A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Neighbors oppose Williamson Act cancellation for North Tustin parcel; board takes no action

April 23, 2024 | Orange County, California


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Neighbors oppose Williamson Act cancellation for North Tustin parcel; board takes no action
A large turnout of North Tustin residents opposed a petition to cancel a Williamson Act contract covering an 11‑acre parcel on Cornell Road, telling the board that the property’s trees, wildlife and neighborhood character should be preserved.

Speakers — many of whom live adjacent to the Miller Estate property — argued the applicant’s petition lacked a specific alternative use required by Government Code 51282(e), said the assessor’s valuation used to compute cancellation fees was out of date and warned that tentative cancellation could lead to piecemeal development without adequate CEQA review. Several speakers urged the board to let the contract expire naturally rather than advance cancellation.

Zeb Law, estate attorney for the trust that filed the petition, told the board the application met staff criteria and that the petition’s proposed alternative was to remove the agricultural restriction; he said trustees had formed a trust and that the family had received offers over the years. Law said cancellation alone would not immediately produce development because separate planning approvals would still be required.

County counsel Nicole Walsh explained the statutory process, saying that "the level of specificity required in a proposal for a specified alternate use shall be determined by the board as necessary" and that, if the board tentatively agreed to cancel, conditions would include payment of the cancellation fee based on assessor valuation within one year of the assessor’s certification. Walsh said the assessor’s valuation in the file was dated November 2023 and that the board has discretion to deny the petition.

After extended public comment and questions about statutory compliance and valuation timing, the board took no motion and did not vote on the petition at the hearing. Chair Wagner said neighbors interested in preserving the site could pursue a purchase or other agreement with the owners; several supervisors said the community had leverage now to negotiate protections before the contract would expire in five years.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee