But Wildomar can, and should, withdraw from the Southwest Communities Financing Authority (“JPA”), which governs the Animal Friends of Valleys (“AFV”).
That’s because each of the original signatories to the agreement would still be responsible for their percentage of the original $15,000,000 construction bond in order to do so.
Except for Wildomar, the “Johnny-come-lately,” who did not join the JPA, until after a December 08, 2010 City Council meeting with a unanimous vote authorizing staff to complete the inequitable membership agreement. Since the construction bond obligation had already been created prior to Wildomar’s joining, there would be no obligation of the part of the City of Wildomar to pay a percentage of that original bond upon secession.
In a recent discussion about the feasibility of seceding from the animal shelter JPA, the City Staffer to whom I was speaking, was unaware that the agreement between the City of Wildomar and the JPA could be unilaterally terminated by the City of Wildomar without incurring that significant budget busting $2,000,000 “exit” obligation.
Therefore, in order to substantiate that feasibility, I quote from the very agreement that is part of the agenda packet for that December 08, 2010 City Council meeting, as follows:
“Section 4. Termination and amendments
(c) If Southwest Communities Facilities Authority has incurred no obligations each party may terminate this Agreement by giving not less than sixty (60) days written notice thereof to all of the parties.
(e) This agreement cannot be terminated until all forms of indebtedness, and/or fiscal obligation incurred by Southwest Communities Facilities Authority, or adequate provision for such payment shall have been made.”
Currently, the only obligation to be repaid is the $57,000″loan” granted by the JPA to Wildomar , who could not afford to pay their full allocation this year.
Unless the JPA refinances the original bond, which it can apparently do with a 4/5 vote of the JPA board, Wildomar can secede from the agreement without incurring any additional obligation to pay approximately 20% of the new bond obligation (potentially, in excess of $2,000,000).
That is why there is an element of urgency to this issue of secession.
For an eye-popping reminder of the inherent “unfairness” to the City of Wildomar that it’s neighboring communities were willfully complicit in implementing (to their economic benefit), please click on the following excellent Michael J. Williams/Californian article on the comparative numbers:
At the recent JPA meeting, I stood up and publicly addressed the member representatives sitting at the dais, fearlessly telling them that their “failure to disclose” (or Wildomar City Staff’s failure to analyze) the inequities of the “population count” versus the “animal count,” would be, in hindsight, the political genesis of the secession movement.
For the record, incumbent City Councilmembers Bridgette Moore and Bob Cashman each voted “aye” on December 08, 2010 issue of joining AFP/JPA without any thoughtful or diligent consideration of any less expensive alternatives.
Comments can be made to firstname.lastname@example.org.
At present, all it will take is the cost of postage to notify Murrieta, Temecula, Canyon Lake, Lake Elsinore, and Riverside County, that the City of Wildomar is going in another direction for its control services.
And, of course, some political “spine.”
“Re-Thinking Wildomar; Doing better with less”