First Steps Up Sonoma Mountain

#70, June 27, 2001

Two cheers for the Petaluma City Council and Supervisor Mike Kerns! Last week, by a 5-2 vote, the Council formally asked the Board of Supervisors to support the County Open Space District (OSD) purchase of Lafferty Park development rights. Supervisor Kerns has pledged to take the City's case to the County Board of Supervisors.

Why cheer? Because OSD purchase of the Lafferty property development rights is critical for the protection and public enjoyment of Lafferty. Mayor Clark Thompson, who voted for the resolution, said, "It's a smart thing to do. If there's a bad economic situation a future council may decide they have to sell the property." Selling the development rights to the OSD would prevent that.

But why shouldn't the City just give the development rights to the OSD, which would be easier to get past the other Supervisors? Well, that would effectively kill Lafferty Park. The park opponents' red tape campaign has cost the City hundreds of thousands of dollars. They know the City is now cutting budgets, and can't afford to fight for Lafferty Park in court. With the proceeds from a market-value sale of development rights, the City can win the war of attrition against Pfendler's lawyers.

This raises a bigger issue: why should the County help the City? Hooray for Mr. Kerns for recognizing that 1) Petaluma residents are also County residents, and have pumped $14 million into the OSD fund, 2) Lafferty will be used by non-Petalumans (it's as close to Cotati as it is to my west side neighborhood), 3) the South County is facing a 1700 acre deficit of accessible open space, per the County General Plan, and 4) this OSD-Lafferty represents the fastest and most cost-effective strategy for making up that shortage.

Why only two cheer? Because the climb to Lafferty Park has only just begun. Fortunately, Mr. Kerns has some powerful arguments to use with his colleagues, in addition to those listed above. To those who say Cities won't sell their property for development, we need only look over the hill. In 1999, voters in the City of Sonoma had to resort to a referendum to prevent the sale of their "unused" city-owned hillside open space from being sold to a developer. The OSD can't buy development rights from government agencies? In 1998, they paid $255,000 to the State of California to purchase a forever-wild conservation easement over a 290-acre portion of the Sonoma Developmental Center property.

Why not wait until Lafferty is really threatened with sale for development? That strategy failed on the Sonoma Mountain McCrea property, where everyone wrongly assumed that the agreed-upon trail was "safe" without formal protection. In addition, the price may then be far higher than the OSD can afford, if even it still exists.

But won't buying development rights from a City set a bad precedent? For under a million dollars, this purchase will protect the "jewel of Sonoma Mountain" against eyesore development and enable opening for public enjoyment 270 acres with valuable and unique recreational assets (Bay Area and Pacific Ocean views, a perennial stream and variety of ecosystems, miles of trails of a wide variety, all within 30 minutes of 100,000 Sonoma County residents.) If another city has a deal this good (and has put up anywhere near the money Petaluma has invested in Lafferty), the OSD would be foolish not to pursue it.

But can the OSD use recreation potential to help justify purchase of development rights? That is exactly what it did for Moon Ranch, which was classified as low risk of significant development. The development rights purchase was justified based on Moon Ranch's eventual conversion into a regional park (as part of the Lafferty-Moon trade.)

It's heartening to see Supervisor Kerns and Mayor Thompson (along with Council Members Healy, Maguire, Torliatt, and Cader-Thompson) supporting this initiative. It's a great step toward City/County cooperation, and bringing a fair conclusion to the Lafferty controversy. When that happens, they will hear not three cheers, but thirty thousand.