Wednesday, January 15, 2014

• Three News Nuggets

First, Wildomar is being sued again. Let's throw a party... the drinks are on us!

A group calling themselves,  brace yourself for high some level comedy , Alliance for Intelligent Planning. I don't know if they call themselves AFIP (which sounds like Aphid, and we all know how helpful those little pests are) or if they leave out the "f" from "for" and go with AIP which sounds like APE to me. 

I just call them the 3 CEQA'migos, since the only thing that seems to come out of their mouths is the word CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act). It came about in 1970, and was very much needed at the time. Since then however, as would have been predictable, it's been abused... and because of the glut of lawyers in Sacramento, it's next to impossible to get this thing the reform it and we so desperately need.

Read more about CEQA by clicking here.

News Nugget Numero Dos
I just got a press release from the city, and we got our Housing Element approved and now we won't have the threat of the State coming in and dishing out penalties for failure to comply. 
Oh, but don't breath too easily... this is one of those "3 CEQA'migos" moments and they are suing us because of the Housing Element. That's right, they are suing us, the tax payers, because our elected representatives complied with the law. As annoying as they are, their little squeak is far easier to take than what the state would dish out for non compliance.

Li'l Willy Mar (Wildomar in human form) would get pounded by the state if we tried to jerk with them.
As distasteful as it is, we can endure the gadflies. Eventually they'll tucker out and be gone.
I'd be laughing too if it wasn't costing us money to defend it. 


Three of Three
Next week is a special Parks Subcommittee meeting. On the agenda is whether or not the fence at Windsong Park should stay up or not. If you like this fence, and think it's a good idea to keep it up let your committee members know it. If you think it is an unattractive eyesore, that detracts from the community, and would like it to come down... as it was never there while the park was opened before, then  you need to email the committee and tell them that.

To refresh you memory, this is the fence in question. Any new fence will cost a lot of money, and need regular maintenance. Plus someone will have to open and close it every night. An expense we can do without.
I am against this fence, or any other fence going up there, and I'll be attending the Parks Subcommittee meeting next week [6:30 pm Tuesday, 1-21-2014]. Remember, actions speak louder than words (though an email is nearly as good) check the email links below to get your voice heard.
Just a reminder what the park looked like when it was opened and without a fence.



  1. Hi Joseph, I love that picture with no fence. Curious where you got that. As far as whether we should have a fence or not, I personally am neutral. One thought came to mind, maybe open the park without the fence, and if there are no problems, keep it that way. If the park has troublemakers and nuisance individuals, it might be good to put it back. Just a thought...

    - Kevin Sax

    1. Hi Kevin,
      I agree that if nothing else, the fence should come down for a year, and if it turns out to be a necessity, put up a new one at that point. Something that wouldn't detract from the area.

    2. That seems reasonable.

      -Kevin Sax

  2. I think if they do that they need to set some parameters as i think one neighbor calls on ANY transgression even if minor and non-property or life threatening. Sheila.

  3. I don't know how any resident, on any issue, thinks they can call the police over and over and still be considered credible. If there is a true nuisance, then many people in the affected area would call in.


Let's hear what you have to say... for other inquiries try the email listed under "view my complete profile" but if you want to discuss a blog topic, I'll only do it in this comment section, not by email.

Subscribe by Email