Sonoma County approves consultant contract to restart Sonoma Developmental Center EIR process

The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors on May 6 approved a contract to prepare a new environmental impact report (EIR) for the Sonoma Developmental Center (SDC) site, combining court-directed corrective work and review of a specific development proposal.

Permit Sonoma Director Dennis Wick told the board the county faces a "different situation here than we normally do going into environmental review" because the court has given specific direction on what must be corrected and a development proposal has been submitted that was not part of the original administrative record. "We have that framework," Wick said, explaining the new contract assembles subconsultants with local and technical expertise to address evacuation, cultural resources, biological assessment, historic architecture and traffic.

Why it matters: The SDC property is state-owned and has been the subject of a long, contentious process that produced a draft specific plan the court later found deficient. The board27s vote authorizes county staff to proceed with a project-level EIR that reviewers say is intended to correct the earlier record and evaluate a concrete development proposal so the county can make an informed decision on the site's future.

Board action and timeline The board voted to move the item out of the consent calendar for public comment and then approved the contract after staff presentation and public input. Vice Chair Hilda Hermosillo led the request to hold the item for discussion; Supervisor Rabbit moved approval and Supervisor Gore seconded the motion. The roll call vote on the EIR contract was recorded as unanimous in favor.

Wick told the board the contract is for a two-year period and staff are "targeted to come back to the Board in April of next year with a merits recommendation to you from the planning commission on this project." He said the county had added new specialty firms to the consultant team for this project-specific review, including a safety and evacuation team, a cultural resources firm with tribal confidence, Wetlands Research Associates for biological work, local firms familiar with the site, and historic preservation consultants.

Public comment and concerns Speakers at the public hearing urged caution or called for different approaches. "You have been put into an untenable position by trying to collaterally do a builder's remedy at the same time that you are obligated to implement the specific plan by the special statute," said a public commenter who asked the county to seek declaratory relief in court to clarify which statute applies. Resident Lori Pyle pressed the board not to rehire the same consultant team that prepared the previous specific plan, saying in part, "They do not know nor do they respect the sanctity of it within the community."

County staff and Permit Sonoma representatives responded to questions about cost allocation and public participation. Wick said the state has provided remaining funds toward the corrective work and the applicant has agreed to pay at-cost fees tied to the development proposal; staff are finalizing accounting arrangements with the applicant and the state. He described the public process ahead: a Notice of Preparation to set the EIR scope, public review of a draft EIR, and combined hearings that will include the planning commission and ultimately the board. Wick added there will be outreach about hearing dates and he welcomed holding hearings within Sonoma Valley to increase accessibility for residents directly affected by the project.

What the contract covers Wick said the new EIR effort must merge two parallel needs: comply with a court order directing corrective actions to the earlier environmental review and analyze a specific development proposal that was not part of the prior administrative record. "We have had to merge those two in order to have a stable project that we can evaluate in this new EIR," he said. The consultant team was assembled to provide local, project-specific expertise rather than the program-level approach used earlier.

Next steps and limits Staff emphasized that community input will be part of the formal CEQA process. The board approved the contract, and staff will return with further scheduling and accounting details, including how remaining state funds and applicant charges will be allocated. Any procedural or policy questions about the builder27s remedy, SB 330 procedures, or the specific plan process will be handled as the EIR proceeds and as legal counsel and staff work with the state and applicant to finalize terms.

Ending The schedule presented by staff sets public milestones under CEQA and aims to provide the board with a merits recommendation within about a year, with additional post-decision work (mitigation monitoring and ministerial permits) to follow should the project advance. The board's decision authorizes the county to proceed with the EIR, subject to the public review and hearing process required by state law.