Supervisors Violate Constitutional Oaths

Supervisors Novasel, Ranalli, and Veerkamp received the following letters on March 8, 2017.  As of this date, former Supervisor Mikulaco has not picked up his letter at the Post Office.

Click here to read letter to Supervisor Veerkamp
Click here to read letter to Supervisor Ranalli
Click here to read letter to Supervisor Novasel
Click here to read letter to former Supervisor Mikulaco

Here are excerpts from the letters and video clips:

Whenever constitutional violations are committed by public officers, there are constitutional remedies available to the people. Such remedies make those who violate their oaths, such as you, accountable and liable for their unconstitutional actions conducted in perjury of their oaths.

Your continued refusal to allow the public the opportunity to make comment on the staff’s monthly TGPA/ZOU status update was a violation of the Ralph M. Brown Act. By your actions, as stated herein, you perjured your oath, which oath was given in exchange for the public trust. Therefore, you violated the public trust, and also violated the rights of free speech, redress of grievances to government and peaceful assembly, guaranteed in the First Amendment, all of which actions were conducted by you without constitutional or any other valid lawful authority.

Your refusal to provide a meaningful process for Citizens made it extremely clear to the audience that this meeting was a joke, a farce and a fraud, simply meant to give the appearance of a just and fair hearing, but delivering nothing of the kind.

Special Interest Group plots against grassroots community groups

The following message is being distributed by a group that is aligned with Parker Development, “Alliance for Responsible Planning” and being headed by the Board of Supervisor’s appointed Chairperson of the Community and Economic Development Advisory Commission,
Maryann Argyres.

(Save Our County’s comments in red)

Begin forwarded message:

Date: January 7, 2016 at 1:20:55 PM PST
Subject:Alliance for Responsible Planning Luncheon — Friday, January 22, 2016; 11:30 AM to 1:00 PM
You are cordially invited to attend a complimentary luncheon
 
Friday, January 22, 2016
 
From 11:30 AM until 1:00 PM
In the Private Waterfall Buffet Room at Red Hawk Casino.
 
Much has happened since our last luncheon meeting, and new issues are on the horizon. 
 
Following years of public hearings and environmental review, the Board of Supervisors approved the Targeted General Plan Amendment/Zoning Ordinance Update on December 15, 2015.  The first comprehensive update of the zoning ordinance in over 30 years:
 
  • Brings zoning consistent with the General Plan for about 6% of parcels that were previously “inconsistent”;
    There are 94,000 parcels on the tax rolls 6% would be 5640 parcels so why did the county rezone 37,000 parcels?
  • Extends “right to farm” protections to some of our most productive agricultural lands;
    And possibly removed protections from around 2,300 previously Ag zoned parcels that the County “opted out” of Ag without much understanding of the consequence of that action.
  • Provides rural commerce opportunities to maintain economic viability of larger parcels in rural areas;  
    Allowing for rural commerce was already in the existing General Plan, but the County went beyond this by allowing a home occupancy business to be retail or industrial without checking for compatibility with their neighbor.
  • Does not change General Plan Land Uses (“colors”) except a small number of map corrections.
    This is a conflicting statement.  The county changed land use even after telling the public that there would be NO land use changes.  The public argued that this massive General Plan overhaul would not be necessary if they just changed the land use to match the zoning.  We were told by the County that they could not change land use.   
As you might imagine, this does not conclude planning-related issues on the near-term horizon.  
  • Litigation to challenge TGPA/ZOU is threatened by opposition groups;
    This is not a threat but is a duty of the public to hold our government officials responsible for upholding the law.  The Board of Supervisors left the public no choice but to litigate – unfortunately they will be using our money to defend their actions.
  • Petitions to recall the entire Board of Supervisors are being circulated by a small group of activists frustrated by their inability to control County government; 
    The Board of Supervisors are suppose to be public servants and answer to their citizens, that’s what we hired them to do!  We did not yield our sovereignty to the agencies which serve us.
  • Efforts continue to obstruct our “Area of Origin” water rights application, including attempts to discredit the fiscally sound policies of the majority of the EID Board.
  • Is it a sound decision to gamble $11 million of tax and rate payer funds for speculation when they know that the jurisdictions down river will sue to stop them as they did before? The other issue to consider is do we really need water rights for 216,000* more residents on metered water and do we really want to fund the last $180 million* to implement the infrastructure for these future residents? (*these facts are hard to document given they come from those that don’t always share truth)
     
Two initiatives will appear on the June 2016 ballot.  The “Yellow Petition” claims to “Reinstate Measure Y”, but even Bill Center has said this initiative goes “far beyond” original Measure Y, and would have “serious economic impacts”. The “Purple Petition” would make sweeping General Plan amendments to conform the Land Use Map to old zoning, among other changes.
“Reinstate Measure Y” goes back to forcing the developers to pay their own way for roads and as originally stated takes the vote away from the Board and back to the people before a road can be allowed to go to level of service F (gridlock). 
The “Retain our current zoning and Rural assets” initiative requires the Board to implement the protection policies as promised in the 2004 General Plan before allowing developers to bulldoze the resources the plan was to protect.  
The Board of Supervisors have enormous power over our land use, over the last 20 years they have severely abused that discretion and these initiatives put that power back in check allowing for common sense development and protection of our treasured resources for local use rather than incentivizing stack and pack development for favored developers at Taxpayers expense.
 
As you can see, there’s a lot to talk about, and we hope you will be able to join us for this timely discussion.  Because seating is limited, please let us know in advance if you are unable to attend
Anyone want to go and set the record straight for this propaganda event? 
 
Thank you again for your valuable contribution to the future of our county.
 
Maryann Argyres
Alliance for Responsible Planning, President
 
RSVP (Regrets Only) by reply to this email or to

alliance4responsibleplanning@gmail.com

COMMUNITY GROUP FILES LEGAL ACTION AGAINST EL DORADO COUNTY APPROVAL OF THE GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE

For Immediate Release                                             Contact: Ellen Van Dyke (530)676-8025

COMMUNITY GROUP FILES LEGAL ACTION AGAINST EL DORADO COUNTY APPROVAL OF
THE GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE

January 14, 2016 – Placerville, CA
On Wednesday January 13, Rural Communities United continued its efforts to protect rural character by filing a case challenging the County’s massive rezoning and gutting of the voter approved 2004 general plan. Rural Communities United is an organization of local residents who seek to protect the County’s rural character for current and future residents.

The case was filed to protect rural groundwater supplies, fire safety, and traffic circulation. The case alleges that the mass rezoning of thousands of parcels fails to respect the 2004 general plan protections for the County’s rural resources. According to the case filed in El Dorado County Superior Court, “These planning blunders have transformed El Dorado County’s general plan and zoning ordinance into the antithesis of orderly planning.”

The case was also filed to protect the rights of local citizens to fair hearings. The case scolds county planning commissioners and supervisors for not giving fair hearings to those who expressed concerns regarding the effects of the rezones on their homes and neighborhoods. According to the case, the County’s deliberate indifference to the rights of its residents has, “caused good people to question their faith in the integrity of their government.”

The case will likely be heard by a judge later in the year in El Dorado County Superior Court. Ellen Van Dyke of Rural Communities United said, “We hope to inspire people throughout El Dorado County to protect the things that make this a great place to live.”

website: www.RuralCommunitiesUnited.org

email: contactRCU@gmail.com

LAST CHANCE – Take Action! Contact Supervisors to stop rezoning Shingle Springs

The Supervisors will take their final action on the General Plan overhaul and Zoning Ordinance Update on Tuesday, December 15, 2015.  This is your last chance to make comment on the project.  
Watch this video to learn more about the project:  https://youtu.be/Dr_LRPTiswk

From Shingle Springs Community Alliance:

On Friday, 11/13/15, the Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 to pass the TGPA/ZOU (General Plan Update/Zoning Ordinance Update or LUPPU).  They will come back on 12/15/15 to finalize their vote and clean up any loose ends to prepare for the anticipated lawsuit.
 
The Board’s approval included rezoning 37,000 parcels in El Dorado County.   Rezoning the parcels was done without notifying landowners nor adjacent landowners who would be impacted.  The County put the burden of finding the rezoned parcels on citizens.  So, during the hearings on November 10, 12, and 13, citizens did point out several parcels that were being rezoned to higher development densities, which is in conflict with the stated goals.  
Here is a very concrete example of a rezone to a higher, incompatible density, in Shingle Springs.
  1. This map shows the intersection of Ponderosa Road and Highway 50.  The Board rezoned the 2 north corners of Ponderosa and Highway 50 to an intense commercial zone that is for regional projects, like a Costco (in red with horizontal lines).  That will completely destroy our sense of place in Shingle Springs and negatively impact traffic forever.
  2. Additionally, these commercial parcels are adjacent to Medium Density Residential parcels, which are 1-acre to 5-acres in size (the pink color).  A regional project is a very intense use and not compatible with residential homes.  Therefore, a request was made to rezone the commercial parcels to a compatible zone, such as Commercial Office or Commercial Light, but that request was ignored.
    View video here:  https://youtu.be/UhBJKkCZjaA
    View submitted document here:  https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6SYfsvp_87XZzY2b0pvSGhta2M/view?usp=sharing
    Look up parcels here: http://gem.edcgov.us/zoning_luppu/  If you have questions on the map, contact Shawna Purvines, El Dorado County Long Range Planning, (530) 621-5362
  3. Furthermore, there are already small businesses and offices on these commercial parcels.  Changing their zoning to Commercial Regional makes the businesses on the ground incompatible with the zoning.  The TGPA/ZOU was NOT supposed to create inconsistencies.
  4. Lastly, the community of Shingle Springs has been very active in the past several years.  Why didn’t the Planning staff or Supervisors tell us about the proposed changes and ask for our input???
This is just one example out of the 37,000 parcels that were rezoned.  How many other instances of unnecessary and increased densities were approved without public knowledge?
PLEASE TAKE ACTION – Write to the Supervisors – Customize our sample email to fit your concerns
 

To: <bosone@edcgov.us>, <bostwo@edcgov.us>, <bosthree@edcgov.us>, <bosfour@edcgov.us>, <bosfive@edcgov.us>, <edc.cob@edcgov.us>, shawna.purvines@edcgov.us

Subject: TGPA/ZOU Final vote on 12-15-15

Dear Supervisors Mikulaco, Veerkamp, Ranalli, and Novasel,

I request that you do not approve the rezoning of thousands of parcels in El Dorado County.  The rezone at the intersection of Ponderosa Road and Highway 50 is an example of how the community of Shingle Springs was left out of the process and not informed about the negative impacts to traffic and quality of life from these rezones.  Instead of these rezones, I ask that you use our County resources to protect our existing Community Identity in Shingle Springs as a peaceful country community of homes and ranches on acreage.
 
Thank you to Supervisor Frentzen for voting No on these rezones and the TGPA.
 
Sincerely,
 
[Your Name]
[Your Town]

 

Take Action! Contact Supervisors to stop rezoning Shingle Springs

From Shingle Springs Community Alliance:

On Friday, 11/13/15, the Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 to pass the TGPA/ZOU (General Plan Update/Zoning Ordinance Update or LUPPU).  They will come back on 12/15/15 to finalize their vote and clean up any loose ends to prepare for the anticipated lawsuit.
 
The Board’s approval included rezoning 37,000 parcels in El Dorado County.   Rezoning the parcels was done without notifying landowners nor adjacent landowners who would be impacted.  The County put the burden of finding the rezoned parcels on citizens.  So, during the hearings on November 10, 12, and 13, citizens did point out several parcels that were being rezoned to higher development densities, which is in conflict with the stated goals.  
Here is a very concrete example of a rezone to a higher, incompatible density, in Shingle Springs.
  1. This map shows the intersection of Ponderosa Road and Highway 50.  The Board rezoned the 2 north corners of Ponderosa and Highway 50 to an intense commercial zone that is for regional projects, like a Costco (in red with horizontal lines).  That will completely destroy our sense of place in Shingle Springs and negatively impact traffic forever.
  2. Additionally, these commercial parcels are adjacent to Medium Density Residential parcels, which are 1-acre to 5-acres in size (the pink color).  A regional project is a very intense use and not compatible with residential homes.  Therefore, a request was made to rezone the commercial parcels to a compatible zone, such as Commercial Office or Commercial Light, but that request was ignored.
    View video here:  https://youtu.be/UhBJKkCZjaA
    View submitted document here:  https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6SYfsvp_87XZzY2b0pvSGhta2M/view?usp=sharing
    Look up parcels here: http://gem.edcgov.us/zoning_luppu/  If you have questions on the map, contact Shawna Purvines, El Dorado County Long Range Planning, (530) 621-5362
  3. Furthermore, there are already small businesses and offices on these commercial parcels.  Changing their zoning to Commercial Regional makes the businesses on the ground incompatible with the zoning.  The TGPA/ZOU was NOT supposed to create inconsistencies.
  4. Lastly, the community of Shingle Springs has been very active in the past several years.  Why didn’t the Planning staff or Supervisors tell us about the proposed changes and ask for our input???
This is just one example out of the 37,000 parcels that were rezoned.  How many other instances of unnecessary and increased densities were approved without public knowledge?
PLEASE TAKE ACTION – Write to the Supervisors – Customize our sample email to fit your concerns
 

To: <bosone@edcgov.us>, <bostwo@edcgov.us>, <bosthree@edcgov.us>, <bosfour@edcgov.us>, <bosfive@edcgov.us>, <edc.cob@edcgov.us>, shawna.purvines@edcgov.us

Subject: TGPA/ZOU Final vote on 12-15-15

Dear Supervisors Mikulaco, Veerkamp, Ranalli, and Novasel,

I request that you do not approve the rezoning of thousands of parcels in El Dorado County.  The rezone at the intersection of Ponderosa Road and Highway 50 is an example of how the community was left out of the process and not informed about the negative impacts to traffic and quality of life from these rezones.  Instead of these rezones, I ask that you use our County resources to protect our existing Community Identity in Shingle Springs as a peaceful country community of homes and ranches on acreage.
 
Thank you to Supervisor Frentzen for voting No on these rezones and the TGPA.
 
Sincerely,
 
[Your Name]
[Your Town]