The developers didn’t play by the rules. The RDEIR, the FEIR and the Staff Report document that the golf course was built in violation of local zoning codes/ordinances and Williamson Act contract. Various agencies describe violations of state and federal laws enacted to protect the environment and agricultural land. The developer should not gain an advantage now just because the golf course exists. County officials should not reward such outrageous behavior by approving the developer’s goal, at the expense of other county residents and the surrounding community. Doing so would brand Calaveras County as a safe haven for developers willing to risk building before securing approvals or basic entitlements.

The project doesn’t meet the Board of Supervisors’ Discretionary Development Policy 07-242 that “All divisions of land will be served by public surface water and public sewer with the exception of those projects where: (a) all parcels to be created are in excess of 40 acres; or (b) only one additional parcel is being created.”

Irrigating the private golf course uses 113 million gallons of groundwater annually. California is experiencing a record drought. The aquifer serving the Wallace/Burson area is declining. Around 25 local wells have gone dry, forcing homeowners to truck in water for daily survival.  Project impacts on the aquifer and surrounding wells can’t be determined without appropriate field testing, but watering turf grass is NOT the most beneficial use of precious local water resources.

Long-term sustainability of the project’s water supply is uncertain. The RDEIR says any new water demands must be provided by surface water.  However, CCWD has indicated it has no reclaimed water to provide Trinitas, nor means of delivering it, if it was available. They also say it could take ten years or more and up to $30,000,000 to bring surface water to the Valley Springs/Burson/Wallace area. The chance of doing so in the foreseeable future without taxpayer subsidies through a public assessment or bond measure is slim. The project should not be approved on a long-shot hope of future surface water.

Traffic will more than double, causing driving delays, worsening road surfaces and threatening public safety, due to increased daily vehicle trips by new residents, golfers playing somewhere from 12,000-36,000 or more rounds of golf annually, and visitors to the clubhouse, restaurant, bar, banquet facilities, retail shops and 30-unit motel. In addition, the proposal calls for 24 events of up to 500 people per year, one event of up to 1,000 people, and unlimited events of up to 250 people. Any one “event” can last for several days, as golf tournaments often do. This could result in nearly constant events, which will keep traffic coursing through our community. If the land is rezoned Recreation-Existing Parcel Size-Planned Development (REC-X-PD), even larger events could be approved, since different rules apply under Recreation zoning. The threat to public safety on our dangerous roads will increase dramatically.

The project exemplifies “leap-frog development”, would be growth inducing, resulting in lost agricultural land and open spaces. If approved, the golf resort/event facility would inevitably lead to the conversion of surrounding agricultural land to additional housing and commercial development, worsening existing water and road infrastructure deficiencies. The ultimate cost of approving the golf resort is the irreplaceable loss of our natural resources, open space, agricultural land and quiet rural residential community.

Golf facilities and events aren’t compatible with surrounding ranching operations and rural residences. Noise from public address systems and amplified music associated with events would be allowed from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., seven days a week. In addition to the traffic and noise, project lighting from streetlights, 5 acres of lighted parking lots and headlights from vehicles coming and going from the facilities after dark will alter the area’s character and views of the night sky, and interfere with ranching activities on adjacent properties.

No cost/benefit analysis supports exaggerated claims of economic benefit to the county. Several large golf resort projects have gone into foreclosure recently, from Sacramento to Bakersfield. This development may fail to generate enough revenue to pay for its impacts on water, wear and tear on local roads and the disruption of our agricultural and rural community. If it is approved, the benefit will go primarily to the developers. It’s a bad deal for the county.

Inconsistent with General Plan Goals, Policies and Implementation Procedures See Legal Issues and Comments on the RDEIR Exhibit 64 for more on this topic

Inadequate General Plan - The County’s own EIR consultant Mintier & Harnish has declared the existing general plan inadequate and legally deficient. How can a project’s compliance with a faulty general plan guarantee less than significant impacts?