910 Ranch Recreation Management Plan
Summary not yet generated for this topic.
Community sentiment
At a glance
- Public comments
- 9
- Last 30 days
- 0
Last discussed Jun 24, 2026.
Public comments (9)
Shared 40 years of history on the property, urged the council to go slow, protect wildlife, prohibit dogs near streams, and officially name the property a nature preserve and wildlife sanctuary.
County Council - Jun 24, 2026 · 3:38:15 →Stressed the importance of preserving the ranch's pristine ecosystem and wildlife under drought and wildfire stress, asking the council to prioritize preservation over recreation.
County Council - Jun 24, 2026 · 3:44:24 →Suggested taking a unique approach to the property that differs from other open space properties in the county.
County Council - Jun 24, 2026 · 3:46:23 →Praised staff for a thoughtful plan that concentrates impacts and leaves large areas untouched, while acknowledging the public's desire for access.
County Council - Jun 24, 2026 · 6:21:00 →Expressed deep concerns over staff's management practices, short public notice, and proposed parking/trail footprints, urging a pause for expert ecological visioning.
County Council - Jun 24, 2026 · 3:51:18 →Urged the council to prioritize ecological rehabilitation, prohibit dogs entirely, limit parking lots, and form a citizen/expert stewardship committee.
County Council - Jun 24, 2026 · 4:07:27 →Expressed support for the proposed recreation plan, noting that gentle public access balances preservation with community use.
County Council - Jun 24, 2026 · 7:01:40 →Emphasized the ranch's unique wildlife value, advocated limiting recreation and banning dogs, and urged the council to move slowly.
County Council - Jun 24, 2026 · 7:08:00 →Stressed the need to adequately fund property stewardship and staffing during upcoming budget cycles.
County Council - Jun 24, 2026 · 7:14:00 →