After public hearings filled with strong opinions from both sides, the annexation of 187 acres known as Erickson Ranch was approved in a single consent agenda item during last week's Sutter Creek City Council meeting.

The controversy surrounding the parcel that is located on both sides of the Highway 49 bypass arose nearly two years after the city received it in April 2006 after signing a cooperative agreement with the state Department of Transportation. The city also received a one-time endowment of $50,949, the interest of which is to be used to maintain, manage and protect the property in perpetuity. Some residents felt the money wasn't enough to cover future costs, while others criticized Caltrans for the introduction of an ecosystem that didn't exist before the state's mitigation project.

City officials have said the agreement was hammered out years ago and cannot be renegotiated.

Resident Amelia Watson feels the city was "hoodwinked" by Caltrans and has no idea what the future cost of maintaining such acreage will entail.

"I think the city should have reconsidered all options before they signed the grant deed and accepted the money," she said after the meeting. "It's now a moot point seeing that all the details are finished, and what was Sutter Creek left with, except for a piece of land that no one can use?"

Watson was referring to the signed cooperative agreement between the city and Caltrans that doesn't allow for recreational use or public access on the proposed mitigation site. An eventual parkway trail is being developed along the outside perimeter for walking, running and educational stations.

Resident Ed Swift has been vocal in his opposition to the city signing such an agreement and has approached the council during several meetings in order to criticize what he foresees as a drain to the city. "Caltrans is using the property to mitigate the bypass, which is their problem, not Sutter Creek's," he said. "But we have to meet what are almost their impossible conditions with no benefits to the citizens of the city."

Mike Kirkley, a city planning commissioner and division chief of the Amador-El Dorado unit of CALFIRE, had posed questions to Caltrans regarding the work that is planned for the site and has requested documentation on the mitigation project only to be told through e-mail that he would have to visit the Caltrans district office in Stockton to review a 400-plus-page document at 25 cents per page.

Since that e-mail from Caltrans project manager Grace Magsayo, Kirkley said he has not been contacted again and has not been able to visit the office.

Kirkley is concerned with the oak regeneration plan, its cost and who will be responsible if the trees do not survive. He also has questions regarding the "seeps" portion of the project and how long the irrigation system will be needed.

"Please list where a project of this type has been successful and what data do you have that indicates the soils will hold water long enough to establish a wetlands ecosystem," Kirkley said in his original request. Kirkley is referring to plans that include even-age oak plantation woodlands where no woodlands previously existed and changes to the small creek by having "holding ponds" installed and clay bottoms put into the creek to retain water.

Said Swift, "What were probably vernal pools will now be wetlands because of the channeling of seeps into the holding ponds to create water year round." Swift added that this practice could eventually kill the adjacent mature oaks as they are not used to the increase of water. "With these large changes it is obvious that it is not the 'natural habitat' it was prior to being 'mitigated,'" he said.

City Manager Rob Duke has said repeatedly that the terms of the agreement remain acceptable for the city. The city won't have to pay property taxes on the land, for instance, which runs between Sutter-Ione Road to old Highway 49 and extends from Sutter Creek to Amador City.

"In any case," he said, "the city gained a beautiful piece of land for open space and walking trails with an endowment to pay for future maintenance."