Hold on . . . rethinking the weed abatement fee

Well, if we didn't learn from the controversy over the 911 Fee, we've had another humbling experience with a $99 fee for a "weed abatement inspection fee." Mayor Christy Weir will be asking the Council to waive the fee and I will be supporting that recommendation. For more details see this announcement:

http://www.cityofventura.net/newsmanager/ templates/?a=17&z=12

Last summer, it seemed like a good idea when staff proposed it as part of our annual updating of all the fees charged by the City. Why?

That requires a little explanation. We all are annoyed by mysterious fees charged by banks and other businesses. It's a little different when it comes to cities.

California voters have been pretty consistent over the last 25 years: they generally don't like paying higher taxes. Yet a wide range of powerful forces have continued to push up spending. Local government is sometimes part of the problem, but more often, we are simply left holding the bag. We didn't create the State budget deficits or the State raids on local revenues to bail out Sacramento. We didn't dream up all the new State and Federal environmental and other mandates -- we just have to figure out how to pay for them.

One of those is a State law that requires us to enforce annual weed clearance behind homes along potential fire lines. It's a perfectly sensible law -- and it has helped save hundreds, if not thousands of homes. And the vast majority of homeowners sensibly comply.

But the cost of notifying property owners, inspecting compliance and enforcing the law is paid for by everybody in the city.

I doubt that anyone resents that. We all know that protecting lives and property is in everyone's interest. But when we face budget cuts that affect everyone in the community, is there a rationale for having those who benefit the most from the fireline weed clearance program pay a modest fee for administering something that directly benefits them?

That's a legitimate question. Unfortunately, we (City staff) failed to ask it. We simply lumped that new fee into the annual fee schedule. No one noticed, no one protested and eight months later staff simply mailed out the notices to 1200 very surprised homeowners.

That's not how we should do business. I agree with the Mayor Weir's comment: “Our goal is to do right by our residents, and we owe them better communication when City decisions affect them directly.” So Fire Chief Mike Lavery and I will be supporting her call for waiving the fee and refunding it to anyone who has already sent in their check.