5357 / 27.9% Yes votes ...... 13819 / 72.1% No votes

See Also: Index of all Measures

The Alameda County Board of Supervisors initiated this incorporation process by submitting an application to LAFCo. After a year of analysis of the proposal, and numerous public hearings, LAFCo approved the proposed incorporation, and based on the independent fiscal analysis conducted, found that the new city will be financially feasible. It is projected that the new city will receive sufficient revenue to provide an adequate level of service and maintain a reserve if the proposed city imposes a TOT and extends the UUT beyond its current expiration date of June 2009.

If this measure passes, the City will assume the service responsibilities and the associated revenues, assets and liabilities of the County as they relate to the specific municipal services that the city will provide. These service responsibilities include, for example, law enforcement, land use planning, public works, and general municipal services. As set forth in the LAFCo Resolution, special districts and County Service Areas currently in place will continue to provide fire protection, parks and recreation, water and sewer services, and other services, whether or not the incorporation is approved. The roads, streets and other public assets will be transferred from the County to the new city. The new city council will govern all matters regarding city operations, levels of service, and land use regulations. All County ordinances will remain in effect until the city council enacts ordinances superseding them. The County will continue to provide various countywide services, such as health care, social services and court administration.

The proposed City boundaries are shown on the enclosed map, and contain 11.5 square miles with an estimated population of 58,000 residents and 30,600 registered voters. The boundaries are generally described as East of the City of San Leandro and the unincorporated community of Ashland; South, southwest, and east of the rural hill areas separating the area from the Cities of Moraga, Danville, San Ramon, and Dublin; and North of the City of Hayward and the unincorporated community of Fairview. The proposed city boundaries generally coincide with the current Alameda County urban growth boundary as approved by the Alameda County voters in November 2000.

s/LOU ANN TEXEIRA, Executive Officer
Alameda Local Agency Formation Commission

San Francisco Chronicle

• November 1 - Castro Valley to cast vote on cityhood

• October 22 - Residents to decide on independent Castro Valley; Future of Alameda County's biggest unincorporated area rests on Nov. 5 vote

• October 18 - City of Castro Valley

• October 18 - Out-of-towners push incorporation

Yes on Q

No on Q

Citizens for Castro Valley

The Citizens for Castro Valley (C4CV) was formed in 1985. It was formed by Castro Valley Citizens to explore the feasibility and desirability of self government.

Castro Valley Democratic Club - California

Now we need to take proper steps to protect Castro Valley's great quality of life by approving Measure Q.

Measure Q will keep local tax dollars in Castro Valley where they belong. YES on Q means we will control the tax decisions that affect our community. All local taxes raised from Castro Valley will stay in Castro Valley to benefit our local citizens.

Measure Q will protect us from future county tax increases that are not supported by a majority of Castro Valley voters. YES on Q means our local taxes could not be raised in the future without the majority consent of Castro Valley voters. We will get to keep the Utility Users Tax money that would otherwise go to the County.

Measure Q will ensure vital services are kept close to home - like police, fire, and other public safety services. YES on Q means we will be able to count on these essential services - located in our community, dedicated solely to serving our community - so we can be certain residents receive the essential services they deserve.

Measure Q will ensure Castro Valley citizens get to set the priorities for our community. Setting priorities as important as safety, streets and road maintenance, parks and open space, should not be left to anyone other than citizens from our own community.

Join the Castro Valley Chamber of Commerce, the League of Women Voters - Eden Area, public safety professionals, and citizens throughout our community in taking a proactive step to ensure Castro Valley endures as a quality community for years to come.

Please vote YES on Q.

s/EDWIN K. REULING, Former Castro Valley School Board Member
s/JOHAN KLEHS, Vice-Chair, California State Board of Equalization
s/STEPHANIE CARTWRIGHT, Former President, League of Women Voters - Eden Area
s/ROBERTA RIVEL, Vice President, R.T. Nahas Company CV Mac Councilman
s/SUZANNE BARBA, Member, Eden Township Healthcare District

All local taxes WON'T stay in CV. Taxes go to the county or state, and portions are returned to cities as specified by law.

County provided SERVICES will be CUT. Some office staff will be REDUCED MORE THAN HALF from recommended levels. POLICE will be SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED. Presently, we have 24 CHP officers and 64 Sheriff's deputies. If Q passes, we will have NO CHP and 65 deputies TOTAL. A 26% REDUCTION IN POLICE. The proposed city budget does not even provide for a police station.

Incorporation will REMOVE CURRENT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION of our hills and canyons. SPRAWLING DEVELOPMENTS, HEAVIER TRAFFIC AND OVERCROWDED SCHOOLS will follow.

A city of Castro Valley, with a NEW $3.2 MILLION LAYER OF BUREAUCRATS and top employees making $142,000 - $175,000/year, would be the POOREST in the East Bay. We have no space for new commercial development, so the pressure will be on to replace SMALL businesses with BIGGER ones that generate more taxes.

Castro Valley IS a great place to live. Let's keep it that way.

PLEASE VOTE NO ON Q.

s/ARTHUR B. GEEN Executive Vice President,
Alameda County Taxpayers Association
s/KEITH BOYER Commander,
Alameda County Sheriff's Dept. (RETIRED)
s/ROYCE DILLINGHAM Captain,
Oakland Fire Dept. (Ret.), C.V. Resident
s/MARY L. BONETTI Castro Valley Business Owner
s/ARTHUR L. VARGAS
s/GLENN R. CARLSON
s/TOM HOUCHINS

We cannot afford incorporation. Castro Valley will be Alameda County's POOREST city. Our sales tax revenue of $42 per person compares to $295 for San Leandro, $244 for Hayward and $440 for Dublin. A prosperous city needs major commercial enterprises to generate sales and property taxes. We don't have space for these. Our city budget per resident would average only 1/3 that of neighboring cities, which translates into reduced services.

The financial feasibility study is seriously flawed. It relies on overly optimistic projections of revenues and unacceptably low levels of services. If revenues don't materialize, significantly higher property taxes will be required.

Young families should vote NO because incorporation means higher taxes, rapid urban development, more traffic, overcrowding, and a lower quality of life. Our excellent schools will be strained by increased enrollments.

Homeowners should vote NO because incorporation means more apartments, subsidies for low income housing, excessive commercial development and more traffic.

Seniors should vote NO because taxes will continue to grow to support more bureaucrats and ambitious politicians. Do we really need a $175,000 city manager to babysit County employees who will continue to provide services we already get?

Business owners should vote NO because business assessments and fees can be raised by the City Council without voter approval.

Environmentally concerned residents should vote NO because incorporation will allow sprawling development in our hills and canyons without a vote of the people, bypassing current protections.

Incorporation is a RISKY PROPOSAL which will forever end Castro Valley's small-town atmosphere. We favor our current way of life which makes Castro Valley more pleasant than surrounding cities. We must avoid creating a woefully underfunded city and being stuck paying higher taxes for reduced services.

VOTE NO on INCORPORATION. VOTE NO on Q.

s/TOM HOUCHINS, Sheriff (ret.) Alameda County
s/ARTHUR B. GEEN, Executive Vice President
Alameda County Taxpayers Association
s/DONNA L. SIRE, Vice Chair Castro Valley,
Incorporation Study Group
s/GLENN R. CARLSON, President of Truth,
The Residents Understand The Hype (of Incorporation)
s/ARTHUR L. (ART) VARGAS, Director/President
Castro Valley Sanitary District (Retired)
California Local Agency Investment Board (former Board Member)

Here are the facts: There is nothing protecting Castro Valley from tax grabs that take our money and give it to others. Because we pay taxes to the County, the County decides where our taxes go.

We aren't protected from future tax increases. Currently voters from surrounding cities can raise our taxes # without impacting themselves or their communities, and without consent of a majority of Castro Valley voters.

We don't have the authority to control our future. Castro Valley is governed by outsiders who don't live here and don't understand our needs. None are accountable solely to us. They make decisions based on their values and priorities, not Castro Valley's.

Measure Q will:
• Keep Utility User Tax money in Castro Valley that would otherwise go the the County
• Redirect our tax dollars back to Castro Valley to benefit our local community
• Protect us from future tax increases without majority consent of Castro Valley voters
• Ensure our Castro Valley community reflects Castro Valley priorities

The County's extensive analysis found that Measure Q provides a sound, fiscally responsible future, including adequate resources and reserves to meet community needs.

Measure Q ensures spending and services that reflect local priorities - like police, fire, roads and parks. Voting YES supports Castro Valley decisions based on Castro Valley priorities.

Don't be persuaded by irrational people with irrational arguments.

Protect Castro Valley from unwanted tax grabs. Keep taxes local and working for you.

Please vote YES.

s/RONALD L. MEISSNER Past President and current Board Member of Chamber of Commerce
s/ELEANOR NOLEROTH 60 year Castro Valley Resident & League of Women Voters Member
s/DONNA M. RUSSELL Senior Citizen & C.V.H.S. Teacher-Retired
s/HEIDI DENZLER-HALSEY Castro Valley Schools Parent Volunteer
s/DARRELL S. LAVIN, DC Castro Valley Rotary, Past President, Chiropractor

WHEREAS, a proposal to incorporate the City of Castro Valley was filed with the Executive Officer of the Alameda Local Agency Formation Commission pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Section 56000 et seq. of the Government Code); and
WHEREAS, in September 2001, the Commission appointed a 15-member Study Group, and initiated a series of public meetings of the Study Group to provide a community forum for considering the proposal and obtaining public comment; and
WHEREAS, the Study Group has served as a valuable sounding board to the fiscal consultants and LAFCo staff on various issues such as boundaries and municipal services, and has provided valuable input to the Commission, to the consultants and to LAFCo staff; and
WHEREAS, at the times and in the manner required by law, the Executive Officer has given notice of the Commission's consideration of the proposal; and
WHEREAS, the Executive Officer, pursuant to Government Code Section 56800 prepared or caused to be prepared a Comprehensive Fiscal Analysis of the proposed incorporation and has furnished a copy of this report to each person entitled to a copy; and
WHEREAS, the Executive Officer, pursuant to Government Code Section 56665 reviewed the proposed incorporation and prepared a report including recommendations, and has furnished a copy of this report to each person entitled to a copy; and
WHEREAS, the Commission on May 9, 2002 considered the proposed incorporation and the report of the Executive Officer, and considered the factors determined by the Commission to be relevant to this incorporation, including, but not limited to, the factors specified in Government Code Section 56668; and
WHEREAS, the Commission heard, discussed and considered all oral and written testimony related to the proposal, including, but not limited to, the Executive Officer's report and recommendation, the Comprehensive Fiscal Analysis, the environmental document, spheres of influence and applicable general and specific plans; and
WHEREAS, the Commission heard and received all oral and written protests, objections and evidence which we, and all persons present were given an opportunity to hear and be heard with respect to the proposed incorporation and the report of the Executive Officer; and
WHEREAS, the Local Agency Formation Commission finds the proposal to be in the best interests of the affected area and the total organization of local governmental agencies within Alameda County; and
WHEREAS, this resolution includes as Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, the "Revenue Neutrality Resolution No. R-2002-504 as approved by the Alameda County Board of Supervisors on April 9, 2002 and specific provisions of that resolution in the text of this resolution are denoted by parenthetical references.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED by the Alameda Local Agency Formation Commission as follows:

A. The proposed city is expected to receive revenues sufficient to provide public services and facilities and a reasonable reserve during the first three fiscal years following incorporation; and
B. The incorporation of the proposed city is consistent with the intent of the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, Government Code sections 56001, 56300, 56301 and 56377 and the adopted policies and procedures of the Alameda LAFCo; and
C. The Comprehensive Fiscal Analysis has been prepared and reviewed pursuant to Government Code Section 56800.
D. Having reviewed the spheres of influence of affected local agencies, the incorporation is consistent with those spheres.
E. The Commission has reviewed the Executive Officer's report and recommendations prepared pursuant to section 56665, and the testimony presented at its public hearing.

A. Mitigation Period Obligations - During the 10-year mitigation period, the City shall pay to the County $610,510 per year. This amount has been adjusted in accordance with Commission action (e.g., boundary modifications).
B. Transition Year Payment During the transition year, the City shall pay to the County approximately $12,000,000, to be increased by the change in cost-of-living.

A. Payment to Count - Should the calculation of property taxes prepared pursuant to Government Code Section 56810 be modified as a result of a court action brought pursuant to Government Code Subsection 56810(h), or as a result of legislative action with retroactive application, to provide that a larger share be retained by the County and a smaller share transferred to the City than that specified by LAFCo pursuant to Government Code Section 56810, in approving the Incorporation, the County shall transfer the amount of annual property tax resulting from such difference to the City for the purpose of maintaining revenue neutrality pursuant to Government Code Section 56815, and this Agreement ("equalizing payment").
B. Payment to City - Should the calculation prepared pursuant to Government Code Section 56810, be modified as a result of a court action brought pursuant to Government Code Subsection 56810(h), or as a result of legislative action with retroactive application, to provide that a smaller share be retained by the County and a larger share transferred to the City than that specified by LAFCo pursuant to Government Code Section 56810, in approving the Incorporation, the City shall make an equalizing payment to the County.

A. Revenues currently received by the County of Alameda for the incorporation area and the expenditures for service responsibilities to be transferred to the new city are not equal;
B. In approving the proposed incorporation, the Commission finds pursuant to Government Code Section 56815 as follows:
1) That the County of Alameda has agreed to the incorporation of the City of Castro Valley on the terms and conditions set forth in the Revenue Neutrality Resolution;
2) That the approval of the Revenue Neutrality Resolution by the County and other terms and conditions set forth herein adequately mitigate the negative fiscal effect of the incorporation on the County;
3) That but for the conditions contained herein incorporating all of the provisions of the Revenue Neutrality Resolution, the Commission would be unable to make the required findings under Section 56815 and approve the incorporation;
4) That the terms and conditions contained herein are integral to the approval of the incorporation under Government Code sections 56880, 56881, 56375, and 56720; and
5) That the terms and conditions relating to revenue neutrality imposed by this resolution are independent legislative enactments of the Commission.

A. A sales and use tax at the maximum rate of one percent (1%) of the retail sale or use of tangible personal property within the City of Castro Valley to be collected under contract with the State Board of Equalization and returned to the City of Castro Valley pursuant to local ordinance.
B. A real property transfer tax at the rate imposed by Alameda County upon the sales of real property within the City of Castro Valley to be collected by Alameda County and returned to the City of Castro Valley pursuant to local ordinance.
C. The County of Alameda currently levies a utility users tax in unincorporated Alameda County. Unless re-authorized, this tax will sunset on June 30, 2009. As a condition of incorporation, the Commission, pursuant to Government Code section 56886(t), conditions incorporation on the continuation of the existing Utility Users Tax. Moreover, as an additional condition of incorporation, the Commission requires that the Utility Users Tax sunset provision be removed so that the tax will be ongoing. (Government Code section 56886(s)). These conditions are imposed solely to ensure financial feasibility of the proposed City during the initial years after incorporation. The new City may modify, alter or rescind this tax in its discretion so long as its financial obligations to the County are satisfied.
D. As a condition of incorporation, the City of Castro Valley will impose and levy a transient occupancy tax in the territory proposed for incorporation. The initial rate shall be set at 10%. This condition is imposed solely to ensure financial feasibility of the proposed City during the initial years after incorporation. The new City may modify, alter or rescind this tax in its discretion so long as its financial obligations to the County are satisfied.
E. All other general taxes presently imposed by Alameda County at the same rate and in the same manner as they are imposed and collected by Alameda County.
F. All taxes generally authorized for incorporated cities, including, but not limited to:
.Property taxes
.Sales taxes
.Real property transfer taxes
.Franchise fees

(a) The name of the proposed city shall be the City of Castro Valley.
(b) The boundaries of the proposed city shall be as described in Exhibit A of Resolution No. 2002-11.
(c) The city shall be governed by a five-member city council elected at large. Subject to the limitations of Government Code Section 56724, the election of the first City Council shall be on November 5, 2002. The terms of office of the City Council shall be four years. Of the first elected legislative body, the terms of the two members of the city council with the largest popular votes shall be four years. Of the first elected legislative body, the terms of the three members of the city council with the least popular votes shall be two years (Government Code Section 57377). Pursuant to Government Code Section 36801, at the first City Council meeting, the city council shall choose one of its number as mayor, and one of its number as mayor pro tempore.
(d) Upon and after the effective date of incorporation, the City Manager, City Clerk, and City Treasurer shall be appointed by the City Council pursuant to Government Code Section 36511.
(e) Incorporation of the City of Castro Valley shall be contingent upon voter approval, at the same election as incorporation, of a transient occupancy tax of 10%, and a utility users tax of 5.5%. The purpose of these taxes shall be to assist the proposed city in meeting the costs of providing municipal services to the proposed city. The question submitted at the election with respect to incorporation of the proposed city shall include, with matters set forth in Government Code Sections 57133(a), 57134 and 57135, a statement of this condition on incorporation.
(f) The appropriations limit for the proposed city shall be $18.98 million.
(g) The proposed city shall utilize the regular assessment roll of the County.
(h) The effective date for incorporation of the City of Castro Valley shall be July 1, 2003.

(a) There shall be included on the ballot to be marked by the voters of the proposed city, in addition to any other matters required by law, ballot language in the following form:

(b) The ballot to be used at the election shall be both as to form and matters contained therein such as may be required by law. On the ballot, in addition to any other printed matter required by law, opposite the question to be voted upon and to its right, the words "yes" and "no" shall be printed on a separate line with voting squares.
(c) The full text of the ballot measure shall read as set forth in Appendix "B". The Commission requests that the full text of the ballot measure be printed in the ballot pamphlet.
(d) LAFCo will request that the Alameda County Board of Supervisors authorize, instruct, and direct the Registrar of Voters to provide and furnish any and all official ballots, notices, printed matter, and all supplies, equipment and paraphernalia that may be necessary to properly and lawfully conduct the election.
(e) LAFCo will request that the Registrar of Voters take the necessary and appropriate actions to provide the necessary election officers, polling places, and voting precincts for the election.
(f) LAFCo will request that the polls for the election be open during the hours required by law, and the election shall be held and conducted as provided by law.
(g) LAFCo will request that notice of time and place of holding the election, together with any other notices required by law, shall be given by the Registrar of Voters.
(h) Arguments for and against the question may be, and other analyses provided for by law shall be, submitted in accordance with the law.
(i) The election shall be consolidated with any other election held on the same date in territory that is the same or in part the same.
(j) The canvass of ballots cast at the election shall be conducted in accordance with the law.

2.1 Pursuant to Government Code Section 57384, the amount of the repayment of approximately $12,000,716 will be increased by the change in cost-of-living in the immediate San Francisco Bay Area (CPI-U for the San Francisco - Oakland - San Jose, CA, All Items, 1982-84=100, NSA). The change in CPI shall be determined by calculating the difference between the July 2001 reported monthly amount and the July 2003 reported monthly amount.
2.2 The amount of the repayment to the County will be reduced by the amount of FY 2002-2003 fourth quarter sales tax generated within the area included within the Incorporation that would have been paid to County in FY 2003-2004.
2.3 The County will receive repayment in FY 2003-2004 of its first year's expenses to provide these services. If the City does not plan to provide repayment in FY 2003-2004, it must notify the County, in writing, no later than April 1, 2004.
2.4 Alternately, the City and the County may agree to repay the County for its first year's expenses over a five (5) year period beginning with FY 2003-2004. Each payment will include principal and interest calculated on the unpaid balance owed the County at the County's investment rate for pooled funds.

3.1 Commencing with the effective date of the Incorporation (July 1, 2003), the City will pay the County a mitigation payment of approximately $557,931 each Fiscal Year for a ten (10) year period.
3.2 The amount of the mitigation payment will be increased annually following FY 2003-2004 based on the change in cost-of-living in the immediate San Francisco Bay Area (CPI-U for the San Francisco - Oakland - San Jose, CA, All Items, 1982-84=100, NSA). The change in CPI shall be determined by calculating the difference between the July 2004 reported monthly amount, and the July 2003 reported monthly amount. The same methodology will be used to calculate subsequent year adjustments using each year's change in July reported amounts to calculate the subsequent year CPI change.
3.3 The payment by the City to the County will be paid each year from property tax revenues collected by the County prior to distribution of these revenues to the City.
3.4 Should the calculation of property taxes prepared pursuant to Government Code Section 56810, be modified as a result of a court action brought pursuant to Government Code Subsection 56810(h), or as a result of legislative action with retroactive application, to provide that a larger share be retained by the County and a smaller share transferred to the City than that specified by LAFCo pursuant to Government Code Section 56810, in approving the Incorporation, the County shall transfer the amount of annual property tax resulting from such difference to the City for the purpose of maintaining revenue neutrality pursuant to Government Code Section 56815, and this Agreement ("equalizing payment"). Should the calculation prepared pursuant to Government Code Section 56810, be modified as a result of a court action brought pursuant to Government Code Subsection 56810(h), or as a result of legislative action with retroactive application, to provide that a smaller share be retained by the County and a larger share transferred to the City than that specified by LAFCo, pursuant to Government Code Section 56810, in approving the Incorporation, the City shall make an equalizing payment to the County.
3.5 The City will contract with the County for Police Protection and Library services for an initial term of at least five years.

4.1 Home, McKinney and Community Development Block Grant

4.2 Redevelopment agencies ("RDA's"). It is the County Board of Supervisors' intent, acting as the governing body of the County RDA, to transfer jurisdiction of that portion of the County RDA project area included wholly within the boundaries of the City, designated as the Castro Valley Sub-Area, to a City RDA upon organization of a City RDA, pursuant to Health and Safety Code, Section 33215. The City RDA will have as its projects the projects approved by the County RDA and other projects the City RDA identifies.
4.3 All dedicated County roads will be conveyed to the new city. The transfer of other public facilities will occur pursuant to Terms and Conditions imposed by LAFCo.