Time right for Wildomar cityhood

By: The Californian Opinion Staff Our view: Even given current economic troubles, city should be able to stand on its own | Saturday, January 26, 2008 10:06 PM PST ∞

Leaders of the Wildomar cityhood effort must be wondering by now if they are snake-bit.

It's been more than 15 years since they began the effort to turn the small community between Murrieta and Lake Elsinore into a city of its own. The effort stalled for a long time, but roared back to life five years ago when a group of residents in the southern part of the community, wanting better law enforcement and emergency services, made a pitch to be absorbed by neighboring Murrieta.

That bid failed, but it helped rejuvenate the long-dormant cityhood efforts. Just as things seemed ripe for success, however, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Legislature pulled the rug out from under advocates by taking a prime source of income for new cities to help balance the state's own red-ink-drenched budget.

It took more than two years for that problem to be resolved, but last year community leaders finally succeeded in getting the question to the ballot.

Now, just before the pivotal vote on Feb. 5, the economy starts to show signs of distress, raising questions in many people's minds about the financial projections that are the cornerstone of the cityhood measure.

But while the nation's economic forecasts are troubling, they shouldn't prevent Wildomar from being able to sustain itself in the early years of cityhood, according to the consultant who prepared the financial study. This, after all, is the reason these studies are done using conservative figures for critical sources of revenue.

A big factor in Wildomar's favor is that its money is projected to come from a variety of sources, not just sales taxes, which many cities rely heavily on but can be volatile as people choose to delay big purchases. Only 10 percent to 20 percent of the new city's income is expected to come from sales tax in the first few years, while the rest would come from more stable sources. Even property tax should be a reasonably consistent source, despite the downturn in the housing market.

Property taxes won't rise as quickly as they did in recent years, but they ought to hit the 2.5 percent annual growth rate projected in the analysis.

One of the biggest sources of revenue for the city is that money the state hijacked then partially restored about 18 months ago ---- those vehicle license fees we all pay every year when we register our cars. New cities used to get triple their share for the first few years of existence in order to help them get established. Under the new deal, they don't get triple the amount any more but the fees will still amount to approximately $3 million of the new city's expected $13 million budget.

But here's the kicker: That deal runs out July 1, 2009. If the cityhood effort is delayed, as some are urging, that money will be gone and there's no guarantee it will be replaced. Riverside County also has been very supportive of cityhood efforts in both Wildomar and neighboring Menifee Valley, agreeing to give the young cities the money it would save by not having to provide services to the area any longer ---- in Wildomar's case, an estimated $300,000.

There's no guarantee that the county would feel so magnanimous in a few years.

So while it might seem like a scary time to be going out on its own, the numbers still pencil out: Wildomar should be able to support itself as a city, and still provide better services to its residents than the county can, while bringing much-needed local control to the valley.

Counties in California were never intended or designed to provide urban services to areas. It was always anticipated that when areas became more populated, they would form cities and provide for themselves. Over the years, the state and counties have made that process more difficult, but that only ensures that when a question of cityhood makes it to the ballot it has been vetted thoroughly.

The new city of Wildomar would be small ---- about 27,000 people ---- and there will no doubt be growing pains. But it's time for the community named for William Collier and Donald and Margaret Graham more than 100 years ago to claim its place among the cities of Southwest County and California.

First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.