Sutter County Grand Jury
• 2020-2021
Development in South Sutter County Fowl Play in the Natomas Basin?
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 6 findings
F1
There was a serious communication breakdown between the Conservancy, Sutter County Board of Supervisors and County appointees, both in the time consuming and unclear method of selecting Conservancy board members and ensuring our county liaison is actively involved.
F2
The Grand Jury found no evidence that the Board of Supervisors was informed of the appointees’ resignations, causing a lack of corrective measures being taken to ease concerns about Conservancy management and the County’s development interests in southern Sutter County.
F3
Past board of directors at the Conservancy approved risky investments of Sutter County mitigation funds which are still in place and could lead to financial problems in the future.
F4
Commissions representing the City of Sacramento ignored the objections from Sutter County on developing outside Conservation Plan borders and proceeded with development.
F5
Current development outside of the Conservation Plan by the City of Sacramento jeopardizes the Plan requiring renegotiation and impacting development in south Sutter County.
F6
Current plans for development in Sacramento County (not a member of the conservancy) disrupt planned Sutter County development in the Natomas Basin.
Recommendations 6
-
R1The Sutter County Board of Supervisors immediately create a procedure to receive briefings of any letters of resignation sent to it and have that information relayed during a public meeting for full transparency.
-
R2The Sutter County Board of Supervisors direct the Chief Administrative Officer to create a board and commission appointment procedure that is consistent for all boards and commissions to be completed within a set timeframe minimizing the impact to the County within one month of receipt.
-
R3The Sutter County Board of Supervisors establish procedures to receive regular annual updates from the Conservancy on the impacts of all development in the area within the next 90 days.
-
R4The Sutter County Board of Supervisors immediately direct its members to the Conservancy board of directors to investigate management of the Conservancy endowment fund investments and change procedures to minimize the financial impact on Sutter County.
-
R5The Sutter County Board of Supervisors immediately start proceedings to renegotiate the Conservation Plan with the City of Sacramento and other Plan permittees to remediate the encroachment done by the City and its impact on wildlife in the new plan. Sutter County should include Sacramento County in its negotiations for a comprehensive conservation plan for the Natomas Basin.
-
R6The Sutter County Board of Supervisors direct the county staff to prepare a letter for signatures clarifying their position to both the County of Sacramento and the City of Sacramento and objecting to development not meeting the Conservation Plan.
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Sutter County Board of Supervisors
Elected County Office