Name: Maria Nunez

Age: 59

Occupation: Businesswoman

A number of community leaders and developers insist that Plymouth must secure a safe, reliable water source for its future. In working toward this goal, what level of cost is too high for Plymouth residents to absorb in their water rates?

The desire for a secure, safe and reliable water supply goes beyond community leaders and developers. The fact is the city has been under a building moratorium issued by the state of California for over 20 years. The city has existed on water from "emergency wells." Due to this moratorium, Plymouth has not grown at the "average growth rate," which keeps the burden on the existing ratepayers. To survive, this town needs to foster smart growth with a balance of business and homes. Growth combined with proper fiscal management of existing water facilities and making the tough decisions to either sell or otherwise relinquish systems where the costs exceed the financial revenue is the logical solution.

Is the Arroyo Ditch worth restoring as a viable source of water for Plymouth?

One has to consider the historical records of the ditch that reflect financial losses dating back to the pre-1940s, including operation by Amador County and by the city. Excerpts from the agreement deeding the ditch from the county to the city disclose acceptance of the ditch in an "as is" condition, knowing that it is in need of repair, improvement and maintenance, and those water rights have not been adjudicated. As far as water rights, the important question is as to the quantity, which determines value. The quantity cannot be determined except by adjudication, which would require large amounts of money and time. There is a major difference between water rights and diversion rights. The city has acknowledged time periods of no beneficial use and the California Supreme Court ruling stating that "… the mere fact that the ditch was full or carried a certain quantity of water throughout the season is of no consequence, unless all of the water so carried was put to a beneficial use all of the time." Millions of dollars have been spent on the ditch for studies, engineers, repairs and failed hypalon lining, which leaves a reasonable person to conclude that the city should pursue sale or lease of the ditch. The city cannot continue to place the burden of the ditch on the revenue generated by the well water systems. Just last year, the city spent over $83,000 on ditch repairs from your water rates.

Do you recognize The Ione Band of Miwok Indians under the leadership of Chairman Matthew Franklin as a sovereign government?

The Ione Band of Miwok Indians is a federally recognized tribe by the U.S. Department of the Interior. Matthew Franklin was elected by a majority of the tribal membership as their chairman and is recognized as such by representatives of both the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Department of the Interior. This is a federal government determination and therefore I would also recognize them as a sovereign government just as every federal agency and California state agency recognizes them.

Plymouth's Main Street currently has one merchant, three eating establishments, a bar and dozens of empty shop windows. Residents also complain of Main Street's "dilapidated" look, saying it lacks the style and charm of the county's other downtown districts. What's the best longterm strategy to revitalize Main Street Plymouth?

A cooperative effort that includes the city, property owners, historical society and Economic Development Committee. The city was designated a redevelopment area in 1997, but there was no follow through to designate an area and proceed with implementation of a professionally done study that outlined revitalization of the downtown area.

Under what, if any, circumstances should the Plymouth City Council negotiate a partnership with the Ione Band of Miwok Indians through a Municipal Services Agreement?

I believe the city of Plymouth should negotiate a Municipal Services Agreement with the Ione Band of Miwok Indians as soon as possible. Negotiations do NOT mean support for a casino. I have consistently advocated for an MSA as an "insurance policy" to provide for our city and citizens should the project move forward. An MSA could be negotiated, BUT NOT executed unless the federal government decides the tribe has met all requirements set forth by the BIA and Department of the Interior determination to take their land into trust.