What's new
By:

CEQA case dropped by enviros for $350k

Don't pass the smell test.
 

AS ALWAYS JUST FOLLOW THE BENJAMINS AS ALL THIS CRAPPOLA HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ENVIROMENT IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM....sic arse country abducted by the courts-John
 

I feel that the case should have been dismissed WITH prejudice so they can't turn around in a couple of years and file it again in the hopes of getting another payday. This more than anything else should show that these groups are not interested in anything except making money at the expense of the tax payers of California. This kind of insanity has got to stop. Sue and Settle has got to be stopped as well or these groups will continue to use it to take money that could be used for programs that benefit the people of the state.
 

People keep saying the state is giving in or running scared- I call bs, there is more to it than that. It's more about the enviros having people in positions within the state that can make these decisions to settle happen. Look at the bio's on the state reps and such. They are members and donors of the very outfits that are doing the sueing. This is the heart of the scam that's not being reported or talked about. These employees are furthering the enviros agenda and filling their war chests with our money.
 

russau said:
did they settle for fear of loseing and setting a precident for all of us to follow??!!
Click to expand...

According to the paperwork they withdrew the complaint as SB 637 addressed what they were after

ratled
 

fowledup said:
People keep saying the state is giving in or running scared- I call bs, there is more to it than that. It's more about the enviros having people in positions within the state that can make these decisions to settle happen. Look at the bio's on the state reps and such. They are members and donors of the very outfits that are doing the sueing. This is the heart of the scam that's not being reported or talked about. These employees are furthering the enviros agenda and filling their war chests with our money.
Click to expand...

If these socalled "representatives" of ours are belonging to these wacoenviromental groups and that they are actually voteing with/for these groups this would be a conflict of interest and he should be restricted from voteing on this. why are the good people of the state the he represents scramming about his representation/voteing on this matter?? If we don't keep a vigilant eye on these socalled "representatives" then who will? this is why a lot of things are getting passed and we sit here!! Im just as guilty as everyone else about this! It takes a LOT of time and effort on our part to keep up with these jerks!
 

ratled said:
According to the paperwork they withdrew the complaint as SB 637 addressed what they were after

ratled
Click to expand...

That raises a MAJOR question on my part then. Why is the state paying them the $350K? I'd say it's time to follow the money (again). If their case was rendered moot by SB637 the state should not be paying them a single dime!!!
 

BINGO GI but truth is stranger than fiction is this sic arse state owned lock stock and motherlode by the environutz.......:BangHead:...John
 

Well if someone had the chutzpah to challenge the Sierra Funds NFP status and they ended up having to pay taxes (including BACK TAXES) as a corp we would most likely see an end of their theft of public funds. If we were very VERY lucky, Izzy would serve time for defrauding the public while we were at it. Can I put that on my Christmas wish list?
 

goldenIrishman said:
Well if someone had the chutzpah to challenge the Sierra Funds NFP status and they ended up having to pay taxes (including BACK TAXES) as a corp we would most likely see an end of their theft of public funds. If we were very VERY lucky, Izzy would serve time for defrauding the public while we were at it. Can I put that on my Christmas wish list?
Click to expand...
AND on the top of my Bucket list!!
 

goldenIrishman said:
Well if someone had the chutzpah to challenge the Sierra Funds NFP status and they ended up having to pay taxes (including BACK TAXES) as a corp we would most likely see an end of their theft of public funds. If we were very VERY lucky, Izzy would serve time for defrauding the public while we were at it. Can I put that on my Christmas wish list?
Click to expand...
Several formal complaints were filed a few months back. It is under " review".......I think the complaints will have to start rolling in until the office that receives them is sick of it and actually does their job!!
 

goldenIrishman said:
Well if someone had the chutzpah to challenge the Sierra Funds NFP status and they ended up having to pay taxes (including BACK TAXES) as a corp we would most likely see an end of their theft of public funds. If we were very VERY lucky, Izzy would serve time for defrauding the public while we were at it. Can I put that on my Christmas wish list?
Click to expand...

I am trying GI.....

How does "The Serria Fund" keep its 501( c )( 3 ) status?

L​
Lobbying
In general, no organization may qualify for section 501(c)(3) status if a substantial part of its activities is attempting to influence legislation (commonly known as lobbying). A 501(c)(3) organization may engage in some lobbying, but too much lobbying activity risks loss of tax-exempt status.
Legislation includes action by Congress, any state legislature, any local council, or similar governing body, with respect to acts, bills, resolutions, or similar items (such as legislative confirmation of appointive office), or by the public in referendum, ballot initiative, constitutional amendment, or similar procedure. It does not include actions by executive, judicial, or administrative bodies.
An organization will be regarded as attempting to influence legislation if it contacts, or urges the public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or if the organization advocates the adoption or rejection of legislation.
Organizations may, however, involve themselves in issues of public policy without the activity being considered as lobbying. For example, organizations may conduct educational meetings, prepare and distribute educational materials, or otherwise consider public policy issues in an educational manner without jeopardizing their tax-exempt status.
Additional information:



Page Last Reviewed or Updated: 10-Mar-2015​

From <https://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Lobbying>
----------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- ---------------------- -----------------------------------------------------
*
Elizabeth “Izzy” Martin, C.E.O.,is a community organizer and environmental advocate with over thirty years of experience working in rural communities to promote economic and environmental justice. She has worked with a wide diversity of constituencies, from farm workers to small farmers and rural environmentalists.
Izzy was the founding Executive Director of the California Agrarian Action Project in 1980 (renamed the Community Alliance with Family Farmers in 1990). She developed the highly successful California Institute for Rural Studies program to work with pesticide poison victims and to support organic farmers, and helped to draft and pass several pieces ofl andmark legislation protecting rural communities from pesticides and promoting sustainable agriculture. Izzy worked in administration and project development for the California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation for five years.
Izzy first entered local politics when she was appointed and served two terms on the Nevada County Planning Commission during the1990’s. Later, while serving on the Nevada County Board of Supervisors(1999-2003), Ms. Martin led the fight in the state legislature to put the South Yuba River into the state’s wild and scenic river program. In 2004 she led the successful advocacy effort to persuade the California State legislature to establish the Sierra Nevada Conservancy, working with Assemblymen John Laird and Tim Leslie.

Izzy became CEO of The Sierra Fund in 2004. Since that time she has helped to develop more than $80 million in State funds for conservationi n the Sierra, as well as building a significant and strong foundation for The Sierra Fund.

From <Elizabeth Martin | The Sierra Fund>

----------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- ---------------------- -----------------------------------------------------*
About
The Sierra Fund is a 501(c)3 nonprofit tax-exempt organization based in Nevada City, California. We serve the Sierra Nevada region of California, which includes 25 million acres, a third of the state’s area, and all or part of 22 rural counties.

From <About | The Sierra Fund>
----------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------------
*
Victory on suction dredge mining reform: Governor Brown signs SB 637
Posted on October 9, 2015
S.B. 637 Requires Clean Water Act Permits for Motorized Suction Dredge Mining
Sacramento, Calif.—California Gov. Jerry Brown today signed into law Senate Bill 637 to protect California’s water supplies, wildlife and cultural resources from the damaging ffects of destructive suction dredge gold mining. The new law requires that all small-scale miners using motorized suction pumps obtain a Clean Water Act Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board before mining in California waterways.
“This is a great victory for all of us concerned about clean water and healthy fisheries,” said Elizabeth Martin, CEO of The Sierra Fund.
“We are very pleased that our tribal fisheries and sacred sites will receive additional protections from the ravages of gold-mining clubs who have been damaging our resources for decades,” said Josh Saxon, council memberof the Karuk Tribe.
The legislation affects suction dredge mining, high banking and any other form of mining that relies on motorized suction pumps to process materials from the banks or beds of rivers and streams. Suction dredges are powered by gas or diesel engines that are mounted on floating pontoons in the river; attached to their engines is a powerful vacuum hose, which the dredger uses to suction up the gravel, sand and mud from the bottom of the river. The suctioned material is sifted in search of gold. Similarly, high banking suctions water to process material excavated from riverbanks, causing erosion and sediment problems as well as affecting cultural sites.
Dredging and high banking alters fish habitat by changing the river bottom and often reintroduces mercury, left over from historic mining operations, to the waterways threatening communities and fisheries. These machines can turn a clear-running mountain stream into a murky watercourse unfit for swimming or fishing.
The measure comes after nearly a decade of litigation among tribes, conservationists and miners. A moratorium on the environmentally destructive practice has been in effect since 2009, but recent court decisions have cast uncertainty on it and prompted clarification from the legislature. Senate Bill 637 was authored by Senator Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica) and sponsored by The Sierra Fund to provide clear authority to the State Water Resources Control Board to permit or deny small-scale suction dredge mining in order to maintain water-quality standards.
“We commend Senator Allen for standing up for our precious water resources and wildlife during this devastating drought,” said Jonathan Evans,Environmental Health legal director at the Center for Biological Diversity.
The issue has implications for the economy as well as the environment. “For our members, this is about protecting jobs and family owned businesses which rely on healthy salmon fisheries,” said Glen Spain of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations,

(And the hell with protecting jobs and family owned businesses of small miners and prospectors, and the small communities we buy our supplies from, and the bigger companies we but our larger equipment from.) My addition.

the West Coast’s largest trade association of commercial fishing families.
The Sierra Fund and the Karuk Tribe have been working with the Center for Biological Diversity,Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, Friends of the River,Environmental Law Foundation, Upper American River Foundation, California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, Foothills Anglers Association, North Fork American River Alliance, Klamath Riverkeeper and the Central Sierra Environmental Resource Center for several years to reform small-scale mining laws and regulations.

From <Victory on suction dredge mining reform: Governor Brown signs SB 637 | The Sierra Fund>
----------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------------
*
pavley
SMARA Reform Bill (SB 209) shelved until 2016 legislative session
Posted on November 2,2015November 2, 2015
The Sierra Fund’s bill being carried by Senator Fran Pavley to amend the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) got all of the way through the Senate and to the floor of the Assembly before being put on a shelf until winter. This bill aims to improve enforcement of SMARA by lead agencies(usually cities and counties). Key elements of SMARA include ensuring regular and expert inspections, adequate financial mechanisms in place to support reclamation, and a good reclamation plan that is implemented when mining ends.

*
SMARA Reform Bill (SB 209)shelved until 2016 legislative session
Posted on November 2,2015November 2, 2015
The Sierra Fund’s bill being carried by Senator Fran Pavley to amend the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) got all of the way through the Senate and to the floor of the Assembly before being put on a shelf until winter.
This bill aims to improve enforcement of SMARA by lead agencies(usually cities and counties). Key elements of SMARA include ensuring regular and expert inspections, adequate financial mechanisms in place to support reclamation, and a good reclamation plan that is implemented when mining ends.
The Sierra Fund CEO Elizabeth Martin participated in a Governor-convened weekly “stakeholder meeting” to discuss SMARA issues in spring 2015,and this group collaboratively developed some good ideas on SMARA reform that the local agencies, administration, mining industry, and conservation community could support. Over the next couple of months we hope to fine-tune these ideas and figure out which of them could become part of the legislative package for next year.

From <https://www.sierrafund.org/sb-209-shelved-til-2016/>

----------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- ---------------------- ----------------------------------------- ------------------------------

SMARA reform bills move forward
Posted on July 16, 2015July23, 2015
On Monday, July 13 the California Assembly Natural Resources Committee voted to approve SB 209 (Pavley), a bill sponsored by The Sierra Fund to strengthen enforcement of SMARA. On a 7 – 1 bipartisan vote the bill was moved out of the committee and onto the Appropriations Committee, where it will be heard later in […]

*
SMARA reform bills move forward
Posted on July 16, 2015July23, 2015
On Monday, July 13 the California Assembly Natural Resources Committee voted to approve SB 209 (Pavley),a bill sponsored by The Sierra Fund to strengthen enforcement of SMARA. On a 7 – 1 bipartisan vote the bill was moved out of the committee and onto the Appropriations Committee, where it will be heard later in August.
SB 209 includes elements of the SMARA reform proposals that have been developed out of a Governor-convened stakeholder process that Elizabeth “Izzy” Martin of The Sierra Fund has been participating in since March. The bill is supported by a broad coalition of conservation, environmental justice and community organizations.
On Tuesday, July 14 the Senate Natural Resources Committee voted to approve AB 1142 (Gray), a bill sponsored by the mining industry to reform SMARA. The Sierra Fund testified as “opposed unless amended” to the Committee. The amendments supported by The Sierra Fund were agreed upon in concept by the Committee and the bill’s author Assemblyman Adam Gray. This bill also garnered bi-partisan support. This bill moves on to the Senate Appropriations Committee to be heard after the legislative summer recess is over.

From <https://www.sierrafund.org/smara-reform-moves-forward/>

----------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------

SMARA reform bill (SB 209) passes Senate Floor
Posted on May 28, 2015 July23, 2015
SB 209 (Pavley), a bill to improve enforcement of California’s Surface Mining and Reclamation Act passed the Senate Floor.
A wide range of organizations have worked to support this bill including TSF, Environmental Working Group, CA League of Conservation Voters,Clean Water Action, Wolf Creek Community Alliance, CLAIM-GV, Endangered Habitats League, CA Native Plant Society, San Juan Ridge Taxpayers Association,and Center for Biological Diversity.

*
SMARA reform bill (SB 209) passes Senate Floor
Posted on May 28, 2015July23, 2015
SB 209 (Pavley), a bill to improve enforcement of California’s Surface Mining and Reclamation Act passed the Senate Floor.
A wide range of organizations have worked to support this bill including TSF, Environmental Working Group, CA League of Conservation Voters, Clean Water Action, Wolf Creek Community Alliance, CLAIM-GV, Endangered Habitats League, CA Native Plant Society, San Juan Ridge Taxpayers Association, and Center for Biological Diversity.
SB 209 is designed to remedy a number of problems with enforcement of the California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA). Research by the Senate Natural Resources Committee and the Office of Mine Reclamation has shown that SMARA is enforced inconsistently, and that lead agencies around the state have a spotty record of inspection, enforcement of permit conditions, and reclamation of mines in their jurisdiction. Some mines stop operation and their financial assurances are returned to them without completing required reclamation activities. In some cases, mines that are known to not be in compliance with SMARA law are allowed to operate and sell their products to the State despite the mine’s failure to comply with state law. It has also been documented that many current mine operators do not pay their fees, creating financial strain on the regulatory activities funded by these fees.
The State has an interest in regulating mining to ensure that a mine is operated in compliance with its locally issued permit, which protects the State’s water and air from contamination, and to ensure that when the mine ceases operation it is remediated to be ready for a beneficial end use. SB 209 is a good start to address these issues.

From <https://www.sierrafund.org/sb-209-passes-senate-floor/>


----------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- ---------------------- -----------------------------------------------------
Update on SMARA reform bill (SB 209)
Posted on May 11, 2015May 12, 2015
The Sierra Fund continues to track the progress of SB 209(Pavley), a bill to improve SMARA, which has now passed the Senate Natural Resources Committee and will be heard in Appropriations later this spring. This bill will likely be amended to include the language that is being developed through weekly stakeholder meetings being convened by Governor Brown, which The Sierra Fund has been participating in.

*
Update on SMARA reform bill (SB209)
Posted on May 11, 2015May 12, 2015
The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act(SMARA) was passed in 1975 and signed into law by then-Governor Jerry Brown. Now, 40 years later, the Governor has convened stakeholders interested in SMARA in a process designed to evaluate and find ways to improve the law. Elizabeth “Izzy” Martin, The Sierra Fund’s CEO, has been invited to participate in this process, which includes weekly meetings in the Governor’s office.
The Sierra Fund continues to track the progress of SB 209(Pavley), a bill to improve SMARA, which has now passed the Senate Natural Resources Committee and will be heard in Appropriations later this spring. This bill will likely be amended toi nclude the language that is being developed through the Governor’s stakeholder meetings.

From <https://www.sierrafund.org/update-on-sb-209/>

----------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- ---------------------- ----------------------------------------------------

Bill to reform Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SB 209) introduced
Posted on March 12,2015March 12, 2015
Senator Pavley has introduced SB 209, a bill to reform the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA). The Sierra Fund has worked with Senator Pavley to help identify opportunities to improve consistent enforcement of SMARA, relating to inspections and reclamation. Regulation of mining practices based on their environmental impacts began with the “Sawyer Decision”in […]

*
Bill to reform Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SB 209) introduced
Posted on March 12,2015March 12, 2015
Senator Pavley has introduced SB 209, a bill to reform the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA). The Sierra Fund has worked with Senator Pavley to help identify opportunities to improve consistent enforcement of SMARA, relating to inspections and reclamation.
Regulation of mining practices based on their environmental impacts began with the “Sawyer Decision” in 1884 which essentially ended large scale hydraulic mining in the state. Prior to the adoption of the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) in 1975, mining in California, likeall other states in the nation, was regulated by the federal 1872 Mining Act.Prior to the adoption of the California SMARA and its later amendments, there were no requirements that mines be reclaimed.
SMARA regulates both the opening of new mines and the reclamation of any currently operating mines. California SMARA law applies on all lands in the state when more than one acre of disturbance or more than 1,000 cubic yards of overburden or product is removed.
SMARA delegates mine regulatory and permitting functions on all property to the local land use agency, usually cities or counties. These“lead agencies” perform the environmental evaluation of mines required by CEQA, as well as review and approve the reclamation plan and associated financial surety documents as part of the overall mining permit they issue. The lead agency is also responsible for mine inspections and enforcement activities.
Recent research by the California Senate Natural Resources Committee and by the Department of Conservation’s OMR has shown that SMARA is enforced inconsistently by the counties and cities that serve as lead agency. While some local jurisdictions do an excellent job of regulating their mines, some counties and cities have been found to have a spotty record of inspection, enforcement of permit conditions, and reclamation of mines in their jurisdiction. In other instances, mines that are known to not be incompliance with SMARA law are allowed to operate and sell their products to theS tate despite the mine’s failure to comply with state law. In addition,it has been documented that many current mine operators do not pay their fees,creating financial strain on the regulatory activities funded by these fees.
As introduced, Senator Pavley’s SMARA reform bill, SB 209, would require the Department of Conservation to begin in 2018 to offer continuing educational opportunities for lead agency employees to become certified by the department to inspect surface mining operations. The bill would prohibit a lead agency that operates a surface mining operation from having an inspection performed by a lead agency employee, as specified, unless that employee has become certified as a surface mining operation inspector within the previous 2 years.

From <https://www.sierrafund.org/smara-bil...09-introduced/>

----------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- ---------------------- ---------------------------------------------------

Legislative Update on SB 1270 and1259
Posted on May28, 2014May 28, 2014
The Sierra Fund is supporting two bills authored by Senator Fran Pavley in the current legislative session, SB 1270 and SB 1259. SB 1270, the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) Reform Act of 2014 was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee without enough votes to muster passage, making the bill essentially dead for the year. SB 1259 Sedimentation Studies has moved to the floor of the Senate after unanimously passing both the Appropriation sand Natural Resources Committees. This bill requires the Department of Water Resources (DWR) to gather data to study the loss of storage capacity behind California dams resulting from sedimentation.


*
Legislative Update on SB 1270 and1259
Posted on May28, 2014May 28, 2014
The Sierra Fund is supporting two bills authored by Senator Fran Pavley in the current legislative session, SB 1270 and SB 1259.
SB 1270 (Pavley), the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) Reform Act of 2014 was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee without enough votes to muster passage, making the bill essentially dead for the year. SB 1270 would have strengthened the State of California’s ability to support enforcement of the State’s mining law, including requiring that mandated annual mine inspections by local governments actually take place. Despite taking amendments offered by local government they remained opposed to the bill. The mining industry also took an oppose position.
SB 1259 (Pavley) Sedimentation Studies has moved to the floor of the Senate after unanimously passing both the Appropriations and Natural Resources Committees. This bill requires the Department of Water Resources (DWR) to gather data to study the loss of storage capacity behind California dams resulting from sedimentation. The bill requires that the initial study be completed by January 2017.
The author, Senator Pavley, notes that “Studies indicated that California’s reservoirs have lost a significant amount of storage capacity due to sedimentation. Restoring that storage capacity could greatly increase the state’s ability to store water; potentially by millions of acre-feet.Unfortunately, we don’t have sufficient information to know which reservoirs are most impacted and which have the greatest potential for cost-effective sediment removal.”

From <https://www.sierrafund.org/legislati...1270-and-1259/>

----------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- ---------------------- -----------------------------------------------------

Mining Reform Bill SB1270 Passes First Senate Hurdle
Posted on April 30, 2014April 30,2014
The Senate Natural Resources Committee yesterday passed SB 1270(Pavley), the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) Reform Act on a vote of 7 – 2.
Elizabeth Martin, CEO of the bill’s sponsor The Sierra Fund,spoke as an expert witness on the benefits of the bill.

How was she considered an expert witness?

Senator Fran Pavley, Chairof the Committee and author of the bill introduced the bill with the note that this is the first time that SMARA has been revisited since legislation championed by California State Senator Byron Sher in the 1990s.


*
Mining Reform Bill SB1270 PassesFirst Senate Hurdle
Posted on April 30, 2014April 30,2014
The Senate Natural Resources Committee yesterday passed SB 1270(Pavley), the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) Reform Act on a vote of 7 – 2.
The Sierra Fund is sponsor of the bill,and Elizabeth Martin, CEO, spoke yesterday as an expert witness on the benefits of the bill. Senator Fran Pavley, Chair of the Committee and author of the bill introduced the bill with the note that this is the first time that SMARA has been revisited since legislation championed by California State Senator Byron Sher in the 1990s.
“This bill does not in any way interfere with County land use authority to permit mines,” noted Martin, a former Nevada County Supervisor and before that a Nevada County Planning Commissioner. “It does bring new tools to the Department of Conservation to help improve implementation of SMARA. It creates a Division of Mines overseen by a State Mine Inspector;and helps improve transparency in how mining fees are used to fund enforcement. And, of course, it puts a major focus on improving the rate and quality of the already mandated annual mine inspections.”
Brian Baca, a mining expert who has served on the State Mining and Geology Board, also spoke as a technical witness before the committee. Advocates from a number of organizations including Environmental Working Group,Trust for Public Land, Sierra Club, Clean Water Action and more stood up in favor of the bill. Advocates for counties, and a number of representatives from the mining industry, spoke about their concerns.
Senator Pavley’s staff is working with Counties and mining industry representatives to design amendments that will address the concerns that they have raised. The Sierra Fund continues to be committed to the process of finding common ground with all stakeholders. The bill will likely be heard next in the Senate Appropriations Committee later this spring.
In other news from the Capitol
Also yesterday the Senate Natural Resources moved forward SB 1259(Pavley), a bill that would authorize the CA Department of Water Resources (DWR) to investigate and gather data to study the loss of storage capacity behind dams resulting from siltation and to complete an initial study by January 1, 2017. The bill would also require that the study include an evaluation of cost-effective strategies for sediment removal, relative to the costs of alternative methods of flood protection and water supply. This bill passed unanimously and will likely be heard next in the Senate Appropriations Committee later this spring.

From <https://www.sierrafund.org/sb1270-passes-hurdle/>

----------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- ---------------------- -----------------------------------------------------

Reservoir Siltation Studies Proposed in SB 1259
Posted on April 16,2014April 16, 2014
Senator Fran Pavley, Chair of the California Senate Natural Resources Committee, has introduced SB 1259, a bill that if passed and signed by the Governor would: Require the Department of Water Resources to gather data for review of the loss of storage capacity behind dams resulting from siltation; Require that siltation studies include an evaluation […]

From <https://www.sierrafund.org/tag/pavley/>

*
Reservoir Siltation Studies Proposed in SB 1259
Posted on April 16,2014 April 16, 2014
Senator Fran Pavley, Chair of the California Senate Natural Resources Committee, has introduced SB1259, a bill that if passed and signed by the Governor would:


  • Require the Department of Water Resources to gather data for review of the loss of storage capacity behind dams resulting from siltation;
  • Require that siltation studies include an evaluation of cost-effective strategies for sediment removal, relative to the costs of alternative methods of flood protection and water supply; and
  • Require that results of the siltation study be reflected in an upcoming update of the California Water Plan and be provided to the appropriate policy committees of the Senate and the Assembly.

The bill would require that an initial study be completed byJanuary 1, 2017.

From <https://www.sierrafund.org/siltation-studies-proposed/>
----------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- ---------------------- -----------------------------------------------

Sentto…

IRS
[TABLE="class: cms_table"]
[TR]
[TD]Tamera Ripperda, Director, Exempt Organizations[/TD]
[TD](202) 317-8989[/TD]
[TD](877) 814-2234[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


----------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- ---------------------- --------------------------

TomMcClintok
2200A Douglas Blvd, Suite 240
Roseville, CA 95661
Phone: (916) 786-5560
Fax: (916) 786-6364
----------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
JerryBrown
Governor Jerry Brown
c/o State Capitol, Suite 1173
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 445-2841
Fax: (916) 558-3160
----------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- -----------------------
SacBee
DanWalters
dwalters@sacbee.com
Last edited by Hefty1; Nov 10, 2015 at 12:46 AM.​
 

Ahmen to that!!!!!!! I think all it would take is to whisper into a legislators ear that is mining friendly to get things rolling on this! show them the money trail of these damocrats wacoenviromentalists and see if they run with it! In a election year you would think theyed already be on to this!
 

WOW, Hefty great post nice info, need to send that to get our reps get them interested maybe have them investigate could get some traction, FPPC is like most other government agency


“Izzy Martin is the reason we founded AMRA, to fight illegal and unconstitutional methods being used against the small miners to eliminate what we do,” AMRA’s Facebook page states. “We ALL need to send these letters to the IRS for the illegal activity she and Sierra Fund is engaged in and demand an investigation. We ALL also need to petition the Fair Political Practices Commission for the same reasons.”
Shannon Poe, president of AMRA, disputed the FPPC’s findings about Martin. He said his group may conduct its own probe of her activities.
“It’s rather unfortunate because the evidence is quite glaring,” Poe said, adding moments later, “Some questions need to be asked of the FPPC. We don’t know what the extent of their investigation was.”
Fair Political Practices Commission finds no evidence of wrongdoing by Sierra Fund director | TheUnion.com
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Mountain report

⬅️ Previous Thread

Dredgers kill Salmon

Next Thread ➡️

Top Member Reactions

Similar threads

leslie(nova scotia)
  • Suggestion Suggestion
Massacre at Coinic Prime
Replies
3
Views
576
cudamark
cudamark
John-Edmonton
Out Mossing And Washing Roots Today
Replies
0
Views
400
John-Edmonton
John-Edmonton
JeffDowns
  • Suggestion Suggestion
Buggy Brake
Replies
8
Views
1K
pepperj
pepperj

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Serious Detecting

Latest Discussions

Back
Top Bottom