Perhaps the holiday spirit has found its way into governmental meetings.

At Wednesday night's meeting of the Sutter Creek Planning Commission, commissioners, applicant, officials, staff and residents displayed little contentiousness over the issues involved in the Gold Rush Ranch and Golf Resort project.

The first of three presentations on the agenda for the evening was made by John Griffith of the Amador Water Agency. Findings contained in a Water Supply Assessment for Gold Rush Ranch Inc., prepared by HydroScience Engineers Inc. in January have been called into question by AWA Director-elect Bill Condrashoff. At issue in Condrashoff's letter, dated Aug. 22, is the agency's ability to provide the quantity of water promised, given limitations on flow contained in the agency's rights to water from the Mokelumne River. AWA has rights to 15,000 acre feet of water at a flow rate of 30 cubic feet per second. Condrashoff's calculations showed a need for more than 30 cfs during summer peak use periods.

According to the AWA response letter submitted to the planning commission in November, the California Department of Water Resources typically recognizes cfs limitations in water rights as a 30-day average, and not an instantaneous maximum.

"Condrashoff came before the commission," said commissioner Cort Strandberg. "Where did he go wrong? Both of you sound cogent and you have lots of numbers."

"He was right," Griffith replied. "We can't get to 15,000 acre feet."

"The key problem is, how do we meet demand in July?" said Tom Infusino, attorney for the Foothill Conservancy. Infusino also questioned the adequacy of the assessment's treatment of issues such as additional storage requirements, conservation and reclamation.

"I'm worried about industrial water," said Sutter Creek resident Bart Weatherly, referring to the assessment's apparent use of all of the AWA's water for residential purposes. "As a ratepayer, I feel that I paid for the (Amador Transmission) pipeline, but Gold Rush didn't pay a dime for the pipeline."

The evening's second presentation was made by Assistant City Manager Sean Rabe. "We don't want to get into a position where we're subsidizing a development," said Rabe in presenting the city's take on the Gold Rush fiscal study.

"The developer will probably argue for a cap on the (Community Facilities District)," Rabe explained. "Staff will recommend no cap." The CFD, presently expected to be $308 per residence, is the mechanism by which additional contributions can be obtained from developments, over and above property taxes and fees.

"The study is being updated to reflect present conditions," Rabe continued. "The biggest difference is the parks." There has been discussion ongoing about the size, type and maintenance costs associated with the parks proposed for the Gold Rush project.

"The CFD is set by a vote of the property owners," said Commissioner Mike Kirkley. "Right now, there is only one property owner. When there are 1,300 property owners, can they make the CFD go away?"

"I'm not the CFD expert," Rabe replied, "but it's my understanding that once a CFD is in place, it can't be voted away."

There was general agreement that this question requires further research.

The third and final presentation was made by Greg Bardini on behalf of the applicant. Bardini went through the revised Chapter Six of the Gold Rush Ranch and Golf Resort Specific Plan: Community Design and Performance Standards.

During Bardini's presentation, Commissioner Frank Cunha asked, "How are we going to incorporate all of our last five meetings into this document?"

Commission Chairman Robin Peters began to reply, saying, "Next Monday, the meeting will be to discuss in detail...", only to be drawn in by Cunha's statement: "This document should be updated to reflect all that we've discussed the last five meetings."

"Who would incorporate all of the changes we've suggested?" asked Peters.

The answer lay in the final decision, which was to cancel next week's meeting and expect staff to prepare an entire package for the Jan. 12, 2009 meeting. The city's project consultant, Andy Hauge, joined Bardini and the commissioners in unanimous agreement that full updates can be completed and dealt with at that time.