Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Campus Acquisition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board authorizes notice of intent to buy Brickway buildings amid debate over relocating county services
Summary
The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors voted to publish a Government Code notice of intent to purchase the Brickway campus as part of a proposed $434 million county‑campus roadmap. Supporters said acquisition preserves a feasible path to house county staff; critics, labor and community groups warned the move would reduce public access and called for broader outreach and competitive offers.
The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors on March 25 authorized staff to publish a notice of intent to purchase the Brickway office campus, a procedural step that would allow the county to pursue a possible acquisition and return later with a purchase and sale agreement and due diligence findings.
Johannes, director of Public Infrastructure, told the board the Brickway buildings would help the county implement a $434 million roadmap to modernize county facilities and house about 1,700 employees across a combination of new construction and purchased properties. He said the Brickway acquisition price under negotiation was $32 million and that, compared with rebuilding on the existing campus or downtown alternatives, purchasing Brickway offers a lower per‑employee capital cost.
“Moving Brickway, having Brickway available would allow us to move ACTTC, ROV and CRA,” Johannes said, describing operational benefits and arguing the site’s size and parking make it suitable for county needs.
Labor leaders, neighborhood groups and voters’‑rights advocates urged caution. Travis Balzerini, president of SEIU 1021 Sonoma County chapter, told the board the Brickway buildings would require substantial retrofit work and said workers and residents had not been meaningfully engaged.
“Purchase of Brickway is occurring without adequate outreach,” Balzerini said. “This building is not suitable for immediate use and is more expensive than comparable space in Santa Rosa.”
Community organizers and residents said moving services such as the Registrar of Voters and Recorder farther from Santa Rosa would make access harder for transit‑dependent residents. Diana Kingsbury of the North Bay Organizing Project said remote placement could disenfranchise voters who need in‑person assistance to correct ballot signatures.
Deputy County Counsel Jeremy Fonseca explained the immediate action only authorizes the required three‑week Government Code notice and does not obligate the county to complete a purchase. If staff returns with a purchase and sale agreement, the board would vote again before finalizing any acquisition. Fonseca said the county plans a longer public notice window and anticipated returning to the board in early May.
The vote to publish the notice passed with Supervisor Hermosillo and Chair Hopkins voting yes, Supervisor Corsi opposed and Supervisor Rabbit recused. CEO Rivera and staff committed to expanded outreach, scheduled union meetings and said they remain open to other market opportunities.
What happens next: staff will publish the notice of intent, continue property discussions and due diligence, meet with labor and stakeholder groups, and bring a proposed purchase and sale agreement back to the board for a binding vote if negotiations and inspections proceed.
