UPDATED: Lake Elsinore ‘Measure A’ appears to be headed for defeat

Update: Tuesday, May 2, 10:40 p.m.

According to the Riverside County Registrar of Voters, approximately 270 Vote-by-Mail, 60 Provisional and eight damaged ballots that require duplication still must be processed. Work on those begins Wednesday morning. Ballots that are postmarked on or before Election Day and received no later than Friday also remain to be counted. The next updated results will be posted at 6 p.m. on Thursday.

Update: Tuesday, May 2, 10:30 p.m.

With all 12 precincts reporting, Lake Elsinore’s Measure A looks to be easily defeated. As of 10:17 p.m. 2,928 no votes were cast as compared to 414 votes for approval.

At this time it is unknown how many votes remain to be counted, though according to the Riverside County Registrars Office, information regarding provisional, vote-by-mail, and damaged ballots that require duplication and remain to be counted will be posted shortly.

Election results are not final until the vote has been certified by the California Secretary of State’s office.

This story will be updated as more information  becomes available.

Update: Tuesday, May 2 10:14 p.m.

The second report on Lake Elsinore’s Special Election for Measure A, otherwise known as the Alberhill Villages Initiative, shows a vast majority of voters are against the measure which could bankrupt the city if approved.

Currently with eight out of 12 precincts reporting, 2,935 have cast votes against the measure while only 406 have voted to approve it.

Lake Elsinore has a total of 12 precincts.

This story will be updated as more information becomes available.

Original Story:

The first report for Lake Elsinore’s Measure A shows the voters who cast their ballots by mail overwhelmingly voting against the plan which could bankrupt the city if passed.

In the 8 p.m. update 2,540 no votes were cast compared to 391 yes votes.

Measure A, if it passes, could cost the city more than $240 million should it pass and negate the recently approved amended agreement for the Alberhill Villages Specific Plan, an agreement between both the city of Lake Elsinore and Alberhill Villages Developer Castle & Cooke. The two parties have long been at odds over the issue until the Feb. 14 City Council meeting where the amended agreement was approved.

The passage of Measure A would threaten everything the city has worked so hard to achieve, according to Assistant City Manager Jason Simpson.

“The council just adopted an amended plan for Alberhill Villages Specific plan and that plan essentially was also negotiated with the developer and it puts the city in a much better position financially than when the city adopted the plan and then the developer came in and filed an initiative to essentially not want to pay for anything and let the city pay the capital costs.”

Simpson said should Measure A pass there would be no way the city would be able to fund it.

“The impact, there was 8,000 residential units planned and should they be built they wouldn’t pay their fair share of the increased impact on police and fire,” he explained. “We negotiated that and they are going to be paying their full impact under the new plan.”

Measure A or the Alberhill Villages Specific Plan projects a loss of somewhere between $33 million and $243 million based on a variety of factors including the sports park, inclusion in the CFDs and a number of other potential issues that could arise. Under the newly agreed upon plan, the city stands to gain $25.7 million at the 20-year mark. Should Measure A pass, it would negate the newly agreed upon plan.

“The initiative was too far along for them to pull it back,” Simpson said in March. “Both the opponents and proponents are recommending everyone vote no on the initiative in May.”

One Response to "UPDATED: Lake Elsinore ‘Measure A’ appears to be headed for defeat"

  1. Ron Loftus   May 3, 2017 at 6:41 pm

    who was the person who cleaned up the homeless camps,
    l wish to thank her her name was Natelie
    Thank you


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.