Tom

Amador County – About 51 people attended a special Sutter Creek City Council meeting Monday to hear the council work on responses to the 2009-2010 Grand Jury report. City Manager Derek Cole recommended the council only take public comment, due to the number of people in attendance and try to avoid its tendency to have a dialogue during public comment. Mayor Gary Wooten led the discussion of the response, prepared by Mayor Pro Tempore Tim Murphy, Cole and acting City Manager Sean Rabe. Mimi Arata urged the council to not reject the Grand Jury opinion that they have the finance director report directly to the council instead of the city manager. The council stayed with Murphy’s recommendation to reject that idea. Councilman Pat Crosby spoke in support of former Finance Director Jeff Gardner, saying Gardner told him his finance reports were correct, and the council could not read them. Crosby said Gardner maintained that “his numbers did match the general ledger.” Murphy disagreed, saying the council “had data corrected at meetings,” and “frequently the numbers were changed in different reports,” but “that’s not to say it’s all wrong.” Wooten, and Councilwomen Linda Rianda and Sandy Anderson agreed. Crosby said he also thought the Grand Jury “rightfully said that we were mishandling” city government. Murphy in the prepared response criticized a comment by the Grand Jury that encouraged citizens to get involved, to “help the city government avoid defaulting to continued mismanagement.” Murphy in the draft response said it was “an unwarranted insult and below the professional standard expected of a Grand Jury recommendation.” Murphy said it was kind of a “cheap shot” by the jury, but he wouldn’t object if the council wanted to remove his comment. Murphy said some of the report’s issues were two years old or older. Some were brought to light months before the jury investigation began, and he thought “the Grand Jury should have recognized that.” Rianda said one person had thanked her for Murphy’s comment, saying it defended against a “slam of (citizens) by the Grand Jury.” But Rianda said “that last sentence may be a tad much.” Wooten said he was offended by the jury’s statement, inferring that city mismanagement still continued. Anderson said it was “a little emotional,” and recommended simply saying the Grand Jury comment was “unwarranted.” The council agreed, 4-1, with Crosby opposing. Anderson said Rianda and Murphy spent 20-30 hours on budget, audit and personnel committee work to address the issues, and “this is not mismanagement.” Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Published in Local

Wednesday, 01 September 2010 06:42

New Kirkwood power plant under construction

Amador County - Kirkwood Meadows Public Utility District (KMPUD) recently announced that a new power plant for the Kirkwood community and resort operations is under construction, with the main building to be erected this fall. The plant is expected to be fully operational in 2011. The utility recently closed on its sale of $5.5 million in Bond Anticipation Notes, the main source of financing for the project. Both the Kirkwood ski resort and surrounding residences have been served by a temporary power plant after the permanent plant was destroyed by a powerhouse fire on January 1, 2010. The new plant will be located immediately north of that location. The plant will serve over 700 residential customers and a number of commercial clients, as well as ski operations at the resort. Julie Koster, Kirkwood Director of Sales and Marketing, said in a release Tuesday that “the proposed power plant is a new state of the art 10,000 square foot facility that will provide power to the entire Kirkwood community, ultimately resulting in the closure of a separate power generation facility being run to support the water, wastewater, fire and KMPUD operations,” said Koster. She said: “The new plant will have similar production capacity to what was destroyed in the fire, but will have world class air quality, generation, switching and distribution technology which will dramatically increase power quality and reliability while reducing particulate emissions by over 70 percent compared to the pre-existing conditions.” Construction of the plant has been in the works for months, but was setback temporarily by an appeal from SMART Energy group in July. The group said in its appellant statement that “the District approved construction of an all-diesel power plant despite the availability of feasible alternatives that would reduce the proposed plant’s adverse impacts on air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and human health.” The appeal was eventually denied and construction resumed on the facility, but Koster said the new design anticipates changes in technology. “The facility will be built as a prime diesel power plant but will be flexible enough to accommodate alternative fuels and future renewable energy options like wind and solar arrangements,” she said. The KPMUD also continues to pursue a plan to eventually connect Kirkwood with PG&E facilities that are part of the preexisting regional electric grid. Mountain Utilities will manage electric and gas operations until the new plant is fully operational. Wayne Amer, President of Mountain Utilities, said that “while we made it through last winter with a band aid approach, we will have full network redundancy and a switchable distribution system fully operational by October.” This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Published in Local

Wednesday, 01 September 2010 06:40

Ione, Supes shelve ‘sphere of influence’ agreement

Amador County – Amador County Supervisors and the Ione City Council both voted separately Tuesday to table an agreement on Ione’s “Sphere of Influence” amendment until the county is nearer to finishing its own General Plan. The council and supervisors held a joint meeting on a “Memorandum of Understanding” as part of a city sphere of influence amendment process, as required by law. Supervisors came close to rejecting the agreement, but Supervisor Richard Forster urged cooperation. He said he agreed “with private property rights,” but felt that the two entities were close to an agreement. Forster said: “I think we should keep working on this.” Ione City Planner Christopher Jordan said they could “remove this automatic applicability,” and handle land use designations as they come. But he urged a vote, saying that if the county did not support the land use designation aspect of the agreement, the MOU was not worth pursuing further. Supervisors voted to table the MOU until the county gets closer to approving its own finalized General Plan. The city council also voted to table it. Supervisor John Plasse and the board disagreed with the MOU provision by Ione that obligated the county to designate land-usage within the Ione “Sphere of Influence.” Plasse said: “It’s about land use authority and how far it infringes on property rights.” He said the county would have no say over land in its jurisdiction. Supervisor Brian Oneto said that was “pretty much my position.” Supervisor Louis Boitano said he was “not opposed to the MOU,” but he wanted to “take it back to the committees and maybe draft up our version of the MOU that we could live with.” Councilman Jim Ulm said he also did not agree with telling property owners outside the city how to use their land. Plasse said the solution for the city is annexation, and Councilwoman Andrea Bonham asked how the council can communicate with the county before annexation, “so we’re not letting in something that is not a vision we all worked for?” Forster said the issue could be handled with an “overlay,” and he said the board will hear Ione’s concerns and try to work with them and give them what they want in land designations. Boitano said “we don’t have a problem with the proposed sphere of influence,” or future annexation, but “we take general plan amendments very seriously.” The MOU included such amendments if land designation became an issue. Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Published in Local

Wednesday, 01 September 2010 06:38

Supes oppose state EMS reconfiguration plan

Amador County - The Board of Supervisors voted Tuesday to oppose a proposed plan to reconfigure Local Emergency Medical Services Agencies (LEMSA’s). The recently-revealed plan by the State EMS Authority would redraw the boundaries of the current LEMSA’s into seven areas and rework the funding formula for counties. The plan has already drawn opposition from a number of regional medical service agencies and the Regional Council of Rural Counties, which represents member counties in areas of State and Federal advocacy. In a draft policy released by the EMS Authority in early August, the agency proposes to “move away from the current process which provides funding based primarily on ad hoc county groupings and population to a process that is developed to support logical, effective geographical regions.” In other words, said Supervisor Louis Boitano, “the EMS is trying to fast-track their redrawing of the boundary lines with no input from rural counties.” He said the proposal raises “concerns that rural counties could be left out” and lose already limited state funding for local paramedic programs. He referred to a position paper from the Regional EMS Agency Administrators of California, who say “the current economic recession is also having a dramatic effect on state finances which in turn poses a significant threat to the state support of regional LEMSA’s.” The paper says “regional administrators strongly question the basic assumptions used by the EMS Authority in formulating their rational for major system change including the concept of ‘area groupings’ and the proposal to allow limited state funds be used to support non-rural LEMSA’s.” The paper says “those faulty assumptions could result in a significant degradation of EMS services in rural communities throughout the state of California.” The paper’s authors also believe the EMS Authority has placed an “overemphasis” on “the importance of contiguous county membership in a region and…an oversimplification of how patient flow patterns effect regional administration.” Boitano said the current regional system is manageable, and “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” “We just want the agencies input as to why they want to fast-track this,” he said. The board approved a motion by Supervisor Ted Novelli to draft a letter of support for RCRC’s position to allow local EMSA’s to give their input on the proposed plan. The motion was carried unanimously. Story by Alex Lane This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.