Sutter Creek – The Sutter Creek City Council continued its Gold Rush Ranch & Golf Resort public hearing this week, and would answer questions brought out in hearings last week. Project principal Bill Bunce last week said he cherished the process. “Some people in this community think that I am lower than whale dung, and I appreciate that,” Bunce said last Tuesday. “I love this process.” He said: “I think this is the best project to come to the foothills, and I say that humbly.” On Thursday, one woman said she thought anti-Gold Rush signs in town were negative and “should come down.” She said tourists see the signs and think something is wrong. Bart Weatherly said he represented 100 to 150 people and was appalled at Bunce liking the process. He said it was “killing” him and “has turned neighbors and friends against each other.” Weatherly called Gold Rush “un-build-able,” “un-sell-able” and “un-livable,” and gave Bunce a list of comments and questions. Bunce told the council he would answer the document in writing, and give the answers to the council. Lisa Koslowski, president of the Sutter Creek Business Association, said her organization voted to support Gold Rush a year ago, and “most of us were in favor of it.” She said as a business person, she knows she will benefit, but as a resident, she was “torn.” Koslowski said “it’s a beautiful project. If you are developing that land, you should let no one other than Gold Rush do it.” She said she was torn because she really did not “want 5,000 people around here.” She said the design and materials they are going to use are “very beautiful,” but “if they sell, do we have any control over that?” Bob Reeder of the Amador County Business Council, said his group voted unanimously to support Gold Rush, and urged the council to pass it, as did Former Supervisor Richard Vinson, District 3, who said he thought it was a good project. Tom Infusino told the council that the Foothill Conservancy thought the project’s Environmental Impact Report was not in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, and he submitted a partial list of those presumed failings. The Conservancy’s Katherine Evatt said she thought the project would include “smart growth” and recycled water, but she was disappointed that it did not, and the project’s plan seemed to envision “what developers see as the city’s future.” Infusino urged the city council to complete a fiscal analysis of the project before any approval of Gold Rush. Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.