Editorial: What value is Oxnard Premium?
If the grass seems greener in the parks at Oxnard’s Riverpark community than it does in parks elsewhere in the city, there are reasons for that. The turf gets fertilized every three months instead of once a year. It gets aerated three times as often. Irrigation lines are inspected and repaired daily, rather than catch-as-catch-can.
It’s not just the turf that gets extra care. Trash and debris get picked up daily instead of weekly. Graffiti removal takes place daily. There is a dog park that is closed every Thursday morning so that it can be freshened up. The fountain in Riverpark’s Central Park flows every day except during high winds.
There is a difference between what might be called Oxnard Premium and Oxnard Regular. The property owners in the community pay extra for this heightened level of service. They even get additional police patrols. It’s part of the deal and has been since the community was developed in 2005 and Community Facilities District No. 5 was established.
More: Competing ballot measures will determine fate of Riverpark special tax
These districts, also known as Mello-Roos districts after the legislators who authored the state law authorizing them, are hardly unique to Oxnard. The Riverpark district is not even unique within Oxnard, which has two others that also levy ongoing tax assessments to pay for services. There are other similar districts, but their tax assessments are used to pay off bonds that were issued to finance the infrastructure for their communities, rather than for ongoing services. Those taxes go away after the bonds are paid off.
This fall, the residents of Riverpark are going to be asked to take a look at that green grass and also at their property tax bills and decide whether they want to continue to have premium services or settle for regular or perhaps try out some uncertain middle grade. They will be presented with four choices: keep things as they are, repeal the tax completely, cap the maximum that can be assessed, or place additional limits on how the tax revenue can be spent.
It’s going to be a lot to ask of voters to make an informed choice.
For starters, they will need to know a basic fact of life about residential development in California: It rarely pays for itself. Property taxes are strictly limited by Proposition 13, and cities get only a small slice of property tax revenues, about 12 percent. The majority goes to K-12 school district and community colleges. Counties and special districts get a larger share than do cities.
In the case of Oxnard, property taxes account for only about a third of its General Fund budget. A majority of the city’s general revenues comes from sales taxes. The bottom line is that residential development does not generate enough in tax revenue to pay for the additional police, fire, park and street maintenance and other services required by the new homeowners and renters.
To be sure, these facilities districts were designed to be a workaround to the limits imposed by Proposition 13. It behaves just like a property tax, but the tax is assessed on land value rather than property value. That’s why the amount each homeowner pays is based on square footage rather than the value of a specific home. At the time of sale or resale, buyers must be made aware of the district and its costs, so every resident knows the terms of ownership from the start.
Now, thanks to a package of ballot initiatives, they will be asked to make a cost-benefit analysis of the tax. Oxnard City Manager Alex Nguyen told The Star that residents should be aware of both ends of that equation. If the tax is abolished, he said, “the quality of amenities in their rather nice neighborhood is going to be diminished.”
The residents are going to have to do some thinking about that. At least for the time being, they will be able to sit in a nice, green park to contemplate their choices.
This article originally appeared on Ventura County Star: Editorial: What value is Oxnard Premium?
