Rohnert Park's General Plan and update process

By Paul D. Stutrud

Rohnert Park has been in a General Plan update process for over ten years (ever since the Harvey Bell/Sierra Club lawsuit in 1990 that legally criticized the General Plan. The biggest problem with the General Plan processes have been the blatant ommission of the citizens in the process and discussion of issues. The current General Plan is yet another example - in spite of what our Mayor claims has been an open invitation to the public.

Up until the 1992 Grand Jury investigation and the final report that was released in January of 1993, Jimmie Rogers pretty much did what he wanted in this city, including the fast track and illegal approval of the Wine Tasting Center that was to be an enhancement for his Red Lion Plaza boutique. The Wine Tasting Center was built on "permanent Public Open Space land" without following the legal processes required by law for the removal of lands from the designation "Public Open Space."

Of course, Rogers was aided and abetted by his three-two majority on the City Council, including Mayor Linda Spiro who signed a 20-page contract for the Wine Center that had blank spaces where the financial details should have been.

As a result, the taxpayers of Rohnert Park have been paying $10,000 per month to a private for-profit Sonoma County Wineries Association for them to use the Wine Tasting Center as a showcase to sell and promote their products. Shouldn't they be paying the City of Rohnert Park?

The taxpayers of Rohnert Park got stuck for a special General Plan update to accomodate Condiotti Enterprises for a special annexation to build 540 homes (including a site for Jimmie Rogers to build his current residence - which ROgers does not own and only recently filed a lease/option to buy). The annexation did not happen because the land was in the Williamson Act but the General Plan update cost the taxpayers about $500,000.

The taxpayers of Rohnert Park got stuck for a special toilet retrofit program to try to conjur up enough sewage capacity to accomodate Condiotti's annexation. In spite of the annexation not happening, the City continued to soak the taxpayers for over $600,000 for this fiasco.

In spite of no available sewage capacity, the majority of three city council (and their cohorts on the Planning Commission) approved two tracts of homes by the Tatmans, the William Lyons/Sterling Homes project in 'M' Section and yet no low-cost or affordable homes were ever added to the city's needed stock. We still do not have adequate sewage capacity. Nor do we have adequate water sources.

The City of Rohnert Park has known of these shortfalls for at least fifteen years. They have ignored reality and have gotten the residents of Rohnert Park closer and closer to the days when we will not be able to enjoy the quality of life we have enjoyed. The City currently overdraws its Sonoma County Water Agency allotment from the Aquaduct by 400%. This 400% is only available as long as Petaluma does not use up their 14% surplus of their Aquaduct allotment. But Petaluma is working toward their own buildout and when that water is fully claimed, Rohnert Park will not have it to draw upon.

The water that lies under Rohnert Park in the aquifer is also in trouble. It is not recharging. It has never recovered from a 4,000 acre-feet draw that occured in a one year period in 1980-81. The water table was drawn down 130 feet and has continued to go down. The results of this has been a problem not only for Rohnert Park but also for the surrounding agricultural community - which has had numerous well failures that have had signficiant financial impacts on their private users. This is one of the reasons the current General Plan has been challenged in court with the lawsuit filed by the folks of Penngrove.

Which brings this discussion to the flaws of the Rohnert Park General Plan processes. The State has a very clear set of laws embodied in the Government Codes, Public Resources Codes, Health and Safety Codes and other codes that pertain to the requirements of a General Plan. The Governors Office of Planning and Research publishes a book called the "General Plan Guidelines" which is available for about $16 to any interested citizen. This book should be the required manual for every city council and planning commissioner for promoting a good General Plan update.

It clearly states what is to be done about encouraging public participation and interest in the General Plan process. Of course, the main thrust is of getting public awareness through the use of the local newspapers (taking out full page ads and writing articles), through the use of public access television programming, through spot radio announcements and newsletters and flyers.

This was not done in Rohnert Park. Instead, we had a four-person 'ad hoc' committee meeting at hours that the normal working person could not attend and making decisions based on whether or not the issues suited our local developers. The adhoc committe was comprised of two pro-growth people (Mayor Vidak-Martinez and Planning Commissioner Greg Nordin) and two slow-growth people (Councilman Jake MacKenzie and Planning Commissioner Shawn Kilat). There were other meetings that did include certain "invited" members of the public but for the most part, the average citizen was not even aware of what was going on.

The General Plan Guidelines call for "Neighborhood Meetings". By virtue of Rohnert Park's alphabeticly named sections, it would have been quite easy to call for such neighborhood meetings and to get into the specific issues of those sections. For example, people from 'L' Section (where Mayor Vidak-Martinez lives) had to make a special appearance before the city council to complain of the severe traffic issues they are problemed with. How many other sections of Rohnert Park have similar problems?

What about founder Paul Golis's original plan to have a swimming pool in every section of Rohnert Park? What about the issues of undergrounding the electrical wires in 'A' and 'B' Sections? These were promised from the days the homes were first built and all of the rate payors of Rohnert Park have been paying for this for years? Why didn't the General Plan process allow this discussion?

Of course, there is much more to be discussed but this is one sampling of what it has been like having a pro-growth majority running this city. In spite of the laws that are supposed to be incorporated in and adherred to in the General Plan, it has been a developers three-two world.