Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Finance Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
South Laguna homeowners press council over undergrounding assessments, urge votes against park parcel charges
Summary
Dozens of public commenters from South Laguna criticized the West Street underground-utility assessment methodology and urged council to oppose assessments on park parcels, saying proposed costs are substantially higher than earlier estimates.
Get email alerts on the Public Finance Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Multiple South Laguna residents and homeowners urged the council to halt or rethink the West Street underground-utility assessment district, citing sharply higher assessment numbers, changes in assessment methodology and disproportionate impacts on park parcels and fixed‑income homeowners.
Tom Slattery and several neighbors described assessments that they said are many times larger than earlier estimates, with one homeowner saying their lot’s estimate rose to about $59,000 plus $10,000–$15,000 more for trenching and hookups. Speakers said the current methodology apportions costs by square footage rather than by view or other measures used in prior undergrounding districts, a change they said benefits some parcels while severely penalizing others.
Speakers asked the council to vote against authorizing assessments for the three Village Green Park parcels that would share costs with the full district, saying park parcels should not dilute the neighborhood vote or shift public funds to a small area. Several commenters urged the council to “start over,” to require up‑to‑date methodology disclosures and to ensure notices to property owners accurately reflect expected annual tax impacts. Residents emphasized fixed‑income and retirement concerns and said high assessments could threaten affordability and insurance costs.
City staff noted outreach and that a vote on the assessment parcels remains pending; council members and staff did not take immediate action at the meeting but acknowledged the widespread public concern and said they will treat the item carefully when it returns for votes.

