Skip to content
Sign up free
News

Competition heats up for California's land preservation dollars

By Chris Hinyub

3-minute read

The lethargic economy is threatening land conservation efforts and assistance for farmers in the heart of California's wine country. The Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District has managed to stay out of the red, but after bond payments and reduced revenue, the taxpayer-funded program that has so far protected more than 85,000 acres of undeveloped land will be left with a very limited budget for new land deals in the coming years.

The district has not been presented with such a “perfect storm” of fiscal challenges in its 21-year history, agency staff say. The five county supervisors who serve as the district's board of directors held a special meeting Monday to discuss priorities and plot a course for the future.

According to district spokesmen, there are two main factors driving the looming budgetary crisis: a sharp and sudden decline in sales tax revenue (the district's primary source of income) and debt obligations on a recent three-year deal with the state to finance land purchases and conservation easements from private landowners using bonds.

Efren Carrillo, president of the open space board, blames the district's woes on “Bad financial planning” – alluding to the bond-financed spending spree that has resulted in $98 million worth of debt. The district will be paying off those bonds over the next two decades at $7.5 million per year. From 2007 to 2009, the district used the bonds to finance several high-profile land purchases including Taylor Mountain, Jenner Headlands and add-ons to Sonoma Coast State Park and Tolay Lake Regional Park.

Director Valerie Brown wasn't willing to take responsibility for the botched budget. She maintained that the district's recently disbanded Open Space Authority was overseeing most financial decisions up until this year. Voters agreed to a five-year term limit on the authority when the district was renewed in 2006. That deal was supposed to give county supervisors more control over district expenditures. That control came at a price.

Debt payments (combined with staffing and program costs) are expected to siphon most of the district's annual revenue, meaning there's virtually no way to replenish cash reserves. With no more bond proceeds, the district must rely on cash reserves as its main source of project funding. These reserves have dropped from $77 million to $57 million in the past two years and planned projects will shrink that number to $35 million shortly.

This is a scary prospect for the district as Brett Wilkison of the Santa Rosa Press points out:

“At current levels, assuming no growth in sales tax, that figure would support about five years of land purchases and easement projects on private land, a massive shortfall considering the district is supposed to live through 2031.”

A voter-approved quarter-percent sales tax will provide enough income to maintain ongoing expenses. The district is projecting that revenue from taxpayers will amount to $16 million next fiscal year – a 17 percent drop from peak levels in 2007.

District Manager Bill Keene wants to avoid what some supervisors are suggesting: a pause on land deals. His plan is to reduce operational costs while still being able to deposit about $1.5 million annually into reserves. Keene says this year's budget will stand at $18.9 million, half of that coming from previous contributions to reserves.

Currently, supervisors are looking at ways to trim operational costs. One suggestion that has gained traction is to transfer some of the district's own land holdings (some 6,700 acres) to another public entity or even to private hands.

Monday's meeting saw a packed audience of land conservationist, recreation groups and city representatives lobbying for their interests. But a large gathering of farmers came out to voice their concerns about vanishing project dollars. A common refrain from farmers and ranchers was that they were under-served by the district. As Steve Schwartz, executive director of California Farm Link said, “Ag needs its fair share of acquisition dollars.”

Upwards of 80 projects compete for district support each year. Of those, usually only eight make it to a list of finalists. Keene assured the crowd that the district has a guaranteed $35 million in uncommitted cash dedicated to land conservation projects. Competition for that money will likely be fierce.

Tags: News

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Get IVN’s Free Weekly Newsletter:Get IVN’s Free Newsletter

Get IVN’s Free Weekly Newsletter:Get IVN’s Free Newsletter

Nonpartisan Issues. Diverse Perspectives.

Check your inbox and click the link to confirm.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

Competition heats up for California's land preservation dollars

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us