County appeals Wildomar land ruling
By: AARON CLAVERIE - Staff Writer
Appellate court stopped county from selling land to Mt. San Jacinto College | ∞
WILDOMAR -- The state Supreme Court has been asked to weigh in on a controversial proposal to build a college campus on land here that was tabbed for a regional park.
Riverside County, spurred by the Northern California counties of Marin and Napa, filed the petition with the court last week. The county is hoping the court overturns a recent appellate court ruling that upheld a 2006 Superior Court ruling.
The judge who issued the 2006 ruling determined that the county, which was trying to sell the land to the college district, needs voter or legislative approval before changing the property's zoning.
Mt. San Jacinto College wanted the land -- 40 acres north of Clinton Keith Road in southwest Wildomar -- to build a campus for 15,000 students, district officials have said.
The land, and 120 neighboring acres that has been declared protected habitat for endangered species, was purchased in 1994 by the county's Parks and Open Space District with the idea that it would become a regional park serving Murrieta, Lake Elsinore and Wildomar, said Riverside County Supervisor Bob Buster.
When Wildomar residents voted in 1999 to dissolve a local parks maintenance district, Buster started talking with the college district about selling the land to the district for a campus.
"They (Wildomar voters) changed the rules on us," he said.
The Northern California counties, Buster said, have offered to help pay for the Supreme Court review because the appellate court ruling could limit the ability of parks districts throughout the state to sell what he called "excess" parcels of parks land.
Earlier this month, the county Board of Supervisors unanimously voted to petition the Supreme Court and the petition was filed on Dec. 21, records show.
Some residents near the proposed site of the campus, open space in southeast Wildomar north of Clinton Keith, argued against the sale to the college, citing adverse traffic and environmental impacts. Many of those same residents preferred converting the land into a regional park, the original plan when the county's Regional Park and Open Space District bought the land, and a neighboring 80 acres, in 1994.
Some Wildomar residents have spoken in favor of the college's expansion plans, saying it would boost the area's quality of life.
Buster said that if the Supreme Court does not decide to hear the case, the county will attempt to have a bill passed in the state Legislature that would allow it to sell the land to the college.
He opposes putting it to a vote for cost reasons, saying it doesn't make sense for the county to pay to sell its message to voters in Blythe.
Wildomar resident Gerard Ste. Marie, who lives near the proposed campus site, sued the county in 2002 to stop the sale, which would have netted the county about $4.8 million at the time.
He wasn't surprised to hear that putting the matter to a vote isn't in the county's immediate plans.
"They don't want the voters in this area to decide it. They want politicians in places other than Riverside County to make the decision," Ste. Marie said Thursday.
The president of Mt. San Jacinto College's Board of Trustees, Joan Sparkman of Temecula, said the district is still interested in buying the land.
"I just don't know what century that might happen in," she said.
The land is a great location for the growing district, she said, because it's located near Interstate 15 and accessible to residents living in the western parts of the district.
"We're excited about getting the property because it's difficult to find such a large piece," she said.
Talking about the lawsuit and the potential for a drawn out appeal process, Sparkman said, "One person can stop a whole lot of things from happening."
Wildomar retiree Joe McCabe, a member of the county's Municipal Advisory Council, lives about a mile away from where the park was supposed to be built.
He said most of his neighbors preferred the park plan, even though it wasn't going to have amenities such as playgrounds or ballfields, because they were concerned about increased traffic, college students parking on residential streets and other such hassles.
"What are you going to put there, a business park, homes, a college or a park? Most people prefer a park," he said.
In an attempt to appease the residents, McCabe said the college proposed letting the community use the campus' sports fields when the school wasn't using them.
That wasn't much of a selling point though, he said, because residents figured access would be limited by practices that would run late into the evening and weekend games.
Contact staff writer Aaron Claverie at (951) 676-4315, Ext. 2624, or aclaverie@californian.com.
More Stories
Advertisement
Initiative-vote on it ! wrote on Dec 28, 2007 6:44 AM:Why hasn't anyone floated an initiative to stop the present process of the county just selling land planned for a park ? Why not give the right to the voters of Riverside County ? As far as costs are concerned, an initiative started NOW, given 6 months for qualification, would be on the presidential ballot of 2008, and I do not think there would be any significant costs involved with it. Get it on the ballot. This must be equally as important that which indian tribe gets to have more gambling !
Regional Park Shmark wrote on Dec 28, 2007 8:33 AM:As a community, we would get more use out of the college. Rolling hills, we're not the Sound of Music. There's no such thing as open space, get use to it! Of course I would have loved the land near my home to become nothing but it's not a reality and your desire to have nothing built next to your tract of houses is ridiculous. Progress, upward and onward towards higher education locally...woo hoo!
Concerned-1 wrote on Dec 28, 2007 9:24 AM:Here's an idea: Stop Sprawling! There are plenty of existing buildings/space within the already developed areas of SW County where a campus could be located. Stop building stupid retail and start building smart. Geeze!
Roberto1 wrote on Dec 28, 2007 9:49 AM:I guess they figured a negative mitigated declaration would do the trick...or EIR, in either case open space should only be replaced with more open space IMHO.
Land Barons wrote on Dec 28, 2007 12:24 PM:What's the point of having a General Plan if you're just going to chuck it to serve the interests of your political backers? The county should focus on enforcing existing rules and stop making them up as they go along.
Rebecca wrote on Dec 28, 2007 12:42 PM:Sounds like it would be an ideal site for an institute for ecological study. Would the University of California be interested in it for that reason?
Agreeing with Rebecca wrote on Dec 28, 2007 9:22 PM:Great, diversified idea for our County!
Way to think!!! Hope this is considered!
First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.
Today's Stories
Advertisement


