Board Of Supervisors — Tuesday, October 24, 2017
This is the plain-text record. Open this meeting in the interactive archive for video timestamps, search and vote comparisons.
1. Call to Order
2. Moment of Silence
3. Pledge of Allegiance
4. Presentations by County Departments: (a) Animal Care & Control - Animals Available for Adoption (b) Human Resources - Current County Job Openings
5. Consideration of Items Not Appearing on the Posted Agenda (Extra Items)
6. Current Construction Projects - Contract Change Orders
6.1Consideration of Change Order No. 1 for Harbin Springs Road at Harbin Creek Bridge Replacement Project, Federal Project No. BRLO-5914(106), Bid No. 17-04
Action Item
approved — Pass
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Attached for the Board's review and approval is Contract Change Order (CCO) 1 for the subject project.
On June 21, the day after the project bid opening, the foothill yellow-legged frog (FYLF, Rana boylii) was designated as a candidate species for listing as "threatened" under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). Candidate species are entitled to the same legal protection as are the "endangered" or "threatened" species under CESA. Any attempt to relocate the FYLF (ushering, chasing, touching, handling, etc.) is considered a "take" and will require an Incidental Take Permit (ITP). A Biological Survey, required prior to construction, identified 10 adult and juvenile FYLF under the existing Bailey bridge. As a result, all construction activities were halted until an ITP was obtained from California Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW). Letters of support, written by Supervisor Simon and the CAO, elevated the ITP application review to "expedited". CDFW eventually agreed to allow the construction to proceed under Draft ITP Measures after a five-week shut-down.
Contract Change Order No. 1 addresses the costs associated with the preparation of the ITP Application, preparation and implementation of FYLF Relocation Plan, installation and removal of FYLF exclusion fence, performance of daily ITP compliance monitoring and the required reporting, and accelerating the construction schedule. These items resulted in an increase of $181,512.00 to the original contract amount of $1,092.803.60 for a new contract amount of $1,274,315.60. Caltrans has concurred that the costs are reasonable and eligible for reimbursement. The County has requested additional funding for the project to offset the increased costs.
This project is fully funded by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) thru Federal Highway Bridge Program (HBP) funds and California Toll Credit funds. Therefore, this project is 100% federally and state funded thru construction.
Staff recommends approval by the Board of Supervisors of CCO 1 and that the Board authorize the Chair to execute said CCO for an increase of $181,512.00 and a revised contract amount of $1,274,315.60.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): This project is fully funded by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) thru Federal Highway Bridge Program (HBP) funds and California Toll Credit funds. Therefore, this project is 100% federally and state funded thru construction.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval by the Board of Supervisors of CCO 1 for an increase of $181,512.00 and a revised contract amount of $1,274,315.60, and authorize the Chair to sign.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Scott De Leon, Public Works Director
DATE: October 24, 2017
SUBJECT: Approval of Change Order No. 1 for Harbin Springs Road at Harbin Creek Bridge Replacement Project, Federal Project No. BRLO-5914(106), Bid No. 17-04
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Attached for the Board's review and approval is Contract Change Order (CCO) 1 for the subject project.
On June 21, the day after the project bid opening, the foothill yellow-legged frog (FYLF, Rana boylii) was designated as a candidate species for listing as "threatened" under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). Candidate species are entitled to the same legal protection as are the "endangered" or "threatened" species under CESA. Any attempt to relocate the FYLF (ushering, chasing, touching, handling, etc.) is considered a "take" and will require an Incidental Take Permit (ITP). A Biological Survey, required prior to construction, identified 10 adult and juvenile FYLF under the existing Bailey bridge. As a result, all construction activities were halted until an ITP was obtained from California Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW). Letters of support, written by Supervisor Simon and the CAO, elevated the ITP application review to "expedited". CDFW eventually agreed to allow the construction to proceed under Draft ITP Measures after a five-week shut-down.
Contract Change Order No. 1 addresses the costs associated with the preparation of the ITP Application, preparation and implementation of FYLF Relocation Plan, installation and removal of FYLF exclusion fence, performance of daily ITP compliance monitoring and the required reporting, and accelerating the construction schedule. These items resulted in an increase of $181,512.00 to the original contract amount of $1,092.803.60 for a new contract amount of $1,274,315.60. Caltrans has concurred that the costs are reasonable and eligible for reimbursement. The County has requested additional funding for the project to offset the increased costs.
This project is fully funded by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) thru Federal Highway Bridge Program (HBP) funds and California Toll Credit funds. Therefore, this project is 100% federally and state funded thru construction.
Staff recommends approval by the Board of Supervisors of CCO 1 and that the Board authorize the Chair to execute said CCO for an increase of $181,512.00 and a revised contract amount of $1,274,315.60.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost: $181,512.00
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): This project is fully funded by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) thru Federal Highway Bridge Program (HBP) funds and California Toll Credit funds. Therefore, this project is 100% federally and state funded thru construction.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval by the Board of Supervisors of CCO 1 for an increase of $181,512.00 and a revised contract amount of $1,274,315.60, and authorize the Chair to sign.
On motion of Supervisor Simon, and by vote of the Board, approved Change Order No. 1 for Harbin Springs Road at Harbin Creek Bridge Replacement Project, Federal Project No. BRLO-5914(106), Bid No. 17-04, for an increase of $181,512; and authorized the Chair to sign. The motion carried by the following vote:
Clerk’s notes: Public Works Director Scott DeLeon presented the item to the Board.
Chair Smith asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
7. Approval of the Consent Agenda
7.1Approve Minutes of the Board of Supervisors meeting held October 3, 2017
Minutes
passed on consent
7.2(a) Waive the formal bidding process, pursuant to Lake County Code Section 38.2, as it is not in the public interest due to the unique nature of goods or services; and (b) Approve the Agreement between the County of Lake and St. Helena Hospital for the Fiscal Year 2017-18 for a contract maximum of $45,000; and authorize the Board Chair to sign the Agreement.
Agreement
passed on consent
Staff memo
Services were provided during Fiscal Year 2016-17 that were not reimbursed under the Fiscal Year 2016-17 contract; therefore, this Agreement will allow for the reimbursement of the remaining unpaid services provided during Fiscal Year 2016-17.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: St. Helena Hospital has two psychiatric facilities: Adventist Health St. Helena and Adventist Health Vallejo. Both facilities provide Psychiatric Inpatient Hospital Services and Professional Services associated with Acute Inpatient Psychiatric Hospitalizations to clients referred by Lake County Behavioral Health (LCBH).
As LCBH has had a successful ongoing working relationship with St. Helena Hospital and would like to continue this working relationship, LCBH is requesting to waive the formal bidding process, pursuant to Lake County Code Section 38.2, as it is not in the public interest due to the unique nature of goods or services.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Contract Amount: $45,000
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): LCBH is requesting the approval of the Agreement with St. Helena Hospital for Fiscal Year 2017-18 for a contract maximum of $45,000. This Agreement allows for the reimbursement of the remaining unpaid services that were provided during Fiscal Year 2016-17 that were not reimbursed.
This contract is funded by Realignment funds for Acute Hospitalizations and funded by Medi-Cal funds for Professional Services.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): N/A
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: (a) Waive the formal bidding process, pursuant to Lake County Code Section 38.2, as it is not in the public interest due to the unique nature of goods or services; and (b) Approve the Agreement between the County of Lake and St. Helena Hospital for the Fiscal Year 2017-18 for a contract maximum of $45,000; and authorize the Board Chair to sign the Agreement.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: Todd Metcalf
Behavioral Health Administrator
DATE: October 24, 2017
SUBJECT: Approve the Agreement between the County of Lake and St. Helena Hospital dba Adventist Health St. Helena and Adventist Health Vallejo for Acute Inpatient Psychiatric Hospital Services and Professional Services Associated with Acute Inpatient Psychiatric Hospitalizations for Fiscal Year 2017-18 in the amount of $45,000 and Authorize the Board Chair to sign the Agreement.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Attached, for your approval, is the Agreement between the County of Lake and St. Helena Hospital dba Adventist Health St. Helena and Adventist Health Vallejo for Acute Inpatient Hospital Services and Professional Services associated with Acute Inpatient Psychiatric Hospitalizations for Fiscal Year 2017-18.
Services were provided during Fiscal Year 2016-17 that were not reimbursed under the Fiscal Year 2016-17 contract; therefore, this Agreement will allow for the reimbursement of the remaining unpaid services provided during Fiscal Year 2016-17.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: St. Helena Hospital has two psychiatric facilities: Adventist Health St. Helena and Adventist Health Vallejo. Both facilities provide Psychiatric Inpatient Hospital Services and Professional Services associated with Acute Inpatient Psychiatric Hospitalizations to clients referred by Lake County Behavioral Health (LCBH).
As LCBH has had a successful ongoing working relationship with St. Helena Hospital and would like to continue this working relationship, LCBH is requesting to waive the formal bidding process, pursuant to Lake County Code Section 38.2, as it is not in the public interest due to the unique nature of goods or services.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Contract Amount: $45,000
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): LCBH is requesting the approval of the Agreement with St. Helena Hospital for Fiscal Year 2017-18 for a contract maximum of $45,000. This Agreement allows for the reimbursement of the remaining unpaid services that were provided during Fiscal Year 2016-17 that were not reimbursed.
This contract is funded by Realignment funds for Acute Hospitalizations and funded by Medi-Cal funds for Professional Services.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): N/A
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: (a) Waive the formal bidding process, pursuant to Lake County Code Section 38.2, as it is not in the public interest due to the unique nature of goods or services; and (b) Approve the Agreement between the County of Lake and St. Helena Hospital for the Fiscal Year 2017-18 for a contract maximum of $45,000; and authorize the Board Chair to sign the Agreement.
7.3(a) Waive the formal bidding process, pursuant to Lake County Code Section 2-38.4, as the County is piggybacking on a cooperative purchasing consortium contract; and (b) Approve Purchase Order with AAA Business Solutions, for cubicle workstations, in the amount of $84,949.36, and Authorize the Community Development Director to sign.
Action Item
passed on consent
Motion carried
Carried 5-0 — moved by Steele (recovered from the archived minutes by OCR)
Brown: aye Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Community Development Department does not have enough workstations for the budgeted staff. There are 29 budgeted positions and only 21 workstations. To meet the needs of the Department, some workstations are doubled and tripled-upped. The budget includes money to replace the existing offices and cubicles with smaller cubicles creating 38 workstations. The additional workstations are needed for the staff (6) who will be processing and monitoring the cannabis permits and a proposed Zoning Hearing Officer and their administrative assistant.
We have been working with AAA Business Solutions who has a The Cooperative purchasing Network (TCPN) contract R142208. This contract was competitive bid and pursuant to Section 2-38.4 of the Lake County Code, we will piggyback onto that contract. Attached is the proposed purchase order for this service. It includes the purchase and installation of the cubicles. The purchase order totals 41 cubicles which include five which will be located for a redesigned front counter and are not considered workstations. The Building Division budget includes money for this amount for this project ($101,774). The demolition and remodeling of the existing offices and front counter are in a separate line item of $45,000.
FISCAL IMPACT: ___ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Amount Budgeted: $101,774
Additional Request: N/A
Annual Cost (if planned for future years): N/A
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): The new cubicles are included in the Department's Budget in the amount of $101,774. The cost of the cubicles and installation is $84,949.36.
STAFF IMPACT (if applicable): N/A
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: (a) Waive the formal bidding process, pursuant to Lake County Code Section 2-38.4, as the County is piggybacking on a cooperative purchasing consortium contract; and (b) Approve Purchase Order with AAA Business Solutions in the amount of $84,949.36, and Authorize the Community Development Director to sign.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
CC: Carol J. Huchingson, Lake County Administrative Officer
FROM: Robert Massarelli, AICP
Lake County Community Development Director
DATE: October 24, 2017
SUBJECT: (a) Waive the formal bidding process, pursuant to Lake County Code Section 2-38.4, as the County is piggybacking on a cooperative purchasing consortium contract; and (b) Approve Purchase Order with AAA Business Solutions in the amount of $84,949.36, and Authorize the Community Development Director to sign.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Community Development Department does not have enough workstations for the budgeted staff. There are 29 budgeted positions and only 21 workstations. To meet the needs of the Department, some workstations are doubled and tripled-upped. The budget includes money to replace the existing offices and cubicles with smaller cubicles creating 38 workstations. The additional workstations are needed for the staff (6) who will be processing and monitoring the cannabis permits and a proposed Zoning Hearing Officer and their administrative assistant.
We have been working with AAA Business Solutions who has a The Cooperative purchasing Network (TCPN) contract R142208. This contract was competitive bid and pursuant to Section 2-38.4 of the Lake County Code, we will piggyback onto that contract. Attached is the proposed purchase order for this service. It includes the purchase and installation of the cubicles. The purchase order totals 41 cubicles which include five which will be located for a redesigned front counter and are not considered workstations. The Building Division budget includes money for this amount for this project ($101,774). The demolition and remodeling of the existing offices and front counter are in a separate line item of $45,000.
FISCAL IMPACT: ___ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost: $84,949.36
Amount Budgeted: $101,774
Additional Request: N/A
Annual Cost (if planned for future years): N/A
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): The new cubicles are included in the Department's Budget in the amount of $101,774. The cost of the cubicles and installation is $84,949.36.
STAFF IMPACT (if applicable): N/A
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: (a) Waive the formal bidding process, pursuant to Lake County Code Section 2-38.4, as the County is piggybacking on a cooperative purchasing consortium contract; and (b) Approve Purchase Order with AAA Business Solutions in the amount of $84,949.36, and Authorize the Community Development Director to sign.
7.4(Sitting as the Lake County Sanitation District, Board of Directors) Approve Notarized Dedication and Conveyance for Sewer Mainline Extension to Serve Assessor's Parcel Number 024-231-120/9535 State Highway 53, Lower Lake and Authorize the Chair to Sign.
Action Item
passed on consent
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Attached for your review and approval is the notarized Dedication and Conveyance for the sewer line built to serve the subject property. The construction of 175.94 lineal feet of eight-inch PVC sewer pipe, one sewer manhole, one rodding inlet, one six-inch sewer lateral and property line clean out has been completed and approved in accordance with District standards
FISCAL IMPACT: _X_ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): N/A
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): N/A
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve Notarized Dedication and Conveyance for Sewer Mainline Extension to Serve Assessor's Parcel Number 024-231-120/9535 State Highway 53, Lower Lake and Authorize the Chair to Sign.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors, Sitting as the LACOSAN Board of Directors
FROM: Jan Coppinger, Jill Shaul
DATE: October 24, 2017
SUBJECT: Approve Notarized Dedication and Conveyance for Sewer Mainline Extension to Serve Assessor's Parcel Number 024-231-120/9535 State Highway 53, Lower Lake and Authorize the Chair to Sign.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Attached for your review and approval is the notarized Dedication and Conveyance for the sewer line built to serve the subject property. The construction of 175.94 lineal feet of eight-inch PVC sewer pipe, one sewer manhole, one rodding inlet, one six-inch sewer lateral and property line clean out has been completed and approved in accordance with District standards
FISCAL IMPACT: _X_ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost:
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): N/A
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): N/A
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve Notarized Dedication and Conveyance for Sewer Mainline Extension to Serve Assessor's Parcel Number 024-231-120/9535 State Highway 53, Lower Lake and Authorize the Chair to Sign.
7.5Approve Contract Between County of Lake and Lake Family Resource Center for CalWORKs Domestic Violence Services in the Amount of $25,000, from July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018; and authorize the Chair to Sign.
Agreement
passed on consent
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Lake County Department of Social Services (LCDSS) has contracted with Lake Family Resource Center (LFRC) since January 2000 to provide Domestic Violence (DV) counseling services to California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) recipients, and DV training to CalWORKs Eligibility and Employment Services staff. LFRC is the only agency in the County to provide comprehensive DV services, including counseling, shelter, and hot-line services. LFRC has satisfactorily performed contracted DV services to date. The last time LCDSS issued a Request for Proposals for these services in 2008, LFRC was the only responder. Given these facts, we request that your Board waive the County Consultant Selection Procedure for CalWORKs DV services. The total compensation for this contract is twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000.00). These funds are approved in our budget and there is no County cost.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Amount Budgeted: $25,000.00
Additional Requested: 0
Annual Cost (if planned for future years): N/A
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): There is no County cost associated with this agreement.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): None.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve Contract between County of Lake and Lake Family Resource Center for CalWORKs Domestic Violence Services in the Amount of $25,000 (twenty-five thousand dollars), from July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018; and authorize the Chair to Sign.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Crystal Markytan, Social Services Director
DATE: October 24, 2017
SUBJECT: Approve Contract between County of Lake and Lake Family Resource Center for CalWORKs Domestic Violence Services in the Amount of $25,000 (twenty-five thousand dollars), from July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018; and authorize the Chair to Sign.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Lake County Department of Social Services (LCDSS) has contracted with Lake Family Resource Center (LFRC) since January 2000 to provide Domestic Violence (DV) counseling services to California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) recipients, and DV training to CalWORKs Eligibility and Employment Services staff. LFRC is the only agency in the County to provide comprehensive DV services, including counseling, shelter, and hot-line services. LFRC has satisfactorily performed contracted DV services to date. The last time LCDSS issued a Request for Proposals for these services in 2008, LFRC was the only responder. Given these facts, we request that your Board waive the County Consultant Selection Procedure for CalWORKs DV services. The total compensation for this contract is twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000.00). These funds are approved in our budget and there is no County cost.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost: $25,000.0
Amount Budgeted: $25,000.00
Additional Requested: 0
Annual Cost (if planned for future years): N/A
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): There is no County cost associated with this agreement.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): None.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve Contract between County of Lake and Lake Family Resource Center for CalWORKs Domestic Violence Services in the Amount of $25,000 (twenty-five thousand dollars), from July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018; and authorize the Chair to Sign.
7.6Adopt Resolution to Cancel Capital Improvement Reserve Designations in the amount of $31,500 (Middletown Sewer) and Appropriate the Funds to 253.8353.783.18-00 – Maintenance - Bldgs. & Improvements.
Resolution
passed on consent
7.7Approve an Agreement between the County of Lake and the Regents of the University of California for a University Services Agreement to provide phosphorus and nitrogen analysis of lakebed sediment cores from October 2017 through October 2020, for an amount not to exceed $42,663, and authorize the Chair to sign.
Agreement
passed on consent
approved — Pass
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The County will engage the services of University of California for phosphorus and nitrogen analysis of lakebed sediment cores from October 2017 through October 2020. The provided services cannot be adequately performed by other agencies or commercial firms. The total cost of the contract shall not exceed $42,663. The university severely limits its liability in the contract; however there is limited risk to the County because the State Dept. of Water Resources assists County Water Resources staff to obtain the sediment cores, which are then shipped to the University for Analysis.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost: $42,663
Amount Budgeted: $$42,665
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative):
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve an Agreement between the County of Lake and the Regents of the University of California for a University Services Agreement to provide phosphorus and nitrogen analysis of lakebed sediment cores from October 2017 through October 2020, for an amount not to exceed $42,663, and authorize the Chair to sign.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Philip B. Moy, Water Resources Department Director
DATE: October 24, 2017
SUBJECT: Approve an Agreement between the County of Lake and the Regents of the University of California for a University Services Agreement to provide phosphorus and nitrogen analysis of lakebed sediment cores from October 2017 through October 2020, for an amount not to exceed $42,663, and authorize the Chair to sign.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The County will engage the services of University of California for phosphorus and nitrogen analysis of lakebed sediment cores from October 2017 through October 2020. The provided services cannot be adequately performed by other agencies or commercial firms. The total cost of the contract shall not exceed $42,663. The university severely limits its liability in the contract; however there is limited risk to the County because the State Dept. of Water Resources assists County Water Resources staff to obtain the sediment cores, which are then shipped to the University for Analysis.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost: $42,663
Amount Budgeted: $$42,665
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative):
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve an Agreement between the County of Lake and the Regents of the University of California for a University Services Agreement to provide phosphorus and nitrogen analysis of lakebed sediment cores from October 2017 through October 2020, for an amount not to exceed $42,663, and authorize the Chair to sign.
On motion of Supervisor Steele, and by vote of the Board, approved Consent Agenda items 7.1 through 7.7. The motion carried by the following vote:
8. Timed Items
8.19:05 A.M. - Public Input
Motion carried · 2 motions
Carried 5-0 (recovered from the archived minutes by OCR)
Brown: aye Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Carried 5-0 (recovered from the archived minutes by OCR)
Brown: aye Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Clerk’s notes: Mark Pavode and Scott Patterson wanted to speak about the Sulphur Fire. The Board decided that this item will be covered in item 8.2 and the topic could be discussed at that time. Joan Percy and Willyne Wilcoxon spoke.
8.29:10 A.M. - (a) Consideration of Continuation of a Proclamation of a Local Health Emergency by the Lake County Health Officer; and (b) Update and Discussion on Sulphur Fire Recovery
Proclamation
approved — Pass
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
(a) The Health Services Department is requesting Board approval of the continuation of a Local Health Emergency Proclamation due to the recent Sulphur Fire activity.
(b) The County Administrative Officer is requesting time to provide updates and have a discussion on the recovery activities pertaining to the Sulphur Fire.
FISCAL IMPACT: _X_ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): None
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): None
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: (a) Your Board's approval is requested and recommended for the continuation of a Proclamation of a Local Health Emergency. (b) Discussion only.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: Denise Pomeroy, Health Services Director
Carol J. Huchingson, County Administrative Officer
DATE: October 24, 2017
SUBJECT: (a) Consideration of Continuation of a Proclamation of a Local Health Emergency by the Lake County Health Officer; and (b) Update and Discussion on Sulphur Fire Recovery
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
(a) The Health Services Department is requesting Board approval of the continuation of a Local Health Emergency Proclamation due to the recent Sulphur Fire activity.
(b) The County Administrative Officer is requesting time to provide updates and have a discussion on the recovery activities pertaining to the Sulphur Fire.
FISCAL IMPACT: _X_ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost:
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): None
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): None
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: (a) Your Board's approval is requested and recommended for the continuation of a Proclamation of a Local Health Emergency. (b) Discussion only.
On motion of Supervisor Steele, and by vote of the Board, approved the Continuation of a Proclamation of a Local Health Emergency by the Lake County Health Officer. The motion carried by the following vote:
Clerk’s notes: Lake County Health Officer Dr. Karen Tait presented the item to the Board. Environmental Health Director Ray Ruminski was present and spoke.
Mr. Ruminski reported that resources have been combined with State and Federal projects within seven counties. The previous debris clean up was handled by Cal Recycle, the U.S. Army Corps will be responsible for the current debris clean up.. Ashbritt from Florida and ECC from Burlingame, CA will be the contractors for this project. The Right of Entry project is with the U.S. Army Corps with the clean up to start Nov 1, 2017. The option for homeowners is they can hire their own contractor to clean up their property but will still have to pass the soil confirmation test.
County Administrtive Officer Carol Huchingson reported that the County is working on an agreement for mutual aid regarding the clean up in the Clearlake city limits. The Clearlake City Council is holding a special meeting to address this issue. Environmental Health will assist in the clean up and the Administrative office to assist in insurance collection. The Local Assistance Center will be open through the end of this week. Community recovery meetings for the Sulphur Fire will be at 5:00 p.m. this week. The Lake County Recovers website is back up and running.
Water Resources Director Phil Moy reported on Holiday Island. He is concerned about whether the Army Corps will be helping with the debris removal. Wooden retaining walls have been burned and sediment may fall into the lake. Reinforcement of the walls may be able to take place at the same time as the clean up efforts.
Community Development Department Director Bob Massarelli reported on a resolution for temporary housing and non-comforming structures that would come before the Board on November 7, 2017.
Chair Smith asked if anyone present wished to speak and Mark Parode spoke. No one else wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
8.49:30 A.M. - PUBLIC HEARING - Consideration of Appeal (AB 17-04) of Planning Commission's Adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration, Based on Initial Study IS 17-21, and Approval of Lakebed Encroachment Permit
Public Hearing
denied
Carried 5-0 — moved by Brown
Brown: aye Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Carried 5-0 — moved by Scott
Brown: aye Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Staff memo
REQUIRED FINDINGS: The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires the approval of a mitigated negative declaration be based on the following findings:
Mitigated Negative Declaration for a Lakebed Encroachment Permit:
1. Potential environmental impacts related to biological resources have been mitigated to insignificant levels by use permit condition section C.
2. Potential environmental impacts related to timing and monitoring have been mitigated to insignificant levels by use permit conditions section F.
3. This project is consistent with land uses in the vicinity.
4. This project is consistent with the Clear Lake Shoreline Ordinance with the incorporated mitigations and conditions of approval.
5. As mitigated, this project will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts.
According to the Lake County Shoreline Ordinance, the approval of a Lakebed Encroachment Permit requires the following findings:
Lakebed Encroachment Permit:
1. The proposed use, operation, alteration, construction, or activity will not cause significant harm to:
(A) The water quality of the lake, including but not limited to its clarity, temperature, color, taste and odor.
(B) The nearshore and foreshore.
(C) The land underlying the lake.
(D) Fish and other aquatic forms of life, their habitats, their breeding and spawning grounds.
(E) The natural beauty of the area.
(F) Navigation, safety, or health.
(G) The long-term preservation of the project site in its natural condition.
(H) Archeological or historical resources of state-wide significance.
(I) The wetlands.
2. The proposed use, operation, alteration, construction, or activity will:
(A) Be in furtherance of general statewide interest.
(B) Not be inconsistent with the public rights of commerce, navigation, fishery, recreation, and preservation of the project site in its natural state.
(C) Not result in substantial interference with public use of the lake's navigable waters.
(D) Be supported by sufficient accessory uses to accommodate the proposed construction or use.
(E) Not violate any other provision of law.
(F) Not be incompatible with existing nearshore and foreshore uses or structures on or in the immediate vicinity of the littoral parcel.
FISCAL IMPACT: _x_ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost:
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): Action taken by the Board will have no fiscal impact on the County.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): N/A
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends the Board of Supervisors deny Shoreline Ordinance Appeal AB17-04 and uphold the decisions of the Planning Commission to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and grant the Lakebed Encroachment Permit, based on the findings listed in the staff memorandum dated October 24, 2017. Furthermore, staff recommends the Board of Supervisors direct County Counsel prepare Findings of Fact.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Robert Massarelli, Community Development Director
Peggy Barthel, Assistant Resource Planner
SUBJECT: Consideration of Appeal (AB 17-04) of Planning Commission's Adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration based on Initial Study IS 17-21, and Approval of Lakebed Encroachment Permit
DATE: October 24, 2017
EXHIBITS: A. Vicinity Map
B. Planning Commission Staff Report dated September 14, 2017
C. Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 2017
D. Shoreline Ordinance Appeal AB17-04
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Project Name: Bell Haven Homeowners Association Lakebed Encroachment Permit
Application: Lakebed Encroachment Permit, Initial Study
Applicant: Bell Haven Homeowners Association
3400 Dillard Ave, Kelseyville, CA 95451
Project Summary: The Applicant applied for a Lakebed Encroachment Permit to replace the existing ramp and floating dock system and create a contiguous elevated dock and pavilion with ramps down to a covered floating boat lift and a floating boat dock. The new dock features would necessitate installing 21 8" steel pilings. Lighting would also be installed to illuminate the dock deck and pavilion. The parcel currently has a private dock facility, composed of an elevated dock with a ramp down to a floating dock. The existing dock facilities occupy 1,457 square feet. The proposed facilities would occupy 3,063 square feet, increasing the floating dock area by 401 square feet and the elevated dock area by 1,205 square feet.
The rehabilitation is proposed to protect people and property from harm. The Applicant is taking this opportunity to upgrade its facilities with amenities to better serve property owners and guests.
Location: 6460 Soda Bay Drive, Kelseyville, CA
APN: 044-030-01
Zoning: "O-FF" Open Space-Floodway Fringe
General Plan: Public Facilities
Flood Zone: Flood Zone AE: this parcel is in an area of 100-year flood; base flood elevation and flood hazard factors determined. Parcel is mapped within the Floodway Fringe Combining District.
Slope: Less than 10% slope
II. APPEAL BACKGROUND
Staff previously issued a Class 2 Categorical Exemption (CE16-64), for the replacement or repair of an existing structure located on the same site. A timely appeal to the Planning Commission (AA16-02) was received on December 19, 2016 and heard before the Planning Commission on March 9, 2017. The Planning Commission denied the appeal. A timely appeal to the Board of Supervisors (AB17-03) of the Planning Commission's decision was received on March 10, 2017 and heard on June 20 and August 22, 2017. The Board of Supervisors denied the appeal.
Concurrently, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) made a determination that an Initial Study was required to address effects of the project on the Clear Lake Hitch, a recently listed Threatened Species. Projects which require an Initial Study to comply with the provisions of CEQA are submitted by the Community Development Department to the Planning Commission for action thereon. The Planning Commission adopted the Initial Study and associated mitigated negative declaration, and granted the Lakebed Encroachment Permit, on September 28, 2017 (Exhibit C). On October 2, 2017, Joan Sturges filed a timely appeal of the Planning Commission's decision (Exhibit D).
III. SHORELINE ORDINANCE APPEAL DISCUSSION
Ms. Sturges appealed the Planning Commission's decision with the following reason:
"The proposed dock and structures are too huge. Wildlife of 128 species of birds, deer, foxes, fish, otters, etc. would be disrupted and their natural habitate (sic) gone. I do not want to look at it as it consumes half of my view shed."
Each appeal item is detailed below:
"The proposed dock and structures are too huge."
In accordance with Shoreline Ordinance Section 23.6-2, the placement of all piers, docks, buoys, boat ramps or launching facilities shall be permitted only within an area and to a depth defined as follows (only sections relating to size are included here):
(A) An area within lines extended parallel to and ten feet (10') inward of property lines extending lakeward from the high water mark (7.79 feet Rumsey) into the foreshore and nearshore. Lakebed Management may require verification of the location of the property lines by a legal record of survey. Piers, docks, buoys, boat ramps and launching facility structures shared by two (2) adjacent properties or more may qualify for a zero lot line setback."
In 2000, the Planning Commission approved a variance for the Bell Haven Resort dock such that it could extend 182 feet beyond zero Rumsey; 82 feet longer than normally allowed. This extension was required to allow guests to safely moor their boats in the shallow waters of Soda Bay. The proposed work will not extend the length of the structure beyond the approved variance and will not interfere with the littoral access rights of adjoining property owners.
(E) Homeowner's Associations, Condominium and Townhouse Developments, Mobile Home Parks, Resorts and Commercial Properties.
(4) For any proposed multiple launching facility, the structure shall not cover more than fifty percent (50%) of the shoreline frontage of the parcel or two hundred feet (200'), whichever is most limiting.
The proposed structure will be 75 feet in width. Lakebed Management Staff determined that the shoreline frontage of the Bell Haven parcel is 150 feet. Therefore, the proposed structure complies with the Clear Lake Shoreline Ordinance.
"Wildlife of 128 species of birds, deer, foxes, fish, otters, etc. would be disrupted and their natural habitate (sic) gone."
Potential impacts to sensitive species were identified in the Initial Study, Section IV. CDFW recommends construction between October 15 and January 1 to protect Clear Lake hitch habitat. The construction footprint would be limited to the immediate vicinity of the dock and the area of shoreline immediately located on either side of the existing dock. Riparian vegetation located further away from the existing dock would not be impacted. Relative to the footprint of Clear Lake, the proposed project area is small and would not impede the ability of any fish or aquatic species to move freely throughout the lake or along the shoreline. The shoreline would not be physically blocked. Implementation of and compliance with project mitigation measures and conditions of approval identified in the Initial Study and the Mitigation and Monitoring Plan would avoid or reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels.
"I do not want to look at it as it consumes half of my view shed."
The appellant did not provide other documentation to support this statement. As discussed in the September 14, 2017 Staff Report to the Planning Commission (Exhibit B) and the discussion of Clear Lake Shoreline Ordinance Section 23.6.2 above, Lakebed Management has reviewed the project and determined that the project is in conformance with the Clear Lake Shoreline Ordinance. The project will maintain the existing structure and widen the lakeward end of the pier. The height of the proposed structure will not exceed 20 feet Rumsey.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
A CEQA Initial Study for this project was completed (Attachment 3). Comments were received from the public and are included as Attachment 4. Recommendations and mitigation measures provided in IS17-21 were incorporated into the Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (Attachment 5) to reduce potential environmental impacts.
Implementation of and compliance with project mitigation measures and conditions of approval identified in the CEQA Initial Study and the Mitigation and Monitoring Plan, as outlined below, would avoid or reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels.
1. AESTHETICS, CULTURAL RESOURCES, NOISE, TRIBAL CULTRUAL RESOURCES
No potentially-significant impacts were identified. Conditions are in place to ensure that the project will not cause significant impacts.
2. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES, AIR QUALITY, GEOLOGY & SOILS, GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, HAZARDS & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, HYDROLOGY & WATER QUALITY, LAND USE & PLANNING, MINERAL RESOURCES, POPULATION & HOUSING, PUBLIC SERVICES, RECREATION, TRANSPORTATION & TRAFFIC, UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS
No potentially-significant impacts were identified.
3. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Potential impacts will be reduced to less than significant with Mitigation Measures identified in the Mitigation and Monitoring Plan.
V. CLEAR LAKE SHORELINE ORDINANCE STANDARDS FOR REGULATING USES, OPERATIONS, CONSTRUCTION, AND ALTERATIONS, AND ACTIVITIES ON THE LAKE
23.5-1 Before Lakebed Management shall issue any administrative encroachment permit, it must be established that the proposed use, operation, alteration, construction, or activity will not cause significant harm to:
(A) The water quality of the lake, including but not limited to its clarity, temperature, color, taste and odor.
The project will not adversely affect water quality.
(B) The nearshore and foreshore.
The project will not adversely affect the nearshore or foreshore.
(C) The land underlying the lake.
The project will not adversely affect the lakebed.
(D) Fish and other aquatic forms of life, their habitats, their breeding and spawning grounds.
Potential impact to immature hitch in the nearshore and foreshore areas will be avoided by the seasonal timing of construction activities.
(E) The natural beauty of the area.
The project will not adversely affect the natural beauty of the area.
(F) Navigation, safety, or health.
The project will not adversely affect navigation, safety, or health.
(G) The long-term preservation of the project site in its natural condition.
No significant harm will be caused by this project.
(H) Archeological or historical resources of state-wide significance.
No archaeological or historical resources of state-wide significance have been identified.
(I) The wetlands.
No wetlands are identified in the location of the project.
23.5-2 Before Lakebed Management shall issue any administrative encroachment permit, it shall find that the proposed use, operation, alteration, construction, or activity will:
(A) Be in furtherance of general statewide interest.
The project will further the general statewide interest.
(B) Not be inconsistent with the public rights of commerce, navigation, fishery, recreation, and preservation of the project site in its natural state.
The project is consistent with public rights and preservation of the natural state of the site.
(C) Not result in substantial interference with public use of the lake's navigable waters.
The project will not interfere with navigation.
(D) Be supported by sufficient accessory uses to accommodate the proposed construction or use.
The project will be used as proposed by the Applicant.
(E) Not violate any other provision of law.
The project does not violate any laws.
(F) Not be incompatible with existing nearshore and foreshore uses or structures on or in the immediate vicinity of the littoral parcel.
The project is consistent with nearby shorezone uses.
REQUIRED FINDINGS: The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires the approval of a mitigated negative declaration be based on the following findings:
Mitigated Negative Declaration for a Lakebed Encroachment Permit:
1. Potential environmental impacts related to biological resources have been mitigated to insignificant levels by use permit condition section C.
2. Potential environmental impacts related to timing and monitoring have been mitigated to insignificant levels by use permit conditions section F.
3. This project is consistent with land uses in the vicinity.
4. This project is consistent with the Clear Lake Shoreline Ordinance with the incorporated mitigations and conditions of approval.
5. As mitigated, this project will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts.
According to the Lake County Shoreline Ordinance, the approval of a Lakebed Encroachment Permit requires the following findings:
Lakebed Encroachment Permit:
1. The proposed use, operation, alteration, construction, or activity will not cause significant harm to:
(A) The water quality of the lake, including but not limited to its clarity, temperature, color, taste and odor.
(B) The nearshore and foreshore.
(C) The land underlying the lake.
(D) Fish and other aquatic forms of life, their habitats, their breeding and spawning grounds.
(E) The natural beauty of the area.
(F) Navigation, safety, or health.
(G) The long-term preservation of the project site in its natural condition.
(H) Archeological or historical resources of state-wide significance.
(I) The wetlands.
2. The proposed use, operation, alteration, construction, or activity will:
(A) Be in furtherance of general statewide interest.
(B) Not be inconsistent with the public rights of commerce, navigation, fishery, recreation, and preservation of the project site in its natural state.
(C) Not result in substantial interference with public use of the lake's navigable waters.
(D) Be supported by sufficient accessory uses to accommodate the proposed construction or use.
(E) Not violate any other provision of law.
(F) Not be incompatible with existing nearshore and foreshore uses or structures on or in the immediate vicinity of the littoral parcel.
FISCAL IMPACT: _x_ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost:
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): Action taken by the Board will have no fiscal impact on the County.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): N/A
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends the Board of Supervisors deny Shoreline Ordinance Appeal AB17-04 and uphold the decisions of the Planning Commission to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and grant the Lakebed Encroachment Permit, based on the findings listed in the staff memorandum dated October 24, 2017. Furthermore, staff recommends the Board of Supervisors direct County Counsel prepare Findings of Fact.
On motion of Supervisor Brown, and by vote of the Board, denied to grant a continuance for the appeal as there was no good cause to delay the case. The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5 - Smith, Steele, Brown, Scott and Simon
On motion of Supervisor Scott, and by vote of the Board, denied the appeal (AB 17-04) of Planning Commission's Adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration, Based on Initial Study IS 17-21, and Approval of Lakebed Encroachment Permit. The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5 - Smith, Steele, Brown, Scott and Simon
Clerk’s notes: Chair Smith announced that the appellant had requested a continuance via email. Supervisor Brown made a motion that there was no good cause to grant a continuance and to move forward with the case today.
The Clerk swore in all parties to the appeal. Community Development Senior Planner Michalyn DelValle introduced the item to the Board. Associate Planner Peggy Barthel presented the item and gave a PowerPoint presentation of the proposed project. Water Resources Director Phil Moy was present and spoke.
Chair Smith asked if anyone present wished to speak and the following people spoke: Joan Moss and Laurie Dohring, applicant. No one else wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
9. Non-Timed Items
9.1Supervisors’ weekly calendar, travel and reports
9.2Consideration of Proposed 2018 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Calendar.
Action Item
recommended for approval
Carried 4-0 — moved by Scott (recovered from the archived minutes by OCR)
Brown: absent Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: absent Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Carried 4-0 — moved by Simon (recovered from the archived minutes by OCR)
Brown: absent Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: absent Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Carried 4-0 — moved by Steele (recovered from the archived minutes by OCR)
Brown: absent Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: absent Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Carried 4-0 (recovered from the archived minutes by OCR)
Brown: absent Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: absent Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Attached hereto, please find a proposed Board of Supervisors 2018 Regular Meeting Calendar for your consideration.
FISCAL IMPACT: _X_ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Amount Budgeted: n/a
Additional Requested: n/a
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): n/a
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): n/a
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
I recommend your Board approve the proposed 2018 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Calendar.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Carol J. Huchingson, County Administrative Officer
DATE: October 24, 2017
SUBJECT: Consideration of Proposed 2018 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Calendar
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Attached hereto, please find a proposed Board of Supervisors 2018 Regular Meeting Calendar for your consideration.
FISCAL IMPACT: _X_ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost: n/a
Amount Budgeted: n/a
Additional Requested: n/a
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): n/a
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): n/a
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
I recommend your Board approve the proposed 2018 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Calendar.
There was Board consensus to approve the 2018 Board of Supervisors meeting calendar with the addition of the January 2, 2018 meeting at 10:00 a.m.
Clerk’s notes: County Administrative Officer Carol Huchingson presented the item to the Board. Chair Smith suggested that the Board meet on January 2nd at 10:00 a.m. due to the ongoing Health proclamation.
Chair Smith asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
9.3Consideration of an Ordinance amending County Code section 2-2, 2.2 of Article I, Chapter 2, of the Lake County Code, Office Hours of County Offices.
Ordinance
Advanced
Carried 4-0 — moved by Scott
Brown: absent Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: absent Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Carried 4-0 — moved by Simon
Brown: absent Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: absent Scott: aye Simon: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Staff memo
As you are aware, California Government Code section 24260 empowers your Board to set office hours for the transaction of County business. At present, standard County public office hours are Monday-Friday, 8am-5pm, per section 2-2, 2.1 of Article I, Chapter 2, of the Lake County Code. Noon hour closures are permitted under limited "Extraordinary circumstances," and any other departures must be approved by your Board.
It has come to the attention of County staff that the pathway for approval of temporary alternate office hours is unclear, and that many circumstances which reasonably require infrequent public hour reductions are not accounted for in current policy.
Your Board will recall conceptual discussion of office hours April 25, 2017, which included presentation of some draft language prepared by staff. Informed by your feedback, we sought comment from all Department Heads and conducted additional research into County office hour norms. The draft Ordinance before your Board today must be introduced, and can only be adopted at a future meeting.
Other California Counties, including nearby Mendocino and similarly populous San Benito authorize changes in office hours by Resolution or Ordinance. Tehama County allows that "[Appointed] authorities may submit alternate work hours plans" to their Board.
Your Board has the authority to put forth a pathway that is appropriately adaptive, allowing County departments to serve their customers in the best available manner.
The attached draft Ordinance maintains departmental authority to meet a host of business needs, and grants your Board the flexibility, for example, to consider innovative practices that may require temporary changes of public office hours to implement.
Administrative Staff greatly appreciate the insight and input brought forth by many County Department Heads in the development of this draft Ordinance, which reflects the collected experience of many County leaders.
Given lingering effects of the economic downturn of 2008, ongoing recruitment and retention problems and the enhancement of our economic struggles brought by the natural disasters of 2015-2017, it is necessary to have the ability to reconsider departmental structures and business practices.
Providing a pathway for departments to bring alternate work schedules for your consideration is a valuable step toward development of more efficient and modern public services in Lake County.
Staff expects some departments may come forward with specific proposals for your consideration once this Ordinance takes effect, which would be 30 days following the 2nd reading, if not substantially altered following introduction.
This Ordinance is intended to provide flexibility for your Board to consider such proposals, and your Board maintains the authority to weigh the merits of any such proposal.
FISCAL IMPACT: _X_ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost:
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): None
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): None
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Consider and introduce the attached Ordinance amending County Code section 2-2, 2.2 of Article I, Chapter 2, of the Lake County Code, Office Hours of County Offices.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Carol J. Huchingson, County Administrative Officer
DATE: October 24, 2017
SUBJECT: Consideration of an Ordinance amending County Code section 2-2, 2.2 of Article I, Chapter 2, of the Lake County Code, Office Hours of County Offices.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
As you are aware, California Government Code section 24260 empowers your Board to set office hours for the transaction of County business. At present, standard County public office hours are Monday-Friday, 8am-5pm, per section 2-2, 2.1 of Article I, Chapter 2, of the Lake County Code. Noon hour closures are permitted under limited "Extraordinary circumstances," and any other departures must be approved by your Board.
It has come to the attention of County staff that the pathway for approval of temporary alternate office hours is unclear, and that many circumstances which reasonably require infrequent public hour reductions are not accounted for in current policy.
Your Board will recall conceptual discussion of office hours April 25, 2017, which included presentation of some draft language prepared by staff. Informed by your feedback, we sought comment from all Department Heads and conducted additional research into County office hour norms. The draft Ordinance before your Board today must be introduced, and can only be adopted at a future meeting.
Other California Counties, including nearby Mendocino and similarly populous San Benito authorize changes in office hours by Resolution or Ordinance. Tehama County allows that "[Appointed] authorities may submit alternate work hours plans" to their Board.
Your Board has the authority to put forth a pathway that is appropriately adaptive, allowing County departments to serve their customers in the best available manner.
The attached draft Ordinance maintains departmental authority to meet a host of business needs, and grants your Board the flexibility, for example, to consider innovative practices that may require temporary changes of public office hours to implement.
Administrative Staff greatly appreciate the insight and input brought forth by many County Department Heads in the development of this draft Ordinance, which reflects the collected experience of many County leaders.
Given lingering effects of the economic downturn of 2008, ongoing recruitment and retention problems and the enhancement of our economic struggles brought by the natural disasters of 2015-2017, it is necessary to have the ability to reconsider departmental structures and business practices.
Providing a pathway for departments to bring alternate work schedules for your consideration is a valuable step toward development of more efficient and modern public services in Lake County.
Staff expects some departments may come forward with specific proposals for your consideration once this Ordinance takes effect, which would be 30 days following the 2nd reading, if not substantially altered following introduction.
This Ordinance is intended to provide flexibility for your Board to consider such proposals, and your Board maintains the authority to weigh the merits of any such proposal.
FISCAL IMPACT: _X_ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost:
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): None
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): None
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Consider and introduce the attached Ordinance amending County Code section 2-2, 2.2 of Article I, Chapter 2, of the Lake County Code, Office Hours of County Offices.
On motion of Supervisor Scott, and by vote of the Board, waived the reading of the ordinance to be read in title only (clerk did so). The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Supervisors Simon, Steele, Scott and Smith
Absent: Supervisor Brown
On motion of Supervisor Simon, and by vote of the Board, advanced the ordinance for a second reading on November 7, 2017. The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Supervisors Simon, Steele, Scott and Smith
Absent: Supervisor Brown
Clerk’s notes: County Administrative Officer Carol Huchingson introduced the item. Deputy County Administrative Officer Matthew Rothstein presented the item to the Board.
Chair Smith asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
9.4Consideration of Request to Extend the Assessor-Recorder and Treasurer-Tax Collector’s Temporary Modification of Front Office Hours of Operation through December 31, 2017.
Action Item
approved — Pass
Staff memo
Standard County public office hours are Monday-Friday, 8am-5pm, per section 2-2, 2.2 of Article I, Chapter 2, of the Lake County Code. Noon hour closures are permitted under limited "Extraordinary circumstances," and any other departures must be approved by your Board.
As you are aware, Cathy Saderlund, Auditor-Controller/County Clerk, Richard Ford, Assessor-Recorder, and Barbara Ringen, Treasurer-Tax Collector, requested your approval for temporary modification of public front office hours in early 2017. Your Board unanimously approved these requests, allowing modification of office hours through June 30, 2017.
We applaud Cathy Saderlund for rebuilding capacity and returning to normal public office hours June 19, 2017.
Both the Assessor-Recorder and Treasurer-Tax Collector offices continue public office hours of 9am-12pm and 1-4pm. Understaffing and limited capacity persists due to turnover of employees.
Mr. Ford's March report to your Board appropriately noted the County's Property Tax base is critical to every area of County operations; our office estimates Property Taxes represent 50-55% of new General Fund revenue.
The Assessor-Recorder and the Treasurer Tax Collector both play crucial roles; these offices' success and the overall success of the County go hand in hand. Failure to make timely assessments has consequences, increasing property owners' odds of property tax default and loss of potential tax revenue by the County; action to collect defaulted obligations takes considerable Treasurer-Tax Collector staff time. Annual tax sales reimburse delinquent tax debts and even help make affordable housing stock available to Lake County residents.
There are six vacancies in full-time positions in the Assessor-Recorder's staff, of twenty-two allocated full-time equivalents; three of six allocated Appraiser positions are vacant. There are four full-time positions vacant in the Treasurer-Tax Collector's office, of ten allocated full-time equivalents. Both departments have vacancies at the leadership level, impacting the development of new staff.
We are working with both offices, creatively problem solving capacity needs. Efforts have included job fairs hosted by HR, seeking support from other Counties and contractors and prioritizing revenue dense workloads. We request more time to develop solutions that serve the County of Lake's long-term interests.
Both Mr. Ford and Ms. Ringen are expected to be present, to update your Board on their progress and ongoing needs.
FISCAL IMPACT: _X_ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): None
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): None
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve extension of the Assessor-Recorder and Treasurer-Tax Collector's temporary modification of front office hours of operation through December 31, 2017.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Carol J. Huchingson, County Administrative Officer
DATE: October 24, 2017
SUBJECT: Consideration of request to extend the Assessor-Recorder and Treasurer-Tax Collector's temporary modification of front office hours of operation through December 31, 2017.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Standard County public office hours are Monday-Friday, 8am-5pm, per section 2-2, 2.2 of Article I, Chapter 2, of the Lake County Code. Noon hour closures are permitted under limited "Extraordinary circumstances," and any other departures must be approved by your Board.
As you are aware, Cathy Saderlund, Auditor-Controller/County Clerk, Richard Ford, Assessor-Recorder, and Barbara Ringen, Treasurer-Tax Collector, requested your approval for temporary modification of public front office hours in early 2017. Your Board unanimously approved these requests, allowing modification of office hours through June 30, 2017.
We applaud Cathy Saderlund for rebuilding capacity and returning to normal public office hours June 19, 2017.
Both the Assessor-Recorder and Treasurer-Tax Collector offices continue public office hours of 9am-12pm and 1-4pm. Understaffing and limited capacity persists due to turnover of employees.
Mr. Ford's March report to your Board appropriately noted the County's Property Tax base is critical to every area of County operations; our office estimates Property Taxes represent 50-55% of new General Fund revenue.
The Assessor-Recorder and the Treasurer Tax Collector both play crucial roles; these offices' success and the overall success of the County go hand in hand. Failure to make timely assessments has consequences, increasing property owners' odds of property tax default and loss of potential tax revenue by the County; action to collect defaulted obligations takes considerable Treasurer-Tax Collector staff time. Annual tax sales reimburse delinquent tax debts and even help make affordable housing stock available to Lake County residents.
There are six vacancies in full-time positions in the Assessor-Recorder's staff, of twenty-two allocated full-time equivalents; three of six allocated Appraiser positions are vacant. There are four full-time positions vacant in the Treasurer-Tax Collector's office, of ten allocated full-time equivalents. Both departments have vacancies at the leadership level, impacting the development of new staff.
We are working with both offices, creatively problem solving capacity needs. Efforts have included job fairs hosted by HR, seeking support from other Counties and contractors and prioritizing revenue dense workloads. We request more time to develop solutions that serve the County of Lake's long-term interests.
Both Mr. Ford and Ms. Ringen are expected to be present, to update your Board on their progress and ongoing needs.
FISCAL IMPACT: _X_ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost:
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): None
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): None
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve extension of the Assessor-Recorder and Treasurer-Tax Collector's temporary modification of front office hours of operation through December 31, 2017.
On motion of Supervisor Steele, and by vote of the Board, approved to extend the Assessor-Recorder's temporary modification of Front Office Hours of Operation through December 31, 2017. The motion carried by the following vote:
Clerk’s notes: Deputy County Administrative Officer Matthew Rothstein presented the item to the Board. County Administrative Officer Carol Huchingson let the Board know that Treasurer Tax Collector Barbara Ringen was unable to attend today's meeting to give input regarding the department needs. This item will be brought back at another date. Assessor Recorder Richard Ford gave a PowerPoint presentation illustrating his department's current workload.
Chair Smith asked if anyone present wished to speak and Diane Fridley spoke. No one else wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
9.5Consideration for Discussion and Decision Regarding the Wall of Honor Located in the Courthouse
Action Item
recommended for approval
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
It has come to the attention of the Health Services Department that for some time the "Wall of Honor" which was erected to recognize the men and women of Lake County serving overseas in the war zones has not been maintained. The intent was for the Wall to be up for the duration of the war. Unfortunately, it has not been maintained due to the fact that the original agency that requested the Wall no longer exists.
The "Wall of Honor" distinguishes our local service members for their courage, commitment and sacrifice. The Health Services Department, Veteran Services Division would be glad to have the "Wall of Honor" relocated to their office where they will continue to care for, support and present the display of photos, not only for current serving members but to expand it to be more than it was originally intended to be. The photos will continue to identify the service member's name, branch of service, rank and location.
If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 263-1090.
FISCAL IMPACT: X__ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): N/A
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): N/A
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Your Board's decision regarding the location of the Wall of Honor is requested.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: Denise Pomeroy, Health Services Director
DATE: October 24, 2017
SUBJECT: Consideration for Discussion and Decision Regarding the Wall of Honor
Located in the Courthouse
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
It has come to the attention of the Health Services Department that for some time the "Wall of Honor" which was erected to recognize the men and women of Lake County serving overseas in the war zones has not been maintained. The intent was for the Wall to be up for the duration of the war. Unfortunately, it has not been maintained due to the fact that the original agency that requested the Wall no longer exists.
The "Wall of Honor" distinguishes our local service members for their courage, commitment and sacrifice. The Health Services Department, Veteran Services Division would be glad to have the "Wall of Honor" relocated to their office where they will continue to care for, support and present the display of photos, not only for current serving members but to expand it to be more than it was originally intended to be. The photos will continue to identify the service member's name, branch of service, rank and location.
If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 263-1090.
FISCAL IMPACT: X__ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost:
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): N/A
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): N/A
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Your Board's decision regarding the location of the Wall of Honor is requested.
There was Board consensus to move the Wall of Honor from the Courthouse to the Veterans Services Building and place a smaller memory board at the Courthouse.
Clerk’s notes: Health Services Director Denise Pomeroy presented the item to the Board. Veterans Service's Officer Saul Sanabria was present and spoke.
Chair Smith asked if anyone present wished to speak and Joan Moss spoke. No one else wished to speak and the public input portion of the item was closed.
9.6Consideration of Proposed Agreement Between the County of Lake and the County of Tehama for Housing of Juvenile Wards.
Agreement
approved — Pass
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
For the past few years, beginning on October 1, 2015, Lake County has contracted with Mendocino County to house our juvenile ward population. The base rate Mendocino was charging Lake County during the course of that agreement was $150.00 per day, per bed with a guaranteed 12 bed minimum. Although I believed that rate was high (in comparison to what many counties in California pay or charge for similar services), because of Mendocino's close proximity and because, at the time, our average daily population was between nine and 10, the agreement was seen as reasonable and a benefit to both neighboring counties.
Over the course of that agreement, our average daily population declined and has been at approximately six for the past twenty 20 months. Because of the 12 bed minimum, we were actually paying $300.00 per day, per bed when we only had six wards in the facility. I have spoken to numerous California Chief Probation Officers who either contract for beds, or contract them out and have reviewed several contracts other counties utilize for this service. I believe the "going rate" for this service is approximately $100.00 per day, per bed and none of the counties I contacted pay or charge a minimum bed fee. In fact, during my conversations with those Chiefs, several made offers to contract with Lake County to house our juvenile wards for daily rates ranging from $90.00 per day, per bed to $125.00 per day, per bed, with no minimum bed requirement.
When it came time to renew our contract with Mendocino County, I proposed we continue our contract at the same daily rate ($150.00), but requested the minimum bed charge be lowered to eight. Because our daily population had declined to six, I felt that was more than fair. I still believed the daily rate was high, but felt if we could lower the minimum bed charge Lake County would experience some savings and would at least be moving this agreement in a beneficial direction. Mendocino County declined that proposal and instead offered a five year agreement with a 3% increase to the daily bed rate for each of those five years and to keep the 12 bed minimum in place. Their proposal would have increased our daily bed rate to $154.50/day/bed in year one, $159.14/day/bed in year two, $163.91/day/bed in year three, $168.83/day/bed in year four and $173.90/day/bed in year five. I explained to Mendocino County Staff that with a 12 bed minimum and average daily population of six, we would actually be paying as much as $347.80/day/bed during the course of their proposed contract. I also expressed my belief that the going rate for this service throughout California is approximately $100.00/day/bed, with no minimum bed charge. At that point I informed them we would consider their offer but that a significant increase to the existing contract would be difficult to manage given Lake County's budget challenges and that I would at least need to consider offers I had received from other counties that would represent significant savings to Lake County. Deputy County Administrative Officer Stephen Carter and I did meet with Mendocino County in a follow-up negotiation meeting but we were advised that their offer was not negotiable.
My staff and I began evaluating offers from other counties and visiting facilities to determine our best option. We were impressed with many facilities, but felt Tehama County offered the best overall facility for our wards. They currently contract with three other small counties and have a combined population of approximately twenty wards. They have a very modern facility and offer programming that we believe far exceeds what our wards have received in the past. Tehama's rate for juvenile ward placement is $100.00 per day, per bed with no minimum bed charge. With an average daily population of six, the base rate of this agreement with Tehama would be approximately $219,000 annually. That amount would represent a savings over Mendocino County's proposed agreement of $457,710 in year one and increasing to $542,682 over the five year term. Although we anticipate an increase in transportation costs (the Board also has before it agenda file number 17-890, consideration of a resolution amending position allocation to deal with the increased transportation needs) this agreement represents a significant savings to Lake County.
In addition to the savings, we believe the facility, programming, staff and environment at Tehama County will represent the best possible option for our wards. We understand the distance, at just over two hours one way, is an issue for some but believe the positives outweigh that inconvenience. In juvenile placement, both with the Department of Social Services and with Probation, quality of placement is the primary objective. As mentioned, our current average daily juvenile hall population is six; however, we also have six additional wards in court ordered placement throughout California, in locations such as Redding, Tahoe, Fresno, San Andreas and one out of state in Nevada. I say that simply to illustrate that, although this agreement would represent an increase in transportation, the travel involved itself is not new to Probation and is simply part of doing business.
Please consider this memorandum as my request to have the Board of Supervisors approve this Agreement and authorize the Chair to sign.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost: $219,000 base
Amount Budgeted:$657,000
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative):
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Request the Board of Supervisors to approve the Agreement between the County of Lake and the County of Tehama for juvenile ward placement and authorize the Chair to sign.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Rob Howe, Chief Probation Officer
DATE: October 17, 2017
SUBJECT: Consideration of proposed Agreement with Tehama County to house Lake County juvenile wards.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
For the past few years, beginning on October 1, 2015, Lake County has contracted with Mendocino County to house our juvenile ward population. The base rate Mendocino was charging Lake County during the course of that agreement was $150.00 per day, per bed with a guaranteed 12 bed minimum. Although I believed that rate was high (in comparison to what many counties in California pay or charge for similar services), because of Mendocino's close proximity and because, at the time, our average daily population was between nine and 10, the agreement was seen as reasonable and a benefit to both neighboring counties.
Over the course of that agreement, our average daily population declined and has been at approximately six for the past twenty 20 months. Because of the 12 bed minimum, we were actually paying $300.00 per day, per bed when we only had six wards in the facility. I have spoken to numerous California Chief Probation Officers who either contract for beds, or contract them out and have reviewed several contracts other counties utilize for this service. I believe the "going rate" for this service is approximately $100.00 per day, per bed and none of the counties I contacted pay or charge a minimum bed fee. In fact, during my conversations with those Chiefs, several made offers to contract with Lake County to house our juvenile wards for daily rates ranging from $90.00 per day, per bed to $125.00 per day, per bed, with no minimum bed requirement.
When it came time to renew our contract with Mendocino County, I proposed we continue our contract at the same daily rate ($150.00), but requested the minimum bed charge be lowered to eight. Because our daily population had declined to six, I felt that was more than fair. I still believed the daily rate was high, but felt if we could lower the minimum bed charge Lake County would experience some savings and would at least be moving this agreement in a beneficial direction. Mendocino County declined that proposal and instead offered a five year agreement with a 3% increase to the daily bed rate for each of those five years and to keep the 12 bed minimum in place. Their proposal would have increased our daily bed rate to $154.50/day/bed in year one, $159.14/day/bed in year two, $163.91/day/bed in year three, $168.83/day/bed in year four and $173.90/day/bed in year five. I explained to Mendocino County Staff that with a 12 bed minimum and average daily population of six, we would actually be paying as much as $347.80/day/bed during the course of their proposed contract. I also expressed my belief that the going rate for this service throughout California is approximately $100.00/day/bed, with no minimum bed charge. At that point I informed them we would consider their offer but that a significant increase to the existing contract would be difficult to manage given Lake County's budget challenges and that I would at least need to consider offers I had received from other counties that would represent significant savings to Lake County. Deputy County Administrative Officer Stephen Carter and I did meet with Mendocino County in a follow-up negotiation meeting but we were advised that their offer was not negotiable.
My staff and I began evaluating offers from other counties and visiting facilities to determine our best option. We were impressed with many facilities, but felt Tehama County offered the best overall facility for our wards. They currently contract with three other small counties and have a combined population of approximately twenty wards. They have a very modern facility and offer programming that we believe far exceeds what our wards have received in the past. Tehama's rate for juvenile ward placement is $100.00 per day, per bed with no minimum bed charge. With an average daily population of six, the base rate of this agreement with Tehama would be approximately $219,000 annually. That amount would represent a savings over Mendocino County's proposed agreement of $457,710 in year one and increasing to $542,682 over the five year term. Although we anticipate an increase in transportation costs (the Board also has before it agenda file number 17-890, consideration of a resolution amending position allocation to deal with the increased transportation needs) this agreement represents a significant savings to Lake County.
In addition to the savings, we believe the facility, programming, staff and environment at Tehama County will represent the best possible option for our wards. We understand the distance, at just over two hours one way, is an issue for some but believe the positives outweigh that inconvenience. In juvenile placement, both with the Department of Social Services and with Probation, quality of placement is the primary objective. As mentioned, our current average daily juvenile hall population is six; however, we also have six additional wards in court ordered placement throughout California, in locations such as Redding, Tahoe, Fresno, San Andreas and one out of state in Nevada. I say that simply to illustrate that, although this agreement would represent an increase in transportation, the travel involved itself is not new to Probation and is simply part of doing business.
Please consider this memorandum as my request to have the Board of Supervisors approve this Agreement and authorize the Chair to sign.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost: $219,000 base
Amount Budgeted:$657,000
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative):
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Request the Board of Supervisors to approve the Agreement between the County of Lake and the County of Tehama for juvenile ward placement and authorize the Chair to sign.
On motion of Supervisor Scott, and by vote of the Board, approved the Agreement Between the County of Lake and the County of Tehama for Housing of Juvenile Wards, and authorized the Chair to sign. The motion carried by the following vote:
Clerk’s notes: Chief Probation Officer Rob Howe presented the item to the Board. Senior Deputy Probation Officer Kevin O'Brien was present and spoke.
Chair Smith asked if anyone present wished to speak and Joan Moss spoke. No one else wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
9.7Consideration of Resolution Amending Position Allocations for Budget Unit 2302-Probation.
Resolution
Adopted — Pass
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Staff submits for your Board's consideration and approval the attached Resolution to amend the position allocations for Budget Unit 2302-Probation. Staff is requesting to add one (1) Deputy Probation Officer I/II/III allocation and change one (1) Deputy Probation Officer I/II/III allocation from "Unfunded" to "Funded".
The Board has before it, in a separate agenda item (file # 17-891), a request to approve an Agreement with Tehama County to house Lake County juvenile detainees. That new agreement would replace our current agreement with Mendocino County and would result in an estimated savings of approximately $450,000-$540,000 annually off our base rate. Although it represents a significant savings, it would require additional staff to accommodate transportation needs. By adding one Deputy Probation Officer (DPO) and funding one currently unfunded DPO, we could not only handle the increased transportation needs, but we believe we could increase DPO placement visits and accommodate special family and attorney visits.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested: Because of the projected savings with a new Agreement, no additional funding is being requested.
Annual Cost (if planned for future years): Approximately $112,900.00
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative):
It is anticipated the savings from the aforementioned Agreement would not only cover the additional cost of this increased allocation request, but would still represent a significant savings to the County.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff requests your Board's approval of this Resolution and authorization of the Chair to sign.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Rob Howe, Chief Probation Officer
DATE: October 17, 2017
SUBJECT: Resolution Amending Position Allocations for Budget Unit 2302-Probation
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Staff submits for your Board's consideration and approval the attached Resolution to amend the position allocations for Budget Unit 2302-Probation. Staff is requesting to add one (1) Deputy Probation Officer I/II/III allocation and change one (1) Deputy Probation Officer I/II/III allocation from "Unfunded" to "Funded".
The Board has before it, in a separate agenda item (file # 17-891), a request to approve an Agreement with Tehama County to house Lake County juvenile detainees. That new agreement would replace our current agreement with Mendocino County and would result in an estimated savings of approximately $450,000-$540,000 annually off our base rate. Although it represents a significant savings, it would require additional staff to accommodate transportation needs. By adding one Deputy Probation Officer (DPO) and funding one currently unfunded DPO, we could not only handle the increased transportation needs, but we believe we could increase DPO placement visits and accommodate special family and attorney visits.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost: Approximately $112,900.00 (Our average entry level DPO salary plus benefits is $56,450.00, times two positons) annually.
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested: Because of the projected savings with a new Agreement, no additional funding is being requested.
Annual Cost (if planned for future years): Approximately $112,900.00
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative):
It is anticipated the savings from the aforementioned Agreement would not only cover the additional cost of this increased allocation request, but would still represent a significant savings to the County.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff requests your Board's approval of this Resolution and authorization of the Chair to sign.
Supervisor Scott offered the Resolution and it was passed by roll call vote:
Clerk’s notes: Chief Probation Officer Rob Howe presented the item to the Board. Senior Deputy Probation Officer Kevin O'Brien was present and spoke.
Chair Smith asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
10. Closed Session
10.1Public Employee Evaluations
Title: Social Services Director
Closed Session Item
Clerk’s notes: The Board reconvened into Regular Session at 12:14 p.m. having taken no action.