North Pacheco Annexation: Will It Go To The Voters?

It appears that residents of the North Pacheco area will have a chance to vote on whether or not they want to be annexed to the city of Martinez.

On Tuesday, Martinez resident Tim Platt delivered 47 letters to the county’s Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) protesting the annexation. Two letters were received by mail, and two others were delivered in person to the protest meeting.

According to LAFCO Executive Officer Lou Ann Texeira, if 25 percent of the registered voters in the affected area protest the annexation, the city must either hold a mail-in election or drop the annexation bid.

There are 121 registered voter in the 100-acre annexation area, which stretches from the railroad trestle to the intersection of Highway 4 and I-680. At least 32 of those letters will have to be certified by the County Election Department to quality for a vote.

If the area is annexed, property owners will receive an average of $100 annually in their tax bills, due to Measure H, the city’s park bond approved by voters in 2008.

One resident was on hand at the meeting to make his feelings against the annexation clear.

“I’m too old to pay more taxes,” said Gene Koch. “I’ve had it with  the misexpenditure of money. They’ve wasted it and now they want more. I’m voting no.”

Koch complained that he never received any notice about annexation meetings, though contract planner Dina Tasini said that all affected residents received notice, and several meetings were held on the issue.

Another resident, Jim Hdin, said he was not convinced the annexation was a bad thing, but worried that the city would come in and demand that sidewalks be constructed on his street.

Tasini said that the city would probably request sidewalks and other improvements in conjunction with any city road improvements, but that such requests would not be made right away.

One Pacheco resident was on hand to support the move.

“I feel like this will be a benefit to the area, and to the city,” said Paula Burke. “I think it will increase property values.”

City officials said they first began annexation proceedings when businesses in the area requested help. Several businesses in Pacheco have accused the county of trying to make up for the decline in tax revenue by using code enforcement, and the subsequent fees.

Tim Platt, a Martinez resident, has opposed the annexation bid. He said that it’s a bad deal for the city, and for the Pacheco residents.

“I think this decision is one of several bad fiscal and policy decisions by this City Council, including the mess that's been made of our Marina and Berrellesa Palms,” Platt said. “The annexation will be a money loser, and 45 percent of tax receipts from the area would go back to the county forever, if the city annexes the area.”

He questioned how the city would provide services such as police, road maintenance and other services when the city is already facing financial challenges.

Under the proposed annexation agreement, the county would collect 45 percent of the tax revenue at its current level. The city would collect the entire amount of any tax increase based on the increased value of the property.

Tasini and Texeira both said that the 45/55 split was a good deal for the city, noting that other such agreements often go far more favorably for the county in question.

“I don’t have any problem with this going for a vote,” said Mayor Rob Schroder on Wednesday. Schroder is also a voting member of LAFCO. “It’s just another step we have to go through. It seems logical that the people in the affected area would have the right to say yes or no. If the letters are certified, the council will have to make a decision whether or not to pursue a vote. The major question there will be the cost of an election. We’ll be taking this up, maybe as early as the council meeting in two weeks, but maybe later than that.”