Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Siskiyou County supervisors approve agricultural preserve amendments, citing Williamson Act complexities
Loading...
Summary
The Board of Supervisors approved staff resolutions to amend agricultural preserves and reissue Williamson Act contracts for two separate landowners, finding both projects exempt from CEQA under Guideline/Section 15317. The moves follow extended discussion about administrative challenges posed by many small, noncontiguous preserves.
SISKIYOU COUNTY — The Board of Supervisors voted to amend agricultural preserves and reissue separate Williamson Act contracts for two private parcels, approving staff recommendations that each project be found exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under Guideline/Section 15317.
Bernadette Sisson, associate planner, told the board that Dustin and Mariah Mason had applied to create a separate Williamson Act contract for about 80.38 acres on Scala Lane south of Montague. Review found two small portions (0.56 acre and 1.06 acre) not currently under contract; staff recommended adding those acres, removing the Mason parcel and adjacent Shannons parcel from the existing preserve, and creating a new 127.02‑acre preserve consisting of the Mason parcel and the adjacent 45.02 acres owned by the Shannons. Sisson said staff recommended determining the change exempt from CEQA pursuant to section 15317 (open space easements and contracts).
After discussion about how historic, scattered preserves interact with current requirements, the board approved the Mason resolution. Speaker 4 characterized the current pattern of small, noncontiguous preserves as “an absolute nightmare,” arguing a broader countywide approach might simplify administration; Sisson and other staff cautioned that a countywide ag preserve could have statutory consequences under government code guidance and the county’s guidelines, potentially triggering contract eligibility across a wider area and requiring careful legal review.
Sisson also presented a second application, for a separate 96.5‑acre contract east of Highway 97 near Niptole. Staff found the parcel lay within an existing ag preserve and recommended removing it from that preserve and creating a new 285.5‑acre preserve by combining the subject parcel with adjacent 199‑ and 189‑acre parcels owned by Glasson Canyon Nursery. The board approved the resolution to amend the preserve and reissue the contract; staff again recommended a CEQA exemption under section 15317.
Both items passed on roll call votes. The clerk noted that public hearing notices for the Mason item produced at least one undeliverable mail return; no proponents or opponents spoke at the hearings and no online commenters were recorded in the meeting transcript. The board requested additional mapping and one‑on‑one briefings with supervisors before future preserve items appear on the agenda.
The actions affect how the county configures Williamson Act preserves and could influence future applications where parcels are noncontiguous or where smaller historical preserves need reconfiguration. The board did not adopt a countywide preserve at this meeting; supervisors asked staff to include options in an upcoming white paper and legal review before pursuing broader changes.