About Our Ads | Privacy

Login or Signup

Facebook user?
You can use your Facebook account to log in.

Login | Register | Subscriber Services | Contact Us

HomeNewsLocal News / TEMECULA: Landowner may challenge city's annexation attempt

He said he's concerned about city's plans to change use of land

TEMECULA: Landowner may challenge city's annexation attempt

TEMECULA: Landowner may challenge city's annexation attempt
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Related Stories

If the county's boundary-setting commission eventually reconsiders Temecula's application to annex 4,500 acres of land on its southwestern borders, it won't be because of anything done by Phil Williams.

The commission member, a director on the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District, withdrew his request Thursday to have an $875 fee waived that would have allowed him to request a reconsideration of the approval of Temecula's annexation bid without any out-of-pocket expense.

But Williams' action might be moot because Nelson Mamey, a landowner with holdings near the acreage eyed by the city, plans to file a reconsideration request early next week.

"He wrote a check out today," said George Spiliotis, the Local Agency Formation Commission's executive director.

The commission voted 6-0 on June 24 to approve Temecula's application to annex the land, a swath dominated by the Santa Margarita Ecological Reserve, a research field station managed by San Diego State University.

If the reconsideration request is filed, Spiliotis said the commission would reconsider the annexation vote at a public hearing that likely would be held in September.

That hearing could be another interesting public meeting in what has turned into an ongoing series of showdowns in Riverside pitting the city of Temecula against the commission's board, a seven-member body that does not include a representative from Temecula. Last year, the commission voted to reject the city's bid to annex 5,000 acres of land that included the site pegged for a controversial quarry.

Williams has said the city of Temecula misrepresented its true intentions for the territory it applied to annex. He based his claim on a video recording of last week's City Council meeting, which featured a discussion by the council members on future plans for the annexed land.

Meanwhile, the city of Temecula has its own list of grievances with the commission, and city officials have said there are legal questions regarding a condition attached to the commission's approval that required the city to remove 169 acres from its sphere of influence.

That adjustment, requested by the commission before it would approve the annexation, was an alteration that had been lobbied for by Granite Construction, the Northern California-based company working to dig a quarry near the southeastern edge of the land the city is looking to annex.

Granite owns or has an option to buy land within the 169 acres that the city was asked to remove from its sphere, a designation that identifies land a city might annex in the future.

Williams withdrew his request for a fee waiver on Thursday morning before the item could be voted on by the commission during its regular meeting in Riverside.

"There were some issues that were raised that would take time to research and time is of the essence," Williams said during a telephone interview.

"The city had raised some questions on the issue regarding whether a public official getting a waiver of a fee was appropriate. To have an attorney research whether or not this one ruling from 27 years ago would or would not apply would be wasting taxpayers' tax dollars. Why would I want to do that?" Williams said.

Anyone looking to request a reconsideration of the commission's decision has until Monday to file that paperwork, and Mamey, according to Spiliotis, plans to meet that deadline.

Mamey has expressed concerns previously with the city's move to annex the reserve land, and he sent the city a letter months ago saying developing the reserve into a "park" would diminish the value of his land due to increased traffic and other types of related issues.

In response to his letter, a city planning official said, "There are no plans for a park."

Mamey said in a letter to the commission dated Tuesday that, "contrary to testimony provided by city of Temecula representatives," the city is clearly planning on changing the use of the annexation area to trails, camping and more public use. As way of evidence, Mamey cites comments made by Temecula council members during last week's meeting.

Call staff writer Aaron Claverie at 951-676-4315, ext. 2624.

Copyright 2012 North County Times. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Print Email

Sponsored Links

About Temecula

City Hall
41000 Main Street, Temecula CA 92590; 951-694-6444; 888-836-3285

Temecula Police Department
Main Station - 30755-A Auld Road, Murrieta, CA 92563; Office: 951-696-3000 Office; Non-Emergency Calls - 24 hours: 800-950-2444; Temecula Residents: 951-696-HELP (4357)

Public Works
951-694-6411

Graffiti Hotline
951-240-4201

Temecula Fire Department
Fire stations: 28830 Mercedes St., 951-676-2161; 27415 Enterprise Circle West, 951-699-4517; 30650 Pauba Road, 951-693-0683; 32211 Wolf Valley Road, 951-302-1497

Click here for more listings of Temecula community groups, services and resources.

Connect with Us


In the Newsroom

The Californian Editor: Lauri Lockwood 951-676-4315, ext. 2622, lockwood@californian.com

Temecula Reporter: Aaron Claverie 951-676-4315, ext. 2624, aclaverie@californian.com

Community News: 760-839-3300 commnews@nctimes.com


Advertising

Fallbrook & Southwest Riverside Retail Manager: Nancy Carroll
951-676-4315 ext. 2659, ncarroll@nctimes.com


Get-It Offers

Featured Businesses

Hint: Enter a keyword that you are looking for like tires, pizza or doctors or browse the full business directory, powered by Local.com