San Joaquin County planning panel continues Manteca Sportsman's Club permit after school safety request

The San Joaquin County Planning Commission on an unspecified date voted 4-1 to continue consideration of a conditional-use permit for the Manteca Sportsman's Club until March 5 after the San Joaquin County Office of Education requested additional time to obtain an independent ballistic review.

Anthony Flores, a representative of the San Joaquin County Office of Education, told the commission the county is a neighbor of the shooting range and has students, parents and staff who use Durham Ferry Academy, a site roughly a mile from the range. "We are trying to reestablish some good relations with our neighbors," Flores said, and added the office had engaged a ballistic expert who lives in Arizona and could be scheduled once procurement steps are completed.

The county representative said the issue that prompted the review was a change around 2020 in the type of firearm used at the range, which the county says increased the potential for projectiles to travel beyond the shooting range's boundaries onto the school property.

John Swan, president of the Manteca Sportsman's Club, urged the commission not to grant a further delay, saying the club has revised plans and safety materials in response to prior requests and that the sheriff's department previously reviewed the club's design and materials. "We have adjusted our plans for every request that's been made," Swan said, and noted the club has retained its own ballistics expert and invited further questions of that expert.

Chair remarks and questions from commissioners focused on timing and precedent. Staff and the county confirmed they expected to initiate contracting steps with the ballistic consultant within days, but no firm delivery date for a written report was given during the hearing. The chair then called for a motion "to accept the continuance with the stipulation that it will be on the March 5 calendar." An unidentified commissioner moved, a second was made, and the motion passed by roll call, announced as 4-1. The chair stated, "So item 2 will be continued to the March 5 agenda."

The continuance preserves the commission's ability to consider the permit at the March 5 meeting with any new ballistic analysis in hand. Commissioners did not adopt any substantive conditions during the continuance; the record reflects continued negotiation between the county and the sports club over technical reviews and mitigation measures.

Next steps: item 2 will return to the Planning Commission on March 5 for further consideration if staff and the county deliver the requested expert review.