Business improvement district fails
By CRYSTAL LEE/Democrat staff Writer
Article Created: 08/01/2007 10:45:30 AM PDT
The proposed downtown Property and Business Improvement District, or PBID, failed with a majority
protest Tuesday night.
After the ballots were counted, City Clerk Sue Vannucci announced 68.07 percent of the votes submitted
by property owners opposed the formation of the PBID and 31.93 percent supported it.
The ballots were accepted until the close of the public hearing, during which several property owners
applauded the Woodland City Council for withdrawing their ballot vote.
The City Council had decided 3 1 prior to the public hearing to withdraw the city's vote that would have
been weighted at 18.6 percent, based on square-footage of property owned within the district.
The decision came from a motion by Councilman Jeff Monroe, seconded by Vice Mayor Skip Davies, that
was made prior to the scheduled public hearing.
Mayor Dave Flory also supported the motion to withdraw the city's vote. Councilman Art Pimentel opposed
the motion and Councilman Bill Marble was not present.
- Reach Crystal Lee at 406-6232 or clee@dailydemocrat.com.
'PBID' proposal an unfair tax
Daily Democrat
Article Created: 07/31/2007 08:44:40 AM PDT
Meg and Tom Stallard are citizens leading the property-based improvement district tax. Normally we
choose membership in an organization, we are not forced. The "PBID" (on the agenda for discussion at
tonight's City Council meeting) is a vote by property owners based on square footage. Land owners with
the most property can vote to assess/tax the rest of us. This "committee," not the city, will control over
$200,000 a year! If you cannot pay, your property will be liened!
The way this works for example, you have four houses and the largest lot owner decides they want a
parking garage. They form a "committee" and vote to tax the other three houses $2,000 a year for a
parking garage on their lot, as it helps decrease the cars parking on the street.
Essentially eight major downtown landowners can vote in a huge tax for 176 other property owners.
Coincidentally, assessment lines were drawn by the Stallard's and the tax is only on the ground floor, so
the multi-story complex's the Stallards own are only taxed on the ground floor elevation. Those with the
largest amount of land holdings will force a financial burden on the majority of small land owners. My
assessment, $1,700 is a 50 percent increase over my current tax bill.
Another downtown owner's graveled lot, the developers have been trying to snatch, will be taxed an
additional $7,200 a year. They cannot make this much in rent on the lot.
Taxation being implemented in this manner shows we are not a democracy of voters, but a money grab for
the devious few. This is un-democratic and un-American and shows we can be taxed without fair process.
The Woodland City Council is facilitating and controls over 18 percent of the vote based on land
ownership. They will be the deciding vote in this case. They are constantly complaining about not having
enough money, and yet will waste $42,000 of our tax money annually on this committee! This is a waste of
money and unfair to the majority of owners that do not want it.
BRENDA CEDARBLADE, Woodland
'PBID' proposal is flawed and should be altered
Daily Democrat
Article Created: 07/31/2007 08:44:39 AM PDT
At Issue:
Property-based improvement district being voted on by the Woodland City Council.
Our Opinion:
This proposed district discriminates against a majority of downtown businesses and should be changed to
allow greater representation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Woodland City Council is voting tonight on a proposed property-based improvement district, which
would create a special district in the city's downtown designed to raise money so downtown could be
marketed to bring in other businesses as well as promote the downtown itself.
It sounds like a worthy effort on the face, but we have seen this sort of thing before and do not feel it is
either fair or beneficial to a majority of downtown businesses. As such, before the council acts we
encourage it to make alterations which would make the district more democratic in its makeup.
If the PBID is formed, it will follow what has become a long string of so-called "improvement districts" in the
city meant to generate business. Some of these districts have operated under - or in tandem with - the
Woodland Chamber of Commerce. Some have been independent. To our knowledge, all have failed due
to inadequate funding from the city and even the businesses themselves.
We have always thought these marketing or promotional districts were vital to downtown and have
supported them because it's been our experience that many downtown merchants must often be dragged
kicking and screaming into promoting themselves.
Now comes PBID: This district would force an alliance of downtown merchants and property owners who
could benefit from a unified marketing strategy. There is nothing wrong with the intent.
The approach, however, is flawed and needs changing. Basically, PBID only allows those who own
property a vote, while ignoring so-called "tenant merchants," those who are not the actual owners of their
stores but only rent or lease the space.
In limiting the district's representation to only property owners, which includes the city of Woodland and
Yolo County governments, then only they could make decisions.
, a privileged few would be deciding the direction of the entire downtown, forcing fees on those without a
voice.
We cannot support this plan because it would leave out a majority of business people, who should have a
voice in the direction of downtown.
Additionally, we already have the Chamber of Commerce as a promotional agency, despite the fact it's not
always effective. The city also has an active and effective Redevelopment Agency, and an Economic
Development Strategic Plan, both of which include provisions for promotion, downtown landscaping and
business improvement.
The tools are in place to assist downtown and should continue to be used. And if city officials don't believe
what they have is working properly, then they should devote their time to fixing the problems rather than
creating a new layer of bureaucracy.
We urge the City Council to defeat this proposal at its meeting tonight.