Posted by: Jan | March 26, 2019

Tunnel Construction Issues being Ignored

Here’s a great blog by Deirdre at California Water Research about the issues being ignored or hidden with the tunnel construction. “WaterFix: Tunneling risks and tunnel construction contracts”

“Whether there is one Delta tunnel or two, the construction of a large diameter tunnel in Delta soils consisting of sedimentary layers of peat, sand, silt, and clay is a significant engineering challenge.

There was a large sinkhole created by “Big Bertha” during the Seattle Highway 99 tunnel construction which “shows the problems that can be created by “loss of ground” when tunneling in sedimentary deposits. Even when there is no “loss of ground” there can still be significant settlement on the surface. Washington Governor Jay Inslee halted the tunnel boring on January 14, 2016, citing concerns over public safety.”

“The current alignment of the WaterFix main tunnels passes under Delta island levees, State Route 4, State Route 12, the BNSF railroad tracks used by Amtrak, the Mokelumne aqueduct, and natural gas and other product and services pipelines. These are all critical infrastructure in the Delta. But measures to protect this infrastructure from tunneling impacts were not identified in the WaterFix environmental documents.”

Read all the details at: “WaterFix: Tunneling risks and tunnel construction contracts”

Posted by: Jan | February 21, 2019

Go West, young Newsom!

In response to this article, Newsom offers Delta compromise, a guest commentary that says, “Delta interests should seize the opportunity to cease water fights”, the California Delta Chambers & Visitor’s Bureau chimes in and says “No!”:

The California Delta Chambers & Visitor’s Bureau opposes diverting the Sacramento River around the Delta. We have never made a distinction over the method of diversion whether it be canals, tunnels, or any other conveyance. Diverting the river will destroy what is left of the Delta. The water barons in the south will want as much water as they can get out of the system and they will not finance it unless they are assured of this. We do not trust them! Over the last 12+ years we have asked officials to give us a few examples of where a project like this has not destroyed the parent waterway, so far they have produced – none. We have also asked for a study to determine how much water can be removed from the system without destroying fish and wildlife populations – they have refused to do so, we think it is somewhere in the 3 million acre-foot range. Don’t be fooled by this new scheme. A common ploy of government organizations is to ask for twice as much as you expect to get and settle for half and call it a compromise.

If the river needs to be diverted then do it at Sherman Island which will enhance the natural flow, cost less, and be self-regulating as far as salt intrusion.


We agree! The Sherman Island site is what Dr. Robert Pyke proposed years ago, and is also what Rep. Garamendi is pitching. It is referred to as the “Western Alignment.” The beauty of taking water there is that the water would have already flowed through the Delta, providing the fish what they need and keeping the water in the Delta fresh for Delta farms, boating, and recreation. That plan is self-regulating. That is, if too much water is extracted for the health of the Delta, the salt water would intrude at Sherman Island. But in years like right now, when water is flowing rapidly through the Delta, they could be pumping tons of water to ship South to refill the aquifers there, the reservoirs, and the Kerns Water Bank.

Some people who read my blogs mistakenly think STCDA may be for the tunnels if they move them out of the Delta and go East, around the Delta. No, that isn’t true. The truth is that if they ignore everyone in the Delta and still move to build them, going East or West would at least not destroy the Delta communities, boating, and fishing for ten years. Any tunnels operated with the same abandon that DWR and the Water Contractors have displayed for decades will destroy the Delta long-term.

Posted by: Jan | February 20, 2019

STCDA vs. the DWR

DWR has been cheating the system but justice is on our side

Save the California Delta Alliance has filed our initial petition against the Department of Water Resources (DWR) concerning the California WaterFix (aka Delta Tunnels). The entire lawsuit plus a copy of only the Introduction (for those who find looking at legalese scary) are attached. I hope you will at least read through the Introduction so you can see what we have been doing to fight back against the continued push by DWR for the tunnels.

Regardless of what goes forward, the past-Governor Brown’s two tunnels or Governor Newsom’s one tunnel, the plan as designed will cause unrepairable damage to Delta communities and to the ecosystem.

As the petition states, our members have exhausted all administrative processes to make our valid concerns about this project known.

Our Legal Council, Michael Brodsky, lays it all out clearly and concisely. If you want a review how this project morphed from what the legislature dictated (the Delta Reform Act) to the ambitious Bay and Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) which included environmental improvements and habitat, and then into WaterFix (the Tunnel Plan), read through the Introduction, at least.

I like Brodsky’s overview of what caused the Legislature to write the Delta Reform Act in the first place, in 2009 (emphasis added):

The State Water Project’s dream of making the Central California desert bloom and fueling unlimited population growth in arid Southern California metropolises with exported Delta water, zealously promoted over a half century ago by recently retired Governor Jerry Brown’s father, Edmund G. “Pat” Brown, is an unsustainable artifact of the environmentally ignorant 1950’s. The mega-engineering dream has proven an environmental nightmare. It has been legislatively replaced by the goal of reducing exports, taking pressure off of the Delta, and developing technologically up- to-date regional water supply infrastructure to replace Delta exports.

You may wonder what role Save the California Delta Alliance plays when there are so many environmental groups, big and little, fighting against this project. Why this lawsuit? As you all know, over the past years you, our members, have been going to the meetings in Sacramento, showing up, making comments, sending in complaints. It often seemed futile, yet because all of you have gone on the record telling the DWR over and over what the unmistakable and intolerable impacts this through-Delta tunnel plan would have on your lives, it has allowed us to now make this very compelling case.

In summary, why does STCDA have to take action? We represent you!

Many Petitioners, including national environmental groups, will no doubt call the illegality of proposed project operations.

Delta Alliance will brief these issues as well. However, because of the herculean effort DWR has expended in camouflaging a water grab to make it look like an environmental benefit, it has done less to cover its tracks with regard to the impacts that massive amounts of construction activity will have on Delta communities and Delta Recreation.

DWR has shown disregard toward the small rural communities and family businesses— of modest means — that will be obliterated by eleven years or more of continuous heavy construction. It made no meaningful effort to consider alternative infrastructure locations or employ alternative construction methods with regard to construction impacts on Delta recreation and communities.

Delta Alliance will focus a significant amount of its briefing on DWR’s failure to consider construction impacts in any serious way, and will attempt as best it can within its limited means to give voice to the voiceless before this Court.

Here is the Introduction:
Introduction Section.

Read the entire document:
The Entire Petition.

And if you appreciate STCDA’s efforts to represent you in the ongoing fight against the tunnels, please donate!

Posted by: Jan | February 12, 2019

Newsom makes appointments to the SWRCB

Gov. Gavin Newsom announces his appointment for State Water Resources Control Board: Joaquin Esquivel as Chair of the State Water Board and also Laurel Firestone to the Board. Esquivel has served on the Water Board since 2017. Esquivel was assistant secretary for federal water policy at the California Natural Resources Agency from 2015 to 2017 Firestone served on the Tulare County Water Commission from 2007 to 2012, and co‐chaired the Governor’s Drinking Water Stakeholder Group from 2012 to 2014.

Good? Bad? STCDA had been advocating to keep Felicia Marcus as Chair. In our assessment, losing Felicia Marcus is a big blow for the Water Board. With the new updated Water Quality Plan on-the-line, if it goes to the back-burner, fish will not withstand another waiting period.

Esquivel’s appointment is considered a positive sign for voluntary settlement agreements. What those are is creative ways to improve the ecosystem without providing increased flows. If we know anything, we know that years of “experiments” with habitat projects and other “creative ways to improve the environment” have only made the fish situation more dire, so that isn’t promising.

Firestone is new to the Board. Firestone has no knowledge of the delta or water quality plan or flows. Human right to water is her “thing.”

These two appointments weakens the board in setting real requirements to protect fish. And we lose the history of the last three years of testimonies arguing our case to prove the destruction of the WaterFix construction project.

Result: Bad, unless Newsom is freeing up Marcus to be the new head of the DWR. If that is his plan, that would be good news.

Posted by: Jan | February 7, 2019

2019 Status of the Water Wars

2019 is a new year. What’s been happening in the Water Wars?

Photo by Tony Kukulich, Discovery Bay Press, Feb 6, 2019.

Reminder: At the end of 2018

If you remember, at the end of 2018, the WaterFix opponents had successfully argued before the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the Delta Stewardship Council (DSC) that the tunnel project’s destructive through-Delta construction project would be a disaster for small Delta communities in the North, for the entire area’s traffic when hoards of construction vehicles flood the small rural roads and two-lane levee highways, and for boating and recreation when barge traffic and construction totally shuts down boating in the Delta for the entire 10 or more years of construction.

Because of the strong case built against the tunnel construction, the SWRCB put off awarding the necessary permit to begin construction of the new intakes for the tunnels, waiting for a decision by the DSC whether or not the tunnel project was consistent with the Delta Plan. Consistency with the Delta Plan is a requirement for any project to move forward in the Delta. When the DSC Staff recommended strongly that the tunnels were inconsistent with the Delta Plan, both because of the construction impacts and water quality degradation, the Department of Water Resources (DWR) withdrew their consistency request.

The DWR did withdraw their consistency request but, in a sneaky move, also asked the DSC to withdraw the appeals, which they immediately did, shutting down all of the valid information and complaints that had been presented in the opponents’ appeals. STCDA’s Legal Council Michael Brodsky submitted a formal complaint, which we knew would be ignored, but wanted our complaint on-the-record.

Regardless, at the end of 2018, the project appeared to be at a roadblock.

Now it’s 2019.

Without SWRCB permits, no construction can begin.

Then why is the Joint Powers Association DCA awarding contracts for the tunnels work? The Delta Conveyance Design and Construction Authority (DCA) move ahead and select the Jacobs company to be the engineering design manager for the Delta Tunnels? Then the DCA awarded Fugro a contract for a major geotechnical investigation to support the California WaterFix project even though the project has not been approved. (Both were reported by Dan Bacher, FishSniffer). “The awarding of contracts to Fugro and Jacobs by the DCA also takes place despite an avalanche of lawsuits by cities, counties, water districts, Tribes, fishing groups, environmental NGOs and other organizations against a project opponents consider to be the most environmentally destructive public works project in California history.” People are wondering how the State thinks they can spend money on contracts and engineering when they have no permits.

A very worrisome action was the recent Trump Administration’s update to the Biological Assessment. Their goal is to increase exports from the Delta by reducing restrictions. Since we know the current high levels are what have caused the decades of decline in the Delta, this is a huge concern. It is now up to the US Dept. of Fish and Game and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to provide their feedback. In the past, NMFS has put science and logic above political gamesmanship. We hope they are allowed to give an honest assessment and that it will be listened to. It has been bad enough that we have had years of a Brown Administration that has ignored science and moved ahead with tunnel vision. Now we have the Trump Administration pushing past science to side with the almond farmers against the Delta communities, farmers, and fish.

These are worrisome developments. But we have a new Governor. Everyone wants to know his opinion on the Delta Tunnels.

While we haven’t heard directly from our new governor about what his position is, Contra Costa Supervisor Diane Burgis was hopeful when Gov. Newsom called for a meeting with Delta representatives as one of his first activities in January. On January 23rd, Newsom met with the Delta County Coalition (a representation of supervisors from five Delta Counties: Contra Costa, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Solano, and Yolo) and Delta Caucus members (Rep. Jim Frasier, Susan Eggman, Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, and Buffy Wicks). They discussed the lack of representation from the Delta on State Agencies and Boards making decisions about the Delta. They also discussed the Delta as a Place and what that means. No promises were made but Supervisor Burgis left the meeting feeling optimistic.

So far, Newsom has appointed Wade Crowfoot of Oakland as Secretary of the California Natural Resources Agency. He was West Coast political director at the Environmental Defense Fund and senior environmental advisor to former San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom from 2004 to 2007. We were encouraged by his choice of Jarad Blumenfeld, a former Obama administration official and longtime environmental advocate as the new secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency. As EPA Chief, Blumenfeld will lead the SWRCB. As far as I can tell, there have been no objections from the environmental groups about either of these appointments.

More importantly, additional upcoming appointments to be made by Governor Newsom will give us more insight into his intentions going forward. We will be encouraged if Newsom re-assigns Felicia Marcus as Chairperson of the SWRCB, as she has proven to be a fair arbitrar during the past three years of Water Board Hearings. She also showed fortitude in pushing back against the CA Dept. Fish and Wildlife and requiring increased flows on the San Joaquin River. We hope that decision will be supported by Gov. Newsom as the process moves forward. We’re hoping he decides to pick a new Director of the Department of Water Resources. That would be a big, positive step.

Besides the good news from the recent Newsom meeting, we have our Northern California Senators and Assemblymembers who formed the Delta Caucus last year, pushing to bring sanity to the project. From the Discovery Bay Press:

Last week, (February 1), Sen Bill Todd (Napa) introduced Senate Bill (SB) 204, which would require the Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the Delta Conveyance, Design and Construction Authority (DCDCA) to submit information about pending State Water Project contracts to the legislature for public review prior to those agencies moving forward with work on the Delta Tunnels.

The state’s Water Code requires DWR to advise the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) at least 60 days prior to the renewal or extension of water supply contracts between DWR and water contractors. In September 2018, DWR sought to extend the contracts with 29 water contractors from the current expiration date in 2035 to a new expiration date of 2085. During the hearing to review the contract extension, legislators renewed the call for increase oversight.

“I’ve been saying all along that DWR should not be spending large sums of tax dollars on any WaterFix contracts without oversight from the legislature,” said Frazier at the time. “I am working with other Delta Caucus legislators to determine what that oversight would look like and what it might take to implement it legislatively.”

For more information, read here: Discovery Bay Press “Senate Bill 204 increases WaterFix oversight”.

Bottom line: There are lawsuits starting opposing continued moves forward by the various agencies. Meanwhile, the Trump Administration’s new Biological Assessment is a huge concern in addition to the JPA’s DCDCA contracts to start the project and the Santa Clara Water Board push for rate increases to support the tunnels.

We will see what happens next, but STCDA will continue to do our part to stop the Tunnels.

Posted by: Jan | January 31, 2019

The word is getting out – will anyone listen?

This is a good news report and good publicity, via Sacramento NBC affiliate, KCRA: Twin Tunnels Project Could Endanger Vital Levees.


The reporters have picked up on what tunnel and soils engineers have been saying regarding the potential (likely) damage to levees from tunneling under the Delta’s soft, alluvial soils. There is a huge risk to the twenty-two levees the tunnels will bore under that tunneling activity will cause levee failure. Similar testimony has been delivered to the State Water Resources Control Board and the Delta Stewardship Council.

Besides levees, there is equal risk to other infrastructure, like the Santa Fe Railroad which runs on on a raised trestle where the tunnel will be going under (very risky), the East Bay MUD’s Mokelumne Aqueduct (which provides all of Alameda Country including Oakland’s water supply), major highways that run on top of fragile levees (e.g., Highway 4 between Brentwood and Stockton), and other infrastructure.
Amtrak on the Sante Fe trestle – the tunnel is planned directly below it

Yet this is all being ignored as the various groups keep trying to move the project ahead, even though they have not secured the necessary permits and lawsuits are in progress.

The risk of tunneling is real. The Department of Water Resources’ own independent scientists warned of the risk years ago and recommended choosing the Eastern route, around the Delta, instead of the Through-Delta route which they continue to focus on. Yet here we are.

Posted by: Jan | December 24, 2018

2018 – What a Year it Was!

I hope you are enjoying this magical time of year!

We’ve had quite a year this year. We have made progress against the California WaterFix (Delta Tunnels) on multiple fronts and have clearly articulated to the State agencies our concerns with through-Delta tunnel construction destroying communities, our economy, boating and recreation waterways, and our way of life. Finally, they have begun to listen and grasp the real issues – both construction issues and long-term operational issues. As a result, Governor Brown is leaving office without breaking ground on his tunnels. This is a huge win and I thank all of you for your efforts !!!

The year in recap:

  • We successfully delayed votes and slowed the Tunnel approval process down multiple times. Thanks to those of you who attended events, sent in your comments, and communicated with your representatives!
  • Our testimonies throughout the year to the State Water Resources and Control Board delayed the permitting process. That is on hold at this time.
  • The Water Board voted to increase the water flow on the San Joaquin River. This was the first time in decades that the water quality plan was updated and flows to be improved. Although both the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers need even more to truly return the Delta to minimum needs for salmon and other species and to keep the Delta fresh, it was a great first step!
  • We convinced the Delta Stewardship Council Staff that the tunnel construction plan is completely unacceptable for the communities who live in the Delta. In addition, that the tunnel operational plan was insufficient. The Staff reported to the Council that the tunnels are “inconsistent” with the Delta Plan and should not be incorporated. As a result, the Department of Water Resources withdrew their consistency request.
  • We had a successful fundraising golf event this year. That plus other smaller events and individual donations provided enough funding to keep us going during 2018. Our coffers are low now. Please donate (see info at the bottom or click the Donate button on the right).
  • Karen Mann volunteered to run STCDA for two months while Jan & Mike were on vacation. She is now our official VP and will continue next year. Thanks Karen!
  • Our 2019 STCDA Board is:
    President TBD
    VP Karen Mann
    Secretary Linda Sepulveda
    Treasurer Peter Hills
    Director (DBYC) Dane McCoy
    Director (CA Delta Chamber)   Bill Wells
    Director (Bethel Island) Jamie Bolt

    (I will continue with Member Communications.)

  • Yours truly (Jan) was named Citizen of the Year for 2018 thanks to all of you jumping in and making a difference and making our little organization a success. The fun part was being the Grand Marshall in the Discovery Bay Parade of Lights.
    Parade Of Lights 2018

From me and STCDA, wishing you and your families a joyous holiday season and a Happy New Year!

Jan McCleery, President, Save the California Delta Alliance

P.S. We’ve had success this year and Governor Brown is out, but Diane Feinstein and the Central Valley representatives will continue to try to go around our state agencies and their process in order to take more water and build those tunnels. But we will continue our efforts!

To donate by check, please make check payable to “STCDA” and mail to:
PO Box 1760
Discovery Bay, CA 94505

We are a 501(c)3 nonprofit so your donations are tax deductible. Thank you!

Yesterday the State Water Resources Control Board voted 4-1 to adopt the controversial flow standards for San Joaquin River tributaries and salinity standards for the South Delta.

This is the meeting Jerry Brown delayed for a month to give Gavin Newsom and the agencies time to come up with voluntary compromises as Newsom heads to take on the Governor role.

The Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan update for the Lower San Joaquin River and Southern Delta, includes a requirement for 40 percent of unimpaired flow, within a range of 30 to 50 percent. While this isn’t the full amount needed according to the Delta Flow Requirements reports, it is a start in the right direction.

From Maven’s report:

A dramatic decline in the once-thriving populations of native fish species that migrate through and inhabit the Delta has brought some species to the brink of extinction. In 1984, for example, about 70,000 fall-run Chinook salmon adults returned to the San Joaquin Basin. The number of returning adults dropped to 40,000 in 2010 and just 10,000 in 2016 and 2017.

While multiple factors contributed to the decline, the magnitude of diversions out of the Sacramento, San Joaquin, and other rivers feeding into the Bay-Delta is a major reason for the ecosystem decline. Currently, flows remaining in the San Joaquin River and its three tributaries can run as low as 6 percent in dry or drought years, while they average 10 to 20 percent of unimpaired flow at critical times of the year and range from 21 to 40 percent on average.

The Board is continuing now to work on flow requirements for the Sacramento River.

Read the entire Maven’s Notebook report: REACTIONS: Water agencies and organizations react to voluntary settlements and the State Water Board vote to adopt new flow standards for San Joaquin River tributaries

The California Farm Bureau sounded less on-board with their statement. While they congratulated the collaborative effort undertaken during the last 30 days to reach an agreement, they want collaboration rather than rules and claim an approach listing habitat restoration first followed by water flows and improved temperature for fish is the solution, claiming that is a proven approach.

We say it isn’t a very “proven approach” when there were 70,000 fall-run Chinook in 1984 (back when exports were below 6 MAF) and the number of returning adults dropped to 40,000 in 2010 and just 10,000 in 2016 and 2017 (during the timeframe where the state has implemented many habitat restoration projects). Habitat restoration alone cannot save the salmon. Fish need fresh water flows first and foremost.

Similarly, the agencies that came to the table the last 30 days with their voluntary compromises, like Department of Water Resources and Metropolitan Water District touted that they are working on these compromises, but we note that they have not formally signed off on their end of the agreement. For example, Metropolitan calls their side of the bargain “proposed voluntary settlement agreements”.

Not to put a wet blanket on this very good news, we will just need to see if they continue on their path of compromises for the benefit of the fish and the estuary.

But today we are extremely proud of the Water Board for doing the right thing and taking that first, hard step towards the needed improved water flows in the Delta.

Posted by: Jan | December 12, 2018

We object!

We’ve been saying that in the Department of Water Resources (DWR) December 7 letter withdrawing the WaterFix (Delta Tunnels) from the current process DWR did not admit that WaterFix’s through-Delta tunnel construction would be abysmal for Delta communities and farmers, nor did they admit WaterFix violated sections of the Delta Plan relating to reducing reliance, maintaining water quality standards, and protecting boating and recreating.

In the DWR letter, Karla Nemeth, DWR Director, claimed the opposite, that “WaterFix is consistent with the Delta Plan Policies.” In addition, she made the request to dismiss all appeals which resulted in the immediate dismissal of all appeals three hours later, without opportunity for Appellants to respond.

The Council took only three hours to act!

Save the California Delta Alliance calls “foul!” We object! It appears to the public to be an end-run by the Department around the public process.

The appeals are not moot. The DWR does not commit to or even discuss the possibility of making any changes to aspects of the project that we find objectionable. No facts have changed.

We want the DWR to commit to making changes in their project, which include:

  1. Moving the tunnel route East, avoiding damaging construction traffic on two-lane Delta levee highways, avoiding tunneling under fragile levees, and avoiding barge traffic impacts to boating and recreation.
  2. Relocating pumping facilities to not impact the legacy towns (Hood, Clarksburg, Walnut Grove).
  3. Committing to the proper removal and treatment of tunnel muck.
  4. Developing a real operations plan which includes measurable targets for reduction of exports and reduction of reliance on the Delta (instead of a hand-waiving “adaptive management” proposal).
  5. Providing a valid, peer-reviewed Cost/Benefits Analysis.

Else the Council should vote and remand the matter to the DWR. We believe that this is the only lawful course at this point given the current WaterFix Plan.

It looks like a closed-door process to us, lacking transparency. The DWR wants to push its interpretations of the Delta Reform Act and Delta Plan behind closed doors without our due process rights.

We are requesting no ex party closed door communications between the Council and the DWR!

Here is the email sent objecting to the withdrawal of our appeals: Subject: California WaterFix C20185 request to reconsider dismissal of appeals .

Posted by: Jan | December 10, 2018

What happens next?

After nine years working to stop the Delta Tunnel project, when the Department of Water Resources (DWR) withdrew their request to the Delta Stewardship Council to certify the Tunnel plan last week, our first response was “We won!” Especially since the Delta Stewardship Council Staff agreed with our appeal about the tunnel construction damage and long-term water quality issues.

But we couldn’t help but wonder what it all means.


In her letter, DWR Director Karla Nemeth referred only to Council Chairman Randy Fiorini’s statement that DWR “filed its Certification of Consistency before it was ready to demonstrate consistency with the Delta Plan” as the reason DWR made the withdrawal. She did not mention the Staff’s agreement with our appeal or the issues raised about the tunnels.

Yes, the Council Staff agreed with our appeal and said the tunnels were not consistent with the Delta Plan. But in the DWR letter, Nemeth didn’t say she agreed with Fiorini or refer at all to the opposition’s claims.

Just the opposite. Nemeth stated that the DWR “firmly believes the timing was appropriate,” a “thorough record had been prepared,” and that “WaterFix is consistent with the Delta Plan Policies.” Instead, DWR’s reason for withdrawing is “unresolved issues related to the interpretation of the requirements of the Delta Reform Act and Delta Plan Policies,” (i.e., just a technicality).

The optimistic of us would say Nemeth was just “saving face” for the DWR and we hope the DWR will take their tunnel plan and slink away into the night.

However, Nemeth also requested that the Council dismiss all appeals of the WaterFix certification of consistency. And the Council did just that.

The whole thing sounds sneaky to me. Maybe because we know Karla’s husband is executive strategist with the Metropolitan Water District, the group financing the tunnel plan. I don’t hear DWR admitting that the Tunnel Plan is terrible for the Delta, only that there’s some minor unresolved issues.

So what does that mean?
I asked our Legal Council about it. Michael Brodsky said it would have been better for us to go forward to the hearings on December 20-21 and have a formal decision sustaining our appeal. Instead now, our appeal has been dismissed and there was nothing we could do to stop it.

So while we’re still happy that it was a big setback for the tunnels, by dismissing the appeals they may be trying to limit the damage to the tunnel plan.

We just have to see what happens next.

And to be prepared for what happens next, we are in our Holiday Season Fundraising mode and appreciate any year-end donations you’d like to make.

Please donate . . .

We’re a 501(c)3 non-profit so all donations are tax-deductible.

STCDA is an all-voluntary organization and does not, nor does it anticipate, paying board members salaries or wages or legal council fees.

Or make checks payable to “STCDA” and mail to:

    P.O. Box 1760
    Discovery Bay, CA 94505

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »