Changes are in store for the March Joint Powers Authority

The entity that oversees development at the March Air Reserve Base may have outlived its purpose, at least regarding land use. Some officials want the authority to give up its land entitlements and concentrate on protecting the airport. One thing seems certain: the issue won’t be resolved quickly.

The March Joint Powers Authority, the agency formed in 1993 to oversee the conversion of March Air Force Base to civilian use, may get its wings clipped.

In May, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors voted to begin restructuring the authority and, in the process, remove much of its power.

Board members recommended that the authority’s land-use entitlement be transferred back to the county. That move would give the county control of an estimated 2,100 acres of undeveloped land around the airport, which is now March Air Reserve Base.

That land is divided up among the four municipalities that make up the March JPA – Riverside County and the cities of Riverside, Moreno Valley and Perris – but it’s all unincorporated. That means the county would have final say in any development, unless the three cities were to annex the land that’s in their spheres of influence.

Ultimately, the supervisors recommended that the authority refocus its efforts make protecting the airport its primary mission. It would oppose inappropriate land use in and around the base while continuing to promote civilian use of the facility.

The March JPA might also consider working with the Riverside County Economic Development Agency to manage and promote civilian use, but the authority would no longer have final say in land development, according to the board’s recommendation.

“There’s a general agreement that the authority has outlived its original purpose and that its role needs to be redefined,” said Riverside County Supervisor Kevin Jeffries, who sits on the eight-member March Joint Powers Commission, the authority’s governing board. “What we have to do is start a discussion and figure out how we’re going to do this.

“We need to work out the fine points, and that could take a long time. There are some very complicated issues to deal with.”

Three weeks after the board’s vote, the joint powers commission weighed in on the future of the March JPA. It recommended that the authority’s staff put together a reorganization and refinement plan, one “advancing and protecting the long-term viability of the March Air Reserve Base and its public and private-sector uses.”

That report is expected to be completed by mid-September. The commission also recommended that the March JPA help with the transfer of all properties not associated with the airport to the appropriate jurisdictions, either through transfer, annexation or return.

The commission originally recommended that all property transfers be completed by Jan 1, 2020, but it removed that stipulation, leaving the issue of a transfer date open.

March JPA officials now assume that their job description will be changed, but when and how remains to be seen, said Danielle Wheeler, the authority’s director.

One thing, however, will not change. The authority will still be responsible for protecting the airport, so it will have some voice on what’s developed nearby, and it will oppose any projects it believes are inappropriate.

It will be especially sensitive to any proposed development on the north and south end of the airport because of its potential to interfere with the runway, Wheeler said.

“A big part of our mission has always been to protect the base, and that’s not going to change,” said Wheeler, a 13-year March JPA employee who became director in January. “If we get something that’s too tall, or something with satellite dishes or microwaves that might disrupt our radio signals, we would oppose that.”

Wheeler conceded that, after 23 years, the JPA’s mission probably should be redefined.

It was never meant to last forever, only to replace the jobs that were lost when March Air Force Base shut down, and at that it’s been successful: it’s created about 3,000 jobs since then, while adding about $700 million to the tax rolls through the commercial development its has brought to the base.

Most of that tax revenue happened after 2003, when the authority received the bulk of the land from the federal government, Wheeler said.

Dividing up what is now under the jurisdiction of the March JPA will be difficult, and it will involve more than allocating land among the four jurisdictions involved: the base is carrying $30 million in bond debt, it has 70-year-old infrastructure and it ’s home to several hazardous waste sites that must be cleaned.

There are also several large commercial projects in different stages of development that the authority is now in charge of: March Life Care Campus, March Air Field Museum, the expansion of Meridian Business Park and the development of the March Veterans Village, which broke ground last November.

Any change to the authority’s land entitlement powers means those projects would have to be reassigned, either to the county or to the sphere-of-influence in which they’re located.

“It’s going to be very difficult to deal with all of that equitably,” Wheeler said.

March JPA has had its relevancy questioned before. Ten years ago Riverside proposed dividing the agency’s property holdings among the three cities in the authority, a proposal the city ultimately withdrew.

Two years ago, Tom Owings, the mayor of Moreno Valley at the time, suggested dissolving the authority. Like many are arguing today, Owings maintained that the authority had outlived its usefulness.

At the time, Moreno Valley was suing the JPA over the March Life Care project. The suit was dismissed, and later on the authority dropped the dissolution request.

“I think what we need is a discussion on what should happen to the authority,” Moreno Valley City Councilman Jeffrey J. Giba said. “We need a roadmap for that. No one is saying get rid of it, but some changes need to be made.”

Giba, who is also a member of the March Joint Powers Commission, was one of the commission members who suggested looking at a reorganization.

That task could be tougher than people realize, Riverside City Councilman and commission member Mike Gardner said.

“You’re going to have different supervisors, different commission members, different city councils,” Gardner said. “It’s going to be very difficult.”