Board approves exchange of property-tax increment to allow El Dorado Senior Village annexation, 3-2

The El Dorado County Board of Supervisors voted 3-2 on Tuesday to authorize an exchange of property-tax increment to support the annexation of two parcels into the El Dorado Irrigation District (EID) service area, clearing a technical step for the El Dorado Senior Village affordable senior housing project.

What the vote covered The vote did not approve or deny the housing development itself — it authorized a county resolution setting how future property-tax increment would be allocated if the parcels are annexed into a service-providing district, consistent with the county's past practice. "This is generally a fairly routine process," CAO staff said in explaining the purpose of the action. The allocation recommended in staff materials would give EID a fraction of the incremental property tax (2.6667 percent of the increment), with small proportional reductions to other local funds.

Why it mattered to speakers - EID asked the board to adopt the staff-recommended exchange, noting water and wastewater service are essential public services and that a small portion of future increment helps offset fixed capital and operating costs. "Property taxes are intended to help fund essential public services. There is hardly a government service more essential than the provision of water and wastewater service," Brian Paulson, general counsel for EID, told the board. - Supporters of the project, including Housing Eldorado and the developer, said the site is identified in the county's housing element for affordable senior housing and that final construction financing is contingent on access to water and sewer. The developer's attorney said removing the parcels from the housing inventory would increase the county's exposure under state housing law and that the parcels are needed to demonstrate available water and sewer for sites in the county's housing inventory. - Opponents — residents near the proposed project — raised traffic, infrastructure and safety concerns. Lisa Stewart, a resident who said she shared a fence with the site, asked the board to "reject the proposed annexation" and to delay action until a full impact assessment is completed.

Tax-exempt status concern County staff flagged a complicating issue: low-income housing projects can be eligible for the welfare property-tax exemption, a state property-tax exclusion that syndicators or nonprofit owners sometimes apply for once construction is complete and the developer pulls building permits. "We have some indications that it could be," CAO staff said; the exemption would remove most or all taxable value from property taxes and could leave other districts with less revenue than the incremental split would suggest. Staff said the exemption is applied for annually and is typically requested after the developer pulls building permits.

Board decision and vote After the public hearing and discussion, the Board approved staff's recommended allocation. The motion carried 3-2; the transcript records Supervisors Trumbo and Parlin voting no. The board majority said the incremental split is small, that access to water and sewer is a precondition for construction financing, and that refusal to approve the exchange could jeopardize a project the county has identified to meet part of its housing obligations.

Ending The choice authorizes a technical tax-increment allocation to EID consistent with past practice; staff noted the project's final tax status will depend on whether the owner later qualifies for a welfare exemption. Opponents cited traffic and location concerns and urged delay until a fuller local impact assessment is completed.