by Stacey Jett
Chula Vista, CA — A recent decision by the City of Chula Vista to grant exclusive use of the equestrian arena at Rohr Park has sparked significant controversy and public outcry. The agreement, passed on October 17, 2023, with the approval of the City Council, Mayor John McCann, and City Manager Maria Kachadorian, has led to claims of unfair treatment and violations of municipal and state codes.
The exclusive use agreement, supported by Civic Center’s President Judy Tieber, has essentially barred the local horse-owning community from accessing the facility that has been a cherished resource for decades. The community of backyard horse owners and local equestrian groups have traditionally relied on the arena for the management and enjoyment of their horses, utilizing it freely and cooperatively. The agreement is set to last until October 2028, with a possible extension of an additional five years. This is seen by many members as highly “unreasonable”
A Question of Compliance
The agreement’s terms stipulate adherence to all relevant laws and codes, prioritizing the most stringent regulations. However, the current situation suggests a potential oversight or misinterpretation. The locking of the public park facility has led to accusations against the Sunnyside Saddle Club for blocking access and creating an environment that appears to prioritize a small group over the broader public interest. Membership is now required to access the facility and you must be in “good standing” with the club. No Turnouts.
Historically, the Rohr Park arena has been accessible to everyone, with only occasional disruptions from events hosted by the Sunnyside Saddle Club, which typically holds 5-6 shows annually. The recent cancellation of the August 4th show underscores the disproportionate impact of the current restrictions. The park facility remains idle for approximately 359 days each year, despite a local horse community eager to use it.
Public Rights and Municipal Codes
The municipal code emphasizes that public parks are meant for the enjoyment of all citizens, without regard to status. The imposition of a membership requirement and the enforcement of “no turnout” rules contradict this principle, as they effectively limit access based on arbitrary conditions. According to the California Resource Codes (Sections 5400-5409), any significant alteration in public land use requires just compensation, a provision that the Chula Vista City Council has confirmed will not be provided in this case.
Despite assurances from the city of Chula Vista in a May 25, 2023 article in the San Diego Union-Tribune that the public park facility would remain accessible, the reality on the ground tells a different story. The local horse community, due to their peaceful redress, has faced threats of arrest, trespassing, “workplace violence” restraining orders (using the park’s address), audio and visual surveillance, and warnings by police of intervention by animal control—an agency typically concerned with animal neglect, not the provision of safe and adequate facilities for horse management as well as patently meritless accusations of graffiti, burglary, physical assault, etcetera.
Community Response and Legal Considerations
The local horse owners, facing these restrictive measures, view the situation as a public nuisance. They argue that the locking of the arena obstructs their use of public lands and undermines the municipal and state codes designed to protect public access. The community’s coordinated effort to reclaim their access highlights the tension between a Private Club, local governance, and public rights.
The broader issue reflects a troubling trend observed in other areas, such as Lakesdie, and the Dehesa, Crest, and Granite Hills area, where public facilities have been either privatized or closed despite a significant local horse-owning population. The community’s concerns underscore a need for better protection of public amenities and adherence to legal requirements.
The dispute over the Rohr Park equestrian arena transcends local concerns, serving as a crucial test of public rights and government accountability. As the community fights for the return of their valued facility, they are also advocating for a reassessment of how public lands are managed and protected, emphasizing the need for greater oversight and responsiveness from local authorities.