The Coalition NEVER said a Municipal Advisory Council would prevent encroachment!  While a Municipal Advisory Council is not full protection from the Town of Yucca Valley to include the Community of Yucca Mesa in their Sphere of Influence with eventual annexation, the Joshua Tree Municipal Advisory Council (MAC) has been in existence for over 15 years and their MAC was  influential in deterring Yucca Valley from attempting to annex them.  It is working for them, why not give it a try in Yucca Mesa?

The fact that Yucca Valley has already attempted to place a Sphere of Influence (SOI) over Yucca Mesa by submitting an Application to LAFCO in March 2009 and recent discussions with the Town of Yucca Valley officials regarding the Town planning future attempts is clearly a serious threat ... not just a perception as Derry states.

The Coalition met with Derry in early 2009 to discuss Yucca Valley's threat.  He would not and did not support Yucca Mesa's plight.  He wanted to be neutral by not taking sides about the SOI.  He now states that he will oppose any such effort that would impede upon the Mesa's ability to maintain their independence and to retain autonomy.  Why should we believe Supervisor Derry now based on his past behavior?  

The Supervisor further states:  "In the meantime, my staff and I are exploring avenues to ensure the long-term sustainability of your autonomy and seek to stave off any threat of annexation."  Useful for campaigning, perhaps, but as an alternate LAFCO Board Member,  Supervisor Derry well knows the County is not the deciding factor in expanding SOIs or annexations ... LAFCO is.  Every five years the Town of Yucca Valley submits a Municipal Service Review (MSR) to LAFCO which is mandated by the State of California.  Since Yucca Valley's airport is up for review in 2013, the Town could feasibly submit another request to expand their sphere at that time or any other time should they so desire.  As the community adjacent to the town sharing the same water district, Yucca Mesa is under constant threat from the Town of Yucca Valley and the County or Supervisor Derry can not do anything about it (can not or will not?).

While the residents of Yucca Mesa do have an opportunity to stop a full annexation by the Town of Yucca Valley through a vote, the battle recently fought was not about annexation, but the SOI, the first step to annexation without a vote of the people.  Had the Coalition been unsuccessful in convincing the Town to withdraw their application for a SOI, LAFCO could have approved the SOI expansion, the Town could have municipalized the High Desert Water District and charged Mesans (an estimated $25,000 - $35,000 per house) for the Town's wastewater treatment plant, which would not benefit Yucca Mesa at all.  Again ... WITHOUT A VOTE OF THE PEOPLE.  Supervisor Derry did not intervene to prevent this injustice.  Why should we believe he will help defend us now?

Supervisor Derry informs us that he does not "believe there are an adequate number of stakeholder groups or issues to justify the time and cost associated with establishing and operating a Yucca Mesa MAC."  Derry is obviously ignoring the Coalition that stopped the Town.  Further, the supervisor has obviously discounted the 200 petition signatures collected by the Coalition and presented to him on May 27, 2010, representing residents, voters, and homeowners.  These 200 signatures were collected in only 50 hours of going house-to-house in one small sampling area of Yucca Mesa.  Every resident visited signed except for three people (one was moving, two were ill).  Every indication confirmed that had the Coalition continued throughout the balance of Yucca Mesa, the same percentage of signatures could be obtained in support for a legal representative government ... a Yucca Mesa MAC.

Stakeholder groups?  There are four stakeholder groups we know of:  Yucca Mesa Residents, the Stop Yucca Mesa Annexation Coalition (Coalition), Yucca Mesa Improvement Association (YMIA), and the Homestead Valley Community Council (HVCC).  The major majority of the Residents and the Coalition have requested a MAC.  By its activities, YMIA is a social club with only four people objecting to a MAC because they believe they ARE the government.  HVCC is a group made up of four members from each of four improvement associations (Yucca Mesa, Flamingo Heights, Landers, and Johnson Valley) who also believe they ARE the government.  Only four of the council members are from Yucca Mesa and those four are also YMIA board members.  YMIA's total membership is 5% or less of the total Yucca Mesa population.  Both of these organizations are private, unstructured corporations who abide by their own rules and do not submit to the Brown Act, a transparency in government requirement of the utmost importance to Mesans.  The Coalition is surprised and insulted that the Supervisor is supporting anti-Brown Act special interest groups especially in light of his very public support for transparency in government.

The residents do not want another "private" group representing them.  They want a legal representative government by reinstating the Yucca Mesa MAC that was originally formed in 1992.  They do not want to broaden the size and scope of the MAC to include the entire Homestead Valley.  Yucca Mesa is a separate community from the Homestead Valley.  Yucca Mesa is serviced by the Hi-Desert Water District while the other three communities are serviced by Big Horn Desert View Water District.  At this time, only Yucca Mesa is threatened by a Yucca Valley SOI/Annexation.  Yucca Mesa has the largest population of the four.  Mesans want to know what is going on in their community, such as police reports, fire department reports, paramedic reports, reports from the Supervisor, reports from the Council members about building, etc., and they want a monthly opportunity to provide input of importance to them directly to the Supervisor.  Neither HVCC nor YMIA provide this kind of structure and opportunity.  YMIA is a social club, and HVCC is a private corporation that holds their meetings at 3:00 p.m. at different locations each month.  Both are non-Brown Act compliant and do not meet either the transparency test nor do they meet the needs of the residents.

Time and Cost?  Field Representative Alan Rasmussen made it very clear to the Coalition that there was no funding available for a Yucca Mesa MAC and that the MAC would have to be run by volunteers from the community.  The Coalition assured Mr. Rasmussen that there were more than ample volunteers to be Council Members, a volunteer webmaster, administrative volunteers, and free signs announcing the meetings.  The cost to the County would be $0.00.  The Yucca Mesa residents want a MAC and are willing to volunteer their time and money to run it.

Yes, Supervisor Derry and his Field Rep have met with Coalition members ... and the Coalition has been insulted and stonewalled for a year.  

It's time to go shopping for a new supervisor who will be sensitive to the needs of the Yucca Mesa Community.