Quote of the Day

You must be the change you wish to see in the world  -Ghandi

Citing concerns raised not only by environmental groups but also by state and federal agencies, Judge Zimmerman rejected the FAA's claim that it had satisfied National Environmental Policy Act requirements through its preparation of an Environmental Assessment, and ordered the FAA to prepare and adopt a full Environmental Impact Statement before construction of the airport expansion can commence.

In his ruling, Judge Zimmerman found: "At bottom, many deficiencies in the [Final Environmental Assessment] can be attributed to defendants' myopic view of the airport project. Common sense dictates that improving an airport to introduce regular commercial air service in an area known for, and reliant on, tourism, will have a substantial impact on a number of environmental factors. The FEA's conclusion that the project would have no significant impact on endangered or threatened species strains credulity."

The original Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact by FAA fails to address the impacts of converting the small airport into a facility able to bring in thousands of tourists every year.

The proposed expansion would convert a small private airplane facility into a major regional airport, landing B-737s and B-757s, carrying over a hundred passengers each. Projected air traffic would vastly increase the need for facilities-hotels, condominiums, cabins, restaurants, shopping centers, rental car agencies, road upgrades, parking lots, traffic signals, etc. to support a large influx of visitors. The public has yet to receive a full accounting of what effects the proposed expansion would have on the Mammoth community and the natural resources of the region.

"The National Environmental Policy Act requires agencies to 'look before they leap' into projects that may have vast environmental consequences," said Susan Britton of Earthjustice who is representing the coalition. "This ruling reaffirms the public's right to know that the federal government has done its homework before approving large projects."

The Sierra Club, National Parks Conservation Association, California Trout, and Natural Resources Defense Council brought the lawsuit that led to today's decision.

"This project proposes to double the number of visitor-days with tourists arriving by plane," said Sierra Club member Owen Maloy, who lives in the region. "People still don't have enough information about how this will change our area. There is risk of destroying the very scenic values that attract visitors."

Mammoth Mountain Ski Area currently supports approximately 1,000,000 skier-days per year. The owners seek to remake Mammoth in the image of Aspen and Sun Valley by attracting more out-of-state skiers to justify more real estate development. The project proposes to double the number of skier-days each winter, and vastly increase summer visitation as well. Mammoth Mountain will help fund the proposed expansion by "loaning" Mammoth Lakes the local funding share required under FAA guidelines for airport expansions. Mammoth expects to receive a federal grant to cover the difference.

Growth induced by the airport expansion could also adversely affect several protected species in the area, including the Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep, sage grouse, Owens tui chub, and bald eagle. Increased tourism in the area could increase air pollution and noise pollution.

"Mammoth Lakes is the eastern gateway to such national treasures as Yosemite National Park, and the John Muir and Ansel Adams Wilderness areas, and is itself a place with spectacular natural beauty. A full-blown EIS is needed to address all impacts resulting from the airport expansion, which the FAA has thus far ignored," said Michelle Jesperson of the National Parks Conservation Association, another co-plaintiff in the lawsuit.

Cal Trout's Southern California Manager, Jim Edmondson, said, "Airport expansion would require more development and, thus, more water withdrawals, more storage and handling of toxic jet fuels, more traffic, more noise, and other incompatible elements putting the area's fisheries and other elements of this fragile ecosystem in harm's way. It just makes sense to understand what we are getting into."

The decision issued today also resolves a similar lawsuit filed by the California Attorney General's Office over the airport plan. Read the Court's Decision online at: http://www.earthjustice.org/news/documents/4-03/Mammothdecision.pdf

Tell Congress To Maintain A Strong Endangered Species Act

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is one of America's strongest laws conserving the nation's fish and wildlife. Since becoming law 30 years ago the ESA has worked to help restore populations of grizzly bears, Peninsular bighorn sheep, Gila trout and gray wolves. Now, Congress, at the request of the Bush Administration, is considering weakening this landmark conservation law by exempting the Pentagon from conserving the habitat of at-risk fish and wildlife on the more than 25 million acres of public land it manages, making it easier for the federal government to avoid habitat conservation activities, on all lands. The need for the Pentagon, or any segment of government, to be above the law and avoid conserving the open space, wildlands and clean water that imperiled species and our families depend on and enjoy, is unfounded. (See testimony in this issue by Representative Nick J Rahall.)

Return to Index 

Thursday, April 24, 2003. The Bush Administration is holding six public hearings around the country focusing on environmental health for aging baby boomers. The Administration has proposed what has been dubbed the "Senior Death Discount," which would discount the lives of seniors 37 percent when new environmental rules are calculated by the Federal government.

According to today's Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, at the recent hearing in Pittsburgh, one Sierra Club activist "turned the Environmental Protection Agency and the Bush administration over her knee to give them a virtual spanking for seeking to weaken clean air rules and for discounting the value of seniors' lives."

Return to Index 

Thursday, 24 April 2003

Bill Allayaud allayaud@sierraclub-sac.org

Since the Legislature is in full-swing, we are very busy in Sacramento, and Chapter-related legislation could arise, now would be a good time to review our procedures for getting information about a bill, or taking a position on a bill:

If you would like general information on the status of, or the Sierra Club’s position, on a particular bill, contact Marianne Batchelder, 916-557-1100, ext 107, batchelder@sierraclub-sac.org.

Under the Sierra Club California bylaws, the California Legislative Committee (CLC) is the only Sierra Club entity with authority to take positions on state legislation. Sierra Club Chapters and Groups that would like Sierra Club California to take a position on a particular bill should contact Marianne Batchelder in the Sacramento office to find out if the CLC has already taken a position on the bill. If not, Marianne will notify the appropriate Sacramento staff person and the CLC Chair of the Chapter or Group making the request. The CLC will consult with the designated Chapter or Group representative, take appropriate action and notify the designated Chapter or Group representative of the CLC’s decision regarding the bill.

Once the CLC has taken a position on a bill, the chapter or group may participate in direct or grassroots lobbying activities in furtherance of that position if Sierra Club California has expressly requested Chapters and Groups to undertake this activity (i.e. through an action alert posted to the Cal Activists List or otherwise), or the Chapter or Group obtains prior approval to undertake lobbying activities from the appropriate Sacramento staff person and the CLC. Direct lobbying activities include direct contacts by Sierra Club volunteers or staff with members of the Legislature and their staff (via telephone calls, letters, emails or faxes), testimony in legislative committees, etc., and grassroots lobbying includes such things as phone banking, action alerts, tabling, postcards, etc. encouraging other persons to contact legislators.

We strongly encourage Chapter and Groups to participate in lobbying activities on bills for which Sierra Club California has taken a position, but such efforts need to be closely coordinated with Sacramento staff in order to avoid the potential for confusion, miscommunication and mixed messages in the Legislature, which can backfire and seriously undermine overall efforts to support or oppose a particular piece of legislation. Therefore, before undertaking any direct or grassroots lobbying activity on a matter involving the California Legislature, the Chapter or Group must first contact Marianne Batchelder so that she can notify the appropriate Sacramento staff person in advance. The Sacramento staff will then assist the Chapter or Group in coordinating the lobbying activities.

For your reference, here is a list of the Sierra Club staff and CLC leads handling particular issue areas (also found in SC California RedBook):

Return to Index 

The Coastal Commission undertook analysis of a "new" Marblehead, and judging from the lack of opposition to the project, it had indeed been improved.

Marblehead is a residential and commercial project across 250 acres stretching from Interstate Highway #5 to the ocean in the City of San Clemente in southern Orange County (for photos, go to www.californiacoastline.org, photo no. 5080). Not all of Marblehead, however, lies in the coastal zone. The Coastal Commission undertook analysis of only 201 acres, and did not review most of a giant 700,000 square foot mega-mall already approved by the City. Instead, the Commission set about determining Coastal Act compliance for subdivision and construction of 313 single family homes on 44 acres, 141,506 square feet of commercial space in ten commercial buildings on 22 acres, public parks on 15 acres, 95 acres of public and private open space and pedestrian and bicycle trails, 12 acres of private streets, and 10 acres of public streets and parking.

When the project first came before the Commission in March 2001 coastal staff recommended denial and the Commission was ready to ditch the project for it's canyon fills, nearly 4 million cubic yards of grading, 424 homes, lack of open space and public trails and destruction of coastal sage scrub habitat and wetlands. The application was withdrawn and the developer went back to the drawing board.

When the project came again to the Commission in January 2003 it again appeared doomed, again based upon 2.4 million yards of grading and canyon fill with associated habitat destruction. Again the project was withdrawn and again it was back to drawing board.

Yet last week, with grading reduced to approximately 2 million yards, with 313 houses and additional open space, trails and habitat restoration, the project was deemed acceptable by coastal staff.

Commissioners welcomed some features of the project:

• With respect to the bluff face and ocean-fronting portion of the project, the open space, trails and habitat protections are significant, especially when compared to the cemented bluffs adjacent to the Marblehead property (see adjacent properties at www.californiacoastline.org, photos nos. 5073-74).

• With over 55% of the coastal zone portion of the property going into permanent open space, it is hoped that the $5 million habitat restoration plan will result in, among other things, an increase in nesting pairs of gnatcatchers from 2 (currently) to 8-10.

• A project to produce the rare Blochman's Dudleya has already resulted in over 16,000 plants.

• For wetlands, the existing 5 acres will be increased to nearly 10 acres.

• Less than 1-acre of native needle grass will be increased to nearly 5 acres.

Coastal Sage Scrub Habitat Onsite Will Increase From Approximately 10 acres to Over 77 acres

For some Commissioners, however, the most important feature of the project was the water quality treatment plan. Called "state of the art" by the nonprofit Orange County Coastkeeper and supported by Surfrider Foundation, the water quality plan becomes the standard for all new development in the California coastal zone. In general, the idea is to capture and treat not only sewage wastewater, but also all runoff. While this should be feasible during low flow time periods, the system at Marblehead is even designed to capture runoff during the first rains, called "first flush." Catch basins, holding tanks and pipelines should be sufficient to capture runoff through at least the first inch of a rainstorm. Meanwhile, the plan is designed to continue to allow "natural" flows to support wetlands and wildlife.

In addition, many other features such as street sweeping, trash racks, grated inlet covers and elevated covered trash receptacles as well as pesticide, toxics, fertilizer and litter controls enhance the plan. And utilizing the latest research, Marblehead will install a satellite technology irrigation control, also known as "hydra-point" or "Smart Controllers" on all residential units and common areas. These satellite-controlled devices have been shown to reduce urban runoff by over 60%.

It also didn't hurt the project that the developer has agreed to spend tens of millions of dollars throughout the City on numerous projects, including a $7.2 million contribution to the City Transportation program and build a $5.8 million dollar freeway interchange, build a bus terminal in the commercial area, spend over $5 million on needed public roadways, give to the City another $1 million for "downtown revitalization," give $250,000 for a library, give $1 million for senior citizens programs, and provide $1.8 million for schools.

In the end no one opposed the project and the Commission approved it unanimously.

Cosponsor Email Outreach for Local Government Commission California Conference

Bill Allayaud, Tuesday, April 22, 2003

Sierra Club California is a co-sponsor for this conference I hope our members in Southern California, as well as from other parts of the State, can attend. On-line registration is available; a brochure for the conference is available which can be used for registration as well. Please contact Marianne Batchelder by email (batchelder@sierraclub-sac.org) if you would like a copy of the brochure emailed to you.

Registration is now available for the Local Government Commission's Planning and Building More Livable Communities Conference, to be held June 27-28 in San Diego. Visit the LGC's Web site to register at http://www.lgc.org/events — as well as get more detailed information about the conference, session topics, invited speakers, sponsors and cosponsors, and hotel accommodations.

Please contact Dave Defanti (ddefanti@lgc.org) or Michele Kelso (mkelso@lgc.org) at the LGC should you have questions.
web: www.lgc.org, 916-448-1198,

Dave Defanti, Project Coordinator
Local Government Commission
1414 K Street Ste 600
Sacramento CA 95814
phone: (916) 448-1198 x330
fax: (916) 448-8246
 

On-line registration is now available for the statewide Planning and Building More Livable Communities Conference, June 27-28 in San Diego! Visit the LGC's Web site at http://www.lgc.org/events

Return to Index 

Resolutions Passed — May 4, 2003

Solstice Creek Litigation, Malibu — Santa Monica Mountains Task Force

The Angeles Chapter Executive Committee approves litigation to prevent the construction of a seven building bed and breakfast/hotel complex at Solstice Creek. Chapter approval will be subject to approval by the national Litigation Committee. The Conservation Committee also recommends that the Executive Committee approve a $7,500 grant to help fund the lawsuit and a $300 grant to publicize the campaign to prevent the destruction of the ESHA and the sensitive habitat.

Ballona Bluffs Land Acquisition Account in the Sierra Club Foundation — Airport Marina Group

The Angeles Chapter Executive Committee approves a Sierra Club Foundation Account to raise acquisition funds for the Ballona Bluffs in West LA.

Chapter Priority Campaigns I

The Angeles Chapter Executive Committee approves the following standards for selecting Angeles Chapter's Priority Campaigns:

1. The proposed campaign will be focused on a precedent-setting environmental issue and that the campaign if successful will have important positive environmental consequences.

2. The proposed campaign will exhibit excellent planning that meets the standards of "The Sierra Club Campaign Planning Matrix".

3. The proposed campaign will provide "bang for the buck". Benefits to Angeles Chapter and/or the regional groups in proportion to resources that they provide to the campaign must be evident. Benefits include but aren't limited to increased membership, fundraising opportunities, and publicity.

4. The proposed campaign lends itself to memorable or inspirational events or end-products that will resonate with a large number of activists, Club members, and citizens at large.

5. The proposed campaign requires a major commitment of leadership and financial resources by Angeles Chapter in order to be successful. (Some campaigns will be better accomplished by other organizations with contributions from Angeles Chapter.)

6. The proposed campaign will serve as a model to be duplicated by other Sierra Club entities.

7. The proposed campaign will be conducted in a manner consistent with the Sierra Club's values and mission.

Chapter Priority Campaigns II

The length of a priority campaign will be limited to one year with renewal of the designation possible. A vote of the Conservation Committee is required to re-authorize status as a priority campaign.

Return to Index

Rep. Rahall’s Statement on DOD Exemptions

US Rep Nick J Rahall

Ranking Democrat - House Resources Committee

Hearing on HR 1835 - May 6, 2003

Mr. Chairman, the issue at hand represents a classic example of a solution in search of a problem. I say that because the Department of Defense has spared no expense in the aftermath of 9-11 to assert that our nation's environmental laws are undermining the training and readiness of our fighting forces.

Yet, according to reports released by the General Accounting Office, the Pentagon has failed miserably to provide any compelling examples to verify this allegation. Moreover, the major environmental laws all contain a national security exemption which the military has not even bothered to utilize to address any real or perceived encroachment concerns.

These facts, however, have not gotten into the way of the Defense Department from throwing up the boogeymen of Osama and Saddam to legislatively exempt itself from major environmental statutes aimed at protecting all Americans and the natural resources we cherish.

Today, the Committee is considering HR 1835, the National Security Readiness Act of 2003. This bill includes provisions that really should be labeled as "Weapons of Mass Extortion." Make no mistake: it would gut key provisions of the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act, going far beyond even what the military wants.

I say this because HR 1835 would provide exemptions to the ESA for all Federal agencies, not just the Department of Defense. It would make private property owners, States, and local communities bear the burden for the recovery of threatened an endangered species. That is patently unfair.

And in the case of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the bill would change the definition of harassment for all activities, not just military readiness activities. It says: Rev up the motor boat, buddy, and let's chase us some dolphins.

In this regard, this bill does nothing less than put Flipper in the cross-hairs.

The Defense Department does not need HR 1835 and it is not seeking HR 1835. The bill overreaches. It is being used as a vehicle for those who have other agendas that transcend military readiness to gut the ESA and MMPA through a back door approach.

If enacted, this bill would go back to the future, turning the clock back almost 40 years.

In 1966, the Secretaries of the Interior, Defense and Agriculture only had to preserve endangered species insofar as consistent with their mission. Similarly HR 1835 would have Federal agencies seek to conserve species "insofar as is practicable and consistent with their primary purposes." As such, under the bill the Bonneville Power Administration could ignore the effect that operating hydroelectric dams may have on endangered salmon, on the grounds that the agency's primary mission is to market hydroelectric power.

Mr. Chairman, this policy did not work in the 1960s and 1970s, and it will not work today. President Nixon recognized this, and for me to be reduced to quoting Richard Nixon, you know something is wrong.

At the 1973 signing ceremony for the Endangered Species Act, President Nixon said: ‘Nothing is more priceless and more worthy of preservation than the rich array of animal life with which our country has been blessed. It is a many-faceted treasure, of value to scholars, scientists, and nature lovers alike, and it forms a vital part of the heritage we all share as Americans.’

Mr. Chairman, in my view, this bill comes down this: Without it, our military will continue to be prepared, as it was in Iraq and as it was in every military exercise since the enactment of the ESA and MMPA. With it, we lose sight of some of what our military is being called to protect here at home.

Return to Index

Proposed Resolutions (for consideration on May 21)
Background, pro and con arguments are deleted from the website version.

Resolution on Local Autonomy for Groups and Chapters

The Conservation Committee recommends that the Chapter Executive Committee oppose the National guidelines on schools/hospitals/etc. Our Chapter should advise the National Board that all environmental decisions be the jurisdiction of the local Chapter or Group unless there is an obvious break with established Sierra Club policy. We further recommend that the National Legal Committee restrict judgments to legal matters only.

Chapter Open Space Campaign

The Conservation Committee recommends that the Chapter continue to prioritize the present open space campaigns that focus on the Santa Clara River watershed, the San Gabriel River Watershed and the open space areas of Orange County.

Promoting Trails

The Conservation Committee of the Angeles Chapter of the Sierra Club recommends that the Angeles Chapter adopt the following policy: The Angeles Chapter of the Sierra Club does not accept the classification of a street, sidewalk, or other hard surfaced public thoroughfare as a "trail" for planning purposes, meeting open space requirements, or meeting any such regulatory requirement. A "trail" is of necessity unpaved.

Return to Index 

Sierra Club Resources Info

National's new GoldBook will provide chapters and groups with information on the differences between 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) funds, how to utilize and access charitable 501(c)(3) funds, how to get a project approved, and fundraising plus much, much, more material on the Sierra Club. It is now available at the new clubhouse website.  Go to   http://www.clubhouse.sierraclub.org and follow the instructions for obtaining the password. The GoldBook can be found by clicking on A - Z List of Materials box, then on "G" under A-Z List of Documents, and then on GoldBook, Educational Project Guidelines.

The California/Nevada Regional Directory (RedBook03) is now available from Sierra Club California for free in electronic form. The paper edition will be $15 each (not yet available), and will be available only on special order. The electronic version will be updated periodically. Both hard and electronic copy will be available only from Lori Ives. Contact her for details at ivesico@earthlink.net.
Return to Index 

Sierra Club Committee Contacts

Air Committee, Bob Palzer bob.palzer@sierraclub.org
Wetlands Working Group, Robin Mann robin.mann@sierraclub.org
Water Committee, Albert Ettinger aettinger@elpc.org
Environmental Justice Committee, Phaedra Pezzullo phaedra@email.unc.edu
Genetic Engineering Committee, Laurel Hopwood laurel.hopwood@sierraclub.org
Waste Committee, Jim Mays jmays@ulster.net
Sprawl Committee, Tim Frank tim.frank@sierraclub.org
CAFO/Clean Water Committee, Hank Graddy hank.graddy@sierraclub.org
Community Health Committee, Michael McCally michael.mccally@mssm.edu
Workplace Environment Committee, Les Reid lesreid@frazmtn.com
ECL/End Commercial Logging on Federal Public Lands Cmmittee, Connie Hanson chcccpn@aol.com

Return to Index

Action Directory

Sierra Club Legislative Hotline — (202) 675-2394
Sierra Club National Headquarters — (415) 977-5500
Sierra Club Sacramento Legislative Office — (916) 557-1100; fax (916) 227-9669
Sierra Club World Wide Web — http://www.sierraclub.org
Sierra Club Vote Watch Website — http://www.sierraclub.org/votewatch/
White House Comment Line — (202) 456-1111
White House Fax Line — (202) 456-2461
President George W Bush — president@whitehouse.gov
Vice President Dick Cheney — vice-president@whitehouse.gov
White House Address — 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, Washington, DC 20500
US Capitol Switchboard — (202) 224-3121
To contact your senators: Senate Office Bldg, Washington DC 20510 —  http://www.senate.gov/contacting/index.cfm
To contact your representative: House Office Bldg, Washington DC 20515 —  http://www.house.gov/writerep
California Capitol Switchboard — (916) 322-9900

Return to Index

E-mail Discussion Lists

There are three important discussion lists for Angeles environmental activists:
      the Angeles Chapter Conservation Listserve angeles-conservation@lists.sierraclub.org
      the Angeles-Alerts Listserve angeles-alerts@lists.sierraclub.org
      the California/Nevada Listserve calif-activists@lists.sierraclub.org

To subscribe to Angeles-Alerts: email listsserv@lists.sierraclub.org with the message

    “subscribe angeles-conservation” or “subscribe calif-activists” or  "subscribe angeles-alerts"

To subscribe to California Activists: email <calif-activists-request@lists.sierraclub.org> your name, email address, Sierra Club

    membership number, and position in Club (or how it is that you are active). Subscription is processed by one of the list owners,

    usually the same day.

To leave a list, send an e-mail listserv@lists.sierraclub.org and, in the text of your message (not the subject line), write:
    “signoff calif-activists” or “signoff angeles-conservation” or "signoff angeles-alerts"  Note:  it's "listserv," not "listserve."

The Angeles Chapter’s website is www.angeles.sierraclub.org

Return to Index

Parking at the Chapter Office

Visitors must park inside the building weekdays and week-nights. The outside lot is reserved for monthly parking and requires a keycard entry through a gate. There is no attendant. Gates are closed 24 hours a day during the week.
    Weeknights: You may park free inside the building after 5:30 pm. Be prepared to show your membership card or one of our parking passes, available at the front desk in the Chapter office. Take a ticket when you enter through the gate; present it at the parking office near the elevators and sign it. The ticket machine at the front gate may be turned off after 7 pm. If so, buzz the attendant and say you are going to a Sierra Club meeting. There is no entry after 8 pm. The outside gate is up after 8 pm.
No parking inside the building is allowed on weekends.
    Saturday: Attendant is expected to be on duty from 8 am to 3 pm. You may park free, showing Sierra Club affiliation as above. Tickets may be validated at the Chapter office. Outside gates are down all day.
    Sunday: Outside gates are up; there is no attendant.
Linda Hoyer

Return to Index

Motions should be submitted in advance, together with objective background material and supporting and opposing arguments, both to the Committee Chair and Newsletter Editor, for distribution with the agenda. Other motions will be postponed for action at a later meeting unless the motion is submitted in writing and unless the Committee votes an exception to ordinary procedure. Motions needing further action by the Angeles Chapter ExComm or some higher level of the Sierra Club should start out: “The Angeles Chapter Conservation Committee recommends that the Sierra Club...”

Angeles Chapter Conservation Committee

Angeles Chapter Office, The Equitable Building, 3435 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 320, Los Angeles CA 90010-1904
Gordon LaBedz, Chair, 562-494-6368 GlaBedzMD@aol.com

Agenda — May 21, 2003

7:30 Introductions/Announcements

7:45 Review of Agenda

7:50 Conservation Coordinators' Report

8:05 Resolution Recommending Chapter and Group Independence on Local Public Facilities

8:20 Resolution Reaffirming Chapter Open Space Campaign

8:35 Resolution to define a trail as unpaved

8:50 Reports

9:30 Adjourn

Next meeting is June 18

Return to Index

Orange County Conservation Committee

Gail Prothero, Chair 949-347-1255 gprothero@cox.net

     Vice Chair: Bob Siebert; Secretary: Chuck Buck; Staff: Rachel Myers

Agenda —  May 20, 2003

Location: Inn at the Park in Irvine
From the north, come down 405 to 73 and off at University. Turn left and pass Campus and turn right on Harvard. Follow Harvard as it bends; look for Marquette. The Inn is at 10 Marquette, on the corner of Harvard and Marquette behind a steel fence.
From the south, get off 405 at Culver and go left. Follow Culver past Michelson and University and turn right on Harvard.
Take Harvard to Marquette. It's on your right.

7:00  Welcome, Introductions, Approval of Agenda, Minutes

7:20  Announcements, Old Business (Gail Prothero)

7:25  Staff Reports (Rachel Myers)

7:35  Santa Ana Mountains Task Force (Paul Carlton)

7:45  Friends of the Foothills (Paul Carlton or Bill Holmes)

7:55  Saddleback Canyons Task Force (Rich Gomez)

8:10  Santa Ana River Conservancy (AB 496) (Bonnie Sharpe?)

8:20  Native American Sacred Sites Task Force (Rebecca Robles?)

8:30  Finance/Treasurer (Jay Matchett)

8:40  Recognition of Sierra Club Leader (Paul Arms)

8:50  Working with the Orange County Political Committee (Paul Arms)

9:00  Adjourn

Next Meeting is Tuesday, June 17, 7 pm

Return to Index

Orange County MAY 2003 Announcements

MON, MAY 12, 6:30 pm — Task Force Tabling Opportunity! Orange County Sierra Singles Newcomer's Meeting, Costa Mesa Neighborhood Community Center, 1845 Park Avenue, Costa Mesa. Large crowd expected. To reserve a table for your task force please contact: Ana Juarez, OCSS Chair at ajuchihua@adelphia.net

WED, MAY 14, 7:00 pm — Dana Point Headlands Task Force Organizing and Planning Meeting. All who want to save the Headlands are invited. Dana Point Community Center, 34052 Del Obispo, Dana Point. Contact Celia Kutcher at (949) 496-9689.

MON, MAY 19  — Deadline for Chapter Grant Applications. Task Force chairs please e-mail your grant applications to Rachel Myers at rachel.myers@sierraclub.org with cc to gprothero@cox.net at least a week prior to May 19 if you would like feedback and assistance.

MON, MAY 19, 7 pm — The Orange County Native American Sacred Sites Task Force requests your support at a special meeting of the San Juan Capistrano City Council to urge that the Junipero Serra zone change decision be put on the ballot. The council will decide what to do about the proposed Junipero Serra High School project to be built on the Native American sacred site and cemetery of Putiidhem. The city's earlier decision to approve a general plan change to allow the school at Junipero Serra and Camino Capistrano with a side-agreement to get a head tax from the students rather than put the issue before voters was overturned by the Superior Court. Directions to San Juan Capistrano City Hall: From I-5, turn west (toward the beach) on Ortega Highway (74), left on Del Obispo, Left on Paseo Adelanto. Contact Rebecca Robles at rrobles5@cox.net.

TUES, MAY 20, *Update* — The Public Hearing on the Hobo-Aliso project at the Laguna Beach City Council has been postponed until June. An organizing meeting will take place on May 20 instead. Contact Penny Elia at (949) 499-4499.

TUES, MAY 27, 10 am — California High Speed Rail Authority Board Meeting at Irvine City Hall. The California High Speed Rail Authority will make a decision on double-track routes and studies. Authority staff is recommending that future rail routes avoid sensitive coastal communities and inland routes that would cut across habitat lands in the San Mateo Creek watershed. The inland route is being pushed by the Transportation Corridor Agency (TCA), as the TCA would like to hitch the disastrous proposed Foothill toll road to the rail route. CHSPR staff is recommending tunneling under the I-5. If you are available to attend, please oppose any inland alignment along the proposed extension of the 241 toll road. Time: 10-12am, Place: Irvine City Hall, One Civic Center Plaza, Irvine (405 to Culver Head inland to Alton., Left on Alton to Harvard. Right on Harvard to Civic Center Plaza) Contact: Gail Prothero (949) 347-1255

WED, MAY 28, 6:30 pm — Important public workshop by wildlife agencies on the NCCP reserve design alternatives for Rancho Mission Viejo. Big turnout needed to give public input. San Juan Capistrano Community Center, 25925 Camino del Avion, San Juan Capistrano. Contact Brittany McKee (949) 361-7534.

SAT, MAY 31, 11:00 am — 9:00 pm thru SUN, JUNE 1, 11 am - 6 pm — Juaneno/Ajachamen Native American Pow-Wow. Public invited. Booths, dancing, songs, good food. Free. Saddleback College, 28000 Marguerite Parkway, Mission Viejo. Contact Rebecca Robles at rrobles5@cox.net

Return to Index

Conservation Committee Calendar

PLEASE! Send correction or additions about your calendar dates to the editor, preferably by email: ivesico@earthlink.net

Return to Index