Frivolous Lawsuits? Part 1 of a 5-Part Series

Part 1:  Refuge Promises To U.S. Department of The Interior’s Fish and Wildlife Service

The United States Department of the Interior’s Fish and Wildlife Service was opposed initially to the development of the Refuge Subdivision back in 2001.  They were concerned because the development would increase the population of residents adjacent to the Wildlife Refuge and would place increased burdens on the Wildlife Refuge's water and wildlife.

Fish and Wildlife advised the County of its opinion and requested that the Original Developer’s application for the Subdivision be denied.  In light of Fish and Wildlife's position, the County required the Original Developer to obtain the approval of Fish and Wildlife before the County would approve the development of the Subdivision.

In order to address the concerns raised by Fish and Wildlife and in order to obtain the County's approval of the development of The Refuge, the Original Developer agreed to:

a)   Lower the density at The Refuge from 600 units to 360 units;

b)   Eliminate all multi-family and time-share components of the development;

c)    Move the Golf Course clubhouse to increase the natural areas of the  Subdivision;

d)   Increase the acreage of the Golf Course to provide more open area and green space.

The Original Developer also promised and represented to Fish and Wildlife that the Golf Course would serve as an appropriate transition between the Subdivision and the Wildlife Refuge because the Golf Course provides natural open space, would protect the water and wildlife resources of the Wildlife Refuge, and the Golf Course would otherwise improve riparian conditions for the area.

The Original Developer made such promises to Fish and Wildlife to induce it to approve the Subdivision.

Fish and Wildlife approved the plans for the development of the Subdivision based on the Original Developers' representations and promises.  The Golf Course, in its platted state, was a key element in obtaining approval from Fish and Wildlife for the Subdivision.

Only after Fish and Wildlife issued its approval did Mohave County approve development of The Refuge Subdivision.

As the successor-in-interest to the Original Developer, The Aldridges are subject to the representations and agreements of the Original Developer with Fish and Wildlife.  These agreements run “with the land”.  To replace 50 acres of this land that was agreed to remain as a “buffer” between the homes and the Wildlife Refuge with 300 RV pads and all of the associated by-products and significantly increase the density of the area would be a direct violation of these representations and agreements.  

Besides the legal ramifications, if these agreements and restrictions are disregarded by the Aldridges and the City of Lake Havasu, how likely is it that these governmental entities will cooperate with developments such as this in the future?

Over the next several months, we will be providing additional information in this 5-part series.  Part 2 will address Final County Resolutions, the Final Plat Map, restrictions on further subdividing this land and zoning (which, by the way, is the basis of the lawsuit that was just filed against the City of Lake Havasu by Refuge property owners).

It is important for the residents of Lake Havasu to realize that by annexing this land, the City is stepping right into the middle of this legal and moral nightmare. Wouldn’t it make more sense for the City to wait until these and other issues of contention (outlined in separate postings) are resolved before moving ahead with this ill-advised partial annexation?  

For key documents related to this article, check our "Documents & Links" tab.