In 2020, the city and county of Fresno had to take special measures to allow a Fresno attorney to build nearly 500 homes on his family’s land in the southwest part of town.

Part of that agreement required the city to not only annex the 89 acres owned by Eddie Fanucchi, but also a parcel that would connect the new development to city limits.

However, residents objected to the annexation, and in the November election, more than 84% of them rejected joining the city. While the vote won’t stop homebuilding from happening at that property, it may preview a fight on the other side of town.

If the city ever undertakes annexation to develop southeast Fresno, resident opposition could be one of many hurdles for the city’s stalled SEDA plan.

SW Fresno Homes Moving Forward Despite

The map for Fanucchi’s development near Dakota and Hayes avenues would have created a peninsula that bypassed city control — something lawmakers try to avoid, said Brian Spaunhurst, executive officer of the Fresno Local Agency Formation Commission.

Rather than repeat the contentious and lengthy annexation process, Fanucchi and the city agreed to submit a separate application proposal, Spaunhurst said.

But during the annexation process, landowners and registered voters objected to the proposal, forcing the matter to go before voters. Spaunhurst said the agency does not ask why residents would oppose an annexation.

Related Story: City, County of Fresno Reach Tax Agreement. Can Building Move Forward?

To annex land, notices have to be given to affected people. For land considered “uninhabited” — 11 or fewer registered voters — the commission may not need to send out notices or hold hearings. But for land with more than 12 voters, an election must be held if protests come from more than 25% of voters.

Of the 76 votes cast during the November election for annexing the parcel of land at Ashlan and Hayes avenues, 64 people voted “no.” The “no” vote won’t affect the Fanucchi development as the city agreed to take on roadways connecting the parcel to the rest of the city, said Fresno City Manager Georgeanne White.

Fanucchi said construction on the project is well underway, with waterlines being laid.

“The area needs the housing, we’ve very happy that we made a better use of our old property to help the housing needs that are out there because most of these homes are all going to be first-time buyer homes,” Fanucchi said.

SEDA Will Irreversibly Transform Prime Farmland: Residents

Part of what made getting Fanucchi’s land development so contentious was that the agreement for how the city and county would split property taxes expired as the plan map was getting ready for approval. Both governments said they weren’t getting enough to pay for services they provide.

In December, both bodies agreed to a new tax sharing agreement.

And, while hearings for the tax-sharing agreement at the city brought out developers praising the agreement, at the county hearing, residents of southeast Fresno came out to object.

The SEDA plan repurposes 9,000 acres of land from rural farmland into a residential and commercial miniature city. The city’s specific plan, which includes an environmental study and estimated infrastructure cost, is stalled, with little apparent desire from city officials to move the plan forward.

Under the terms of the agreement, the city would get 51% of property taxes in the SEDA area, compared to the 40% it gets everywhere else.

Many residents said during the meeting that the SEDA plan comes at the cost of valuable farmland.

Related Story: Is Fresno Done Growing? Officials Call for Halt to City Support of Southeast ...

Jose León Barraza, CEO for the Southeast Fresno Community Economic Development Association and Fresno City Council candidate, said SEDA promotes urban sprawl at a time the city has vacant infill land.

Property owners David and Helen Ramming said the plan changes land and water use and increases traffic and noise pollution in the area.

“Losing our farm is not as big a concern as losing the 9,000 acres of prime agricultural land with the best sandy soil in the country,” Helen Ramming said.

Fresno County Supervisor Brian Pacheco said during the meeting that SEDA helps bring affordable housing to the county by way of the city.

He also said it helps preserve farmland in other areas.

“As a supervisor from the west side of our county, I supported this plan years after it was originated because I want to protect our unique and highly fertile farm soils of the west,” Pacheco said during the hearing. “If we allow asphalt to overlay our soil, we will never get it back.”

Annexation Requires Consent: Mendes

Annexation is a complicated process.

It begins with a property owner’s request, White said. Under the Cortese Knox Hertzberg Act, to keep from creating county islands and peninsulas, property owners between the requesting land and the nearest city boundary also get drawn into the process. Those that vote against annexation would retain their county zone district.

The city’s overlay code also allows annexed property to keep rural features such as barns for animals or barbed wire that would otherwise not be allowed under city code, said Jennifer Clark, director of Fresno’s Planning and Development Department.

Property owners would also have to consent to selling their land. Mendes said that provides protections for property owners who don’t want to see their land changed.

Bernard Jimenez, assistant director of the Fresno County Department of Public Works and Planning, doubted that work in the SEDA plan would begin in the 10-to-15-year lifespan of the tax sharing agreement.

Opting out may not prevent development from happening around property owners who oppose annexation if SEDA is approved and moves forward.

But Mendes said the overlay district and annexation rules do provide some protections to rural residents.

“Look at the Fanucchi project, a group of people said they don’t want to be annexed, and they didn’t get annexed,” Mendes told GV Wire.