WILDOMAR - Opponents of efforts to make Wildomar a city aren't as visible or as organized as their counterparts, but that doesn't mean they are less committed to their cause.

That lack of visibility may prove problematic, though, if the question of cityhood for this 22-square-mile community sandwiched between Murrieta and Lake Elsinore heads to the ballot, possibly as soon as February.

Critics complain privately, in letters to the editor and on blog sites, but are reluctant to step up publicly to make their concerns known.

One opponent contends cityhood proponents have used intimidation and personal attacks to quiet all but the most outspoken critics.

But Sheryl Ade, a leader of the pro-cityhood Wildomar Incorporation Now, said she found that contention "quite mind-boggling."

The opponents who have registered their complaints generally fear that incorporation could ultimately lead to higher taxes for Wildomar residents, and that a community that needs county subsidies to survive shouldn't be allowed to incorporate.

WIN leaders have disputed both points, saying incorporation wouldn't result in a tax hike (under state law any tax hike has to be approved by voters) and that their financial analysis of the community is purposely conservative, such that the would-be city probably would amass more sales tax dollars than predicted in that report.

A theory has arisen in some circles that there is another reason for the critics' campaign against incorporation, one even closer to their pocketbooks: that they're worried leaders on a Wildomar City Council would restrict development in the community.

But other opponents have written in blogs that they're worried leaders of a city of Wildomar would neglect the community's rural past and urbanize it.

WIN leaders have said they hope to preserve the community's country feel more than its neighbors to the south, Temecula and Murrieta.

"You don't want everything looking exactly alike, so that there's no diversity, no difference - kind of like the 'Stepford Wives'," Ade said. "I don't care for that kind of look. I like eclectic."

The president of WIN, Bob Cashman, has said he hopes to prevent Wildomar from mirroring Temecula, which he has described as the "Disneyland of development."

Finances

On the surface, however, the dispute about cityhood is about Wildomar's finances.

One resident, Gerard Ste. Marie, recently paid $25,000 for the state controller's office to review WIN's financial analysis, which projects the would-be city's local revenues and expenditures in its first 10 years of operation. Gary Thompson, the cityhood group's financial consultant, reported that Wildomar could sustain itself with a contribution from the county to help defray the staffing costs of a new fire station proposed for Clinton Keith Road.

In his challenge, Ste. Marie asked that state officials determine whether it is acceptable "for a county to offset municipal service costs to a proposed city by interjecting public finances in order to salvage an otherwise infeasible incorporation proposal."

Ste. Marie has declined recent interview requests.

Critics distrust Thompson's analysis, instead believing a 2006 report unaffiliated with Wildomar Incorporation Now that found a less favorable financial climate, resident Steve Beutz said in a May interview.

That also is the opinion of Martha Bridges, an outspoken resident who is critical of WIN's leaders.

She also declined to be interviewed, but in an e-mail, wrote: "My overriding concerns are that the budget and revenue projections in the revised (financial analysis) … are inaccurate and strongly biased in support of incorporation. I believe they are, at best, overly optimistic and do not accurately reflect either the actual costs (to run a city) or the tax revenue that would be available to support the new city."

Efforts could be moot

But Bridges' and other critics' concerns may be rendered moot.

In its response to Ste. Marie's challenge, the state controller's office determined that it is acceptable for a county to commit money to help a proposed city become financially viable. Some county leaders have championed the incorporations of Wildomar and Menifee Valley to the east.

County leaders, including Supervisor Bob Buster, support WIN's desire to have local control of their fate - especially as Wildomar transitions from its rural past to the more suburban lifestyle common in Southwest County.

One premise of Ste. Marie's argument was upheld by the state: that it's inappropriate for a financial analysis to base a city's viability "upon unsecured, speculative revenues."

That also was the opinion of George Spiliotis, the executive director of the county Local Agency Formation Commission, which is scheduled to consider the Wildomar cityhood bid Thursday in Riverside. Spiliotis has said he couldn't recommend that a community incorporate on undetermined funding from the county.

But that, too, has been addressed to WIN's benefit. Spiliotis last week recommended that the commission approve the incorporation bid, which would be placed before voters on the February ballot pending the formal OK by the county Board of Supervisors.

Support for incorporation

Earlier this month, the supervisors unanimously agreed to return the county's annual savings of $238,000 to $310,000 - as projected by Thompson - to a city of Wildomar in each if its first 10 years of operation if those funds are needed to maintain financial solvency. That may not negate the board's earlier pledge to have county officials negotiate a cost-sharing agreement for the proposed new fire station, which would be the community's second. So, Wildomar could have a windfall of dollars, both from sales tax and from the county, to ensure solvency - in its first decade, anyway.

That decision, Ade said, should end all questions about the financial viability of Wildomar as a city.

That hasn't happened, however.

Critics contend incorporating denotes an ability to take care of itself. Wildomar probably couldn't do so if the county Fire Department mandates that a second fire station be built in the 22-square-mile community.

So it appears under any circumstance, a city of Wildomar wouldn't have complete financial independence for at least a couple of years.

Other critics have noted, mostly under aliases on blogs, that Thompson's report doesn't provide for the expansion or improvement in community services - which actually is a primary reason proponents have cited for wanting to incorporate: local control over services.

Although critics have been mostly silent, that could change soon, especially considering the Board of Supervisors recent decisions that boost WIN's bid.

"Many people opposed to cityhood have assumed that LAFCO would do their due diligence and find incorporation financially infeasible, thus making it unnecessary for them to speak out and risk the wrath of the WIN supporters," Briggs wrote in an e-mail. "Some are beginning to worry that assumption may be wrong and are beginning to speak up."

- Contact staff writer Brian Eckhouse at (951) 676-4315, Ext. 2626, or beckhouse@californian.com.