OPINION

GUEST OPINION – Mount Shasta Golden Eagle project: city carelessness?

Submitted by Mt. Shasta Tomorrow: Dale La Forest, Betty Kreeger, Peggy Risch, Johanna Altorfer, and Vicki Gold

Appellants Mt. Shasta Tomorrow, Dale La Forest, Betty Kreeger, Peggy Risch, Johanna Altorfer, and Vicki Gold filed an Appeal December 28, 2020 on the very flawed Golden Eagle Charter School Project and a hearing is scheduled for Monday, Jan. 25 25th at the next Mount Shasta City Council meeting at 5:30 p.m.

Our request to have the hearing postponed has been denied which we are protesting.

We request your emails in support of our Cure & Correct letter to Brown Act violation and other procedural violations. Please send emails to all city council members and staff: To: jstackfleth@mtshastaca.gov, jredmond@mtshastaca.gov, jcollings@mtshastaca.gov, tmontgomery@mtshastaca.gov, TStearns@mtshastaca.gov cc: Bruce Pope, kjoyce@mtshastaca.gov, Juliana Lucchesi, jlucchesi@mtshastaca.gov.

This is the largest project to come before the planning commission in 10 years with the exception of the Freeze Project by City Park. There are many reasons we maintain this project should have been denied.

This is not about the quality of the schooling offered by GECS. Many community members and three planning commissioners have children who have attended. However, this is about CEQA, location, planning, and the inadequate Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.

Our Appeal filed on Dec. 23, 2020 identified the many environmental, health and safety issues, including:

• Aesthetics Impacts

• Air Quality Impacts

• Noise Impacts

• Wetlands Intrusion

• Traffic Impacts

• Abandonment and gifting of city streets

The city's response is erroneous. In particular, the city’s response violates our rights where it claims that:

• The city’s public notice is not inadequate.

• All appellants were notified as required.

• All previously heard appeals have conformed to a 15-minute initial time-period and a five minute rebuttal period.

• The city council is not required to consider evidence not presented to the planning commission.

• The city’s notification of the appeal complied with the city’s municipal code.

• All notifications included the time for the council’s public hearing.

However, we maintain the following:

1. Brown Act violation

2. Failure to notify appellants about appeal procedures

3. 15-minute appeal presentation time is unreasonable.

4. Appeal is not limited just to issues raised before planning commission.

5. Failure to notify public as required by city laws.

6. Failure to notify all tenants and property owners living within the 300 foot radius as required by city code thereby disenfranchising the majority of residents in proximity to the project.

7. Failure to notify those requesting notice.

8. Failure to include time of public hearing notice.

We still request, for all the reasons we have provided, that the appeal hearing be postponed until Feb. 8 or to a date thereafter which we could negotiate as prescribed in 18.32.040 notice and schedule of appeal hearings.

We also request that the city comply with the Brown Act to publish a legally adequate Agenda description before this public hearing is rescheduled.

Please show your support by phoning or attending by Zoom the appeal hearing if only just to witness the proceedings – your presence will be noted even if you do not speak.

To Zoom use this link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87064850276 Or Telephone in at: +1 253 215 8782 or +1 346 248 7799 or +1 408 638 0968 or +1 669 900 6833 or +1 312 626 6799 Webinar ID: 870 6485 0276