As Seaside stumbles through trying to develop its Fort Ord property, liability keeps cropping up.

The City of Seaside has long wrestled with questions about how best to grow, which is something that, to some extent, it must do: Back in the 1990s, when Fort Ord shut down, local municipalities accepted thousands of acres from the U.S. Army, for free.

Seaside was primary among them, but the catch is the land in many cases needed to be cleaned up, whether of munitions, or lead paint – and asbestos-laden buildings. And even back in the 1990s, there were questions about the former Fort Ord’s water supply.

But if the cities – Seaside included – can’t develop the land, it becomes an albatross, an added expense in things like police and fire patrol, and maintenance.

One of Seaside’s boldest attempts to develop its former Fort Ord land, Monterey Downs, was planned as a sprawling single-family home development with a horse track. It was initially approved by the City Council in 2016. But that approval was rescinded when the developer, Brian Boudreau, wouldn’t agree to sign an agreement that would indemnify the city from any future liability associated with it – at the time, two lawsuits over the approval had just been filed.

The city has since been courting other developers, and while there’s been some progress with infill development in the city – the Ascent housing project on Broadway is going up right now – it’s a struggle. Developing on the former Fort Ord is expensive.

The latest salvo on that topic is that the Seaside City Council, in closed session on May 16, approved paying Sacramento-based developer Paul Petrovich $850,000 in a settlement to make a lawsuit he filed against the city in 2021 go away.

Broadly speaking, Petrovich alleged that the City misrepresented itself, and the available water supply, when he entered into an exclusive negotiating agreement with Seaside in 2017 to acquire and develop the approximately 60-acre Main Gate property. (The City Council approved an environmental impact report for a specific plan to develop the property in 2010.)

There might be more lawsuits coming. Also on May 16, Seaside City Council approved a new general plan, called Seaside 2040. Jon Farrow, an attorney for Landwatch Monterey County, wrote to the council, calling into question a multitude of things. Farrow asked that Seaside East – a 635-acre slice of land east of Gen. Jim Moore Boulevard – be excluded from the plan, and argued the general plan’s environmental impact report is fundamentally flawed.

So too did Sofia Prado-Irwin, a scientist with nonprofit Center for Biological Diversity. She closed by writing, “Given the possibility that the Center will be required to pursue legal remedies,” all documents must be preserved.

During the May 16 meeting, Mayor Ian Oglesby said that there were no immediate plans to develop the Seaside East land, but that the general plan is a city-wide document and he doesn’t want to hinder future city councils.

“I’m not supportive of all of a sudden making it open space,” he said.

Sheri Damon, Seaside’s city attorney, says that any proposed development on the site, which harbors numerous protected plant species and is currently open space, will need to have a separate plan approved.