It is always a good thing to have the other view.
Another View: Transparency needed in Placer development
By Robert M. Weygandt and F.C. "Rocky" Rockholm - Special to The Bee
Published 12:00 am PST Sunday, December 16, 2007
The Bee made some valid points about Roseville's vote to consider annexing Placer Ranch but mistakenly portrayed the county as a bad guy. Nothing could be further from the truth. The editorial missed two critical issues that are important for the public to understand.
First, Placer Ranch would need a substantial annual subsidy whether it is developed in unincorporated Placer County or the city of Roseville. A subsidy is needed because the project would feature a campus of California State University, Sacramento, planned to accommodate 25,000 students.
It is important to understand, though, the university and its students would need law enforcement and other services. But the university would not generate enough revenue to offset the costs because public universities do not pay property taxes, the main revenue source for cities and counties.
We believe strongly the public should be aware of the issue because Placer County residents have a direct stake in how the subsidy is handled.
The Roseville City Council did not address the issue before deciding to proceed, and city staff overlooked it by eliminating the university from its initial fiscal analysis.
