Residents steaming about Geyser

There is more to lose than to gain, so it's crucial to get it right."

That theme ran through Angus Saint-Evans' presentation to the Orland Technical Advisory Committee Wednesday at Carnegie Hall.

The retired Glenn County Superior Court judge was the last of 29 speakers at a public hearing about Crystal Geyser Water Co.'s proposed sparkling mineral water bottling plant. He provided an extensive overview of the opponents' positions.

"The project is not good for Orland," Saint-Evans said, noting "there is much divisiveness in the city."

He called it the "biggest issue in Orland" in his 29 years as a resident.

During the five-hour hearing, the standing-room-only crowd, committee and Crystal Geyser representatives listened to two people in favor of the city approving Crystal Geyser's application to build a 112,000-square-foot structure at 1507 County Road 200.

The rest were against.

Most people speaking against the proposal were members of Save Our Water Resources, a community group organized in August to try to keep Crystal Geyser from moving into Orland.

While some live in close proximity to the proposed site, several speakers live outside the city limits.

Two environmentalists traveled from Chico to present their points of view. Two other out-of-towners were attorneys for the challengers — one from Sacramento represented the citizens group, and one from Davis represented local farmers Greg Appel and Matt Vereschagin.

The most common issue raised was the desire for an environmental impact report.

"Every concern comes down to an EIR," Greg Wickert said.

The first speaker was a land-use attorney from Sacramento. Sabrina Teller introduced SOWR's concerns about having an EIR done and questioned the committees decision not to do it.

The California Environmental Quality Act is "a black letter law," she said.

She argued that the project is not exempt as committee members had stated previously.

Joanne Overton, president and co-founder of the citizens group, introduced the ideas of groundwater contamination, water bottles being made from fossil fuels and the broader issue of climate change — issues that were repeated throughout hearing.

Speakers also focused on truck traffic, noise levels, the impact of plastic bottles on the environment, the Orland Dry Cleaner's polluted subterranean plume, and the community's reliance on agriculture.

Among other threads tying the opposition's presentations together were discussions of groundwater availability and

the need for it to be replenished and sustainable, current drought conditions in California, concerns about Crystal Geyser depleting the water table and the possible impact on local farmers and whether Crystal Geyser would live up to its agreement with the city.

Sharon Ellis accused city officials of not doing their due diligence.

"You should have been leading Crystal Geyser, not letting them lead you," she said.

On the other side, former Orland city manager Joe Riker said no adjudicated water rights exist, so it is up to "city and county agencies to regulate groundwater."

He also mentioned that several housing developments that require water have gone up or are planned and the county has added several small lot developments with permission to drill wells.

"I don't hear concerns about those wells," he said. "Where was all this water concern when small lots were being built?"

Referring to issues that came up during his tenure as city manager, Riker said, "I feel this is a proper projection under the guidelines established for development. I believe the project will benefit the citizens of this city."

Helen Duree said the plant means employment.

"We really need jobs in this town. We need something so we can keep our kids here," she said.

"A lot of people think this project is a good idea, but they're afraid to say anything" for fear of reprisal, Duree added.

She said she has "heard a lot of untruths from opponents that have made me very uncomfortable. It's the truth we want."

Following the public comments, Crystal Geyser spokesman Alec Van Ryan said he had "30 pages of notes," so, instead of trying to address all the questions and issues right there, the company "will prepare a comprehensive response before the end of the month."

Committee Chairwoman Nancy Sailsbery said the panel also preferred to prepare a thoughtful response, rather than trying to provide answers on the spot. That response is expected at the committee's next meeting.

"It's wise for them two give a response," Overton said after the hearing. "We've got a long way to go."

Sailsbery said Thursday she thought "the meeting went great. I was really impressed with the homework they did and the presentations."

But Saint-Evans said the principal question has gone unanswered.

"They didn't make a response. They still haven't answered 'Why no EIR?'"

INFORMATION

The next Orland Technical Advisory Committee meeting is scheduled for 10 a.m. Dec. 9 at Carnegie Hall.