Board Of Supervisors — Tuesday, June 24, 2014

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Alan D. Flora, Deputy Administrative Officer DATE: June 18, 2014 SUBJECT: Approve a Special Evening Meeting of the Board of Supervisors on July 1, 2014 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: At the June 17, 2014 Board of Supervisors meeting your Board considered and approved scheduling a special meeting for the evening of July 1, 2014. This meeting was scheduled to allow your Board to certify the results of the June 3rd election and to allow a presentation of a proposed Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance. This item was added to the June 17th agenda as an addendum after the initial agenda was posted. The addendum was emailed and physically posted according to the requirements of the Brown Act, but it was inadvertently not posted on-line with the required 72 hour advance notice of the meeting. While there is plenty of time to properly notice the meeting agenda prior to the July 1st special meeting, out of an abundance of caution and the desire to fully comply with the intention of the law, staff is requesting your Board re-approve the special meeting at this June 24th meeting. This additional step will ensure unquestionable compliance with the Brown Act related to this meeting notification. FISCAL IMPACT: _X_ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted Estimated Cost: Amount Budgeted: Additional Requested: Annual Cost (if planned for future years): ..Recommended Action RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve a special evening meeting of the Board of Supervisors on July 1, 2014 at 6:00 p.m.

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Kristy Kelly, MA, MFT Behavioral Health Director DATE: June 10, 2014 SUBJECT: Waiver of County Policy and Procedure, Section 15 - Travel Policy - Section 1.4 F Claiming Requirements EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Lake County Behavioral Health is requesting the Board to waive Section 1.4 F of the County Travel Policy requiring travel reimbursement claims to be filed within 60 days of the date the expense was incurred for two staff members. The total cost of the two claims for reimbursement is $89.25. The two employees and related expense claims amounts are: Jim Isherwood - $17.16 and April Giambra - $72.09. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: The department is requesting reimbursement of the two attached travel claims as the amounts being requested were submitted timely to the fiscal unit; however, the fiscal unit did not submit the claim timely to the auditor's office. Every attempt is made to insure that claims are submitted within the requirements of the Travel Policy. The department feels that as this was an administrative error, that the employee should not be penalized. FISCAL IMPACT: _ _ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted Estimated Cost: $89.25 Amount Budgeted: $81,000 Additional Requested: N/A Annual Cost (if planned for future years): N/A FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): Adequate funds are budgeted to reimburse these expenses as they are considered to be a normal and ongoing expense of providing Mental Health services. No additional funds are needed to reimburse staff. STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):N/A ..Recommended Action RECOMMENDED ACTION: LCBH respectfully requests waiver of the 60 day claiming limitation and authorize department to reimburse the travel expenses to these employees.

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Denise Rushing, Chairman, Board of Supervisors FROM: Francisco Rivero, Sheriff DATE: June 11, 2014 SUBJECT: Request waiver for 900 hour employees EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Sheriff's Office requests authorization to waive the 900 hour limit for the following: Hart Gall is funded in the Sheriff/Court Security budget 2204 and his salary is reimbursed through this budget. He will not exceed 960 hours and there is no cost to the general fund. Willie Sapeta is currently budgeted in 2201/1.12 and he is not subject to the 960 hour maximum as he is not a retired annuitant. He assists with department training, exercises and is the SWAT team paramedic. A portion of his salary is reimbursed through EMPG funds. FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted Estimated Cost: Amount Budgeted: Additional Requested: Annual Cost (if planned for future years): FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): Funds are currently budgeted. STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): ..Recommended Action RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Sheriff's Office recommends approval.

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Denise Rushing, Chairman, Board of Supervisors FROM: Francisco Rivero, Sheriff DATE: June 10, 2014 SUBJECT: Approval of contract amendment #4 with MGI for background services EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Sheriff's Office requests approval of the attached "Law Enforcement Pre-employment background investigations contract amendment #4. On August 2, 2011, Your Board approved a Pre-Employment background investigations contract for MGI-Madeira Group International for background services. This amendment increases the amount of compensation from $45,000 to $55,000. This increase is necessary to complete payment for outstanding backgrounds through the contract period of June 30, 2014. Funding is not an issue at this time and these services have been budgeted. Thank you for your consideration of this request. FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted Estimated Cost: 10,000 Amount Budgeted:10,000 Additional Requested:n/a Annual Cost (if planned for future years):20,000 FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): Background services are currently budgeted in 23.80. STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):N/A ..Recommended Action RECOMMENDED ACTION:

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Scott De Leon, Public Works Director DATE: June 11, 2014 SUBJECT: Resolution Approving Right of Way Certification for Upgrade of Existing Warning Signs and Pavement Markers - Butts Canyon Road and Soda Bay Road - Federal Project No. HRRL-5914 (086) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Department of Public Works will begin the upgrading of warning signs and pavement markers for Soda Bay Road and Butts Canyon Road. When Federal funds are used, as in this project, Caltrans requires a certification that all right-of-way are clear before they will allow the project to proceed. All right-of-way for this project is within existing County right-of-way. Caltrans requires that the right-of-way certification be authorized by an approved resolution by the Board of Supervisors. Both documents have been prepared and are attached for your consideration. Staff recommends your approval of the attached Resolution and right-of-way certification. FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted Estimated Cost: Amount Budgeted: Additional Requested: Annual Cost (if planned for future years): FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): ..Recommended Action RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends your approval of the attached Resolution and right-of-way certification.

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: CAROL J. HUCHINGSON, SOCIAL SERVICES DIRECTOR DATE: JUNE 13, 2014 SUBJECT: MASTER SHREDDING SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH CINTAS DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Staff has completed the process of gathering quotes for document shredding services. Cintas Document Management was selected as the winning vendor, as their prices proved to be the most competitive. We anticipate substantial savings with this new vendor based on past expenditures. The term of this agreement is from July 1, 2014 to June 30, 2017, with an annual cost of $3,718. FISCAL IMPACT: None Budgeted Non-Budgeted Estimated Cost:_$3,718.00_____________________ Amount Budgeted:__$18,000.00_________________ Additional Requested:___0______________________ Annual cost if planned for future years:___$3,718.00___ FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): There is no County cost associated with this agreement. STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): ..Recommended Action RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the Master Shredding Service Agreement with Cintas Document Management, with the total compensation amount not to exceed $11,154.00 for the term July 1, 2014 to June 30, 2017, authorizing the Social Services Director to execute said agreement. Thank you for your consideration. cc: Jennifer Fitts, Deputy Social Services Director Edgar Perez, Program Manager

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Mark Dellinger, Special Districts Administrator Tanya Michel, Deputy Administrator - Fiscal DATE: June 10, 2014 SUBJECT: Resolution to Increase the Special Districts Administration Operating Change Fund EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: We are requesting the Board's approval to increase the Operating Change Fund from one hundred dollars ($100.00) to four hundred ($400.00) to enable the staff to have the appropriate change fund to facilitate change making for customers coming in to pay water and sewer bills. FISCAL IMPACT: __ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted Estimated Cost: Amount Budgeted: Additional Requested: $300.00 Annual Cost (if planned for future years): FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): See Above STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): None ..Recommended Action RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review and approval of the resolution requesting an increase in the Special Districts Administration Operation Change Fund.

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: Jim Brown, Health Services Director DATE: May 28, 2014 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING THE COUNTY OF LAKE HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT'S REQUEST TO BECOME A SMOKE-FREE DEPARTMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE HEALTH SERVICES DIRECTOR TO ESTABLISH AND IMPLEMENT A DEPARTMENTAL POLICY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Health Services Department is requesting Board approval of our request to become a Smoke-Free department. The health and safety of our staff is a top priority for our Department. In 2010, the Surgeon General of the United States declared tobacco use remains the nation's leading preventable cause of premature death and disability. Additionally, there is no safe level of exposure to second-hand smoke. Documentation supporting the facts stated in our resolution are attached for your information. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please contact either myself or Sherylin Taylor, Director of Nursing. FISCAL IMPACT: __ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted Estimated Cost: Amount Budgeted: Additional Requested: Annual Cost (if planned for future years): FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): ..Recommended Action Approval for Health Services to move forward with a Smoke Free Department and establish and implement a departmental policy. Thank you for your consideration of this request.

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: Jim Brown, Health Services Director DATE: June 12, 2014 SUBJECT: Health Services Requests Board Approval Allowing the Five Lake County Fire Districts a 90-Day Extension of Their Current Ambulance Permits in Order for Them to Complete the Formation of a JPA and Receive Approval from County Counsel to Act as a Single Permittee EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Health Services Department is responsible for issuing the five Lake County Fire Districts a permit to operate ground ambulances every two years. The current permitting cycle is for FY 2014-2016. We have been notified that the Fire Districts are in the process of forming a JPA and have not yet completed the process. The Health Services Department is requesting Board approval to extend their current permits for 90 days beyond July 1, 2014 to allow them to complete their paperwork for the JPA and to receive approval from County Counsel to act as a Single Permittee. Should the Fire Districts be unable to complete this process within 90 days, they will need to complete and submit requests for their permits individually. FISCAL IMPACT: __ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted Estimated Cost: Amount Budgeted: Additional Requested: Annual Cost (if planned for future years): FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): ..Recommended Action RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approval of Request

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Lake County Housing Commission FROM: Carol Huchingson, Social Services Director DATE: June 16, 2014 SUBJECT: a. APPROVAL OF REVISED LAKE COUNTY HOUSING COMMISSION SECTION 8 HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER PROGRAM BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013/2014 b. APPROVAL OF LAKE COUNTY HOUSING COMMISSION SECTION 8 HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER PROGRAM BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014/2015 c. APPROVAL OF SECTION 8 ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN UPDATE OF MAY 6, 2014 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: a. As you are aware, the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program annual budget and any recommended adjustments must be submitted to the Board of Housing Commissioners for approval. In keeping with this requirement, we are providing your Board with a revised Fiscal Year 2013/2014 budget spreadsheet detailing the changes to both revenue and expenditures for the program. The Fiscal Year 2013/2014 budget spreadsheet includes the budget amounts previously approved by your Board as well as the recommended changes. These changes reflect the actual activity in the Section 8 Program, including repayment of a large fraudulent overpayment as well as the addition of new revenue and expense accounts, as recommended by our external auditor and accounting firm. b. As you are aware, the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program annual budget and any recommended adjustments must be submitted to the Board of Housing Commissioners for approval. In keeping with this requirement, we are providing your Board with the Fiscal Year 2014/2015 budget spreadsheet detailing both revenue and expenditures for the program. The Fiscal Year 2014/2015 budget spreadsheet includes the revised Fiscal Year 2013/14 budget amounts previously approved by your Board as well as the recommended amounts for fiscal year 2014/15. These changes include increases to our Family Self Sufficiency escrow accounts as well as increases to Housing Assistance Payments, now that our reserves have been spent down. c. On May 6, 2014, your Board held a Public Hearing on the Public Housing Authority Administrative Plan. During the 45-day public comment period that preceded the hearing, there were no written comments received. On May 13, 2014 the Resident Advisory Board (RAB) met to consider public comments on the document and to consider any requested changes. At that meeting, the RAB took action to recommend that your Board approve the Section 8 Administrative Plan update of May 6, 2014. ..Recommended Action RECOMMENDED ACTION: a) It is recommended that your Board approve the Revised Lake County Housing Commission Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Budget for Fiscal Year 2013/2014, directing staff to prepare a minute order to verify your actions. b) It is recommended that your Board approve the Lake County Housing Commission Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Budget for Fiscal Year 2014/2015, directing staff to prepare a minute order to verify your actions. c) It is recommended that your Board approve the Section 8 Administrative Plan update of May 6, 2014, directing staff to prepare a minute order verifying your action.

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: CAROL J. HUCHINGSON, SOCIAL SERVICES DIRECTOR DATE: JUNE 11, 2014 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION TO THE CALIFORNIA STATE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FOR FUNDING UNDER THE CALHOME PROGRAM; AND IF SELECTED, AUTHORIZING THE SOCIAL SERVICES DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE THE STANDARD AGREEMENT, ANY AMENDMENTS THERETO, AND ANY RELATED DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE CALHOME PROGRAM. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On April 29, 2014 the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) released a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for the CalHome Program. This NOFA offers the opportunity for the County to apply for funding that will complement the County's current housing programs. This includes the First Time Home Buyer and the Owner-Occupied Rehabilitation Programs. These programs are designed to help very low-income to low income families to purchase homes and to help homeowners of the same demographics to make needed repairs to their properties. The loans provided by these programs offer a very low interest rate with deferred payments. After discussing the funding opportunity with the County Administrative Officer, I am recommending that the County of Lake submit an application for a total of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) to administer the housing programs mentioned above. 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 the Resolution Authorizing Submittal of an Application to the California State Department of Housing and Community Development for Funding under the CalHome Program; and if selected, Authorizing the Social Services Director to Execute the Standard Agreement, and any Amendments Thereto, and any Related Documents Necessary to Participate in the CalHome Program, authorizing the Chair to sign. Thank you for your consideration. cc: Jennifer Fitts, Deputy Social Services Director Edgar Perez, Program Manager

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Richard Coel, Community Development Director Prepared by: Michalyn DelValle, Senior Planner DATE: May 29, 2014 SUBJECT: Appeal of Planning Commission Approval of Major Use Permit for Dollar General Store, Nice; AB 14-02 APN's 032-262-30 and 31, Supervisorial District 3 EXHIBITS: A. Appeal Form B. Draft Planning Commission Minutes dated May 8, 2014 C. Planning Commission Staff Report Dated April 18, 2014 I. BACKGROUND The appellants are appealing the Planning Commission's May 8, 2014 approval of a Major Use Permit (UP 13-09) to allow construction of an approximately 9,100 square foot general retail store (Dollar General) at 3539 & 3577 State Highway 20, Nice. The appeal was filed by Avtar Singh, Jagtar Singh and Mohammad Sadiq regarding the economic impact the Dollar General in Nice may have on their businesses. None of the appellants attended the Planning Commission hearing or submitted comments or concerns by letter to the Commission. This is despite the fact that the project was circulated for review and comment to the Northshore Business Association when the use permit application was submitted. No comments were received from the Northshore Business Association. II. APPEAL DISCUSSION The appeal form (BOS Exhibit A) states that the appellants are three small business owners in Nice concerned about their struggling businesses closing if a new big business moves in to town, due to the small population in Nice and bad economy. The appellants businesses are the Nice Market, Marina Market and Tower Mart. The Marina Market and Tower Mart are primarily convenience stores with retail fuel sales. The Nice Market is a small grocery store that sells a number of items not carried by Dollar General, such as meats, fresh produce and beer and wine. These stores are all within 2,000 feet of each other. Dollar General sells a broad range of items, many of which are not carried by the appellant's stores. Additionally, the Dollar General Store is not considered a large store at 9,100 square feet. For comparison, the Tower Mart in Clearlake Oaks is approximately 8,000 square feet. The CVS Pharmacy in Lakeport and Rite Aid in Clearlake are both approximately twice the size of this proposed store. Staff contacted the project applicant and they indicated that the Dollar General store will employ seven to ten (7-10) employees on average. The operating hours will typically be 8:00 am-10:00 pm and approximately two to four (2-4) of the employees will have full time employment. Dollar General sells various types of products: cleaning, health, food, beauty, apparel, household, pet, toys, and office and school supplies. Staff feels that this project will provide increased opportunities for local residents to shop locally and help to reduce vehicle use and greenhouse gas emissions required to travel to other locations to obtain general retail services. The project is specifically consistent with GP Policy LU-4.1 encouraging the development of small neighborhood convenience facilities (that do not exceed 15,000 total square feet of floor space). The project is also consistent with the Upper Lake-Nice Area Plan which states that a high priority should be given to providing services and employment opportunities locally. Two residents that were non business owners spoke at the Planning Commission hearing in support of the project. They indicated that the job creation is needed. Additionally, a local business owner felt that the competition was healthy and was also in support of the project although he sells some of the same merchandise. ..Recommended Action III. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors make a motion of intended decision to deny the appeal of UP 13-09 approved by the Planning Commission on May 8, 2014. Sample Motions: Appeal Denial I move that the Board of Supervisors make an intended decision to deny the appeal AB 14-02 of Planning Commission's adoption of a mitigated negative declaration and approval of Use Permit 13-09 for Cross Development, on behalf of Dollar General.

..Title ..Body TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Richard Coel, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Nuisance Abatement Hearing for Ronald Shanko June 24, 2014 @ 10:00 A.M. Agenda Item Supervisorial District 1 Date: June 10, 2014 PROPERTY OUTLINE: Property Owner: Ronald Shanko Mailing Address: 15230 May Hallow Road, Lower Lake, CA 95457 Location: Same APN: 122-012-18 Zoning: "RR", Rural Residential Case #: 14-0011 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Notice of Nuisance and Order to Abate 3. Nuisance Abatement Hearing Request Form 4. Notice of Hearing before B.O.S. 5. Photos OVERVIEW As a result of receiving a Notice of Nuisance and Order to Abate, on March 1, 2014 Ronald Shanko submitted a Nuisance Abatement Hearing Request Form listing reasons why he does not believe conditions on his property are a nuisance. Please refer to Attachment 3. In February 2014 an investigation by the Community Development Department of site conditions and permit history of property located at 15230 May Hallow Road, Lower Lake resulted in the posting of a Notice of Nuisance and Order to Abate. These nuisance conditions include an unfinished, substandard single-family residence for which the building permit expired on December 19, 2013 due to inactivity; occupancy of an unpermitted mobilehome; open and outdoor storage of junk and household garbage, occupancy of travel trailers and concerns over livestock kept on the property. III. DISCUSSION The Nuisance Abatement Hearing Request Form lists five responses as to why Mr. Shanko believes the site conditions should not be considered a public nuisance. These reasons, followed by staff's responses to each are listed below: 1. Spring Cleanup of trash is complete. A site visit on May 28th by the Chief Building Official confirmed that the household garbage has been removed from the site, however, other miscellaneous items are being stored on this property, including a large fiberglass pool. Because the dwelling was never finished and the building permit has expired, no residential occupancy is allowed and therefore no accessory residential storage is authorized. 2. Extra Trailers have been removed. The May 28th site visit confirmed that an old travel trailer had been removed from the property, however the old single-wide mobilehome remains. The single-wide mobilehome was authorized as a temporary dwelling for one-year under Zoning Permit 10-22. That Zoning Permit was issued to temporarily rectify a violation when the owner brought in that mobilehome without permits in 2008. A demolition permit was also issued in 2010 to assure that the mobile home would be removed from the site. 3. No one lives in the house under construction This appears to be true, however, the mobilehome is still being occupied despite the temporary dwelling permit being expired along with the building permit for the construction of a permanent residence. 4. I will renew the temporary residence permit. Renewal of a temporary dwelling permit is not an option in this case. The building permit to construct a residence on this property, originally issued in 2008, has expired and substantial progress on construction was never made. The foundation and subfloor was constructed, but then the owner deviated from the construction plans by constructing a shack on top of the subfloor. Also, the zoning permit issued for occupancy of the single-wide mobilehome during construction of the residence was issued for one-year and there has been no substantial progress toward completion of the residence. Even if the building permit for the residence was still valid, substantial progress must be demonstrated to extend a temporary dwelling permit, and the owner has already exceeded the three (3) year maximum time allowed under a temporary dwelling permit. The mobilehome is substandard, does not meet the minimum residential construction standards of the "RR" zoning district, and has been on this property for approximately 6 years. 5. We only have 2 roosters and 10 hens, 2 old horses, 2 dogs and some cats. The Notice of Nuisance and Order to Abate included a requirement to remove all animals and livestock from the property. This was because the property does not have a residence. Upon further review, staff has determined that the horses and chickens can remain on the property without a residence, because the "RR" zoning district allows agricultural uses as the primary use of the property. However, the dogs and cats are not considered agricultural livestock and will need to be relocated until such time that construction of a residence is completed, under permit on this property. As long as the livestock is provided with adequate shelter, food and water, those animals can remain. ..Recommended Action IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board of Supervisors uphold the Notice of Nuisance and Order to Abate that was posted at the site on March 4, 2014. The order allowed the property owner to voluntarily abate the nuisance conditions by April 7, 2014, by removing all unpermitted construction or obtain permits from the County Building & Safety Division, removing all open and outdoor storage of junk and household garbage, and removing the mobilehome, cats and dogs. The shack that was constructed upon the subfloor of the unfinished house along with the weather damaged subfloor needs to be removed. SAMPLE MOTION: I move that the Board of Supervisors uphold the Notice of Nuisance and Order to Abate posted on March 1, 2014 for nuisance conditions at 15230 May Hallow Road, Lower Lake, CA, also known as Assessor's Parcel Number 122-012-18, and authorize staff to abate the nuisance conditions if the property owner fails to comply with the Notice and Order by July 1, 2014. All costs associated with this abatement case shall become a charge against the property.

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Space Committee By: Alan D. Flora, Deputy Administrative Officer DATE: June 11, 2014 SUBJECT: Lower Lake Sheriff's Substation and Social Services' Anderson Ranch Expansion EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Staff are providing an update and requesting Board direction related to two office space related issues. The first is an update on the on-going research and analysis related to the location of a Sheriff's sub-station in Lower Lake, specifically in the old Lower Lake Bank Building. The second issue is discussion related to Social Services demand for additional space and the possibility of an expansion at their Anderson Ranch facility. Lower Lake Substation Over the past year staff has had multiple discussions with your Board related to both the potential utilization of the Lower Lake Bank Building by a variety of county departments, and specifically the desire of many community members for the location of a sheriff's sub-station in the building. There are a variety of issues that complicate the community's interest in location of a sub-station in the Bank Building. To be successfully utilized as an acceptable office building that meets code requirements, significant renovations and upgrades to the building will be needed to meet building code and ADA requirements. While the building is owned by the County, more specifically it is owned by the Building Department. The Building and Safety Fund (Fund 109) is separate from the General Fund, and as your Board is aware has not been balanced due to the recession and has required contributions from the General Fund to maintain operations for the past few years. It is in both the interest of the Building Fund and the General Fund if the building is sold or transferred to another County department. An appraisal was completed within the past year that valued the building at $218,000. For the Sheriff's Office to utilize this building as a substation would require the purchase of the building by the General Fund as well as funding the necessary improvements. Rough estimates for upgrades and renovations are expected to be at least $50,000 to $75,000. Staff does not believe the General Fund can currently afford this type of investment, particularly for the expected role of the building to operate essentially as a location for deputies to do paperwork. Other uses may include the temporary storage of evidence and other miscellaneous uses, but due to reduced staffing levels expanded uses are not expected at this time. Staff has explored partnerships with other county departments to share the space, but an ideal partnership has not been currently identified. Social Services Currently, Social Services is greatly in need of additional office space. Due to expanded services and increased staffing levels brought about by Health Care Reform and other new initiatives, existing leased space is no longer sufficient. The majority of Social Services staff has been located in Lower Lake since the late 90's, initially with the entire department in the 23,000 square foot leased Anderson Ranch facility. But the department quickly outgrew the space and Child Welfare Services and Adult Services were spun off to other leased sites in Lakeport and Lower Lake, respectively. When the County ceased to contract out for Employment Services and those services were brought in-house, another Lower Lake site was leased for this purpose near the Anderson Ranch office. In more recent years, needed additional space for off-site conference/training rooms and for family services has been leased in Clearlake and Lakeport. In fiscal year 13/14, Social Services planned to add three leased modular buildings on-site, in the rear of the Anderson Ranch facility. These buildings were intended for customer groups and services and for a family center. Unfortunately, it was determined late in the year that this plan was not feasible. As the department's space needs grow, the availability of additional long-term space for lease, accessible for customers and ADA compliant, is very minimal county-wide. As a long-range solution to meet the growing need for space, the owner of the existing Anderson Ranch facility has proposed to build and lease a new, two-story, 40,000 building to house consolidated Social Services functions now spread over several south-county locations. The proposed building would enable Employment Services, Adult Services, and Welfare Fraud Investigations, operated under contract, to be combined at one site centrally located adjacent to the existing facility which houses Administration, Eligibility and numerous other related functions. In addition, very limited training space could be expanded beyond the current 12 user capacity to much more and conference rooms would be added to alleviate struggles with overbooking of inadequate existing space for meetings. There are many good reasons for bringing all of these functions together in one centralized location, including improved customer safety for those who attempt to walk along busy Highway 53 as they travel between offices, Facilities Maintenance and Information Systems infrastructure could be centralized eliminating the need for responsible staff to be on the road much of the time, more effective supervision of staff as those split between offices are brought together, and enhanced security for a large vehicle fleet, just to name a few. In the short term, more planning and acquisition of leased space will be needed to meet the department's needs while awaiting construction of the new building. Also, the Child Welfare Services office, which staff recommends remain in Lakeport to be in close proximity to the juvenile court, is presently bursting at the seams and long-term solutions are needed for this office as well. Consequently, apart from the development of the new building, Social Services staff will continue to coordinate with the Space Committee to meet these additional short-term and long-range needs. FISCAL IMPACT: __ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted Estimated Cost: Amount Budgeted: Additional Requested: Annual Cost (if planned for future years): FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): ..Recommended Action RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: A) Provide staff direction related to utilization of Lower Lake Bank Building and establishment of a Sheriff's sub-station in Lower Lake. B) Conceptually approve the proposal to expand the Anderson Ranch Social Services facility, authorizing staff to continue research and evaluation of the project's feasibility. C) Establish a negotiating team to enter into negotiations with the owner of the existing Anderson Ranch Social Services facility regarding the proposed expansion.

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Alan D. Flora, Deputy Administrative Officer DATE: June 17, 2014 SUBJECT: Update on Closing the Pool at the Lucerne Castle EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: At the June 17, 2014 Board of Supervisor's meeting, your Board's direction requested staff look at additional options related to closing the pool at the Lucerne Castle, while preserving the ability to utilize the pool at a future time if desired. Your Board specifically requested costs related to constructing a deck over the pool or installing a securable cover over the pool. In addition, your Board requested information on contracted services for maintenance. Staff is currently gathering the requested information and will present it to your Board at the meeting on June 24, 2014. FISCAL IMPACT: __ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted Estimated Cost: Amount Budgeted: Additional Requested: Annual Cost (if planned for future years): FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): ..Recommended Action RECOMMENDED ACTION: Provide direction to staff regarding closing the pool.

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors FROM: Anita L. Grant County Counsel DATE: June 18, 2014 SUBJECT: Consideration of Request to Add PSA 26 Area Agency on Aging to the County's Liability Policy as an Additional Covered Party EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On May 22, 2014, the Governing Board of the PSA 26 Area Agency on Aging approved staff's recommendation to request that the County of Lake add that agency to the County's liability policy coverage as an additional covered party. There is no additional cost to the County to add the AAA to its policy as an additional insured party. It is true that there would be a slight expansion of potential liability, but the only persons acting on behalf of the AAA are existing County of Lake employees. There have been no liability claims made against the AAA or staff since the agency's creation. For the agency to obtain its own independent coverage is cost prohibitive even through CSAC-EIA. If your Board agrees that because the liability risk is minimal and the benefit to the AAA is so significant, please approve the addition of the AAA as an additional covered party under the County's liability insurance policy coverage. FISCAL IMPACT: X__ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted Estimated Cost: Amount Budgeted: Additional Requested: Annual Cost (if planned for future years): FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): ..Recommended Action RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of the request to add PSA26 AAA to the County's liability insurance coverage as an additional covered party.

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors FROM: Anita L. Grant, County Counsel DATE: June 13, 2014 SUBJECT: Retention of Specialized Services - Coverage Counsel EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: As your Board is aware, Lake County is a member of CSAC-EIA, a joint powers authority which was formed to create an insurance pool for its members, offering among many other types of coverage, liability coverage. The County's liability coverage provides coverage for claims from third parties alleging damages due to negligence on the part of the County arising out of personal injury, property damage, public officials errors and omissions, employment practices liability, and automobile liability. The County's policy has a $10,000 deductible. The County's liability insurance policy covers all costs over and above that deductible, which includes the costs of defense and the cost of any settlement or judgment. As your Board is also aware, CSAC-EIA has recently denied coverage to the County in one legal matter, Lakeside Heights HOA, et al. v. County of Lake, claiming that an exclusion in the County's coverage documents applies. The County has filed a request for reconsideration with CSAC-EIA. The County will also have an opportunity to make a presentation to the Claims Review Committee of CSAC-EIA. We are informed that CSAC-EIA will have its coverage counsel in attendance. Coverage counsel is a legal specialist in insurance coverage law. It is advisable that the County also avail itself of expert insurance coverage advice. Through a series of communications from persons in the insurance industry, we received a recommendation to use the specialized services of the firm, Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard, and Smith, LLP. ..Recommended Action RECOMMENDED ACTION: I recommend that your Board approve the retention of coverage counsel to assist us in the administrative process of seeking CSAC-EIA's reconsideration of its denial of coverage and that you approve and authorize the Chair to sign the attached agreement for professional services. Thank you.

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: Jim Brown, Health Services Director DATE: June 9, 2014 SUBJECT: Request Board of Supervisor's Approval to Promote Saul Sanabria, Assistant Veteran Services Officer to Veteran Services Officer Effective July 1, 2014 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The current Assistant Veterans Services Officer allocation in the Veterans Budget Unit will be eliminated effective July 1, 2014. Therefore the Health Services Department is requesting Board approval to promote Mr. Saul Sanabria to the County Veterans Services Officer effective July 1, 2014. Saul has been the Assistant Veteran Services Officer since March 2014. Since coming on board, he has proven to be a valuable asset to the department. Numerous County Veterans have shared with me that Saul is friendly, professional and helpful in providing services. Mr. Sanabria brings to Lake County an extensive background in Veterans Services from both Imperial County where he was their County Veterans Service Officer for more than 7 years and most recently from Inyo/Mono County where he was their Assistant Veterans Services Officer/Veterans Services Representative. He has both the management background and the hands-on experience from both of those positions to run a veterans' office and represent veterans and their dependents in applying for available federal benefits from the United States Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office (VARO). He is an accredited veterans' representative with CA Department of Veterans Affairs (CDVA) and numerous veterans' service organizations. He is very knowledgeable of all of the rules, regulations, timelines, and procedures in applying for benefits, initiating or reopening disability claims, and filing appeals on denied claims. He is very familiar with and has worked with veterans to obtain inpatient or outpatient care from the VA Medical Centers and Community Based Outreach Clinics. He also has experience in assisting military retirees and their dependents and/or survivors in obtaining their benefits from the Department of Defense (DOD). He has assisted veterans in proceedings involving military service. And he has been assisting members and dependents of the National Guard and Reserve Components in obtaining appropriate benefits and assistance. Additionally, Saul spent more than 9 years as an Administrative Analyst/Grant Administrator/ Military Liaison and Legal Office Supervisor where he was responsible for the supervision of 16 staff members and handled the administration, labor relations, recruitment, classification and compensation, and management of all facility and clerical operations in the Imperial County Office of District Attorney. FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted Estimated Cost: Amount Budgeted: Additional Requested: Annual Cost (if planned for future years): FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): ..Recommended Action RECOMMENDED ACTION: Your Board's approval is requested and recommended. Thank you for your consideration of this request.

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Caroline Chavez, Public Services Director DATE: June 18, 2014 SUBJECT: Consideration of an Ordinance adding Article XI to Chapter 15 of Lake County Code Regulating Permitted Events in County Parks and Regulations on the Use of County Property for Special Events/Activities EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Your Board understandably takes great pride in the condition, accessibility and opportunities for recreation that are provided by Lake County's Parks as they are a critical resources to the quality of life in Lake County. Staff is dedicated to delivering on your directive that our parks be accessible and inviting so they are used as much as possible, by as many people as possible, and as equitably as possible. As your Board knows, special events which are likely to attract a large number of people raise issues which do not arise with small gatherings and events. That is why the County established a policy requiring permits for special events. Recent events have occurred that staff does not believe are consistent with your vision. Although the the event in question has the potential to be a benefit to the community and to be compatible with your Board's vision, it is operating outside of the Permit process; a process that is essential for ensuring the equitable and responsible use of county property and ensuring that uses are in conformity with health and welfare standards and the desires of the local community. When a group or individual wants to use County property to conduct a special event or activity, a Property Use Permit must be obtained from the County. The permitting process provides an opportunity to determine: 1) If the proposed event is consistent with established regulations 2) If the proposed event is compatible with the proposed venue(s). 3) If the proposed venue is available at the date and time requested. 4) If additional County resources are needed and their availability. 5) If there might be any undesirable impact to nearby residents. 6) If there is any regulatory oversight required by other public agencies. 7) The event-specific conditions that should govern the conduct of the event so as to help ensure the responsible use of publicly owned facilities, property and resources, and to ensure that the event is conducted in a way that is consistent with the general health and welfare of the public. The ongoing event in Middletown prompted staff to review the County's Policy entitled "Use of County Property for Special Events" which currently governs the issuance of Property Use Permits. This policy, which was adopted in 1986, established the permit requirement for use of County property for Special Events. It also sets forth in general terms, the procedures and insurance requirements that govern the issuance of property use permits for special events. Over the years, this policy has not only grown obsolete in terms of delegation of responsibilities pertaining to review and approval of such permits, but the policy also does not adequately reference the specific regulations and conditions that are necessary to properly protect and preserve publicly owned facilities as well as to encourage their responsible use. Perhaps the biggest drawback of this 1986 document is that it reflects establishment of a permit requirement by policy rather than by ordinance. As such, it lacks the weight of law and an enforcement mechanism. Consequently, staff has prepared the attached ordinance which establishes that the requirement to obtain a permit for the conduct of a special event in a County Park is a legal requirement rather than just a policy requirement. Additionally, the ordinance provides a mechanism to enforce this permit requirement as well as dissuade engagement in certain prohibited acts. Although the main goal of the proposed ordinance is to support the permit requirement, the ordinance also specifies that the regulations shall be promulgated which govern the use of County parks and the issuance of permits. In other words, the ordinance requires development of implementing regulations. Consequently, staff has crafted the attached "Regulation on the Use of County Property for Special Events/Activities" which is not only intended to comply with the regulatory requirement in the ordinance, but is also intended to replace the 1986 policy on the use of County property for special events. To that end, the proposed regulations are intended to support the issuance of all Property Use Permits whether they be for use of a street, park, museum or the lake. These regulations do not reflect any new rules or conditions that are not already being required for such events. Instead, these regulations simply aggregates existing rules and conditions, as well as some common sense provisions that were previously unstated, into a centralized regulatory document that is intended to provide clarity to the permit process and use expectations. Both the ordinance and the regulatory document are works in progress. Development of these documents has reached a point where it is prudent to solicit your board's review and direction before devoting any more staff time to this project. There are a number of specific issues for which staff are seeking your direction, including: 1. Whether and under what conditions to provide utility services (power & water) for special events? 2. Whether to allow dogs in the parks and/or during special events? 3. What kind of fees (if any) to impose and amounts thereof? 4. To what extent to allow commercial vending enterprises? 5. To what extent to allow political activities/functions? 6. To what extend to allow sectarian activities/functions? 7. What kind of events might be eligible for waiving the County standard insurance requirements? 8. Whether and under what conditions to allow serving or selling alcohol? 9. Whether and under what conditions to allow preparing, serving or selling of food? Staff looks forward to reviewing the attached documents and discussing the relevant issues with the Board. ..Recommended Action RECOMMENDED ACTION:

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Scott DeLeon, Public Works Director DATE: June 11, 2014 SUBJECT: Approve Amendment One to Agreement between the County of Lake and GLASS ARCHITECTS for Facility Design Services for Behavioral Health Clearlake Facility Expansion in Clearlake, California EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On December 17, 2013, the Department of Public Works entered into an Agreement with GLASS ARCHITECTS for Facility Design Services for the Behavioral Health Clearlake Facility Expansion in Clearlake, CA. The Agreement provided for services to complete Phase 1, Schematic Design. GLASS ARCHITECTS completed the scope of services under Phase 1. County staff reviewed and approved the schematic design and the architectural program, and prepared an amendment to proceed with Phase 2 services for the project. Amendment One was presented to the Board of Supervisors for consideration on May 20, 2014. As a result of comments from the public, the Board further discussed the Amendment on June 3, 2014. Based on the Board of Supervisors direction, Amendment One has subsequently been revised. Whereas it was initially proposed that Amendment One include all services required to complete Phase 2, staff now proposes that Geotechnical and Landscape services be performed under separate contracts, that Civil services be performed by county staff, and that Construction Administration services be deferred until the design is further developed and the scope can be more clearly defined. Therefore, this revised Amendment One will provide for certain Phase 2 services which include Design Development, Construction Documents, and Permit/Bidding. As a result of this amendment, the contract amount will be increased by $136,550. Amendment One will also incorporate certain contract language modifications which were approved by County Counsel, as well as extend the term of the agreement. The Behavioral Health Department has included sufficient funds in their budget for services to be provided under Amendment One. Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve Amendment One to the Agreement for Facility Design Services for Behavioral Health Clearlake Facility Expansion in Clearlake, CA, with GLASS ARCHITECTS in the amount not to exceed $146,875 (an increase of $136,550) and authorize the Chairman to execute said Amendment. FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted Estimated Cost: 146,875 Amount Budgeted: 146,875 Additional Requested: Annual Cost (if planned for future years): FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): ..Recommended Action RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve Amendment One to the Agreement for Facility Design Services for Behavioral Health Clearlake Facility Expansion in Clearlake, CA, with GLASS ARCHITECTS in the amount not to exceed $146,875 (an increase of $136,550) and authorize the Chairman to execute said Amendment.

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Mark Dellinger, Special Districts Administrator Tanya Michel, Deputy Administrator-Fiscal DATE: June 9, 2014 SUBJECT: Credit Card Payment Processing EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Currently Special District's does not have the ability to accept credit card or electronic payments. Special District's would like to contract with a payment processor to enable us to accept credit card and electronic payments. In order to provide improved customer service, Special District's would like to have the ability to accept credit card and electronic payments for water and sewer billings. The credit card and electronic payments would be available online or via telephone. We have many customers that would like the ability to pay their bill with a credit card. This service would provide a benefit for those customers. At this time we would not want to accept credit card payments in the office, customers would be able to make payments in the office with a check or cash with the possibility of credit card payment being accepted at a future date. Consideration was given to the different options from Paymentus and we recommend proceeding with the implementation of a convenience fee that would be charged, collected and retained by Paymentus. The convenience fee would be $3.45 per credit card or electronic transaction processed by Paymentus. In setting up the ability to accept credit card and electronic payments, there would not be any cost to Special Districts; the convenience fee would be charged to the customer and would be retained by Paymentus. In addition to the convenience fee there is also a limit on the maximum transaction amount, $375.00. The credit card payment types that will be accepted would be Visa and Mastercard. Paymentus will meet the Payment Card Industry security standards relieving Special Districts of the Payment Card Industry compliance requirements as there would not be any credit card data stored with Special Districts. There are no implementation costs associated with establishing services with Paymentus; however there will be costs associated with providing an electronic file from our Utility Billing System to Paymentus. There will be a one-time fee from Cascade (CAMS) for the set-up of the credit card processing. The estimate provided from CAMS ranges from $1,500 to $3,000 dependent upon the amount of automation requested of CAMS. FISCAL IMPACT: __ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted Estimated Cost: $1,500 - $3,000 Amount Budgeted: Additional Requested: Annual Cost (if planned for future years): FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): Estimated costs of $1,500 to $3,000 depending on the amount of automation requested from CAMS. There are no implementation costs from Paymentus. STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): None ..Recommended Action RECOMMENDED ACTION: Following board approval Special Districts will enter into a contract with Paymentus to provide credit card and electronic payment processing.