STREAMLINING PUBLIC COMMENT IS NOT OK

Tell MMWD Directors TODAY That You Object

Marin Municipal Water District, which has an infamously bad track record of transparency, public inclusion and responsiveness, is now contemplating a new move in the wrong direction.  Late in the agenda of its November 2 board meeting, Directors will consider “streamlining” public comment at all future board meetings.

Email MMWD Directors ASAP and tell them This is Not OK.  They are OUR elected representatives and must guard OUR right to be heard and get answers.  Send a copy of your comment to info@costmarin.org  so that we can ensure that record is preserved.  Or, voice your protest during discussion of agenda item 7 at tonight’s Zoom board meeting.  Late in the board meeting is, unfortunately, a place to bury proposals likely to be unpopular with the public.

CO$T sent MMWD Directors the following Letter of Objection detailing why public comment should not be “streamlined” and proposing sensible ways to fix MMWD’s interminable meetings.

CO$T OBJECTION LETTER – November 1, 2021
RE: Streamlining of Board Meetings (Agenda Item 07)

The Board of Directors of the Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers supports streamlining of MMWD Board meetings, but NOT by further degrading public comment and the Board’s response to it.  Agenda item 7 at the November 2 board meeting proposes to “streamline” public comments as a way to shorten overall future meeting time.  The Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers objects to “streamlining public comment” by both methods proposed in the Nov 2 staff report, including (1)having the board secretary summarize, rephrase, and consolidate all public comments prior to Directors’ responses and (2)combining related agenda items, thereby reducing the number of public comment opportunities.  Streamlining public comment in these ways is a major misstep in the wrong direction.  MMWD is an organization that already suffers diminishing public trust and growing anger in both Marin and Richmond (where MMWD failed to adequately engage elected officials and residents impacted by the  pump station and generator it intends to place there).

Recent MMWD meetings DO need to be run more time efficiently than currently.  Regularly scheduled bi-monthly board meetings extend into wee hours and “committee” meetings involving the full board consume entire weekday mornings multiple times monthly.

As a direct result of this poor time management, Board President Cynthia Koehler often moves to reduce public comment time by one-third, from 3 minutes to 2 minutes, even when there are very few speakers.  At MMWD’s October 15 offsite board meeting, the roughly 7 indefatigable members of the public who endured six hours of indoor sessions were rewarded with the opportunity to comment only one minute each.

Given the relatively small amount of time consumed by public comments and responses to them, streamlining public comment isn’t a bona fide solution to the long meetings.  Rather, such a proposal signals MMWD’s increased lack of interest in public engagement at a time when the public is up in arms about the district’s mismanagement of the drought emergency and high-handed approach to dealing with the public.  This same lack of concern for public engagement has infuriated Richmond Mayor Tom Butt.   And, this same lack of interest in public inclusion was reflected in MMWD’s recent decision to host an in-person only, indoor, offsite board meeting focused on the hot topic of water supply adequacy — and then refuse to videotape it.  CO$T videotaped the entire meeting and posted it for public viewing because the water district didn’t.

Don’t mess with public comment.  It sends a very bad message at a time when MMWD needs public support.

The real problem with MMWD’s marathon board meetings is poor management of the REST of the agenda.  Fortunately, there are things District Directors could do to fix that.  Here are a few positive suggestions:

1. Prepare and post online all PowerPoint slides 72 hours in advance of all Board and committee meetings.  Staff and paid consultants CAN do this if told to.  Directors and the public could then review those materials prior to the board meeting instead of being slowly walked through each slide during the meeting.  This is the most impactful change that could improve meeting efficiency.

2. Make better use of the consent calendar.  Use the consent calendar to approve routine expenditures and hires.  The board should NOT, however, cede such authority to the general manager as staff is now proposing.

3. Reorganize the agenda to put the most important items first.  Instead, topics meriting the most in-depth board and community input are regularly placed late on the agenda, when everyone is tired and ready to go to bed.  Rushing against the clock results in less thoughtful decisions.

4. Publish the agenda with rough start time estimates for each agenda item.  Other districts do this.  These estimates aren’t binding, but help the board president better manage the meeting.

5. The board president must manage the board discussion better, keeping it on topic and concise.  Other agencies and districts face equally complex issues but do a much better job of keeping focused.

In sum, CO$T urges MMWD’s directors to streamline its meetings by making better use of its time rather than limiting public input and response to it.

THE SKINNY FROM CO$T October 27

WHAT’S HAPPENING AT COST?   HOW CAN YOU HELP?
This skinny monthly bulletin takes only one minute to read.

Help wanted: MMWD Board Candidates and Campaign Volunteers
COST is recruiting and developing candidates to run against members of the Marin Municipal Water District’s Board of Directors whose terms expire November 2022.  MMWD is failing to fulfil its primary responsibility to plan for and provide an adequate, dependable water supply.  Contact us ASAP with candidate ideas or to volunteer to help our candidates get elected.  To effect change, join our team!

Act now: A Special Challenge Grant Benefits CO$T and GFC! 
CO$T recently hosted a webinar — excellent video here — featuring  David Crane, President of Govern for California, to talk about the legislative sausage-making in Sacramento.  It isn’t pretty.  David tied California’s runaway taxes and declining services to influence pedaling: special interests’ large campaign contributions to state legislators. Fortunately, GFC is an increasingly powerful counterweight, steering large donations to legislators who better represent the general interest of Californians.   We’re excited to announce a special opportunity for you to double your impact on better government.  Every dollar you donate to GFC this month will be matched by an equal donation to CO$T, thanks to the generosity of one of our supporters.  Click here to donate to GFC.  Then Contact CO$T to let us know the amount of your GFC contribution.  Act now!

Truth and Consequences of CA’s New Housing Laws: CO$T  hosted a free webinar on October 25 at 1:15 pm with some real star power: CA Sen. Mike McGuire; CA Assembly Member Marc Levine; ABAG Exec. Com. Member and Novato Mayor Pat Eklund; and California Catalysts for Local Control Founder Susan Kirsch will be discussing the impacts of statewide housing legislation that diminishes local control over new projects. Marin Independent Journal’s political commentator, Dick Spotswood, moderated.  A full description and video are on our home page.

Direct Your Sales Tax Dollars via a 2 minute survey. 
CO$T is working to ensure that any renewal of Marin County Parks and Open space ¼ cent sales tax (Measure A) is rebalanced to favor the most urgent current needs.  CO$T’s position is that if the sales tax is to be renewed, a much larger percentage must be spent on reducing the accumulated fire-prone fuel load in Open Space.  Conversely, our money should stop being spent on subsidizing private farmland (e.g., the scandal-plagued Marin Agricultural Land Trust); and less money spent on new open space acquisition (until the county is able to safely manage the wildly overgrown property it already owns).  Fill in the Parks administration’s short survey to tell them how you want your sales tax money spent.

YOU can steer Bezos’ riches to CO$T:
Sign up for the free AmazonSmile program and designate the Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers Foundation as your favorite charity.  Anytime you shop on their platform we will receive 0.5% of the amount you spend.

That’s it for now, we’ll be back in touch soon!

Mimi, Paul, Kingston, Laura, Doug, Lucy and Carsten

Cease and Desist Impending Brown Act Violation for MMWD October 15 Board Meeting

(This demand letter was sent to MMWD’s General Counsel, Mollie MacLean, on October 13, 2021 by CO$T’s attorney.)

Dear Counsel,

On behalf of the Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers, I am writing to demand that the Marin Municipal Water District (“MMWD” or “District”) cease and desist from its impending violation of the Brown Act. Specifically, the District has announced that its Board meeting on Friday will be held during a work day, offsite, and not permit remote public access. Further, the District intends to segregate the unvaccinated—including those with medical conditions that make them both vulnerable to the coronavirus and unable to take the vaccine—in a separate area outside the building in which the meeting will be taking place, denying them equal access to the meeting itself, the board, and District staff in attendance. Immune compromised individuals are effectively excluded altogether from participating because it is unsafe for them to either attend an indoor event or to congregate with an unvaccinated population, and the unvaccinated are most at risk by being in the company of other unvaccinated persons so the event as currently designed creates a public health threat.

To intentionally design a special board meeting that will endanger public health during a pandemic and limit public oversight of the Board during an unprecedented water crisis when the Board is under blistering public scrutiny for its management of the public’s water supply is illegal, unconscionable, and defies common sense. If MMWD does not determine by C.O.B. today, Wednesday, October 13, that all members of the public will be permitted to fully, equally, and safely observe and participate in this Friday’s Board meeting in person or remotely, we will have no choice but to consider filing for injunctive and declaratory relief to stop the violation and publicly hold accountable all those who are responsible.

Link to PDF

 

Late Breaking Follow up Letter regarding medical segregation at the upcoming MWWD Board Meeting

Link to Follow Up Letter

 

CO$T takes the initiative and videotapes the MMWD special meeting.

 

MMWD 10/15/21 Board Retreat Examined Water Supply Options
CO$T Videotaped the Entire Meeting Because the Water District Didn’t

Link to powerpoint slides here

 

California’s New Housing Laws Truth and Consequences

California’s New Housing Laws Truth and Consequences

Q&A WEBINAR
For CO$T Supporters and Friends

Truth AND Consequences from Zayda Productions on Vimeo.

* Mike McGuire – State Senator *

* Marc Levine – State Assembly & Insurance Commissioner Candidate *

* Pat Eklund – Novato Mayor & Longtime ABAG Representative *

* Susan Kirsch – California Community Catalysts for Local Control *

* Dick Spotswood, Moderator – Marin IJ’s Militant Centrist Political Columnist *

–
CA State Laws Now Target “The Housing Problem” at the Local Level – What Happens from Here?
Legislation to change housing policy statewide is an ongoing thrust and highly contentious. Can recent and future Sacramento legislation deliver a lot more housing and improve affordability? What are the consequences — good and bad — of limiting cities’ control over planning, growth and zoning? Hear from prominent leaders with diverse viewpoints, all of whom aim for a better California.

The Latest Big Development?

It’s SB-9
In September, 2021, two days after his recall victory, Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB9 as part of a 24 bill package intended to address housing supply and affordability.

What is Senate Bill 9?

It is the most controversial of the recently enacted laws. Some praise SB-9 as breaking a housing supply logjam. Some predict it will do little. Still are concerned it ends single family housing and local control of planning. A repeal initiative is already underway. It allows property owners to split a single-family lot into two lots, add a second home to their lot or split their lot into two and place duplexes on each. The last option would create four housing units on a property currently limited to a single-family house. The new law will mark a shift from current policies that allow only two large units — a stand-alone house and an accessory dwelling unit — on single-family lots, as well as an attached junior unit no larger than 500 square feet. Under the new law, local control will be attenuated, as cities and counties across California will be required to approve development proposals that meet specified size and design standards. Proponents say that outlawing single family zoning is a linchpin to housing more Californians affordably and equitably. Detractors say local control over planning is essential to ensure adequate infrastructure, public services, evacuation, and livable neighborhoods.

Where Our Panelists Stand on SB-9:

State Senator Mike McGuire – Co-Sponsored SB 9 and voted Aye
Assemblyman Marc Levine — Voted NO on SB-9
Pat Eklund – Favors local government control over planning & growth
Susan Kirsch – Concerned about impact on single family home ownership and neighborhoods.

Don’t miss the chance to hear this dynamic panel and ask questions.
Join Us Monday 10/25 at 1:15PM

Your Contribution Helps CO$T
Sponsor Valuable Community Events

Help Pry California from Special Interests’ Grip!

Help Pry California from Special Interests’ Grip!

“Govern for California’s David Crane Has a Plan”

Webinar for CO$T & GFC Supporters

Wednesday, September 22, 10 am

Special interests’ money gets state and local politicians elected. They get what they pay for. We get runaway expenditures, higher taxes and declining services.

GFC President David Crane — public policy expert and good governance advocate – is leading a masterly campaign to get California off this unsustainable trajectory and our politicians back to representing the public interest. GFC is levelling the playing field by putting serious money behind responsible candidates and advancing its own legislative initiatives that put ordinary Californians’ interests first. Crane is an authority on government finance, accounting, pension liability, and how the sausage gets made in Sacramento.

Join us for the Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers’ webinar featuring GFC. Don’t miss this opportunity to learn more and ask David questions about GFC’s game plan.

Reserve Your Webinar Spot Now click here
About David Crane
David Crane, President of Govern for California, addressed CO$T’s 2018 Fall Forum with a rousing call to action and Q&A about “What They Don’t Want You to Know about Taxes, Pensions, Public Education and Services.“

From 2004-2010 he served as a special adviser to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and from 1979-2003 he was a partner at Babcock & Brown, a financial services company. David also serves on the board of the Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California and formerly served on the University of California Board of Regents and as a director of the California State Teachers Retirement System, Environmental Defense Fund, and the Volcker-Ravitch Task Force on the State Budget Crisis. He is a lecturer in Public Policy at Stanford University.

Senior and Low-Income Marin Parcel Tax and Fee Exemptions APPLY NOW! Filing Deadlines Soon!

Time is short to submit applications for exemptions and discounts on an array of Marin add-on property taxes and agency fees.  Individuals who may qualify include those who are seniors, disabled, low-to-moderate income, or have special circumstances (e.g., medical conditions that require extra water).  Because so many tax- and rate- payers miss out on a cost-saving opportunity for which they qualify, the Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers is providing the information below.  To ensure you’re kept in the loop, sign up for our future alerts here. 

Marin County’s Property Tax Exemption webpage has a full list of the agencies whose taxes are collected via property tax bills and may offer discounts/exemptions.  [Certain agencies, e.g., sewer and water, send a bill to the property owner or renter directly and offer discounts, some of which we describe further down this page.]

If you enter your parcel number in the box on the county’s exemption page, the website pulls up a list of, and telephone numbers for, all the agencies that bill YOU through your property tax bill.  The list also identifies the specific agencies on your tax bill that offer exemptions.  For each one, there is a telephone number for more details regarding the criteria and deadlines; in many instances there is a hot-link to the application form.

Many school districts offer parcel tax exemptions for seniors 65 and older, and often for low-income and disabled taxpayers as well.  School parcel taxes are typically the largest exemptions/discounts available.  Some of them have application deadlines in early May so you may need to act quickly.  While income- and disability-based discounts require annual filing, school parcel tax senior exemptions need only be applied for once, though in some instances the school district may require a new application for a renewed or supplemental tax measure.  Note that you may be paying taxes to more than one school district (e.g., K-8 and high school), thus requiring multiple exemption applications.
Mark your calendar: Reapply annually for any expiring exemptions!
 There is also a low-income senior exemption for the Marin Wildfire Preparedness Authority parcel tax.  Note that the application must be postmarked by June 30, 2021. The income threshold is pretty high. It goes up annually and last year was $97,600 for 1 person; $111,550 for two; higher for more; check the website in late April for a likely increase in the threshold.  This tax is assessed on building square footage so make sure to verify that the official records show that the square footage of your property is accurate. If not, contact the Assessor’soffice.  

Note that some agencies such as the MWPA do not acknowledge receipt or approval of your exemption/discount application.  The only way to know for sure is to keep a proof of all your exemption/discount applications and then carefully review your tax bill AS SOON AS YOU RECEIVE IT.  If you can prove that your valid application was not reflected on your tax bill, immediately contact the agency to ask for an adjustment.  Advocating on behalf of taxpayers, CO$T is urging agencies to acknowledge receipt of each application and inform the taxpayer in writing whether it has been approved.
More Cost-Saving Opportunities Below
Donate to Help Pay for this Message
A variety of discounts and exemptions are offered by agencies that are NOT on your property tax bill.  Some are only available to seniors.  Some use a “very low income” standard, meaning not so many customers qualify as under the “low-income” one used by MWPA. The most sizeable non-tax-bill discounts are those offered by water and sanitation districts:

  • Ross Valley Sanitary District offers alow-income sewer charge assistance program with income thresholds similar to what MWPA’s.
  • Other Sanitation Districts. There are twelve other sanitation districts in Marin. Check with your local agency for discounts.
  • Marin Municipal Water District has several discount programs listed here — some are not tied to income.  Note also that in the wake of the outcry against its huge 2019 meter-charge fee increases, MMWD is encouraging downsizing residential meters that are over 5/8″ in size in order to reduce the especially big charges levied on larger meters (which are the subject of a legal complaint filed by CO$T on behalf of ratepayers).  The charges for downsizing are listed in item 1.2 in the district’s rate/fee schedule.  Your meter size is shown on your water bill, under Account Summary, e.g., “CAPITAL MAINT. FEE FOR 1″ METER.”  Make sure you ask what it will cost if you have to re-upsize, if, for example, you have to install interior fire suppression sprinklers.  For more information, call MMWD at 415-945-1400 or email CustomerService@MarinWater.org
  • North Marin Water District has a bimonthly low-income discount available. 
  • Stinson Beach County Water District has a low-income discount program.  For more information and a copy of the form call 415-868-1333. 

You CAN lower your PG&E bill, which may be about to rise!  PG&E offers several low-income discount programs.  Note that PG&E is currently automatically transitioning residential customers to time of use plan.  This may RAISE your bill if you don’t act to change your usage pattern or immediately change your PG&E rate plan to the one that’s most cost-effective for you.  Click here — and then click the “make your choice” button — to explore whether choosing a different rate plan will prevent a higher bill or lower what you’re already paying.  
If you found this information useful, SIGN UP for future alerts  
DONATE to Help Cover the Cost of this Taxpayer Alert
Forward this Email to Friends; Share on Social Media

Join VCTA’s FREE Important Time-Sensitive Zoom Event

Prop 19 Makes Many Seniors’ Moves More Affordable.
BUT, It Raised Tax on Inherited Property.
Immediate Action May Protect Your Heirs!
(Click here for one of the Legal Blogs on Prop 19)

CO$T Invites You to Join VCTA’s FREE
Important, Time-Sensitive Zoom Event
Thursday January 14 at 1 PM

Click Here To Register
 

Event Description:

A discussion on key elements of Proposition 19 passed in the November 2020 election. Learn about how Proposition 19 will limit the transfer of assessed values between parents and children/grandchildren, while expanding the ability for certain persons to transfer the assessed value of their primary residence to a replacement primary residence.

Provisions of Proposition 19 affecting transfers between parents and children/grandchildren will become effective for transfers of property occurring on and after February 16, 2021, while provisions regarding the transfer of base year values from one primary residence to another will become effective on April 1, 2021.

VCTA and VC CoLAB urges everyone to take advantage of this important and timely virtual event.

Reject False, Misleading Resolution That Claims CA Law Requires MMWD to Fund Part-Time Directors’ Health Insurance

EMAIL MMWD DIRECTORS TODAY ASAP!

Support CO$T’s Demand that MMWD Directors Reject False, Misleading Resolution
That Claims CA Law Requires MMWD to Fund Part-Time Directors’ Health Insurance 

CO$T sent the objection letter below demanding that Marin Municipal Water District Directors vote AGAINST a resolution before them tonight (7:30M, 11/17) falsely claiming that the law mandates MMWD provide health insurance to these part-time Directors at public expense

CO$T urges you to send a letter to MMWD Directors and General Manager TODAY supporting our demand: ckoehler@marinwater.org
lbragman@marinwater.org 
aquintero@Marinwater.org
lrussell@marinwater.org
jgibson@marinwater.org
bhorenstein@marinwater.org
 

You may also attend the meeting via Zoom and express your opinion during public comment on agenda item 8 (PDF page 76).  MMWD’s instructions for attending and commenting are as follows:  
To participate online, go to https://zoom.us/j/93550979704. You can also participate by phone by calling 1-699-900-9128 and entering the webinar ID#: 935 5097 9704.  To watch the meeting live on YouTube, click here. 
During the public comment periods, the public may comment by clicking the “raise hand”
button on the bottom of the Zoom screen; if you are joining by phone and would like to
comment, press *9 and we will call on you as appropriate.
You may also submit your comments in advance or during the meeting by emailing them to BoardComment@MarinWater.org. Emailed comments on informational items will be provided to the board and posted on MMWD’s website. Emailed comments on approval items will be read aloud at the meeting prior to the board taking action on the item, and posted on MMWD’s website.



CO$T OBJECTION LETTER Re Resolution No. 8592 – Director Health Insurance Payments
(Sent to MMMWD Directors and General Manager November 17, 2020)
 
To the Directors:
 
The Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers protests the false and misleading resolution that is being presented to the MMWD Board at its November 17, 2020, meeting, namely Resolution No. 8592. The resolution purports that the law requires MMWD to pay Board members the full cost for their purchase of family medical insurance up to a statutory maximum.  The resolution is buried on page 76 of the 121-page agenda. 
 
The resolution falsely states that California Government Code Sec. 22892 (b) requires MMWD to make these payments.
 
In fact, Government Code Sec. 22892 applies only to employees and annuitants.  Board members are neither.  The entire text of Government Code Sec. 22892 is attached.
 
We urge you as directors representing ratepayers to reject this factually incorrect and legally problematic resolution.   Without having any legitimate legal support, passing this resolution would be a grave impropriety and a clear case of self-dealing.
 
We further urge you to introduce a resolution ending MMWD’s practice of paying for the health insurance of part-time independent Directors, which is an inappropriate expenditure of ratepayer funds and contrary to the prevailing practice of virtually all other Marin public agencies.   It is especially egregious for health insurance payments be provided to – and accepted by — directors eligible for Medicare.

***********
RESOLUTION NO. 8592
FIXING THE EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION AT AN EQUAL AMOUNT FOR BOARD MEMBERS UNDER THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES’ MEDICAL AND HOSPITAL CARE ACT

WHEREAS, (1) Marin Municipal Water District is a contracting agency under Government Code Section 22920 and subject to the Public Employees’ Medical and Hospital Care Act (the “Act”); and WHEREAS, WHEREAS, RESOLVED, RESOLVED, RESOLVED, RESOLVED, (2) Government Code Section 22892(a) provides that a contracting agency subject to Act shall fix the amount of the employer contribution by resolution; and (3) Government Code Section 22892(b) provides that the employer contribution shall be an equal amount for board members, but may not be less than the amount prescribed by Section 22892(b) of the Act; and (a) That the employer contribution for each board member {700 Non-PERS Board of Directors) shall be the amount necessary to pay the full cost of his/her enrollment, including the enrollment of family members in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $935.84 per month with respect to board member enrolled for self alone,$1,871.68 per month for board member enrolled for self and one family member, and $1,871.68 per month for board member enrolled for self and two or more family members, plus administrative fees and Contingency Reserve Fund assessments; and be it further (b) Marin Municipal Water District has fully complied with any and all applicable provisions of Government Code Section 7507 in electing the benefits set forth above; and be it further (c) That the participation of the employees and annuitants of Marin Municipal Water District shall be subject to determination of its status as an “agency or instrumentality of the state or political subdivision of a State” that is eligible to participate in a governmental plan within the meaning of Section 414(d) of the Internal Revenue Code, upon publication of final Regulations pursuant to such Section. If it is determined that Marin Municipal Water District would not qualify as an agency or instrumentality of the state or political subdivision of a State under such final Regulations, CalPERS may be obligated, and reserves the right to terminate the health coverage of all participants of the employer. (d) That the executive body appoint and direct, and it does hereby appoint and direct, The Human Resources Manager to file with the Board a verified copy of this resolution and to perform on behalf of Marin Municipal Water District all functions required of it under the Act. Adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Directors at Corte Madera, CA, this 17th day of November, 2020.


Adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Directors at Corte Madera, CA, this 17th day of November, 2020.
Signed: __________________________ President, Board of Directors
Attest: ___________________________ Secretary to the Board

*************
California Government Code
§ 22892
(a)The employer contribution of a contracting agency shall begin on the effective date of enrollment
and shall be the amount fixed from time to time by resolution of the governing body of the
agency. The resolution shall be filed with the board and the contribution amount shall be effective
on the first day of the second month following the month in which the resolution is received by
the system.
(b)(1)The employer contribution shall be an equal amount for both employees and annuitants, but
may not be less than the following:
(A)Prior to January 1, 2004, sixteen dollars ($16) per month.
(B)During calendar year 2004, thirty-two dollars and twenty cents ($32.20) per month.
(C)During calendar year 2005, forty-eight dollars and forty cents ($48.40) per month.
(D)During calendar year 2006, sixty-four dollars and sixty cents ($64.60) per month.
(E)During calendar year 2007, eighty dollars and eighty cents ($80.80) per month.
(F)During calendar year 2008, ninety-seven dollars ($97) per month.
(2)Commencing January 1, 2009, the employer contribution shall be adjusted annually by the board
to reflect any change in the medical care component of the Consumer Price Index and shall be
rounded to the nearest dollar.
(c)A contracting agency may, notwithstanding the equal contribution requirement of subdivision 

Senior and Low Income Parcel Tax and Fee Exemptions – APPLY NOW!

Time is short to submit applications for exemptions and discounts on an array of parcel taxes and agency fees. Some of the deadlines have already passed but many jurisdictions are still accepting applications for fiscal 2021.

Marin County’s Property Tax Exemption webpage has a lot of the information you need for most, but not all, of the taxes and fees that could impact you.

If you enter your parcel number, the website pulls up a list of all the exemptions for which you are eligible that show up on your tax bill. There is also a full list of such exemptions countywide. In many but not all instances there is a hot link to the application form that also details the criteria and deadlines.

Not yet posted, but upcoming soon, is information for filing for a low income senior exemption for the new Marin Wildfire Preparedness Authority parcel tax, which is assessed on building square footage.

The income threshold is pretty high ($97,600 for 1 person; $111,550 for two; higher for more), meaning a fair number of homeowners could qualify for exemptions. If you aren’t exempt, make sure to verify that the square footage of your property is accurate; if not, contact the assessor’s office to inquire about a correction.

Detailed information should be available soon at: https://www.marinwildfire.org

We expect the exemption filing window will be open for at least 30 days thereafter. CO$T is pressing for MWPA to proactively inform all potentially eligible homeowners in time to apply.

Virtually every school district offers parcel tax exemptions for seniors 65 and older, and often for low income and disabled taxpayers as well. While income-based discounts require annual filing, school parcel tax senior exemptions need only be applied for once, though in some instances the school district may require a new application for a renewed or supplemental tax measure. Most other senior exemptions and all low-income exemptions / discounts require annual filing.

School parcel taxes are typically the largest exemptions/discounts available. Some, unfortunately, had application deadlines in early May, but others are still open.

There are a variety of discounts and exemptions offered by other agencies for low income customers. Some are only available to seniors. Some use a stricter standard, “very low income”, meaning not so many customers qualify.

Ross Valley Sanitary District offers a low-income sewer charge assistance program with income thresholds similar to what MWPA will offer.

Marin Municipal Water District has several discount programs listed on this webpage..

Note also that in the wake of the outcry against its huge 2019 meter-charge fee increases, MMWD is encouraging downsizing residential meters that are over 5/8” in size in order to reduce the especially big charges levied on larger meters (which are the subject of a legal complaint filed by CO$T on behalf of ratepayers). The charges for downsizing are listed here.

Make sure you inquire about what it will cost if you have to re-upsize, if, for example, you have to install interior fire suppression sprinklers. Call MMWD for more information.

Disclaimer: CO$T provides information about tax and fee exemptions and discounts as a public service to our readers. You must contact the county and/or agencies via website, email or phone for the most up to date and accurate information. We are not responsible for any errors or omissions.

COST weighs in re Tam Union 2nd try at Parcel tax Measure

TUHSD is eyeing a 2nd try at a parcel tax renewal/increase in Nov 2020 or a 2021 special election. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. It appears Tam Union’s initial instinct is contemplating doing just that.

Tam Union relies heavily on parcel taxes to supplement funding for its operations. All its current parcel taxes expire June 30, 2022. Replacing this revenue stream is an important priority. Unfortunately, Tam Union didn’t seek to simply replace the existing funding. It sought instead a renewal that included a big proposed increase in the parcel tax… its second big hike in only 16 months.

Voters soundly rejected Measure B on the March 3, 2020 ballot.

TUHSD’s taxpayer-paid consultants debriefed the board at its April 16 meeting, with key points in its analysis highlighted in their Measure B debrief PowerPoint TBWB, which ran the campaign, blamed Measure B’s failure to bad timing vis a vis macro factors (taxpayer mood; stock market decline). There was no mention whatsoever of issues specific to measure B, e.g., stiff local resistance to unaffordable, repeated tax increases demanded by a district facing steeply declining enrollment.

The debrief also failed to note that the board had plowed ahead with measure B despite poor advance polling and clear signals from CO$T that it would oppose the tax increase as unfair, unaffordable, and unnecessary.

In failing to acknowledge the local factors that doomed Measure B Tam Union is moving quickly toward a second parcel tax measure try that could very well fail. The consultants and the board are focusing mainly on timing tweaks aimed to select a more favorable electorate. The board is already spending more money on consultants and polling slated to start in mid-May or early June.

It appears they completely missed the message voters delivered in March.

It is imperative that Tam Union’s board take the lead in developing a risk-averse strategy to secure sufficient taxpayer funding to avoid marching off its fiscal cliff in 2022. That means an affordable parcel tax measure that is sized to the district’s falling enrollment and equitably distributed across taxpayers.

Below is the April 14, 2020 letter CO$T sent to Tam Union’s board.

Letter to Tamalpais Union High School District Board re Parcel Tax Renewal

From CO$T Directors Carsten Andersen, Kingston Cole, Laura Effel, Doug Kelly, Bruce Vogen, Mimi Willard

April 14, 2020

In the March 2020 election, Tam Union failed in its effort (Measure B) to renew and substantially increase its existing parcel taxes, all of which expire June 30, 2022. It is now incumbent on the board to move forward with a parcel tax renewal plan that has broad community support and a strong probability of passage.

CO$T is concerned that TUHSD might move forward hastily to again seek a substantial increase in its parcel taxes with the same deficiencies that we have opposed previously. We urge the board to start with a clean slate. Forget about expensive consultants, polls, and trying to force an unpopular proposal. Engage the community instead in developing a consensus proposal. We would be happy to discuss how to achieve a taxing mechanism and financial underpinning that is fair, justified, and acceptable to the community.

In pursuing Measure B, Tam Union’s board regrettably made a high risk gamble on its ability to pass a parcel tax that did not poll well with voters. The district wanted a $190 increase in the parcel tax but its own polling showed tepid support: 66.6% with a 3.7% margin of error. This translated into a mere 50/50 chance of clearing the 2/3 approval hurdle needed for passage.The final vote fell well short of that.

The Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers opposed Measure B because (1) the $190 increase was unaffordable, coming right on the heels of a $149 increase (2)the rising enrollment rationale given for a sharply higher parcel tax was nonsensical in light of the district’s own projections of steeply declining student count; and (3)a flat parcel tax is especially unfair to owners of small homes and now meets stiff resistance.

None of the above considerations is in the PowerPoint presentation prepared by your consultant for the April 14 board meeting. You must engage in a candid assessment of what’s gone wrong so far in order to plot a path to successfully renewing the parcel tax upon which you heavily rely. The current economic situation and resultant constituents’ anxiety and wariness of higher taxes compound your challenge.

TBWB presents tonight options for timing of a second try to renew the parcel tax, including November 2020 and two special election dates in 2021. CO$T strongly urges you not to pursue a special election. It will be highly controversial. Low-turnout elections have been used by TBWB and other consultants to select a small, favorable electorate. It is also an expensive option. Choosing a special election – and/or recycling a rejected proposal — will embroil the district in unneeded controversy from the get-go.You cannot afford to fail twice.

CO$T has made clear its opposition to tax measure special elections as inherently undemocratic. In our Sensible Tax Criteria posted on our website, COSTMarin.org, we state:

Except in rare instances of extreme urgency, CO$T will automatically oppose any tax presented to voters at a time other than a statewide election.

CO$T understands the importance of securing an adequate and predictable funding stream for TUHSD that is, at the same time, fair and affordable to the community. We are amenable to engaging in a dialogue with that in mind, including a joint meeting with Senator Mike McGuire and Senate staff to resolve any reservations the district has regarding legality of a per square foot parcel tax for Tam Union; a per square foot tax is more likely to secure support from district taxpayer-voters. We are also amenable to helping the district develop an 8-10 year forecast of its staffing and financial needs as enrollment declines.

CST Demands Emergency Measure Closing Tax Collection Office

Urgent Plea to Marin County Supervisors: Declare Health Emergency & Close Tax Collection Office

March 29, 2020

The Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers demands that Marin County Supervisors immediately declare a public health emergency that includes closing the county tax collection cashier window now through at least May 8 (with further extensions as appropriate). Doing so protects the health and safety of taxpayers who pay in person (to ensure timely payment and receive receipts) and also of public employees of the county tax office.

Importantly, this declaration of a public health emergency provides vital protection to our most financially vulnerable homeowners. Unlike county employees, many homeowners are now without a paycheck. For some families, paying property taxes on April 10 means they’ll be unable to buy food or pay for water and electricity; some will incur stiff penalties by choosing to pay for food and utilities instead of property taxes. YOU alone, as Supervisors, have the ability to provide a solution: Under California Revenue and Taxation Code section 2619, if the tax collector’s office is closed on tax day, late payment penalties cannot be charged. Any taxes due will be considered as paid on time so long as they are paid on the first business day after the tax collector’s office reopens.

The action we are demanding should not imperil the financial stability of the county nor the agencies to which it distributes tax proceeds. Most property owners will pay on time or have already done so. Among those who haven’t paid yet are undoubtedly many who are struggling to do so.

Please note that there is no other surefire way to protect those least able to pay. Marin County’s Finance Director Roy Given, per his communication with Santa Venetia resident Robert Dobrin, interprets state law as prohibiting him from granting late fee and penalty relief to county taxpayers unless the state grants Marin a waiver. Moreover, while Revenue and Tax Code Section 4985.2 (as pointed out by Assemblyman Marc Levine) may give the Tax Collector full authority to waive penalties for late payment of the April 10 installment for this FY 2019-20 alone, the installment and penalty must first be paid, before the penalty can later be waived. For those unable to make the payment by April 10, let alone the consequent 10% late-payment penalty, the authority provided to the Tax Collector is meaningless. Hence we are demanding that your Board declare an Emergency that addresses this pressing financial issue, while simultaneously protecting taxpayers and county employees from appearing in person at the tax collection office during a pandemic.

The county has granted protections for renters (at the expense of landlords) but not for homeowners unable to pay property taxes on time. Does the county’s desire to protect 100% of its revenues/payroll trump the public health and financial emergency facing its most vulnerable citizens?

Time is of the essence. This is when leaders must lead. Use your emergency powers to declare a public health emergency that closes the county tax collection desk through at least May 8 (with further extensions if necessary).

Let it be known that those who are financially distressed can wait to pay their tax bill, without penalty, until the office reopens. In parallel, you should communicate clearly to all taxpayers that those who can afford to pay on time SHOULD do so for our collective well-being; make sure everyone knows of the option to pay from the safety of their homes, without any added fees, via electronic funds transfer from a checking account.

COST Raises Concerns re SMART’s Fiber Optic Contract

Read the full PDF by clicking the link below.

Summary: Since September 2019, CO$T has been researching an 80-year “fiber-optic” agreement signed in April 2015 between SMART and Sonoma based internet service provider Sonic Communications. The project involved a thorough evaluation of public records on SMART’s website (sonomamarin.org) as well as documents obtained from SMART through public records requests.

[click link here for the full report]

Spotswood on COST in The Marin IJ

“Founded by Kentfield’s Mimi Willard, COST, unlike most California taxpayer groups, doesn’t automatically make negative recommendations on every tax measure. That delivers credibility especially when the recommendation is positive. It also gives those ideologically opposed to all government-sponsored ballot measures a fit.”

“The all-volunteer group is active year-round endeavoring to nudge proponents of ballot measures to meet its criteria for support.

Its standards include equitability, transparency and sunset clauses. It supports only progressive parcel taxes levied per square foot of structure or per dwelling unit. Measures should include exemptions for seniors, disabled people and those with low incomes. COST opposes parcel taxes where each property owner pays the same whether it’s for a studio condo or a mall. Voters deserve the truth about a tax’s proposed use. All taxes need a realistic sunset date: 10 years for parcel taxes and 30 years for bonds. The tax’s use needs to meet basic cost-benefit ratios.”

Read More

COST Endorses County Wildfire Tax After Gaining Significant Concessions Protecting Taxpayers. We recommend YES on Measure C on the March 2020 Ballot

The Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers is endorsing the countywide wildfire protection Measure C which would levy a $10 tax for every 100 square feet of building. Believing in the importance of wildfire preparedness and the likelihood that voters would approve a tax measure to fund it, COST advocated successfully for the per square foot approach because it’s fairer than a flat parcel tax charging a studio condo the same as a mall. We also led a successful fight for the tax and joint-powers authority to end in 10 years, rather than the initially proposed forever tax with annual escalators. We’re proud to have won important protections for Marin’s taxpaying voters.


CO$T Directors attended many public meetings and had multiple conversations with officials and council members throughout the county. We worked hard over several months to kill the perpetual tax in favor of a 10-year sunset.


A 10-year sunset places multiple guardrails on the JPA and the tax. It precludes establishment of a permanent bureaucracy with pensionable employees and long-term debt. Many workers will be seasonal, to the consternation of unions.


It the fire tax disappoints, individual fire agencies can exit at 10 years and/or voters can reject renewing the tax.


You might prefer having no tax at all. But it’s not clear that would have been the measure’s final outcome. We’re proud of our work on behalf of Marin’s taxpaying voters, which sometimes entails compromise.

COST OPPOSES HUGE HIGH SCHOOL PARCEL TAX ON MARCH 2020 BALLOT

The Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers OPPOSES Measure B, which would raise for the second time in little over a year, the parcel tax for Tamalpais Union High Schools (Redwood, Drake, and Tamalpais). All told, the tax jumps from $300 to $645, then increases 3% annually for 10 years.

Leading Marin citizens’ opposition, CO$T submitted the primary and rebuttal arguments against Measure B, which appear in the voter pamphlet. This tax is simply unfair, unaffordable, and unnecessary.

CO$T’s two ballot arguments, shown below, make the case for why Tam District residents should vote NO.

—————–

Argument Against Tam Union Parcel Tax

Voters should reject Measure B, an unfair and unaffordable ten-year parcel tax renewal and dramatic increase. Your taxes start at $645 a year,
increasing 3% annually, reaching $842 in 10 years. Up from $300 just 2 years ago.

Voters passed a $149 second parcel tax for TUHSD in 2018 (on top of the larger existing one). TUHSD is adding back costs reduced just last year and wants another $190!

Measure B is unfair because it’s a flat rate. A studio pays the same as a mansion, mall or apartment complex.

TUHSD says this tax hike request was always part of the plan. This was not disclosed to voters who approved Measure J 16 months ago.
Rising enrollment is the supposed reason for a higher tax. But their own study shows enrollment declines start in 3 years.
No 10-year financial forecast justifies the proposed 10-year tax.
Pension expenses are why we’re facing so many tax measures. TUHSD must lobby Sacramento for reform instead of hitting homeowners with increasing parcel taxes.

Seniors and medically disabled: Though you can get an exemption from this tax, it DOES harm you. Your friends, neighbors, and caregivers are forced out by unaffordability. Your kids can’t live nearby. Higher taxes don’t help property values, and they threaten your quality of life.
Don’t believe threats of teacher layoffs and rising class sizes. Current parcel taxes don’t expire until 2022, giving the District time to rethink its needs and present a fairer, more affordable proposal.

The Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers supported 2018’s Measure J as a 4-year urgent measure for a school district threatened by insolvency. With 2018 Measure J’s $5 million annual infusion, TUHSD hasn’t made the case for a much higher tax lasting 10 years. CO$T OPPOSES Measure B.
VOTE NO.

COALITION OF SENSIBLE TAXPAYERS Mimi Willard, President

LAURA EFFEL
COST Director and former Grand Juror

PASCAL SISICH
Retired affordable housing director, and tax oversight committee member

DOUG KELLY
COST Director and former San Anselmo Town Councilmember

ROBERT MILTNER
Parent of 2 Redwood graduates

Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Measure B

Only a year ago, voters approved a $149 Tam Union parcel tax increase for four years. Now, with almost identical promises and threats, they say they need $190 more. It’s too much. Vote No.

Tam Union is already reversing much-touted expense cuts. Of two senior
management positions eliminated, one is being added back. Also being reversed: much of the $ 1 million savings achieved by ending non-classroom “Teacher Leader” payments.
Tam Union’s enrollment begins long-term DECLINE in two years. This should mean fewer teachers and administrators, not more. If Measure B passes, ALL $645 (plus 3% escalators) of Tam Union parcel taxes will be in place for a new TEN-YEAR term.

Yet Tam Union claims enrollment increases are why they need more money.

The truth: Tam Union’s 2020 pension expenses are $5 million higher than they would have been without a 2013 state mandate making local districts pay more for their pension liabilities.

The truth: $5 million annually is what the November 2018 supplemental parcel tax raised.

Moreover, the proposed flat parcel tax is unfair.

Measure B forces a studio condo owner to pay as much as the mall!
Tam Union’s parcel tax should be per building square foot. If uniformly applied to all parcels, that’s fair and legal for school taxes. The proposed Marin County Wildfire Protection Parcel Tax Measure, which the Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers endorsed, is essentially per building square foot

Tam Union has two-plus years on its current parcel taxes to reform spending and propose a fairer tax measure that ensures extra money goes into classrooms.

Help make this happen. VOTE NO.

SUSAN KIRSCH Community Organizer

TAMSEN McCRACKEN Parent of former Redwood student and lawyer

DORSEY McTAGGART Retired official court reporter

MARSHA HALLET Artist

WILLIAM ROSTENBERG Greenbrae resident

COST OPPOSES SMART SALES TAX ON MARCH 2020 BALLOT

The Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers OPPOSES Measure I, which would renew until 2059 the ¼ cent sales tax dedicated to the Sonoma Marin Area Rapid Transit (SMART) agency. Measure I will be on the ballot for the March 3, 2020 election (ballots mail around February 1).

Leading Marin citizens’ opposition, CO$T submitted the primary and rebuttal arguments against Measure I, which appear in the voter pamphlet. CO$T’s two ballot arguments, shown below, make the case for why Marin should vote NO. As you read through these, please take note of the co-signers of our ballot arguments, who joined a wide-ranging coalition opposed to giving SMART 39 years of free rein with our tax dollars.

—————–

PRIMARY ARGUMENT AGAINST MEASURE I (Prepared and Submitted by CO$T)

VOTENOonMEASURE I

At $2.4 billion dollars in new taxes, Measure I is too much for something that does so little. There’s no accountability.

Measure I adds a 30-year extension of Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District’s (SMART) current sales tax, which doesn’t even expire for another nine years.

Measure I gives SMART a blank check with our sales tax dollars until 2059 -allowing it to spend tax revenue on things that don’t improve transportation. SMART lacks transparency and needs better budget oversight.

SMART has had no material impact on 101 traffic in Marin. BUT they’ve made Central Marin traffic much worse.

COSTLY AND INEFFICIENT

  • For each round trip on SMART, the subsidy is more than $100. So in addition to the ticket price it costs taxpayers an additional $100 per round trip for each rider.
  • More than 42% of SMART’s current sales tax revenue goes to pay interest on its debt.
  • Connections to other public transit like Larkspur ferry aren’t synced. Passengers will wait up to 90 minutes for train-ferry connections.

BROKEN PROMISES

  • In 2008, SMART promised 70 miles of train track. Eleven years later there are only 45 miles.
  • SMART – began rail service over three years behind schedule and massively over budget
  • SMART promised Marin voters a 70 mile continuous bike path. A fraction of the path has been built, in non-continuous segments. Current plans for Measure spending doesn’t include ANY bike path money.

POOR MANAGEMENT AND BAD DECISIONS

•SMART will spend $65 million for a three mile Windsor track extension that generates few additional riders.

• SMART didn’t implement 7 of 8 of a Grand Jury report’s recommendations designed to improve the agency’s financial oversight and communication with the public.

Vote NO on Measure I and send a strong message to SMART that they can’t waste any more taxpayer money.

COALITION OF SENSIBLE TAXPAYERS

Mimi Willard, President

CITIZENS FOR SUSTAINABLE PENSION PLANS

Jody Morales, Founder

MIKE ARNOLD PhD, Economist

PAUL PREMO Foreperson Pro Tem, 2012-2013 Marin County Civil Grand Jury

CARSTEN ANDERSEN Former President, Marin Cyclists

———————————————————————

REBUTTAL TO THE ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE I (Prepared and Submitted by CO$T)

Vote NO!

SMART Gets Another $2.4 Billion from Measure I. Marin Gets Nothing

4 out of 5 of SMART’s scanty ridership are Sonoma residents.

What SMART promised Marin — but can’t deliver — is traffic and greenhouse gas reduction. They don’t even try to substantiate those claims.

The Inconvenient Truth

SMART trains block major Marin arteries, snarling tens of thousands of exhaust­ emitting cars in a massive daily traffic jam. This benefits under 1,000 commuters riding to/through Central Marin. Many previously rode buses.

Stunningly Non-Transparent

SMART repeatedly refused to promptly provide ACCURATE, DETAILED ridership data. They don’t want you know they’re running so many near-empty diesel trains. That increases carbon emissions and wastes taxpayer dollars on subsidies averaging nine times the ticket price.

No Accountability

SMART blew off Marin County Civil Grand Jury’s recommended reforms. SMART’s Citizens Oversight Committee met only once in 2018.

Misleading Voters

  • SMART’s interest expense RISES another $47 million under Measure I. Postponing debt repayment 30 years costs us much more interest.
  • Measure I commits ZERO to addressing the broken promise of a continuous 70 mile bike/pedestrian path.
  • With only a single-track, SMART cannot provide frequent service nor fix long waits for ferry connections.

This sales tax costs on average $9,700 per Marin household.

The current sales tax doesn’t expire until 2029. It is regional infrastructure. SMART should be funded instead by the proposed November 2020 $100 Billion nine-county Faster Bay Area Transportation Sales Tax, NOT a Marin County sales tax.

VOTE NO. Visit NotSoSmart.org

JAMES H. ANDREWS

Councilman & Mayor, Town of Corte Madera

JUDY SCHRIEBMAN

Environmentalist

ROGER E. ROBERTS

Project Finance Analyst

SUSAN KIRSCH

Community Organizer

THOMAS A. RUBIN

Transit Consultant

Marin tax activists challenge Tam school district plan

Marin tax activists challenge Tam school district plan

A Marin taxpayers group is challenging a plan by the Tamalpais Union High School District to place a parcel tax increase measure on the March 3 ballot.

“This parcel tax will more than double within 18 months from $300 to $645,” Mimi Willard of the Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers said in an email. “CO$T has stated it will not support another flat parcel tax increase at Tam Union.”

Willard said the proposed $190 per parcel annual increase would be added to the existing $300 parcel tax plus a $149 supplemental tax, Measure J, approved by voters in November 2018. MORE HERE

____________________________________________________________________________

TO: Tamalpais Union High School District Directors

FROM: Mimi Willard

DATE: October 15, 2019

SUBJECT: PARCEL TAX RENEWAL; COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

As a taxpayer-resident of the Tamalpais Union High School district, I am concerned about recent developments that merit more careful consideration by the board.

Flat parcel tax renewal: The district appears to be hurtling forward toward a flat parcel tax increase of $190 on the March 2020 ballot. This is reckless.The polling [August 27 agenda item 11D] on the $190 increase showed it had a 50/50 chance of failing. The district faces a fiscal cliff in 2022. It is mind-boggling that the board has not in any public meeting that I’ve seen asked its consultants (paid for at taxpayer expense) whether pursuing the $190 increase is prudent. The option of a $90 increase polled better, and of no increase better still.

The polling, which was completed several months ago, did not reflect subsequent developments that make passing your parcel tax even more difficult. These include: Marin Municipal Water District’s large new capital maintenance fee; Marin Wildfire preparedness tax on the March 2020 ballot (>$200 for average single family home based on $0.10 per square foot); SMART tax renewal also on the March 2020 ballot; and most important, a general sense of tax exhaustion. The Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers will not support a further $190 increase in TUHSD’s parcel tax.The assertion that TUHSD needs $190 doesn’t mean it will pass.

Per square foot parcel tax: The district should be taking a more serious look at a per square foot parcel tax. Flat parcel taxes that levy the same amount for a mansion, apartment complex or small condo are unfair. Recent developments have changed / clarified the legal situation regarding schools’ ability to levy a tax based on square footage of improvements. Such an approach will have broader voter support.

Community engagement: In the past, TUHSD was a model of public engagement.In the last year, things have taken a turn for the worse. Open comment has been moved to the end of the meeting, which is highly unusual.  No one comes to offer public comment on topics not on your agenda given the lateness of the hour and the great uncertainty as to at what time all other board business will be complete. Meanwhile, letters submitted to your board are no longer included in the meeting packet. [Note this letter IS posted to the latest TUHSD board agenda as a board communication, item 10, which is a pleasant surprise.] Topics of interest to the public are buried on the agenda behind lengthy discussions of topics of little public interest.

The net effect is that public input is effectively stifled, as is the dissemination of that input to other members of the public. These changes send an unfortunate message to the taxpayer-voters on whom you are depending to increase your parcel tax for the second time in 16 months, taking it from $300 to $645.

Marin County Wildfire JPA Tax Measure Initial Term Must Not Exceed Ten Years

Marin County Wildfire JPA Tax Measure (March 2020 ballot) Initial Term Must Not Exceed Ten Years;
Additional Concerns include Lack of Project List and Clarity re Citizen Oversight Committee

CO$T sent submitted and read into the record the following memo on September 24, 2020 to the Marin County Board of Supervisors:

The Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers believes in the need for a county-wide approach to wildfire protection and in theory supports funding that via a county-wide tax tied to square footage of improved property.

However, CO$T will not support a funding a novel, untested, Joint Powers Authority (JPA) with a tax whose initial term exceeds ten years.

CO$T is recognized for its sensible, disciplined approach to weighing need for funding against the appropriateness of the funding mechanism. We have widely publicized our Sensible Tax Criteria. One of our key criteria is:
“Every tax should have a sunset date — and one that is tied to the projects it funds. For most sales and parcel taxes, 8-10 years is a reasonable maximum term; voters then have the opportunity to renew, cancel, or amend these taxes (which can be especially important if the tax/fee or what it funds is novel).”

The proposed JPA is indeed novel. No one can fully anticipate all the possibilities of what can go right or wrong. As such, it is imperative that taxpayers have an opportunity to weigh in via a renewal measure within the next decade. That democratic event provides an essential check and reset opportunity that will keep the county-wide initiative performing optimally over the long-term.

CO$T also urges that the JPA resolution address these additional concerns:
Project list. Per our Sensible Tax criteria, every tax measure that funds a series of maintenance or capital projects should be supported by a project list. The JPA is new. Voters deserve to know what the money will be spent on during the initial 10 year term advocated above.

Citizens Oversight Committee. CO$T would like to see a COC that has teeth and is not just a rubberstamp. We would be receptive to a dialogue that ensures that appropriate language mandating such a COC structure is in the JPA authorizing resolution.

The above are the initial concerns we have regarding the Marin County wildfire JPA and tax measure. Foremost among those is the requirement for a ten-year sunset. Additional concerns and comments from us may arise as more details emerge.

CO$T will continue to work with all parties toward what we hope will be a successful county-wide wildfire protection plan.

CST files suit to stop MMWD’s Illegal Fees

CST Files Suit to Stop MMWD’s Illegal Fees

Kentfield, CA: Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers v. MMWD: Complaint Filed in Marin Superior Court Alleges Multiple Violations of California Law & Requests Injunction

Petition and Complaint

Click for document download

On August 20, 2019, government fee litigation specialist McNeill Law Offices filed suit in Marin Superior Court against the Marin Municipal Water District on behalf of lead plaintiff the Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers and four individual ratepayers. The complaint alleges that new and increased MMWD fees effective July 1, 2019 violate the California Constitution on multiple counts. Plaintiffs ask the Court for expedited hearing and a court order to stop the collection of fees that are inherently illegal and were illegally adopted.

The complaint’s most prominent claim is that MMWD’s new Capital Maintenance Fee (CMF) and increased Watershed Maintenance Fee (WMF) both use a seriously flawed methodology: meter size. This results in a large number of ratepayers being charged substantially more than the cost of service, which the law prohibits. Further, the obvious inequity of charging by meter size rather than usage caused public outcry, which the District sought to allay by adopting unlawful patches to the flawed fees. The resulting fee scheme is arbitrary and capricious – and illegal. It places an unfair burden on residential ratepayers broadly, especially those who are low water users or have large meters.

Proposition 218, California’s Right to Vote on Taxes Act, allows water districts to impose rates and fees without voter approval if the rates/fees, uses, and process scrupulously meet specific criteria and conform to the law. CST v MMWD alleges the District’s latest fees and process violate Prop 218’s requirements and as such should have been subject to a ratepayer vote.

The pleading alleges multiple legal violations falling into several categories. The most egregious violations include:
The fee revenue exceeds the cost of service.
CMF and WMF are not proportionately allocated to the individual properties; are arbitrary, capricious, and include an incoherent, illegal series of preferences.
The District failed to follow legally-mandated procedures for fee adoption and made further changes after the fees were approved.

Additional violations include:
Charges are being imposed for general governmental services (e.g., fire protection and watershed management) that require voter approval.
The District lacks the authority to impose fire protection fees without approval from the voters and explicit permission from relevant local agencies.
Excessive charges for large meters discourage installation of residential fire suppression systems, thereby increasing fire hazard.
Charging fees based on meter size rather than usage incentivizes water waste.
MMWD has failed to comply with state law requiring an annual accounting for connection fees and the use of such funds for capital projects.

Plaintiffs seek a Judgment requiring MMWD to cease charging the CMF and WMF; and come into compliance with other laws the suit alleges were violated.

CST is seeking donations to pay for its legal action protecting ratepayers from the adverse consequences of MMWD’s allegedly illegal fees and process. CST hopes its suit will also have a sentinel affect, encouraging MMWD and other Marin agencies and jurisdictions to scrupulously comply with the law.

Download Press Release Here
Download Exhibits to Petition and Complaint Here

Mimi Willard Talk at McGinnis Park Tuesday 7 FREE

Come hear CO$T President Mimi Willard – Tues 6/25 7PM. Free Event


McInnis Park Restaurant
350 Smith Ranch Road
San Rafael, California 94941
June 25, 2019
7:00 pm

Mimi Willard, Founder and President of the Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers, addresses the Marin Rental Property Association Tuesday June 25, 7PM, at McInnes Park Restaurant (350 Smith Ranch Road, San Rafael). CO$T encourages its supporters and the public to attend this free event. Learn about recent and coming developments affecting Marin taxpayer-voters — and how to help. There will be ample Q&A.

Mimi will discuss CO$T’s legal challenge to Marin Municipal Water District’s huge, new meter-size based fee and rate increase, which is effective July 1. CO$T contends MMWD’s fee/rate is excessive, unfairly apportioned, and violates CA law in several regards.

Other hot topics include:

  • Early insights into a new county-wide fire protection tax that will be on the 2020 ballot. It may be a progressive parcel tax (large building owners pay more). Other local ballot measures may compete for taxpayer dollars and votes, e.g., sales taxes for County Open Space and SMART.
  • A proactive collaboration between San Anselmo and CO$T that’s a model for future tax measures.
  • Possible March 2020 statewide ballot initiatives lowering the threshold for passing school parcel tax measures and most bond measures from 2/3 to 55% of votes cast
  • Split roll tax initiative qualified for Nov 2020 ballot: It would split the tax rolls so that commercial properties are no longer protected by prop 13 and will be regularly reassessed at market value.
  • CO$T is seeking leaders, volunteers, community organizers, donors and candidates for public office. Find out how you might help.

Join us on Tuesday. It’s free. There’s room for all comers!