Last week, Alameda County Supervisors David Haubert and Nate Miley listened to their constituents and heard a resounding message: Tesla Park must be preserved as a reserve.
Public opposition to developing the 3,100-acre tract for recreational use has been running up against the plans of the county’s Agricultural Advisory Committee. The park’s ultimate designation rests in the hands of the California Department of Parks and Recreation, but the local committees and leaders have influence over the process.
The 3,100-acre tract was protected by Senate Bill 155 in 2021, which prevented an off-road vehicle recreation area being built there.
At issue is whether the environmentally sensitive area, home to dozens of special-status plant species, should be designated a state park, which would allow more intensive recreation, such as camping and bicycling, or a nature or cultural reserve, which would prioritize conservation and only allow passive recreational uses. A State Cultural Reserve designation would also comport with preserving the land’s historic connections to Native American tribes. Cultural surveys have identified evidence of Indigenous settlements in and around the property, and the Altamont Landfill Open Space Committee has also asked State Parks to classify the area as a reserve to protect Native American history.
Last November, the Alameda County’s Agricultural Advisory Committee sent a note to the Board of Supervisors to advocate for specific trail connections and parking areas in the Tesla property, which seemed to reinforce the belief that State Parks has all but decided to classify the area as a park with active recreational opportunities. Draft concepts shared by State Parks last year all included plans for camping, which would not be permitted in a natural or cultural reserve.
The committee’s letter was a premature attempt to affect the outcome of the state classification process, and Haubert and Miley, who comprise the board’s transportation and planning committee, took the right action last week to not forward the letter to the full Board of Supervisors.
Several groups including Tri-Valley Conservancy and the Native Plant Society have registered their opposition to a multi-use trail on the lane.
An attempt to create “facts on the ground” in and around the Tesla property — such as supporting the creation of trail connections before the classification process is complete — is an end-run around democratic processes. All our supervisors should take note that this is happening in the open, where the public can see this.
The Livermore Area Recreation and Park District’s master plan also does not imply any trail connections to the Tesla parcel. Agricultural Advisory Committee chair Jack Norton said State Parks doesn’t build trails that harm wildlife.
State Parks may not intend to harm wildlife, but developing anything above the minimum level of recreational use on the land is undoubtedly going to do exactly that.
Those who support minimum-impact activities in the property need to keep up the pressure to ensure the state doesn’t ram through a plan that will negatively impact the land’s biodiversity and Native American history. Our local leadership also needs to resist the attempts to make an active-use park a foregone conclusion.