The Concerned Citizens of Amador County have appealed Amador County Superior Court Judge Susan Harlan's decision in their Lincoln Project lawsuit. That suit challenged the county's approval of the Lincoln Mine project on both sides of Highway 49 between Sutter Creek and Amador City. As described in our last newsletter, Harlan ruled against the Citizens and agreed with the county that waste tailing units over 100 feet high, a five-story, 30,000-square-foot mill structure, and a visitor's center could be located on land designated as "residential-suburban" (R-S) in the Amador County general plan. Harlan also ruled that county violations of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) did not result in any harm and that the county's efforts to comply were sufficient.

The "tail does not wag the dog"

The Citizens' lawsuit claimed that allowing mining in the R-S residential designation was inconsistent with the county general plan, which the appeal terms "the basic land use framework" for the county. The appeal maintains that the county's approval of the mine use permit is invalid because the Amador County General Plan does not authorize mining and residential uses "within the same land use classification." The R-S description in the general plan lists appropriate uses as "single family residential, agricultural and schools, parks, etc." Mining is not mentioned.

In the superior court the county reasoned, and Harlan agreed, that because county zoning allows mining in residential areas, mining was not precluded by the general plan's limited list of uses allowed on land designated R-S. The Citizens' appeal specifically challenges this reasoning, because zoning cannot control a general plan - instead, in the hierarchy of land use law, the general plan controls the zoning ordinance. The appeal notes than in an earlier case, " . . .the California Supreme Court used the colloquial expression 'the tail does not wag the dog' to make the point that zoning ordinances do not and cannot direct general plan policies."

Noise and traffic issues

The appeal also cites violations of the general plan Noise Element and CEQA. Regarding the last-minute, pre-approval insertion of a traffic study into the environmental studies for the project, the appeal states, "Amador County did not make a good faith effort to comply with CEQA's mandatory requirements, when analyzing the potentially significant adverse consequences of the estimated total truck trips generated by the proposed mining project." The project would double to fifty the number of heavy truck trips per day on local roads and highways, compared to the number of trips allowed when the supervisors first approved the mining project in 1993. In violation of CEQA, the public was not allowed to review or comment on the traffic study.

Appeal to be heard in Sacramento

The appeal will be heard by the Third District Court of Appeal in Sacramento, probably later this year. If you are concerned about allowing mining and heavy industrial development in our county's residential areas without due notice in the general plan, and you would like to help the Concerned Citizens defray their considerable legal expenses, please send donations to:

Concerned Citizens P.O. Box 544 Amador City, CA 95601

Pursuing a land use case in superior and appellate courts typically costs between $25,000 and $40,000.