📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report
This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.
El Dorado County Grand Jury
• 2009-2010
El Dorado County Grand Jury 2009-2010 Municipal Incorporation Processes and the Allocation of Costs
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 2 findings
F1
Page 7
It is recommended that LAFCO reconsider its present governing philosophy and policy regarding cost sharing among the major stakeholders in an incorporation process. A more balanced approach is recommended that recognizes required studies benefit many groups and governmental entities and are not the exclusive domain of local incorporation groups.
F2
Page 7
LAFCO, especially in light of revenue neutrality requirements in State law, should consider the possibility of greater retroactive cost sharing in the event that required studies demonstrate that a local community would indeed be financially feasible or succeed in incorporating. RESPONSES Responses to findings and numbered recommendations in this report are required in accordance with California Penal Code §933 and §933.05. Responses should be addressed to: The Honorable Suzanne N. Kingsbury, Presiding Judge of the El Dorado County Superior Court, 1354 Johnson Blvd., South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150.
Recommendations 2
-
R1It is recommended that LAFCO reconsider its present governing philosophy and policy regarding cost sharing among the major stakeholders in an incorporation process. A more balanced approach is recommended that recognizes required studies benefit many groups and governmental entities and are not the exclusive domain of local incorporation groups.
-
R2LAFCO, especially in light of revenue neutrality requirements in State law, should consider the possibility of greater retroactive cost sharing in the event that required studies demonstrate that a local community would indeed be financially feasible or succeed in incorporating. RESPONSES Responses to findings and numbered recommendations in this report are required in accordance with California Penal Code §933 and §933.05. Responses should be addressed to: The Honorable Suzanne N. Kingsbury, Presiding Judge of the El Dorado County Superior Court, 1354 Johnson Blvd., South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150.