How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
Opinion
- Details
- Written by: Lake County News Reports
A number of serious environmental effects have been identified. To mention only a few of the most significant, the project will require the disturbance of a half million cubic yards of soil and rock, much of it asbestos-laden serpentine.
Nearly a hundred acres of oak woodlands will be destroyed, with no mitigation beyond the planting of saplings that cannot even begin to resemble the lost habitat for generations.
Since appropriate preliminary surveys have not yet been conducted for either biological or cultural resources, the potential loss of rare plants and hitherto undiscovered archaeological sites is impossible to estimate.
The intense darkness of the night skies and equally intense silence of this rural neighborhood will be lost forever. Increased traffic will burden adjacent streets, and add to the load in downtown Lakeport and elsewhere in a manner that has not been analyzed. 600 acre-feet of Clear Lake water – nearly a quarter of the entire Community Service Area 21 allocation – will be used to irrigate a golf course.
Possible sedimentation impacts on Scotts Creek and Lyons Creek, and by extension on Clear Lake itself, have not yet been fully investigated.
Worst of all, the growth pattern for the whole north Lakeport region will be distorted: rather than expanding in the orderly manner prescribed by sound planning principles and defined by a community growth boundary, development will leapfrog out into open countryside adjacent to ongoing agricultural operations. Cristallago is a poster child for sprawl, and the antithesis of modern smart growth principles.
Nor does the analysis provided by the environmental impact report (EIR) offer the Board of Supervisors a sound basis for reaching a decision. Many of its defects stem from an inherent structural confusion between a “project” and a “programmatic” EIR, which has resulted in analysis of many highly significant impacts being deferred under the pretext of being programmatic, with others evaluated on a project level, while the distinction between the two is never made clear.
Several specific inadequacies are particularly glaring:
Water supply. Neither possible conflicts with the obligation to supply water to the Geysers nor effects of using Clear Lake water for golf course irrigation are evaluated.
Traffic. Both cumulative impact analysis and proposed impact fees are inadequate.
Air Quality. The EIR unreasonably finds cumulative contributions to greenhouse gases to be insignificant, contrary to State of California standards, and it disregards comments from the Air Quality Management District warning that cumulative impacts from this project could result in the loss of attainment status for the air basin as a whole, meaning among other consequences a requirement for annual smog inspections.
Cultural and biological resources. Both preliminary investigations and proposed mitigations are inadequate.
Alternatives analysis. Essential information about land use conflicts is not provided, even though these impacts have been identified as significant and unavoidable.
General Plan inconsistencies. The EIR unreasonably fails to admit many policy inconsistencies that were identified by planning staff and members of the public.
Some of these environmental impacts are still subject to debate – and if the Board of Supervisors does not reject the project outright it should allow that debate to continue by decertifying the EIR, substantively addressing the many questions that have been raised, and recirculating it for public review – but unquestionably “significant and unavoidable” impacts have been identified to scenic views, to woodland habitat, and to surrounding land uses. A finding of “overriding considerations” will thus be a necessary pre-condition to project approval, and such a finding cannot reasonably be supported.
It has been repeatedly asserted that Cristallago would provide an economic engine not only for the Lakeport area but also for the whole of Lake County. This assertion, dubious even during the unprecedented housing bubble that prevailed at the time of the original application, has become absurd.
Nationwide, golf clubs are closing and the resorts and residential developments tied to them falling into bankruptcy – even before recent scandals involving Tiger Woods that are predicted to result in a 50 percent decline in the audience for televised golf.
The economic evaluation of Cristallago’s resort component was based on the assumption that dedicated marina facilities would be provided to resort guests and home owners, but now the lakeshore property intended for those amenities has gone into foreclosure.
The overwhelming majority of jobs created by the project would be in the service sector, with low pay and few if any benefits, and their number will be greatly reduced if the resort component fails to meet the improbably rosy projections that have been offered.
The shaky financial condition of the developers raises the specter of a project that has been begun but which cannot be completed. This scenario has been repeated far too often in Lake County already, with a previous example on this very project site. We cannot afford another paper subdivision, especially not on this massive scale.
Leaving the worst for last, Cristallago conflicts grossly with the Lake County General Plan. The most obvious defect – residential densities forbidden outside Community Growth Boundaries – is only one among dozens of acknowledged inconsistencies. For a list, see the Sierra Club comment letter posted on line at http://www.lakelive.info/cristallago/pdffiles/SCBOS1.20.10.pdf .
State Planning and Zoning law explicitly forbids approval of a project which conflicts with general plan policies or which renders the general plan internally inconsistent. No exception can be made to this requirement, nor do any “overriding considerations” apply.
Amending the general plan for the sake of the project is not an option. This is commonly done with designations on particular parcels, but these conflicts stem from fundamental policies that are the very backbone of the document.
It is inconceivable that for any reasons the Board of Supervisors would choose to dismantle an excellent general plan that was recently adopted after years of effort and the expenditure of millions of dollars, and certainly not in order to facilitate a tenuous project that offers so little in the way of tangible benefits to the community.
In short, approval of this application would eviscerate our general plan, set devastating precedents for the rest of Lake County, distort growth patterns in the Lakeport region, and create environmental havoc, all without a viable expectation of realizing the compensatory benefits that have been promised.
Please call or write your supervisors and urge them to reject this application.
Victoria Brandon is chair of the Sierra Club Lake Group.
- Details
- Written by: Norm Ihle
To say that this development should scare each and every citizen in Lake County is an understatement. These houses will be packed in like sardines from Park Way all the way along Highway 29 heading north from Lakeport, clustered together as if we were in Manteca, Stockton or Rio Vista, which is why the Lake County General Plan was developed in order to stop this urban sprawl from happening in our county.
This project will put the lake, the environment, the neighbors in the vicinity and the watershed of Scotts Creek in jeopardy. They want us to believe that they can take care of any problems that might result from the subdivision; all for the sake of money.
They want to start the grading and cutting in of home sites right away, leaving the landscape looking like one large construction site for 20 years without one home even purchased. If you look at an aerial view of Rio Vista you would be appalled at all the home site pads with no homes. Is this what our general plan is about?
The developers are from Gridley and Ft. Bragg. The owners are from Ripon, Ft. Bragg and Pleasanton, Calif. They will all become millionaires and want this subdivision to be built no matter how much lying to the public they have to do in order to make it happen. They picked our county because they thought we were an easy mark. I could go on and on about how they have tried to mislead the Planning Commission and now the Board of Supervisors. Because of constraints on how much I can write, I’ll keep it to one example.
I have previously written to the paper outlining my concerns about the large amount of asbestos in the soil. In the Planning Commission meeting of Sept. 10, 2009, I told them the land was rampant with asbestos. To the credit of some of the planning commissioners, they too were concerned. At that time, the developers told us not to worry; only 5 percent to 10 percent of the soil had asbestos. This was a clear cut lie to all of us.
In the memo to the Board of Supervisors from the Planning Department it states: “At least 300 of the home sites, two neighborhood parks, conference facility, community center, community commercial village and golf course holes 10 through 17 and a portion of 18” have asbestos in the soil at the “high end range.” This is clearly the most toxic site in all of Lake County.
This sure seems like a lot more than 5 percent to 10 percent to me. I ask you, are they telling the truth?
Their plan to handle this toxic site is to cover the soil in most areas with 3 inches of uncontaminated soil and the home sites with 12 inches of soil. This is woefully inadequate. Placing more top soil on the home sites will create serious erosion problems as most of theses sites are on a grade of over 30 percent, thus the homes will be sliding down the hillsides.
Imagine if your child were to go out in the backyard to play and digs a hole in the soil, she is now contaminated with asbestos fibers. If a dog digs a hole anywhere in the above-mentioned areas and gets in your car, both you and your car are now contaminated. Children have a much higher health risk and exposure at an early age may well lead to diseases and cancer earlier in life. These asbestos fibers are so small that they can only be seen with a microscope. They cause cancer and other lung diseases. The incubation time for these diseases is about 10 to 40 years That we know is a fact and there are still many lawsuits concerning families, miners and construction workers getting cancer on the books throughout the country. The asbestos exposure epidemic is in full swing in the US. Approximately 30 people a day are dying of these awful diseases and our Planning Department thinks you can build right on top of it.
How the Board of Supervisors could possibly consider approving this subdivision is beyond me. They are supposed to look out for the best interests of their neighbors in the county. By approving this subdivision, they will being putting every adult and child who lives there directly in harm's way.
This whole project needs to be sent back to the drawing board and be redone, omitting the areas of asbestos from any home sites or high foot traffic areas.
Please join me at 1:30 p.m. on Tuesday, Jan. 16, at the Board of Supervisors meeting to watch these developers use “smoke and mirrors” to try and convince us that our families lives and our way of life will be better for us all, just trust them.
These men have already lied and fooled the Planning Commission. The question now is will the Board of Supervisors have the courage and integrity to send this mess back to the drawing board or will they fail to protect the current and new citizens of Lake County and approve this high risk subdivision?
I say that these men cannot be trusted. This needs to go to a vote of the people in the next election in November. I’m very concerned that the Board of Supervisors will “roll over” all for the sake of money.
Norm Ihle lives in north Lakeport.
- Details
- Written by: Olga Martin Steele
I wrote about that meeting and thanks to Elizabeth Larson it was posted in the Lake County News. I’ve also been following the feedback posted by readers, which I appreciate. However, it is disappointing that those individuals posting negative comments do not have the courage of conviction to reveal their identity as I have.
Be that as it may, as to Lake County News Editor Elizabeth Larson, I am a fan. She gets raves from me for the thorough and unbiased job she did.
As to the closed meeting, I continue to believe the decision to exclude the public was flawed. Additionally, the editorial opinion issued in the Record-Bee stated the obvious but missed the point. While I agree with the editor’s opinion that the law enforcement union had the right to hold a closed meeting for their members and other law enforcement personnel, the question that needs addressing is, “Why was it so important to the public who showed up to be permitted access?” The answer lies in several points overlooked in the Record-Bee editorial opinion.
For good reason transparency in all aspects of government has taken hold throughout the nation. Law enforcement officials in many localities realize the value of citizen involvement and are taking steps to draw in the community by day-lighting their operations. The use of citizen advisory and oversight groups is proving to be a useful tool to help solve problems that really can’t be solved with just a police presence. With plenty of empty chairs in the public meeting room the union leadership would have been well served to thank the good people who showed up for their interest and invite in at least a few, if not all, as observers. This would have been a real class act. Instead, their actions simply perpetuated a slew of negative perceptions. And that’s a real shame.
One negative perception fueled by the decision to hold a closed meeting is the notion that law enforcement personnel don’t consider themselves as members of the public. In fact they are the public, employed as public servants, with special powers to enforce the law. They are in a very powerful position and it sends a bad message when instead of finding every opportunity to embrace transparency, openness, and partnership with the public they sometimes act in ways that can be interpreted as elitist – as though they are separate and above the public.
The closed meeting also perpetuated the notion that law enforcement in general didn’t want to hear from the public or for the public to hear them. At a time when negative aspersions against certain public officials appear strong in the community this meeting missed the opportunity to allow the general public to see how the candidates talk amongst themselves and, more importantly, to answer their co-workers. I observed how one candidate, Deputy Rivero, speaks to the public outside the debate on Monday night. It would have been helpful to observe him and the other candidates in a setting where they face their fellow officers and coworkers. Other debates will not offer this unique and important setting.
Further, the reasons given by the union leaders for not allowing the public to observe the meeting, i.e. they didn’t want their meeting somehow derailed by the public, could perpetuate another notion – that the very people we look to for protection from crime and criminals somehow fear the public. A few simple ground rules could have been issued for the public attendees and, frankly, violators could have been shown the door.
Sadly, another notion heard amongst the excluded group – that some cops are not truthful – was perpetuated. While the media reported the events at the meeting as a debate, at the front door we were told emphatically the meeting was not a debate. Among other things, a debate is a discussion of opposing reasons or views. Semantics? Maybe. But I think the media characterized the meeting as a debate because it was. Why the union leadership chose to argue the point is silly at best; a lie at worst. Either way, the notion was perpetuated.
It bears mention that the so-called “protesters” were a civilized group of individuals. In my view, there wasn’t one person there that was disruptive or couldn’t have been handled with just a modicum of diplomacy and tact if they became agitated. To my eyes, the group seemed to be a pretty good cross-section of the Lake County community. That 40 people (+/-) cared enough to show up at the meeting and stand in the cold, hoping to be allowed entry, speaks volumes about their commitment to engage as citizens in matters of great importance and their concern for the issues being discussed.
I am pro-law enforcement and I believe the vast majority of Lake County law enforcement personnel do a difficult job well. I also understand what it is to be a civil servant in law enforcement and the importance of good, responsible and accountable leadership. For these reasons, I want and expect more from the leadership. In this case, the union leadership missed an incredible opportunity to elevate the standing of its members and the broader law enforcement community.
A relevant and wonderful old Chinese saying going around right now is that the best time to plant a tree was 40 years ago; the second best time is now. Now is a good time for the union leadership to start using and promoting a different approach when dealing with the public. If they haven’t already done so, it would behoove the union leadership to take an honest look at how they handled this situation and consider what they could start doing differently, now, in the interest of a better public image and providing better public service.
Olga Martin Steele lives in Clearlake Oaks.
- Details
- Written by: Lake County News Reports
The opportunity to represent District 3 is an honor. Today the board and our community can celebrate our successes thus far. Among these are lasting achievements such as the preservation of Mt. Konocti, a revision of the twenty-year General Plan of Development and the Shoreline Area Plan, certification of a Community Wildfire Protection Plan for the County, an analysis of the future water and wastewater infrastructure requirements, over 3 Megawatts of Solar Energy projects (among the largest in the Western U.S.), and the initial economic revitalization of communities on the Northshore even in the face of tough economic times.
There is so much more to do. Together we must continue the work of creating a healthy local economy, focus on job creation, encourage local food security and energy efficiency, improve the health of Clear Lake via Middle Creek wetlands restoration and watershed management, upgrade our community spaces and senior centers, and further even greater citizen involvement through easier access to information and regular town-hall collaboration.
Even with the economic challenges, I see huge opportunity and promise in the times ahead as we find new and creative ways to fund needed infrastructure. Anyone paying attention knows that we have much work to do to restore and renew our County, its communities and economy for the generations that follow us. This is not an easy task. Each of us who are able must put ourselves whole-heartedly into this work.
The good news is that much of what ails our system can be substantially impacted by our own individual decisions and direct local action: how we engage with the land, the water, the community of life around us and each other, what we buy, what we use, how we handle waste – all of these collectively can make a difference. Mostly, though, we need to approach Lake County, our home, with reverence and care – for the land and waters and our communities are a sacred trust and are what will sustain us in the times to come.
To the citizens of District 3 I say this: I am personally grateful to you for the opportunity to serve as your Supervisor thus far and am eager to continue our work together!
The election for District 3 Supervisor, and other county and statewide offices, will be held on June 8, 2010.
Denise Rushing represents District 3 on the Lake County Board of Supervisors. Visit her Web site at www.DeniseRushing.org .