• City Council Meeting July 2025

Reminder, Wildomar's 17th birthday celebration is happening on Saturday, July 26th at Marna O'Brien Park. Put it on your calendar now!

  TOP NEWS FROM THE MEETING

---

• Presentation to RSO Captain Jim Rayls
• Wildomar To Double Traffic Enforcement
• Marna O'Brien Tot Lot Inches Closer To Rubberized Play Surface
• Unused Portions of the Existing Cannabis Code Get Amended
• Metal Shipping Container Discussion

Meeting Recap

Back row, L-R: Mayor Protem Carlos Marquez, Councilwoman Bridgette Moore, Councilman Joseph Morabito. Front: Mayor Ashley DePhillippo and Captain James Rayls.

Item 1.9 Add One Additional Motor Deputy

This isn't as easy as going down to Pie Nation and ordering a round of Nation Sticks™. It takes many months to have a motorcycle delivered, and as long, or longer, to have a trained motor officer assigned (after all, they don't grow on trees).

Soon enough, we'll have two guys chasing down the road demons in town... don't be one of them.

Item 1.10 Marna O'Brien Park Rubberized Play Surface

This feels like it's been a long time coming. With the impediments neutralized, it's slated to be installed by the middle of September. 

Item 2.1 Development Code Amendment (Cannabis)

Let me go straight to the bottom line and then fill in a couple of details from my point of view. 

The bottom line is that there will be no practical changes. 

No one has ever approached the planning department or the economic development department with even the slightest hint in wanting to cultivate, manufacture, distribute, or have a testing laboratory in Wildomar.

Mind you, this is one of those "if you're for it, then vote no" moments where Yes Means No.

We had six people who spoke on the item. Four in favor of changing the code (restricting certain commercial cannabis businesses), and two were against the change.

Remember, the matter at hand was ONLY whether to keep the codes the way they were, or to restrict future business opportunities, nothing else. 

Still, the comments went back to whether or not cannabis should be used at all, especially recreationally. 

If I were just Joe Blogger I'd happily post the back and forth discussion in detail, but I don't won't my colleagues to feel any pinch by highlighting our disagreements. 

Especially since this is, in my estimation, a big nothing burger meant to do little more than close a barn door after we granted permission to people to take as many horses as they'd like.

If this topic interests you, I invite you to watch the video. I'll add a link at the bottom.

I will leave a transcription of my initial comments below. As I was rewatching the video, I saw how much gesturing I was doing... so I made a short video. 

Summary of initial comments by Joseph Morabito on Item 2.1

First,  I want to appreciate the emails I got and the various speakers, Maribel, Gianni, Gina, Mari, John, Jessica, thank you for coming out and expressing your thoughts here.  

Now, remember, this is just about changing some codes.  It's not about whether it's a good thing or not, or medical versus recreation.  Those are fair concerns, but that's not what tonight is about anyway.

California legalized cannabis use back in 2016. That was Prop 64, I believe. Whether it's medical or recreational, this is the United States, and we have a lot of liberties here. 

So, whether you want to think it should only be a medicine, you're probably right. But if somebody else wants to think, well, "That's how I'm going to ease the tension at the end of the day", well, they're also right. 

I've never used it. I'm not interested. I would suggest "don't use it", but that's me. That's my opinion for me.  

And again, when it comes to changing the existing codes, I thought about this a little bit, and I would need a reason why, other than "I want to".

Certainly not to further ban, especially because there has not been any inquiry about these other commercial uses. 

Some person mentioned whether there's also 'never been a surf shop here or a ski shop [in Wildomar]'. 

Okay, well,  we don't need to go out of our way to ban those.  And I'm assuming that we have strict guidelines in California that already regulate [cannabis] heavily.

I can't imagine what it would take (amount of money) for somebody (non-retail cannabis business) to come into Wildomar. 

The real estate here is expensive, and to get a building built, it would be pretty Herculean of them to get past all that and want to [proceed here] (compared to places with lower costs).   

I'm not aware of any additional dangers based on the existing retail shops.  

Now, something that might be a danger is some of the places that sell alcohol. They're open all night, some of them, or at least past 10 o'clock. And it can get kind of sketchy there. They don't have any security.

Under today's codes, the cannabis retailers have guards, lots of cameras, lights, everything. In fact, the retail centers where they are are safer because of that.  

As far as putting something on the ballot, I want to put you on the spot, City Clerk Jeanet Morales. 

How much would a special election probably cost?  

Or, [how much is saved when a City Council seat election is cancelled due to there only being one qualified candidate]?

We save around $16,000 on that one. 

So if it's citywide, it's many thousands of dollars, probably over $50,000 if not even more.  So that is one of the things that you do, elect city council members to make these kinds of decisions.  

But I respect the thought of putting it on the ballot, but in a representative democracy, we are your representatives and pretty much make those votes.

I've noticed that since [cannabis] has become legal in many of the states, that now we're starting to see various reports of, "Look, it's not necessarily any better to smoke that than tobacco for your lungs." 

But again, that's a personal decision that people make. So, anyway,  I am not in favor of eliminating any potential future businesses. I would appreciate it if you have a reason behind why you want to change it.

It's well worth your time watching the video of this item. There were a lot of thoughts and opinions shared. 

I just didn't see the justification of the changes, but that's ok, the majority makes the decision, and then we move on to the next item.

I did suggest an alternate motion where we'd increase the setbacks to 600 feet, but not further restrict future business options, but it died for lack of a second.

We don't hold grudges because of how a vote goes.

Wildomar Rap opinion time

My favorite thing in the whole wide world (a demonstrable overstatement) is when someone brings up a discredited survey from 2018 (before I was elected to the city council) as the basis of their actions.

I'll repost what I published in November 2019.

---

A survey done nearly two years ago was brought up during a public comment. 

During her public comment, Gina Castanon mentioned that the survey that has been used as the primary reason to keep commercial cannabis banned was, "flawed, in my opinion". 

Shortly thereafter, the same survey was used as a key reasoning point for opposing the regulation of cannabis in Wildomar during council discussion.


Opinion Time


The survey was done to see if Measure AA would pass or not (the sales tax increase that was approved by a vote of the people in 2018). 

The survey came back with the claims that AA would get 68% of the vote, but in reality, it only got 58% of the vote. Those 10 percentage points equate to being off the mark by 17%. That is a staggering miscalculation in my view.

The same survey asked a handful of questions, to less than one thousand registered Wildomar voters. It came back with 55% saying they were opposed to any commercial cannabis businesses in the city.

If the first part of the survey (about taxes) was wrong by 17%, then can't we assume that the second part was also wrong to one degree or another? 

If it wasn't off by the same 17%, how about a third of that... 5%. Which makes the survey an even split.

That said, since when are major issues decided by a survey of less than 10% of the voters? 

Still more arguments against the flawed survey

It only asked registered voters their opinion, not the residents that choose not to register to vote for one reason or another. There are many people that choose NOT to register based on their religious beliefs.

Aren't their opinions important on matters that don't get settled at the ballot box? I sure think so.

How about longtime permanent residents? I won't name any, but for example, before my wife took the oath of citizenship back in 2007, she could not register to vote. 

There was no outreach made to those that cannot register to vote, but are every bit as much a part of our community as the registered voters.

Link to November 2019 Blog where this first appeared.

----

Those were a lot of words for something that won't be moving the needle one single solitary iota... and iotas are pretty small.

Item 3.3 Metal Shipping Containers

In brief, the current codes only allow shipping containers on properties that are five acres or larger. Wildomar has many, many properties that are under five acres with a shipping container on it.

Do you know where this (these) shipping containers are in town?

The question is/was, do we change the code that was originally written by Riverside County and tailor it to something more suitable to Wildomar, or leave it as is?

Leaving it as is would put very many people into a situation where they'd have to remove their shipping containers.

Remember, the claim that "I've had my container for many years before Wildomar became a city" doesn't hold water because these containers were NEVER legal even under county rules.

The city council and planning commission want to update the code. Any changes are still in the discovery/discussion stage. 

If you have thoughts that you'd like heard, please email them to me (jmorabito@wildomar.gov) and I'll get them to the planning department for further discussion. 

For me, I suggested that if there are properties under 1 acre that have a shipping container on them, to either grant a temporary amnesty that expires when the property changes hands, or, if possible, write stricter requirements they'd have to meet. 

I anticipate this matter coming back before the end of the year.

Link to agenda and video. Just look for the item you want to watch and click it.

https://cityofwildomar.granicus.com/player/clip/1234?view_id=1&redirect=true

• Planning Commission Meeting March 2025

Did someone say carwash? lol
  

TOP NEWS FROM THE MEETING

---

• Stiiizy Cannabis Proposal (5-0)
• Wildomar Crossings Retail Project - EOT #3 (5-0)
• Clinton Keith Marketplace Retail Center - EOT #1 (5-0)

Meeting Recap

Item 2.1 will allow Stiiizy to open a second location. They are going into the storefront formerly operated by Culture Cannabis at the corner of Bundy Canyon and Mission Trail.

The location is within the yellow square.

Here is a link to the 11 slide PowerPoint presentation.

Item 3.1 

Wildomar Crossings Retail Project first came onto the radar in very early 2018. Originally it was going to bring in three large national chains: Wendy's, Autozone, and Dollar Tree.

This project saw large attendance at planning and city council meetings back in 2018.

Since that time I've heard that Dollar Tree and Autozone have pulled out, with Autozone now looking to go across Clinton Keith to the development occurring there anchored by a carwash. 

Link to 2018 blog regarding this development

If by May of next year, the applicant doesn't begin construction, all the work leading to this point becomes null and void.

Item 3.2 Clinton Keith Marketplace Retail Center - EOT #1 

I'm less familiar with this development as it didn't need to come before the city council. I am going to ask that this come before the city council after watching the video of the meeting.

Here's a mashup of the site map and Google maps.

If you're wondering, YES! there is a proposed car wash. 

One of the commissioners did question the need for another carwash when we're already awash in carwashes, but at the time of the original approval it was an approved usage. 

This item was just an EOT (Extension of Time).

The video of the meeting was interesting. It's less than 30 minutes. I suggest watching it to get all the info. Link at bottom of the blog.

Without the overlay.

Link to video of the meeting

Wildomar Rap opinion time

These types of retail establishments bring in much needed tax monies that are used to fund the things we need in Wildomar. Improved streets, parks, first responders, code enforcement, and much more. 

Those are actually the second set of reasons for supporting commercial/retail development. The first is that it provides local places for the residents of Wildomar to shop, eat, and get services without having to travel to other cities. 

To me, this is obvious, but I do read comments from people who seem to want all development halted. That's unrealistic and counterproductive for the health of a small city.

• City Council Meeting June 2020: Commercial Cannabis Second Reading

The meeting lasted about three and a half hours, and the key item, the second reading of the newly adopted cannabis ordinance, took up about seventy-five minutes. 

I'm going to break this meeting into two blogs. This one for the cannabis issue, a future one for the rest of the meeting.

This has been a long and sometimes contentious journey in getting to this point and I'm not going to rehash everything again. It's time for the community to heal and I respectfully ask the various community leaders to take a similar approach.

Here is a link to the press release (City of Wildomar Press Release on Commercial Cannabis May 29, 2020) with more details.

For an ordinance to take effect it is first voted on (that happened during the last meeting on May 28th), then it comes back to the agenda the next meeting for "the second reading" (which always goes to the consent calendar unless one of the members of the council wants to change their vote, or if the public would like to discuss it again) It goes into full effect 30 days later.

Spoiler alert... I'm not going to break down this issue here. I'm sure that few, if any, are interested anyway. However, if you'd like to see what's been written on this over the years, please follow the key words at the bottom of the blog.

It's really time to put this behind us, and the best way to do so is to not keep going over old ground. 

In the manner of the famous Chief Joseph of the Nez Perce, "Hear me! I am tired. My heart is sick and sad. From where the sun now stands I will bring up the survey no more forever." Except this one last time...

The rationale that I disagree with can be paraphrased this way. It's based on comments seen in the video titled: Council Discussion.

It was argued that the city had used a survey company several times in the past. First for the parks (Measure Z) and they said it would pass, and it passed.

So far so good.

Then the example of the additional one cent sales tax (Measure AA) was pointed to. The company said it would pass, and though they were off by 17%, it did pass. 

Read this blog if you want more of a breakdown on the breakdown regarding this survey 

It was then said that the same company was used to ask the residents of Wildomar if they wanted cannabis businesses in the city. 

The response from the company was: Do not put it on the ballot, it will not pass.

Let me stop everyone there. Did you spot what I spotted?

First, the company used for the survey, according to this narrative, had only been used ONCE prior (Measure Z). 

The second example (Measure AA) was actually part of the same survey that asked about cannabis businesses. 

Here's the kicker and I'm flummoxed that this seems to constantly be going over so many heads here.

The point of surveying voters is to see how they might vote in the coming election. That makes 100% sense when it comes to things like "voter approved tax increases" (which both Measure Z and Measure AA were tax increases).

What makes ZERO sense is to have a survey company try to predict the outcome of a referendum, then come back with "Do not put it on the ballot, it will not pass."

One more time. 

Who gives a flying (expletive) if it would have passed or not? 

Referendums on such things should be allowed to be hashed out among the voters and whatever campaigns they put together in the run up of election day. Just the same way we do for candidates. They shouldn't be circumnavigated with a survey.

The point of a referendum isn't to try and divine if an issue is likely to pass or not with a survey of 5% of the voters. 

District 3 has more than 3600 registered voters.
Only 180 were part of the survey.
You don't even have to do the math, I did it for you.

The point is to have ALL THE PEOPLE vote no matter what their answer may be.

If the actual concern had been having the voters choose, then that should have been the stated goal from the first moment this came up back in early 2017; not suggested at the eleventh hour when it was finally realized that the cause had been lost long ago.

I'm stopping here.

Gramps is always dependable with some down home common sense.

I've long known all the members of the council, and four of us were all part of the same Rotary Club until I needed to step down at the end of last year. They're all caring and concerned individuals and we're all friends.

We've all worked side by side, volunteering in the community on countless occasions, and though this did test us all a bit, I know that it's already water under the bridge and we'll all be there working in unison to serve and promote Wildomar for years to come. ☺☻

#GoWildomar

There are two videos below. One with the public comments, another with the council discussion and vote. If this is important to you, watch the videos. They run about an hour and fifteen minutes between the two of them.

•                •                •

It's the little things, the very insignificant details that become our undoing. The microscopic blunders, invisible to the untrained eye, just as easily emerge as glaring discrepancies to the more sophisticated observer.

– EG Marshall (CBSRMT) 

Wildomar Rap has one of the most untrained eyes in the biz.

This blog was produced for viewing on a desktop or a laptop. Though it's been optimized for smartphones, the formatting can look odd on a smartphone or if you get this delivered through email (such as missing video links). Link to proper format.

• City Council Meeting: Commercial Cannabis May 28, 2020

This was a long meeting, more than 4 hours which came after years' worth of wrangling and 12 months of painstaking work by the subcommittee and staff.

It's never easy to have to make a decision when the community is split, and that proved doubly true with this item. 

I'm not going to go over the nuts and bolts of this item. Here is a link to the press release (City of Wildomar Press Release on Commercial Cannabis May 29, 2020) for that purpose. Here is a link to the ordinance as it appeared in the agenda packet (use this link) if you want to drill down into the details. 

There was also a write up in the Valley News, but I found several mistakes in it and already told the reporter. Here's the link if you'd like to read it. 

Below is the video of my comments that explained my yes vote on commercial cannabis in Wildomar.

I started off by acknowledging that both sides of this argument are comprised of good people, with good intentions, who have made good points, and whose concerns were worthy of being heard and deliberated on. 

Which, for each council member and much of Wildomar's staff, had been the case for months, and that I was truly sorry that my vote was likely going to disappoint a sizable part of the city and many of my friends. 

I also pointed out that all five council members would be facing angry constituents when this was all over. 

Though the five of us have different methods and approaches to our elected position, we all want the best for the city and its residents... even when we're faced with a split decision on an issue that has deep emotional ties for many. 

I took issue with a survey that was done in the past and will demonstrate why I would never rely on such data to base my vote on.

Below is a slide that shows the support for Measure AA as the survey suggested. The total was a prediction that 68% would vote for it.

Slide from presentation at the April 2018 city council meeting.
Link to blog covering that meeting

Hear is a slide that shows the actual results from a legally recognized vote at the ballot box.

Link to ballotopia webpage with these results.

The math is really easy to do, and missing by 10 baseline points equals being off by 17%, well outside of even the most generous margin of error. If I were commissioned to do that survey, I would NOT be using it in my highlight reel.

The survey was of 900 voters throughout the city

Let's consider that. 

We have well in excess of 15,000 voters, but this survey only sought out 900 of them. The only way to have ever been considered is if you've submitted your email or phone number to the registrar of voters. 

I know that my info isn't listed (though my wife's is), and having seen the list of registered voters in District 3 during my campaign, I can tell you that no more than 75% have their phone numbers listed, and no more than 65% have an email listed.

In District 3 there are over 3,600 registered voters. If you divide the 900 total that were surveyed, by the five districts, that would mean roughly 180 people per district were contacted by email or phone. That was enough to satisfy the opposition, and have them proclaim that it stood for "the will of the people".

Remember, the point of the survey was to attempt to gauge what the voters were likely to do in the ballot booth of 2018. They should have put it on the ballot then, but chose not to, even though there were plenty of people urging them to... including me.

However, after the true results of the 2018 election came to bear, and the predictions of the survey nearly missed their mark entirely, then that was the precise moment to STOP using it as the base of your argument. 

If you still want to say the survey was "the will of the people" fine by me, but at least now you know why most people don't accept that.

I slotted this as my favorite public comment
Below is a video by a public speaker identifying himself as Russ Ward and as an Air Force Vet that has been a resident in Wildomar for 8 years. Here are some highlights, but please take the two and half minutes to watch it. 

I'm interested in making comments based on the fact that we're considering entering the market and being cannabis retailers here in Wildomar. I'm a United States Air-Force veteran, eight years I served this wonderful country, and God bless America. 

I fought in Desert Storm, and I believe in having the freedom of choice. I hear all these comments and people saying things, and I respect everyone's opinions, but [...] it kind of makes me a little sick to my stomach. 

I listened for a long time and debated whether or not I should chime in and at this point, this country is about choice, and about freedom. 

I understand people are scared about this but I think what people are saying with this, "it's ok but not in my backyard" or "it's not ok at all"... the people are going to do it regardless of whether or not Wildomar has a dispensary. 

It's going to be just like any other business. There will be enough to supply and help people in the city and if you don't want [to partake] then you choose not to.

If you want to raise your family and teach them to say, "Hey, we don't use cannabis." then that's your choice. 

— Russ Ward, Wildomar Resident

  

To compromise or not to compromise?
The only other issue I'm going to cover here is compromise in politics. 

It was fairly evident that there was going to be little compromise from the opposition even dating back to last year. Which, if they were the majority, that would be one thing.

However, when you know coming in that you're going to come up short in the vote department, why wouldn't you trade your vote for something you personally are stating the community would want?

I don't comprehend standing on principle when it's going to cost you more than what you wanted. Like it or not, even on a city level, this is politics and compromise is often necessary for one side or the other; that's how things get done.

Real life example of being willing to trade a vote for something that would benefit the community.

Back in the January city council meeting representatives from the Santa Rosa Plateau asked for $5000 of taxpayers' money to help them get past the devastating fires from last year.

I don't know how common that is, but I'd never seen such a thing in all the years I'd been going to city council meetings... which extends years before my election.

I asked what they were willing to give Wildomar in exchange for that money. 

All I got were puzzled looks.

I suggested that they could offer Wildomar residents free admission to walk on their trails for a month. I even suggested that they could make it in the hottest time of the year, but still, there was no willingness to make that happen.

So, though I had been willing to trade my vote for something that I thought the community would benefit from, I remained the lone nay vote due to a lack of willingness to compromise. 

Funny addendum... though the Santa Rosa Plateau only asked for $5000, the council offered to give them $10,000 instead.

Link to blog discussing it

I was satisfied with the draft ordinance for commercial cannabis as it was presented. It already had a 600 foot buffer zone when it came to "sensitive uses" which included schools, daycares, and parks.

I asked if we could get another vote, or two, in favor of the ordinance (that we all knew was going to pass) in exchange for pushing out the distance from 600 to 1000 feet.

The response I got was, "My vote can't be bought like that."

I can respect that, but if I knew I was on a losing end of a vote (like in the green box above) not only would I have made the suggestion to begin with (like in the story above), but if the suggestion would have come from another source (fellow council member or in the case of the Santa Rosa Plateau above, from them) I would change my vote to get some form of concession that I could share with my constituents... telling them, "I couldn't get what I wanted, but was able to get something."

Use this link to the video of the suggestion of a compromise

That's it, end of blog.

I'd like to state again that this was a difficult situation and it caused all of us stress and sleepless nights, and I'm sure that's true for many members of the community on both the pro and con side of this as well. 

Now that this is behind us, I'd like to see the various community leaders move to the middle and help the healing to begin. Part of that isn't tolerating lies and distortions on your Facebook pages/posts, allowing such things to go unchallenged is keeping the divisions going.

Another part is that you won't look to sue the city over this, just trying to gum up the works and cost the taxpayers money in legal fees by throwing one losing lawsuit after another at your neighbors, trying to derail what is years overdue in coming.

If you truly have the best interests of the community at heart, I challenge you to prove it with calming words and actions rather than just giving it lip service as you continue to rip at its seams.

Below is the video of the hour and eight minute council discussion and vote.

Complete four hour video below

POST SCRIPT

This blog was highly edited from the first version, it had been cathartic to write, but it was better off getting shelved. 

Still, I made some graphics that were going to be included. I'm going to put them here, without explanation. For those that don't know the background, they can infer what they might have represented. 

One person actually suggested that I equated Sriracha sauce to retail cannabis. Sad and pathetic.

FB Stats as of 10am (5-30-20) regarding the press release as shared by WR's facebook page.

Stats after Wildomar's press release was shared on Wildomar Rap. I would love to compare their stats to these. 

Everyone knew that a baseball reference was coming... right? 

•                •                •

Things that are done, it is needless to speak about. Things that are past, it is needless to blame.

– Confucius 

Wildomar Rap imagines that most people may agree with the wisest man Earth's ever known, but knows that they can't resist themselves at the same time.

This blog was produced for viewing on a desktop or a laptop. Though it's been optimized for smartphones, the formatting can look odd on a smartphone or if you get this delivered through email (such as missing video links). Link to proper format.