- This topic has 100 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 4 months ago by
Anonymous.
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 31, 2011 at 10:26 PM #19089August 31, 2011 at 10:47 PM #726943
bearishgurl
ParticipantNot so fa-a-a-st, paramount ….
…Gary Johnson, Granite’s aggregate resource development manager, said after the two-hour meeting that he was “very disappointed” with the vote and his company would appeal the denials to supervisors.
The matter has not yet come before the Board of Supervisors. The quarry has the right to file a writ of mandamus against the Planning Commission now on the denial of permits or later upon the Board of Supervisors (if they follow the PC’s recommendation). Remember, it’s never “over” until the “fat lady sings.” :=]
The quarry will have 90 days after any adverse decision to file one with the Superior Court.
See: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=85549016583+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve
August 31, 2011 at 10:47 PM #727031ParticipantNot so fa-a-a-st, paramount ….
…Gary Johnson, Granite’s aggregate resource development manager, said after the two-hour meeting that he was “very disappointed” with the vote and his company would appeal the denials to supervisors.
The matter has not yet come before the Board of Supervisors. The quarry has the right to file a writ of mandamus against the Planning Commission now on the denial of permits or later upon the Board of Supervisors (if they follow the PC’s recommendation). Remember, it’s never “over” until the “fat lady sings.” :=]
The quarry will have 90 days after any adverse decision to file one with the Superior Court.
See: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=85549016583+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve
August 31, 2011 at 10:47 PM #727636ParticipantNot so fa-a-a-st, paramount ….
…Gary Johnson, Granite’s aggregate resource development manager, said after the two-hour meeting that he was “very disappointed” with the vote and his company would appeal the denials to supervisors.
The matter has not yet come before the Board of Supervisors. The quarry has the right to file a writ of mandamus against the Planning Commission now on the denial of permits or later upon the Board of Supervisors (if they follow the PC’s recommendation). Remember, it’s never “over” until the “fat lady sings.” :=]
The quarry will have 90 days after any adverse decision to file one with the Superior Court.
See: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=85549016583+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve
August 31, 2011 at 10:47 PM #727785ParticipantNot so fa-a-a-st, paramount ….
…Gary Johnson, Granite’s aggregate resource development manager, said after the two-hour meeting that he was “very disappointed” with the vote and his company would appeal the denials to supervisors.
The matter has not yet come before the Board of Supervisors. The quarry has the right to file a writ of mandamus against the Planning Commission now on the denial of permits or later upon the Board of Supervisors (if they follow the PC’s recommendation). Remember, it’s never “over” until the “fat lady sings.” :=]
The quarry will have 90 days after any adverse decision to file one with the Superior Court.
See: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=85549016583+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve
August 31, 2011 at 10:57 PM #726953paramount
Participant[quote=bearishgurl]Not so fa-a-a-st, paramount ….
…Gary Johnson, Granite’s aggregate resource development manager, said after the two-hour meeting that he was “very disappointed” with the vote and his company would appeal the denials to supervisors.
The matter has not yet come before the Board of Supervisors. The quarry has the right to file a writ of mandamus against the Planning Commission now on the denial of permits or later upon the Board of Supervisors (if they follow the PC’s recommendation). Remember, it’s never “over” until the “fat lady sings.” :=]
The quarry will have 90 days after any adverse decision to file one with the Superior Court.
BG: The Fat Lady is warming up. It’s done. While it is true that Granite has paid off the supervisors, it would be very unusual for the sups to vote against the commission.
And they refused to certify the EIR. Granite doesn’t want this fight – and believe me we were ready to take this to court. This is an uphill battle Granite cannot overcome.
You lost.
August 31, 2011 at 10:57 PM #727041Participant[quote=bearishgurl]Not so fa-a-a-st, paramount ….
…Gary Johnson, Granite’s aggregate resource development manager, said after the two-hour meeting that he was “very disappointed” with the vote and his company would appeal the denials to supervisors.
The matter has not yet come before the Board of Supervisors. The quarry has the right to file a writ of mandamus against the Planning Commission now on the denial of permits or later upon the Board of Supervisors (if they follow the PC’s recommendation). Remember, it’s never “over” until the “fat lady sings.” :=]
The quarry will have 90 days after any adverse decision to file one with the Superior Court.
BG: The Fat Lady is warming up. It’s done. While it is true that Granite has paid off the supervisors, it would be very unusual for the sups to vote against the commission.
And they refused to certify the EIR. Granite doesn’t want this fight – and believe me we were ready to take this to court. This is an uphill battle Granite cannot overcome.
You lost.
August 31, 2011 at 10:57 PM #727645Participant[quote=bearishgurl]Not so fa-a-a-st, paramount ….
…Gary Johnson, Granite’s aggregate resource development manager, said after the two-hour meeting that he was “very disappointed” with the vote and his company would appeal the denials to supervisors.
The matter has not yet come before the Board of Supervisors. The quarry has the right to file a writ of mandamus against the Planning Commission now on the denial of permits or later upon the Board of Supervisors (if they follow the PC’s recommendation). Remember, it’s never “over” until the “fat lady sings.” :=]
The quarry will have 90 days after any adverse decision to file one with the Superior Court.
BG: The Fat Lady is warming up. It’s done. While it is true that Granite has paid off the supervisors, it would be very unusual for the sups to vote against the commission.
And they refused to certify the EIR. Granite doesn’t want this fight – and believe me we were ready to take this to court. This is an uphill battle Granite cannot overcome.
You lost.
August 31, 2011 at 10:57 PM #727795Participant[quote=bearishgurl]Not so fa-a-a-st, paramount ….
…Gary Johnson, Granite’s aggregate resource development manager, said after the two-hour meeting that he was “very disappointed” with the vote and his company would appeal the denials to supervisors.
The matter has not yet come before the Board of Supervisors. The quarry has the right to file a writ of mandamus against the Planning Commission now on the denial of permits or later upon the Board of Supervisors (if they follow the PC’s recommendation). Remember, it’s never “over” until the “fat lady sings.” :=]
The quarry will have 90 days after any adverse decision to file one with the Superior Court.
BG: The Fat Lady is warming up. It’s done. While it is true that Granite has paid off the supervisors, it would be very unusual for the sups to vote against the commission.
And they refused to certify the EIR. Granite doesn’t want this fight – and believe me we were ready to take this to court. This is an uphill battle Granite cannot overcome.
You lost.
August 31, 2011 at 11:44 PM #726978Participant[quote=paramount]BG: The Fat Lady is warming up. It’s done. While it is true that Granite has paid off the supervisors, it would be very unusual for the sups to vote against the commission.
And they refused to certify the EIR. Granite doesn’t want this fight – and believe me we were ready to take this to court. This is an uphill battle Granite cannot overcome.
You lost.[/quote]
paramount, I’m not “losing” anything. Working and residing nearly 70 miles from the proposed project, I have no personal stake in it, one way or the other. Truly.
My l-o-o-o-o-ng experience, however, has taught me never to “assume” that a “fight” is over just because one is “turned down,” denied and/or has suffered an adverse action at the hands of a “government entity.”
The commission’s vote came during its sixth hearing on the project. The first in late April drew more than 1,000 people, and another in June lasted 15 hours. Emotional pleas from everyday residents gave way in later hearings to dry testimony from experts hired by Granite and quarry opponents.
Correct me if I’m wrong here, but my understanding is that these hearings before the Planning Commission were “mandatory.”
The Planning Commission’s refusal to certify quarry’s (very expensive) EIR is further grounds for a mandamus action.
The quarry has a right to order a complete record of their Planning Commission hearing and all the testimony, prepared by the county, for later use in their mandamus action.
California CCP 1094.6 reads, in pertinent part:
(c) The complete record of the proceedings shall be prepared by the local agency or its commission, board, officer, or agent which made the decision and shall be delivered to the petitioner within 190 days after he has filed a written request therefor. The local agency may recover from the petitioner its actual costs for transcribing or otherwise preparing the record. Such record shall include the transcript of the proceedings, all pleadings, all notices and orders, any proposed decision by a hearing officer, the final decision, all admitted exhibits, all rejected exhibits in the possession of the local agency or its commission, board, officer, or agent, all written evidence, and any other papers in the case.
(e) As used in this section, decision means a decision subject to review pursuant to Section 1094.5, suspending, demoting, or dismissing an officer or employee, revoking, denying an application for a permit, license, or other entitlement, imposing a civil or administrative penalty, fine, charge, or cost, or denying an application for any retirement benefit or allowance.
(f) In making a final decision as defined in subdivision (e), the local agency shall provide notice to the party that the time within which judicial review must be sought is governed by this section.
(emphasis added)
Here, the $64M question is, will the quarry begin ordering the hearing record now and get its preparation underway or wait weeks/months for the supes to rubberstamp the Planning Commission’s Recommendation and issue the quarry a “final decision” under CCP 1094.6(f)?
What would YOU do if you had this much $$ and time invested in a project of this magnitude?
August 31, 2011 at 11:44 PM #727065Participant[quote=paramount]BG: The Fat Lady is warming up. It’s done. While it is true that Granite has paid off the supervisors, it would be very unusual for the sups to vote against the commission.
And they refused to certify the EIR. Granite doesn’t want this fight – and believe me we were ready to take this to court. This is an uphill battle Granite cannot overcome.
You lost.[/quote]
paramount, I’m not “losing” anything. Working and residing nearly 70 miles from the proposed project, I have no personal stake in it, one way or the other. Truly.
My l-o-o-o-o-ng experience, however, has taught me never to “assume” that a “fight” is over just because one is “turned down,” denied and/or has suffered an adverse action at the hands of a “government entity.”
The commission’s vote came during its sixth hearing on the project. The first in late April drew more than 1,000 people, and another in June lasted 15 hours. Emotional pleas from everyday residents gave way in later hearings to dry testimony from experts hired by Granite and quarry opponents.
Correct me if I’m wrong here, but my understanding is that these hearings before the Planning Commission were “mandatory.”
The Planning Commission’s refusal to certify quarry’s (very expensive) EIR is further grounds for a mandamus action.
The quarry has a right to order a complete record of their Planning Commission hearing and all the testimony, prepared by the county, for later use in their mandamus action.
California CCP 1094.6 reads, in pertinent part:
(c) The complete record of the proceedings shall be prepared by the local agency or its commission, board, officer, or agent which made the decision and shall be delivered to the petitioner within 190 days after he has filed a written request therefor. The local agency may recover from the petitioner its actual costs for transcribing or otherwise preparing the record. Such record shall include the transcript of the proceedings, all pleadings, all notices and orders, any proposed decision by a hearing officer, the final decision, all admitted exhibits, all rejected exhibits in the possession of the local agency or its commission, board, officer, or agent, all written evidence, and any other papers in the case.
(e) As used in this section, decision means a decision subject to review pursuant to Section 1094.5, suspending, demoting, or dismissing an officer or employee, revoking, denying an application for a permit, license, or other entitlement, imposing a civil or administrative penalty, fine, charge, or cost, or denying an application for any retirement benefit or allowance.
(f) In making a final decision as defined in subdivision (e), the local agency shall provide notice to the party that the time within which judicial review must be sought is governed by this section.
(emphasis added)
Here, the $64M question is, will the quarry begin ordering the hearing record now and get its preparation underway or wait weeks/months for the supes to rubberstamp the Planning Commission’s Recommendation and issue the quarry a “final decision” under CCP 1094.6(f)?
What would YOU do if you had this much $$ and time invested in a project of this magnitude?
August 31, 2011 at 11:44 PM #727669Participant[quote=paramount]BG: The Fat Lady is warming up. It’s done. While it is true that Granite has paid off the supervisors, it would be very unusual for the sups to vote against the commission.
And they refused to certify the EIR. Granite doesn’t want this fight – and believe me we were ready to take this to court. This is an uphill battle Granite cannot overcome.
You lost.[/quote]
paramount, I’m not “losing” anything. Working and residing nearly 70 miles from the proposed project, I have no personal stake in it, one way or the other. Truly.
My l-o-o-o-o-ng experience, however, has taught me never to “assume” that a “fight” is over just because one is “turned down,” denied and/or has suffered an adverse action at the hands of a “government entity.”
The commission’s vote came during its sixth hearing on the project. The first in late April drew more than 1,000 people, and another in June lasted 15 hours. Emotional pleas from everyday residents gave way in later hearings to dry testimony from experts hired by Granite and quarry opponents.
Correct me if I’m wrong here, but my understanding is that these hearings before the Planning Commission were “mandatory.”
The Planning Commission’s refusal to certify quarry’s (very expensive) EIR is further grounds for a mandamus action.
The quarry has a right to order a complete record of their Planning Commission hearing and all the testimony, prepared by the county, for later use in their mandamus action.
California CCP 1094.6 reads, in pertinent part:
(c) The complete record of the proceedings shall be prepared by the local agency or its commission, board, officer, or agent which made the decision and shall be delivered to the petitioner within 190 days after he has filed a written request therefor. The local agency may recover from the petitioner its actual costs for transcribing or otherwise preparing the record. Such record shall include the transcript of the proceedings, all pleadings, all notices and orders, any proposed decision by a hearing officer, the final decision, all admitted exhibits, all rejected exhibits in the possession of the local agency or its commission, board, officer, or agent, all written evidence, and any other papers in the case.
(e) As used in this section, decision means a decision subject to review pursuant to Section 1094.5, suspending, demoting, or dismissing an officer or employee, revoking, denying an application for a permit, license, or other entitlement, imposing a civil or administrative penalty, fine, charge, or cost, or denying an application for any retirement benefit or allowance.
(f) In making a final decision as defined in subdivision (e), the local agency shall provide notice to the party that the time within which judicial review must be sought is governed by this section.
(emphasis added)
Here, the $64M question is, will the quarry begin ordering the hearing record now and get its preparation underway or wait weeks/months for the supes to rubberstamp the Planning Commission’s Recommendation and issue the quarry a “final decision” under CCP 1094.6(f)?
What would YOU do if you had this much $$ and time invested in a project of this magnitude?
August 31, 2011 at 11:44 PM #727819Participant[quote=paramount]BG: The Fat Lady is warming up. It’s done. While it is true that Granite has paid off the supervisors, it would be very unusual for the sups to vote against the commission.
And they refused to certify the EIR. Granite doesn’t want this fight – and believe me we were ready to take this to court. This is an uphill battle Granite cannot overcome.
You lost.[/quote]
paramount, I’m not “losing” anything. Working and residing nearly 70 miles from the proposed project, I have no personal stake in it, one way or the other. Truly.
My l-o-o-o-o-ng experience, however, has taught me never to “assume” that a “fight” is over just because one is “turned down,” denied and/or has suffered an adverse action at the hands of a “government entity.”
The commission’s vote came during its sixth hearing on the project. The first in late April drew more than 1,000 people, and another in June lasted 15 hours. Emotional pleas from everyday residents gave way in later hearings to dry testimony from experts hired by Granite and quarry opponents.
Correct me if I’m wrong here, but my understanding is that these hearings before the Planning Commission were “mandatory.”
The Planning Commission’s refusal to certify quarry’s (very expensive) EIR is further grounds for a mandamus action.
The quarry has a right to order a complete record of their Planning Commission hearing and all the testimony, prepared by the county, for later use in their mandamus action.
California CCP 1094.6 reads, in pertinent part:
(c) The complete record of the proceedings shall be prepared by the local agency or its commission, board, officer, or agent which made the decision and shall be delivered to the petitioner within 190 days after he has filed a written request therefor. The local agency may recover from the petitioner its actual costs for transcribing or otherwise preparing the record. Such record shall include the transcript of the proceedings, all pleadings, all notices and orders, any proposed decision by a hearing officer, the final decision, all admitted exhibits, all rejected exhibits in the possession of the local agency or its commission, board, officer, or agent, all written evidence, and any other papers in the case.
(e) As used in this section, decision means a decision subject to review pursuant to Section 1094.5, suspending, demoting, or dismissing an officer or employee, revoking, denying an application for a permit, license, or other entitlement, imposing a civil or administrative penalty, fine, charge, or cost, or denying an application for any retirement benefit or allowance.
(f) In making a final decision as defined in subdivision (e), the local agency shall provide notice to the party that the time within which judicial review must be sought is governed by this section.
(emphasis added)
Here, the $64M question is, will the quarry begin ordering the hearing record now and get its preparation underway or wait weeks/months for the supes to rubberstamp the Planning Commission’s Recommendation and issue the quarry a “final decision” under CCP 1094.6(f)?
What would YOU do if you had this much $$ and time invested in a project of this magnitude?
September 1, 2011 at 12:29 AM #726993temeculaguy
ParticipantIf you watch the video (not that he claimed to be a legal expert) it is supposed to be nearly a year before granite’s appeal will be heard. Also, a veteran of the commission stated he had never seen a project that garnered so much opposition and emotion. Local politics and campaign contributions work best when nobody is watching, this is the third rail now for the Board of Supervisors. I’m with paramount, it’s over, there will be other fights and that group will stay together, they will show up for the next fight and the next. They have been at it for a decade, Mrs. Hamilton and her S.O.S. group will soon notch their second victory in ten years, Sempra Energy was the first victim and now Granite. Environmentalists backed by universities and local government and townsfolk, not to mention the richest tribe in the state, they are more powerful than you think. I’ve said it for years, if the casino would have let me bet on this, I’d throw down retirement funds, the odds are better than the stock market anyways.
And here’s how this relates to housing and macroeconomics. Everything is on the mend up this way, tourism is up, the major developments have started up again and are building out the unfinished projects(wolf creek is finishing now, so is morgan hill, so is paseo del sol). Repos have tapered off and it’s the end of August, brown lawns are fairly rare (at least in the south where I drive around). I just got out of my PMI, appraisal shows I’m up 25% in value in under 3 years. My street of ten houses is down to only 2 pre-2008 owners. My arm is sore from patting myself on the back.
How did this happen, cause we ripped the band aid off. We went to crap before the moratoriums and bailouts and the low interest rates. We churned through more units than were purchased during the bubble, it stung like a muther %&&^$ for a while but then it got better. 50-60% drop in values in 18 months sucked, but the sooner the better. Housing became affordable, the new owners aren’t saddled with debt, the local economy is recovering and the city is flush with cash. I wish the federal government would have the luxury of hindsight in this little case study and let the invisible hand of economics take care of the rest of the country all at the same time. They wouldn’t have run up so big of a tab trying to slow down the inevitable and their fears turned out to not be such a bad thing had they just let it happen.
Before I get off my soapbox, paramount, see, no granite and the hospital is being built as I type, oh and that low income housing project near the hospital didn’t happen either. Just like I said a year or two ago, I feel cooler than the other side of the pillow.
September 1, 2011 at 12:29 AM #727080ParticipantIf you watch the video (not that he claimed to be a legal expert) it is supposed to be nearly a year before granite’s appeal will be heard. Also, a veteran of the commission stated he had never seen a project that garnered so much opposition and emotion. Local politics and campaign contributions work best when nobody is watching, this is the third rail now for the Board of Supervisors. I’m with paramount, it’s over, there will be other fights and that group will stay together, they will show up for the next fight and the next. They have been at it for a decade, Mrs. Hamilton and her S.O.S. group will soon notch their second victory in ten years, Sempra Energy was the first victim and now Granite. Environmentalists backed by universities and local government and townsfolk, not to mention the richest tribe in the state, they are more powerful than you think. I’ve said it for years, if the casino would have let me bet on this, I’d throw down retirement funds, the odds are better than the stock market anyways.
And here’s how this relates to housing and macroeconomics. Everything is on the mend up this way, tourism is up, the major developments have started up again and are building out the unfinished projects(wolf creek is finishing now, so is morgan hill, so is paseo del sol). Repos have tapered off and it’s the end of August, brown lawns are fairly rare (at least in the south where I drive around). I just got out of my PMI, appraisal shows I’m up 25% in value in under 3 years. My street of ten houses is down to only 2 pre-2008 owners. My arm is sore from patting myself on the back.
How did this happen, cause we ripped the band aid off. We went to crap before the moratoriums and bailouts and the low interest rates. We churned through more units than were purchased during the bubble, it stung like a muther %&&^$ for a while but then it got better. 50-60% drop in values in 18 months sucked, but the sooner the better. Housing became affordable, the new owners aren’t saddled with debt, the local economy is recovering and the city is flush with cash. I wish the federal government would have the luxury of hindsight in this little case study and let the invisible hand of economics take care of the rest of the country all at the same time. They wouldn’t have run up so big of a tab trying to slow down the inevitable and their fears turned out to not be such a bad thing had they just let it happen.
Before I get off my soapbox, paramount, see, no granite and the hospital is being built as I type, oh and that low income housing project near the hospital didn’t happen either. Just like I said a year or two ago, I feel cooler than the other side of the pillow.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.