Rendering of a proposed five-story, 100-room Hyatt hotel proposed on the bluff adjacent to the Cher-Ae Heights Casino, overlooking the Pacific. | Image via California Coastal Commission.

###

The fate of a proposed five-story, 100-room hotel at the Trinidad Rancheria is once again in the hands of the California Coastal Commission.

The Rancheria’s big hotel project, announced back in 2018, has faced a series of bureaucratic hurdles amid questions about its water supply, design and fire protection. The proposed hotel, which would be located on a seaside bluff next to The Heights Casino, has also faced public opposition, including a successful legal challenge to the commission’s 2019 conditional approval of the project.

That lawsuit was brought by the Humboldt Alliance for Responsible Planning (HARP), a local community group that continues to crusade against the hotel as currently designed. (The group also opposes a related Hwy. 101 interchange that has been proposed between Westhaven and Trinidad.)

As with all projects on Native American lands, the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs is the lead agency for development projects such as this, but it has a longstanding practice of asking state agencies, such as the Coastal Commission, to weigh in on matters of consistency with state laws.

At a public hearing Thursday in the Monterey County city of Gonzales, the 12-member commission will consider giving the project another conditional green light. This time around, agency staff is recommending a consistency determination only if the BIA, which holds the land in trust for the Rancheria, can provide proof of a sufficient water supply, secure a formal fire service agreement with CalFire and submit a comprehensive fire protection plan for agency approval.

A schematic showing the location of the proposed hotel and a new parking lot. | Via the Coastal Commission.

The project would also involve the creation of a 1.2-acre leach field and a new 1.5-acre parking lot adjacent to the existing casino parking.

When the Coastal Commission first approved the hotel project in 2019, it said construction couldn’t begin until the BIA demonstrated that there is an adequate water supply. The Rancheria has tried a number of approaches to secure such a supply — negotiating with the City of Trinidad, drilling its own wells and exploring a pipeline extension from the Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District (HBMWD) — but that condition remains unmet.

While HARP and other project opponents have taken issue with a range of aspects, including the hotel’s size, look and location, Thursday’s hearing will focus exclusively on whether the project is consistent with Section 30250 of the California Coastal Act when it comes to fire protection services.

As noted in a staff report, Humboldt County employs a “mutual aid” model for fire protection, relying on multiple local fire protection agencies (many of them volunteer-based) to suppress fires across the region. The county also has a fire service agreement with CalFire.

The Trinidad Rancheria relies on these resources for its own fire protection, but the proposed five-story hotel presents a significant challenge given that few local fire departments are equipped with hook-and-ladder trucks or fire engines with high pumping capacity.

“Thus, an aerial truck or other specialized apparatus that is housed in close proximity to the proposed hotel — as well as firefighting personnel with appropriate training to drive and operate this apparatus — would be needed to provide adequate fire protection services,” the staff report notes.

The Rancheria has proposed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the county to formalize CalFire protection services for the hotel and has offered to participate in a fire planning study for northern coastal Humboldt County. It has also agreed to purchase an aerial truck and create its own volunteer fire department that would serve both the hotel and the surrounding community.

The Opposition

In a letter submitted to the Coastal Commission last week, J. Bryce Kenny, the attorney representing HARP, argues that this hotel project needs to go all the way back to square one, essentially. He says that the BIA’s initial finding that this project is consistent with the California Coastal Management Program (CCMP) was effectively invalidated by HARP’s lawsuit, which resulted in a court order to reconsider the adequacy of fire protection services.

“How can the Commission concur with a consistency determination that is incomplete because it does not even mention fire protection?” Bryce asks.

Bryce also argues that the Trinidad Rancheria is ineligible to enter into a cooperative fire protection contract with CalFire because the state’s public resources code only allows such agreements with a “city, county, or special district” or an “other subdivision of the State of California” or a “person, firm, or corporation.”

Even if it were legally permissible, Bryce is skeptical about the finances.

“Could the Rancheria even afford to pay for such an arrangement all by itself, and still make the hotel profitable, after spending $800,000 on a second hand fire truck?” he ponders. “It is well known that the tribal gaming market in Humboldt County has diminished greatly since the collapse of the ‘green rush’ cannabis market years ago.”

His letter also challenges the proposed hotel location, its compliance with current design standards and the Rancheria’s willingness to abide by conditions placed upon the project.

Madrone. | County of Humboldt.

Steve Madrone, who represents the Fifth District on the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors, has also been an outspoken critic of the hotel project, and on Monday he submitted a comment letter via email in which he challenges the accuracy of the Coastal Commission’s staff report. 

His email says that, contrary to that report, the Trinidad Rancheria is not a signatory to the county’s mutual aid agreement for fire protection, and furthermore, the county’s agreement with CalFire is not year-round, as the report asserts. It only covers the “off season,” which is typically less than half a year.

“The Trinidad area has a long way to go to figure out how to afford year-round fire services and local Volunteer Fire Departments are already stretched beyond their means to provide limited services,” Madrone’s email says. “It would be irresponsible and dangerous to continue to add to the areas fire hazards with a 5 story hotel in the area.”

A handful of Trinidad-area residents also submitted letters of opposition, generally expressing skepticism about the Rancheria’s ability to provide sufficient fire protection for such a tall structure.

The Responses

Just yesterday, the Coastal Commission published a series of responses to these various objections, including feedback from agency staff, the Trinidad Rancheria and the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Staff reiterates that Thursday’s hearing will be limited in scope, focusing only on the adequacy of fire protection. In response to feedback from HARP and others, staff revised one condition of approval to refer to the most recent fire protection standards, but they ignored complaints about water, visual impacts and other aspects of the project.

Regarding an agreement with CalFire for fire protection, staff notes that the Rancheria’s corporate arm could qualify, even if the Rancheria itself cannot. And if that particular arrangement is unavailable, other fire service arrangements are acceptable.

Staff rejects the argument from HARP’s attorney that the BIA’s prior consistency determination should be considered null and void. Staff says the court’s order in the appeal decision established the limited scope of this remand hearing, and the Commission is abiding by that ruling.

Staff also rejects Kenny’s argument that the hotel’s location is inappropriate, pointing out that the Coastal Act does not require services to already exist, only that they will be adequate.

In response to Madrone’s email, staff notes that Trinidad Rancheria is in the process of finalizing a cost-sharing MOU with the county, under which the Rancheria would cover 20% of the cost of an agreement between the county and CalFire. Plus, Trinidad Rancheria is within the response area of Westhaven’s volunteer fire department, which has an existing agreement with CalFire.

On Monday, Commission staff met with representatives of the Tsurai Ancestral Society, at their request, to discuss potential impacts to cultural and coastal resources associated with firefighting activities for the proposed hotel project. The society expressed concerns about potential water quality impacts and adverse effects to coastal water quality and Tsurai cultural resources. Staff acknowledged those concerns but said they’re outside the scope of Thursday’s hearing.

The BIA, for its part, says its original consistency determination remains in place and was not overturned by the court. 

And an attorney representing the Trinidad Rancheria submitted a five-page letter refuting HARP’s objections to the project and defending the Rancheria’s plans for fire protection. 

Tomorrow’s hearing is scheduled to begin at 9 a.m. There will be a link to a live video and audio feed at this website. The Coastal Commission’s report and all related documents can be found here.

###

PREVIOUSLY