For Immediate Release - Judge to decide Vineyard Issue by Thanksgiving?

Lakeport- Friday Nov 19, 2004-After hearing attorney arguments for 4 hours, Lake County Superior Court Judge Robert Crone took the motion for preliminary injunction of Kaj Almann's Six Sigma Ranch and Vineyard's expansion plan named "Diamond Mine Vineyard Phase 2'' under submission. He intends to slog through the evidence, decide how much of it is admissible, and make a decision before Thanksgiving.

The Co-planitiffs, Forest Unlimited and the Concerned Citizens of Coons Flat/Jerusalem Grade brought the case against both the County of Lake and Kaj Ahlmann for proceeding with vineyard grading plans without doing a CEQA required Environmental Impact Report, or other mitigations to address real impacts.

All sides had counsel there to argue their positions in the case. The plaintiff's attorneys made arguments that the vineyard project in it's current incarnation is flawed and would have many impacts to the nearby residents, the oak woodland habitat, streams, and groundwater quality and quantity.

Lake County Counsel argued that the plaintiffs were basing the case on fears and speculation, without evidence to back up the claims.

Kaj Ahlmann's attorney, Peter Windrem, argued that the county has no jurisdiction over water rights issues. He stated it was perfectly legal to cut down oak trees and pump large quantities of water. He gushed over the mitigations that the vineyard owner proposed; Measuring his own well level, twice a year, for five years. (The proposed mitigations are limited to the vineyard wells and do nothing to measure the impacts to the shared aquifer or the neighbors' streams or well water.) Windrem argued that the preliminary injunction would cause Mr. Ahlmann great economic hardship. Lastly he implied the plaintiffs dragged out the project for 4 years were hostile.

In rebuttal arguments, plaintiff attorney, Kimberly Burr pointed out that her clients have been civil and followed all the rules. Plaintiff's involvement only began a little over a year ago, not four years ago as Windrem stated. Delays were caused by the county, the planning commission or the vineyard owner, not the plaintiffs. Burr stated the case was based on evidence, not speculation or fears as county counsel stated. She discussed evidence such as letters from department of water resources, Department of Fish and Game, and UC Cooperative Extension. Plaintiff attorney Jerry Bernhaut stated that there was enough "substantial credible evidence" to support "fair argument" for an EIR, (Environmental Impact Report).

A lot of evidence was submitted. Both The County and the Vineyard Counsel wanted some of it excluded. The Judge said at the end of arguments that he would go through the copious amount of papers, decide what was admissible and that he would rule on the preliminary injunction against the vineyard project before Thanksgiving.

For More Information, old news and documentation go to www.vineyarwatch.org