Special offer

How far can you extend your personal Sphere of Influence?

By
Real Estate Broker/Owner with Prudential California Realty/Gem Mortgage

Yesterday, I attended an interesting Public Hearing before the Local Agency Formation Commission of Riverside County.  You see, I was notified that, as a property owner, our land parcels were going to be inducted into the City of Indio's "sphere of influence."  Now, being inducted into a particular City's sphere of influence is actually part of the annexation process.  It's a one-two punch.  First you throw a wide net over a unincorporated territory that is currently administered to by the larger County that you are part of, then you finalize it through the final vote of the Board of Supervisors, normally a couple of years later.  This is more of a layered approach which allows resistance groups to form up and battle; yet, allows the transference of large swaths of territory to the entity seeking to extend its sphere of influence.

Why would a City want to expand its borders?  Simply speaking, the answer is: money.  Surprise, Surprise, Surprise.   Charging for building permits, expanding infrastructure, widening the tax basis, and developing commercial zonings that produce retail tax revenue are all part of the reasons.  Sometimes, it is better that a City annexes property, other times it is shear madness, depending on who the City is trying to placate.

After a slick presentation, including overhead maps and much discourse delineating which part of the unincorporated parts of Riverside County were going to be inducted into Indio's (approximately 25 square miles) sphere of influence, I was a little shocked that the City of Indio was actually planning on doubling its true size and boundaries gobbling up huge parts of the valley.  I wondered if  the City Fathers of Indio and Map makers were actually under the influence when they inhaled such vast amounts of acreage on paper?       

Then the citizens affected by this gobbling up of territory were asked to comment on whether or not they felt this was a good idea...an amazing and entertaining thing happened that is quite common with entitlement rights these days:  the usual haves vs. the have nots debate developed.  So there it was, the classical conflict:  Local Citizens living in the desert, wanting to get away from people and  urban sprawl vs. the big, cigar-chewing industrialized and bulldoze loving developers. 

On one side, the ex-hippies, environmentalist cactus-hugging and horse-kissing locals who were pleading with the Commission, attempting to stop the Sphere of Influence from going through all wanted the same things:  Open land surrounding them (even if that land did not happen to belong to them).  Star-filled skies, that were not compromised by city lights.  No traffic jams.

In summary they wanted a continuance with the status quo.  Some of them had lived out there in the boondocks since the 70's and cannot stand the rapid development of the Coachella Valley.  I was impressed by this colorful groups' eloquence ala save the whales and the, "poor little me losing my view" approach.  Candidly, they seemed to present rather reasonable requests

The other side, were the industrial military complex of developers seeking to extend their own sphere of influences via Dillon Road and the proposed concrete jungle corridor and the collapsing American currency.  Based on the deep resentment of the beatniks, I would say that these building hawks probably needed to take a course on learning how to win friends and influence people.  These multi-million dollar project managers knew exactly what they wanted and more darkly, how to get it.  They truly represented the determined, well heeled, old boy network of American business interests vs. Mother Nature.  To give them credit, they understood how the wheels of commerce and economic growth can be greatly enhanced through the proper use of the lobby and I'm not talking about the hotel lobby.  They had one thing in common; get the sphere of influence passed as soon as possible. 

A third sort of group spoke representing a kind of hybrid, the eco-sensitive owner builder who was developing larger 2-acre ranchettes vs. thousands of 5000 sq. foot postage stamp lots,  a kinder and gentler version then any of the above mentioned.  This group was represented by a gentleman developer, an astute Englishman, who came out against the sphere of Influence extension plan.  He was; of course, not allowed to build smaller lots then what he was planning base on the zoning that his property was in (I knew this only because my property is adjacent to his), but never the less, he seemed to understand the sensitive issues here better then anyone else.   This generated many comments about forming a buffer zone between the hard core concrete and the Joshua trees, I thought of how the DMI failed in Vietnam....

Finally came the suspenseful hush as the vote was called:  5 for and 1 against the extension.  It passed with flying colors and flying dollars...

What became very obvious was that everyone who spoke at the debate had a definite agenda that was self-serving.  I honestly felt that I was totally neutral but soon realized that I could not afford to be neutral, too much of my own money was on the line and like everyone else I had to consider my own interests.  What am I going to do with my property? You ask.  My politically correct answer is: "Develop it respectfully to all."

 

Comments (0)