Marin conservation panelists accused of ‘self-dealing’ farm projects

A group of residents has filed a state complaint alleging that four Marin Resource Conservation District board members violated conflict-of-interest laws by approving bill payments for habitat restoration projects on their agricultural properties.

The complaint, submitted to the California Fair Political Practices Commission, targets three incumbent board members — Chileno Valley Ranch owner Sally Gale; Fresh Run Farm and Paradise Valley Ranch owner Peter Martinelli; and Moretti Family Dairy owner Mike Moretti — and former board member Robert Giacomini of Robert Giacomini Dairy Inc.

The complaint alleges the board members voted on 46 separate occasions since 2017 to approve nearly $500,000 worth of bill payments as well as financial reports for restoration projects on their properties. The complaint also alleges the board members discussed projects connected with their properties on 36 occasions since 2017.

Petaluma resident Matthew Maguire, one of the 11 residents who filed the complaint, said the actions were “self-dealing” and violate of the Political Reform Act. He said the board members should have recused themselves from the discussions and votes.

The complaint calls for the state commission to void the contract funding awards and approvals.

“If they’re causing the harm and then they’re voting to grant themselves public monies to fix that harm, where’s the accountability?” Maguire said.

The residents are members of Restore Point Reyes National Seashore, a group that opposes ranching operations within the federal park. The group is a project of the Resource Renewal Institute, a Mill Valley organization that filed a lawsuit opposing the park’s plan to extend leases for ranchers renting parkland.

The residents include Maguire, Ross resident Brian Hunt, San Rafael resident Amy Allen, San Rafael resident Lia Wilbourn, San Francisco resident Jon Spear, Sausalito resident Lonna Richmond, San Francisco resident Mark Walsh, Petaluma resident Beverley Alexander, Inverness resident Margo Wixsom, Berkeley resident Elizabeth Dodge and Inverness resident Greg Long.

The Fair Political Practices Commission is determining whether to open an investigation into the complaint. No decision had been made as of Friday, according to commission spokesperson Jay Wierenga.

District staff and board members deny any improprieties. They said the law only requires board members to recuse themselves from discussions and votes when recommended projects and funding awards are being approved, but they do not need to abstain from bill payments.

Established in 1959, the Marin Resource Conservation District is a state-created body that distributes public and private funding for environmental restoration projects throughout most of western Marin. State law mandates that the district’s board consist of landowners or representatives of landowners within the district boundaries.

The financial reports and bill payments that are the subject of the complaint go to the board after the projects are already approved and are often packaged with several other project bills, Gale said. The board members said these projects are not discussed in detail at the time.

“They are simply bills from contractors working through a certain grant,” Gale said. “That grant applied to many individual projects. By projects, I mean either plans or on-the-ground work. We would be an odd bunch if we voted not to pay our bills.”

“If they don’t want us to look at the bills or anything like that, it’s almost like what’s the purpose for us being there?” said Giacomini, whose term on the board ended last year. “If we approved the project, we certainly want to see the bills to justify the cost.”

Martinelli said that the project on his property along Pine Gulch Creek that was cited in the complaint was approved before he joined the board in 2017. If the state commission determines the board members should have recused themselves from these votes and discussions, Martinelli said, it was an honest mistake. However, he said, the motive behind the complaint seems to be to cast ranching and the district’s work in a derogatory light, especially considering the residents’ ties to the Restore Point Reyes National Seashore.

“Unfortunately, our environmental friends are trying to portray it as some kind of scheme to get free stuff, and that’s just not what it is,” Martinelli said.

Moretti did not respond to requests for comment.

Nancy Scolari, the district’s executive director, said the restoration projects are not landowners approving money to benefit other landowners, as the residents allege. All landowners in the 250,000-acre area overseen by the district are eligible for projects.

Proposed projects are reviewed and ranked by a technical advisory committee that includes engineers, biologists, soil scientists and watershed experts, or regulatory agencies that are funding projects can recommend projects to the board, Scolari said.

The recommended projects are then presented to the board for a vote. If one of the selected projects involves property in which board members have a financial interest, they recuse themselves from the vote, Scolari said.

“The benefit around these projects is, it’s not like we’re putting in a fence or a building for a dairy,” Scolari said. “It’s let’s put in trees to restore a creek and let’s reduce sediment from a creek or put in a hedge row for pollinators. These aren’t projects that are going to improve the finances of the property owner. They’re going to improve the environment for the general public.”

Martinelli said the projects come with costs and mandates for the landowner as well.

“These projects all come with burdens,” he said. “There is reporting, I pay for annual biological reports. The project we did involve nine different agencies. It’s a lot of extra work and nobody is in this to get free stuff. We’re in it to do the right thing by the environment so that basically the impact of agriculture can be improved and mitigated over time.”

Maguire said that the complaint is not attacking the validity of the projects, but is about compliance with the law and accountability.

“If you’re a rancher and you’re degrading the environment with your ranching practices and if you’re going to the well of public money to be addressing that, that really needs to have full transparency,” Maguire said.

Maguire also said the district should be reformed so that any member of the public can be eligible for the board because the district allocates public funds.

“So it’s not just the ranching community serving the ranching community’s interest at the expense of the public,” Maguire said.