Merced River Trail Committee recommends dissolution, urges board-directed feasibility review

The Merced River Trail Committee voted unanimously to recommend that the Mariposa County Board of Supervisors dissolve the advisory committee and take the next steps needed to evaluate whether and how the Merced River Trail can proceed.

The committee’s recommendation followed extended discussion of unresolved legal, property and environmental obstacles to completing the trail between Bagby and downstream points such as McSwan Dam. Committee members said the trail’s vision plan is complete but that implementing a master plan requires resolving ownership or easement control for a set of privately held parcels, clarifying hazardous-waste liability, and securing outside funding or agency commitment.

A committee member moved, “I move that we make a recommendation to the board to dissolve the Merced River Trail Committee based on this discussion that we've had today.” A second was recorded and the motion passed unanimously.

Committee members said the county lacks title control over roughly 17 parcels identified as necessary to complete the trail corridor, including Miller’s Gulch, and that federal agencies such as the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service are unlikely to commit significant resources until the county can show control of key parcels. County counsel Walt Wall (referenced in the meeting) recommended that staff take the material gathered so far to the board and seek direction to contract for additional legal/title research and a feasibility study to quantify obstacles and costs.

Participants repeatedly cited a memo and valuation prepared by consultant Vince Kehoe that assessed remediation and acquisition costs; Kehoe’s figures were described in the meeting as roughly $1.2 million to $1.4 million for site value but participants warned those estimates did not include all likely cleanup costs and could rise. Committee members discussed options including prescriptive easements, purchase or easements acquired through negotiation, and possible claims against historic insurance policies for prior operators — measures counsel said would require outside legal or title work.

Speakers also discussed grant-seeking as a parallel path: small feasibility studies were described in the meeting as potentially in the $20,000–$30,000 range, while larger technical or cleanup studies could be far more expensive. Committee members urged staff to pursue funding opportunities and to return to the board with a clear menu of options and estimated costs.

The committee instructed staff to present the recommendation and supporting materials to the Board of Supervisors; staff said they could bring an item to the board on May 6 to seek formal action. If the board approves dissolution, the committee would remain in place until the board’s official action; members discussed that the vision plan would remain available as a reference document for future grant applications and for volunteers or nonprofits to use in pursuing parts of the plan.

Why it matters: committee members said the Merced River Trail is a high‑interest public project with multiple agency partners and strong community support, but that the unresolved legal, funding and contamination liabilities make continued work by an advisory committee difficult without a board-directed feasibility effort. The committee’s motion moves the question to county leadership to determine whether the county will invest staff time, legal review and funds to proceed.

Next steps: staff will return to the Board of Supervisors with the committee’s recommendation, related documents, and counsel’s advice; the board must decide whether to authorize a feasibility study, direct staff to pursue title work, or pursue other options.