Sonoma County supervisors reject proposed Bodega substance-abuse treatment center

Sonoma County supervisors have rejected a proposal to convert an existing Bodega hotel and spa into a residential drug and alcohol treatment center, deciding Tuesday that the coastal retreat has greater public value serving tourists than patients.

The 5-0 preliminary vote was not meant as a rejection of treatment centers, supervisors stressed, but was reached because they said the proposed use clashed with rules meant to protect agriculture, open space and land used for tourism along the coast.

“There is no question in my mind that these types of facilities are needed,” said board Chairman Efren Carrillo, who represents the area.

“I have been the benefactor of one of these types of facilities,” Carrillo said, making a rare public reference to his time in a Marin County treatment center for alcoholism following a 2013 alcohol-fueled arrest outside his female neighbor’s home.

But, he added, “I don’t feel that agriculture is the primary use and the treatment center is ancillary. The loss of those guest rooms on the coast is an issue.”

The board’s decision overturned an approval by planning commissioners. It came four years after Sonoma Coast Villa and Spa owner Charles Litchfield began his bid to transform the property into a 32-bed facility specializing in treatment for opioid abuse and addiction.

Litchfield and his father, Perry, a San Rafael attorney and real estate investor, purchased the hotel in 2010. Charles Litchfield said their 36-acre property would be primarily an agricultural use because he proposed to incorporate gardening and animals - cattle and horses - into therapy programs.

The board, however, said the primary use of the property would not be agricultural and that the conversion would impact tourism-related services, which take precedence over substance abuse treatment along the coast.

Staff for the state Coastal Commission weighed in with many of the same points in a letter this week recommending the county deny the project.

Litchfield, who previously ran a similar treatment center in Marin with his father Perry Litchfield, was disappointed supervisors voted down his proposal.

“It’s really just a shame,” he said. “There has been explosive growth in painkiller and opioid abuse and that was going to be the centerpiece of the treatment center. It’s gotten so bad that we can’t add beds fast enough … That location was ideal because it’s remote and secluded and provides the environment for the type of treatment we were trying to offer there.”

Tuesday’s board hearing came roughly two years after county planning commissioners approved Litchfield’s application to develop the treatment center. Shortly after, two separate appeals were filed - by Occidental attorney Eric Koenigshofer and by a family who own a 495-acre ranch north of Valley Ford between Highway 1 and the Estero Americano tidal estuary.

Koenigshofer, who represented the area on the Board of Supervisors four decades ago but was acting as a private citizen in the appeal, joined appellants Al and Joe Bordessa in saying the proposal would have removed much-needed tourism amenities from the Bodega area.

“The key is public access, and if there is no place to stay when people visit the coast, there is no real capacity to access it,” Koenigshofer said. “We need to be disciplined with what we allow in the coastal zone and we need to try and protect it forever. The idea that the treatment center serves the public is ludicrous.”

Koenigshofer said the hotel and spa will become more important in future years, as the Bordessa Ranch property is developed with hiking trails and other amenities that allow greater public access to nearby wetlands.

The private property is protected with $1.5 million in conservation and recreational easements from the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District and the state Coastal Conservancy.

Litchfield said he is losing money running the 18-room hotel, and he argued that people seeking treatment for drug and alcohol abuse should also be able to stay on the property. Litchfield said the hotel is less than 40 percent occupied on any given day.

“Why is somebody in recovery any less entitled to enjoy the coastal resources than anybody else?” he said.

The vote will be made official at a later date

You can reach Staff Writer Angela Hart at 526-8503.