Select Page

The Sonoma Land Trust claims the almost $600,000 in fines will be paid into a fund to help revive your house.

The property was bought by the Thompsons and, as stated by the court, proceeded to violate the protections on it by digging up and killing three century-plus-old oak trees in an effort.
What that ad does not mention was the role the property had in a conservation drama which ended in a 586,289 fine for the owners. A Sonoma County Superior Court ruled that, although renovating the property, shielded sources were recklessly ruined by Toni and Peter Thompson on the grounds, including felling three oak trees that were historic.
The Thompsons were taken by the hope to court, and Judge Broderick excoriated that the landowners, noting the group seemed unwilling to even acknowledge the damage.

The Thompsons put the property on the market after Broderick’s judgment. The list contains an extra property.
“The easement permanently protects the natural, open space, ecological, and scenic values of the property,” as Superior Court Judge Patrick M. Broderick mentioned in an April judgment ,”which include an exceptionally intact ecosystem dominated by mostly undisturbed native vegetation.”
As stated by the Press Democrat, the few are also pushing to get a new trial, asserting inadequate representation.

“Conservation easements are legally binding and individuals who buy land under easement must understand that protecting these properties isn’t optional,” says Sarah Sigman, attorney to the confidence.

Defendants’ defenses are further undermined by their own persistent failure to tell the truth. Defendants’ claims fail to get the additional reason that defendants have no photographic or documentary support and credibility. The huge majority of the testimony on cross-examination of Peter and Toni Thompson […] was unsuccessful, evasive, inconsistent with all deposition testimony, or completely false.


Sonoma Land Trust

The advertisement dubs the five-bed, four-and-a-half-bath, 4,891-square-foot residence and surrounding territory”the very best of the wine country.”

Handing down a 392,167 fee Particularly for the devastation of these trees on top of additional damages, the judge added that the case was made worse by the things he calls dishonesty throughout the trial.

Back in 2009, 7400 Bennett Valley Road’s former officers allowed the easement (a contractual arrangement to maintain the property ) into the Sonoma Land Trust, also an conservation nonprofit.

Broderick stated, in part,”Despite the severe harm that clearly resulted from their activities, in knowing violation of this easement, defendants continued to object up to and during trial which conditions on the easement property seemed for them to be mostly recovered and aesthetically pleasant ”
[…]The Court finds that neither Mr. nor Ms. Thompson were plausible or persuasive, nor will they support their version of key events using a single contemporaneous document.
Property in the Marketplace for Countless after conservation battle is lost by owners