Annual Fight to Save Slough Begins : Famosa’s Friends Battle Assembly Development Bill

To a dedicated cadre of environmentalists and residents of Point Loma, Ocean Beach and Loma Portal, rallying opposition to the development of the Famosa Slough has become a spring rite as traditional as blooming wildflowers and the first pitch of the baseball season.

Each year, legislators in Sacramento introduce bills to allow development of the slough. And each year local residents join forces to save it.

Monday night, the process began anew, as more than 150 people identifying themselves as “friends of Famosa Slough” vented their anger and kicked off their annual lobbying strategy.

Their target: an Assembly bill recently introduced by Jim Costa (D-Fresno) and co-sponsored by Sunny Mojonnier (R-Encinitas) that would removed the 20-acre marsh from the jurisdiction of the California Coastal Commission.

“It seems we go through this year after year, but we’ll never wear down,” said Randy Beatty, who lives near the slough. “That’s the last open space we have around here, and it should be available to everyone.”

Costa’s bill would clear the way for developer Terry Sheldon to build a 400-unit condominium project on 10 acres of the slough if he agrees to dedicate for public use the remaining 10 acres, which would be cleaned up and then left in its natural state.

“Our major concern is fairness,” said Costa aide Terry Reardon. “This land never should have gone into the coastal zone in the first place, and it’s time that action was corrected.”

Chris Heiserman, an aide to Mojonnier, said the assemblywoman “is aware of the local opposition, and knows it’s very strong. But the key issue is the precedent of removal from the coastal zone. It’s a precedent we feel is important to support.”

The slough has been the subject of heated controversy here and in Sacramento since it was placed under the California Coastal Commission’s jurisdiction by an Assembly committee in 1979. If the slough were removed from Coastal Commission authority, only the approval of the San Diego City Council would be necessary for Sheldon to begin construction.

Sheldon, who could not be reached for comment Monday, has repeatedly said he has the support of a majority of the council members. Councilman Bill Cleator, whose district includes the slough, has for years advocated development of the property.

One of the last remnants of False Bay, an extensive tideland that covered what is now Mission Bay Park, the slough is about half a mile west of the Sports Arena, dividing Ocean Beach from Loma Portal before it feeds into the San Diego River flood channel just north of Interstate 8.

Environmentalists claim that the area provides a habitat where birds, plants and animals can flourish, and hope to have all 20 acres preserved as a park. But those supporting development of the land say it is a dried-up dumping ground that has no value as a natural area.

Frank Garland, spokesman for Friends of Famosa Slough, which boasts 500 members, described the land as a “precious natural resource that is enjoyed by thousands of San Diegans, that must be preserved.” Reardon said Costa “doesn’t believe the land qualifies as a natural resource at all. We see it as nothing more than a mosquito-infested dump.”

“People came together to stop this last year, but it was a very close call,” said Jay Powell of the local Sierra Club chapter.

“As you can see here tonight, we are organized, and that’s going to be important when it comes down to swaying the Legislature again,” Powell said.

Last year, a bill identical to Costa’s that was authored by State Sen. Jim Ellis (R-San Diego) passed the Senate but fell two votes short of approval in the Assembly. Assemblywoman Lucy Killea (D-San Diego), who had initially supported the Ellis bill, led the opposition forces in the Assembly after receiving petitions with more than 5,000 signatures of people working to save the slough.

Killea said Monday that she hopes to introduce a Famosa Slough bill of her own later in the legislative session. “We’ve got to be able to reach a compromise here,” she said. “One side says it’s a precious resource, the other says it is a dump. The truth has to be somewhere in the middle.”

Killea said her bill would include a scientific analysis of the land “to determine just what its natural value is. After we have more dependable information to work with, I’m sure we can come up with a long-range solution that satisfies the landowner and the people who are concerned about losing a valuable natural resource.”

Garland, however, said his forces would not be satisfied unless development of the slough is prohibited.

“We’ve lost too much valuable natural land in that area already,” he said. “We’re down to our last 20 acres, and I don’t want to see any of that given up.”