Summary
The Planning Commission voted to recommend City Council approve a 55‑year development agreement with Pacific Coast Producers (PCP) for the tomato processing facility at 1376 Lehman Avenue in exchange for a $500,000 up‑front payment, a $200,000 annual contribution and a package of site and community improvements.
The Woodland Planning Commission voted to recommend that the City Council approve a development agreement that would vest Pacific Coast Producers’ food‑processing facility at 1376 Lehman Avenue for 55 years in exchange for financial and in‑kind community benefits. The commission approved a resolution recommending adoption by voice vote at its meeting; the item now goes to City Council for first reading on Sept. 2 and second reading on Sept. 16.
The development agreement would require an initial payment of $500,000 on the effective date and an ongoing annual payment of $200,000 adjusted for inflation. Staff said the up‑front funds would be used for investments that “accelerate innovation benefiting Woodland’s evolving food, agricultural and life science economy and/or public safety equipment,” while the annual payments would support city‑administered workforce development and economic innovation programs such as job training and sector partnerships.
Staff presented the agreement as a mechanism to provide long‑term operational certainty for a facility the presentation said has operated at the site since the 1940s and that Pacific Coast Producers has run in Woodland since 1971. According to staff, PCP employs more than 900 people during the peak harvest season and about 65 year‑round, and roughly 85% of the tomatoes it processes are grown within a 17‑mile radius of the plant. The agreement, staff said, would not change zoning, authorize new expansion beyond what current regulations allow, or supersede building and fire safety codes.
Commissioners pressed staff and company representatives on several details during the hearing. Commissioner Smith asked how the $500,000 and $200,000 figures were negotiated; staff replied they resulted from negotiation and represented the city’s reasonable ask in exchange for the 55‑year vesting and other commitments. Smith and other commissioners asked for clearer language on “facility screening” and public‑art commitments. Staff said specific locations and designs would follow city standards and approvals.
A public commenter, Vincent Capizou Johnson, identified himself as a Woodland resident and worker in the area and said he supported the city’s efforts to keep PCP operating in Woodland. "I just wanted to voice my support for whatever the city can do on their end to help keep them in business here in Woodland," Johnson said.
Commissioners also raised concerns about potential impacts if the plant were to close in the future. Commissioner Smith asked whether the agreement or related documents address employee notice or severance. Sabrina Barr, counsel for PCP, replied that PCP has a collective bargaining agreement with severance provisions, a pension plan and, she said, is subject to legal requirements that provide 60 days’ notice to employees in the event of a mass closure. "PCP actually has a collective bargaining agreement, that has severance provisions already for all of their employees. They also have a pension plan and are required by law to provide 60 days notice to employees of any mass closure of a facility," Barr said. Barr also noted that the end of the 55‑year term would not automatically mean closure of the facility.
Beyond the cash contributions, staff described other community benefits the company agreed to provide: facility screening and ongoing site maintenance to improve neighborhood compatibility, public art and mural refreshes along frontages such as East Main and Lehman Avenue, and sustainability upgrades aligned with the city’s Climate Action Plan. PCP representatives said they would work with staff on design and implementation and welcomed opportunities to refresh existing murals and improve fencing and landscaping.
After discussion the commission moved, seconded and approved a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt an ordinance approving the development agreement. The commission’s recommendation will be transmitted to the City Council for its consideration on the dates staff provided.
Next steps: staff will forward the Planning Commission recommendation and the draft development agreement to the City Council for consideration at the scheduled readings on Sept. 2 and Sept. 16.
