Temecula might seek a reversal of a boundary agency’s hotly debated denial of the city’s bid to block a proposed surface mine by annexing 4,997 acres of granite-strewn hillsides.

The City Council recently authorized a two-member committee to decide whether to ask a Riverside County boundary-setting agency to reconsider its June 4 vote in which the panel voted 5-2 against the proposed Santa Margarita Canyon annexation.

That request – which could be rejected by the county Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) – must be submitted by Aug. 25.

"Time is of the essence," Mayor Maryann Edwards said after the council opted to give her and Councilman Jeff Comerchero the authority to make such a decision on its behalf. "That’s a pretty quick turnaround."

Prior to reaching that decision, the pair will review the nearly 10-hour LAFCO hearing and talk to city departments heads and gather other input and information, Edwards said.

"Nothing’s been decided yet," she said.

Prior to authorizing the committee to proceed as it sees fit, four audience members urged the council to seek a reconsideration of the sharply criticized LAFCO decision.

Several of those speakers have been at the forefront of efforts to stop the development of a 414-acre gravel mine at the core of the proposed annexation area.

The annexation area is south of Temecula city limits west of Interstate 15. The Liberty Quarry mine site is in a rugged area behind a California Highway Patrol truck inspection and weigh station near the San Diego County boundary.

Representatives of the mine developer, Granite Construction Co., did not speak during the June 23 council review or appear to be in the audience during that session.

Granite wants to mine more than 270 million tons of sand, gravel and other materials from a 155-acre portion of its site over a 75-year period.

If the city opts to proceed with a reconsideration request, the $1,750 processing fee would boost the amount the city has spent on studies, hearings and other annexation-related expenses.

So far, Temecula has earmarked or spent more than $365,000 – including some legal fees but excluding much of its staff time – on the process, according to city records.

In order to obtain a reconsideration, Temecula must show key information was not or could not have been provided during the June 4 LAFCO hearing.

The seven-member LAFCO board can reject a reconsideration request if that threshold is not been met, said George Spiliotis, the agency’s chief executive.

LAFCO is composed of two county supervisors, four city and special district representatives and a public member.

The two county supervisors – Bob Advertisement
Buster and John Tavaglione – voted in favor of the annexation proposal. Their colleagues disagreed.

City officials say the need to preserve vanishing open space is a key goal of their annexation plan. A zoning change contained in the annexation plan would prevent development of the mine for many years.

Most of the land in the proposed annexation area is under the jurisdiction of a San Diego State University nature reserve and research station.

Granite has countered that the area will likely remain open space even if it remains outside the city because the university does not plan to develop its holdings.

Many of the privately owned parcels have been or would be purchased by Granite if the mine plan proceeds.

Even if LAFCO overturns itself, written protests from 50 percent or more of the landowners who pay property taxes in the area could thwart the annexation, Spiliotis said in an earlier staff report.

More than 100 speakers – including mine foes, Temecula officials and Granite representatives – commented during the June 4 LAFCO hearing.

A reconsideration of the LAFCO decision could trigger a repeat of that lengthy session, as it would entail another public hearing that could spark as many or more audience comments.

In February, LAFCO commissioners voted to hold the review at their usual meeting location in Riverside rather than shift it to a Temecula-area venue.

That decision was made, in part, because Temecula-area locations were deemed inappropriate or too small to handle the anticipated overflow crowd.

Even that decision was roundly criticized, because buses hired by a grassroots group of mine foes had to depart the LAFCO hearing before it ended. As a result, many would-be speakers left the session without commenting.

Mine foes – who are among the most vocal annexation supporters – say Liberty Quarry would increase air pollution, boost area truck traffic, mar scenic views and endanger wildlife corridors and the nature reserve and research area.

Granite officials and other mine supporters cite a growing need for construction materials and a desire to reduce the miles that sand and gravel must be shipped to reach construction and road building sites.

They also point to the jobs and future tax revenues that Liberty Quarry would bring to the area.

Denial of the annexation has kept land use authority for the area – and decision-making powers over the quarry plan – in the hands of Riverside County planning commissioners and supervisors.

If the annexation process does not move forward, county officials will review environmental documents that are nearing completion for the Liberty Quarry development plan.

1. Suzanne Lester says :

---