Beach Tax Abuses Law, Critics Tell Senate Panel : Port Hueneme: The city manager says he was not invited to testify. He sees a political motive behind the charges.

A Senate committee heard charges on Wednesday that Port Hueneme abused a 19-year-old state law by imposing a tax on homes based on their ocean view and beach access.

And some legislators voiced concern that such use of the law might become a statewide trend.

Sen. Robert G. Beverly (R-Manhattan Beach), who sponsored the Landscape and Beach Lighting Act of 1972, said, “I think the Point Hueneme case is stretching it a bit.”

The act permits cities, counties and special districts to levy assessments to buy land and build, operate and maintain parks, landscaping and lighting. But critics charge that Port Hueneme is violating the intent of the act in its efforts to raise revenue for beach maintenance work from homeowners within two blocks of the sea.

Others at the hearing agreed, including Joel Fox, the president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn., who contended that some local officials have created special assessment districts as a “way to raise property taxes and escape the voting requirements of Proposition l3.”

“Benefit assessments have stretched like Pinocchio’s nose beyond their original size and intent,” Fox said.

Sen. Marian Bergeson (R-Newport Beach), chairwoman of the Senate Local Government Committee that conducted the hearing, said she was concerned that officials of several counties “see the act as a way to fund field maintenance and community recreational programs without a vote of the people.”

As for Port Hueneme, Bergeson said, the City Council “sees the act as a way to charge beachfront property owners for beach maintenance. But should residents close to the ocean pay for beach cleanup even though inlanders also use the beach?”

City Manager Richard Velthoen, in a telephone interview, said he was dismayed by the committee members’ allegations. He said he sent a letter and supporting material to every committee member and volunteered to testify Wednesday, but received no response.

“I think the act clearly states that maintenance costs for parks can be assessed from nearby property owners,” Velthoen said. “The beach park costs $400,000 a year to maintain, and the assessment is only paying a portion of that.

“It appears to me that the committee is responding for political reasons rather than practical reasons, or because of any abuse,” Velthoen said.

The City Council voted 4 to 0 for the view tax last July in the face of widespread protest from the 1,250 affected homeowners.

The city hopes to raise $150,000 a year to help pay beach maintenance costs. The average annual cost per affected homeowner would be an estimated $131.

Angry Port Hueneme homeowners have filed a lawsuit challenging the special assessment, and a move to revise the law is expected to be made at the 1992 legislative session that starts in January.

The legal challenge centers on whether a city can assess individual property to pay for the costs of cleaning a beach. As yet, the city has not collected the tax.

Port Hueneme officials argue that homes within the beach district directly benefit from “a clean, safe, attractive beach park.”

Before 1978, local governments relied heavily on property taxes to fund services. But when Proposition 13 was approved that year, it drastically cut both the property tax base and the tax rate, causing local governments to scramble to find new funding mechanisms to help pay for services, which led to increased use of the 19-year-old law.

The act has been used to justify assessment fees by the Azusa Unified School District and the Whittier Union High School District. Several other Orange County school districts planned to use the law but backed off in the face of heavy public protests.

School districts in San Mateo, Imperial and San Diego counties, and the cities of Antioch and Orland in Northern California also have tried to use the act, but have held up attempts to levy a fee or tax pending the outcome of lawsuits.

Sen. John R. Lewis (R-Orange) has proposed a bill to require two-thirds voter approval before any school district may levy assessments under the act. An amendment could be added to extend this requirement to both cities and counties.

Lewis’ bill is expected to be introduced in the upper house soon after the 1992 session starts.