Document text
Initiatives target fees Central Point group wants more say on charges By Vicki Guarino CENTRAL POINT � Saying they are concerned city officials will push through new fees or fee increases without consulting the public, two residents have filed initiative petitions that would tie the city�s hands. The initiatives would prevent the city from assessing new charges or increasing existing charges without consent of at least half of Central Point city voters. City officials say the initiatives could keep programs from paying for themselves and result in a reduction of services. The initiative petitions were filed with the city by residents Dave Shults and Charles Olsen. Petition signatures are being reviewed by the county elections office, city Administrator Jim Bennett said Friday. He estimated that each petition has about 1,200 signatures. About 900 valid signatures each are required to put the measures on the ballot in November. Signature validation is expected to be completed in a few days. If the petitions are certified, Shults said, he is confident the measures will pass. "I don�t think there is any doubt about it passing," Shults said. "The people who signed it were very enthusiastic.�� Both measures address only the fees charged by the city, ranging from processing land-use applications to monthly water usage. The measures are a city equivalent to Oregon tax activist Bill Sizemore�s statewide initiative to control new fees and fee increases, Bennett said. Sizemore�s "Taxpayer Protection Plan�� would cover state-imposed fees and charges. The Central Point initiatives would apply retroactively to May 1999. That was when petitioners began gathering signatures. Shults said he timed the petition filing so the measures would appear on the November ballot. He said he began the drive in response to concerns that Mayor Bill Walton would push through new fees and fee increases. Only one fee has been adopted in that time, he said, evidence that the petitions are having an effect. Shults said the council would have adopted more fees in the past year "except they knew this was coming.�� Bennett said the only fee that would be effected immediately by the proposed limits is a transportation development fee. The one-time charge on new construction, $1,600 for a home, is intended to pay for roadway expansions required to accommodate growth. So far, the city has collected about $250,000 in transportation development charges from builders, Bennett said. That money would have to be refunded under terms of the ballot initiative. Regarding the second ballot initiative � fee increases � no fees have been increased since last May, Bennett said, so no refunds under that measure would have to be paid. Combined, the measures would make assessing fees complicated. "It does not matter whether it�s a systems development charge or a copying fee increase, it would require a voter approval,�� Bennett said. The real cost of the measures, however, are difficult to calculate, he added. Fees are set to cover the expenses of providing a program or service, so levels of service could be diminished, he said. "These revenue restrictive measures have a cumulative impact on services,�� he said. Shults disagreed that residents would have to put up with poorer services under the measures. He said voters could simply approve new fees. "I don�t see that it causes any problem putting these things before the voters," Shults said. Obituaries | Sports | Business | Classifieds | Tempo | Prime Times | So Oregon Sites | Outdoor Journal | Subscribe | Contact | Movies | Advertise | Real Estate Showcase | Archive | Editorials | Letters to the editor | Religion | Wake-up Call | NIE | Cyber Chef | Job Network | So Oregon Weather | WSJ Northwest | Forums | AP Wire | AP Money | F.A.Q. | Awards Ottaway Newspapers, Inc. The Community Newspaper Subsidiary of Dow Jones & Co, Inc Copyright �The Mail Tribune 2000, Medford, Oregon USA