California, (un)Incorporated: Our communities need democracy, path to incorporation

Alameda County
7

I am a resident of Castro Valley, an urbanized, unincorporated community of about 63,000 in Alameda County in the east San Francisco Bay Area. I’ve been working with fellow Californians statewide in unincorporated communities that would like the option of becoming cities, including Salida, Arden Arcade, Mountain House, East Los Angeles and Isla Vista.

Our communities live every day with the impact of little to no local control. Instead of sidewalks, for example, we have dirt paths. If there is a sidewalk, it might just stop in the middle of the block. A mishmash of planning and zoning approaches adversely impacts business development and means that many residents must travel to neighboring cities for access to retail establishments, restaurants and other amenities. These are among the reasons that our communities seek new pathways to greater local control, enhanced democratic participation and greater accountability.

Ultimately, we need voter approval to incorporate. (In my community, we have attempted this previously and wish to do so again.) However, SB 89 (Chapter 35, Statutes of 2011) removed any opportunity for new cities to be financially viable. Communities seeking cityhood already face numerous issues to work through — but because SB 89 makes it fiscally unrealistic to pursue incorporation, these issues are moot.

We should have the ability, just as existing cities did, to give local voters the option to choose cityhood and to incorporate.

In an encouraging move, the Legislature recently corrected the harm that SB 89 caused to the state’s four most recently incorporated cities: Menifee (2008), Wildomar (2008), Eastvale (2010) and Jurupa Valley (2011).

The next step is for the Legislature to ensure that the same opportunities for incorporation, which these cities and all other cities in California have benefited from, exist for communities like mine — so that if we take our quest for cityhood to the voters, the possibility of incorporating is financially feasible.

Unincorporated communities are asking only for a level playing field in their pursuit of local control and cityhood. We encourage legislators and all stakeholders to work with us to make this a reality.

© 2017 League of California Cities®. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission from the November 2017 issue of Western City® magazine, the monthly publication of the League of California Cities®. For related information, visit www.westerncity.com.

This column accompanied an article titled It’s Time to Restore Opportunities for City Incorporation: The Roots of American Democracy in the November 2017 issue of Western City. The article outlines the impacts of a 2011 law that makes municipal incorporation impossible for California’s 6.5 million unincorporated residents. Castro Valley Matters has written previously about this issue in Cityhood Lost: California keeps Castro Valley unincorporated, new cities struggling.

Having read the perspective in this article, and the many voices in the Castro Valley Forum voicing similar opinions, I am always struck by the fact that no one ever seems to mention the inconvenient fact that incorporating as a city would invariably raise taxes on all residents in the incorporated area. Not only would there need to be salaries for all of the new governmental positions, and money for the inevitable “improvements” that a new city government would propose, but also let us not forget that the fire and police services currently provided by Alameda County would need to be paid for by the residents. Newly minted cities can easily go broke (http://www.scpr.org/news/2014/01/12/41532/california-s-youngest-city-jurupa-valley-could-cea/) , and would anyone imagine such an eventuality would be good for the people of CV? Also, when I moved to Castro Valley 7 years ago, one of the reasons was specifically because the area was unincorporated and consequently there are no city taxes. In addition, it’s typically comparatively easier to get a county building permit than a city building permit. If it’s not broken, don’t fix it. If people want to live in a city, move to a city.

One of the greatest misunderstandings about municipal incorporation is the idea that cities (or any local California government like a school district or a special district) can unilaterally raise your taxes. That’s simply not true.

Since the passage of Proposition 13, all property taxes, whether you live in a city or are governed directly by a county, are capped at one percent of your assessed value with a maximum of a two percent increase of your assessment each year. Proposition 218 further placed limits on local governments being able to increase taxes, creating the principle that taxpayers have to vote on increases and local governments can’t unilaterally increase your taxes. It is tremendously difficult for local California governments to increase your taxes. There are parts of our community with higher tax rates than some surrounding cities (different parts of CV are covered by different government districts, meaning tax rates vary throughout town).

What incorporation is really about is delegation decision-making and revenue already raised in our community back to Castro Valley. Alameda County has demonstrated that it is not effective in providing competent municipal services…look at the underinvestment in basic infrastructure in our downtown core, the poorly maintained sidewalks, the streetscape that just stops at the intersection of Redwood and Castro Valley Boulevard. We depend on a county government to deliver municipal services, when its primary mission is to deliver healthcare, social welfare services, public health and other state-mandated services to all 1.4 million residents of Alameda County.

An municipality of Castro Valley would have its own employees, but those employees would be paid for by funds that currently pay the salaries of Alameda County employees. We are not adding a layer of government, we are claiming control of decision-making and revenue. Dublin actually contracts with the Alameda County Sheriff to provide police services. Contracting out for services is a common approach for smaller California municipalities. It’s a model that Castro Valley could employ for police services, and, unlike now, our city government could direct our police service provider on how we want those services deliver.

You point to Jurupa Valley’s fiscal challenges, how it almost sought disincorporation. Jurupa Valley was fiscally viable as a city, until a 2011 law took away revenue generated in that community way. Governor Brown signed legislation a few months ago restoring that revenue, and making whole the fiscal situation to in Jurupa Valley and three other cities in Riverside. That revision to the law, however, did not remedy the situation for future incorporations.

Here is background on the Vehicle License Fee and the situation that almost led to Jurupa Valley’s disincorporation:
https://castrovalleymatters.org/2015/04/06/cityhood-lost/

Here is a link about the restoration of the VLF for Jurupa Valley: http://www.pe.com/2017/05/12/in-jurupa-valley-gov-jerry-brown-signs-a-bill-helping-four-local-cities/amp/

Eugene Turk has done a very good job of describing the pit falls of incorporation. I lived in Castro Valley from 1950 to 20013 and I was involved in the Incorporation issue that came up for a vote. Incorporation was defeated. As Mr. Turk pointed out, who is going to pay for the services of police, fire, administration, road upkeep, the list goes on and on – simple duties of a city. In order to be successful there must be industry to assist in the financial burden of a city. Castro Valley neither has industry nor does it have the space to begin an industry. It is a wonderful residential area and the voters agreed it would be too difficult for Castro Valley to survive as a city, the tax expense would drive everyone out of the area.. Castro Valley is such a nice area, my husband and I raised 5 children there. Our sons enjoyed fishing at Lake Chabot. And we enjoyed walks around the lake. When school was out for summer vacation, I took the children and a picnic lunch and met with a friend and her children at the park with swings, slides, etc. next to the little theater – good ole Chanticleers had some great performances there. In older age, I enjoyed activities at the senior center and volunteered at the Library for the annual book sale. As a widow, up in age I left my home of 63 wonderful years and moved to a senior’s independent living facility,. And I enjoy happy memories of living in Castro Valley, When you think of incorporation, look at the whole picture. J. Rolf

The pitfalls he describes of incorporation are not based in fact. We already pay for police, fire, administration…Alameda County takes the taxes that would normally go to a city of Castro Valley and delivers those services to our community. There are plenty of predominately residential communities that are incorporated throughout California – you don’t need to have industry of big box stories to be viable. Incorporation is about Castro Valley making decisions for Castro Valley with revenue already generated in our community.

I encourage you to learn about Prop. 13 and Prop 218 – both of these measures put very restrictive rules in place on all local governments on their ability to tax. The argument that a City of Castro Valley would raise your taxes is simply not true…it can’t.

How would you deal with the new ncreasing traffic and congestion creating alarm to its citizens if there is a fire or a medical emergency and most of the major streets are like parking lot? It took me over 90 minutes to drive from the Ace store in Castro Valley Blvd to my home near Independece school. Our traffic has increased at an alarming rate, we suffer when there is a traffic accident causing back up somewhere in the Tri-valley .
What’s your input?

Castro Valley is beautiful and family-friendly. Please go somewhere else if you don’t like it and leave it alone. If you want to see what incorporation does, just go to Hayward or San Leandro or Oakland for example. Compare these cities to unincorporated Sunol, Fairvew, and Castro Valley. There lies your answer. Hayward is plagued with heavy traffic, abandoned buildings, homelessness, neglect of San Lorenzo Creek, and complaints from citizens about lack of police response and their drunk fire department chief. Hayward has a large structural deficit and the city council accept large donations from developers to their campaigns. The rep from “Castro Valley Matters” at the Fall Festival specifically stated they want to become incorporated like Hayward and San Leandro. Anyone aiming to incorporate Castro Valley is seeking to fill their own pockets and/or negligently ruin the community’s quality of life.

I am curious what impact incorporation has on the current CV school district?

Currently there are outlier areas in Castro Valley that attend Hayward schools, which is why we ensured to buy in the CV school district area. This choice came with a specific cost vs. a home not in the district.

What would be the benefit to a homeowner who paid the increased cost to live in the CV school district to pass this? Of course the benefit to the outlier areas would be a substantial increase in their home value along with access to a better school district which is already overcrowded.

Would their property taxes be corrected to reflect what others purchased their home for during the same time period? Prop 13 is already an issue creating forever increased cost to homeowners who this doesn’t apply.

Besides some sidewalks, what would we be gaining?

Governance
Supervisors to hear proposal for incorporation fiscal analysis

The Alameda County Board of Supervisors Unincorporated Services Committee meets on Wednesday, April 27 at 6:00 pm to hear from the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) about a proposed fiscal analysis of the feasibility of incorporating Castro Valley and the other Alameda County unincorporated communities.

Featured Story
1
Walking in Castro Valley: “She hit me and didn’t stop”

For the last few years, I have been a committed pedestrian, taking time to walk, exercise my husky Juneau and avoiding driving for nearby errands.

2020 Propositions
Castro Valley Matters Positions on California Propositions – 2020

Reminder: October 19th is the deadline to register to vote in Alameda County. For more information, see the link at https://www.acvote.org/index. You can track your ballot using the using the “voter profile” link at https://www.acgov.org/rovmvp_app/mvp.do. Castro Valley Matters urges your Yes vote on the following Propositions: Proposition Name CVM Endorses …