can you say people support it? Isn't that a weak response?
A: An 18 percent response on a mail survey is considered good, and is accurate within a two percentage point margin of error.
Q: Is there any precedent for and is it legal to make nearby homeowners pay for a park that is open to anyone? Do homeowners near McKinley Park, Capitol Park, etc. have to pay fees to support their parks?
A: Most benefit assessment districts pay for such things as street lighting. It's legal to ask property owners to assess themselves for their mutual benefit. No, property owners near McKinley and Capitol parks don't pay a special fee.
