SDG&E Golden Pacific Power Link Transmission Project
Temecula
Summary not yet generated for this topic.
Community sentiment
At a glance
- Public comments
- 67
- Last 30 days
- 0
Last discussed May 26, 2026.
Public comments (67)
Co-founder of 'Save Temecula, Fight the Power Link,' noting over 6,000 petition signatures against the proposed SDG&E route and urging immediate council opposition.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 2:46:27 →Local realtor warning that 200-foot transmission towers will devastate property values and exacerbate insurance crises.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 2:48:13 →Expressed deep concern over wildfire risks associated with utility infrastructure and the impact on tourism.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 2:49:35 →Warned about electromagnetic fields, noise, and wildfire risks, criticizing utility statements.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 2:51:35 →Longtime resident ready to fight the project just as the community fought Liberty Quarry.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 2:51:58 →Offered expertise in energy trading and power procurement to assist the city in analyzing utility data.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 4:48:17 →Father and eagle scout leader urging the city to reject the power line project.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 2:54:57 →Energy sector professional stating that local solar and battery installations will double the power needed by 2032, making the lines unnecessary.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 2:55:36 →Praised council for standing up for residents and suggested exploring undergrounding or alternatives.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 2:56:47 →Resident near Temecula Creek receiving late notice from SDG&E regarding property access for surveys.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 2:58:05 →Speaking for Temecula Advocacy Coalition, representing tourism and winegrowers, opposing the route through wine country.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 2:59:14 →Speaking for Visit Temecula Valley in opposition to transmission towers threatening scenic corridors and tourism.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:00:14 →Morgan Hill resident highlighting fire risks and interference with aerial firefighting along Temecula Creek.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:02:41 →Stated that meeting attendance does not capture the full scope of community opposition due to work schedules.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:03:31 →Criticized state regulators and utility routing decisions.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:03:37 →Former Quality of Life Master Plan committee member stating the project violates core city values.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:06:09 →Cited studies on elevated childhood cancer rates near high-voltage transmission lines.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:08:46 →Red Hawk Community Association president voicing strong opposition and property value concerns.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:08:53 →Corporate executive noting that the Temecula route was chosen primarily to cut costs for utility shareholders.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:11:46 →Temecula Valley Wine Growers Association Executive Director opposing the route through wine country and agricultural preserves.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 5:20:01 →Urged the city to fight the project and encouraged residents to join grassroots opposition groups.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:13:14 →Temecula Old Town Association board secretary urging opposition to preserve the city's long-term character.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:14:55 →Resident living along Temecula Creek expressing distrust of utility statements and fire insurance concerns.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:16:43 →Raised concerns about electromagnetic field exposure risks to children near schools in Vale Ranch.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:18:02 →Cited historical data on catastrophic California wildfires caused by power lines in creek drainages.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:19:20 →50-year resident and local business owner thanking the council for thorough research and opposing the project.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:20:10 →Longtime resident urging the city to pursue legal and ordinance options to block the power lines.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:21:43 →Expressed deep distrust of utility representatives and called for community unity.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:21:59 →40-year resident recalling past victories against Valley Rainbow and Liberty Quarry, urging a local ordinance.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:23:45 →Offered professional utility project experience to help block the power line route.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:23:49 →19-year resident stating Temecula is a home, not a map dot, urging protection of the community.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 7:01:41 →Engineer praising council questions and encouraging holding utility feet to the fire on engineering studies.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:26:25 →Red Hawk resident noting that state legislation limits litigation, requiring early and united opposition.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:26:16 →Praised staff and council, criticizing utility representatives for poor preparation and lack of answers.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:27:39 →TVUSD school board member and resident speaking on behalf of Vail Ranch Middle School students and community opposition.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 8:03:20 →Resident living along the creek urging legal injunctions and lawsuits against the utility.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:30:43 →Expressed health concerns over cancer risks and property degradation from power lines.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:30:57 →Stated he uses solar and battery backup, rejecting the utility project.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:32:32 →Temecula Creek homeowner discussing financial impacts, property values, and tax assessments.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:32:42 →Save Temecula nonprofit representative highlighting safety, health, and economic harms.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:32:42 →Retired UCR environmental researcher noting that distributed power is the future and utility plans are obsolete.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:35:41 →Local mother expressing mama bear opposition to the project.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:37:08 →Questioned the lack of risk management plans and stakeholder analysis regarding future generations.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:38:50 →Expressed frustration over EMF safety thresholds and corporate financial priorities.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:38:52 →Former San Onofre worker citing radiation and health concerns related to power lines.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:41:08 →Summit View resident noting the visual impact and highlighting Temecula's national prominence in tourism.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:41:44 →Aubrey Place board member representing 180 units bordering Temecula Creek opposing the project.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:43:22 →Barringer Creek resident detailing a recent creek fire and how open airspace allowed CAL FIRE aerial suppression.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:44:16 →Raised concerns over non-ionizing radiation and out-of-state power generation.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:46:49 →Questioned projected energy demand growth and reliance on imported solar panels.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:47:50 →Nighthawk Pass resident who invested life savings in a home 500 feet from the proposed lines.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 13:20:00 →Children's pastor noting the presence of preschools and churches along the route.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:49:42 →36-year resident and power line fire lawyer discussing utility wildfire liability and legal history.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:51:21 →Morgan Hill resident criticizing utility representatives for being unprepared and disrespectful.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:53:37 →17-year resident stating the project must be killed entirely if it cannot bypass Temecula.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:54:03 →Resident living directly on Temecula Creek noting that property values and views are already impacted by being on the map.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:55:55 →Cited statistics showing California has the highest transmission line wildfire fatality rate in the nation.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:57:01 →Noted existing infrastructure corridors and urged more thorough utility homework before targeting Temecula.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:58:12 →Argued the project stems from utility suppression of rooftop solar through trade association lobbying.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:59:27 →Temecula Valley Hospital CEO opposing the power lines due to local grid reliability and emergency care priorities.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 3:59:46 →Longtime resident and business owner stating the community must protect its heart and reject utility lines.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 4:00:45 →Fallbrook Community Planning Group member expressing solidarity against forced regional infrastructure dumping.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 4:01:54 →Wildomar resident sharing historical anecdotes about flash floods and poor routing choices.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 4:03:30 →SDSU habitat restoration worker and local tribal citizen detailing cultural and ecological significance of the river corridor.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 4:04:33 →Resident noting the proposed corridor would run directly through his living room edge.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 4:05:57 →US of A Miss Temecula expressing fear over generational impacts and the meaning of Temecula's name.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 4:06:50 →Resident near Temecula Parkway criticizing the 3-year delay in public notification and wildfire bottlenecks.
City Council — May 26, 2026 · 18:58:21 →