 |
 |
By PAUL PAYNE
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
A Sonoma County judge’s ruling effectively dismisses one of three lawsuits filed to stop a rock quarry on Roblar Road west of Cotati.
Neighbors of quarry developer John Barella had sued him and the county open space district, challenging Barella’s right to use adjoining property to establish a preserve for the endangered tiger salamander.
Such a preserve is required for construction of the quarry and has been sanctioned by open space officials.
In a 27-page ruling issued late last month, Superior Court Judge Elliot Daum concluded that neighbors Joseph and Kathleen Tresch, along with a citizens group opposing the quarry, had no basis for their claim under California environmental law.
Daum ruled their lawsuit does not state a valid cause of action and that opponents cannot in the future amend their claim. Daum is expected to issue a final judgment leading to a dismissal.
Two other lawsuits attempting to stop the 70-acre quarry approved in December by the county board of supervisors are pending.
Opponents claim it would harm water and air quality, increase traffic and hurt wildlife in nearby county-protected open space.
Subscribe by Email
Follow us on Twitter
Hey Pat how would you like a rock quarry in your back yard. With a possibility of contaminating your drinking water. I think you would probably fight the quarry too. I might be wrong and you would be in support of maybe 20 jobs for the sake of you health.
I’m glad its the screw you attitude thats sinking this ecomomy and not the 2 wars, housing bubble and the horrible politicians that are screwing this economy. (Both Rep and Dem). So all we have to do is change the Libs attitude and the crisis goes away.
I am amazed at the selfishness of the Sonoma County Progressives. The I got mine screw you attitude is what is driving this economy into the quicksand pits.
If we do not improve our attitude about growth and develoment we will not improve our state or economy. It is time to go to work and stop being piggish.
John-
Your argument to “buy local, employ local, support local” is nothing but a worn out motto from some fairy tale… Seriously, our “local” bay bridge is being built and shipped from CHINA. Our carpenter’s union, “local” 751, is full of illegals from MEXICO. How many of the major projects being built in Sonoma County are being done so by local contractors? Go ahead, count ‘em.
Corporations care about one thing, and one thing only: Profits. Profits at any cost.
Barella doesn’t want his quarry because he’s concerned about buying, supporting, or hiring “local”. He cares about making a wad for himself. And that’s fine by me- But it’s not okay to destroy a neighborhood in the process. And then try to pass it off as something wonderful for the community because he’s such a great guy.
This quarry is not an environmentally sound project. It’s not a good neighbor project. It will produce more bad than good. It’s just another casino with fewer low paying jobs…
When the aggregate mining was taken out of the river, the tradeoff was hard rock quarries. Those opposing hard rock quarries would prefer to barge the aggregate in from Canada so the money leaves our area and we have no control over how the environment in Canada is compromised. We should be using our own resources for our own needs. Buy local! Employ local! Support local! Or-continue on the unpaved road to bankruptcy. Business owners like Barella should be honored rather than vilified. Businesses create jobs. Jobs pay taxes and buy products. Corporations are not the bad guys. They are our oxygen supply.
We rely on our courts to decide matters of dispute. In this case, it is clear the court favored a business because of its impact on development not because of its impact on its neighbors.
Throw out the judges!
“Corporations and the rich aren’t paying taxes in proportion with their wealth and income.”
I don’t believe that “Wealth & income” should be the primary yard stick by which we measure “proportion” of taxes paid.
Isn’t it more important to consider the contribution made to society as a whole?
I believe it is.
If someone (or a company) is contributing to the socio-economic wellbeing of the community I think THAT is far more important how much money they have or make.
But it’s much simpler to just look at the bottom line & say “you get this much & we get the rest.”
When dealing with simpletons, simplicity is key!
“Tax the rich” (They’re the only ones paying Fed Income Taxes)
“Undocumented Immigrant” (Sounds much better than what it really is)
“Global Warming” (er, uh, I mean Climate Change”)
“Free Health Care” (but no free lunch. OH WAIT… just got my SNAP card!)
I suppose it would be better now to use the rich, alluvial fans of gravel that the russian river so graciously deposits?
If you don’t want gravel operations in your backyard (and who would)perhaps you should thank the environazis who drove this type of development to your neighborhood in the elimination of river quarries.
Oh, is that the business that is paying some of the lowest taxes since the 1950s?
And for some reason middle class conservatives keep harping they are high and they are. So what gives?
Corporations and the rich aren’t paying taxes in proportion with their wealth and income.
And hey, don’t believe me. Believe the Congressional Budget Office. Here’s the details.
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/31/are-taxes-in-the-u-s-high-or-low/
This was a CEQA lawsuit, not a lawsuit on the merits of the Board of Supervisors’ decision to allow commercial developers to benefit from using public lands for their mitigation requirements.
THAT lawsuit on the merits is yet to be filed and surely needs to be.
I think many people will be misled in reading this newspaper article to think that the Judge rejected a lawsuit that challenged the merits of the (terrible) decision by the Board of Supervisors in December of 2010.
To be clear – this was a lawsuit regarding the lack of CEQA review of the Board’s decision to allow mitigation.
Those of you salivating to try and start posting comments about “local” gravel, etc., we’ve already heard it all from you. This is one of the WORST proposals in South Sonoma County ever and the Board of Supervisors’ push-through to be sure they voted to approve it before Kerns and Kelley retired so they could give John Barella that good-friend last favor.
The judge sides with business. So what good is a legal defense? We deserve better.
I think the “SMART” train is dumb. Truly the train to nowhere…
Local gravel mining makes sense to me. Would I want a gravel mining operation to suddenly plop down next to the home I’ve lived in for 30 years? No. Would you?
Those of us working class, blue collar, farm folks are now having to fight for our right to exist peacefully on land we’ve worked hard for all our lives.
I’m a business owner, and a land/home owner. I will proudly stand next to and support anyone who has the guts to fight (or file a lawsuit) against ANY business who would destroy a neighborhood or habitat for the sake of making a pile of money.
I don’t have a problem paying more for concrete if it means saving someone’s neighborhood. Even if it’s a salamander.
Those types want the SMART Train, and oppose the gravel.
The asphalt plant is in the same category.
Be Green, be local, end abusive lawsuits that cost everyone money,and a delay in tax revenues from the businesses and their employees.
We are suing business out of existence. Our system is doomed.