Carmichael assessment true costs

03/31/2014 4:03 PM

04/01/2014 12:28 PM

Re "Parks District awaits vote" (Page B1, March 31): This letter is not about parks, which we support, but rather about the proposed Carmichael assessment district. The article essentially conveys the scripted version of a nominal $45 annual property assessment. Apparently, this is not the case. We recently learned our own property would be taxed at over 14 times more than as reported. Other properties could be even higher. These would be recurring and increasing assessments placed on annual property tax bills. Taxpayers and voters may not see the true financial impact. Here only the proponent agency and consultant communicates without competing campaign information. Proposition 218 passed and is now the law. This latter California state constitutional amendment was precisely intended to provide a fair and open process, with property specific cost benefit analysis. Thus, this is not about park work, but rather that such new tax assessment districts be fully and fairly disclosed to the entire public.

-- Steven Fishbein, Sacramento

Editor's Choice Videos

 

Join the Discussion

The Sacramento Bee is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere on the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Terms of Service