Amador County – The Sutter Creek City Council voted 4-0 with one abstention Monday to give acting City Manager Sean Rabe the power to enforce or not enforce the city’s sign ordinance, after complaints that the Sutter Creek Police Department removed political signs from downtown sidewalks last week.

All of the signs removed promoted Councilwoman Linda Rianda’s reelection, and were removed from planter boxes on Main Street, which led Rianda to abstain from a vote on the issue.

One woman during public comment asked how a complaint by Bart Weatherly, also a candidate in the Sutter Creek City Council race, could lead to such quick action to remove the signs. Rabe said he was absent and getting his wisdom teeth pulled when the complaint came in, saying Rianda’s signs were in the city right-of-way. The officer on duty asked city staff’s opinion, and determined a city right-of-way was not a proper place for the signs.

Rabe said he and City Attorney Derek Cole found First Amendment issues with the city sign ordinance, and asked the council to “direct staff to suspend enforcement of that ordinance.” The council agreed, also allowing for removal of signs for public safety reasons, and from all city property. The council gave the city manager sole power to remove signs.

Rianda asked for clarification on whether the sidewalks were city property, and said she did not intend to put her signs on city property. She asked that if the signs could be left in the planters if they don’t impede the right-of-way.

 Rabe said planters on Main Street are owned by property and business owners, not the city. He said building owners on Main also own the sidewalks, though the city has easements.

Cole said the only way the city can restrict signs is to outlaw all signs, or issue encroachment permits. He said the city sign ordinance limiting signs to 2- by 2-foot at residences “violates the First Amendment,” which guarantees freedom of speech.

Councilman Pat Crosby said they should follow Caltrans’ lead, regulating all signs with encroachment permits. He said he did not see a First Amendment issue.

Councilwoman Sandra Anderson said signs were not always placed by the candidate. And she disagreed with encroachment permitting, saying: “Let’s not do what Caltrans does.”

Planning Commissioner Robin Peters said the commission had the same conversation a week ago, and he urged the city council to bring the city sign ordinance “into the modern era.” He said the best idea would be to not enforce the ordinance until after the November 2^nd election, then readdress the issue without the pressure of politics.

Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Amador County -  The Amador County Board of Supervisors responded Tuesday to positive and negative findings on government departments in the 2009-10 Grand Jury Report, which aims most of its criticism at Amador County Animal Control.

After some revision, the board gave approval to an agenda item outlining responses to the jury’s findings. Each finding includes a response from the department head and the supervisors.

In his response, Animal Control Director John Vail disagreed with four of the jury’s findings.

 The Grand Jury said “in cases of stray or wandering animals and nuisance complaints…adequate documentation of dates and times is needed to identify habitual offenders.” The report said offenses must be witnessed by an ACAC Officer. Vail disagreed partially with this finding, writing in response that not all offenses must be witnessed by an ACAC Officer, and some reports may first be filed with the District Attorney.

The Grand Jury also said many of the department’s policies have been modified and are not contained in writing in the agreements at the General Services Administration office. Vail disagreed, writing the “agreements have not been modified,” but “some agreements may be expired and do need to be renegotiated.”

The report said County leash laws are defined by California Government Code” and “ACAC can only seize or impound a dog or issue citations if a dog is on property other than that owned by its owner or the person who has the right to control the dog.” Vail said California Government Code “does not define County leash laws,” but “does prescribe actions that may or may not be taken by Animal Control Officers.”

Jon Hopkins, General Services Administration Director, said he agrees with some of the findings, but he has seen “many Grand Jury reports” over the years and they are “not always accurate.”

Martha Shaver, County Counsel, said “in most cases, grand juries take a lot of time.”

Supervisors agreed with all of the responses made by Vail.

The Grand Jury also found some services provided by the Amador County Detention Facility to be inadequate because of overcrowding, a lack of proper funding and antiquated equipment. Most findings on this and other departments were positive.

In a letter of response to Judge Susan Harlan, who oversaw the grand jurors, Chairman Brian Oneto said “the report reflects a tremendous amount of effort on behalf of the grand jurors.”

Supervisors unanimously approved their response to the findings.

Supervisors John Plasse and Ted Novelli were absent.

Story by Alex Lane This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Amador County – State Senate candidate and Assemblyman Roger Niello brought his campaign caravan to Amador County Tuesday morning, with a stop at the TSPN TV offices in Jackson. 

Niello is one of three Republicans and one Democrat who will be vying for the seat of the late Senator Dave Cox in District 1. The primary race is November 2nd, and a special election for the position has been decreed by the governor for January 4th.

The Fair Oaks District 5 State Assemblyman kicked off the RV tour of his district last week, and made stops in Sacramento, Rancho Cordova, Orangevale and Folsom. On Tuesday he stopped in Amador County for lunch and sat for an interview at TSPN studio on Main Street in Jackson. Niello said he planned to take the campaign kickoff tour to Galt, Elk Grove, El Dorado County and various locations in Placer County later Tuesday.

He said later in the month, he planned to trek further into the district, which stretches from Sacramento to the Oregon border. But because of the small, winding roads, he plans to take a more conventional vehicle than the RV, “his 33-foot mobile campaign office.”

He plans to make a 400-mile campaign tour, which was planned because of the size of the district, which stretches from Mammoth Lake to the Oregon border. With him on the trek Tuesday was Political Director Stephanie Jantzen, along with his chief of staff Todd, and three other people to help him keep his schedule.

Niello said the district has roughly 900,000 people, similar in population to the other State Senate districts. It also has a little over 500,000 registered voters.

12 counties in State Senate District 1 include Modoc, Lassen, Plumas, Sierra, Nevada, Placer, El Dorado, Sacramento, Amador, Calaveras, Mono and Alpine counties.

Niello and two other announced candidates are from Sacramento County, including Republican Barbara Alby, and Democrat Ken Cooley. Another Republican, Ted Gaines is from Placer County.

Candidates had until Monday (September 20th) to file for the primary in their respective counties, and the counties have until Friday to certify the candidates. The Secretary of State’s office was not sure Wednesday if other candidates had filed in their counties. The office will announce the official candidates for the primary next Monday (September 27th). Amador County elections office reported that it had only heard of the four candidates, though an official candidate list was not yet available.

Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Amador County – Ione City Council heard from staff Tuesday that Amador County Local Agency Formation Commission wants an agreement signed between supervisors and the city before it proceeds with an annexation request.

Mayor Skip Schaufel, a LAFCO board member, said commissioners, “at least three of them … had absolutely no intention to move forward,” and “just flat didn’t have any understanding.”

City Planner Christopher Jordan said Plymouth City Councilman Jon Colburn asked for an updated Municipal Services Review. Ione City Manager Kim Kerr said “no specific reason” was given for the request. 

Jordan said in a year-and-a-half communicating with LAFCO Executive Director Roseanne Chamberlain, she never said they needed an updated Municipal Services Review, but it could be updated using the city’s new General Plan.

Jordan said the big issue that came up was that LAFCO members, Supervisors Ted Novelli and Louis Boitano said they “want to see an agreement approved between the city and the county before they move forward.”

Jordan said he surveyed cities around the state and found agreements with tax sharing, “Best Management Practices,” and a depth of details he did not think Ione and supervisors wanted. Jordan suggested another joint workshop with the county.

Councilwoman Andrea Bonham said the law does not require an agreement. Jordan said it only requires discussion. He said Amador LAFCO has the power to adopt policy and further requirements, but has not done so. ¶ Jordan said he is “concerned that they are holding us to a different standard than Jackson, Plymouth, Sutter Creek or Amador City.” He said: “We are very puzzled at this point.” Councilman David Plank agreed, saying he was hearing some inconsistencies.

Kerr said she was “very mad” at the meeting, and was surprised supervisors led the stoppage. LAFCO also told her it will now do its own notification, after a non-notification complaint, meaning the city must now pay twice for notification.

Jordan said he would send a letter to LAFCO telling them to hold Ione’s $1,000 deposit, and that “we need to know costs as the commission continues to drag this out.”

Kerr said if they try to get an agreement with the county, it “may not be to the level we went to before,” which “was an attempt to try and address some of the concerns that we might face moving forward.” Part of the agreement sought to require the county to have certain zoning within the city’s “Sphere of Influence.”

Jordan said Ione’s Sphere Of Influence change was not as big as that sought by Plymouth. Ione looks to add 160 acres, while Plymouth seeks nearly 1,000 new acres.

Story by Alex Lane This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Amador County – The Sutter Creek City Council voted 4-1 Monday to repeal three city ordinances that create zoning and other regulations for medical marijuana dispensaries, while the majority voiced a preference to enact a ban in the future.

City Attorney Derek Cole said recent court rulings, including for “compassionate use,” are changing the legal atmosphere.

He said a District 4 Appeals Court ruling in Orange County said that an Anaheim municipal ban on dispensaries was sent back to the city for modification. Cole said the ruling in effect “said state law does not conflict with federal law,” and the “two can coexist.” Cole said it may mean that cities cannot base their law on federal law.

Cole said the “area of law in medical marijuana is changing every day,” and in November, after a statewide initiative on legalizing marijuana is closed at the polls, it could be another change.

He said: “What I say now may not be the same as what I say in six months, or a year.”

Councilwoman Linda Rianda asked if they could prohibit marijuana dispensaries in the city. Cole thought “there is a conflict with federal law, but the only court to rule has said no.” Cole said repealing the city’s three medical marijuana zoning ordinances would make city law “silent” on the issue. Then, if an application for a dispensary came in, the council might have to make a ruling for consistency’s sake.

He said applicants may argue for similar uses in city zoning to determine an allowance for a dispensary.

Planning Commissioner Mike Kirkley said he was the only “no” vote in a 3-1 commission recommendation to repeal the ordinances. Kirkley said if the city cannot have a moratorium, the council should keep the current ordinance.

Commissioner Robin Peters said the commission recommended repeal because attorneys advised them that the ordinance was violating federal law, which now may not matter. He said the commission also recommended the council make clear its stance on the issue.

Cole said he believed the commission and city council had the authority to be silent on the issue, or to also ban marijuana dispensaries with city code. “I believe you still have the policy authority to allow this use or not, even if you cannot rely on federal law,” he said. “So far, public agencies have won up to the appellate court.”

Peters said “in light of what the attorney said, the basis for our recommendation is no longer in place.” He said “if the council chooses to act on this, it should do so without our recommendation.”

Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Amador County – Chuck Iley officially became the new County Administrative Officer for Amador County on Monday and subsequently participated in the Board of Supervisors meeting on Tuesday.

Iley most recently served as the director of Developmental Services in Clay County, Florida, a community of 185,000 residents.  

The Board of Supervisors said in a release Wednesday that “his responsibilities included managing the operations of the Developmental Services department as well as the development of all Capital Improvement Plan projects, including three bond-funded road widening projects totaling approximately $85 million.”

Iley is also an engineer and an AICP, APA certified planner with a master’s degree in business administration from the University of North Florida and a bachelor’s degree in civil engineering from the University of Miami. He is a registered professional engineer in California and once for Caltrans, overseeing highway and bridge projects.  

According to Board of Supervisors Chairman Brain Oneto, Iley had worked in Clay County for over nine years and “all his references there speak very highly of him.”

Iley’s starting salary was advertised at $132,165, but according to Kristin Bengyel, interim CAO and acting director of Health Services, he will start at $118,949 due to current work week cutbacks agreed upon with union negotiators.

“All input considered, Chuck seems to be a very level-headed, confident individual and I look forward to working with him,” said Supervisor John Plasse shortly after the hiring process concluded.  

In response to the Board’s decision, Iley stated, “I am honored that the Board of Supervisors has placed their confidence in me to assist them in continuing to tackle the important and difficult issues that face the County. I look forward to working with the Board and the staff as we identify ways to continue to improve our service to our residents and address the challenges that lie before us.”

Amador County – The Upcountry Community Council plans to host an Amador Water Agency Board of Directors candidates’ forum October 11^th at the Upcountry Veterans Hall. All seven candidates for three AWA board seats have committed to attend.  

Moderator will be either UCC Chair Lynn Morgan, or Vice Chair Sherry Curtis. Morgan said the forum will give each candidate five minutes to introduce themselves and their platforms. They will then draw a question out of a “grab bag” and have three minutes to answer it. Morgan said there will be seven questions in the bag, and each candidate answers a different question. Each candidate will then be given a five-minute time period to make a closing statement.

Morgan said “if there are issues that candidates want to rebut, the only time they will have to do that is in their five-minute closing statement.” She said they will each answer a different question, “because, frankly, we don’t have that much time. We only have two hours for seven people.” ¶ She said there will be time at the end, possibly only 20 minutes, for a question and answer session. People will be urged to be very concise and brief in their questions.

The forum will be limited to 120 minutes because “that’s how long our meetings are,” Morgan said.

They came up with the questions in a pretty informal way, she said. The September UCC meeting had a relatively low attendance of eight or 10 people, so she put the task to them to develop questions. She said they had to be relevant to agency business, and they modified all of them to make them consistent and clear.  

Curtis said we “want to know what they know” and “if they really understand what’s going on or not.”  

Curtis said at the last meeting, “we all put out questions, rewrote them” so “everybody was involved.”

Morgan said they agreed amongst themselves to not share the questions with candidates. They are “not literally under lock and key,” but UCC members are relying on trust.

She thinks the forum’s process should work well to let the attendees get to know the candidates.  

Morgan said they have commitments from all candidates, including some who thanked her, because they had only had one forum thus far.

Morgan said: “When candidates get a chance to speak like this, I think it’s a good thing.” Morgan said all Amador County residents are invited to attend.  

The forum is 6-8 p.m. Monday, October 11^th at the Veterans Memorial Hall on Buckhorn Ridge Road.

Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Amador County – The Sutter Creek City Council repealed its medical marijuana zoning ordinances Monday, and heard that it may be able to pass a ban on such facilities within city limits.

Planning Commissioner Robin Peters said the commission’s recommendation in the matter may not have changed, noting legal rulings of late, but it may not have been so strongly worded. Peters said one recommendation was to repeal city code on medical marijuana, and the other was to “make a clear statement regarding prohibition.” He said City Council should “avoid silence,” which could lead people toward seeking applications.  

“If the council doesn’t want medical marijuana dispensaries in the city, it should absolutely say so.”  

He said if they were silent, it will be a mess around these applications for some time.”

Peters also offered to have the planning commission take another look at the issue. The council instead decided to repeal the city ordinances on medical pot zoning, but most said that they preferred a ban.  

Mayor Pro Tem Tim Murphy said medical marijuana dispensaries do not belong in Sutter Creek, and he asked City Attorney Derek Cole if they could add a ban to the ordinance. Cole said it would be a new ordinance, and would have to be referred back to the planning commission.  

Councilwoman Sandy Anderson agreed with Murphy, and said she had not received any calls in support of medical marijuana dispensaries. Rather, it was the opposite, with people telling her they do not want it here. She said her daughter died of cancer and was offered medical marijuana from several sources, but declined the offers. She said anyone saying the availability is an issue is not stating facts.

Councilwoman Linda Rianda said she did not disagree that marijuana may have a medical value, but she did not want such facilities in Sutter Creek. She said “Sacramento has 39 dispensaries, with one as close as 30 miles away,” so “it is near by.” She said patients are also allowed to grow their own. She said the council was not being uncompassionate by repealing the zoning.  

Councilman Pat Crosby said he felt “a dispensary will be an undesirable element of our city.” He believes “it is legal, and we shouldn’t go against state law, but at least now we have some form of control.”

The council approved the repeals on a 4-1 vote, with Crosby against. Robert Allen of Gold Country Harvest spoke in favor of keeping the zoning.