You are here: News - Local

Published: Friday, Aug. 26, 2011

San Miguel land in limbo over illegal grading fines

County, bank at odds over how much to pay for 2005 infraction

tool name

close
tool goes here
| bcuddy@thetribunenews.com

Declaring themselves “insulted” by a proposal considered lowball, the Board of Supervisors this week declined to shrink a fine levied for illegal grading that damaged an archaeological site adjacent to Mission San Miguel to $13,000 — down from $1.8 million first sought six years ago.

“There has been something done there that was wrong,” said Supervisor Frank Mecham, referring to the illegal grading, and there has to be genuine accountability, not the “kind of an insult” manifested in the $13,000 number.

The board’s decision is the latest episode in a long-running saga involving a would-be 58-unit housing project called Mission Gardens Estates.

The location — across Mission Street and the railroad tracks from the mission — is one of the few sites in the state where archaeologists can learn about “neophytes,” which are Indians preparing to become Christians.

But the developer graded illegally there on a scale that appalled archaeologists and Native Americans. The county has sought unsuccessfully for years to collect “mitigation” money.

The board’s refusal to go as low as $13,000, and applicant Coast National Bank’s refusal to negotiate, left the project in limbo.

Coast National Bank, which foreclosed on the property in 2008, has been trying to sell it, and lowering the long-standing “mitigation” or fine would make it more attractive to a buyer.

The bank had a potential buyer in tow Tuesday: Robert Laing of the Pacific Southwest Community Development Corporation, or PSCDC, who builds affordable housing.

The board’s decision followed a complex three-hour hearing that asked policy makers to weigh the importance of providing possible work-force housing against the importance of making developers pay for disturbing irreplaceable cultural resources.

It also touched on many other policy questions, as well as legal ones, as Coast National’s attorney Sophie Treder traded legal opinions with Whitney McDonald of the county Counsel’s Office.

The tangled Mission Gardens Estates project entered the public pipeline in 2003, when the earlier developer submitted an application to develop the site.

After the illegal grading came to light in 2005, the Planning Commission said that under the law the developer must pay to mitigate the damage or, as environmental planner Steve McMasters described it, pay to a “compensatory mitigation fund that (that would) offset the impact to cultural resources.”

The money collected would, generally, go toward education, mapping cultural resources and other such endeavors, distributed in a manner to be decided by a committee that included Native Americans.

The Planning Commission in 2006 calculated the damage done by the illegal grading at $1.8 million. The then-Board of Supervisors cut that in half.

Meanwhile, the project was moving forward on the planning front. Supervisors approved it in 2006. Then the economy went south, and in 2008 the bank foreclosed on the property.

Last year Coast National Bank, which still owns the property and still has approval for it, sought to change some of the conditions of approval. That led to Tuesday’s hearing.

Some of the proposed changes were relatively minor, such as fiddling with secondary access and tinkering with park fees.

But the greater part of the lengthy afternoon was devoted to the illegal grading and whether the bank should pay to mitigate it and, if so, how much.

Treder and other bank representatives argued that the previous contractor, Gordon Marshall, not the bank, graded illegally, and they shouldn’t be held fully accountable.

However, Supervisor Bruce Gibson noted that the bank had made the loan to the developer in fall of 2005, after the illegal grading had been made public. The Tribune ran a front-page article about it July 12, 2005.

If the bank didn’t know, it should have, several supervisors implied.

During the discussion, the bank pointed out that the county had a long-stated goal of providing work-force housing, which Laing said he might be able to do should he take over the project.

However, under questioning from Supervisor Jim Patterson, Laing could provide few specifics on where his financing would come from, whether he would limit the housing to low-income people, whether some of the homes might be rentals and similar questions.

When supervisors asked Laing if building the project was a sure thing, he said, “There are no guarantees in life.”

Supervisors also stressed the importance of acknowledging that, as Mecham put it, “There has been something done there that was wrong.” In addition to the site’s historic value, Mecham spoke about its spiritual importance for Native Americans.

Mecham asked the bank if it would settle for a $450,000 mitigation fee over five years, and Gibson, made wary by the extended legal back-and-forth between Treder and McDonald, added that the bank should also guarantee the county that it wouldn’t sue over the question.

Coast National said no on both counts. They also turned down Mecham’s suggestion that the board delay a decision and try to reach a middle ground.

“The board’s come a long way,” Patterson said. The bank “came to us with an ‘all or nothing’ proposal.”

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.

What you should know about comments on SanLuisObispo.com

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:

  • Keep your comments civil. Don't insult one another or the subjects of our articles. If you think a comment violates our guidelines click the "report abuse" button. Responding to the comment will only encourage bad behavior.
  • Don't use profanities, vulgarities or hate speech. This is a general interest news site. Sometimes, there are children present. Don't say anything in a way you wouldn't want your own child to hear.
  • Do not attack other users; focus your comments on issues, not individuals.
  • Stay on topic. Only post comments relevant to the article at hand. If you want to discuss an issue with a specific user, click on his profile name and leave him a public message.
  • Do not copy and paste outside material into the comment box.
  • Don't repeat the same comment over and over. We heard you the first time.
  • Do not use the commenting system for advertising. That's spam and it isn't allowed.
  • Don't use all capital letters. That's akin to yelling and not appreciated by the audience.

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.

Our news, your way

Get breaking news on your cell phone

Sign up for breaking news alerts from SanLuisObispo.com and get the latest news sent to your cell phone via text message.

Type in your cell phone number

( ) -

I accept the terms and conditions (click to view)

Keep your phone handy!

Upon hitting the Sign up! button, you will receive a message with a four-digit code at the end. Enter this number on the next screen and press the Confirm button.

Terms and Conditions:

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.

Quick Job Search
Top Jobs