SANTA  ROSA  NEIGHBORHOOD  COALITION
  • HOME
    • Contact Us!
  • LAWSUIT AGAINST PLAN BAY AREA
    • PLAN BAY AREA
  • Watch SR Blog
  • VIDEO AND SMEAR
  • SRNC: Success
  • READ NOW
  • HUMBOLDT BIKE BLVD--FINAL
    • HUMBOLDT BIKE BLVD >
      • HUMBOLDT BIKE BLVD LETTERS
  • Green Building
    • Updates for Green Bldg Retrofit Plan
  • Sonoma County Energy Independence Boondoggle
  • Michael Allen & FPPC
    • DOCUMENTATION FOR FPPC COMPLAINT
    • Michael Allen and SCWA
    • Michael Allen: Comments
    • MICHAEL ALLEN: PLAGIARISM CHARGE
  • DELPHI
    • Delphi: What you can do
    • Santa Rosa Visions
  • Senator Wiggins Scandal
  • Juilliard Park
  • Rosa Koire & Kay Tokerud
    • Simon says Build Me A Parking Garage

Wonder where your tax dollars are going? To fight this lawsuit

10/29/2010

1 Comment

 
SEE THE UPDATE AT THE END OF THIS ARTICLE--CITY LOST THE SUIT
April 22, 2010 From the Pacific Legal Foundation
Can government force you to give up fundamental rights for a building permit?
Author: Paul J. Beard II
We all know that government entities across the country are facing major budget deficits. We also know that governments often prefer to avoid the sort of belt-tightening that so many American families have been forced to do in recent years, and instead prefer to find clever ways of financing their operations . . . even if it means violating individuals' rights.

Case in point: The City of Santa Rosa, California, recently enacted a tax scheme to help solve its budget deficit and finance public services (police, fire, etc.). The City didn't cut costs or services. And it didn't implement a fair strategy for raising money. Instead of finding a way for all of its citizens to share in the burden of addressing the budget problem, the City targeted a small group of property owners, converting them into its cash cows.

Under a recently enacted ordinance, any applicant for a residential building permit--with property in a targeted area of the City--must agree to pay "special taxes" for the "privilege" of obtaining that permit. Recognizing the implications of this extortionate condition, the ordinance also requires the applicant to waive all rights pertaining to the imposition of those taxes--including the right freely to vote on them as required by the California Constitution. Not only does the condition require the permit applicant to forfeit his constitutional voting rights, it also violates his equal-protection rights: Individuals not seeking residential building permits, and individuals outside the targeted area, are not required to trade away their constitutional rights, even though they use and enjoy the same types and level of public services.Home Builders Association of Northern California is a nonprofit organization, some of whose members are affected by the City's tax scheme.  Pacific Legal Foundation represents the Association in a lawsuit against the City that seeks to have the ordinance declared unconstitutional and unenforceable.  Read more about the outrageous facts of this case and our legal strategy to get the law off the City's books.


UPDATE:
The Santa Rosa Press Democrat reported today (December 18, 2010) that Judge Mark Tansil sided with the Homebuilders Association of Northern California in the lawsuit to overturn the 2008 tax surcharge on most new home construction in Santa Rosa.  The Judge ruled the tax was unconstitutional because it forces property owners to give up their voting rights in exchange for the right to subdivide their property.  

City Attorney Caroline Fowler disagrees with the decision and will recommend that the city appeal Judge Tansil's decision.  

HOW MUCH WILL THAT COST?  HOW MUCH OF OUR MONEY HAS THE CITY SPENT ON THIS UNCONSTITUTIONAL STUNT?  
Tell the Mayor to drop the suit.  [email protected]

1 Comment
James Bennett
12/17/2010 01:32:08 am

I have always had to sign a legal document holding the City harmless(the City of Santa Rosa is anything but harmless) when applying for a permit. Big picture: asking permission to do what we see fit on OUR Property. Property that we pay taxes on. Then a 'public servant' imposes a bunch of unconstitutional, rediculous regulations on us(usually with an attitude) .Then the extortion, the humiliation, the molestation of
your civil rights begins. Does it seem like real estate ownership is more of a liability than an asset lately? That's the agenda. Agenda 21. Oh yeah...and we pay for it! Lunacy.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Eyes on Santa Rosa

    Calling it as we see it

    Archives

    May 2017
    May 2016
    September 2015
    July 2015
    June 2014
    May 2014
    March 2014
    November 2013
    October 2013
    August 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010

    Categories

    All
    Accountable Development Coalition
    Communitarianism
    Iclei
    Michael Allen
    Neighborhood Associations
    Neighborhood Information
    One Bay Area
    Redevelopment
    Smart Growth
    Smart Train
    Unions

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.