The Truth about El Dorado Hills Cityhood:
Straight Answers to Claims of Measure P opponents

SierraFoot acknowledges the copyright claimed explicitly by SaveEDH.com. Direct quotations below are reproduced subject to the Fair Use provisions of U.S. copyright law, 17CFR107.

Here's a direct quote from the opponents' web site as it appeared on September 24, 2005
with annotations in dark blue to interject the truth.

      
 


It's in the Comprehensive Fiscal Analysis (CFA)
But City Proponents Don't Want
You to Know

Truth:  Proponents DO Want You to Know the Real Information.

Yes, please read details in the CFA.
300% as many building permits as normal have to be issued. Do we want to build up EDH that quick?

Truth: No additional building permits are needed. Even in the analysis for 25% slower growth than we already have, the city can maintain the level of services provided by the county and still have a budget surplus.
Details

[Added lto savedh.com later on same topic:]


Truth: Budgets for Folsom and South Lake Tahoe include their Fire Department, EDH doesn't. Folsom is an industrialized 150-year-old city, SLT has gobs of tourists; TRPA estimates 200,000 per summer.

50% below the budget for the Police Department comparing to other cities in the region. How can we hire the top guns?

Truth: This is true only for West Sacramento, which also has at least 50% more sworn officers per thousand population than El Dorado Hills has.

The CFA says Sheriff's services to EDH cost $3.4 million per year, the city budget is forecast to provide $4.7 million as soon as the transition from county to city is complete.
20% overhead to run a city hall.

Truth: The CFA says no such thing. It recognizes overhead, all organizations have some. Our choice is to pay overhead in Placerville or in EDH, and the CFA suggests that we're likely to save overhead bucks with government located here instead of a half-hour drive away.
2.5 million s.f. retail spaces have to be rushed out.

Truth:  The CFA forecast for city budget surpluses is based on 660,000 sf of new retail space between 2004 and 2014. In fact, Town Center already has entitlements for a million square feet.
Deep in million $$$ debt for years.

Truth:  The CFA forecasts that the city will experience multimillion dollar budget surpluses.
Fiscal sensitivity analyses in the CFA conservatively predict budget surpluses, not deficits, accumulating $12 million to $49 million dollars by 2015.  Annual surpluses average $2.3 million per year for current conditions.
Zero budget to recover the lost CHP services.

Truth: City police will perform those services. Their budget supports traffic patrol at a level that the CHP cannot provide because of the CHP's own lack of resources.
Zero budget to continue the current $12 million highway project.

Truth: Road construction continues to be funded from the same dedicated revenue sources. The county will finish all road projects within city limits that are in progress at the time of incorporation, the city will be the lead agency for new construction.
Zero budget on affordable housing planning.

Truth:  The Planning Department is in LAFCO's estimated budget at $818,476 for the first year after transition from county to city government.
Revenue neutrality laws won't let the city retain any dollar from the current tax base. The County keeps all $$$!

Truth: Tax dollars to fund city services stay in the city.  Revenue neutrality payments to the county are constant, adjusted only for inflation.  As city revenue grows in the future, the growth in revenue stays in the city.
A couple items below are recent additions to the opponents' home page: 
No new services in the proposal!

Truth: The CFA says the city "will be able to maintain or improve municipal services".
Only the city council can authorize new services, and the city council won't exist until the city is incorporated.

Annual Budget Comparison
Budget bar chart from saveedh.com

Truth:  Check the details link to see why this is an anlytically invalid comparison.   This is like doing a car comparison between a Toyota Prius, a Ferrari, and Lincoln Navigator... with the back half of our own car chopped off and discarded. Here's a small sample of a valid revenue comparison with recently incorporated California cities...
Revenue comparison with recently incorporated cities
..
The proposed city really means ...
1. Less services than you are receiving today

Truth:  Service levels will increase. The CFA says that if the city supports the same service levels as now it will operate with a budget surplus.
2. Double bureaucracy, higher costs

Truth:  There is no duplication. Services transferred to the city are no longer performed for us by the county.
3. Forced growth

Truth:  Cityhood does not force growth. We're already legally committed to a lot of growth, but the body that made the commitments is the county.
4. Less cops on the streets

Truth:  The CFA is based on no change in level of services for city police. Most newly incorporated cities increase their level of law enforcement. EDH will have the fiscal resources to be able to do that if we choose to.
5. Delayed current road projects

Truth:  There will be no delays due to incorporation. The county is required to finish all road projects now in progress, while the city also starts new work.
And ...
6. Once incorporated, the city HOOD is subject to the State's affordable housing law.

Truth:  Our area, including the rest of the county, is already subject to that law. As a city we, not Placerville, will decide what forms affordable housing will take.

And remember that by El Dorado Hills standards "low and moderate income" refers to household incomes up to $75,000.  Even good single family homes can qualify as affordable housing.

Click on Details links for additional information and fact-locator references to source documents.

Details pages are under construction at this time.





Here are some older rebuttals to opponents' false claims:

The Truth about El Dorado Hills Cityhood:  Straight answers to Bob Dorr's claims

More facts:  EDH cityhood opponents' push poll

Contributed by John Hidahl and Norm Rowett:
Response to article in El Dorado Hills Telegraph:
“Incorporation opponent raises questions” about Cityhood in El Dorado Hills 


Return to SierraFoot Home Page