Ask the PAC: Meet the man behind the curious signs in north Petaluma

For months in 2021, signs along the east side of Petaluma Blvd. N. caught the attention of passing motorists. Crafted with painstaking detail and bearing a daunting list of accusations and demands, the quizzical displays were taken down only after Sonoma County code officials threatened the property owner with escalating fines.

Owner Thomas Lutge bought the property in March 2020. And he sees the mounting roadblocks to his desired use - a roadside memorial - as part of an elaborate conspiracy.

Lutge, with attorney Herman Franck, of Sacramento, filed a federal lawsuit Jan. 28 against Sonoma County and numerous officials, seeking up to $8 million, plus attorney fees, in an attempt to preserve three abandoned buildings on the property and re-install his signs.

As that case works its way through U.S. District Court for California’s Northern District – or out of it, if county attorneys have their way – the Argus-Courier connected with Lutge in an effort to understand the man behind the mysterious roadside curiosities.

Question: What’s behind those crazy signs in north Petaluma?

Answer: It’s kind of a long story, but Lutge told it quickly, in energetic bursts punctuated with a wry smile and twinkling eyes – oddly gleeful in spite of the unsettling details he relayed during a recent visit to his property.

Among those details are Lutge’s unsupported allegations that his late daughter, who was disabled, was repeatedly raped at the property, and that various law enforcement entities refused to investigate. Lutge never went to Petaluma Police. When asked why, he said he didn’t know where the station was. (It’s just a mile away, on the same road).

In his lawsuit and in person, Lutge, a licensed civil engineer and general contractor, sketches a long cast of villains. But the details are fuzzy, and rarely stand up to scrutiny. Still, Lutge is convinced he has put the pieces together, and he seems genuinely excited to share his findings. Among them: his view that Sonoma County has stood in the way of a would-be memorial for his daughter at the property in order to hide public agencies’ poisoning of the Petaluma River.

During a recent interview Lutge was often interrupted by his attorney, who worked to clarify the finer points of the overarching tale. Lutge has reams of paperwork he claims will support his assertions, including his blueprints purporting to show a drain pipe to the Petaluma River he says cuts through a septic system on the property. All of the details are spelled out in the lawsuit.

But Sonoma County’s planning agency, Permit Sonoma, has characterized the various, interwoven allegations as unfounded.

“The lawsuit is unfounded and the County has filed a motion to dismiss these meritless claims, which is currently being considered by the court,” according to a statement from a Permit Sonoma spokesperson. “Permit Sonoma Code Enforcement has issued appropriate violations for unpermitted and substandard structures. The property owner is responsible for abating the public nuisances that exist on his property.”

In his most recent court action, Lutge has sought a restraining order to bar the county from demolishing the buildings on his property, and to force the county to accept his permit application to use the property as a permanent “crime memorial,” a reference to the allegations involving his daughter which were once detailed on the signs posted at the property.

In a sworn affidavit presented to the court, Lutge said his main motivation is installing, and maintaining, a memorial.

“What can I say on my behalf is that the issue came down to the stated use of the property,” Lutge said. “My stated use, as I have made very clear in all these proceedings and with the multiple filings I gave to the hearing officer, was to provide a crime memorial for my dead daughter, who was a victim of sex crimes at these very buildings.”