The County of Riverside has released the draft EIR for the proposed Liberty Quarry. Because of the size of the report, we are providing a link to the Riverside County Planning Department's draft EIR site. You can download the sections of the report directly from their site.

Read/Download the Draft EIR

Please submit comments on the Draft EIR. Click here for additional information on making effective comments on the DEIR.

The comment period on the draft EIR has been extended until Monday, November 23, 2009.

All comments must be submitted no later than 5:00 P.M., November 23, 2009 to:
Riverside County Planning Department
Attention: David L. Jones
4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor
P.O. Box 1409
Riverside, CA 92502-1409; or
e-mailed to the following e-mail address: [email protected].
Mr. David L. Jones can be contacted by telephone at (951) 955-6863, by fax at (951) 955-3157 or by e-mail at [email protected].

Join us on Facebook!

Come wave a sign with us! Our next sign waving will be held from 4:30 to 5:30 on Thurs., October 1 at the Duck Pond on the corner of Rancho California Road and Ynez Road.

________________________________________

Other ways you can help include writing letters to local, state and federal legislators and the local newspapers. To view all their addresses, follow this link or click on the Get Involved button above.

We are also asking people to consider making a donation to help us in the fight! We need money for legal review and comment on the 8000+ page Environmental Impact Report Granite paid for and produced, in addition to money for technical experts to evaluate the accuracy of data in that report, money for advertising, and other mailings.  Every dollar we get goes to our fight against the quarry.  SOS members are all volunteers and no one gets paid a penny. We have supporters that have committed thousands of dollars, and others only a few.  "Dimes to dollars grow."  Please help us in our "David vs. Goliath" battle! All of your contributions are tax deductible. 

To donate via PayPal, click the Donate button below. If you send a check please mail to SOS Hills, PO Box 2196, Temecula, Ca. 92593-2196.   Our Federal Tax ID # is 33-0807157.

Article from The Californian, July 21, 2009

TEMECULA: Report says quarry would affect air quality, traffic

Impacts called 'significant and unavoidable'

By AARON CLAVERIE - [email protected] | Monday, July 20, 2009 11:40 PM PDT ∞

TEMECULA ---- There is no way to soften or relieve the proposed Liberty Quarry's impact on the area's air quality and already-snarled traffic, even if that quarry is about 20 acres smaller than initially proposed, according to a long-awaited report that was drawn up as part of Granite Construction's bid to build a quarry on 400 acres near Temecula's southwestern border.

The report, a draft environmental impact report that was released Monday after three years of preparation, states, in the jargon that is used by planning agencies, that the impacts related to air quality and traffic and transportation are not likely to be offset to a "less than significant" level and they represent "significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed project."

In addition, the report states that there will be cumulative impacts that are "considerable and unavoidable" with regards to air quality, biological resources, transportation and traffic and utility and service systems.

Due to those findings, the public agency that eventually considers allowing mining on that parcel will need to approve what's called a "statement of overriding considerations" if it decides to approve Granite's application.

That statement, according to state law, must back the agency's decision with specific information from the final environmental impact report or other "substantial evidence" in the record. In essence, the public agency will have to be able to state that the benefits of the project are enough to merit approval despite the "considerable and unavoidable" negative factors.

The final report on the Liberty Quarry project is scheduled to be assembled later this year. It will be a combination of the findings of the draft report, comments on that report submitted by interested parties ---- and there are literally hundreds of interested parties in the region ---- and the responses to those comments.

The 60-day comment period will close at 5 p.m. Sept. 18. Comments can be e-mailed to [email protected].

When the final report is published, the project can go before the county's Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, if, as expected, the county eventually rules on the proposal.

The city of Temecula has attempted to throw a wrench in that machinery by trying to annex the land that Granite has slated for the quarry, but the county's boundary-setting commission rejected its application earlier this year.

On Monday, according to the Local Agency Formation Commission's executive office, the city filed a request for the commission to reconsider its decision.

That decision, the end result of a nine-hour hearing and a 5-2 vote by the commission's board, was controversial locally because a large group of Temecula residents believe the city should have the final say on whether a quarry is built on land near its borders.

Due to the city's request, there will be a new hearing that focuses solely on information that the city is arguing could not have been presented at the initial hearing on June 4.

On Monday, Granite officials responded to the findings in the environmental report by noting that of the more than 100 potential environmental impacts studied in the report, only eight were found to be significant after measures that would offset negative effects were factored in.

Of those eight, two are temporary impacts related to construction, two are due to Riverside County's inability to require other jurisdictions to upgrade interchanges in Temecula and San Diego County to reduce traffic impacts and the others are only "significant" because there is already an existing significant impact on those resources, specifically air quality, air pollution levels, water and a habitat linkage for migratory animals.

The draft report released Monday focuses on four specific scenarios, or "alternatives": not developing the project, reducing the quarry's footprint, reducing the quarry's annual production and an alternate quarry location, land near Winchester that was deemed a feasible alternate location for a quarry of similar size.

Of the four scenarios, the "reduced quarry footprint alternative" ---- which shaves 20 acres off the proposed quarry's total surface acreage ---- was called the "environmentally-superior alternative" by the report, which was produced under the guidance and review of the county's Planning Department by the Lilburn Corp., a San Bernardino-based consulting firm that specializes in controversial land-use projects.

Asked to name the person or entity that decided building a quarry was environmentally superior to not building a quarry, David Jones, the county's geologist, said the "environmentally-superior alternative" phrase is wording that is dictated by the California Environmental Quality Act.

"It means the project is superior even in light of these potential impacts," he said, talking about the unavoidable and significant impacts identified by the report.

The report, which was paid for by Granite, reached that conclusion by stating that with the "no project alternative" there would be "the likelihood of increased air emissions and traffic that would result from the continued need to supply the market area with construction-grade aggregate from more distant sources." The item on the "no project alternative" also states that there would be a "loss of mineral resources" if the site is not developed for a quarry.

Granite project manager Gary Johnson said that the smaller quarry ---- reduced from 155 acres to 135 acres ---- would still produce the same amount of aggregate per year as the larger quarry, 5 million tons, but the life span of the quarry would shrink from 60 years to about 50 years.

"The report identifies which one of the alternatives is best. And the reduced footprint is better than denying the project," he said. "That's the concluding statement and all the data ---- 710 pages or whatever it is ---- supports that."

Temecula city planner Patrick Richardson said Monday that city staff members were reviewing the document and he said the city did not have any comment on the findings of the report as of Monday. Late last week, Mayor Maryann Edwards said in an e-mail that standard operating procedure for the city's response to this sort of document includes tasking employees with sifting through the report and asking the city's legal counsel to inspect it as well.

Robbie Adkins, a Temecula resident who lives about two miles northwest of the proposed quarry site, said work was afoot on Monday to "organize the troops" to raise money to pay for a legal evaluation of the report.

Based on her initial analysis, Adkins said the report clearly described a list of environmental impacts that can't be offset. And she said there's no way the county can persuasively make an argument that there are "overriding considerations" that would allow for those impacts to be ignored.

"I don't think they can do that .... unless someone is completely corruptible," she said.

Supporters of the quarry have argued that the project would provide jobs, tax revenue and the raw materials for infrastructure projects that will benefit the entire region.

Adkins said the economic argument doesn't hold water because the revenue produced by the quarry would be dwarfed by the losses to the area's tourism industry and the lower property values in Temecula that will run hand-in-hand with being known as a "mining town."

"The quarry is expected to produce about $1 (million) to $2 million in sales tax revenue. Temecula's tourism industry produces $23 million in tax revenue. How can you make a strong business case for that? Compromising $23 million for $1 (million) to $2 million?" she said.

Addressing the report's contention that building the quarry is environmentally superior to not building the quarry, Adkins said it's based on a faulty study that theorizes about the number of trucks that might be removed from the county's roads.

"They've been singing that song for four years. It's not accurate and it's not scientific. It used to be that they were going to sell all of the granite to the south, but now they plan to send about one-third to Riverside," she said. "How is that taking trucks off the road?"

To view the report, visit: http://www.rctlma.org/planning/content/temp/liberty_quarry.html.

Call staff writer Aaron Claverie at 951-676-4315, ext. 2624.  

Dear SOS Volunteers and all the concerned residents of the Temecula Valley: 

What a great fight! Supervisor Bob Buster had a wonderful speech advocating the annexation. Only Supervisor Tavaglione voted in agreement with him.

Seven full busloads of supporters; hundreds more who drove; passionate, well-informed speeches...
Yes, we have lost this battle, but we will NOT LOSE THE WAR!

We can not only be proud but are more resolved than ever to beat the quarry!

THANKS TO ALL!

Most important, remember that we have as allies, our great City of Temecula Leaders and Staff, the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians and San Diego State University.

Stay tuned for the next step!

Kathleen Hamilton, President of SOS-Hills
_____________________________________________

Dear Volunteers and Supporters from Rainbow and beyond:

The LAFCO hearing is behind us, and, while the decision they made was disappointing, it was a "choice" to NOT make a "choice." 

So, we move on...but we gained SO much in my opinion;  we KNOW what we are really capable of achieving and the dedication and willingness of all our  volunteers, speakers, and the PEOPLE who supported us and showed up!!

Rainbow, Fallbrook, Temecula, Murrieta...you STOOD up for what you believed in and we will do it again when the time comes. 

There is NO doubt in my mind that a victory will be ours in the end.  We just have to "walk a few more miles" to get there.   

I know that we owe it to all of you to keep you all informed about what is happening and what is coming up.

You can help by getting more and more people involved and on the mailing/e mail list. 

Thank you everyone.   
Jerri Arganda 

Dear SOS Volunteers and all the concerned residents of the Temecula Valley: 

The loss to a LAFCO Board that did not adhere to their principles of "Local Control" for cities and the preservation of "Open Space", and voted against Temecula in favor of a private, for profit company's rights instead, flies in the face of all reason.  We more than proved our case for our City's right to Local Control and to become the logical caretaker of the open space to be annexed.   Anger at injustice can make us better warriors. So now we dust ourselves off, climb "back on the horse" take our gloves off and keep our fists at the ready! This was only Round One. 

We did an amazing job of presenting our case before LAFCO and we are grateful to everyone who got on a bus, or wanted to get on a bus, who took the day off with the loss of  pay to come ,who wrote letters- to- the-editors, marched in rally's, attended our events, stood at markets for signatures and  the BANGO folks who gathered the 750 business people and doctors who oppose the quarry.  SOS sincerely thanks all of you who rose up and stood to be counted on the side of right.  The absolute rightness of our cause has not changed,  we're still fighting against Granite Construction, just in a different venue

 Our organization is solidly in place and with the support of Temecula, Murrieta, Rainbow, Fallbrook, SDSU and The Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians. We are more than ready to take on Round Two!.... So start polishing your armor and sword, practice getting back up on your horse, and let's begin our march to the County Board of Supervisors!

It's not over by a long shot.  

Is this what we want in our hills?

A big thank you to Greg Cress for producing the video!

A California contractor agrees to pay a $48,000 penalty and $192,000
to restore creeks dirtied while 7 miles of U.S. 20 was straightened
The agreement is the third-highest settlement of an environmental
violation in 10 years

Read the rest of the article...