State property: Lake Perris Fairgrounds.
AB 98 would require the Director of General Services to quitclaim, at no cost, the state’s interests in 11 specified parcels of land in the City of Moreno Valley. The parcels are described as largely undeveloped open-space land, including hills and mountains, and the bill ties the transfer to wildfire mitigation, public safety, and expanded recreational use. The city would be required to use the land for wildfire mitigation activities, fire protection for residents and businesses, open-space and outdoor recreational opportunities, and other similar uses the city deems necessary.
The bill also makes legislative findings explaining why the transfer is being proposed. It states that the parcels are in a very high fire hazard severity zone, are within a local responsibility area, and are near schools, neighborhoods, a college campus, and a fire station. The findings further note that the city intends to improve its Public Protection Classification, or ISO rating, through mitigation work, which could help reduce insurance premiums in the area. The bill declares that the transfer serves a public purpose and does not constitute a gift of public funds, and it creates a special statute for Moreno Valley because of the city’s unique wildfire risk conditions.
AB 98 would add Section 14673.13 to the Government Code and create a narrow, city-specific exception to existing state property disposal rules. It would exempt the listed parcels from provisions governing the disposal of surplus state and local real property, and would direct the state to transfer the land without compensation to the City of Moreno Valley if the statutory conditions are met. The bill would affect the Department of General Services, the City of Moreno Valley, and the use and management of the identified state-owned parcels, shifting responsibility for wildfire mitigation and related land use to the city.
The available bill text suggests generally supportive sentiment, with the measure framed around wildfire prevention, public safety, and community recreation. The legislative findings emphasize local need, proximity to vulnerable uses, and the city’s commitment to active maintenance and mitigation, which indicates the bill is presented as a practical public-safety measure rather than a controversial land giveaway. No committee transcript or recorded vote information was provided, so there is no direct evidence of opposition or support beyond the bill’s stated rationale.
The main potential point of contention is the transfer of state property at no cost, which the bill addresses by expressly finding that the transfer serves a public purpose and is not a gift of public funds. Another possible issue is the bill’s city-specific nature: it creates a special statute for Moreno Valley and exempts the parcels from general surplus-property disposal laws, which could raise concerns about precedent or unequal treatment of other jurisdictions. The bill also narrows the transfer to parcels meeting fire-risk and infrastructure-proximity criteria, suggesting the Legislature is trying to justify the exception on wildfire and public-safety grounds.