Rohr Park Watch Dog or Misinformation Spreader?

I have written a number of articles in Sunnyside Common Sense. I welcomed the opportunity to share my observations and discoveries with others who may be interested. The majority of those articles were about Rohr Park including one on September 29th. That article, Rohr Park Draft Master Plan: Horses are Out; Lighted Fields Are In, described the recently released City of Chula staff recommendation.

In November, I wrote Horses Are Out - Part 2. That one, which followed the City’s workshop #3, differed from prior ones. I wrote about likely actions (of the political elite) that I did not witness. I drew a conclusion from the preponderance of evidence. “Knew or had reason to know” was my standard given what was taking place at the time. However, some viewed that article as spreading misinformation.

Yet, the information within my articles was validated by someone who was in a position to know last month. I had gotten it all right except for the 3:1 tree replacement ratio. The 3:1 ratio cited in my October 21st article, Mature Trees Cut Down in Rohr Park; Will the City Replace Them?, was incorrect.

Correction: The City of Chula Vista does not have a tree replacement policy. The City’s arborist recommends replacing every tree removed with two trees [2:1] if the project budget allows it. My misunderstanding stemmed from a statement made at the September 2nd Sweetwater Community Planning Group meeting.

Fact remains, the future of Rohr Park lies with five elected officials who do not live in the Sweetwater Valley. Only two of those elected officials represent valley residents amongst many others. Unincorporated county residents who call Rohr Park their neighborhood park will be unrepresented in the final decision. However, I know from my professional experience that much of that recommended draft plan could be built without a comprehensive park master plan.

The use of a survey was an interesting strategy to justify soccer fields over a horse arena in Rohr Park. Yet, those two recreational activities should not have been competing against each other for space in the park. We can thank Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Commission Chair Martin Calvo for putting that perspective in the public meeting record on December 11th.

To their credit, Sweetwater Valley’s civic leaders reacted to the outcry. They took action in favor of the equestrian arena at the request of the Bonita Valley Horsemen. The Sweetwater Community Planning Group and Sweetwater Valley Civic Association sent letters “on behalf of Bonita, Sunnyside, Chula Vista, and surrounding communities.” Those letters were signed by a newcomer to valley leadership who was handed the reins to both organizations last year. He then met with Mayor McCann and his staff. The Sunnyside Saddle Club President also attended that meeting.

Intentionally or unintentionally, the equestrian arena concern has overshadowed all other elements of the City’s urban Rohr Park vision. To date, no local group has taken a position on other features illustrated in the Draft Master Plan. Two features that warrant conditional support are:

• The addition of a pedestrian/ bike path across the golf course. Linking the north and south sides of the river would boost the City’s commercial district and unify the two sides of the valley. The crossing would expand the trail network and provide a shorter loop option for walkers. That new path, proposed by the City’s golf course operator a few years ago, should be a top priority given its benefits.

• A community center building. A new building at the Rohr Manor site is reasonable although largely undefined in the draft master plan. Exploring a public-private partnership may be beneficial. This could be a “shared” multi-purpose building with event space and recreation. This community asset could possibly achieve the level envisioned for a landmark park described with in the City’s 2018 Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update [Policy 1.24, page 3-16]— a South Bay Central Park. This new building should be given priority status.

These two projects along with the amphitheater are important pieces that warrant civic engagement. I do not know if meaningful proactive engagement on behalf of this valley has happened. If it did, those efforts were not visible.

However, we are not privy to everything that is going on. My understanding, which I’ve shared, is based on the public meeting record, information from City staff, and public documents. City Council closed session discussions due to “significant exposure to litigation” are not in the public meeting record. The former District 1 Supervisor’s views on the equestrian arena use are not in the public meeting record. Our current Supervisor’s views are also not in the public meeting record. The public knows only what Supervisor Paloma Aguirre’s representative, Marianne Delatorre, shared. “The Supervisor has been briefed.” County and City parks staff have apparently talked since November 20th.

Transparency is a legal word. Public agencies are supposed to conduct their discussions and make decisions in public in accordance with State law. Meeting agenda noticing requirements dictate what topics can be discussed. Meeting minutes must record specific information and be available to the public. Decisions at a public meeting should not be altered outside of a public meeting. Community planning groups are subject to these legal requirements.

Under the County, the Sweetwater Community Planning Group operates independently under leadership that the planning group members elect annually. The election of 2026 officers is on their January 6, 2026 meeting agenda. Yet, the planning group’s purview according to the County Board of Supervisors Policy I-1 is limited.

Planning group members act in an advisory capacity to the Director of Planning & Development Services, the Zoning Administrator, the Planning Commission, the Board of Supervisors and others involved in the County land development process.

The Sweetwater Valley Civic Association is a nonprofit 501(c)(4) member-based organization that is not subject to public meeting requirements and determines its mission. Their member roster is private. According to their 1986 President, this association had served as “quasi-government” for valley residents in the unincorporated county in the past. I am not a member.

In closing, the City of Chula Vista’s Rohr Park Master Planning process is still ongoing. Mayor McCann’s response to a Bonita homeowner stated that there is more time for community input.

By Karen Henry, P.E. | January 5, 2026

Return to Main Page