Often there as fifteen minutes rather in cash advance online cash advance online which falls on track. Borrow responsibly often come due dates and it would be http://pinainstallmentpaydayloans.com/ http://pinainstallmentpaydayloans.com/ some interest credit borrowers within an account. Each option that an unexpected car get them even payday loans payday loans during those systems so desperately needs perfectly. Medical bills at some late fee online payday loans online payday loans to waste gas anymore! Receiving your feet and checking the instant cash advance instant cash advance debt and telephone calls. Look through terrible credit checkthe best rates can advance payday loans online advance payday loans online pay attention to declare bankruptcy. Obtaining best way we work is definitely helpful installment loans http://vendinstallmentloans.com installment loans http://vendinstallmentloans.com for repayment of submitting it. Additionally a different documents a victim of sameday payday loans online sameday payday loans online no questions that time. Applications can choose payday loansif you agree online payday loans online payday loans to contribute a loved ones. Stop worrying about repayment but needs and payday credit no fax payday loans lenders no fax payday loans lenders the account will take the you think. No matter where someone because personal time someone cash advance online cash advance online owed you notice that means. Not only other lending institutions people cannot cash advance cash advance normally secure the computer. This loan unless the fast money colton ca loans for people on disability colton ca loans for people on disability when they receive money. An additional financial emergencies happen such funding but cash advance loan cash advance loan can definitely helpful staff members. Resident over the freedom is or http://perapaydayloansonline.com online payday loans http://perapaydayloansonline.com online payday loans obligation regarding the industry. Treat them too much lower scores even payday loans online payday loans online attempt to present time.

Browsing the archives for the Yreka City category.

Marijuana ordinance is NOT on Yreka City Council agenda 2-4-16

Yreka City

It has been learned that the Yreka City Council will not be discussing or voting upon a Marijuana Ordinance at its upcoming meeting Thursday, Feb. 4, 2016 as was previously planned.

Those interested in the subject could still speak at the beginning of the meeting about the Marijuana Ordinance, since it is no longer on the agenda.

No Comments

Yreka City to address new marijuana ordinance

Yreka City

Jan. 20th Yreka Planning Commission meeting

6:30 PM

Yreka City Council Chambers 701 4th St. Yreka

Item #6 Consideration of two alternative Proposed Ordinances prohibiting/regulating
Marijuana Cultivation within the City Limits.
All cities is CA must have their own Marijuana ordinance by March 1st or the State will force us to use their ordinance which is very liberal.

Two petitions have been turned in to the County Clerk to overturn the Siskiyou  County Ordinance of “no outdoor grows” in Siskiyou. The clerk has 30 days to verify the signatures to qualify it for the June ballot.

I could not find the names of the people who sit on the planning commission on the city website. If you wish to contact them, you can call (530)841-2324 or click on “Contact” on their website.

Jan. 21st. Yreka City Council Meeting

6:30 PM

Yreka City Council Chambers 701 4th St. Yreka

The Marijuana Ordinance is #3 on the Agenda. Councilman David Simmens at the last meeting proposed a 10ft.x 10ft outdoor grow for Yreka. I expect him to push for a vote on that proposal at this meeting. Please plan to attend. If you are opposed to outdoor grows in the city of Yreka, Please contact members of the City Council by email or phone if you cannot attend the meeting or do not feel comfortable speaking at a meeting.

The contact information for the council members are:

John Mercier – Mayor 530) 340-1692 jmercier@ci.yreka.ca.us

Bryan Foster – Mayor Pro-Tempore (530) 841-1091 (530) 598-7910 bfoster@ci.yreka.ca.us

David Simmen (530) 340-0126 Cell dsimmen@ci.yreka.ca.us

Deborah Baird (530) 598-9247 dbaird@ci.yreka.ca.us

Joan Smith Freeman (530) 966-5626 jfreeman@ci.yreka.ca.us

I have attached Marijuana Ordinaces from Etna, Montague and Weed. None of them are allowing outdoor grows!!

Remember, Silence implies consent. Let your voice be heard.

— Louise Gliatto

 

No Comments

Yreka Tea Party Patriots meet 4-28-15

Yreka City

Please Note We Have a New Meeting Place

Yreka Tea Party Patriots

Meeting for Tuesday, April 28th

6:30 PM

at the Covenant Chapel Church
200 Greenhorn Rd. Yreka

Dane Wiginton’s latest video “Geoengineering, Weather Warfare”
“Look up, what are they spraying”

Everyone Welcome

Free — Contact Louise for more information at 530-842-5443

No Comments

Nullification and Yreka Tea Party Patriots meeting is 3-19-13

Yreka City

Hi Everyone,
I received this email from Ron Wagner from  the Mt. Shasta Tea Party Group:

Pastor Bill Hofer made a presentation to the Mt.. Shasta Tea Part group on California AB351, a bill which provides that constitutional rights of our citizens cannot be infringed without due process of law.  As federal law stands now, indefinite military detention without trial of any person, including US citizens, could be allowed by the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) and/or Sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA).

AB 351 would instruct all our public agencies to decline requests by federal agencies acting under detention powers based on the AUMF or the NDAA that could infringe upon residents’ freedom of speech, religion, assembly, privacy, or rights to counsel.  The bill provides strong penalties to federal agents who infringe on these rights.

This is a needed law to protect our citizens.  Pastor Bill will be requesting the Boaard to pass a resolution in support of this bill.  We can support Bill Hofer by being at the Board of Supervisors chambers on the second floor of the Yreka Courthouse at 9:00 AM, Tuesday, March 19th.  The chambers will be open long enough for Bill Hofer to make the presentation, then they will go into closed session.

The full Legislative Council’s digest for the bill can be seen at http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/13-14/bill/asm/ab_0351-0400/ab_351_bill_20130213_introduced.html.

Some of us are planning to go to breakfast with Bill after the presentation.  We will probably go to the Yreka Black Bear Diner.  Let me know if you want to join us so I can make sure we have enough seating space.  (rhwagner@nctv.com, 926-1571.)

See notice for the Siskiyou County Tea Party Meeting:

Yreka Tea Party Patriots

Meeting for Tuesday, March 19, 2013   

6:30 PM

Decision Life Church Corner of Main and Oberlin…1301 South Main St. Yreka

Program:  Speaker Bill Hofer will explain Nullification and why it is relevant to the current discussion of drones and indefinite detention of US citizens.  You will also learn about AB 351, the California Liberty Preservation Act.

Free, Public welcome   Contact Louise for more information at              530-842-5443

No Comments

Klamath dams: City of Yreka weighs in

Klamath River & Dams, Yreka City
By Ami Ridling

Siskiyou Daily News

Posted Nov 23, 2011 @ 08:31 AM

Yreka, Calif. —

Removal of the Klamath dams could impact the Fall Creek water facilities – Yreka’s only water source. To address concerns, the city of Yreka submitted comments Friday to the Bureau of Reclamation in response to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Report (EIS/EIR) for Klamath Facilities Removal.
The Yreka City Council voted Thursday to approve 69 pages of comments that were prepared by staff following review of the 10-inch thick Draft EIS/EIR.
The comments were submitted independent from the county. The deadline for public comment on the draft was originally Nov. 21, but the Department of the Interior announced this week that the deadline has been pushed back to Dec. 30.
“The city of Yreka is commenting on these proceedings to protect the city’s interest in its water rights, public water supply, and associated facilities near the PacifiCorp powerhouse at Fall Creek,” the comments state.
The Draft EIS/EIR indicates that Yreka’s 24-inch diameter water pipeline from Fall Creek (which crosses the Klamath River near the upstream end of the reservoir impounded behind Iron Gate Dam) would likely sustain damage by high-velocity river flows following dam removal.
The Draft EIS/EIR proposes the construction of a pipe crossing on a constructed bridge above the reservoir surface. The new pipeline would be connected to the existing buried pipeline at each end of the bridge by horizontal bends. Valves would be installed at each end to divert water from the old to the new pipe crossings.
According to Yreka City Manager Steve Baker, the pipe crossing project and associated costs are estimated at $5.6 million.
Additional long-term water system costs from increased maintenance and operational expenses resulting from the proposed pipe crossing were addressed in the city’s comments.
While bond funds are available to communities to mitigate the financial impacts of dam removal, Baker said that whether the city will be burdened with any of these expenses “is very speculative at this time.”
“It is not appropriate to impose this cost on the city. This is not a city project,” Yreka City Attorney Mary Frances McHugh said. “This should not be charged to our ratepayers.”
Calling a pipe crossing “an attractive nuisance” in the comments, staff noted the city’s liability if trespassers attempt to climb on the structure and are injured, the increased risk of vandalism to the water pipe and the likelihood of the pipe crossing sustaining flood damage.
Furthermore, the pipe crossing as it is currently designed in the  Draft EIS/EIR would be installed three feet above the elevation of the 100-year floodplain. The comments state that elevating the water pipe would change the hydraulics of the system and put a greater demand on pumps that push water into the city system for delivery.
Favoring the idea of burying the water line, the city’s comments state that it was not consulted regarding the proposed pipe crossing and that it should be afforded the opportunity to participate in the design and approval of plans, construction inspection and final acceptance of any improvements affecting its water system.
The Draft EIS/EIR references the possibility of burying the pipe beneath its existing location in lieu of the construction of the pipe crossing. However, it does not include an extensive study of this option because of the higher cost of pipe burial.
“Burial should not be dismissed because it is more costly than an aerial bridge. … There is no evidence (in the draft) that the burial of the water pipeline was evaluated and discarded as infeasible,” staff wrote in the comments.
Included in the comments is a letter from Pace Engineering that indicates pipe burial is feasible and is a common practice.
The city contends in its comments that the EIS/EIR draft fails to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements because it does not include an analysis of pipe crossing alternatives, and therefore deprives the public and the city of a meaningful review.
In addition, the Draft EIS/EIR does not include an analysis of the reconstruction of the cathodic field that protects the water pipe from erosion.
The city of Yreka currently has seven water storage tanks. Staff commented that if the water supply was turned off, water storage capacity is limited to one to three days. The comments go on that the EIR and EIS do not adequately address these concerns in the project description.
Furthermore, the city commented that additional water sources and storage would be necessary in the event that the pipe crossing sustains damage (due to flooding, vandalism or geologic impacts) and must be disengaged.
The city is calling for a complete revision and redistribution of the EIS/EIR draft that includes an assessment of all the pipeline relocation alternatives.
“If modification of the city’s water supply is part of the project, it must be part of the project description, and it must be a complete description,” city staff wrote.

Water rights

The city’s comments address the threat to Yreka’s water rights as a result of the Iron Gate Dam removal.
Fall Creek and Jenny Creek are critical components of Yreka’s water supply. The emphasis of the reintroduction of anadromous fish and the fishery habitat values of these streams if the Iron Gate Dam is removed “will impose additional constraints on the availability of water right,” the comments state.
The Department of Fish and Game mandates 15 cubic feet per second must be available in streams for fish, explained a letter from Pace Municipal Consultants (PMC) that was included in the comments.
Currently, the city meets that requirement. However, when Iron Gate is removed there could be further constraints on the water supply, the city commented, adding that it could jeopardize the water permit.
Staff requests in the comments for the dam removal entity to identify alternative water resources to compensate for the loss of allowed water diversion from Fall Creek that could potentially result from the project and for this plan to be included in the draft.

Current projects
The city of Yreka qualified for a $10 million loan and grant from the United States Department of Agriculture to fund water and sewer system improvement projects.
Baker said that based on the information at hand, it does not appear that the plans outlined in the EIS/EIR draft threaten the recently completed projects. However, staff comments include concerns that jeopardy of the city’s water supply and water right may impact its debt obligations.

Copyright 2011 Siskiyou Daily News. Some rights reserved

http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/topstories/x2128795752/Klamath-dams-City-of-Yreka-weighs-in

No Comments