Tom

Monday, 17 May 2010 06:15

Ione Puts Pause on Marijuana Dispensaries

Amador County – The Ione City Council last week approved an emergency moratorium on the formation of medical marijuana dispensaries while the city prepares an update to its zoning for such establishments. City Manager Kim Kerr recommended that the council consider adopting an “urgency ordinance” that would establish “a moratorium on the establishment of a medical cannabis dispensary” within city limits. Kerr recommended that the council waive a first reading and hold a public hearing on the ordinance May 18th. In 2004, the city adopted an ordinance, regulating the location and operation of pot dispensaries, but issues remain on “how the law applies,” Kerr said. The city’s business license and zoning regulations are in conflict, a fact discovered when someone approached the city about opening a dispensary. A woman spoke to City Planner Christopher Jordan about whether the city allowed medical pot dispensaries in the city. The council enacted the moratorium until the city can update its zoning and business issues related to medical marijuana dispensaries. The moratorium will be in place for 45 days. The council also held a special meeting last Wednesday to discuss the city’s draft audited financial statements for the fiscal year ending June 30th, 2009. The independent auditor will issue the final audit and make a presentation to the city next month. City Clerk Janice Traverso said the audit findings were reviewed and the final audit will be subject of the council’s first regular meeting in June. This week, Ione will hold a special meeting at 4 p.m. Tuesday before its regularly scheduled meeting, at 6 p.m. The early special session will talk about the city’s Capital Improvement Plan. It will also address the “pavement management system” for streets, and will address the “police station remodel project.” The council already had gotten plans for a police station remodel, including disability act requirements, and the council will see if it wants to go through with the plans. Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Published in Local

Monday, 17 May 2010 06:14

School Board Investigates Swallow Nest Destruction

Amador County – The Amador County Unified School District board is expected to discuss the alleged destruction of swallow nests at Amador High School during their next board meeting. Plymouth resident and Veterinarian Elida Malick raised the issue during last week’s meeting. A source at the district told Malick on Friday that they investigated the site of the alleged destruction twice on one day and discovered that a nest had been removed and one bird was “caught behind the nets” near the eaves. The source said they asked for a response to Malick’s presentation by the administration, leading to the addition of the agenda item next week. Malick said she raised the issue during public comment because the board has “repeatedly refused” to add it as a regular agenda item. Malick urged an end to the practice, which she says began in response to one parent who threatened to sue the district, claiming their child might be sensitive to Histoplasma, a fungus sometimes carried by birds. Dr. Bob Hartmann, Amador County Public Health Officer, verified that there have been no cases of Histoplasma reported in Amador County. Malick said that for many years, a colony of native swallows have been completing their southern migration by returning to the eaves of the backside of the school’s gymnasium. She said the nest destruction is a violation of the Migratory Bird Act of 1918, which makes it unlawful to kill, hunt or capture over 800 species of migrating birds. The board said they would investigate the issue. The next school board meeting is scheduled for May 26 at 7 p.m. Story by Alex Lane This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Published in Local

Monday, 17 May 2010 06:12

Sutter Creek Trash Rate Hike Based on Sacramento Landfill Fees

Amador County – The Sutter Creek City Council last week approved a rate increase for city trash and recycling services, related to an increase in dumping fees at a Sacramento County facility. ACES Waste Service requested the rate increase for the garbage and recycling hauling for city residents and businesses. Councilman Pat Crosby said the franchise agreement allowed for the increase, based on increased dumping fees. Assistant City Manager Sean Rabe recommended that the council hear from ACES representatives and open a public hearing, then accept public input on the proposed increase. He also recommended approval of the increase. Rabe said the “franchise agreement allows for an annual rate increase process,” the “proposed increase for this year is 6.89 percent,” and the “adjustment is consistent with the approved Rate Adjustment Methodology as presented in the franchise agreement.” The Sutter Creek staff discussed the increase with ACES representatives, Rabe said, and the “bulk of the increase comes from a 123.81 percent increase in disposal fees at Keifer Landfill,” operated by Sacramento County. Sutter Creek entered into its solid waste franchise agreement with ACES last year, and the agreement “allows for a detailed rate review in the first year of the contract.” ACES Vice President Paul Molinelli Jr. in a letter March 15th to the city council said the 6.89 percent rate increase in the city includes a 2.04 percent increase to cover a disposal rate increase of 21 percent that took effect at last July 1st at the Keifer Landfill. ACES will also be looking for a rate increase approvals before the Amador County Board of Supervisors, for its 3 unincorporated areas. The supervisors’ Administrative Committee of Ted Novelli and Chairman Brian Oneto today will consider requests by ACES to raise waste collection rates. The proposed increases include 11.83 percent at the Pine Grove Transfer Station; 4.34 percent in Franchise Area 2; and 4.91 percent at the Buena Vista Transfer Station. The committee will discuss the items and decide whether to place it on the supervisors’ agenda Tuesday. Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Published in Local

Monday, 17 May 2010 06:11

Amador County Fair 2010

Amador County - After a successful first year, the Amador County Fair Survivor competition is back with a twist. This year teams of two will be encouraged to apply for a chance to be one of five teams competing for $1,000 and the title of the ultimate Amador County Fair Survivor. The chosen contestants will spend the entire duration of the fair (Thursday, July 29 to Sunday, August 1, 2010) at the fairgrounds in Plymouth. Again this year, contestants will be asked to compete in a number of fair related challenges, without money, electronic devices and while only consuming fair food the entire time. The winning team will be awarded $500 and an additional $500 will be given to their favorite local charity. “Last year’s event was so successful, the Fair won a First Award in the Facing Challenges category at the Western Fair Association Conference,” said Amador County Fair CEO Troy Bowers. “It was a wonderful opportunity to generate new interest in the Fair and promote several local charities.” “This year is all about bringing something different to the table,” said Competition Coordinator Brandi Ehlers. “New challenges, new surprises and lots of fun can be expected.” Teams can consist of parent/child, siblings, cousins, friends or any other combination of two. Contestants must be at least 18-years-old. For full rules and regulations and an application available now, visit www.amadorcountyfair.com. Applications are due to the Fair Office in Plymouth Monday, June 28, with chosen contestants announced the following week. This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Published in Local

Friday, 14 May 2010 06:18

BLM Requests Comments On Rules Affecting 231,000 Acres of Public Recreation Land

Amador County - The Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) Mother Lode Field Office is requesting public comments on new rules affecting 231,000 acres of public lands in 10 central California counties. Much of the land is located along rivers in the Sierra Nevada foothills in Yuba, Nevada, Placer, El Dorado, Amador, Calaveras, Tuolumne, and Mariposa counties. The interim final supplementary rules are in effect until publication of the final supplementary rules. The best-known management areas include the South Yuba state Wild and Scenic River, North Fork American Wild and Scenic River, Merced Wild and Scenic River, Pine Hill Preserve, Cosumnes River Preserve, Red Hills Area of Critical Environmental Concern and South Fork American River. The rules will affect camping, hunting, campfire use, and other types of recreation, mainly on the most popular heavily used public lands managed by the Mother Lode Field Office. The new rules will implement decisions made by BLM in the 2008 Sierra Resource Management Plan, 2004 South Fork American River Management Plan, 2005 South Yuba River Comprehensive Management Plan and other recent land-use plans. “Public lands along Sierra Nevada rivers such as the South Yuba, South Fork American, and Merced are very popular with hikers, hunters, gold hunters, and other recreationists. The new rules are necessary to help prevent conflicts between different user groups and protect the outstanding natural beauty of these lands,” said Bill Haigh, BLM Mother Lode Field Office manager. The rules are available online for public review at the Mother Lode Field Office webpage at www.ca.blm.gov/motherlode. Paper copies are available upon request through the Mother Lode Field Office, 5152 Hillsdale Circle, El Dorado Hills, CA 95762. The official notice was published in the Federal Register this week and starts the 60-day public review period. Public comments must be postmarked no later than July 12. Written public comments should be submitted to BLM Mother Lode Field Office, attention Supplementary Rules; or by e-mail to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.; or by fax (916) 941-3199 attention Supplementary Rules. For more information, contact James Barnes at (916) 941-3140. This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Published in News Archive

Friday, 14 May 2010 06:20

School Board Hears Plea Against Destruction of Migratory Swallow Nests

Amador County – The Amador County Unified School District board on Wednesday heard a plea from Plymouth resident and Veterinarian Elida Malick to discontinue its alleged destruction of migrating swallow nests at Amador High School. Malick said she raised the issue during public comment because the board has “repeatedly refused” to add it as a regular agenda item. Malick said that for many years, a colony of native swallows have been completing their southern migration by returning to the eaves of the backside of the school’s gymnasium. “This year,” she said, “the district attempted to eradicate the colony…because one parent threatened to sue the district claiming their child might be sensitive to fungus carried by the birds, the fungus in question being Histoplasma.” Dr. Bob Hartmann, Amador County Public Health Officer, verified that there have been no cases of Histoplasma reported in Amador County. Malick said nest destruction has happened on “at least two occasions” and is a violation of the Migratory Bird Act of 1918, which makes it unlawful to kill, hunt or capture over 800 species of migrating birds. The law took effect soon after the extinction of the passenger pigeon. Malick said that as a result of the district’s action, birds have been driven deeper into the school grounds where they are attempting to nest in “less desirable locations.” Malick said the purpose of bringing this issue to the board’s attention was to “ensure that the practice of destroying nests that adult birds are occupying does not resume, ensure that the district obtains proper permits for nest removal if that is essential in the future, and discontinue the use of the Methyl Anthranilate bird repellent.” “Nature does not always work in a manner that is convenient to our schedules or our delicate sensitivities but that does not make us any less responsible to find ways to co-exist as we, man, continue to exert unyielding pressure on the natural environment,” said Malick. The board made no comments on the issue. No one was available for comment at the school district office at the time this story was written. Story by Alex Lane This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Published in News Archive

Friday, 14 May 2010 06:21

Agencies Comment on Details of Howard Business Park

Amador County – The Howard Business Park, discussed last week by Ione City Council, also had some comments from local agencies on areas of work to be mindful for the project. Vanessa Apodaca of city engineer Roark Weber’s office reviewed the 13 lots in the Howard Business Park’s Conceptual Master Plan and said the project would take access off State Route 124. Apodaca said “comprehensive review of the project cannot be completed due to lack of information,” but she listed items that needed consideration. Those included streets and storm drainage, along with meeting engineering standards, having adequate street lighting approved by the City Planner and avoiding “excess glare and lighting levels.” Apodaca said drainage and traffic studies should be required, and the grade of a road linking to UNIMIN “should not exceed 15 percent.” She also noted that any connections or improvements to Highway 124 would be subject to Caltrans review and approval. Amador County Transportation Commission also had recommended a traffic impact study. Ione Fire Chief Ken Mackey said: “We are very much in favor of the project and only have these limited comments.” He said street names that were not listed in the map should be “handled in the early stages so there are no long-term problems or similarities with other street names in our city, and the hundred blocks.” He also sought clarification of egresses out, or an indication of traffic flow, and he said the fire department would “require a fire hydrant system capable of supplying 2,500 gallons per minute fire flow on a looped water system with two supply sources,” or “an on site water storage tank will be required.” Amador Water Agency supervising engineer John E. Griffin commented that the county-wide agency “will require the applicant to prepare a water model for the Proposed Project and for the entire Policy Area.” He said AWA “will require the applicant to construct improvements identified by the water model,” and he noted that the “capacity of the existing lone Water Treatment Plant is insufficient to accommodate impacts.” AWA recommended “utilizing reclaimed water for irrigation and other non-domestic uses.” He said a “Water Supply Assessment will be required for this project,” and should the lone water treatment plant remain in operation, the existing 14-inch raw water main from the lone Reservoir to the lone plant will not be capable of handling demands from Howard Business Park. Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Published in News Archive

Friday, 14 May 2010 06:22

Commissioner Says No On N Gold Rush Info Misleading

Amador County – The “No On Measure N” campaign against the Gold Rush Ranch & Golf Resort was criticized Thursday for giving incorrect information on its website. Sutter Creek Planning Commissioner Frank Cunha said the website refers to the original documents and Specific Plan that Gold Rush wrote. He said arguments on the website refer to a fiscal analysis done before Sutter Creek City Council and Planning Commission put in place their conditions that require developers to pay. The early analysis said Gold Rush would cost each house in Sutter Creek a $1,000 a year. Cunha said the “council made sure that would never happen.” He said “There’s going to be no cost to the city,” because developers must pay up-front deposits on impact costs. “Every quarter, they have to put up an estimated amount of what the city thinks the cost will be to serve the development.” When houses are sold, it’s paid as a tax on the homeowner. Cunha said “before the first building permit is issued, they will have to do another fiscal analysis, because the “city wanted to be able to change impact fees, to keep them current. He said a “project like this, like Greenhorn Creek, can go on for 15-20 years.” Cunha said Councilwomen Linda Rianda and Sandy Anderson in an opinion piece due to be published today refer readers to city-approved final documents. Cunha urged people to look at the final conditions of approval or the final development agreement, which address “all of the concerns that the city had with the project.” He said “basically” the Planning Commission and City Council rewrote the specific plan to suit Sutter Creek. The original Specific Plan would have taken out 13,000 oak trees, a figure referred to on the “No On N” webpage, but Cunha said it was “one of the first things we threw out.” Cunha said: “Me personally, I’m not a proponent of Gold Rush, but I am a proponent of the specific plan land use agreement.” He said the final specific plan protects the city against all costs for the development, even “if Gold Rush sells to a dozen different developers. He said: “If ‘Yes’ on Gold Rush passes, they will have to work with this document, and it is really specific.” He said the city council did an excellent job with it. Cunha said “if people don’t want Sutter Creek to grow, that’s fine, but if you put a moratorium on Sutter Creek, that’s pretty much a death sentence.” Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Published in News Archive

Friday, 14 May 2010 06:26