The 44-page lawsuit names as respondents the county, filmmaker George Lucas, Lucasfilm, and the partnerships connected to Lucas that own the McGuire and Loma Alta ranches (which are part of the masterplan).

The suit claims county approval of Lucasfilm's expansion violated the California Environmental Quality Act, that Lucasfilm's masterplan is inconsistent with the countywide plan, and that the masterplan and use permits are inconsistent with county zoning.

The lawsuit asks the court to rule that the county must "go back and do an adequate EIR," noted Gaffney, and that "no future project approval is granted in the interim while the court rules."

Supervisor Gary Giacomini this week said, "The county will vigorously defend its decision, [but] the lion's share of the defense will be waged by the real party in interest, Lucasfilm." Attorneys for the county and Lucas are already scheduling meetings to work out a joint strategy, Giacomini said.

The supervisor added, "We expected a lawsuit would be filed. We were meticulous [in following legal procedures]. The suit legally does not have legs and does not have stamina. It will be resolved very quickly. These matters must be resolved within 90 days."

Referring to the Save Our Countywide Plan Committee, Giacomini said, "The people you think would be the plaintiffs are in disarray."

In fact, the Lucas Valley Homeowners' Association is not a party to the lawsuit, and Gaffney declined to say who the committee represents, mentioning only Reed Kathrein as its representative.

Kathrein on Wednesday said that while some individual members may want to block Lucasfilm's expansion, "I can't say the group wants to stop the project."

The issue, he said, is that "this is inconsistent with the countywide plan absent a zoning amendment." As a result, he added, the expansion could set a precedent for allowing commercial operations on other agricultural lands around Nicasio Reservoir, along the Point Reyes-Petaluma Road, in Tiburon, around Novato, and "all around the county...

"Is that what the county wants? Do they realize the traffic and other impacts?"

Like attorney Gaffney, Kathrein would not name other members of the Save Our Countywide Plan Committee but said they include residents throughout the county.

The committee's unknown makeup this week prompted Lucasfilm spokeswoman Jeanne Cole to wonder aloud, "Who are these people?"

Noting the expansion was "unanimously approved both at the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors," Cole said, "It's disappointing that it's come to this [lawsuit].

"We're not going to let it slow us down...if we can help it." She noted it will still be many months before Lucasfilm is ready to begin construction: "We have to go through the precise-development plan. We have to hire architects first."

One of those supporting the lawsuit is Joy Dahlgren of Lucas Valley, who hopes the court action "will avoid anything like this happening again. We don't want anymore commercial development on Lucas Valley Road."

Although the county has told Lucasfilm it can have only 640 employees in its new buildings, Dahlgren noted that amounts to "1,000 square feet per employee...There's a potential for many, many more people being there - especially if it should ever change hands."

In approving Lucas' masterplan, the county placed 84 specific conditions on development, but Dahlgren called them "impossible to enforce. The neighbors would have to be policemen, and we don't want to do that."

Referring to the expansion, she added, "If we had our druthers, we'd stop it."

However, Daniel Chaffin, who had opposed the Lucasfilm expansion throughout county hearings said he is not taking part in the lawsuit. Even if the committee is successful in court and the county has to approve a new EIR, he predicted "the same result."

In deciding not to join in the lawsuit, Chaffin said, "the election of Mr. [Steve] Kinsey had a lot to do with my thinking." During his campaign to replace Giacomini, who is retiring as supervisor, Kinsey backed the Lucasfilm proposal in its final form.

Like Kathrein, however, Chaffin is still worried about traffic problems - especially during construction - and that "other developers may very well try to copy this."

Construction traffic also worries Vicky Van Meter of Upper Lucas Valley, and she has joined the committee filing the lawsuit.

"People don't realize the impact on West Marin," she said. "All the construction vehicles going to Big Rock [one of the ranches owned by Lucas] are going to have to go through West Marin." Lucas Valley Road from the east is too winding, she noted.

Chaffin also warned that Lucasfilm may eventually want to expand even further along Lucas Valley Road, and "when the county gets fully addicted to the tax revenues...it gets awfully hard to say no."

All this notwithstanding, Chaffin said he is willing to accept the supervisors' decision: "This is a democracy."

Another resident of the Lucas Valley Road area who has dropped out of the opposition is Ron Marinoff, a former planning commissioner. "I don't hold out any great hope of the project being defeated," he said, although "some procedural errors may have to be corrected."

Attorney Walter Dods of Marinwood told The Light that while he is not a member of the Save Our Countywide Plan Committee, he has contributed to it.

"We are not opposed to Lucas. We are not opposed to Lucasfilm," said Dods. "We are pro the county plan." Dods said he would consider it a victory if the lawsuit forced the expansion to be scaled back. "Anything less than this huge project would be better for [Lucas] Valley, better for the county," he said.

Both sides in the dispute are agreed on one point: the lawsuit could prove expensive. "It's terribly daunting," said Dods. "Lucas has got a billion bucks in personal assets. Lucasfilm is huge."

"The cost is intimidating," Kathrein concurred. "That's why it's being done as a group." What particularly worries him, Kathrein said, is that "the loser could be assessed with the defense costs."