‘Elephant in the Room’ Haunts Assessment District Panel

With a representative of the Vons shopping center owner looking on, the group planning a possible downtown assessment district grappled with “the elephant in the room” Wednesday night—whether a handful of property owners have the power to decide the fate of the so-called PBID for dozens of others in The Village.

“He’s not yes, he’s not no,” audience member Jenna Zeledon said of the leader, whom she wouldn’t name, of a family trust tied to the Auerbach Realty Group that owns the Vons-anchored La Mesa Springs Shopping Center. “He’s open to anything realistic.”

The Vons center—along with the city of La Mesa and several other large property owners, including Henry’s market—“can make the decision [on the PBID] for everybody,” said committee member Deena While, owner of a children’s bookstore.

Member Shannon O’Dunn, an art gallery owner, said: “This is the elephant in the room—if there is a weighted vote, it basically has two people deciding the whole [question].”

To which Mayor Art Madrid, representing the civic center portion of the proposed district, replied: “This is not a zoo.”

The city’s new fact sheet addressed the issue as well, posing and answering the question: “If Civic Center and other city properties are included in the PBID boundary, won’t the city have such a large representation that the city’s vote alone could form the PBID?”

The fact sheet says no, and explained:

First, the weight of every property owner’s vote is not based solely on the amount of property they own but on the value of the assessment they pay on the property(ies) as a percentage of total PBID assessment. ... The city’s total assessment as a percent of total PBID assessments is estimated at 10 percent in the preliminary PBID scenario.

Second, state law pertaining to PBID formation has a safeguard to prevent any single major property owner from determining the outcome of a PBID formation effort. State law prevents any single property owner paying more than 40 percent of the total PBID assessment from being included in the petition phase of the formation process. There are no property owners with that magnitude of assessment present in the Downtown Village.

The PBID meeting—for property-based business improvement district—took place at the police station community room, with six in the audience.

Coming and going during the meeting, the committee’s 16 members focused on  setting the assessment district’s boundaries and deciding which areas should be in the three “benefit zones.”

Zone 1 would pay the highest fees, while Zone 2 would pay 75 percent of that, for example. Zone 3 fees would be 50 percent of Zone 1.

The group voted to keep the same boundaries as depicted in a map posted on the city’s website Wednesday—a district similar to one that failed about nine years ago.  Members rejected a suggestion to expand the district to areas south of University Avenue around Pine and Cypress streets.

Bill Chopyk, the city’s community development director, told the group that the boundaries are based on the downtown commercial district and civic center.

He and city staffer Chris Gonzales—plus city-hired PBID consultant Ed Henning—helped guide the committee and answered questions.

Seated around a long conference table, the committee huddled over three PBID maps and beneath ones posted on an adjacent wall.

“Everyone is going to have a different benefit [from the PBID] and a different perception of benefit,” said committee Chairwoman Lynn McCrea, an accountant.

Chopyk said: “That’s why we have different [benefit] zones,” referring to areas of the map that would contribute to the district according to the size of their property and how much they got out of the PBID.

Henning said: “When we define a benefit zone, it has to be almost scientific,” giving as an example the changing frequency of security patrols in various zones.

Discussion sometimes veered to unrelated issues, including the wisdom of having parking meters in The Village. Members generally supported them—as a way to give the public a chance at finding a space (since employees of Village businesses might otherwise hog the lots).

A major topic was whether residential properties should be in the PBID. Henning said state law bars areas zoned residential from being in such districts, but the commercially zoned downtown area includes rental and owner-occupied housing.

In the end, the committee (with two abstentions) voted to exempt certain residential properties from the district.

A motion to move the city’s old police station property from Zone 1 to the less-costly Zone 2 failed by a vote of 7-5.

Likewise, the headquarters building of the La Mesa-Spring Valley School District was kept in the district—despite one member noting “the school district has no part in our merchants association.”

But Mayor Madrid called it a “business complex. … It’s a business, absolutely.” And he said the school district, based on Date Avenue, takes taxpayer money, just as City Hall does. And if the Civic Center isn’t excluded from the PBID, neither should the K-8 school district, he said.

The committee also voted to change its twice-a-month meeting nights from Wednesday to Thursday, with the next one set for March 24.

A possible vote of property owners on the PBID is months away—possibly as early as September, according to a “preliminary fact sheet” on the city's website (and attached here). It would be the subject of public hearings and a council vote. 

With 182 parcels and 133 property owners, the PBID would be decided not by the majority of owners but by 50 percent (plus one) of “proposed assessments” in a weighted vote.

Although votes taken Wednesday will help move the process along, consultant Henning said district boundaries and benefit zones can still change. The PBID has a total assessed value of nearly $104 million, the city says.

Fees paid by property owners in the district would go toward physical improvements, services and marketing.