Purchase creating questions
Parties for both sides on defensive
Woodland News, June 23, 2005
A Yolo County Indian tribe's offer to finance the county's proposed purchase of Conaway Ranch has stirred debate.
At stake is land, water, gas, mineral rights and farmland. The privately-owned ranch, east of Woodland, is one of the few remaining large open spaces in the fast-growing Sacramento metropolitan region. The region in recent years has faced pressure to accommodate thousands of coastal Californians longing for cheaper homes.
The result is the county wants to preserve the land and ensure developers won't be pouring concrete and asphalt. They say they have a history of preserving open space.
But the private owners say they won't sell it. They say they will preserve the land.
Also,, some say a tribal entity should remain separate from public governments. They say it is a separate nation and therefore not part of the United States.
But others say that tribes have roots in United States and that they should collaborate with public governments.
The controversies come as the Woodland City Council voted 4-0 Tuesday to remain neutral on a proposed Assembly bill that would allow the Rumsey Band of Wintun Indians to join a joint powers authority on an equal level with public government entities. The bill is awaiting action in the Senate.
The Conaway Ranch JPA has been proposed to manage the ranch, should eminent domain action succeed. Eminent domain allows government entities to buy land for public good. The Yolo County Superior Court is scheduled Aug. 23 to start a trial determining if Yolo County can acquire the 17,300-acre ranch, housing one of the state's richest concentrations of birds and waterfowl.
On May 17, the Yolo County Board of Supervisors made a handshake agreement with the Tribe allowing them to help finance the estimated $60-million ranch, should eminent domain action succeed. There was no written agreement stating the terms of the deal, county officials say.
"Nobody throws $60 million without some security," said Jim Nielsen, former state Senator. "It has to do with the back room secrecy of the county."
But supervisors say the deal was based on trust.
The relations have "evolved" over the years, said Supervisor Mike McGowan.
The handshake came after supervisors agreed May 3 to turn agricultural land next to Cache Creek Casino into a tribe-owned 18-hole golf course. County officials say they have been discussing changing the land since 2000.
But Nielsen says the county is dishonest.
"It gives an odor of a connection," Nielsen said.
But the supervisors disagree.
"It was a coincidence. This is not quid pro quo," McGowan said. "Nielsen can speculate all he wants. He is pulling that out of his hair."
The Tribe's attorney concurs.
"One had nothing to do with the other," Howard Dickstein said.
The farmland, adjacent to the casino, is protected under the Williamson Act, which allows the landowner to preserve the land for agriculture in return for lower property taxes. But the supervisors agreed to change the land's use.
They wanted to turn the casino area into a "destination resort," McGowan said.
"If you go to a hotel and you have a casino and you build a golf course and spa, the average patron is more apt to spend more time and money there," he added. "Now, many clients come and go in one day. It is no help to the locals."
But with the land-use change, the quality of the casino would be "upgraded" and clients would stay longer, he said. "It would help the local economy."
The supervisors initiated an eminent domain action July 8, 2004 hoping that Conaway Ranch would come under public control. Now, the seven-mile long ranch is owned by Conaway Preservation Group, a band of developers, including a Silicon Valley venture capitalist.
The Tribe has asked for a voting seat on the Conaway Ranch JPA board, now comprised of 11 seats. Five seats come from Yolo County, one from UC Davis, one from Yolo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and one each from Woodland, Davis, West Sacramento and Winters.
Some say the Tribe should not be on equal footing with public government entities.
"Our founding father's excluded Indian tribes from participating in local government for a reason," said Councilman Neal Peart.
But the Tribe's attorney says tribes have that right.
"It just reflects ignorance of Indian tribe," said Dickstein. "Rumsey government enters into agreements with the United States. It's a public entity with elected officials, a constitution and it's own laws." McGowan agrees.
"I'm not going to be held by the definitions of the founding fathers," he said.
He added that the founding fathers did not see everybody as equal.
"Those original guidelines of the founding fathers are out of date," he said, referring to the view of African Americans two-hundred years ago. "We see the Tribe as a co-equal form of government," he said.
Still, others say the Tribe has an economic interest by financing the purchase. They say there could be a conflict of interest when an entity pays for something for which it will have voting power.
"It's always suspect when someone buys their way in," said Dudley Holman, former mayor of Woodland, referring to the close timing between the golf-course deal and the Tribe-county JPA partnership. "You can't take part in discussion or voting if you have a financial interest."
Others say if an Indian tribe can take part in the Conaway Ranch JPA then so can nonprofits.
"Why doesn't the YMCA just join the JPA?" asks attorney Robert Millsap of Woodland. "Why doesn't the Rotary Club or the Lion's Club?"
But Dickstein says those comments degrade the Tribe.
"This idea that an Indian tribe is like a Lion's Club, which is not a government, is extremely insulting to the Tribe and certainly reflects, at best, ignorance about the nature of the Tribe and, at worst, prejudice against the Indians."
The owners say they should keep the ranch because they have a history of preservation.
They say they have preserved the land since two of the owners, Steve Gidaro and John Reynen, helped negotiate to purchase it in 1990. They say they have assembled a team of experts to preserve the land, about 67 percent of which is protected under the Williamson Act. They say development cannot occur because much of the land is in a floodplain.
But McGowan, who helped spearhead efforts to buy the ranch, says the current owners cannot be trusted.
"One of the owners is now proposing to sell Yolo County farmland for thousands of homes," he said. "They're all land developers. I call them dirt merchants.
"They go in and buy land for public use at cheap prices and they try to pull in a few fast shenanigans and run land prices up. They sell land back to the government at inflated prices. That is what they do for a living," he added.
Tovey Giezentanner, spokesperson for Conaway Preservation Group, agreed that one of the owners is looking into selling land in Yolo County for homes.
But he said, "We want to preserve the ranch and make sure land and water is available for family farmers for generations to come."
He added that much of the land in the ranch is zoned for farming or for preservation. He said the county has the final say in determining if housing can be developed on the ranch.
But McGowan said if the owners really want to preserve the ranch, then why don't they sell it for less than $60 million. For example, he said the owners should sell the land for $20 million - a sum the county could afford.
But Giezentanner said, "We're interested in seeking a return on our investment through revenues from leasing to local farmers and by placing easements and other controls on the ranch."
Still, McGowan says the owners have less credibility than the county.
"Look at our tract record. Seventy-five percent of Yolo County land is contracted under the Williamson Act," he said. "It is one of the highest percentages in the state."
- Shawbong Fok can be reached sfok@dailydemocrat.com