In September the Amador County Board of Supervisors approved the new version of the Lincoln Mine Project, proposed for the area between Sutter Creek and Amador City along Highway 49. The supervisors apparently were swayed by proponents' claims that the mine would bring 120 well-paying jobs to the area, increase county tax revenue, and boost local tourism.

An earlier version of the Lincoln Project was approved in 1993 after much debate and extensive negotiations between the mining company, Sutter Gold, and neighbors who were concerned about the project's effects on their lives. The negotiations' conducted under the leadership of former county supervisor Stephanie Moreno, mitigated operating conditions and addressed most of the neighbors' concerns.

This time the supervisors and the miners were in no mood to negotiate. Issues raised in public hearings were not taken seriously, and opponents were treated rudely by public officials. No effort was made to ensure that the neighbors' quality of life and property values would not be diminished by the mine operation. The miners prepared their own Environmental Impact Report (EIR), and nearly all of their requests were incorporated into the approved project. A citizens group has now sued the county to bring the mine operation into compliance with state and local environmental and planning laws.

New project expanded operations

As described in the lawsuit, the project consists of "underground mining operations, development of a main mill building, dewatering plants, disposal sites for mining wastes, stockpiles for waste rock and ore, a visitors center, accessory buildings...and access roads.

The revised project will expand the mine's allowable blasting hours, nearly double allowable heavy truck traffic, and move disposal of mine tailings to "surface fill units on the west side of Highway 49, adjacent to the Crestview subdivision. Sutter Gold claims that the new landfills would be environmentally superior to the tailings ponds approved in 1993. However, many Crestview residents were not convinced that the contoured tailings dumps, which would be up to 120 feet high and cover parts of 185 acres, were either safe or compatible with their residential neighborhood.

Public process flawed

Many local residents turned out for the public hearings held on the Lincoln Project. And many were shocked to find their comments summarily dismissed, contradicted, or simply ignored by members of the Amador County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors.

Throughout the process, residents of Sutter Creek and Amador City stressed that the mine already had an approved use permitone with conditions negotiated to mitigate the project's effects on neighbors and their towns. Residents of the area near the mine and real estate sellers were convinced that the project would lower area property values. Sutter Creek merchants expressed their concerns about the potential for the mine to extend its tunnels and blasting underneath the town.

The supervisors showed contempt for the public in the Lincoln approval process. They ignored a request to hold the appeal hearing for the mine at night at an adequately sized location. They conducted the meeting instead during the day in their overflowing chambers, leaving interested members of the public standing outside. None of the opponents' concerns were seriously discussed.

After approving the project EIR, the supervisors held a separate daytime meeting to establish use permit conditions for the mine. Members of the public were not allowed to comment or propose improvements to the 85 conditions as they were reviewed. Only parties called on by the supervisors were allowed to take part in the review.

Lawsuit filed

Concerned Citizens of Amador County, a group of residents who spearheaded opposition to the project, filed suit to stop the mine. The lawsuit, filed in September by attorney Reed Super of San Francisco, alleges that approval of the project did not comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the state Planning and Zoning Law, and the county's own general plan and zoning ordinance.

Among other things, the suit points out that

• The proposed mill complex, accessory buildings, and visitor center are located on land designated "Residential-Suburban (R-S) in the county general plan and zoned "Single-Family ResidentialAgricultural District " (R1-A) in the zoning ordinance. None of this land is designated or zoned for industrial or commercial uses, and many houses and two schools are nearby.
• CalTrans issued a Highway 49 encroachment permit to the mine without proper public notice or review of related environmental documents.
• The county allowed Sutter Gold to prepare its own EIR, a document that is "wholly inadequate, hopelessly incomplete and internally inconsistent, contains numerous legal and technical flaws, fails to support its conclusions with analysis, and improperly defers and delegates the formulation of mitigation measures. . . . .
• The EIR does not adequately analyze alternatives to the described project, as required by CEQA.
• The EIR fails to adequately analyze impacts on land use, traffic, hydrology and water quality, noise/vibration, air quality, aesthetics, and cumulative impacts.
• The county violated several CEQA requirements regarding notice and circulation for EIRs.
• The statement of overriding considerations adopted by the supervisors to offset significant negative environmental impacts is flawed because the EIR does not provide any evidence that the modifications to the project would increase the number of project employees or its operational life. The suit claims that there are "no new jobs, tax revenues, or anything else which could constitute evidence of project benefits.
• The county general plan is legally inadequate because, in violation of state law, it does not clearly specify allowable uses or standards of building intensity (buildings per acre/building area) for each land use classification and does not include noise contours for all sources.

The action seeks reversal of the EIR certification and project approvals as well as an injunction to stop the project until environmental review and approval is brought into compliance with state law and local ordinances.

Next steps

Land use lawsuits typically go through a number of steps and can take years to resolve. If the Concerned Citizens, the county, and Sutter Gold cannot agree on a settlement, the case will first be heard by a local superior court judge. Any appeal of the trial court decision would be heard by the Third District Court of Appeal in Sacramento. Meanwhile, Sutter Gold is continuing work on the project