If San Luis Obispo rancher Dan De Vaul wants fees waived on his proposals for expanding his sober-living facility, he must prove to county supervisors that he is indeed providing the service he claims to be providing.
Supervisors, who over the years have expressed irritation, anger and weariness in their interactions with the irascible — and, some say, intractable — De Vaul, on Tuesday demonstrated outright mistrust.
Dan De Vaul's Sunny Acres will be overseen by a receiver, judge rules
Permit fees for Dan De Vaul's Sunny Acres won't be waived, supervisors say
Judge agrees to let Cal Poly students fix up Sunny Acres ranch
PolyHouse in running to help De Vaul
Sunny Acres receiver has list of jobs for contractor bidding
At a hearing during which De Vaul was seeking fee waivers on improvements he wants to make at his 72-acre ranch and sober-living facility at 10660 Los Osos Valley Road, supervisors questioned him closely about the services he gives.
De Vaul’s Sunny Acres nonprofit takes care of homeless and addicted people, providing counseling and other services. He asks them to pay $300 a month for room and board if they are able, and many work on his ranch to ease or eliminate the payment.
His help for the county’s homeless has brought him considerable public support and has provided him with an apparent moral high ground from which to fight county code enforcement officers’ many attempts to bring his ranch and its facilities up to code.
De Vaul’s oft-stated argument — that having the homeless sleep in out-of-code facilities is a lot better than having them sleep down by “the crick,” as he puts it — has made sense to many of his supporters, who see the confrontation as a battle between humanity and bureaucracy.
However, Supervisor Bruce Gibson and his colleagues Tuesday questioned the basis for that framework.
Gibson said he wants evidence that Sunny Acres is providing a public benefit. Specifically, he asked for tax returns to be shown to the county annually, and that De Vaul document its clientele: how many there are, for example, and what rents they pay.
Supervisor Frank Mecham said, “I need to see reassurances … that something is going to happen” on De Vaul’s ranch.
Chairman Adam Hill said the struggle with De Vaul has been a “decades-long saga,” adding that it has been “a struggle to get Mr. De Vaul to honor his commitments.”
De Vaul was in the audience during this discussion, but said nothing. His attorney, John Belsher, spoke about the permits, but not the inquiries about Sunny Acres paperwork.
Should De Vaul do all that Gibson and the board ask and comply with other conditions, the county will discuss whether to waive his building permit fees, supervisors decided.
Among other requirements: De Vaul must comply with an existing court order, which requires him to fix up several problems on the ranch, including contaminated water and unsafe living facilities.
The board’s decision does not expel homeless people or addicts, nor does it mean that he can’t go forward with his plans. It merely puts off a decision on when and how he can proceed.
The board deferred further action until Oct. 17.
Former San Luis Obispo City Councilwoman Christine Mulholland — who lives on property facing the ranch — testified against waiving De Vaul’s fees. She said De Vaul has been breaking the law for years and continues to do so.
SanLuisObispo.com is happy to provide a forum for reader interaction, discussion, feedback and reaction to our stories. However, we reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments or ban users who can't play nice. See our full terms of service here.
Here are some rules of the road:
You should also know that The Tribune does not screen comments before they are posted. You are more likely to see inappropriate comments before our staff does, so we ask that you click the "report abuse" button to submit those comments for moderator review. You also may notify us via email at webmaster@thetribunenews.com. Note the headline on which the comment is made and tell us the profile name of the user who made the comment. Remember, comment moderation is subjective. You may find some material objectionable that we won't and vice versa.
If you submit a comment, the username of your account will appear along with it. Users cannot remove their own comments once they have submitted them, but you may ask our staff to retract one of your comments by sending an email to webmaster@thetribunenews.com. Again, make sure you note the headline on which the comment is made and tell us your profile name.
Be the first to know what's going on in San Luis Obispo County. Just tell us how you want to find out — we'll take care of the rest.
Sign up for breaking news alerts from SanLuisObispo.com and get the latest news sent to your cell phone via text message.
By signing up for alerts from this site, you are signing up for a program that may include up to 5 SMS text alert(s) per alert category per day. There is no service fee charged per month but your carrier's standard text messaging and other charges may apply. You may stop this subscription service at any time by sending the text message "STOP" to 72737. You must be at least thirteen (13) years of age to use our alert services. If you are between 13 and 17 years old, you agree that you have received parental permission both to complete the registration process and to receive SMS content on your cell phone. For help, send the text message "HELP" to 72737. This service will work with ATT, Verizon, Sprint, Nextel, Alltell, US Cellular, Cincinnati Bell, Boost, Virgin Mobile USA, Celluar South, Telos, Centennial, East Kentucky Network, Cellcom, Immix and Rural Celluar.
E-mail »
Twitter »
Facebook »
iTribune »
Subscribe »
RSS »
About comments
Reader comments on SanLuisObispo.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Tribune. If you see an objectionable comment, click the "report abuse" button below it. We will delete comments containing inappropriate links, obscenities, hate speech, and personal attacks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. See more about comments here.