13 solano fairgrounds 1

Dorain McLeod putts at the Joe Mortara Golf Course at the Solano County Fairgrounds in Vallejo, Thursday. The county is considering a $94 million bond renovation over 25 years for the aging fairgrounds. (Aaron Rosenblatt/Daily Republic)

Solano County

Supervisor candidates differ on fairgrounds

By From page A1 | April 13, 2014

FAIRFIELD — Candidates for two Solano County supervisor seats on the June 3 ballot have various opinions about the county’s fairgrounds proposals to create an iconic, regional draw.

The $94 million, 25-year plan will be a bonanza for the county and Vallejo. Or a bust, with taxpayers holding the bag. Or maybe the project should be done differently. Or at a different time.

Incumbent Jim Spering represents the 3rd District that includes much of Fairfield and Suisun City. His challengers are Fairfield City Councilwoman Pam Bertani, Steven Lowe and Michael Oman.

Incumbent John Vasquez represents the 4th District that includes much of Vacaville and Dixon. His challengers are Dixon City Councilman Thom Bogue and Vacaville residents Gerald Clift and Eugene Ray.

3rd District

Spering for the past few years has championed the idea of renovating the Vallejo fairgrounds. He wants to see it become a regional draw with not only the annual county fair, but also shops, a creekside park, a bigger exhibition hall bustling with events and other attractions.

“It’s probably one of the prime commercial spots in Northern California,” Spering said. “It has about 250,000 cars going by it every single day.”

Having the county continue to maintain the deteriorating structures there is not feasible, Spering said.

With a new exhibition hall, Spering sees the part of the property used for the annual fair having various types of events year-round. Visitors will use the commercial part of the property and vice versa, so that the public and commercial portions complement each other, he said.

A strong economy would change the dynamics of the plan and greatly accelerate the project time line, Spering said. A master developer for the property might step forward, he said.

Critics have worried that, if the project fails, taxpayers might get stuck paying for millions of dollars in bonds.

“Are there guarantees in anything we do?” Spering said. “No. But I think we’re in a very good position with the location of that property of making it successful.”

Bertani said the county’s fairgrounds redevelopment plan is a good idea because it puts the property to its highest and best use. But an event that happened at the June 11, 2013, Board of Supervisors meeting caught her attention.

Supervisors that day talked about the financial study the county had done for the project by Goodwin Consulting Group. A group called Vallejoans for Responsible Growth said it had hired Davis Taussig & Associates to look at the financial study.

Davis Taussig & Associates concluded that the Goodwin study used too low a number when calculating employee impact services on Vallejo. Use the number that is standard fiscal practice and Vallejo would see increased costs of $17 million and only $5 million in increased revenues. The city would not break even on the fairgrounds project until 2046.

County project consultants defended the Goodwin study.

As a result of this disagreement, Bertani wants the county to look further at the math used in the financial study. She would want to know as supervisor that she’s not leaving taxpayers holding the bag on a project that the county didn’t vet up front, she said.

“At this point, I say more due diligence is warranted,” Bertani said.

Oman has his own ideas for the fairgrounds. He wants to see money that Gov. Jerry Brown has allotted to start building a bullet train used instead to extend Bay Area Rapid Transit from Richmond to the fairgrounds.

The fairgrounds could have seven office towers of 200,000 square feet, said Oman, who works in commercial real estate. That would create the biotech campus.

“Biotech is certainly an industry that’s not going by the wayside,” he said. “It’s a market investment for us as a county.”

Whether he and Solano County could convince state officials to divert bullet train money to BART remains to be seen. Although the proposed bullet train linking Los Angeles and the Bay Area is controversial, it is one of Brown’s priorities.

BART officials estimate the cost to build rail line at more than $125 million per mile. That would put the cost of a Vallejo extension at more than $2 billion.

But bringing BART to Solano County has been a recurring dream. Original plans for BART from 1957 called for the system to extend into Solano County, going to Vallejo, then north to Napa, then back through Jameson Canyon to Fairfield. In 1990, the BART president urged the county to support a BART extension to Benicia, Vallejo and Fairfield.

“I think the fairgrounds offer an incredible opportunity,” Oman said.

Lowe could not be reached to give his views on the fairgrounds.

4th District

Vasquez, like Spering, has backed the fairgrounds plan developed by the county.

The fair itself only needs a portion of the property. The county can get rid of the horse racing track and horse stalls, with horse racing gone, he said.

The county wouldn’t float $94 million in bonds all at once, but would move in increments, Vasquez said.

“You’ll be able to hold back or move forward as the need occurs,” Vasquez said. “The property is owned by us. What’s 150 acres of commercial property worth along Interstate 80? The land is worth a lot.”

Yet he doesn’t favor simply selling the land.

“If we were just to turn it over to private development, they’d do what they want very quickly because they need to recoup it,” Vasquez said.

The county, in contrast, can afford to be patient and do the development right, he said.

“Even if we didn’t do anything but the first phase that puts in the entertainment center, we’ve still made a commitment to the fair to improve the fair itself,” Vasquez said. “That will start making money on its own.”

Bogue is more cautious.

“I love the idea. It really fits what’s going on in that area and I think it would enhance the area tremendously,” Bogue said.

He said the proposed project subscribes to his philosophy that the county should be looking for ways to generate revenues to offset costs.

For Bogue, it’s a matter of timing. He isn’t ready to issue bonds quite yet.

“We just got through some real tough economic times,” Bogue said. “You usually build up your foundation and get everything financially secure again and build up your reserves before you would consider doing some investments.”

Clift, who works on his family’s farm near Vacaville, said he would try to stop funding on the fairgrounds project and would not vote for bonds.

“I just don’t think this is the time in our economy to be spending money on it, especially when we could be spending it on roads or other county services,” he said.

Traffic is already bad in the area, he said.

“I can’t imagine trying to make it worse,” he said.

Clift went further. He said the budget to operate the fairgrounds as it exists today is not sustainable, apart from any renovation plans. If the county cannot substantially reduce operating costs, it needs to sell the property or rent it to someone who can use it more efficiently, he said.

The fairgrounds budget for 2014 calls for $3.05 million in revenues and $3.37 million in expenses. Savings in the fairgrounds budget are to fill the $323,927 hole. A county report attributed the loss in large part to roof repairs and other maintenance projects at the aging facility.

Ray, a real estate agent and martial arts instructor, wants to hear more ideas from local people for the fairgrounds property. He mentioned Oman’s idea of having research offices there and a BART extension to the fairgrounds as an example.

He wants to see if a better idea than the county’s for the site can be found before having the county issue bonds.

“That location is incredible right there,” Ray said, noting the fairgrounds is near Interstate 80 and Highway 37, with Interstate 680 and Highway 12 just over the hills.

He talked of finding the highest and best use for the land.

“My gut tells me there’s more that we can do than what they’re doing,” Ray said.

Reach Barry Eberling at 427-6929 or [email protected] Follow him on Twitter at www.twitter.com/beberlingdr.

Barry Eberling

Barry Eberling

Barry Eberling has been a reporter with the Daily Republic since 1987. He covers Solano County government, transportation, growth and the environment. He received his bachelors of art degree from the University of California, Santa Barbara and his masters degree in journalism from the University of California, Berkeley.

Discussion | 15 comments

The Daily Republic does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Please read our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy before commenting.

  • JBApril 13, 2014 - 7:35 am

    Vote Spering and all other incumbents out of office. Do not vote for Pam as you will remember she is not paying full attention to the people of Fairfield and focusing her time on her supervisor campaign.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • The MisterApril 13, 2014 - 7:41 am

    The incumbents want to continue to spend money on this like drunken sailors. Challengers seem to want to be more responsible with our tax dollars. Perhaps the incumbents believe in the "trickle down" theory... you take tax dollars from the working folks in the County and give the money to big planners and developers and somehow the working folks realize a financial benefit. Time to dump the make-believe Supervisors and get people in there who deal in reality.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Mr. PracticalApril 13, 2014 - 9:59 am

    This project is excellent conceptually and can be successfully if done properly. I'll be voting for Spering for his vision and leadership.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • @ Not so Practical after-all MisterApril 13, 2014 - 10:31 am

    What Project?... It seems to me the project is undefined at this point..... That the Supervisors are just looking at various ways to throw money at it...... Remember people... THE BOND DEBT IS THE END GAME... I say NO MORE BOND DEBT... Just sell the property and give the money to Vallejo to rebuild their reserves, sell the property give the money to Vallejo and hold the county fair in Dixon at the Dixon Fairgrounds. Most often the simplest solution is the best... I have now lost faith in you Mr. Practical.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Mr. PracticalApril 13, 2014 - 10:41 am

    That's why I said, "conceptually." Selling it creates one time revenue. The project has potential for long-term, continuous revenue. Let's let the process continue and see where it ends up.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Nope, Nope not buying into that.... Pants on the Ground?April 13, 2014 - 12:44 pm


    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Elvis Costello - I Can't Stand Up For Falling Down.... Fie Fie to UApril 13, 2014 - 10:19 pm


    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Oh Sing It Soulfully! ..... Sam and Dave !April 13, 2014 - 10:21 pm


    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Anyway... Surely YOU JOKE, Practical?April 13, 2014 - 10:58 pm


    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • ?April 13, 2014 - 11:09 pm

    Confusion Say.... Man whose pants fall down while chasing Chicken, run afoul.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Rich GiddensApril 13, 2014 - 11:18 am

    The articles makes the false assumption of a ''regional draw'' and a ''money maker''. This as Stockton went broke making the same sort of assumptions. The public financing of entertainment and tourist attractions needs to stop. There are many examples of bankrupting and budget busting publicly financed venues across the nation. But people don't care and they don't vote. Do you really think your average voter around here cares? That's exactly why governing bodies get away with this sort of ripoff----by the time it's apparent its not a moneymaker and the bills are due by the taxpayer, the politician and his contractor pals are long gone and you're stuck with the hills and consequences. Think about it.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Monica TiptonApril 13, 2014 - 7:51 pm

    The project as currently planned (Solano 360) is a lovely 20th Century development whose time has passed.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • B. ThiemerApril 13, 2014 - 8:38 pm

    If this is surplus property, then it should be sold off, and the revenue used to upgrade the remaining facilities. Additionally, please ask if any of the candidates have any interests in property surrounding the proposed project area.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • YepApril 13, 2014 - 10:17 pm

    Yep. Around September 2008 there was an adjoining portion sold off as surplus. It would be interesting to know who bought it.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • www.geraldclift.com or www.gclift.comApril 13, 2014 - 11:58 pm

    Check this out... This guy has a good website... People, this is an important political position .... County Supervisor... Please remember to look at the websites for all the Candidates... Thank You and if you see a Candidate you like, get involved with the campaign... This is very important for good Candidates that will not owe support to a special interest group. Money buys political favors.... if you do not want "bought" candidates then you need lots of "boots on the ground" unpaid volunteers. Fundraisers to support your Candidate are good ideas also... Thank You

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Recent Articles

  • Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

  • Special Publications »

    Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service (updated 4/30/2015) and Privacy Policy (updated 4/7/2015).
    Copyright (c) 2016 McNaughton Newspapers, Inc., a family-owned local media company that proudly publishes the Daily Republic, Mountain Democrat, Davis Enterprise, Village Life and other community-driven publications.