Eastside Road jail rezone

A 47-year resident said the field was always a buffer zone where nothing would be built; she cited crime, water pollution, emergency access, traffic, wildlife, and noise/light concerns.

Said the location is inappropriate, residents weren't informed until October, and approving the rezone sends a message the commission agrees with the county's use; urged denial.

Opposed the use, citing wildlife, bald eagles, water quality, and alleging the Board of Supervisors pressured the city by delaying a special election.

Cited traffic, crime, noise, wildlife, and falling property values; said a jail next to a residential neighborhood is a safety concern and asked the commission to vote no.

Worried about well water, safety, property values, noise, and loss of tranquility in her neighborhood.

Feared property value losses of $200,000-$300,000 on her river home, harm to wildlife, and released felons in the area.

Said the facility is needed but belongs elsewhere; reported her home has already lost $30,000-$50,000 in value.

Homeschooling father of nine years in the neighborhood; said release points next to homes increase risk and asked the commission to pause and consider other locations.

Questioned changing Parks zoning to Institutional, objected to rezoning before an initial study, and raised shallow wells, river pollution, and child safety.

Warned the county could do whatever it wants if the rezone passes; cited traffic, light pollution, public safety, and lack of notice.

Quoted General Plan goals on preserving neighborhood character and cited CEQA light/glare thresholds and bald eagle habitat; asked for denial as mitigation.

A 52-year resident who has successfully fought prior land uses; noted no buffer opportunity exists and asked the commission to consider residents' perspective.

Called the lease a $1 giveaway and alleged extortion over the special election and Brown Act violations; urged denial as the fastest fix.

Former Anderson mayor who supports the sheriff but not this location; raised fire evacuation access and questioned the wastewater buffer's elimination.

Cited a gap between the 2045 General Plan and the proposal, the MCRP escapes last year, and the river as the city's greatest asset; asked the commission to reject the rezone.

Former mayor and board chairman said the 2022-2023 Board of Supervisors favored the downtown old courthouse site, which is cheaper and better served by infrastructure.

Described the River Ranch neighborhood's history and Fourth of July parade; said a correctional institution would destroy the community and urged rejection.

Cited legal issues and lack of transparency; said comparing the adult facility to juvenile hall is disingenuous and suggested a park as a better use.

The lone clear supporter: favored the rezone away from heavy industrial and suggested a buffer with facilities near the treatment plant, with access off Eastside Road only.

Lives 250 feet from the site; cited devaluation, traffic, and safety, and urged commissioners to use their conscience.

Called the site wetlands with vernal pools and an eagle nest, said the old courthouse site has infrastructure, and alleged CEQA violations and secrecy.

Representing the River Ranch Property Owners Association, warned of hardened homes, rising insurance, plummeting values, and questioned the $1 sale price.

Joked he could raise more than a dollar for the property and accused the commission of bias and the bandwagon effect.

Noted nearly everyone present opposed the project and invited the commission to visit the neighborhood; suggested alternate sites and implied profiteering.

Opposed due to environmental impact on the river, wetlands, and wildlife, plus traffic and poor communication by the city and county.

Asked commissioners to visit the neighborhood; said the jail would destroy its peaceful nature.

Said the sheriff previously proposed a site off Highway 44 at the old dump that would work better; rejected the juvenile hall comparison.

Shasta Birding Society conservation co-chair; called the review piecemealing, said the addenda ignore wildlife and riparian habitat, and noted 136 bird species documented there.

Speaking for the Native Plant Society and Sierra Club, questioned the meeting's legal notice, said the city attorney's last-minute edits revealed piecemealing, and submitted a written letter.

Argued the county doesn't need the rezone, so its real purpose is enabling a future sale to a private party; denial is the only way to stop the project.

Called the riverside property one of the best in the state and said the prison should be built elsewhere, suggesting the trout farm area.

Said she organized the opposition, announced the Shasta Land Trust is interested in buying the property as green space, and disclosed residents have retained legal counsel and been served that day.

Would support a rehabilitation center for non-violent offenders, but said the unknown project scope and poor notice make the decision impossible; urged no action.