UKIAH, CA., 6/4/25 — On Tuesday evening, the city of Ukiah held a workshop to inform residents about the process of annexing unincorporated land in the Willow area south of the city and a portion of Millview to the north, a recent proposal by the city that has raised concerns among locals.
At the beginning of the meeting at the Ukiah Valley Conference Center, which was packed with approximately 100 people, the city’s outside special counsel, Phil Williams — a local attorney — announced that the workshop would not include a group Q&A section.
Instead, information would be provided by four different presenters positioned around the room, each providing an overview of annexation based on topics like economics, zoning, Local Agency Formation Commission guidelines, and public safety.
Once Williams announced that there wouldn’t be a Q&A section of the meeting, about half of the attendees left the conference center. Then the presenters, who were various staff members from the city of Ukiah, formed into four sections around the room to give their presentations.
Shannon Riley, the city’s deputy city manager, led a presentation on the economics of annexation and how it could affect the finances of both the city and Mendocino County.
“One question we’ve been hearing a lot is, will annexation bankrupt the county?'” Riley said. “The county is definitely having some financial struggles right now, but the city has nothing to do with that.”
Riley said during her presentation that if the proposed annexation is approved by the Mendocino Local Agency Formation Commission, the county’s finances would not be significantly affected. However, she also detailed the master tax-sharing agreement signed last summer by the city and county that states if unincorporated land is annexed by Ukiah, the county will lose a large portion of its tax revenue over a set number of years. The proposed annexation will ultimately decrease the county’s sales tax revenue, property tax revenue, and transient occupancy tax revenue.
Jesse Davis, Ukiah’s chief planning manager, led the presentation on zoning and development, outlining how land can legally be used in terms of residential, commercial, industrial or agricultural purposes.
Davis, who has worked for seven years as a planning manager for both the county and the city, told concerned residents that water service would not change in the areas proposed for annexation. He said neighborhoods like Willow and Millview are already part of an incorporated water district, the Ukiah Valley Water Authority, and residents will not be required to switch providers.
“A majority of the parcels in those neighborhoods are going to be using the same services,” Davis explained during his presentation.
Most of the workshop’s presenters allowed little time for attendees to ask detailed questions about the proposed annexation’s impacts on residents.
It remains unclear what kind of agreements the city might make with local utility companies that manage gas, electricity and sewers, and whether residents in the proposed annexation areas will need to transition to new providers for those utilities.
Ross Liberty, the founder and owner of local business Factory Pipe and a member of No Ukiah Annexation, a grassroots organization opposing the city’s annexation proposal, said he doesn’t believe the city is offering an unbiased presentation of the project.
“This meeting was not an unbiased meeting,” Liberty said after the workshop. “It’s their short bullet points that cater to a 30-second attention span. They think that we need education, but that it needs to be short and simple.”
Liberty, a lifelong Ukiah resident, said most locals he’s spoken to from the proposed annexation areas are skeptical about joining the city.
“You just ask anyone from the area to be annexed if they want to be, and it’s absolutely no,” Liberty added.
Liberty also said he doesn’t believe the county’s finances will bounce back from a steady decline in tax revenue over the coming decades if the annexation is approved.
“If this goes through, the county will not be viable,” he added. “If they do this, [the county’s] money is going to be gone.”
To learn more about the annexation proposal or ask questions, people can attend the Ukiah Planning Commission meeting at 6 p.m. June 11 at the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Ave.
Of course the city is offering a biased presentation of the project; everyone there saw that last night. Not offering a Q&A is pretty telling. Our questions are valid but we are being talked over by some bullet points and buzzwords about water security. Just come out and say you’re screwing us for the greater good. County is also thinking short term and ditching long term tax revenue to get let off the hook for some expensive looming infrastructure fixes & upgrades… Makes you wonder if anyone though has your best interests in mind. Not our city. Not our county. Not our state.
I think the sales pitch from the city to acquire these new parcels is that they will be developed into more robust tax producing parcels (sales and property tax). Retail, restaurants, tourism, business, etc. The county is slowly dying financially without the annexation from Ukiah. I think ripping off the Band-Aid (i.e. county finances) quicker is better than slower and there will be pain for the county no matter how you look at it. Services at the county will continue to decline even if Ukiah doesn’t annex anymore parcels. I think the city will do a better job making the Ukiah Valley better developed and more prosperous than what the county can do given its past and present situation. It also makes sense that the city success and I.e. growth would require annexation over time regardless of the feelings toward the county problems.
It’s so funny to me that people think this is about the city of Ukiah trying to do a “power grab.” It’s not perfect but Ukiah is actually remarkably well managed, especially compared to the disaster that is the county. Ukiah has clear objectives and road maps to meet those objectives. They have managed economic downturns and the pandemic with deftness. For a city of Ukiah’s size to maintain a thriving city pool, a solid golf course, an active summer camp, and MANY free events like PumpkinFest and Concerts in the Park is nothing short of remarkable.
People here seem hardwired to find conspiracies when there aren’t any. Ukiah is being forward-thinking; also, annexations like this are INCREDIBLY COMMON. You can’t live on the outskirts of a city whose resources you use and not expect you’ll never be annexed. And of course the city’s proposal was focused on telling folks why the city thinks it’s a good idea – it’s a project they’re trying to achieve, and those people were all doing their jobs.
I agree. Ukiah has way more going on than the rest of the county and it is more open to outside developments beyond being an AG community. Ukiah is the future for this rural county. Some residences want to live in the past unfortunately and may peddle unfounded conspiracy theories to delay and/or muddy the inevitable outcome.
This whole annexation this is all backwards. People who want their property to be in the City of Ukiah should be able to request annexation not have it imposed on them. This massive overreach is clearly being driven by City of Ukiah Staff and is in no way consensual; it’s being forced. While I support the ability for systems to be in place to allow property owners to ask to join the City of Ukiah I am fundamentally opposed to myself and others being forced into the City. This is wrong.
I would like to hear the city say what they are going to gain by this annexation. I would like to hear them say what the benefit is going to be for the outlining areas being annexed and what the negative will be for the outline areas being annexed.
The city (and LAFCO) had a board meeting with the BOS over a master plan to standardize the process of annexation for city agencies throughout the county. It is on youtube to watch.