The Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA) and the
Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) set forth a process for
the removal of four dams along the river and a restoration plan for
the basin, respectively.
Siskiyou County Counsel Thomas Guarino gave a brief background on
the issue, stating that he had been directed to engage in the KBRA and KHSA processes
as a representative of the county without a pre-commitment to dam
removal.
Guarino said that he had been asked to provide a list of what he
believed would be the burdens and benefits associated with signing
the agreements. He stated that in signing, the county would give up
the right to challenge certain actions and the right to sue other
parties, adding that he believes that the county currently does not
have the funds available to pursue a lawsuit of that magnitude.
Benefits, according to Guarino, would be the county’s ability to be
involved in the various decisions and processes that are a part of
the agreements. He also reviewed the executive summary he prepared
for the county, which can be found at the county’s Web site,
www.co.siskiyou.ca.us/bos/index.htm.
Board Chair Marcia Armstrong voiced her concern that a cost/benefit
study being conducted as part of the KHSA regarding economic and
social impacts will be conducted on such a large scale that any
potentially negative impacts to the county may be overlooked if the
potential benefits for the study area are judged to outweigh them.
Answering a question from District 3 Supervisor Michael Kobseff,
Guarino stated that it is his opinion that the board would face
exposure to a lawsuit by being a party to the agreements under the
California Environmental Quality Act’s (CEQA) guidelines stating
that governmental agencies cannot precommit to any action before an
environmental analysis has been completed.
Both agreements are required to have accompanying legislation in
order to go into effect, and the proposed legislative language in
the KHSA includes a statement that the act of signing of the
document is not a “project” as defined in CEQA and the National
Environmental Policy Act, which would exempt that action from
environmental review.
Kobseff also asked Guarino to estimate how much the county has
invested in the agreement processes, and Guarino stated that he
believes that the county has spent approximately $500,000 in time
and money working with the other agreement groups.
The KBRA and KHSA forum will be covered in
a series of articles – Tuesday will feature a look at information
provided by the attending government representatives and questions
they answered from the board.
