Bell Proposes to Levy $35 in Fees for Street Lights, Sewer Repair

Sharon Wade angrily waved two property tax bills in front of the City Council last week to protest proposed fees that would help pay for street lights and sewer maintenance.

“When I first bought this house 10 years ago in 1978, city-related expenses were equal to about one-third of the total cost of the tax bill,” Wade said while holding up one consolidated bill with itemized levies.

“Now it is almost two-thirds of the bill,” she added, holding up her 1988 bill. “There are a lot of poor families in Bell, and it is too much for them. We need lights, but your raising the taxes is just too much.”

Crowded Hearing

Wade was one of almost 100 residents who packed the Bell City Council chamber last Monday night for a standing-room-only hearing on the two proposed city fees--$27.50 for street lighting and $7.47 for sewer maintenance and sanitation.

The council sees the annual levies as one way to meet the demands of a growing city and the resulting strain on its services. The proposal comes at a critical point when Bell’s revenues, especially from the California Bell Casino, have sagged to such low levels that the city must take new measures to build them back up, city officials said.

At Monday’s meeting the council approved a preliminary budget of more than $10 million after making cuts worth about $500,000. The cuts include three full-time and two part-time city positions, three of which are now vacant. A freeze on hiring was part of the cutbacks.

Final budget approval and a vote on the two fees is expected at the Aug. 7 council meeting.

The proposed fees would add about $35 to the annual tax bills of residential property owners.

Projected Revenue

Chief Administrative Officer John Bramble said the lighting fee would generate about $120,000, with about $110,000 earmarked for electricity and the replacement of street light poles. The balance would cover the cost of establishing a lighting assessment district.

Bramble said only the Cheli industrial area in the north end of the city is now being assessed for street lighting. If approved, the fee would be extended citywide.

The proposed sewer maintenance fee would be $7.47 for a residential property of five dwellings, or less on a single parcel. For commercial property and residential units with more than five dwellings the fee would be $44.82. Some high-use commercial properties, such as car washes, motels, self-service laundries, restaurants and wholesale meat companies, would be assessed $74.70.

About $72,000 of the $80,000 raised from the sewer fee would be used to clean sewers, Bramble said.

Uncleaned for 13 Years

“There is a buildup of sewage, rocks, grease, oil and illegally dumped paint,” Bramble said. Funds have not been available to clean the sewer lines for 13 years, he said.

Both the sewer and street lighting fees must be used for their stated purposes, Bramble said. Any surplus would be automatically extended as credit on the next year’s assessment, whether for residential or commercial users.

Councilman Jay Price told the audience that the $35 “was what you can spend in one night of going out to dinner.”

Despite the financial woes facing the city, everyone at the meeting was angry about the proposed fees. Some said they doubted that they would see any tangible results in their neighborhoods.

Lights Shot Out

“We have lights out because gang members go out shooting them. They should try to get who is doing it and make them do community service. I have observed about three different lights being shot out on Randolph (Street),” Wade said.

“I prefer to have a separate bill (for the new fees) and not have them put it on my tax bill,” said John Smith, another Bell resident. “If I have to pay for rubbish and lighting and sewage, fine. But not on my taxes.”

Dale Robinson, a Bell resident since 1940, agreed that too many years have passed since the sewers have been cleaned.

“And as far as a complete thing of $35 a year, it isn’t much really,” said Robinson, in arguing against the fees. “But if they can tack on $35 a year, what would keep them from tacking on $300 the next year?”

“Jay Price says everyone goes out (to dinner) for $35,” Wade said. “If my husband and I go out for dinner we can’t spend $10. I feel as though the council is just not listening to the people.”