My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CITY COUNCIL REGULA MEETING AGENDA PACKET _Revised_ 6-2-26
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2026
>
060226 REGULAR
>
CITY COUNCIL REGULA MEETING AGENDA PACKET _Revised_ 6-2-26
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/29/2026 2:56:22 PM
Creation date
5/29/2026 2:52:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
6/2/2026
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
617
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
1 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Introduction <br /> <br />Executive Summary <br />The Ponderosa Landscape Maintenance District, 1984-1, was created in 1984 as a <br />means to fund the maintenance of the landscape and common areas for the Ponderosa <br />subdivision, a 344-parcel development. The district was formed prior to the passage of <br />Proposition 218, the “Right to Vote on Taxes Act” which requires property owner <br />approval to impose or increase assessments. <br />At the time of formation, no inflation escalator was built into the assessment and the <br />district assessment remained at $16.62 from FY 2000-01, when it was reduced from the <br />approved amount, to FY 2025-26, when it was restored back to the approved amount of <br />$60.08 as indicated in Resolution 88-375. The reduced assessment has led to a severe <br />decline in the level of maintenance, a lack of sufficient funding for capital improvement <br />projects, and forced the city to shut down a portion of the irrigation system. The lack of <br />irrigation has led to an even further decline of the landscape to the point that the district <br />is out of compliance with the level of maintenance required as part of the development <br />approval, which exposes the district and th e property owners to increased liability. <br />Last year, the City proceeded with a Proposition 218-compliant vote process to bring <br />the district to a sustainable funding level . The process include public outreach with <br />residents over a 6-month period, including 3 neighborhood meetings, an online survey <br />submitted to every property owner, and a dedicated webpage. The budget for this past <br />fiscal year required drawing down the reserve by about $32,000 due to the consultant <br />costs, estimated at approximately $36,000, for the Proposition 218 vote. The <br />assessment will remain the same this year as it was last year. <br />A separate Engineer’s Report was completed for the Proposition 218-compliant <br />assessment. This Engineer’s Report will be adopted should the Proposition 218 vote fail <br />to pass. <br />Overview <br />The City of Pleasanton (“City”) is located in Alameda County, and covers an area of <br />24.3 square miles, with over 24,500 assessor parcels, and approximately 8 0,000 <br />residents. The City currently has five Landscape Maintenance Districts (“Districts”) that <br />provide services to a combined total of 680 parcels: <br /> <br />• 1984-1 Ponderosa (Del Prado) – 344 parcels <br />• 1993-1 Windsor – 90 parcels <br />• 1993-2 Bonde Ranch – 103 parcels <br />• 1994-1 Oak Tree Farm – 42 parcels <br />• 1995-1 Moller Ranch – 101 parcels <br />Page 86 of 617
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.