HomeMy WebLinkAboutANNEXATION #121 03-16-81DATE:
TO:
FROM:
-- SUBJECT:
Uarch 16, 1981
l/nter- eom
Honorable N~yor and City Council Uembers
R. K. Fleagle, C~nity Develolmment Consultant
Annexation #121 Ballot Argument
The attached ballot argument for Annexation No. 121 (Irvine~an) bas
~cn signed by the three initiators and submitted to the City Clerk
for publication.
R.K. Fl~le~~
Cc~mmity Development
Consultant
Attachement
RKF/hn
PRO ANNEXATION ARGUMENT
The undersigned residents of the area requested annexation to the city
because we would have much to gain from being in the city and nothing to
lose.
We would gain the benefits of Tustin Police patrol, traffic enforcement,
crime prevention and emergency services. In the event of a major
castastropbe or merely a request for informmtlon, we can call City Mall and
receive an immediate response.
We can vote in city elections and have an effective voice in the
development, maintenance and affairs of our community.
We can gain the benefits of street sweeping, tree tri,mni,%g and refuse
service at no additional cost. Park and recreation programs amd the use of
public buildings would be at reduced costs.
We w~uld receive a higher level of service with no increase in cos:s.
The tax ra:e anJ assessed value is the same for city and county residents.
The average residence would pay $5.60 per year for park amd civic center
bonds but we would still save $30.0 per year as a result of free refuse
service.
The probability of county service charges on a user fee basis makes city
residency even more attractive. We are identified with Tustin by mail
address, school system, and community of interests. We should be a full
partner with the ~itizenshlp benefits that result from annexation.
There is no logical reason for not being a part of the city.
We urge you to vote "Yes" in your own best interests.
Bob Johnson
13222 Woodland
Ruth Pegau
13061 Wreath
Jim Roy
13071 Deaa