KabirCares.org

City to Formally Acknowledge PGPOA Petitions

Prince George's Property Owners' Association

In tonight’s regular council meeting, the Council is set to pass a resolution to  formally acknowledge two petitions submitted by the Prince George’s Property Owners Association.

Since last year, PGPOA has been collecting petition signatures to amend the City Charter in two ways:

1) To limit the total amount of revenue collected through real property taxes to the amount collected in FY 2011, and

2) to prohibit any distinction in the way the City regulates housing based on a variety of factors, including type or size of housing.

The City needs to pass a resolution to acknowledge receipt of these petitions, which were submitted a couple weeks ago.

There have been a a number of concerns about these petitions and the impact that they would have on the City, by preventing the City from obtaining revenue from new developments that come into the City or from allowing its revenue from keep pace with inflation, and seriously hamstringing the City’s ability to regulate rental housing.

The City attorney will be reviewing the proposed Charter amendments and the petitions to see if they meet the legal requirements to require a referendum under State laws and the City Charter.

We will keep you posted.

(Visited 25 times, 1 visits today)

6 Comments to “City to Formally Acknowledge PGPOA Petitions”

  1. By Onward, April 11, 2012 @ 11:24 pm

    So we should amend the city charter just to suit the interests of a group of landlords, most of whom don’t even live in College Park ?? Landlords who are primarliy interested in “maximizing their investment” — most of them aren’t even around to live in our communities ? This has to be one of the all time worst ideas I’ve EVER heard !! I’ll trust my elected rep’s 10000 times more than a group like PGPOA to write charter amendments.

    Are these landlords also working to cap the property tax revenues in Potomac, Bethesda, or wherever they live to FY2011 levels until the end of time unless voters approve each and every increase in an election ???
    Are they hiring their AZ corporation (Petition Partners) to get these property tax cap petitions on the ballot in their communities ?? If they aren’t, then it seems like the only reason why this petition was submitted was retribution against the city council. Forget all the crap about “living within our means” if they’re not willing to practice what they preach. They fought rent control, but lost that battle. They sued, but lost the court case. They couldn’t get their candidates elected to the city council. So now they want to harass the city with misleading petition drives so they can get the city charter changed to maximize their profilts. They have deep pockets, so they can probably afford to go through these sort of petitions over and over again.

    Fine — they’re against rent control, which hasn’t always been handled consistently or fairly. I can understand they have grievances. But I absolutely detest their “me first” attitude, their willingness to use blackmail and take College Park citizens hostage to get their way. Because their investment homes lost value, they’re willing to cripple us with a property tax cap until the end of time. Do they care that everyone else’s homes in College Park, throughout the county and all across the country also lost value in the last 5 years since the housing bubble burst ? NO — it’s all about them and their grievances.

    PGPOA wears the crown as the most ANTI College Park group out there.

  2. By Fazlul Kabir, April 11, 2012 @ 11:50 pm

    Not yet! The council only acted on a procedural matter at last night’s council session – forward the petition requests for the review of the Board of Election and the City attorney. Once they validate the petitions, the residents will vote on them in next year’s municipal election to get them passed. Only then the City Charter will be amended.

    Thanks for your comments.

  3. By Onward, April 14, 2012 @ 7:24 pm

    Wouldn’t there be a special election to vote on these charter amendments this summer if PGPOA submitted the petitions in March ?

  4. By Onward, April 14, 2012 @ 7:25 pm

    It’s great the way these people say it’s all about “rent control discrimination”. Really ?? Discrimination is a loaded, inaccurate, deceptive term that was intended to attract more signatures when their Arizona corporation was circulating their petitions.

    If it was only a matter of voting on rent control, I could respect that … if not for their deceptive tactics. But there’s also ANOTHER amendment there to freeze property tax revenues at FY2011 FOREVER unless we have an election to raise the amount. WHY ??? Where did that come from ? And what’s so sacred about 2011 ?

    Is PGPOA a Tea Party organization ?? Wouldn’t it be great if this was some sort of back door Tea Party scheme to take down College Park. They might as well be, using their AZ petition gathering corporation, the deceptive tactics, the bait & switch to slip in an extra amendment that has NOTHING to do with rent control — all so property tax revenues can be frozen at the FY2011 amount. That’s not keeping property taxes RATES constant like the PG Country TRIM, which is bad enough; it keeps the AMOUNT frozen, even as ALL expenses keep compounding year after year. How many other municipalities in the US operate under these sort of draconian restrictions ? And does anyone want to live in those places ?

  5. By Onward, April 14, 2012 @ 7:25 pm

    I did some research, and got a listing of tax rates for all jurisdiction in Maryland — you can scroll down to look at the rates for PG county:

    http://www.dat.state.md.us/sdatweb/taxrate.html

    Let’s see — the College Park tax rate comes in at 0.322 per $100 of assessed value. That’s the rate that PGPOA finds so oppressive, so we MUST cap total property tax amounts NOW !!

    Now let’s check other municipalities in the county. WOW — look at how much higher the rates are everywhere else !! Let’s check on our neighbors first. Over in Greenbelt, it’s 0.79 — Holy Crap !! In Riverdale Park, it’s 0.654; in Riverdale Park it’s 0.654; in Hyattsville it’s 0.63; in University Park it’s 0.579; in Berwyn Heights it’s 0.516. Let’s keep looking, shall we ? Whoa — it’s 0.79 Mt Rainier, 0.74 in Bladensburg, and 0.71 in Laurel !! Over in New Carrollton it’s 0.5; in Cheverly it’s 0.48; in Bowie it’s 0.40. I could go on … in District Heights it’s 0.73 ! Over in Seat Pleasant it’s 0.58; in Landover Hills it’s 0.48; even in Capitol Heights it’s 0.392.

    You should see a pattern — College Park has LOWER property tax rates than almost all the others in the county. Of the 30 municipalities there, College Park has the 28th highest property tax rates — somebody save us !!

  6. By Onward, April 14, 2012 @ 7:26 pm

    WOW … so many others are being Taxed Enough Already — even worse than us !! So when are the white knights at PGPOA going to come riding in to save them ?? Is PGPOA going to write a bunch more contracts for their AZ corporation, so Petition Partners can start petition drives all over the county and maybe get those property tax revenues frozen at 2011 amounts just like us ?? If it’s all about high property tax rates, then PGPOA better go after Greenbelt, Hyattsville, Laurel, Riverdale Park & University Park NOW. They should also make their way to almost every other municipality in the county FAST, before too many others suffer fates even worse than us.

    You look at the numbers and wonder … why does College Park have to walk the plank first ? Is PGPOA’s second charter amendment really about trying to rein in outrageous tax rates ? Or are they using their truckloads of cash to write charter amendents and start petition drives to get some retribution ?? Maybe strongarm the city council to finally cave in to their demands. Anyway, if they pull this off, PGPOA will probably be Tea Party heroes.