Tuesday’s Board of Supervisors meeting has an unavoidable “showdown” feeling to it. On the one hand the County seems to have realized that Supervisor Maureen Mulheren’s Tax Sharing Agreement has given the City of Ukiah a green light to push it much farther than anyone, probably even Ukiah Officials, expected, not only overreaching, but jeopardizing a decent size chunk of County revenue. Accordingly, it looks like there are four supervisors who think that Ukiah’s big land grab/expansion/annexation proposal is a non-starter. Even Supervisor Mulheren may be having second thoughts seeing how much Ukiah wants to annex.
On the other hand, the City of Ukiah has invested quite a bit in the proposal, although lately, with a lot of public opposition, may be reconsidering.
Supervisor Ted Williams’ proposal to chuck the agreement in its entirety feels more like a shot across the bow of the Good Ship Ukiah because as a practical matter there are problems with simply ditching Mulheren’s tax sharing agreement too.
Since there are a some areas on the outskirts of Ukiah that could be logically incorporated into the City, a better outcome would be not to rescind the entire agreement but to revise it with a basic proviso that the County not be made worse off in the end. That could involve something like telling Ukiah that they should revise their proposal to something smaller while changing the tax sharing formula so that Mendo keeps all current tax revenues. For a much smaller number of parcels bordering Ukiah, they could keep whatever new or additional taxes may materialize if the parcels increase in assessed value via development or re-assessment. (For example Laws Avenue on the south end down to, say, the Garden’s Gate project and up to the Raley’s area on the north.) This way, Ukiah can get credit for whatever reasonable development they can accomplish via annexation and the County doesn’t lose money in the deal. Ukiah would also have to pay for whatever bureaucracy and analysis and legal fees may be required — which should be more modest if their annexation proposal is scaled back.
Is it too much to ask that a reasonable approach like that could arise after Tuesday’s meeting? Perhaps via a tax sharing standing committee (subject to the Brown Act with public involvement)? Or will the officials involved dig in their heels and just abandon the whole idea?
This time the public, or at least those who take an interest in things like this, will be paying closer attention.
Lately, the City of Ukiah seems to be backing away from their oversized annexation proposal. The below press release, issued the night before the Supervisors Annexation Meeting indicates that they are interested in “alternatives to the original proposal” at “a date uncertain.” Funny, though, we don’t see any specific mention of the County or the Board’s Tuesday annexation agenda item. Instead, Ukiah coyly refers to “public partners,” and “partner agencies.”
City Of Ukiah Planning Commission Item Related To Annexation Postponed To Allow For Continued Community Engagement And Collaboration
The City of Ukiah has announced that the (Ukiah) Planning Commission item originally scheduled for this Wednesday, June 25, 2025, regarding the pre-zoning of certain parcels and related land use items associated with a potential future annexation proposal, will be continued to a date uncertain.
The City is taking this step to ensure that there is adequate time to continue engaging with the community and to further explore potential alternatives to the original proposal. In addition, the City believes that more time is needed to allow for ongoing discussions with public partners to support a thoughtful, coordinated approach to land use planning and annexation.
“We need and appreciate the community’s interest in this issue and are committed to continuing a process that is open, transparent, and inclusive,” said Mayor Doug Crane. “It is our goal to make sure any annexation proposal reflects shared objectives, addresses community concerns, and supports long-term planning for the entire region.”
City officials emphasized that no application for annexation has been submitted, nor authorized, at this time, and that any draft proposal will be grounded in meaningful dialogue with residents, partner agencies, and stakeholders.
The City will continue to provide updates on next steps and future meetings as the engagement process continues. Additional information can be found on the City of Ukiah’s website: www.cityofukiah.com/annexation.
Ukiah and the County are ignoring the tool that they should be using to understand and evaluate the massive changes that would flow from the proposed annexation. California has a vehicle for addressing long run planning-zoning-revenue-social issues that have wide spread implications for cities and counties: The General Plan. The General Plan provides a vehicle and a forum for looking at and examining complicated growth issues in an orderly way – looking at fiscal, social and environmental impacts and drawing input from all involved parties- all levels of government and and the general population. The General Plan process is time consuming, but it provides an agreed upon macro-framework for for micro-decision making. Its designed as as the path to avoid situations like our giant Annexation Fiasco. There is an old saying, “Never enough time to do it right, but always enough time to do it over.”