On Tuesday, February 14, the Marin County Board of Supervisors will consider adopting a resolution requesting the Association of Bay Area Governments ("ABAG") to re- designate the "San Quentin Growth Opportunity Area" as a Potential Priority Development Area. (Item 8 on the Supervisors Agenda for that date).  This designation could lay the groundwork for massive development at San Quentin and potentially exempt it from rigorous environmental review and scrutiny.

Although the State of California has not indicated it intends to close San Quentin Prison and sell the property, a hand-picked committee implemented a “San Quentin Vision Plan” in 2003 that envisions the development of a new city with a “base” number of 2,100 housing units, retail and commercial buildings, a transit hub, etc.  A development of this size will have a significant impact on Marin County, San Francisco Bay and the Corte Madera Creek.

The San Quentin Vision Plan proposal has never gone through a proper and thorough vetting process and was never formally adopted by the Board of Supervisors. No EIR has been prepared. No CEQA-standard studies have been conducted which would look into the impact on the Bay, nearby bird and fish habitat, traffic concerns, and the impact on water resources.  While there are approximately 5,000 prisoners living at San Quentin, they have limited water usage and do not drive cars. 

In light of California law SB375, a project that is considered a “priority development area” by regional boards such as ABAG, could become exempt from CEQA or subject to a steam-lined CEQA process, allowing little or no public involvement in the process or thorough consideration of the impacts on the environment of Marin County and the Bay. 

The question about whether or not San Quentin should be developed should not be left up to ABAG to decide, but should be decided by the residents of the County of Marin who will be impacted by the development.

Please join the Sierra Club, Marin Conservation League, the Audubon Society and other local environmental groups in requesting the members of the Board of Supervisors to vote NO on the resolution.