Letter sent to Supervisor Hal Stocker

Hello Hal;

I have had several people ask me about Measure T and also send me some materials about it which I finally got around to examining.  I originally signed the petition to get it on the ballot, but after careful consideration I find that I cannot support it and now  will actively work to hopefully see it defeated in the upcoming election.

I very much support your aim to preserve agricultural lands for ag uses, particularly in the valley.  In our foothill community, there is currently a big push on promoting local production and distribution of ag products.  The best thing that could be done to promote this is not Measure T, but to get irrigation water to more of the developed parcels in Dobbins Oregon House which currently have to draw on groundwater (wells) for irrigation. This would allow for more small agricultural operations to increase production in addition to enhancing fire safety.

The designation of some developed parcels in our community as Natural Resource rather than Rural Community parcels is arbitrary and ignores the fact that every parcel in our community is part of the Natural Resources for which we are responsible.  In the CSA-2, more than half of the developed parcels (many which are 5 acre parcels) are not included in the Rural Community designation.  My own developed parcel lies directly adjacent to parcels which are in the Community designation, and we share access roads etc with them.  These arbitrary boundaries do not make any sense.   I submit to you and the other Board members that the Dobbins-Oregon House Community is really  defined by the Dobbins-Oregon House Fire Protection District (DOHFPD) Community Service District and every parcel in the DOHFPD is part of our rural community.  The boundaries you folks established for our rural community do not reflect the reality of our community and are inconsistent with the General Plan Land Use Designations in the General Plan.  How can  you apply the Natural Resource designation to small developed parcels with existing homes in the CSA-2 area (and most likely in other areas too)?

In many places in the foothills, there are large parcels of undeveloped land, some which are not used for anything. They attract illegal trash dumping, teen-age partying and shooting by non-residents. Additionally, these lands have not been cleared nor have they burned in many years, and they carry some incredibly large fuel loads. For some of these lands the best thing that could happen is for them to undergo controlled development so they would be cleared and occupied, thereby discouraging illegal activities. There is nothing else which will be done with these lands, and if Measure T passes they will not be used for anything at all for many years, thereby becoming increasingly hazardous when we have our next large scale wild land fire.

The Yuba County Board of Supervisors must  reconsider the boundaries which were arbitrarily established designating some parcels in CSA-2 as Natural Resource parcels (which would fall under Measure T) and others as Rural Community, which would not fall under Measure T.   Every Parcel in the CSA-2 is designated as Ag Rural Residential should  be included in the boundary of the DOH Rural Community. Please initiate actions to correct this.

After careful consideration I believe that Measure T would not result in Natural Resource preservation, but could very well result in stagnation and actually increased hazard to the natural resources in the foothills which it seeks to protect.

Thank you for your consideration and all your efforts to support our community.

Art Craigmill

Chair, CSA-2 Committee

Resident of Oregon House