The Carpinteria City Council on Monday night closed the property owner ballot submission period for two new proposed assessment districts and directed city staff, in coordination with Willdan Financial Services, to begin counting the votes.

The council back in November launched the process to create two new assessment districts — the Carpinteria Landscape Maintenance District and the Carpinteria Coastal Berm Assessment District — stating that the city needed consistent funding for its right-of-way landscaping and berm services.

Currently, the city is heavily dipping into other funds, such as the General Fund, to support landscape services and the seasonal construction of the berm, a large sandy structure that goes up every winter along the beach to protect both public and private properties from winter storms. 

Assistant City Manager Ryan Kintz told the council that the new districts would ensure that the city’s landscaping services and the berm “can be maintained consistently (and) responsibly each year with dedicated funding.”

The City of Carpinteria’s revenues are not keeping up with expenditures, so the city’s General and Measure X funds are dwindling, city staff said on Monday night during separate budget discussions.

Updated assessments are part of a “larger strategy of just getting things that have become outdated, catching them up,” City Manager Michael Ramirez said.

Kintz said in November that the city would likely begin cutting programs, services and staff by fiscal year 2028-29 if it couldn’t get dedicated funding sources for landscape and berm services.

The new Landscape Maintenance District would apply to all properties located within the city limits.

The Coastal Berm Assessment District would apply to a little more than 400 parcels near the berm in the city’s Beach Neighborhood.

The council set a public hearing date of March 9 for both districts, and protest ballots for each district were mailed directly to the affected property owners in January. 

Ballots could have been returned by mail, dropped off with the city clerk at Carpinteria City Hall, or placed in the city’s green mailbox, which is located in front of City Hall. 

There was some confusion expressed online over exactly where to return the ballot at the City Hall campus, so city staff put up updated signage earlier this week.

Each vote is weighted by the “proportional financial obligation” of each property, per Kintz.

If more than 50% of the weighted votes come in against each district, the new assessments will not kick in and the city will continue using other funds to support landscaping and berm services. 

If the no votes come in at less than 50%, then the City Council on March 23 will vote on the new assessment districts. 

If approved, the assessments — which would appear on an owner’s property taxes — would kick in for fiscal year 2026-27. That begins July 1. 

The city’s right-of-way landscape services are currently funded by $30-per-parcel assessments established in 1985. 

Those assessments, which generate $200,000 annually, haven’t been raised since 1985.

They no longer cover the $1.15 million cost of landscaping services, which covers city parking lots, trails, some public streets such as the well-traveled Carpinteria and Linden avenues, and tree management for the city’s 2,763 public trees. 

If approved, the new landscaping assessment district should generate $1,110,154 annually, city staff said. It would also replace the current $30 fixed-assessment structure. 

Proposed Assessments

The proposed annual assessment structure for the landscape district is based on how much benefit a property receives from the city’s services, also known as Equivalent Benefit Unit. 

This benefit is calculated using a single-family residential parcel as the baseline. 

A single-family home in Carpinteria, for example, would pay $165.76 annually under the new landscape district.

The property owners of multi-unit parcels would pay $124.32 annually per unit for parcels with two to four units. The owners of apartments with five or more units would pay $107.74 annually per unit. 

The cost to non-residential parcels was broken down by acre instead of units, at a rate of five EBUs per acre. The annual assessment for a 4-acre non-residential parcel, for example, would be $3,315.20. 

Vacant parcels would be charged at a lower, capped rate because those don’t receive as much benefit. A 7-acre vacant property, for example, would pay $828.80 annually.

Some parcels, such as public easements, utility rights-of-way or parcels that can’t be developed, are exempt.

The city’s seasonal berm, first constructed in 1983, is currently funded by fixed assessments established in 1997 that bring in $20,000 annually. 

However, the berm’s annual construction, maintenance and permitting costs come out to roughly $80,000. 

The berm is about 1,375 feet long, 9.5 feet high and 40 feet wide at the base. During the winter months, it can require repair and reinforcement.

These assessments were also established using EBUs, with assignments based on elevation above sea level, proximity to the coast and the berm, parcel size, and land-use type: single-family residential, apartment, public or non-residential. 

They were also split into zones. Parcels that are located zero to 401 feet from the berm were designated as Zone 1, while parcels that are more than 401 feet from the berm, but still within the area where flooding is possible, were designated Zone 2. 

Essentially, those who receive the most benefit from the berm’s existence will pay the most. 

For example, a single-family residential home located on a .47-acre parcel in Zone 1 and on an elevation of six feet would pay $340.11 annually.

However, a single-family residential home on a 0.17-acre lot located in Zone 2 at an elevation of 12 feet, for example, would pay $241.20 annually. 

If the assessment districts are approved for this upcoming fiscal year, the city council can decide to increase these fees starting in fiscal year 2027-28. 

However, that increase is capped at 3% or the change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers in the West Region — whichever is greater. It cannot be increased by more than 6% without an additional property owner vote.