Amador County – Former Amador Water Agency director Madonna Wiebold defended the work of agency staff and the past board last week, and said the current board is right in seeking staff verification of a Water Supply Assessment at the Gold Rush Ranch & Golf Resort. Wiebold said the WSA was submitted to the county, lots of questions came about and it was available to every agency in Amador. She said a lot of people were crunching numbers, accuracy was considered and it was unanimously approved. Wiebold said it is not wrong to question it and ask AWA staff to verify. She said she thought the county could support the water needs of Gold Rush, and the city of Sutter Creek “has lots of control” over the project. Ken Berry of Jackson, who lost an appeal of the Wicklow Way Subdivision on a similar challenge to the WSA, said “no power on earth can stop you from considering the future” of the water agency. Berry said: “It will be a very, very cold day in the center of the earth before you can be sued for doing what you were elected to do.” Gold Rush water attorney Eric Robinson said “the question of peak flows has been addressed in voluminous studies,” which were “sent to the city of Sutter Creek, not to the water agency.” Robinson said engineers assessed all comments received on matters of peak flow and water efficiency and “found no merit to the challenges of citizen (Bill) Condrashoff,” who analyzed the Gold Rush study by the AWA before he was elected to the AWA board of directors. Robinson said existing demand on the Amador Water System is 6,300 acre feet of water, and the Gold Rush project ads 1,203 acre feet of demand. He said “there is about 1,300 acre feet of water demand that was assumed, with no basis of fact, in order to be conservative.” Robinson said the key factor for the state water board “is whether there is enough water for existing and proposed projects.” Sutter Creek Planning Commissioner Mike Kirkley said “if this is super-conservative, maybe we are splitting hairs?” He said he also mentioned a third-party review of the Gold Rush WSA, but he was told later that it wasn’t the intent of city management. Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
-
font size
decrease font size
increase font size
Amador County – Former Amador Water Agency director Madonna Wiebold defended the work of agency staff and the past board last week, and said the current board is right in seeking staff verification of a Water Supply Assessment at the Gold Rush Ranch & Golf Resort. Wiebold said the WSA was submitted to the county, lots of questions came about and it was available to every agency in Amador. She said a lot of people were crunching numbers, accuracy was considered and it was unanimously approved. Wiebold said it is not wrong to question it and ask AWA staff to verify. She said she thought the county could support the water needs of Gold Rush, and the city of Sutter Creek “has lots of control” over the project. Ken Berry of Jackson, who lost an appeal of the Wicklow Way Subdivision on a similar challenge to the WSA, said “no power on earth can stop you from considering the future” of the water agency. Berry said: “It will be a very, very cold day in the center of the earth before you can be sued for doing what you were elected to do.” Gold Rush water attorney Eric Robinson said “the question of peak flows has been addressed in voluminous studies,” which were “sent to the city of Sutter Creek, not to the water agency.” Robinson said engineers assessed all comments received on matters of peak flow and water efficiency and “found no merit to the challenges of citizen (Bill) Condrashoff,” who analyzed the Gold Rush study by the AWA before he was elected to the AWA board of directors. Robinson said existing demand on the Amador Water System is 6,300 acre feet of water, and the Gold Rush project ads 1,203 acre feet of demand. He said “there is about 1,300 acre feet of water demand that was assumed, with no basis of fact, in order to be conservative.” Robinson said the key factor for the state water board “is whether there is enough water for existing and proposed projects.” Sutter Creek Planning Commissioner Mike Kirkley said “if this is super-conservative, maybe we are splitting hairs?” He said he also mentioned a third-party review of the Gold Rush WSA, but he was told later that it wasn’t the intent of city management. Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Published in
News Archive
