Panel warns Marsh to skip land-use vote

City Councilman Garrad Marsh is Modesto's most outspoken proponent for farmland preservation. Last month, he found out he can't vote on a proposal that would advance his cause because he could benefit financially from it.

The California Fair Political Practices Commission advised him to step down from votes on a proposed ordinance that could require builders to set aside an acre of prime farmland for every acre they develop.

The FPPC contends that Marsh has a conflict of interest because he is a developer who plans to build a 14-lot subdivision in northeast Modesto that would not be subject to the conditions of the farmland measure.

That could make Marsh's property more valuable because it would be less expensive to build there than on land bound by the pending agricultural protections, FPPC attorney Scott Hallabrin wrote in a letter dated April 22 to City Attorney Susana Alcala Wood.

The City Council approved Marsh's development proposal in 2006. He has 12 more months to make it happen without being subject to new building conditions from the city.

Marsh previously developed a 180-lot, 49-acre subdivision near Enochs High School.

"There's nothing wrong with Garrad Marsh being a developer. I think it's great. But he can't be a developer and a City Council member making decisions that will impact his holdings," said Steve Madison, chief executive of the Central California Building Industry Association.

Madison asked Wood to investigate Marsh's conflict of interest in October. She sent a letter to the FPPC asking for advice. Wood plans to follow up with more questions to the FPPC to determine the scope of its recommendation.

'A target on my back'

Marsh wants to find out if he can vote on the farmland preservation ordinance if he agrees to have the city apply it to his property. He doubts he'll build on the land by next May, making the question moot because he won't have a chance to benefit from the agricultural measure.

"I think I have a target on my back from the BIA," Marsh said. "They know I favor ag mitigation, which is something farmers in general favor. I'm on board for that. Our ag property is too valuable to squander for sprawl."

Marsh and former Councilman Denny Jackman led the push last year for the "Stamp Out Sprawl" ballot measure, which places restrictions on residential development on land outside the city limit.

Madison argues that Marsh should be barred from voting on any land-use questions because any steps he takes to restrict development could make his property more attractive.

At least one of Marsh's colleagues agrees, at least until he can hear back from the FPPC with more details. Otherwise, the city could be exposed to lawsuits and Marsh could incur fines from the FPPC.

"It's a problem for him, and I would've expected that after six years of him being on the council, that somebody would've explored this road," said City Councilwoman Janice Keating, who often disagrees with Marsh on land-use issues.

The Building Industry Association has sued Stanislaus County to overturn a farmland preservation measure the Board of Supervisors adopted in 2007 and raised questions to the FPPC about whether three supervisors who own farmland had a conflict of interest when they voted for it.

Sewer vote questioned

Keating and Marsh serve on the council's Economic Development Committee, which has the first say on growth issues. The committee two weeks ago recommended that the city ask voters whether sewers should be extended to four areas outside the city limit. It's considered the first step on a long road toward annexation.

Marsh supported three choices that center on economic development. He voted against one that likely would yield residential subdivisions on the Riverbank border. Madison said that vote, which took place after the city received the FPPC letter, is another example of a decision that could benefit Marsh's property.

Marsh and Wood said that decision likely is more abstract than the one on farmland preservation. Wood said she'd ask the FPPC for more clarification.

Marsh said the sewer vote is advisory, meaning it wouldn't necessarily lead to annexation. He further said developers could put their own initiatives on the ballot asking voters to extend sewer lines.

Bee staff writer Adam Ashton can be reached at aashton@modbee.com or 578-2366.