Home Oakley Oakley Works to Save 14-Acre Vineyard State Wants to Remove

Oakley Works to Save 14-Acre Vineyard State Wants to Remove

by ECT

dutchsloughmap

On Tuesday, the Oakley City Council will be hosting a Work Session during its Council Meeting to discuss options to try and save 14-acres of Vineyard within the Dutch Slough Wetlands Restoration Project Area.

Since 2003, the vineyard property has been controlled by the State Department of Water Resources (DWR) and is located within the nearly 1,200 acre Dutch Slough Wetlands Restoration Project area. As part of the restoration project, the vineyard is set to be removed—a plan that has been in place for over 10-years.

In the eleventh hour and after millions of dollars have been spent by DWR on the project, the City of Oakley is seeking a solution on saving the vineyard through a land swap or moving the vines to another location.

Matt Cline, of Cline Vineyards, hopes to protect the vineyard where he provided a two-page document to the City on why the vineyard should be protected by calling the vineyard historical and says it could make Oakley a more desirable location.

According to the report, Matt Cline stated that he has leased the land from Stan Emerson or sub-leased the land through Brent Gilbert for the past 25-years. He averages 59.16 tons per year.  Cline states that the vineyard can co-exist with this wetlands restoration project.

However, Patty Finfrock of DWR disagrees saying a commercial vineyard does not belong in the middle of a tidal marsh restoration project.

One idea that was originally discussed, was the idea of a land swap where DWR would allow Oakley to keep the 14-acre vineyard and would then swap out 14-acres of a future 55-acre park .

Dutch Slough

“The land swap idea was discussed with Kevin Romick, as a potential compromise solution to the conflict about the future of the vineyard. However, after more careful consideration, DWR decided the land swap was not a workable solution, as it did not significantly help us meet the project’s objectives,” explained Finfrock.

According to her letter to Kevin Romick (shown below), she stated conflict of interest with vineyard operations and a restored habitat, legal issues with State Property for private gain amongst other reasons.

Another issue facing the 14-acre vineyard is the legality of the lease Mr. Cline has with Mr. Gilbert.

According to City Manager Bryan Montgomery, Mr. Cline is able to utilize the property through subletting  and a lease payment is made to the state.

Councilman Romick referred me to a response from Brent Gilbert which stated that he has a lease for the entire parcel and explained that Mr. Cline works for him on a profit sharing basis.

According to Ms. Finfrock, Mr. Gilbert has a lease to graze cattle, not farm a vineyard which would be an unapproved use of the land per the lease agreement.

“Mr Cline does not, and never did, have a lease with the Department of Water Resources (DWR), or any other State agency, for the vineyard on our (DWR) property. The vineyard is 14 acres within a 426 acre parcel that DWR leases for cattle grazing. Our lessee had an arrangement with Mr Cline to farm the vineyard. Recently, our lessee and Mr Cline were informed via letter that Mr Cline’s use of the property was not allowed by DWR, and that Mr Cline could not access the property without prior permission from DWR,” explained Finfrock.

When asked on the legality of running a commercial vineyard on state property for private gains since 2003, Ms. Finfrock stated she could not speak to that.

Finfrock did explain that one solution was to allow Mr. Cline first right of refusal on the vines where he could purchase them from the state and then transplant them to another location. That proposal may now also be up in the air and the vines would then be sold to the highest bidder.

Below is a copy of the Letter from DWR to Councilmember Kevin Romick dated January 3 regarding the land swap.

January 3, 2014

Councilmember Kevin Romick
Oakley City Council
3231 Main Street
Oakley, CA 94561

Dear Mr. Romick,

Thank you for meeting with me to discuss the potential for trading the Dutch Slough vineyard for 14 acres within the Emerson property designated for the City Park. After a decade of planning, the Department of Water Resources is looking forward to beginning construction of the Dutch Slough Project (Project) in 2014. The Project is planned to meet three objectives: restoring natural Delta habitats, providing education and recreational opportunities, and applying the lessons learned to future restoration projects. In addition, the project is a significant action toward fulfilling the Delta Levees

Program mandate of net habitat improvement in the Delta through expenditure of State funds, which elevates habitat restoration to the primary Project objective.

Disposition of the vineyard is one of the remaining issues to be resolved before starting the restoration construction. As you know, the Project plans to restore 14 acres of tidal marsh to the area currently occupied by the vineyard, and to use the soil excavated from the site to restore an additional 20 acres of tidal marsh. These 34 acres of marsh represent 12% of the tidal marsh to be restored on the Emerson parcel. If the vineyard were preserved in place, the resulting reduction in tidal marsh acreage would be a significant change to the Project and would run counter to our primary objective of tidal habitat restoration. Several other factors are of concern if the vineyard remained in place, including:

  • Potential conflicts between vineyard operations and the restored habitats, including increased groundwater elevation and potential flooding of the vineyard, risk that sulfur and other chemicals applied to the vineyard would runoff into the restored marsh, and agricultural vehicle traffic which would require maintenance of proper roadways and could conflict with recreational use of the restoration site.
  • Legal (and public perception) issues with the use of State property for private gain.
  • An agricultural operation within a tidal marsh restoration is incompatible with the objectives of the restoration.

In considering how to manage the issues around the vineyard and the overarching restoration goals for the property, we reviewed a land swap option with the City’s park land in-holding. However, the land swap.idea that we discussed would not relieve these concerns, except for the use of State land for private gain. In addition, going forward with the land swap has a number of other negative consequences for the Project and

DWR. Both parcels of land would need to be appraised by the State; these appraisals customarily take many months to complete, which could delay Project implementation. As part of the appraisal, a site assessment for hazardous materials would need to be conducted on the portion currently owned by the Emerson family. In addition, the swap could only occur if the appraisals resulted in very similar values for the two parcels, which is unlikely given the need to remove dilapidated buildings from the Emerson family’s parcel. The appraisal, site assessment, and building removal would all increase the Project budget. Finally. the current vineyard site is at higher elevation and will provide more fill material and result in more tidal marsh acreage. All of these factors make the 14-acre vineyard more valuable to the Project than a 14-acre parcel of the land designated for the City Park.

I also talked to Assemblyman Jim Frazier about the land swap idea, and he indicated that such a land swap might require a change in the Oakley General Plan, and may also complicate agreements with some of the ongoing and future developments, which have been promised a 55-acre park that does not include a vineyard. Despite my initial enthusiasm for the land swap idea, careful reflection resulted in consideration of the foregoing issues and how they will negatively impact the Project budget, schedule, and objectives. Unfortunately, it does not appear to be a feasible option and we are no longer pursuing the land swap.

However, we will offer the vines for salvage. Matt Cline has been offered right of first refusal and he has indicated in a letter to DWR that he plans to pursue this option. If he does not salvage all the material in the vineyard, we will offer the City and other interested parties the opportunity to take cuttings or to salvage any remaining vines for transplantation.

If you would like to discuss this further, please feel free to call me at (916) 651-0851 or email me at [email protected].

Sincerely yours,

Patty Finfrock

cc. Mayor Randy Pope
Councilwoman Diane Burgis

For the full staff report, visit City of Oakley

January 24:
DWR Dutch Slough Restoration Project Report Available for Public Comment

Dutch Slough Tidal Marsh Restoration

Project Description

The Dutch Slough Tidal Marsh Restoration Project, in an area formerly slated for urban development, will soon become 1,178 acres of critically needed habitat for fish and wildlife in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The project’s location in the western Delta offers the opportunity, soil types, and lack of subsidence to create a large area of tidal marsh and complex intertidal channels favored by native Delta species. Shaded channels, native grasslands, and riparian forests will be restored in the upland portions of the site. The restored habitats are like those that historically dominated the Delta, and their restoration is considered a critical action to increase numbers of native sensitive species and improve general ecological health of the Delta.

This project will not only provide critical habitat for native plants, fish, and wildlife that are in rapid decline in the Delta, but will also provide outdoor recreation and resources for the residents of the Delta and Bay Area. The former landowners of the project area, once pursuing permits for developing the area with up to 6,000 houses, partnered with State, Federal, and private agencies to create a project to provide an island of habitats and open space in the rapidly urbanizing area of eastern Contra Costa County. The cooperative partnership between the Department of Water Resources, Department of Fish and Wildlife Ecosystem Restoration Program, State Coastal Conservancy, Reclamation Districts, Natural Heritage Institute, City of Oakley, Ironhouse Sanitary District, and private consultants has undertaken the long process of scoping, planning, preparing environmental documents, and securing funding. In 2013, after a decade of planning and preparation, the Dutch Slough Tidal Marsh Restoration Project will begin construction of the first of three phases of project implementation and begin to realize the Project’s goals and objectives.

Project Goals

  1. Benefit native species by re-establishing natural ecological process and habitats.
  2. Contribute to scientific understanding of Delta habitat restoration.
  3. Provide shoreline access and educational and recreational opportunities.

In addition to restoring natural habitats, the Project has a significant recreational component. Fifty-five acres located in the south-central portion of the original land purchase will be deeded to the City of Oakley for a community park. To coordinate with the park, the Dutch Slough Project will include the following recreation features on the Emerson (westernmost) parcel: bike/pedestrian trails, shoreline access, fishing opportunities, and interpretive signs to facilitate educational visits to the site by school and community groups. Click on this link to access the City’s Community Park and Public Access Conceptual Master Plan (PDF: 65.1 MB)

Background

The three parcels which make up the project site were originally leveed around the turn of the 20th century. For over a hundred years, the three parcels of the Dutch Slough property were used for grazing and dairy operations. During the past thirty years, eastern Contra Costa County has undergone a rapid urbanization, and, beginning in the 1990s, the former landowners began securing approvals for the eventual development of the property. In 1997, Contra Costa County approved a development agreement for this property that would have allowed for the construction of 4,500-6,100 housing units on the site. When the City of Oakley incorporated in 1999, this property was within the city limits, and the City accepted the County’s development agreement.

In the fall of 2001, the Natural Heritage Institute (NHI) and the Department of Water Resources (DWR) identified the site as an important restoration opportunity and began working cooperatively with the landowners to obtain grant funding to acquire and restore the property. During 2002, the project partners worked with the Oakley City Council to build local support for the project. In 2002, CALFED’s Ecosystem Restoration Program (now part of the Department of Fish and Wildlife) and the State Coastal Conservancy’s San Francisco Bay Area Program awarded grants to fund the acquisition. In the fall of 2003, the Department of Water Resources completed the purchase of the restoration site.

Site Description

The Dutch Slough site is located in the City of Oakley, eastern Contra Costa County, in the western Delta. The site encompasses 1,178-acres, and is bounded by Dutch Slough on the north, Marsh Creek on the west, the Contra Costa Canal on the south and Jersey Island Road on the east. The site is comprised of three parcels, partially separated by Emerson Slough and Little Dutch Slough. Unlike much of the Delta, the site is not deeply subsided and still has topographic diversity.

East Bay Regional Park District’s Big Break Regional Shoreline is adjacent to the northwestern edge of the site, and the Marsh Creek Regional Trail runs along the southwest side. The City of Oakley will own a 55-acre community park at the south end of the restoration site. The restoration project will re-route Marsh Creek onto the Emerson (westernmost) parcel, and once the restoration is complete, the Marsh Creek Trail will continue to the new mouth of Marsh Creek.

Project Construction

  1. Excavation and import of fill material

The primary goal for the project is to create large expanses of intertidal tule and/or cattail marshes. These marshes develop in areas where the soil surface is exposed at low tide and flooded at high tide. To maximize the area that will become tidal marsh after the levees are breached, higher (southern) areas will be graded down and the excavated soil moved to areas of lower elevation. In addition, about 500,000 cubic yards of soil will be imported and placed in lower elevation areas. Because the northern portions of the site are the most subsided, it is not economically feasible to import the large quantities of material necessary to bring these areas to marsh elevations. These areas will be restored or enhanced as other habitats—open tidal water, managed marsh, or uplands.

  1. Grading

After the soil is placed in areas that will be restored to tidal marsh, it must be graded to the correct elevations and slope, and tidal channels excavated. Proper grading is necessary to allow tidal waters to move freely, transporting nutrients, sediments, plant material, invertebrate organisms, and small fishes into and out of the marshes.

  1. Vegetation per-establishment

In tidal marshes, tules germinate best in areas where the soil surface is exposed part of each day and water depths rarely exceed 1 foot. Once established, however, tules can withstand deeper and longer flooding. Therefore, to increase the area of vegetated marsh, a one or two-year period of tule pre-establishment will occur prior to levee breaching. Water levels will be controlled in new marsh areas to facilitate growth of large expanses of tules and cattails. These tules will also prevent soil erosion when the site is breached.

  1. Levee Breaching

Once the tules are growing well, the levees will be breached, and project construction will be complete.

http://water.ca.gov/floodsafe/fessro/environmental/dee/dutchslough/index.cfm

You may also like

13 comments

Bobby Lott Jan 26, 2014 - 7:41 am

How is this fair to other farmers who follow the rules? Will our cities bail us out to? Land swap seems to benefit just one person at the expense of the rest of Oakley. Is the sublease even at market value since the state never approved it?

Sara G Jan 26, 2014 - 7:42 am

DWR Should back off. Protect the vines at all cost OAKLEY!!!!!!!

John Gonzalez Jan 26, 2014 - 7:48 am

If the lease was not with the state or approved by the state, what happens to all the profit by Gilbert and Cline? Glad that is not me.

Jake G Jan 26, 2014 - 7:55 am

Reminds me of the movie bad news bears and replace “play” with “grow”.

Let them grow, let them grow, let them grow!!!!!! Save the vines!

JimSimmons42 Jan 26, 2014 - 8:06 am

This issue could be solved very easily if the State pulls the lease from Gilbert. Tough one for all parties. If there is no lease, there is no problem.

Barbara DuMont Jan 26, 2014 - 9:24 am

I am really really fed up with all the “save the grapes” nonsense. What about the pasture lands? All the orchards are already gone. Why was it even discussed to for the city to give up 14 acres of a park to save a vineyard? How does that benefit the whole city?? Not everyone drinks wine!! Even to just suggest to give up public land so that a private citizen can continue to make money is so very wrong that it brings into question ethics.

Rob Saw Jan 26, 2014 - 10:33 am

All for saving grapes, but it should be private investors doing so, not the city of oakley giving away our land. Oakley should not be wasting its time with this project because they really have no say since its state land. I’d like 14 acres so I can start a vineyard, where is my hand out city of oakley?

Cathy Jan 26, 2014 - 10:38 am

This has BS written all over it.

Cline has been illegally harvesting grapes according to this article. Why isn’t the state going after him and Mr Gilbert? That is income the state desperately needs even if it is a couple hundred thousand dollars though it sounds like it could go in to the millions. I want to know how much Gilbert and Cline have made with this sweetheart deal and how much this last minute effort is now costing the state. I think our state representatives should be investigating all this to see if we can capture some financial gain from these men that clearly thought they could get away with something.

Cline has known about this impending project for years and yet he waits until the last minute to throw a monkey wrench in to this? I suspect he wanted to fly under the radar with the state as long as possible so that he could squeeze every dollar out of it for his own personal gain. Now he pulls in Councilman Romick for what reason?

Why is Romick taking this on? This is a state issue and why would he be willing to trade valuable city parkland for vineyards that only a private party has to benefit from? Did you see the movie Mr Romick showed around a few years back? They promoted the idea of transplanting vines to other areas. Why isn’t he promoting MOVING the vines? I think the vines should NOT go to Gilbert or Cline but to the highest bidder.

I certainly hope that Mr Romick isn’t suggesting that the city of Oakley get in to the grape growing business. He and the council have their hands full enough as it is.

Clearly this is an attempt of Mr Cline to use Mr Romick as his agent to continue making money off the state land. Shame on all of them. This is a waste of state money and of City of Oakley time and money. This IS BS.

Paul Jan 26, 2014 - 11:23 am

Nice points Cathy. I agree that this is complete BS and usual Oakley who keep residents in the dark until the very last minute. I’d also like to mention that while the Kevin Romick did pitch a movie, he also create and was selling a book on vines in Oakley. Something doesn’t smell right in this deal. Typical Oakley! Change is needed.

Mary Jan 26, 2014 - 12:26 pm

The author is clearly making a mountain out of a mole hill per his usual self. Don’t believe everything you read.

ECV Jan 26, 2014 - 12:32 pm

It looks to me like the author is simply reporting on an issue. If it becomes a “mountain”, don’t blame the player, blame the game.

Julio Jan 26, 2014 - 12:37 pm

There seems to be a lot hiding here. Mr. Romick and Oakley should stay out of it. I agree this needs to be sorted out and Cline and Gilbert probably owe the state a lot of money.

Bev Jan 26, 2014 - 5:05 pm

I don’t understand. Why is this on Oakley’s agenda? Does the city want to get in to the grape growing business?

Comments are closed.