Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parcel Tax topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
San Dimas council raises landscape parcel tax by 3.4% to keep maintenance fund solvent; one abstention
Summary
The council adopted Resolution 2026-39 to increase the citywide landscape parcel tax by the March-to-March CPI of 3.4% to help cover rising water and contract costs for park and median maintenance; the measure passed 4–0 with one abstention.
Get email alerts on the Parcel Tax topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The San Dimas City Council on June 9 approved a 3.4% adjustment to the citywide landscape parcel tax to help offset rising maintenance costs, adopting Resolution 2026-39. Staff recommended the increase — an automatic CPI adjustment permitted under Ordinance 1086 — to align tax revenue with higher contract and utility costs for landscape maintenance.
Scott Wasserman, Director of Parks & Recreation, told the council the parcel-tax fund (Fund 8) pays for citywide landscape and tree maintenance performed by the city's primary contractors, Nevvis Landscape and West Coast Arborist, and that Option 1 (3.4% CPI increase) is projected to raise revenue to $1,107,414 for FY 2026–27 while still leaving an estimated Fund 8 deficit of roughly $239,025 that would require general-fund subsidy.
A public commenter cited sharply higher Golden State Water rates and widespread tree-disease costs (eucalyptus beetle treatments) as drivers that make the parcel tax and scope for maintenance more expensive. "They invested a lot of money. Recently, probably our rates are going up to use Golden State Water," a public speaker said, urging the council to account for water and disease-treatment costs.
Councilmembers debated whether to apply the CPI increase and discussed longer-term options such as altering planting scope, pursuing recycled water or going to voters for a larger increase. After deliberation the council voted to adopt Option 1; the motion carried 4 in favor, 0 opposed, 1 abstention (Councilmember Vienna abstained). The adjustment is intended to reduce the rate at which the general fund must subsidize landscape maintenance but staff said ongoing discussion about scope and long-term solutions is warranted.

