The Fort Bragg City Council voted last week to extend a pause a lawsuit against Mendocino Railway, in favor of negotiating a master development agreement for the oceanfront expanse known as the mill site.
The decision has raised concerns about whether the city is neglecting its responsibility to enforce state and local environmental laws. Peter McNamee, a concerned citizen following the issue, warned that rather than expediting development, the city's move could delay progress and deter investment needed for environmental remediation and infrastructure.
At the core of the dispute is the question of jurisdiction over the former Georgia-Pacific lumber mill site. The city initially sued to clarify its authority to enforce state and local regulations after Mendocino Railway claimed it was subject only to federal oversight due to its status as a railroad.
The legal battle prompted Fort Bragg to request the California Coastal Commission to take over enforcement of the Coastal Act regarding Mendocino Railway's activities within city limits. Since then, the commission has cited the railway for violations carrying potential fines of up to $10,000 per day—totaling in the millions.
However, following the November elections, the city quietly initiated negotiations with Mendocino Railway for a development deal, without notifying the public or the Coastal Commission. In response, the commission petitioned the court to deny the city’s request to stay the lawsuit, arguing that Mendocino Railway continues to violate the Coastal Act and that a judicial ruling is essential to resolve jurisdiction and enforcement issues.
McNamee and other critics argue that until these legal uncertainties are addressed, development will remain stalled. “No investor is going to put millions into this site if there's a chance the courts will later rule the development was unlawful,” he said. “This approach by the city and Mendocino Railway attempts to circumvent the normal regulatory process that every other property owner and developer in California must follow.”
Had another developer acquired the site outright instead of attempting to claim it through eminent domain, McNamee noted, they would have been subject to the state's regulatory framework. He emphasized that California’s environmental and land use laws do not prohibit development but rather ensure it aligns with legal and safety standards.
As negotiations proceed, the fate of the mill site remains uncertain, with legal, financial, and regulatory challenges looming over its future development.
