Laserfiche WebLink
City of Pleasanton <br />LighƟng & Landscape Maintenance District No. 1995-1, <br />Moller Ranch <br />Engineer’s Report <br /> <br />Page 11 <br /> <br />If the City Council approves this Engineer's Report and the conƟnuaƟon of the <br />assessments by resoluƟon, a noƟce of public hearing must be published in a local <br />paper at least 10 days prior to the date of the public hearing. The resoluƟon <br />preliminarily approving the Engineer's Report and establishing the date for a public <br />hearing is used for this noƟce. <br />Following the minimum 10-day Ɵme period aŌer publishing the noƟce, a public <br />hearing is held for the purpose of allowing public tesƟmony about the proposed <br />conƟnuaƟon of the assessments. This hearing is currently scheduled for July 21, <br />2026. At this hearing, the City Council would consider approval of a resoluƟon <br />confirming the conƟnuaƟon of the assessments for fiscal year 2026-27. If so <br />confirmed and approved, the assessments would be submiƩed to the County <br />Auditor/Controller for inclusion on the property tax rolls for Fiscal Year 2026-27. <br />Legal Requirements <br />Proposition 218 <br />The City of Pleasanton’s five Landscape and LighƟng Maintenance Districts were <br />formed prior to the passage of ProposiƟon 218, “The Right to Vote on Taxes Act,” <br />which was approved by the voters of California on November 6, 1996, and is now <br />ArƟcle XIIIC and XIIID of the California ConsƟtuƟon. (ProposiƟon 218 provides for <br />benefit assessments to be levied to fund the cost of providing services, <br />improvements, as well as maintenance and operaƟon expenses to a public <br />improvement which benefits the assessed property.) Although these assessments <br />are consistent with ProposiƟon 218, the California judiciary has generally referred <br />to pre-ProposiƟon 218 assessments as “grandfathered assessments” and held <br />them to a lower standard than post ProposiƟon 218 assessments. <br />The exisƟng Assessment Districts will be re-assessed consistent with the <br />procedures and requirements imposed by ProposiƟon 218, which describes <br />several important requirements, including property-owner balloƟng and approval <br />for the imposiƟon of new or increased assessments. <br />Page 258 of 617