Menu

Home › Forums › Closed Forums › Properties or Areas › PB – Special assessment tax and outsourcing police

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 91 total)
1 2 3 … 5 6 7
  • Author
    Posts
  • June 5, 2008 at 11:53 AM #12952
    jpinpb
    Participant

    http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20080605-9999-1cz5pb.html

    West side property tax levy proposed

    Funds sought to pay for cleanup, security
    By Helen Gao
    UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

    June 5, 2008

    PACIFIC BEACH – Packed with bars, restaurants and boutiques, Pacific Beach’s commercial corridor along Garnet and Grand avenues attracts hordes of visitors, and along with the crowds come litter, graffiti and security problems.
    Graphic: Proposed district

    Discover Pacific Beach, a business improvement association, is pushing to create an assessment district in the western part of the neighborhood where commercial and residential property owners would have to pay special taxes to fund maintenance and security on their streets.

    The owners of some large businesses, such as Tower 23 Hotel and Catamaran Resort Hotel, support the proposal, but the plan is drawing the ire of some homeowners. They say the assessments should be limited to businesses because they are the ones who attract the visitors.

    AdvertisementThe district would cover 2,173 parcels and generate $474,505 a year, based on a report commissioned by San Diego. Assessments would vary depending on the level of service a property owner receives, the size of a property and other factors. Taxes in fiscal 2009 would range from $3.63 to $20,182 per parcel. The rates would increase up to 5 percent a year.
    The assessments would go toward removing litter, cleaning up graffiti, power-washing sidewalks and tending to landscape, as well hiring security guard “ambassadors” and off-duty police officers.

    Two teams of officers would patrol Friday and Saturday nights along Garnet and Grand avenues from 11 p.m. to 3 a.m. The ambassadors would work Mission Boulevard from Tuesday through Thursday between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m.

    Marcie Beckett, who would be assessed $66 a year for her single family home, calls the tax unfair. She also said most homeowners who are affected by the proposal are uninformed about it.

    “I am not opposed to a maintenance assessment district,” Beckett said. “I think the businesses are the ones who should be paying for this, not the residents. Some of the businesses are financially gaining from the activities that are generating the need for this demand (for services).”

    PB forum
    What: A public forum on a proposed maintenance district

    When: 6:30 p.m. today

    Where: Discover Pacific Beach’s office, 1503 Garnet Avenue, Pacific Beach

    But Mike McNeill, president of the Discover Pacific Beach board of directors, said similar assessment districts in places such as Little Italy have worked well.

    “Our community needs funds to do all the things that the residents and business owners want,” McNeill said.

    The San Diego City Council is scheduled to discuss the proposal Tuesday. If the council gives its go-ahead, ballots would be sent to affected property owners.

    The votes of owners who would be levied the largest assessments would be weighed more than those cast by people paying lesser amounts. For that reason, business owners would likely have more influence on the outcome of the vote than residential property owners.

    Majority support is needed to approve the district. The City Council would have to grant final approval.

    June 5, 2008 at 11:58 AM #217429
    jpinpb
    Participant

    I guess the property tax obtained during the real estate boom wasn’t enough to take care of the neighborhood. I’m not happy w/this. Come on. Places on the boardwalk were selling for 5 million. The tax on one place alone should go a long ways. Unbelievable how the “mismanagement” is so rampant. Still not enough in their pockets. Let’s invent some “special” tax. Don’t want to pay fire or police more money, let’s hire “security guard ambassadors.” WAFJ. If I want to hire a security guard, I don’t need a third-party city to charge me for it. Fine if businesses want to pay. Our tax dollars get spent there and then some. They can write it off, I imagine. This is just so beyond excessive. First proposing paying for parking. Now the taxes. Getting a little much. W/potential to raise it 5% every year. WTF!!

    June 5, 2008 at 11:58 AM #217591
    jpinpb
    Participant

    I guess the property tax obtained during the real estate boom wasn’t enough to take care of the neighborhood. I’m not happy w/this. Come on. Places on the boardwalk were selling for 5 million. The tax on one place alone should go a long ways. Unbelievable how the “mismanagement” is so rampant. Still not enough in their pockets. Let’s invent some “special” tax. Don’t want to pay fire or police more money, let’s hire “security guard ambassadors.” WAFJ. If I want to hire a security guard, I don’t need a third-party city to charge me for it. Fine if businesses want to pay. Our tax dollars get spent there and then some. They can write it off, I imagine. This is just so beyond excessive. First proposing paying for parking. Now the taxes. Getting a little much. W/potential to raise it 5% every year. WTF!!

    June 5, 2008 at 11:58 AM #217568
    jpinpb
    Participant

    I guess the property tax obtained during the real estate boom wasn’t enough to take care of the neighborhood. I’m not happy w/this. Come on. Places on the boardwalk were selling for 5 million. The tax on one place alone should go a long ways. Unbelievable how the “mismanagement” is so rampant. Still not enough in their pockets. Let’s invent some “special” tax. Don’t want to pay fire or police more money, let’s hire “security guard ambassadors.” WAFJ. If I want to hire a security guard, I don’t need a third-party city to charge me for it. Fine if businesses want to pay. Our tax dollars get spent there and then some. They can write it off, I imagine. This is just so beyond excessive. First proposing paying for parking. Now the taxes. Getting a little much. W/potential to raise it 5% every year. WTF!!

    June 5, 2008 at 11:58 AM #217539
    jpinpb
    Participant

    I guess the property tax obtained during the real estate boom wasn’t enough to take care of the neighborhood. I’m not happy w/this. Come on. Places on the boardwalk were selling for 5 million. The tax on one place alone should go a long ways. Unbelievable how the “mismanagement” is so rampant. Still not enough in their pockets. Let’s invent some “special” tax. Don’t want to pay fire or police more money, let’s hire “security guard ambassadors.” WAFJ. If I want to hire a security guard, I don’t need a third-party city to charge me for it. Fine if businesses want to pay. Our tax dollars get spent there and then some. They can write it off, I imagine. This is just so beyond excessive. First proposing paying for parking. Now the taxes. Getting a little much. W/potential to raise it 5% every year. WTF!!

    June 5, 2008 at 11:58 AM #217518
    jpinpb
    Participant

    I guess the property tax obtained during the real estate boom wasn’t enough to take care of the neighborhood. I’m not happy w/this. Come on. Places on the boardwalk were selling for 5 million. The tax on one place alone should go a long ways. Unbelievable how the “mismanagement” is so rampant. Still not enough in their pockets. Let’s invent some “special” tax. Don’t want to pay fire or police more money, let’s hire “security guard ambassadors.” WAFJ. If I want to hire a security guard, I don’t need a third-party city to charge me for it. Fine if businesses want to pay. Our tax dollars get spent there and then some. They can write it off, I imagine. This is just so beyond excessive. First proposing paying for parking. Now the taxes. Getting a little much. W/potential to raise it 5% every year. WTF!!

    June 5, 2008 at 12:10 PM #217531
    PadreBrian
    Participant

    Hell no.

    If they want to raises money for private security let the bar owners pay. At 12 bucks a drink (for 10 cents worth of alcohol) let them provide security for the area….instead of the bar owners snorting up their noses.

    June 5, 2008 at 12:10 PM #217604
    PadreBrian
    Participant

    Hell no.

    If they want to raises money for private security let the bar owners pay. At 12 bucks a drink (for 10 cents worth of alcohol) let them provide security for the area….instead of the bar owners snorting up their noses.

    June 5, 2008 at 12:10 PM #217554
    PadreBrian
    Participant

    Hell no.

    If they want to raises money for private security let the bar owners pay. At 12 bucks a drink (for 10 cents worth of alcohol) let them provide security for the area….instead of the bar owners snorting up their noses.

    June 5, 2008 at 12:10 PM #217581
    PadreBrian
    Participant

    Hell no.

    If they want to raises money for private security let the bar owners pay. At 12 bucks a drink (for 10 cents worth of alcohol) let them provide security for the area….instead of the bar owners snorting up their noses.

    June 5, 2008 at 12:10 PM #217443
    PadreBrian
    Participant

    Hell no.

    If they want to raises money for private security let the bar owners pay. At 12 bucks a drink (for 10 cents worth of alcohol) let them provide security for the area….instead of the bar owners snorting up their noses.

    June 5, 2008 at 12:21 PM #217625
    pbnative
    Participant

    Little Italy is the wrong example to use. LI is charming, where PB has been aptly called a ‘sh*t hole.’ I was born here and it’s home for me, but Garnet has way too many bars, tatoo/piercing shops, and resale stores. A few of each would be nice, but they just keep coming. Restaurants like the Belgian Fries place has to beg and plead to be able to serve Belgian beer (don’t know if they finally can), while crappy bars line Garnet. A good hole-in-the-wall bar is key for any neighborhood (Tiki Hut and $2 pints of Guiness!), but we don’t need 35 of them. The businesses that are creating this need while profiting should pay to clean up after themselves. If Garnet were a charming place to stroll, grab some munchies and enjoy a cocktail, I’d pony up my coin with a happy little smile. (Although I already pay $6,300 a year in prop taxes, seems like they could do something with that.)

    June 5, 2008 at 12:21 PM #217551
    pbnative
    Participant

    Little Italy is the wrong example to use. LI is charming, where PB has been aptly called a ‘sh*t hole.’ I was born here and it’s home for me, but Garnet has way too many bars, tatoo/piercing shops, and resale stores. A few of each would be nice, but they just keep coming. Restaurants like the Belgian Fries place has to beg and plead to be able to serve Belgian beer (don’t know if they finally can), while crappy bars line Garnet. A good hole-in-the-wall bar is key for any neighborhood (Tiki Hut and $2 pints of Guiness!), but we don’t need 35 of them. The businesses that are creating this need while profiting should pay to clean up after themselves. If Garnet were a charming place to stroll, grab some munchies and enjoy a cocktail, I’d pony up my coin with a happy little smile. (Although I already pay $6,300 a year in prop taxes, seems like they could do something with that.)

    June 5, 2008 at 12:21 PM #217602
    pbnative
    Participant

    Little Italy is the wrong example to use. LI is charming, where PB has been aptly called a ‘sh*t hole.’ I was born here and it’s home for me, but Garnet has way too many bars, tatoo/piercing shops, and resale stores. A few of each would be nice, but they just keep coming. Restaurants like the Belgian Fries place has to beg and plead to be able to serve Belgian beer (don’t know if they finally can), while crappy bars line Garnet. A good hole-in-the-wall bar is key for any neighborhood (Tiki Hut and $2 pints of Guiness!), but we don’t need 35 of them. The businesses that are creating this need while profiting should pay to clean up after themselves. If Garnet were a charming place to stroll, grab some munchies and enjoy a cocktail, I’d pony up my coin with a happy little smile. (Although I already pay $6,300 a year in prop taxes, seems like they could do something with that.)

    June 5, 2008 at 12:21 PM #217463
    pbnative
    Participant

    Little Italy is the wrong example to use. LI is charming, where PB has been aptly called a ‘sh*t hole.’ I was born here and it’s home for me, but Garnet has way too many bars, tatoo/piercing shops, and resale stores. A few of each would be nice, but they just keep coming. Restaurants like the Belgian Fries place has to beg and plead to be able to serve Belgian beer (don’t know if they finally can), while crappy bars line Garnet. A good hole-in-the-wall bar is key for any neighborhood (Tiki Hut and $2 pints of Guiness!), but we don’t need 35 of them. The businesses that are creating this need while profiting should pay to clean up after themselves. If Garnet were a charming place to stroll, grab some munchies and enjoy a cocktail, I’d pony up my coin with a happy little smile. (Although I already pay $6,300 a year in prop taxes, seems like they could do something with that.)

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 91 total)
1 2 3 … 5 6 7
  • The forum ‘Properties or Areas’ is closed to new topics and replies.