New Report Needed for Gopher Dam, Judge Rules

A Superior Court judge Friday scolded Oceanside officials for misleading opponents of a proposed dam east of the city and ordered the officials to prepare a new environmental impact report for the project.

The ruling by Judge William Kennedy nullifies an earlier environmental report on the $16-million dam, planned for an unincorporated rural area known as Gopher Canyon. The project’s opponents went to court to challenge that document, saying it was based on faulty information and approved by the City Council without adequate public input.

Neighbors of the dam site described Kennedy’s ruling as a “major victory” that could ultimately convince Oceanside to abandon the project.

“This is a wonderful victory, it really is,” said Patti Morris, a resident of Gopher Canyon who, since 1981, has spearheaded the fight against the dam. “They say you can’t fight City Hall. Well, I say you can.”

Morris, who has spent about $25,000 on legal fees in her campaign against the dam, predicted that the new environmental impact report would “show everyone what many of us already know--that this project is totally ill-conceived.”

“If they’re smart, they’ll give it up now,” she said.

But Oceanside City Councilman Walter Gilbert, reached after the hearing, vowed that the city would continue its efforts to build the dam and reservoir, which he called “an urgent, desperately needed project.”

“As far as I know, we are the only city in San Diego County that has virtually no reserve supply of water--and we are the second-largest city in the county,” Gilbert said. “If we had an earthquake today and our wholesale water supply sources were interrupted, we’d only have water for around 50 hours. If we build the Gopher Canyon dam . . . we’d have water to last 30 days. We’ve got to have that dam, and we’ll get it.”

As proposed, the dam would be built in Bonsall, eight miles east of the Oceanside city limits and south of Gopher Canyon Road--just upstream from an exclusive community of estates, horse ranches and the Vista Valley Country Club. That site was selected because it sits atop the San Diego County Water Authority’s aqueduct lines, which Oceanside could easily tap to enhance its storage supply.

When filled with as much as 5,500 acre-feet of imported water, the earthen dam and reservoir could provide water for use during summer months, when demand is at a peak, and during emergencies. But Morris and other residents who live below where the dam would be argue that the structure would threaten their lives and depreciate property values. Morris said engineering studies she has commissioned show that a break in the dam would “send a wall of water 45 feet high and 1,500 feet wide crashing down upon us and on to the ocean.”

“We would be living under a 24-hour threat to our property and our lives,” said Morris, who has amassed files of news clippings on dam failures and their gruesome consequences. In March, 1982, Morris and fellow residents, organized as Citizens Opposed to the Dam, sued the city in an effort to block construction of the dam. They charged that the environmental impact report (EIR) for the project was defective because soil tests and other analyses were conducted for a dam less than half the size of the one planned for Gopher Canyon. In addition, the suit said, the EIR’s conclusions about damage that a break in the dam would inflict were based on descriptions of the canyon in the 1960s. Many homes have been built--or approved--since then, Morris said.

Finally, the suit alleged that the city violated state law by failing to notify Gopher Canyon residents that an EIR was being prepared.

After the suit was filed, the city agreed to spend $29,000 on a second EIR and hired a company to prepare it. Despite numerous promises over three years, nothing has been done, said Morris’ attorney, Christopher Garrett of Latham & Watkins.

Meanwhile, the city has continued to purchase land at the dam site--Oceanside now owns about 90% of the necessary acreage--and proceeded with plans for the project, which Gilbert said has been held up by the litigation and by a lack of available funds.

Explaining his ruling Friday, Judge Kennedy, in a clear reprimand of Oceanside officials, said the city had “misled . . . residents of Gopher Canyon into sitting on their rights by promising that a supplemental EIR would be forthcoming.”

Further, Kennedy said, the city “reneged on that promise” by failing to ensure the second EIR was completed.

City Atty. Charles Revlett could not be reached for comment. Assistant City Manager Bill Workman said he expected the consulting firm hired to prepare the second EIR would release a finished product for public comment in about two months.