Vallejo council directs staff to negotiate MOU with Scotts Valley Band for two interim tribal offices

Vallejo’s City Council voted Sept. 30 to direct staff to negotiate a memorandum of understanding with the Scotts Valley Band of Pomo Indians to provide reimbursable city services to two temporary modular tribal offices on federally designated tribal trust land. The motion passed after public comment and extended council discussion, with Councilmember McGeath and Mayor Sarras recorded in opposition.

The city’s assistant city manager, Gillian Hayne, told the council the tribe submitted a land-into-trust application years ago and that the land was placed into trust on Jan. 10, 2025; federal review of the tribe’s gaming eligibility was temporarily rescinded in March 2025 and litigation is ongoing. Hayne said the tribe began limited site work Sept. 19 and is proposing a parking area and two small modular buildings intended as interim offices. “This MOU would only apply to the temporary office proposal,” she said, adding that the city “has no discretionary approval over the federally designated tribal trust lands” but can act as a responsible agency in environmental review and negotiate reimbursement for services.

Public speakers were sharply divided. Wanda Maderos, a Vallejo resident, said she was surprised to see ground‑disturbing work while litigation is pending and asked whether cultural‑resource protections and consultation with ancestral tribes have been secured. “Cultural resources must be protected by law,” she said. Matthew Adams, representing a nearby Wintun nation, urged the council to condition future agreements to ensure sequel environmental review and said the city retains some contracting and property rights that can be used to condition outcomes. Representatives of the Scotts Valley Band, including Chairman Sean Davis, urged patience and government‑to‑government collaboration, describing the tribe’s decades‑long effort to regain land and saying the offices are intended to establish a local presence and administration.

Council members focused on three recurring concerns: the council’s limited legal authority over trust land, the city’s operational capacity (particularly police and fire staffing and response times), and the need to recover all city costs. Several members emphasized that any MOU must include clear reimbursement terms. Hayne said most of the technical impact studies (traffic, water, socioeconomic) are expected by year’s end, while public‑safety analysis could take about nine months and likely would be ready in the second quarter of 2026.

During debate Councilmember Ledesky proposed a friendly amendment to expressly allow negotiation of private security augmentation and to retain a consultant to help manage the negotiations; that amendment tied in a 3–3 vote and failed to advance. Council then voted on the primary motion to direct staff to negotiate the MOU; the council approved the direction with two dissenting votes.

The motion directs staff to negotiate terms for reimbursable water, police and fire services for the two modular offices and to return a draft MOU to council for review. The council’s action explicitly does not authorize a broader agreement for any larger casino, hotel or housing project on the trust land; staff emphasized any larger development would require separate negotiations, approvals and (where applicable) additional environmental review.