Before the Gavel: Apartment Association Voices Opposition to Pasadena Fire Parcel Tax as Council Weighs Ballot Measure

The Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles is urging Pasadena City Council members to reject a proposed parcel tax that would raise an estimated $30 million annually for fire protection and emergency response, arguing the measure unfairly places the cost of citywide services on property owners while sparing renters, visitors and others who also benefit from them.

“We are strongly opposed to the parcel tax resolution as it unfairly places a financial burden for fire services enjoyed by the entire community, including renters [residential and commercial], workers [including non-residents], tourists, sports enthusiasts, dignitaries, business and social visitors, solely onto property owners,” wrote Janet M. Gagnon, Esq. in an email to the City Council. “A sales tax (a/k/a, transactions and use tax) would be far more equitable and would face no opposition according to the City’s Finance Committee report. If the need for additional funding is urgent, then the tax with the least objections should be utilized to secure passage, which is a sales tax and NOT a parcel tax.”

The correspondence comes ahead of Monday night’s City Council meeting, where officials are expected to decide whether to place the special tax before voters on the Nov. 3 ballot.

The proposed measure would provide a dedicated funding source for the Pasadena Fire Department to address long-deferred capital needs, including replacing or seismically upgrading aging fire stations, expanding wildfire preparedness and maintaining emergency response capabilities.

Because the proposal is a special tax dedicated to fire services, it would require approval by two-thirds of voters.

Representing rental housing providers throughout the region, the Apartment Association said more than 80% of its members are “mom-and-pop” owners with 20 or fewer units.

Emergency medical services now account for the majority of Pasadena Fire Department calls and argued the city has provided no data demonstrating that property owners are the primary users of those services.

Because anyone in Pasadena can require emergency medical assistance, the group contends the cost should be shared through a broader-based tax rather than a parcel tax assessed only on property owners.

The letter also warns that owners of rent-stabilized multifamily properties would be disproportionately affected because the city’s rent stabilization ordinance limits their ability to recover additional costs through rent increases. The association urged the council to exempt multifamily properties if it proceeds with the measure, warning the tax could drive small landlords to sell their properties and reduce the city’s supply of naturally occurring affordable housing.

In addition, the organization criticized the city for pursuing a permanent tax before conducting what it called a comprehensive review of the existing budget. It suggested the council instead consider a temporary sales tax or bond measure while evaluating spending priorities.

Local residents also submitted objections before Monday’s meeting.

Steve Haussler, who said he lost two homes in the Eaton Fire, wrote that the city should be able to identify roughly $30 million for fire improvements within its existing $1.4 billion budget and accused officials of using fear to avoid making difficult budget decisions.

“Out of a $1.4 Billion budget I cannot believe $30 or so million cannot be found on an annual basis to fund the needed upgrades for the Fire Department,” wrote Haussler. “Adding this tax measure is yelling “FIRE!” on a too-crowded ballot and uses fear to avoid the Council doing their proper job of balancing our budget.”

In a separate email, Lisa Haussler said she supports maintaining excellent fire protection and emergency response services but questioned whether the city had fully evaluated existing revenues and other funding alternatives before asking voters to approve another permanent parcel tax.

She urged council members to consider the cumulative financial impact on homeowners and local businesses.

“I strongly support maintaining excellent fire protection and emergency response services,” wrote Lisa Haussler. “However, I am concerned about placing another permanent parcel tax on Pasadena property owners without first demonstrating that existing revenues have been fully evaluated and that alt reasonable alternatives have been explored. Please carefully consider the cumulative financial impact on homeowners and local businesses before moving this measure forward.”