Wildomar Planning Commission adopts five-year CIP, orders correction of duplicate project number

The Wildomar Planning Commission voted unanimously on May 6 to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2026-06, finding the city’s five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for fiscal year 2026–27 consistent with the Wildomar general plan and directing staff to correct an exhibit numbering ambiguity in the project list.

Cameron Luna, an associate engineer in the Public Works department, told the commission the CIP includes 52 projects over five fiscal years organized into nine categories — roads and transportation, signals, maintenance, drainage, trails, parks, buildings and facilities, cemetery, and an "other" category for administrative capital work. "In total, we have 52 projects," Luna said, describing the list as largely carryover projects with road and drainage programs comprising the largest share.

The commission’s action followed questions about project prioritization and transparency. Jason (Public Works staff) said the CIP is not assigned a strict 1-to-52 ranking; rather, higher priority is driven by funding availability, need, and prior city-council direction. "There’s not, like, a one through 52 ranking," he said, pointing to larger regional projects such as Bundy Canyon Road and Clinton Keith Road widenings as examples of work the city is prioritizing when construction funding or grants are available. Staff also told the commission that, once the CIP is adopted by council, the city posts a booklet with detail sheets and line-item budgets for each project on the city website.

During debate, a commissioner raised a clerical issue: two items in the exhibit were listed with the same CIP number (105). Staff acknowledged the duplicate as an error and the commission amended the motion to adopt the resolution while directing staff to clarify and correct exhibit numbering. The amended motion passed on a 5–0 roll-call vote: Chair Jay King — aye; Commissioner Cambero — aye; Commissioner Filar — aye; Commissioner Yoon — aye; Vice Chair Golden — aye. The motion recorded as adopted is: "Adopt PC Resolution No. 2026-06 and direct staff to clarify any Exhibit 1 numbering ambiguity, including the duplicate CIP number 105."

Why it matters: The CIP guides one-time, capital expenditures that implement the city’s general plan and shape infrastructure investments — e.g., pavement rehabilitation, drainage improvements, park conversions and facility maintenance. The commission’s consistency determination is a statutory step under California Government Code sections 65401 and 65402 that confirms city-adopted capital programs align with the general plan’s goals and policies.

What’s next: The commission’s consistency finding will be part of the administrative record for council action; staff said the final adopted CIP and project detail sheets (including budgets and fiscal-year phasing) will be posted to the city website and that staff will correct the exhibit numbering per the commission’s direction.