A group of over 50 Marin residents filed a lawsuit last week against the county over its decision to approve the $8.85-million purchase of the San Geronimo Valley Golf Course with assistance from the Trust for Public Land.
The group, called the San Geronimo Advocates, contends that the county violated the California Environmental Quality Act, known as CEQA, on numerous counts, but primarily in its decision to purchase the property before conducting an environmental review and accompanying public process.
The county cited its ultimate intention to convert the course into a park or open space when it filed an exemption from CEQA that applies to “transfers of interest in land to preserve open space.”
The Board of Supervisor’s Nov. 14 resolution authorizing the purchase said there will be no substantial adverse impacts to the environment at this stage of the process—the course may be operated by a third party through 2019—but that any future projects would indeed be subject to CEQA review.
The suit claims that the use of this exemption, along with the commitment of $2.5 million in Measure A funds—which can only be allocated for projects benefiting parks, open spaces and natural resources—resulted in a “de facto determination” about the future use of the property before a thorough public review of all possible uses for the site.
“While the county has promised a future environmental review, by the terms of the Class 25 exemption and the use of Measure A funds, that review will be nothing more than an after-the-fact, check-the-box exercise that justifies the county’s decision,” the suit states.
The lawsuit also references the San Geronimo Community Plan, which states that “the golf course should be retained with no major expansion of the facilities. Future uses should be limited to those which support the primary use as a golf course.” (It does not cite this as a violation.)
The San Geronimo Advocates have asked supervisors to rescind the resolution that authorized the purchase of the course, which the group calls “a valuable recreational resource,” and to hold off on using Measure A funds until the county completes an environmental review and associated public process.
“The lawsuit isn’t something we absolutely wanted to do, but we felt it was important that we get a process, that we plan before you purchase it,” Niz Brown, a Woodacre real estate broker and one of the leaders of the suit, told supervisors on Tuesday. “Since we went public, over 50 people have donated to the cause… And mostly they are upset over the fact that you are using county funds to destroy a very special recreational asset without planning ahead. And there’s not any conversation about what it is going to cost the county, going forward after paying $8.5 million for it.”
Ms. Brown said those helping to fund to suit “are environmentalists as well. It’s not just the golfers and it’s not just the taxpayers—it’s a wide range of people.”
Fissure on board
Back in November, supervisors voted to go forward with the purchase of the golf course despite an administrative error: the county’s notices of intent for the purchase had not been not published in a newspaper for three consecutive weeks, as stipulated by law, before the vote. (The last notice was late.)
Since then, the county re-published the public notice in the Marin Independent Journal.
At Tuesday’s hearing, county counsel Brian Washington explained that in order to have an “abundance of caution and eliminate any doubt that the notice had been done properly,” they had re-noticed the action. This meant that supervisors had to vote again on going forward with the golf course purchase.
And though supervisors had voted unanimously in November, the re-vote on Tuesday revealed a new division on the board: Supervisor Judy Arnold, the board’s chair, dissented, citing extensive community concern.
“Environmentally, acquiring this property is a sound decision,” Supervisor Arnold said in her closing comments. But, she added, “From everything I’m hearing, it’s clear that we needed more dialogue on this matter. It’s only with public participation that we can find the right way forward for a community who clearly feels they have not been heard. In response to community concerns and questions about this project, I’m having a difficult time allocating general fund dollars, especially when we have so many unfunded needs in Marin that these funds could be used to support.”
Yet in a 4:1 vote, the resolution passed for a second time.
Tuesday’s hearing also offered an opportunity for a small number of residents to criticize the lawsuit, which was filed in Marin Superior Court on Tuesday, Dec. 5.
One Woodacre resident expressed dismay. “I need to share my upset and my anger at this nuisance lawsuit that wants to torpedo the acquisition of the golf course for the purpose of rewilding 157 acres,” he said. “This legal action is unconscionable, vindictive, venal and destructive of all of our community relations. It is entirely not based on environmental science, it uses false and misleading arguments, it is an abomination for all of us who desire to live healthily and closer to nature.”
The numbers present at the hearing, which was largely a formality linked to the re-vote, paled in comparison with the hundreds at the November hearing when the board first voted on the purchase. But those who spoke this week generally fell into the same two camps: environmentalists encouraged the deal to protect endangered coho salmon and threatened steelhead trout in San Geronimo and Larsen Creeks, while critics said the deal was hurried or expressed dismay over the closure of a cherished sporting venue.
Next steps
In October, the Trust for Public Land signed an option-to-purchase agreement to buy the course for a maximum of $8.85 million. The county has committed to purchasing the course from the trust within the next year and, in the interim, to pay an independent party to operate the business—keeping it secure, clean and mowed—until at least 2019.
County Parks is developing a request for proposals for potential operators by Jan. 5. Previously, the county was unable to find anyone willing to assume the financial risk of operating the course. This time, the county will offer to pay an operator to run the golf course up to $140,000, which is what it estimates it would pay per year to maintain the property on its own.
Though supervisors committed to use $1.41 million from general funds and $2.5 million from Measure A acquisition funds, the purchase is nevertheless contingent upon the county and the trust succeeding in securing $4.94 million from state and private sources.
The lawsuit however, may prolong the transaction.
Mr. Washington, the county counsel, said he is talking with the attorney representing the San Geronimo Advocates, Riley F. Hurd, about the possibility of the county agreeing not to close on the property before a judge rules on their request for a preliminary injunction at the first hearing. That may not take place until March.
Brian Moriarty, the senior project manager for the Trust for Public Land, said that the lawsuit will not affect the trust’s purchase of the golf course, which is set to enter escrow by the end of the year.
The trust, which said it borrowed the money for the outright purchase, took interest in the project as an exceptional conservation opportunity given the importance of the Lagunitas Creek watershed to the threatened and endangered fish.
Mr. Moriarty said that although the suit does not have an impact on the trust’s purchase, it may affect the timing of the county’s subsequent purchase from the trust. “As we understand,[the lawsuit] is a question of process,” he said. “The suit is claiming there was an improper procedure followed, and it’s possible that the remedy for that is more public process to evaluate the impacts of the acquisition. If that’s the result, we may have to hold the property for a longer period of time, which is something we are happy to accommodate.”
In the meantime, Marin County Parks is moving ahead with plans for a smooth transition.
At Tuesday’s hearing, parks director Max Korten said he and his staff have been reaching out to San Geronimo Valley residents and community groups to discuss both the short-term management of the golf course and long-term planning for the site.
He said the department also planned to discuss these issues with residents across Marin but that, since “the average visitor to trails within our parks lives within a mile and comes over 70 times a year, it’s extremely important to reach out to the immediate community that we serve.”
The department is now searching for a facilitator for this community planning and envisioning process. Mr. Korten explained that because the uses for the property could be broader than the jurisdiction of the parks department—for example, organic farming—the planning process would not be limited to his department.