Siskiyou County Settles Water Access Lawsuit with Shasta Vista Residents
Press release from the ACLU Foundation of Northern California:
On [June] 30, the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors agreed to a settlement that will resolve the remaining claims in Mathis et al. v. County of Siskiyou et al., a case brought by Siskiyou residents who challenged water access restrictions in a community that is home to more than 1,000 residents, most of whom are Asian American.
Under the settlement, the County will refrain from enforcing local laws that had the effect of curtailing water deliveries to Shasta Vista, a rural, largely undeveloped subdivision, whose residents have long had to obtain their water from sources outside of their community. This agreement will cover water deliveries for domestic use only, not cannabis cultivation, and will remain in place while residents of the Shasta Vista community look for a more permanent source of domestic water. Efforts to create sustainable, permanent water solutions for domestic use in Shasta Vista will be an ongoing, multi-year process.
Everyone deserves the opportunity to have good, safe, and potable water in their homes, and this agreement will give the Shasta Vista community an opportunity to achieve this, County leaders said. While Representatives of the County acknowledge that finding a solution to the provision of water in the area will be an involved and detailed process, the settlement agreement makes clear that the County supports the efforts of the community to find long term solutions for domestic water access.
“Like most of my neighbors, I can’t afford to drill a well on my property and for years have struggled to have a reliable supply of clean water,” said Russell Mathis, a longtime Shasta Vista resident, who is the lead plaintiff in the case. “This agreement means that residents in my community will get the water we desperately need for bathing, caring for animals, and protecting ourselves against wildfires.”
Plaintiffs were represented by the ACLU Foundation of Northern California, the Asian Law Caucus, and Covington & Burling LLP.
Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
Shasta Vista, just like Trinity Pines, was marketed as a rustic get away for camping and roughing it.
They were never intended for year round occupancy and that’s why the developers were allowed to get away without providing basic infrastructure.
Fast forward to successive waves of greed rushers and you get an influx of down and dirty outlaw growers.
Settling the lawsuit at least cuts off the cash flow to the attorneys but who’s going to monitor that the trucked in water will only be used for domestic purposes and not cannabis?
Most likely the authorities will loook the other way and at least some of the residents will keep trying to scratch out a living by selling in the traditional market – cuz there’s no other way to make a go of things if you’re stuck in Shasta Vista.