*If you buy one of those new homes off of Palomar in the Avalino development.
Measure T is asking for $28 per $100k of assessed value.
My wife and I purchased our home in 2001 for $194k (that was blindingly high for the times), but I took a peek at our tax bill and its assessed value is closer to $280k today.
These are my most recent property taxes. I can only imagine how much higher the taxes a newer home, sold recently must be... and that's not factoring in the crazy new insurance rates or HOA fees.
Though I voted against Measure V, and will be voting against Measure T (knowing full well that my fellow residents love raising their own taxes every chance they get), I'm already prepared to shell out another $76.69 per year.
A lot of money is going into this campaign. Don't worry Pro-Measure T peeps, Californians love higher taxes, and with the paltry 55% threshold to get over, it's a lead pipe cinch.
In preparation for this blog, I went and read my opinions the last time LEUSD asked for $100,000,000 from the property taxpayers (2016), and my opinions really haven't changed on the subject.
There were a couple of images I created for that blog that I'll reuse here since they are still applicable and make the point.
If you vote against school bonds, you're a big meanie! (It's always with the heartstrings to get into your wallet)
At the time of the 2016 Measure V vote, LEUSD had no bonds. I like the members of the school board, but back then there was a quote in the Press Enterprise where a member of the board said something like this, “We’re one of the few school districts in the whole county that doesn’t have a school bond.”
Which inspired me to create the following graphic, now known as a meme.
Sometimes it's just fine to not try and keep up with the Joneses.
In fact, they're sort of using that same card again by trying to shame us since we're currently paying the lowest school bond payments in the sampled region.
Do what the old Washington Senators fans used to do when reading the standings... turn it upside down and you'll see that we are actually doing better than all the others listed.
If it does pass, you're supposed to be pleased that we aren't Hemet based on my editing of the above graph to show what the new figures will become.
Maybe all these NEW taxes are something that you welcome. I just wasn't raised that way.
Below I'll add the flyers from the Yes on T group, then follow it up with one more opinion (scout's honor).
There is something about qualifying for matching grants if this is passed. Just another way the state jerks around with the voters. Giving us "damned if you do, damned if you don't" options at every turn.
Lucky me, the average will be paying $104 per year, and I'll be under $80. Being below average never felt so good. Until you factor in Measure 2016's Measure V that is.
Wildomar Rap opinion time
Let me start off by saying that I was raised in a middle class family... oh wait, that's someone else's tagline.
I've long since adjusted to the 2016 $105,000,000 bond passed in 2016.
It's a 30 year bond, but less than eight years into that bond they are coming back for nearly double that asking for another $198,000,000.
It's VERY fair to ask, so when will LEUSD be coming around with their hand out again?
WHEN?
How many different bonds are they willing to ask homeowners to shoulder?
That's not even taking into account current demographics that are saying growth in California, even the IE, is no longer a thing. Below is a link to the recent SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments) Demographics Workshop that I attended.
It's all interesting, but it's also nearly four hours long. This video is cued up to the keynote address (about half an hour) where the expert discusses the future of SoCal.
I did talk with one of the LEUSD higher-ups at the Wildomar State of the City event 10 days ago. I told him I was going to give my opinions on Measure T. We all have opinions, and this is what mine looks like.
Vote your conscience, don't be swayed by emotionalism... even from friends in high places.
There are about 37,000 people who call Wildomar home. Of that number, as of May 2024, there were 22,160 registered voters, but only, roughly, a fifth of that will be getting ballots with a city council race on it.
That is what happens when there are district-based elections in a small city instead of at-large.
District 2 had no one compete against incumbent Dustin Nigg. So he was appointed without needing to campaign for votes, whereas incumbent Bridgette Moore has two challengers.
Such a disservice to the voters and the candidates as well, that we, along with hundreds of other cities in California, were forced to go away from at-large city council elections due to money-grubbing lawsuits falsely waving the race card around.
But that's its own long story... buy me a coffee and I'll go on about it for at least half an hour... maybe even two half hours. lol
Who are the three people on the ballot?
The first two photos were supplied by the candidates, and the last one was the best current photo I could find online.
How did I come to know them?
I met Bridgette back in 2013 when I was picking up litter near the old Brown house, where the new Kaiser medical office building is today. That chance meeting predated Wildomar Rap by about two months.
She was concerned that we might be trespassing. It was one of those 109 degree August days, but there she was, looking after the city. I asked her what was slated for the field across the street.
There was nothing at that time, but she asked if I'd like to set up a meeting with the city manager and her to talk about things in Wildomar. I politely declined.
Ah, the memories... who misses that old place?
The correct answer is, NOBODY!
Veronica had been a member of the Planning Commission for a couple of years when I first started to attend city meetings in late 2013. That's where I first came to know her.
Let me add to the lore of how Wildomar Rap came about.
Here's something that occurred at one of the first planning commission meetings I ever attended.
This is how I remember it.
A former city councilwoman became a gadfly after she lost in 2010. She would always pal around with a poison pen blogger of that era and they would go to as many city meetings as they had time for. After which he'd do a quick write-up cutting down the fledgling city, the council members, and city staffers.
Mind you, the old council chamber was quite cozy compared to today, and the audience was all of about five feet away from the dais. The public speakers would tower over the council members or planning commissioners.
From left to right are Veronica Langworthy, Stan Smith, Bobby Swann, Dan Bidwell, Dan York, and behind the microphone is "longtime resident out at the farm" George Taylor.
In the September 2013 planning commission meeting the former council member was essentially heckling the commission members from just about the same spot that this photo was taken.
After several minutes of it, Veronica had run out of patience with Chair Stan Smith who was allowing the chatter to continue on unabated, and she told them to cut it out. I loved it. Good job, Veronica.
The next day there was a complete lie posted about what had transpired by that blogger. Somehow it was a topic at The Patch since the writer never allowed comments on his blogs, and that's where I straightened out the narrative... two weeks later Wildomar Rap was born.
I met Karen about a month ago at Montague Brothers and we had a nice chat for more than half an hour before we got into the blog interview, but that's the extent of my dealings with her.
It's fair to say that I would have tired of Wildomar Rap before the first year had gone by had it not been for Bridgette's unanticipated promotion of the blog.
I wasn't sure why she'd refer to Wildomar Rap during city council meetings, but I have to admit that it was fun to hear. Also, the previous local blogger was needlessly harsh and was only trying to cause problems for his own amusement.
Since I was down the middle, and not a hater, that was obviously a welcomed relief for the city council and they embraced me.
By 2015, Bridgette and my wife Grace became very good friends, and that lasted until my wife got ill enough to get medically retired at the age of 50 in early 2018. It's not that the friendship ended, it's that my wife couldn't leave the house so it withered.
Though we were friends, she didn't publically endorse me when I ran for city council in 2018, and I understood the reasons why.
Bridgette and I started Wildomar Beautification Volunteers back in the Summer of 2020. She and I have worked well together and have remained friends despite disagreeing on many items that have come before the city council.
There I am in the upper left-hand corner, George Cambero, Bridgette Moore and Grace Morabito at a Susan G. Komen event at the Lake Elsinore Levee in 2016.
Regarding Veronica, I was literally at every planning commission meeting from September 2013 on, and so was she.
I always liked her approach, and that she took her position seriously... even if there were occasions when she tried to uncork a few one-liners that might have gone sideways (as you'll see in the video).
I thought highly enough of her to ask if she'd like to be part of my 2017 Thanksgiving blog, and she was happy to participate.
This appeared in the Wildomar Rap 2017 Thanksgiving blog.
When I was elected in 2018 I had the option to retain her for the planning commission (as her term was expiring) but after a couple of meetings, we couldn't get to the place where I'd ask her to stay on.
On to Karen, I've only had the one conversation with her, but I left with a very high opinion of her.
How do I assess them as potential Wildomar City Council Members?
I'll start with Karen.
She's a nice and amiable person. One that I believe has the requisite tools to do a good job on the city council if she were to be elected.
This January she'll mark the third year that she's called Wildomar home. I have seen her at several city council meetings over the Summer, and she told me that she's watched many more online.
So far she's not opted to speak on any items at city council or use the three minutes of public comment time to introduce herself to the current council, staff, and community.
Jumping over to Veronica, she's a longtime resident and has been involved in the city longer than I have been. She's proven that she cares deeply for the community.
If there was suddenly an opening on the city council from District 4, and she were to apply for an appointment, I know that she'd do a good job, she has a good working knowledge of Wildomar; both historically speaking and how it's currently going.
Now let me shine the light on Bridgette.
Like her two challengers, she's also a nice person. We can check that box for all of them.
She's owned a home and lived in Wildomar for more than 25 years. She's been active in the community, to a nearly unbelievable level that whole time.
Her dedication to Wildomar, and to the region, is well noted by people all throughout Western Riverside County.
Just a couple of days ago I was attending an RTA meeting as an alternate for Bridgette and CEO Kristin Warsinski used part of her report to the Board of Directors to acknowledge some unplanned community involvement that Bridgette jumped into (see video for details).
Though I believe that Veronica and Karen are both equipped to do a good job, Bridgette is already doing a good job.
In all honesty, the very best that either Karen or Veronica could hope to do is approximate the job that Bridgette is currently doing and has been doing since she was first elected in 2008.
I can hear many of you saying, "What about term limits, Joseph?"
That tends to make more sense when it's a partisan position.
Let me share a quote from 2014 winning candidate Tim Walker on the topic of term limits (originally found in the September 2014 "Better Know A Candidate" blog featuring him).
I share the same opinion as above.
One of Karen's slogans is "Time for change in District 4."
Can I ask you a serious question?
What does that mean in the real world?
What kind of "change" does she think is needed in Wildomar, or that she could bring about?
Change from Bridgette Moore's impeccable record?
She's missed one city council meeting since I've been watching starting in 2013, and that was due to a family emergency.
In reality, she puts in so much time that it makes the rest of the council look like we're standing still... and the suggestion is to "change" that.
Really, why?
As I said earlier, the best that either Veronica or Karen could possibly hope to come close to is approaching her high water mark of preparation for city council meetings, community involvement, public engagement, and willing spirit that has been working for the betterment of Wildomar's residents for longer than most of us can remember.
I don't fault either Karen or Veronica, they simply have the bad luck of being in the same district as a Hall of Famer named Bridgette Moore.
"Oh Joseph, calm down with your fanboy review of Bridgette already!"
Let me put it this way... for those who think "it's time for a change in District 4".
When you find a good auto mechanic, do you go to the term limits card and say, "Well, ya know, Beau has done an incredible job taking care of my car for the last 15 years, but on the other hand, Jethro is new to the area and has a lot of pretty signs out there, so, it's time for me to change my mechanic... or hairdresser, or house cleaner."
C'mon Gramps, don't change yet, remember he's the guy who always takes your calls and answers your emails about random questions you could have easily found yourself by googling in the first place.
If you think the job of the city council isn't much more than a ceremonial position, and that experience has little bearing on how a person is able to get things accomplished when dealing with a professional staff and all the egos one encounters, then that shows how disconnected you are. Sorry, I'm not going to sugarcoat it.
Experience actually matters and more than a decade's worth of a positive track record should be a significant factor to the voters.
If endorsements have any meaning, I'm endorsing Bridgette Moore for another term on the Wildomar City Council. Here's a look at her other endorsements while we're on that subject.
Though this is a District 4 election, the whole of Wildomar will be watching since it matters to all five districts who is on the council.
Still, if it turns out that voters decide it is indeed "time for a change in District 4" I have complete confidence that I'll be able to work well with either Karen or Veronica.
They are both quality people. Elections always break one way or the other and in the aftermath, it's up to the electeds to have short memories once the vote counting is done.
I've been doing"Better Know a Candidate"blogs since 2014 and this year there will be a total of three blogs for District 4.
In August I reached out to all three candidates and I heard back from all three. In the end, two sat for the interview (Karen Ellison and Bridgette Moore) while one candidate declined, Veronica Langworthy.
I do have a copy of her ballot statement, so I'll post that here where a softball Q&A would have gone.
I have thoughts, but this blog will not have opinions, that'll be in the next blog that discusses the race in District 4. Look for that in a week or two.
I have no recent photos of Veronica Langworthy, so I'll use this photo taken in front of Montegue Brothers Coffee.
Wildomar incorporated in 2008 to begin local control and to end the need to drive to Riverside County meetings to address city issues. Early local meetings were filled with people sharing dreams of keeping Wildomar family-friendly, re-opening parks. and addressing issues such as land use, police, fire and public safety.
I got involved and was appointed Planning Commissioner, serving for eight years.
Road maintenance is an ongoing concern today. Both private and public roads are in similar disrepair. The road maintenance budget is stretched, yet money is allocated for councilmember's health insurance, retirement, and other benefits.
The use of a "consent calendar" allows the council to vote on multiple agenda items without discussion. On April 10, 2024 the council approved thirteen items in one vote including their opposition to "The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act." This act would have amended the California Constitution to define all state and local levies, charges, and fees as taxes.
All state tax increases passed by two-thirds legislative vote would have an additional requirement to be passed by a majority of California voters. This hasty process benefits Governor Newsom rather than the citizens of Wildomar.
The state of California on Monday, Sept. 23,warned the city of Norwalkthat if it does not take steps to repeal a moratorium on emergency shelters and supportive housing by its next City Council meeting the state will revoke the city’s housing element compliance.
On Friday, Sept. 20, Norwalk asked for an extension of the Sept. 23 deadline set by the state to respond to a notice of violation sent by the California Department of Housing and Community Development over the city’s moratorium.
Last week, the Norwalk City Council unanimously voted to extend the moratorium until August 2025. The initial moratorium, passed last month, halts new development of the following uses: convenience stores, discount stores, laundromats, vehicle washing, payday loan establishments, emergency shelters, single-room occupancy, supportive housing and transitional housing.
The day before the council vote to extend the moratorium, Newsom and HCD announced a notice of violation had been sent to the city over the moratorium and demanded a response by Monday, Sept. 23.
HCD responded to the request for an extension on Monday in which it wrote that seven days was enough time for a response.
“However, HCD recognizes that the City may need time to identify the quickest path to resolving the issue,” the response read. “As such, HCD will monitor the October 1st City Council meeting and will expect your formal response the following day.”
Wildomar Rap opinion time
When I come across examples of California cities trying to stand up to the State machine (especially when it comes to housing and homeless issues) and the inevitable consequences they'll be facing, I like to share them with the residents of Wildomar.
It's one thing to suggest going full Rambo and "taking no prisoners" (or whatever the current phrase may be) but in practice, it costs municipalities a ton of money to remedy if they choose to go down such a primrose path.
One of my stated goals is to keep Wildomar out of the news for making pigheaded decisions that are sure to blow up in our faces.
The City Council, according to HCD, must either vote to repeal the moratorium on Oct. 1, and if necessary conduct a final vote on Oct. 15 or direct staff to prepare an ordinance to repeal the moratorium for consideration at a council meeting on or before Oct. 15.
“If the city chooses the latter option, HCD will revoke its finding of housing element compliance if the City Council does not vote to repeal the moratorium on or before October 15th and, if necessary, conduct a final adoption vote on or before November 5th,” the response read.
At a Thursday, Sept. 19, press conference announcing the signing of more than 30 bills related to housing and homelessness, Newsom mentioned Norwalk as an example of local jurisdictions not doing enough to address the crisis.
“Various consequences apply when a city does not have a housing element in compliance with Housing Element Law, including the immediate application of the ‘Builder’s Remedy’ and ineligibility or delay in receiving certain state funds,” the response read. “HCD may also refer the matter to the California Office of the Attorney General to seek court-imposed financial penalties and other remedies.”
Levy Sun, a spokesperson for the city, said in an email Monday afternoon that the city would continue to evaluate the HCD’s response.
Governor Newsom signed the full list of housing bills below
Preventing and Ending Homelessness
AB 3093 by Assemblymember Chris Ward — Land use: housing element
AB 799 by Assemblymember Luz Rivas — Interagency Council on Homelessness: funding: state programs
SB 7 by Senator Catherine Blakespear — Regional housing need: determination
SB 1395 by Senator Josh Becker — Shelter crisis: Low Barrier Navigation Center: use by right: building standards
Accountability
AB 1886 by Assemblymember David Alvarez — Housing Element Law: substantial compliance: Housing Accountability Act
AB 1893 by Assemblymember Buffy Wicks — Housing Accountability Act: housing disapprovals: required local findings
AB 2023 by Assemblymember Sharon Quirk-Silva — Housing Element: Inventory of Land: Substantial Compliance: Rebuttable Presumptions
SB 1037 by Senator Scott Wiener — Planning and zoning: housing element: enforcement
AB 1413 by Assemblymember Phil Ting — Housing Accountability Act: disapprovals: California Environmental Quality Act
AB 2667 by Assemblymember Miguel Santiago — Affirmatively furthering fair housing: housing element: reporting
SB 393 by Senator Steven M. Glazer — Civil actions: housing development projects
SB 450 by Senator Toni Atkins — Housing development: approvals
Housing Streamlining and Production
AB 2243 by Assemblymember Buffy Wicks — Housing development projects: objective standards: affordability and site criteria
AB 2488 by Assemblymember Phil Ting – Downtown revitalization and economic recovery financing districts: City and County of San Francisco
AB 2199 by Assemblymember Marc Berman — California Environmental Quality Act: exemption: residential or mixed-use housing projects
AB 2694 by Assemblymember Christopher M. Ward — Density Bonus Law: residential care facilities for the elderly
SB 312 by Senator Scott Wiener — California Environmental Quality Act: university housing development projects: exemption
SB 1123 by Senator Anna Caballero — Planning and zoning: subdivisions: ministerial review
SB 1211 by Senator Nancy Skinner — Land use: accessory dwelling units: ministerial approval
Transparency and Efficiency
AB 1053 by Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel — Housing programs: multifamily housing programs: expenditure of loan proceeds
AB 2117 by Assemblymember Joe Patterson — Development permit expirations: actions or proceedings.
AB 2430 by Assemblymember David Alvarez — Planning and zoning: density bonuses: monitoring fees
AB 2553 by Assemblymember Laura Friedman — Housing development: major transit stops: vehicular traffic impact fees
AB 2663 by Assemblymember Timothy S. Grayson — Inclusionary housing: fees: reports
AB 2926 by Assemblymember Ash Kalra — Planning and zoning: assisted housing developments: Notice of expiration of affordability restrictions
SB 937 by Senator Scott Wiener — Development projects: fees and charges
Housing Protections
AB 2801 by Assemblymember Laura Friedman — Tenancy: security deposits
AB 2747 by Assemblymember Matt Haney — Tenancy: credit reporting
SB 611 By Senator Caroline Menjivar — Residential rental properties: fees and security
SB 900 by Senator Tom Umberg — Common interest developments: repair and maintenance
Tribal Housing
AB 1878 by Assemblymember Eduardo Garcia — Housing programs: tribal housing program
SB 1187 by Senator pro tem Mike McGuire — Housing programs: Tribal Housing Reconstitution and Resiliency Act
Wildomar Rap opinion time
What we need most is an informed electorate.
Very often I run into people who think that common sense is what rules the day in politics, which is a flat out joke.
If someone would make a graph of housing costs and government interference (the road to Hell paved with good intentions and all) we'd see a direct correlation.
Above and below you'll see dozens of new laws added to the books with the desired intention of making housing more affordable for all, but we all know that there will be an inverse reaction that will see affordability issues compound to the negative over time.
Remember, elections have consequences. Yet, I don't see the voters of California wising up and changing out the one-party rule that has systematically made this state ever-increasingly too expensive for most people.
Look on the bright side of things, next year there are sure to be dozens more similar bills looking to remove local control and push their one-size-fits-all agenda onto those of us who still live here that Governor Newsom is sure to sign.
AB 3093 (Ward) — Makes changes to the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) process, including requiring local governments to account for people with extremely low incomes and those experiencing homelessness in their housing elements.
AB 1893 (Wicks) — Modifies/clarifies the Builder's Remedy law under the Housing Accountability Act. New Builder's Remedy projects must comply with certain site restrictions, density limits, and other standards. However, builder’s remedy projects will also have a lower percentage of affordable housing required.
AB 2488 (Ting) — Allows San Francisco to establish a downtown revitalization and economic recovery financing district.
AB 2667 (Santiago) — Requires local governments to use a new standardized reporting format for the 7th and each subsequent revision of the housing element.
SB 450 (Atkins) — Makes changes to California’s upzoning law, SB 9. Local governments will be required to approve or deny an application for a new SB 9 unit or lot split within 60 days and provide homeowners with a reason and remedy if their application is denied. It also mandates consistency in local objective zoning, subdivision, and design standards to ease the burden on applicants.
SB 1037 (Wiener) — Strengthens the Attorney General’s ability to seek civil penalties against cities that violate state housing laws.
SB 1395 (Becker) — Makes it easier for local governments to use tiny homes as shelter for the unhoused.
For a full list of the enacted housing legislation, click here.
On Thursday, the Governor also announced new guidelines for the HomeKey+ program, which will provide up to $2.2 billion in funding for permanent supportive housing.
At the signing, Newsom took another potshot at cities and counties for their role in the housing and homelessness crisis.
“There’s never been more support to address all of those concerns than in the last four or five years,” Newsom said. “So what gives? Time to do your job. Time to address the crisis of encampments on the streets in this state. And yes, I’m not going to back off from that. And you will see that reflected in my January budget. I’m going to fund success and I’m not going to fund the rhetoric of failure anymore.”
Posts
.png)
