FORT BRAGG, CA., 6/11/25 — The Fort Bragg City Council voted Monday to move ahead with preparation of a memorandum of understanding between the city and the Mendocino Railway, aka the Skunk Train, regarding the development of the former Georgia-Pacific mill site on the Fort Bragg headlands.
The City Council also voted to accept a Mill Site Development Strategy report prepared by the consulting firm Economic & Planning Systems Inc. as a “reference and guide for subsequent phases of planning for the reuse of the Mill Site.”
The vote was the latest in the cumbersome process and ongoing controversy over what to do about the 300+ acres that were once part of the Georgia-Pacific lumber operations in Fort Bragg.
The Skunk Train bought the former mill site from Georgia-Pacific in 2021 and assumed the environmental cleanup obligations arising from over a century of industrial pollution. By that point, the debate over when the environmental mess would be cleaned up and how to use the land going forward was already decades old.
Acrimony between the city and the Skunk Train accelerated when the Skunk Train asserted that its federal rail designation exempted it from state and local regulations.
In August 2021, the city filed a lawsuit in the Mendocino County Superior Court asking for a ruling that any new development on the mill site must comply with local and state laws and regulations. The Coastal Commission later joined the action.
In November 2024, all sides agreed to put the lawsuit on hold for three months in an effort to work out a development plan and avoid further litigation costs.
In February of this year, the city and the Skunk Train held a community workshop seeking — and getting an earful of — public comment on an “illustrative plan” showing proposed uses of the mill site, including a conference center, housing, a dining hall, residential housing, an electric trolley route, and open parkland.
After the workshop, the City Council voted in March to extend the litigation pause for another three months. The court’s order putting the case on hold expires on July 1.
A few days before Monday’s vote, the city released the 59-page mill site strategy report outlining the steps needed to reach a master development agreement and theoretically put the issues to rest.
As Monday’s meeting showed, there is a long way to go between here and there.
City Manager Isaac Whippy reminded the council and public that, before the litigation hold, the city had paid over $480,000 in legal fees, not counting staff time, and could anticipate coughing up $40,000 per month if the pause is lifted.
The pause has been productive, Whippy said, because the Skunk Train has “agreed that 92% of the mill site will be subject to local and state oversight,” with the regulation of the remaining 8% of “rail-designated land” still an open question.
Whippy emphasized that the proposed memorandum of understanding will be a “nonbinding document that does not commit the city to a specific land use” on the site.
As has become usual at meetings involving the mill site, the public was ready when the time came for them to speak. Peter McNamee of the GrassRoots Institute, a community-based organization that monitors the development of the headlands, criticized the short time given to review the dense strategy report, which he characterized as the “product of over eight months of closed-door negotiations.”
Fort Bragg residents Marcy Snyder and Susan Sisk echoed McNamee’s request that the city give people more time to read the material rather than, as Snyder put it, “bulldozing” it through on Monday.
Other locals were more sanguine, seeing no harm in proceeding with the MOU process rather than, as resident Jacob Patterson put it, “wasting $40,000 a month on” lawyers.
Skunk Train vice president of business development Chris Hart repeated the refrain that “nothing has been finalized” and promised that the process to come and the eventual contract will address all concerns.
The council vote was split, with Mayor Jason Godeke, Vice Mayor Marcia Rafanan and councilmember Scott Hockett voting in favor of the resolution. Councilmember Tess Albin-Smith voted no, agreeing with the idea of waiting until after an upcoming public workshop. Councilmember Lindy Peters did not attend the meeting.
The four members present voted unanimously to authorize payment of the $60,000 cost associated with preparing the MOU, to be split 50/50 between the city and the Skunk Train.
Two mill site workshops will be held to continue the discussion, the first on June 26 at 6 p.m. at a location to be determined and another at a date to be set in July.
Last Monday, Fort Bragg’s City Manager asked the City Council to approve negotiating a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Mendocino Railway to build hundreds of housing units and commercial/industrial buildings on the contaminated former Georgia Pacific Mill Site. The City Manager also asked the Council to approve a “Mill Site Strategy Report” to guide negotiations with the railway.
The Strategy Report is a long poorly written, jargon saturated document filled with disputed & contradicting assertions. It embraces controversial proposals such as heavy industry locomotive & rail car maintenance/repair activities and significantly expanded train operations being exempted from State and local coastal zone land use and environmental regulation.
It is the product of 8 months of closed door City and Mendocino Railway negotiations that excluded public observation or participation.
Yet this very controversial report was only released to the public 5 days before the Council’s action.
That is an entirely insufficient time for public review and is completely inconsistent with the public involvement promises the City made to the community.
Several community members asked the Council to postpone action until after the City holds a public headlands workshop later this month. But in their haste to act, a three Council member majority (Hockett, Rafanan, Godeke) out voted the minority to proceed immediately before the public workshop.
The actions of the three Council members demonstrates a callous lack of respect for public involvement. Voters should keep this in mind in the upcoming 2026 Council election.
Mr. McNamee continues his weekly criticisms of the Fort Bragg City Council and Mendocino Railway—often presenting selective information while omitting key facts.
First, he has referenced a past disagreement between the City of West Sacramento and Sierra Northern Railway, one of our affiliated companies. What he failed to mention is that this matter was resolved years ago to the City’s full satisfaction. In fact, just this past Saturday, West Sacramento awarded us its 2025 Civic Leadership Award—a clear testament to our ongoing, constructive relationship with the city.
Second, he has pointed to a similar disagreement between Sierra Northern and the City of Fillmore, again ignoring the fact that the issue was resolved—also to the satisfaction of the City—several years ago.
Third, and now McNamee claims that the City and Mendocino Railway have finalized development plans for the former Georgia-Pacific millsite behind closed doors. This is simply false. As explained by multiple speakers at Monday’s Council meeting, the vote was to establish a PROCESS for collaboration between the City and Mendocino Railway—not to approve any plans. City Manager Isaac Whippy confirmed that this process will include public workshops and regular updates at Council meetings.
McNamee also criticized the inclusion of industrial zoning, claiming it was inappropriate and secretly decided. In fact, light and heavy industry have been part of the City’s long-term vision for the site for years. Draft planning documents from 2017 through 2021 frequently included industrial uses in the southern portion of the millsite as part of a broader strategy to create higher-paying jobs in Fort Bragg. These discussions occurred during publicly noticed meetings. If Mr. McNamee is only now raising concerns, it suggests a lack of engagement or concern about the public process.
His broader opposition to Mendocino Railway also raises questions. While he has not disclosed it publicly, his home is located just above Tunnel #1. In 2022, his wife, Donne Brownsey—then Chair of the California Coastal Commission—filed a lawsuit against Mendocino Railway and started a multi-year campaign that blocked funding to repair the tunnel near their residence. The absence of disclosure regarding this apparent conflict of interest is troubling.
Today, the City, Mendocino Railway, and the Coastal Commission (now under new leadership) are working in good faith to resolve a long-standing legal dispute. Yes, some meetings have been held in closed session—as is standard in legal negotiations. But the aim is resolution, not secrecy.
As City Manager Whippy noted Monday, Fort Bragg has already spent approximately $500,000 in taxpayer funds on this legal fight and continues to spend $40,000 per month. Mendocino Railway is incurring similar costs. This level of spending is unsustainable and detracts from the resources that could be used to improve the community. Thankfully, progress is being made. But while others are working toward a resolution, McNamee continues to escalate the conflict. As a non-resident of Fort Bragg living in a nice house in the country, he may not feel the financial toll—but Fort Bragg’s residents certainly do.
The current court-approved legal stay—which temporarily paused litigation to allow for negotiation—expires at the end of this month. It is the second such stay, and the court may not approve a third. If no agreement is reached, litigation will resume in July, and each party will be required to reengage its legal teams. McNamee appears unconcerned with the legal or financial urgency, or with the fact that the millsite has now sat unused for 23 years.
The redevelopment proposals Mendocino Railway has submitted are designed to meet Fort Bragg’s long-term needs, including housing, employment opportunities, and public open space. Key elements include:
• Northern section: More than 50% is expected to remain open space. Based on public feedback, a proposed railroad line has been replaced with a quiet, electric trolley and moved significantly further inland.
• Central section: A proposed 60-acre nature preserve, with the potential to daylight historic creeks.
• Southern section: The Railway’s illustrative plan largely aligns with the City’s draft zoning concepts and includes substantial open space. Importantly, Mendocino Railway has offered to work with the City to limit rail operations to the trolley and to give the City veto power over any final route—a significant concession.
Despite these efforts, McNamee accuses the City of moving too fast. Yet he appears unaware—or unconcerned—with the court-imposed timeline. Every week of delay costs each party approximately $10,000 in legal fees. While no one expects a final resolution this month, our hope is to achieve one this summer. Given the financial stakes, every week counts.
Recently, McNamee also announced that he intends to challenge sitting Councilmembers in the 2026 election if they do not adopt his position. This follows the 2024 election, during which his organization, the Grass Roots Institute, made last-minute accusations that were later proven false—though not before votes were cast. That level of political gamesmanship is disappointing, especially from an organization claiming to represent the community’s interests.
And now, that same organization has announced it received a $150,000 grant to inform the public about millsite revitalization. We sincerely hope that taxpayer dollars are used to support honest, fact-based public engagement—not a continuation of anti-growth and anti-Councilmember messaging.
Rather than create division, issue threats, and spread misinformation, we urge Mr. McNamee to participate in a good-faith effort to reach a resolution. Fort Bragg deserves better. Our community needs housing, jobs, open space, and long-term economic vitality—not more lawsuits, delays, or political grandstanding. Let’s move forward—together.
Give the land back to the Pomo at the very least let the tribe guide the use of the land.
More industry west of the hwy 1 NO!!!!!!
MORE SCIENCE AND NATURE!.
This is majestic land and the planning should accentuate that.
Is the short time that is put forward above, sufficient for the for the consideration of this important and dense document by the public and the officials to weigh in on? I question that it is, especially as so much of it seems to have been put together behind closed doors leaving the public and other informed persons out of the loop until now.
Why is there a rush now?
Warren De Smidt
Warren,
First, I think McNamee ignores the years of public meetings where many of these elements were discussed, including back on Feb 25. As a participant in the process, I can attest everyone has had great urgency and we have been trying to keep the public informed. In July, all parties must renew our legal fight if the court doesn’t provide a third stay. With the City Council’s actions, we will now spend the rest of this month working hard to try to work out issues and then discuss publicly them on June 26. Had the council not voted 3-1 to proceed, we would have had to sit idle and lost the remaining time of our stay.
Throw more money at it! Snipe and jaw, new cars an holidays for the lawyers.
Meanwhile, I get to drive by one of the most beautiful views on Earth, park at one of several trailheads an meet with friends and walk my dog.
Ya’ll keep throwing money around like it sprouts from the groundlike mushrooms and don’t change a thing.
That suits me fine. If you had that money to spend on public works and infrastructure who knows what kind of mischief you’d get up to!
It appears that the GRI and its president have ideas for coastal development that are out of step with a majority of people. They believe, despite lack of evidence, that the sea level rise threatens our coast and therefore, I guess, any new development. The public isn’t buying it and neither is the science. Secondly, they believe any development must include “social equity” when the American public is not even sure what that means. It is asked to be included in the consideration of the project as a means to kill it. They seem unconcerned that the local economy has been collapsing and uninterested in balancing competing needs.