LAKEPORT — The Lake County Board of Supervisors (BOS) Tuesday put a charge into the debate regarding development on Rattlesnake Island by making intended decisions that could move a property owner”s project forward.
The BOS voted 3-2 in favor of an intended decision to grant the appeal of John Nady, who proposes to build a house, caretaker”s residence and stand-alone bathroom on land he owns on the island.
Nady appealed a May 2010 Lake County Planning Commission decision requiring the completion of an environmental impact report (EIR) focusing on cultural archaeological resources as part of the application process.
Members of the Elem Indian Colony supported the focused EIR requirement as a way to protect culturally significant areas of Rattlesnake Island from being disturbed, and it appears they will turn to the courts for support in light of the BOS votes Tuesday.
“We”re going to go straight to litigation,” tribal administrator Jim Brown said.
With the prospect of legal proceedings, the nearly decade-long debate on the proposed project could be far from ending despite the support given by the BOS.
In total, the BOS voted 3-2 in favor of three intended decisions on the project, with supervisors Anthony Farrington and Denise Rushing dissenting each time.
The second decision supported issuing a mitigated negative declaration based on a finding that the project would not have a significant impact on the environment because of the results of an already-completed initial study and associated mitigation monitoring plan.
Some opponents of the project argued the proposed mitigation program was inadequate based on California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines and that a focused EIR should be required.
Nady”s representatives presented more than three hours of evidence on Tuesday, attempting to show that the proposed plan adequately fulfilled CEQA requirements.
The last intended decision supported issuing a CEQA grading permit. All three decisions will not become final until the BOS considers at a future meeting proposed findings of fact prepared by County Counsel.
For the supervisors, the debate hinged on the balance of private property rights and tribal heritage concerns.
District 5 Supervisor Rob Brown said he believed that Nady, as the landowner, has the right to build a home on the property. “This comes down to private property ownership,” he said.
District 2 Supervisor Jeff Smith supported the current landowner”s property rights, adding, “I too wish that, way back when, the Elem would have obtained the land.”
Smith ended his remarks by saying he hoped Nady and the tribe could work out an agreement to allow the island to remain “as sacred as it can be under private ownership.”
Farrington said he supported “erring on the side of caution” with proposed projects on culturally sensitive lands and wanted to see a focused EIR completed for Nady”s plan.
Rushing shared similar concerns about the project, saying, “Once development takes place on that island, it can”t be taken back.” She added that enough evidence existed to support the commission”s EIR requirement. “I think it would be a real tragedy to reverse that decision,” she said.
BOS Chair Jim Comstock said he supported the proposed mitigation plan, especially because one section requires a professional archaeologist as well as an American Indian representative be on-site to monitor all excavation.
The most significant earth removal would occur with the construction of about 209 feet of 1.5-foot-wide linear trench to tie into existing utilities, as well as the installation of a septic tank.
Contact Jeremy Walsh at jwalsh@record-bee.com or call him at 263-5636, ext. 37.
