PBID Critic: Exercise Your Right to NOT Petition Your Government

Now that the so-called Downtown Village PBID, all $378,000 of it, has entered the petition phase, I'd like to clear up a few misconceptions that are cropping up during the belated public sales campaign.

1. "We are still early in the process, and there is ample time to address concerns."

In fact, almost all the real decisions have already been made over the last few years. Now that petitions are floating about, the substantive part of the process is almost done. While it is true that the earliest that assessments can hit your property tax bill is the end of 2012 or the beginning of next year, your chance to have a real say about costs and purported benefits is disappearing quickly as the City Council is expected to vote on whether to certify the district as early as April.

2. "Signing the petition doesn't do anything more than move the process forward. It's like voting on whether to vote, but really more a formality than anything else."

This may be the most pernicious myth, and requires some explanation.

Here's how it works from this point:

A. Petition Phase (requires a majority of TOTAL ASSESSMENTS IN DISTRICT to move to)

B. Voting Phase (requires a majority of ONLY THOSE BALLOTS RETURNED to move to)

C. City Council Vote on Certification (requires a majority of the Council, including the Mayor—a primary force behind the PBID)

So why shouldn't you just sign your petition and advance the vote? That certainly sounds fair. It sound's democratic. It sounds American.

Here's why: No matter what you've been told, the Petition Phase is effectively the real vote.

Again: The Petition Phase is, for all practical purposes, the real vote and it's one that neuters rather than empowers you.

You see, for the petition phase to advance to a vote, $189,000+-, or more than half the total assessments, must be turned in. During the voting phase, however, the PBID can pass with a bare majority of only those ballots actually returned, typically a much lower number.  If you have questions, concerns, or just want to be guaranteed a say, the time for your voice to be heard is now!

Just nine owners can swing the petition, but would you be surprised to hear that it might only take two owners in the voting phase to force the PBID through. How so? Let's look at Misconception #3:

3. "I've been told that it only takes a few property owners to pass PBID. That has to be a lie, doesn't it?"

I've heard it said it would take at least "19 Parcels to reach a majority." Even if true, that's hardly fair. What isn't mentioned is that several large owners control more than one parcel. The Auerbach owned Vons Shopping Center comprises three all by itself. The City of La Mesa owns everything from the Fire and Police Stations, to City Hall and several parking lots to the breezeway just west of the Regal, for almost 16% of the total vote.

Here are the top nine owners and their approximate assessments.

(These numbers are tough to suss out, as the committee has chosen to only list parcel numbers and not actual ownership. Please let me know if you think I've made a mistake.)

CIF La Mesa (Plaza Office

Buildings by Trolley

Sprouts/Hennry's

Property

La Mesa-Spring Valley

School District

$189,000 needed to

"Win" if 100% Turnout

Result: PBID "Wins" by $3,500, even if EVERY OTHER OWNER OPPOSES IT.

What if not everybody votes? Let's see:

To be safe, let's take 45% as representative of average turnout for this kind of special election. (A recent vote in North Park saw only 37%). That means in theory that just TWO property owners can vote to increase the taxes of more than 200!

How?

$378,000 (total assessments)  X  45% (turnout)  =  $170,100 (pool from which a majority "YES" is needed to win.

$170,100 (returned ballots)  X  50% + $1 (simple majority)  =  $85,051 (enough to pass "PBID")

You might be saying, "Wait, now. I thought you said two people can decide my fate. Isn't $85,000 almost a quarter of the district? Sure that's a little unfair, but we see elections won all the time by candidates who only got about a quarter of the electorate. People who don't vote have no right to complain."

OK, here's where it gets really interesting. In my example, as few as two property owners CAN determine the outcome. Remember that the votes are weighted by assessment? In other words, the more you pay, the more your say.

We see from the table above that the city and Auerbach Realty, redevelopers out of Santa Monica, could pass the PBID in a 45% turnout scenario and still have $15,000 of wiggle room. If the city chooses not to vote, as is its right, and as is only right given that the Civic Center has no "business" being in a business district in the first place, what happens? Well, if Owners 2, 3 and 4 (Auerbach, La Mesa Plaza and Pac Bell—for whom Art Madrid worked for what, 20 years?) vote together, then still just three property owners decide your fate.

Is there any world in which allowing just 1 percent to rule the rest is fair? What about the 99%? No matter where you stand politically, I hope we all can take the best lessons of last fall's protests to heart and recognize an injustice when we see it.

NINE PROPERTIES IS THE THEORETICAL BEST-CASE MINIMUM.

Weighted voting was intended to protect large property owners from being taxed by their smaller neighbors just because they are thought to have deep pockets. Think of "No Taxation Without Representation."

Unfortunately, cities around California quickly realized that they could subvert these protections for the big through manufactured assessment districts that deny a voice to the small.

Which brings us to the fourth misconception:

4. "What if the PBID passes with 70-80% of the vote and scores of properties. That proves its popularity, doesn't it?"

The short answer is "NO." Because of weighted voting, every vote is different and there will be no secret ballot. Every ballot is public knowledge, and the feeling that this district has been gerrymandered into a "done deal" is pervasive. Even the most vehemently opposed will be under sustained and public pressure to "go along to get along" for fear of repercussions, whether social or financial.

This district will never survive meaningful, impartial scrutiny.

5. "I've heard that if we don't pass the PBID, the Streetscape Project will never happen? Is that true?"

I've heard this myself. Just today, in fact, Mayor Madrid and Parking Commissioner Jim Wieboldt stated exactly that in an outreach meeting to address what the Mayor likes to call "the church problem." Mayor Madrid said specifically, "We will spend (about a million) on repairs, but the remaining $4 million (in grant money) will be spread around the rest of the city."

However, that directly contradicts what we heard at City Council last year. As I understand it, the City wants a mechanism to recover the expected $65,000 in annual maintenance for the full Streetscape before committing to build it. That's all.

(What the mayor says now is not the official city position. It is one of his tailored messages that changes with each audience. For example, the other night he told the residents at La Mesa Plaza that churches and nonprofits have gotten a "free ride" for too long, a viewpoint he considerably soft-pedaled at the Methodist Social Hall today.)

There are better, less expensive, and fairer ways to accomplish the city's reasonable cost-recovery goals. We hope to discuss these in the coming months, but first the PBID has to be temporarily tabled. That's why we are asking you to preserve your rights by choosing to NOT exercise them this one time. Strangely enough, it may be the only way for you to be heard.

Our website (villagepbidforum.com) is still pretty pathetic. We don't have professional PR teams, but we're trying to get the word out. In the meantime, if you have questions or doubts about the wisdom of "PBID," please feel free to call me or come by any time.

Bill Jaynes

ALL THINGS BRIGHT AND BRITISH

8401 La Mesa Blvd.

619-464-2298