On Feb. 28, Publisher Jack Mitchell interviewed Allen Warren, president of New Faze, the Sacramento company that wants to build the Jackson Hills golf course community. In that interview, which could best be described as a hard sell tactic, several statements were made that were misleading or untrue.
Mr. Warren makes it sound like the citizens who oppose his project are proponents of "no growth." This is not true. The citizens who oppose Jackson Hills do so because it is poorly designed and it will hurt the city financially. Jackson Hills will cause nightmare traffic, yet New Faze has not offered sufficient mitigation. The golf course will require potable water. Jackson Hills will cause more wastewater problems than it solves, and the cost of solving these problems will be borne by Jackson's current residents, not the developer. The citizens who oppose Jackson Hills are those who care about what happens to Jackson and the taxpayers in this community. Mr. Warren's only concern is making a profit.
Mr. Warren talks about how the property is already within the city limits. Not true. More than half of the property will need to be annexed from the county. Mr. Warren says that the property is appropriately zoned for Jackson Hills. Not true. Jackson Hills will require rezoning because the land within the city limits is zoned for one dwelling per acre and the land in the county is zoned for one dwelling per 40 acres. This is described in Chapter 6 of the Jackson Hills Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) as Alternative 2. Amador Citizens for Smart Growth has publically recommended that the property in question be developed as currently zoned. New Faze claimed this option was unacceptable to them.
As for the oak trees, Mr. Warren claims only 10 to 15 percent will be removed and they will be replaced at a 3 to 1 ratio. Not true. Impact 4.9.2 in the DEIR states that 357 trees will be removed in Phase I. The DEIR then goes on to describe that trees to be removed in Phase II have not yet been identified. And the mitigation for oak removal is described as replacement of trees greater than 16 inches at the 3 to 1 ratio. If the tree is 15 inches or smaller, then it will only be replaced at a 1 to1 ratio, which is hardly a recipe for success.
Mr. Warren claims that the people who will live in Jackson Hills will be retirees and pre-retirees, and so the impact on traffic and schools will be minimal. How does Mr. Warren know this? Will the contracts limit sales of these homes to people who are retired and have no children? Are we to believe that people who are retired and live in golf course communities don't drive often? Appropriate planning requires that the expected demographics of Jackson Hills be based on Jackson's current population. That would mean that of the additional 1,150 residents that would live in Jackson, 163 would be students and 564 would work outside the home. It would be irresponsible to plan for anything less than this.
Mr. Warren discusses the financial benefit of Jackson Hills, however, the DEIR's fiscal impact report assumes that the required additional firemen will be volunteer and ignores the annual maintenance costs of the wastewater treatment plant that will be necessary due to Jackson Hills. The economic impact of Jackson Hills will be negative and Jackson's current taxpayers will have to pick up the slack.
It was interesting that Mr. Warren used Elk Grove as an example of government layoffs. In that community, which was allowed to grow without appropriate controls and oversight, the developer abandoned the community and left bills to be paid by the homeowners and taxpayers (Feb. 5 Sacramento Bee, "Lien Times hit Elk Grove: Lawsuits jolt new subdivision's residents"). One-time-only developer fees will not cover the costs of establishing necessary infrastructure and do nothing for annual maintenance costs. The best way to protect Jackson and Amador County from experiencing the same economic problems that Elk Grove and Vallejo are experiencing is to grow using the principles of smart growth.