Board Of Supervisors — Tuesday, December 15, 2015
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. Presentation of Animals at the Animal Care and Control Shelter
5. Consideration of Items Not Appearing on the Posted Agenda (Extra Items)
5.1Contract Change Order No. 1 - Paradise Valley Intertie Pipeline Construction Contract with O.C. Jones & Sons, Inc., cost reduction of $31,022.85.
Action Item
approved
Carried 5-0 — moved by Steele
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Attached for the Board's review and approval is Contract Change Order No. 1 for the subject project.
The proposed change order includes one additive item and three deductive items. The additive item is the result of the contractor encountering several buried utilities that were not shown on the construction drawings (itemized cost attached). The additional cost is $8,077.15. The deductive items were deleted from the contract because they will either be completed under a separate contract or reduced production rates did not occur (work within environmentally sensitive areas). The net result is a reduction in the contract of $31,022.85. This will be a balancing change order because the construction work is now complete,
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends approval and authorization for the Chair to sign.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Mark Dellinger, Special Districts Administrator
DATE: December 10, 2015
SUBJECT: Contract Change Order No.1 - Paradise Valley Intertie Pipeline Construction Contract with O.C. Jones & Sons, Inc. - Contract Change Order No. 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Attached for the Board's review and approval is Contract Change Order No. 1 for the subject project.
The proposed change order includes one additive item and three deductive items. The additive item is the result of the contractor encountering several buried utilities that were not shown on the construction drawings (itemized cost attached). The additional cost is $8,077.15. The deductive items were deleted from the contract because they will either be completed under a separate contract or reduced production rates did not occur (work within environmentally sensitive areas). The net result is a reduction in the contract of $31,022.85. This will be a balancing change order because the construction work is now complete,
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends approval and authorization for the Chair to sign.
On motion of Supervisor Steele, and by vote of the Board, approved Contract Change Order No. 1 - Paradise Valley Intertie Pipeline Construction Contract with O.C. Jones & Sons, Inc., cost reduction of $31,022.85.. The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5- Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Clerk’s notes: Special DIstricts Administrator Mark Dellinger presented the item to the Board. He clarified that the Board Chair does not need to sign, he is requesting a minute order for final payment due to a different form being used.
Chair Farrington asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
5.2Contract Change Order No. Three with Statewide Traffic Safety & Signs, Inc for HR3 Sign Replacement & Striping Project
Action Item
approved
Carried 5-0 — moved by Comstock
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Attached for the Board's review and approval is Contract Change Order (CCO) No. Three for the subject project.
CCO No. Three balances all contract items to reflect actual final in-place quantities. This resulted in an increase of $6,681.52 to the original contract amount.
This project is funded 90 % from the Federal Highway Administration High Risk Rural Roads (HR3) program, and a 10% local funds match. Sufficient funds have been budgeted for this change order.
Staff recommends approval by the Board of Supervisors of Contract Change Order No. Three and that the Board authorize the Chair to execute CCO No. Three for an increase of $6,681.52 and a revised contract amount of $128,441.03.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost:$6,681.52
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): This project is funded 90 % from the Federal Highway Administration High Risk Rural Roads (HR3) program, and a 10% local funds match. Sufficient funds have been budgeted for this change order.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval by the Board of Supervisors of Contract Change Order No. Three and that the Board authorize the Chair to execute CCO No. Three for an increase of $6,681.52 and a revised contract amount of $128,441.03.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Scott De Leon, Public Works Director
DATE: December 11, 2015
SUBJECT: Approval of Contract Change Order No. Three with Statewide Traffic Safety & Signs, Inc for HR3 Sign Replacement & Striping Project
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Attached for the Board's review and approval is Contract Change Order (CCO) No. Three for the subject project.
CCO No. Three balances all contract items to reflect actual final in-place quantities. This resulted in an increase of $6,681.52 to the original contract amount.
This project is funded 90 % from the Federal Highway Administration High Risk Rural Roads (HR3) program, and a 10% local funds match. Sufficient funds have been budgeted for this change order.
Staff recommends approval by the Board of Supervisors of Contract Change Order No. Three and that the Board authorize the Chair to execute CCO No. Three for an increase of $6,681.52 and a revised contract amount of $128,441.03.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost:$6,681.52
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): This project is funded 90 % from the Federal Highway Administration High Risk Rural Roads (HR3) program, and a 10% local funds match. Sufficient funds have been budgeted for this change order.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval by the Board of Supervisors of Contract Change Order No. Three and that the Board authorize the Chair to execute CCO No. Three for an increase of $6,681.52 and a revised contract amount of $128,441.03.
On motion of Supervisor Comstock, and by vote of the Board, approved Contract Change Order No. Three with Statewide Traffic Safety & Signs, Inc for HR3 Sign Replacement & Striping Project. The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5- Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Clerk’s notes: Scott DeLeon presented the item to Board.
Chair Farrington asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
5.3Contract Change Order No. Two with Statewide Traffic Safety & Signs, Inc for HR3 Sign Replacement & Striping Project
Action Item
approved
Carried 5-0 — moved by Comstock
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Attached for the Board's review and approval is Contract Change Order (CCO) No. Two for the subject project.
CCO No. Two addresses the need to remove the existing pavement markers on 3 miles of Soda bay Road prior to placing new striping and pavement markers. The removal of pavement markers was not included in the original plans & specifications. This extra work resulted in an increase of $600.00 to the original contract amount.
This project is funded 90 % from the Federal Highway Administration High Risk Rural Roads (HR3) program, and a 10% local funds match. Sufficient funds have been budgeted for this change order.
Staff recommends approval by the Board of Supervisors of Contract Change Order No. Two and that the Board authorize the Chair to execute CCO No. Two for an increase of $600.00 and a revised contract amount of $121,759.51.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost: $600
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): This project is funded 90 % from the Federal Highway Administration High Risk Rural Roads (HR3) program, and a 10% local funds match. Sufficient funds have been budgeted for this change order.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval by the Board of Supervisors of Contract Change Order No. Two and that the Board authorize the Chair to execute CCO No. Two for an increase of $600.00 and a revised contract amount of $121,759.51.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Scott De Leon, Public Works Director
DATE: December 11, 2015
SUBJECT: Approval of Contract Change Order No. Two with Statewide Traffic Safety & Signs, Inc. for HR3 Sign Replacement & Striping Project
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Attached for the Board's review and approval is Contract Change Order (CCO) No. Two for the subject project.
CCO No. Two addresses the need to remove the existing pavement markers on 3 miles of Soda bay Road prior to placing new striping and pavement markers. The removal of pavement markers was not included in the original plans & specifications. This extra work resulted in an increase of $600.00 to the original contract amount.
This project is funded 90 % from the Federal Highway Administration High Risk Rural Roads (HR3) program, and a 10% local funds match. Sufficient funds have been budgeted for this change order.
Staff recommends approval by the Board of Supervisors of Contract Change Order No. Two and that the Board authorize the Chair to execute CCO No. Two for an increase of $600.00 and a revised contract amount of $121,759.51.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost: $600
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): This project is funded 90 % from the Federal Highway Administration High Risk Rural Roads (HR3) program, and a 10% local funds match. Sufficient funds have been budgeted for this change order.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval by the Board of Supervisors of Contract Change Order No. Two and that the Board authorize the Chair to execute CCO No. Two for an increase of $600.00 and a revised contract amount of $121,759.51.
On motion of Supervisor Comstock, and by vote of the Board, approved Contract Change Order No. Two with Statewide Traffic Safety & Signs, Inc for HR3 Sign Replacement & Striping Project. The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5- Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Clerk’s notes: Public Works Director Scott DeLeon presented the item to the Board. Chair Farrington asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
6. Current Construction Projects - Contract Change Orders
7. Approval of the Consent Agenda
7.1Approve Minutes of the Board of Supervisors meetings held April 7, 2015, April 21, 2015, April 28, 2015, May 5, 2015, November 17, 2015 and November 20, 2015- Special Mtg.
Minutes
passed on consent
7.2Approve Late Travel Claim for Assessor-Recorder Richard Ford, in the amount of $327.28.
Action Item
passed on consent
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
I am requesting approval of a travel and expense claim that was submitted after the 60 day deadline as outlined in the County of Lake travel policy. While there is no excuse for the lateness of this submittal, the concentration on processing the roll changes due to the recent wildfire has taken precedent as a focus in my office.
If you have any further questions, please call the Assessor's Office at 707-263-2302
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve Late Travel Claim for Assessor-Recorder Richard Ford, in the amount of $327.28.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Richard Ford, Assessor-Recorder
DATE: December 7, 2015
SUBJECT: Approval of Late Travel Expense Claim for Assessor-Recorder Richard Ford, in the amount of $327.28
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
I am requesting approval of a travel and expense claim that was submitted after the 60 day deadline as outlined in the County of Lake travel policy. While there is no excuse for the lateness of this submittal, the concentration on processing the roll changes due to the recent wildfire has taken precedent as a focus in my office.
If you have any further questions, please call the Assessor's Office at 707-263-2302
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve Late Travel Claim for Assessor-Recorder Richard Ford, in the amount of $327.28.
7.3Approve reissuance of tax refund check to F and C Investment in the amount of $1,366.62.
Action Item
passed on consent
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
We received a request from Kai Garcia of F and C Investment Property LLC to reissue a check that was not cashed within six months from the date of issuance and is therefore void. Government Code 29802 sets the guidelines by which the Auditor-Controller or your Board may authorize replacement of void checks. The check in question is the following:
* Check number 661956 was a supplemental tax refund for a reduction in value in the amount of $1,366.62, issued to F and C Investment Prop LLC on 12/5/12. According to Kai Garcia the check was never received.
It has been verified that the check has been cancelled in the financial system and was not reissued. Attached is the supporting documentation.
This check falls outside the two year timeframe allowable for the Auditor-Controller to approve reissuance and we respectfully request your approval to reissue the above check.
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 to reissue check to F and C Investment Prop LLC in the amount of $1,366.62
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Cathy Saderlund, Auditor-Controller
DATE: November 25, 2015
SUBJECT: F and C Investment Prop LLC Tax Refund from FY 12/13
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
We received a request from Kai Garcia of F and C Investment Property LLC to reissue a check that was not cashed within six months from the date of issuance and is therefore void. Government Code 29802 sets the guidelines by which the Auditor-Controller or your Board may authorize replacement of void checks. The check in question is the following:
* Check number 661956 was a supplemental tax refund for a reduction in value in the amount of $1,366.62, issued to F and C Investment Prop LLC on 12/5/12. According to Kai Garcia the check was never received.
It has been verified that the check has been cancelled in the financial system and was not reissued. Attached is the supporting documentation.
This check falls outside the two year timeframe allowable for the Auditor-Controller to approve reissuance and we respectfully request your approval to reissue the above check.
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 to reissue check to F and C Investment Prop LLC in the amount of $1,366.62
7.4(a) Waive the formal bidding process, pursuant to Lake County Code 38.2, as it is not in the public interest due to the unique nature of goods or services; and (b) Approve the First Amendment to the Agreement between the County of Lake and Redwood Community Services, Inc. for Fiscal Year 2016-17 for a contract maximum of $149,655 and authorize the Board Chair to sign the Amendment.
Agreement
passed on consent
Staff memo
Lake County Behavioral Health is required to make available substance abuse treatment to women of Lake County who are either pregnant or post-partum. These services, referred to as "perinatal services", are specifically designed to address the substance use issues related to this high risk population. Services include group and one-to-one treatment which is provided by certified substance abuse counselors. In addition, transportation will be provided as necessary and case management and childcare will be provided in a safe, welcoming, State certified setting. Lake County Behavioral Health is contracting with Redwood Community Services, Inc. to provide a perinatal program for Fiscal Year 2016-17. Lake County Behavioral Health has contracted with Redwood Community Services, Inc. in the past and has confidence that they will be able to provide quality services in a meaningful and fiscally efficient manner.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Original Contract Amount: $299,655
Decrease In Contract Amount: $150,000
New Contract Amount: $149,655
Additional Requested: N/A
Annual Cost (if planned for future years): N/A
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): Lake County Behavioral Health is requesting a decrease in the amount of $150,000 for a new contract maximum of $149,655. Funding for this Agreement will be from the SAPT Block Grant set-aside allocation, perinatal Drug Medi-Cal, and Realignment funds.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): N/A
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: (a) Waive the formal bidding process, pursuant to Lake County Code 38.2, as it is not in the public interest due to the unique nature of goods or services; and (b) Approve the First Amendment to the Agreement between the County of Lake and Redwood Community Services, Inc. for Fiscal Year 2016-17 for a contract maximum of $149,655 and authorize the Board Chair to sign the Amendment.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: Todd Metcalf
Behavioral Health Director
DATE:
SUBJECT: Approve the First Amendment to the Agreement between County of Lake and Redwood Community Services, Inc. for AOD Perinatal Program Services for Fiscal Year 2016-17
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Attached, for your approval, is the First Amendment to the Agreement between the County of Lake and Redwood Community Services, Inc. for AOD Perinatal Program Services for Fiscal Year 2016-17.
Lake County Behavioral Health is required to make available substance abuse treatment to women of Lake County who are either pregnant or post-partum. These services, referred to as "perinatal services", are specifically designed to address the substance use issues related to this high risk population. Services include group and one-to-one treatment which is provided by certified substance abuse counselors. In addition, transportation will be provided as necessary and case management and childcare will be provided in a safe, welcoming, State certified setting. Lake County Behavioral Health is contracting with Redwood Community Services, Inc. to provide a perinatal program for Fiscal Year 2016-17. Lake County Behavioral Health has contracted with Redwood Community Services, Inc. in the past and has confidence that they will be able to provide quality services in a meaningful and fiscally efficient manner.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Original Contract Amount: $299,655
Decrease In Contract Amount: $150,000
New Contract Amount: $149,655
Additional Requested: N/A
Annual Cost (if planned for future years): N/A
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): Lake County Behavioral Health is requesting a decrease in the amount of $150,000 for a new contract maximum of $149,655. Funding for this Agreement will be from the SAPT Block Grant set-aside allocation, perinatal Drug Medi-Cal, and Realignment funds.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): N/A
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: (a) Waive the formal bidding process, pursuant to Lake County Code 38.2, as it is not in the public interest due to the unique nature of goods or services; and (b) Approve the First Amendment to the Agreement between the County of Lake and Redwood Community Services, Inc. for Fiscal Year 2016-17 for a contract maximum of $149,655 and authorize the Board Chair to sign the Amendment.
7.5Approve First Amendment to the Agreement between the County of Lake and Community Care HIV/AIDS Program for Provision of HIV/AIDS Counseling and Case Management Services for Lake County Residents for Fiscal Year 2015-16, changing the location of 4 of the 10 workshops and authorize the Chair to sign.
Agreement
passed on consent
Staff memo
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: CCAHP has a facility in Lower Lake that provides community services with a focus on harm reduction, substance use/abuse counseling, and HIV testing and education. Currently they have a drug and alcohol counseling intern and will offer weekly 1-on-1 counseling, recovery maintenance support groups, and harm reduction workshops. Recently, CCHAP staff have become state certified as rapid HIV test counselors, and are now approved to do anonymous and confidential rapid HIV testing; therefore, Lake County Behavioral Health - Alcohol & Other Drug Services is expanding the contract to include quarterly education sessions at both our North Shore and South Shore sites in addition to offering HIV/AIDS testing when the workshops are held at the North Shore site. Lake County Behavioral Health - Alcohol & Other Drug Services continues to partner with CCHAP to provide community health and prevention services.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost: N/A
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Requested: N/A
Annual Cost (if planned for future years): N/A
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): There is no fiscal impact at this time.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): N/A
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Lake County Behavioral Health requests the Board approve the First Amendment to the Agreement between the County of Lake and CCHAP and authorize the Board Chair to sign the Amendment.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: Linda Morris, LMFT, MAC
Behavioral Health Director
DATE: December 15, 2015
SUBJECT: First Amendment to the Agreement between the County of Lake and Community Care HIV/AIDS Program for Provision of HIV/AIDS Counseling and Case Management Services for Lake County Residents for Fiscal Year 2015-16
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Attached, for your approval, is the First Amendment to the Agreement between the County of Lake and Community Care HIV/AIDS Program (CCHAP) for provision of HIV/AIDS Counseling and Case Management Services for Lake County Residents for Fiscal Year 2015-2016.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: CCAHP has a facility in Lower Lake that provides community services with a focus on harm reduction, substance use/abuse counseling, and HIV testing and education. Currently they have a drug and alcohol counseling intern and will offer weekly 1-on-1 counseling, recovery maintenance support groups, and harm reduction workshops. Recently, CCHAP staff have become state certified as rapid HIV test counselors, and are now approved to do anonymous and confidential rapid HIV testing; therefore, Lake County Behavioral Health - Alcohol & Other Drug Services is expanding the contract to include quarterly education sessions at both our North Shore and South Shore sites in addition to offering HIV/AIDS testing when the workshops are held at the North Shore site. Lake County Behavioral Health - Alcohol & Other Drug Services continues to partner with CCHAP to provide community health and prevention services.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost: N/A
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Requested: N/A
Annual Cost (if planned for future years): N/A
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative): There is no fiscal impact at this time.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): N/A
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Lake County Behavioral Health requests the Board approve the First Amendment to the Agreement between the County of Lake and CCHAP and authorize the Board Chair to sign the Amendment.
7.6Approve Second Amendment to Agreement between the County of Lake and Breezy Bill Pay and Errands for Janitorial Services, contract maximum of $29,100 and authorize the Chair to sign.
Agreement
passed on consent
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Approve Second Amendment to Agreement between the County of Lake and Breezy Bill Pay and Errands for
Janitorial Services.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost:
Amount Budgeted: $29,100
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative):
Compensation to Contractor shall not exceed $300 per week with the total maximum under this contract being $29,100.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends approval of Second Amendment to maintain janitorial services and requests the Chair to sign.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: GAIL WOODWORTH
Child Support Services Director
DATE: November 23, 2015
SUBJECT: Approval of Second Amendment to Agreement between the County of Lake and Breezy
Bill Pay and Errands for Janitorial Services
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Approve Second Amendment to Agreement between the County of Lake and Breezy Bill Pay and Errands for
Janitorial Services.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost:
Amount Budgeted: $29,100
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative):
Compensation to Contractor shall not exceed $300 per week with the total maximum under this contract being $29,100.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends approval of Second Amendment to maintain janitorial services and requests the Chair to sign.
7.7Adopt Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2015-120 Establishing Position Allocations for Fiscal Year 2015-2016, Budget Unit 2110, District Attorney.
Action Item
passed on consent
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This Resolution to amend the District Attorney Investigator position allocation is being requested due to the lack of viable candidates for the two vacant District Attorney Investigator positions, which have had three unsuccessful recruitment attempts. We anticipate that broadening the position to Trainees will give us a better selection of candidates.
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:
Adopt the Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2015-120 Establishing Position Allocations for Fiscal Year 2015-2016, Budget Unit 2110, District Attorney
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: The Honorable Members of the Lake County Board of Supervisors
FROM: Don A. Anderson, District Attorney
DATE: December 7, 2015
SUBJECT: Adopt the Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2015-120 Establishing Position Allocations for Fiscal Year 2015-2016, Budget Unit 2110, District Attorney
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This Resolution to amend the District Attorney Investigator position allocation is being requested due to the lack of viable candidates for the two vacant District Attorney Investigator positions, which have had three unsuccessful recruitment attempts. We anticipate that broadening the position to Trainees will give us a better selection of candidates.
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:
Adopt the Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2015-120 Establishing Position Allocations for Fiscal Year 2015-2016, Budget Unit 2110, District Attorney
7.8Adopt Resolution Authorizing the Public Services Director or his Designee to Sign a Notice of Completion for Work Performed Under Agreement for Construction of the Holiday Harbor Sheet Pile Wall.
Resolution
passed on consent
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The construction of the Holiday Harbor Sheet Pile Wall is now fully complete and all invoices have been processed. It is necessary at this time to file a notice of completion for the project.
Attached hereto to is a proposed resolution which, if approved, will authorize the Public Services Director or his designee to execute the Notice of Completion.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost: $106,043.00
Amount Budgeted: $106,043.00
Additional Requested: N/A
Annual Cost (if planned for future years): N/A
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative):
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): N/A
..Recommended Action:
Staff recommends adoption of the attached resolution.
Original memo text
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Kati Galvani for Kim Clymire
Interim Public Services Director
DATE: December 3, 2015
SUBJECT: Notice of Completion for the Holiday Harbor Seawall
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The construction of the Holiday Harbor Sheet Pile Wall is now fully complete and all invoices have been processed. It is necessary at this time to file a notice of completion for the project.
Attached hereto to is a proposed resolution which, if approved, will authorize the Public Services Director or his designee to execute the Notice of Completion.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None _X_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost: $106,043.00
Amount Budgeted: $106,043.00
Additional Requested: N/A
Annual Cost (if planned for future years): N/A
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative):
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): N/A
..Recommended Action:
Staff recommends adoption of the attached resolution.
7.9Adopt Resolution delegating to the County Public Works Director authority to initiate negotiations for the purchase of a portion of certain parcels (APN 008-664-010, 008-664-120, 008-665-010, 242-042-010, 242-041-010, 242-041-020 and 242-041-030) as part of the Konocti Road Safe Routes to School project.
Resolution
passed on consent
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Konocti Road Safe Routes to School project is slated for construction in 2016. In order to commence negotiations and set just compensation for the required property acquisitions and temporary construction easements, authorization must be provided to the County Public Works Director to initiate negotiations.
This project is 90% funded for construction with State Safe Routes to School funds and a 10% County match.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the resolution delegating to the County Public Works Director authority to initiate negotiations for the purchase of a portion of certain parcels (APN 008-664-010, 008-664-120, 008-665-010, 242-042-010, 242-041-010, 242-041-020 and 242-041-030). Approve the Resolution and authorize the Chair to sign.
SD:es
Attachment
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Scott DeLeon, Public Works Director
DATE: November 18, 2015
SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution delegating to the County Public Works Director authority to initiate negotiations for the purchase of a portion of certain parcels (APN 008-664-010, 008-664-120, 008-665-010, 242-042-010, 242-041-010, 242-041-020 and 242-041-030) as part of the Konocti Road Safe Routes to School project.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Konocti Road Safe Routes to School project is slated for construction in 2016. In order to commence negotiations and set just compensation for the required property acquisitions and temporary construction easements, authorization must be provided to the County Public Works Director to initiate negotiations.
This project is 90% funded for construction with State Safe Routes to School funds and a 10% County match.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the resolution delegating to the County Public Works Director authority to initiate negotiations for the purchase of a portion of certain parcels (APN 008-664-010, 008-664-120, 008-665-010, 242-042-010, 242-041-010, 242-041-020 and 242-041-030). Approve the Resolution and authorize the Chair to sign.
SD:es
Attachment
7.10Adopt Resolution delegating to the County Public Works Director authority to initiate negotiations for the purchase of a portion of certain parcels (APN 050-471-080, 050-471-090, 050-471-150, 050-471-100 and 050-471-140) as part of the bridge replacement on Foard Road
Resolution
passed on consent
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On January 13, 2015, The Department of Public Works entered into an Agreement with Bender Rosenthal Inc., to provide Right of Way services for Four (4) Bridge Replacement Projects and Two (2) Bridge Rehabilitation Projects in Lake County, CA.
The Anderson Creek Bridge on Foard Road project is slated for construction in 2016. In order to commence negotiations and set just compensation for the required property acquisitions and temporary construction easements, authorization must be provided to the County's Right of Way consultants, Bender Rosenthal Inc., to proceed.
This project is 100% funded for construction with state and federal funds. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Caltrans offer Federal Highway Bridge Program (HBP) funds and California Toll Credits to eligible projects. The FHWA, in an agreement with Caltrans, provides for the use of toll credits in lieu of local matching funds.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors adopt the resolution delegating to the County Public Works Director authority to initiate negotiations for the purchase of a portion of certain parcels (APN 050-471-080, 050-471-090, 050-471-150, 050-471-100 and 050-471-140). Approve the Resolution and authorize the Chair to sign.
SD:es
Attachment
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Scott DeLeon, Public Works Director
DATE: November 18, 2015
SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution delegating to the County Public Works Director authority to initiate negotiations for the purchase of a portion of certain parcels (APN 050-471-080, 050-471-090, 050-471-150, 050-471-100 and 050-471-140) as part of the bridge replacement on Foard Road
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On January 13, 2015, The Department of Public Works entered into an Agreement with Bender Rosenthal Inc., to provide Right of Way services for Four (4) Bridge Replacement Projects and Two (2) Bridge Rehabilitation Projects in Lake County, CA.
The Anderson Creek Bridge on Foard Road project is slated for construction in 2016. In order to commence negotiations and set just compensation for the required property acquisitions and temporary construction easements, authorization must be provided to the County's Right of Way consultants, Bender Rosenthal Inc., to proceed.
This project is 100% funded for construction with state and federal funds. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Caltrans offer Federal Highway Bridge Program (HBP) funds and California Toll Credits to eligible projects. The FHWA, in an agreement with Caltrans, provides for the use of toll credits in lieu of local matching funds.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors adopt the resolution delegating to the County Public Works Director authority to initiate negotiations for the purchase of a portion of certain parcels (APN 050-471-080, 050-471-090, 050-471-150, 050-471-100 and 050-471-140). Approve the Resolution and authorize the Chair to sign.
SD:es
Attachment
7.11Adopt Resolution delegating to the County Public Works Director authority to initiate negotiations for the purchase of a portion of a certain parcel (APN 013-031-240) as part of the bridge replacement project on Dry Creek Road.
Resolution
passed on consent
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On October 7, 2015, the Department of Public Works entered into an Agreement with Bender Rosenthal Inc., to provide Right of Way services for Replacement of Dry Creek Bridge on Dry Creek Road in Lake County, CA.
The Dry Creek Bridge on Dry Creek Road project is slated for construction in 2016. In order to commence negotiations and set just compensation for the required property acquisition and temporary construction easement, authorization must be provided to the County's Right of Way consultants, Bender Rosenthal Inc., to proceed.
This project is 100% funded for construction with State and federal funds. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Caltrans offer Federal Highway Bridge Program (HBP) funds and California Toll Credit funds to eligible projects. The FHWA, in an agreement with Caltrans, provides for the use of toll credits in lieu of local matching funds.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the resolution delegating to the County Public Works Director authority to initiate negotiations for the purchase of a portion of a certain parcel (APN 013-031-240). Approve the Resolution and authorize the Chair to sign.
SD:es
Attachment
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Scott DeLeon, Public Works Director
DATE: November 18, 2015
SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution delegating to the County Public Works Director authority to initiate negotiations for the purchase of a portion of a certain parcel (APN 013-031-240) as part of the bridge replacement project on Dry Creek Road.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On October 7, 2015, the Department of Public Works entered into an Agreement with Bender Rosenthal Inc., to provide Right of Way services for Replacement of Dry Creek Bridge on Dry Creek Road in Lake County, CA.
The Dry Creek Bridge on Dry Creek Road project is slated for construction in 2016. In order to commence negotiations and set just compensation for the required property acquisition and temporary construction easement, authorization must be provided to the County's Right of Way consultants, Bender Rosenthal Inc., to proceed.
This project is 100% funded for construction with State and federal funds. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Caltrans offer Federal Highway Bridge Program (HBP) funds and California Toll Credit funds to eligible projects. The FHWA, in an agreement with Caltrans, provides for the use of toll credits in lieu of local matching funds.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the resolution delegating to the County Public Works Director authority to initiate negotiations for the purchase of a portion of a certain parcel (APN 013-031-240). Approve the Resolution and authorize the Chair to sign.
SD:es
Attachment
7.12(a) Waive the normal sealed bid process under Ordinance #2406, section 38.2, for the purchase of two F-250 pick-ups; and (b) Authorize the Sheriff/Coroner or his designee to issue a purchase order to Downtown Ford in the amount of $57,310.
Action Item
passed on consent
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Sheriff's Department is requesting Your Boards' approval to purchase two (2) 2016 F-250 4x4 pickups. These vehicles will be used by the Search and Rescue division.
Vehicle quotes were requested from Kathy Fowler Chrysler Jeep Dodge, Corning Ford, Ukiah Ford and Downtown Ford. The bids are as follows:
Kathy Fowler - $36,676.55
Corning Ford - $29,294.98
Ukiah Ford - $29,105.90
Downtown Ford - $28,654.85
Copies of the vehicle quotes are attached for your review.
The Sheriff's Department currently has $80,000 budgeted for the purchase of these vehicles.
We are asking that your Board waive the normal sealed bid process under Ordinance #2406, section 38.2 and award the bid to Downtown Ford in the amount of $57,309.64 and authorize the Sheriff/Coroner or his designee to issue a purchase order.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None x_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost: 57,310
Amount Budgeted: 80,000
Additional Requested: N/A
Annual Cost (if planned for future years): N/A
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative):
Funds are budgeted in the Sheriff's Search and Rescue budget 2218/62.72 and there is no cost to the County at this time.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): N/A
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
(a) Waive the normal sealed bid process under Ordinance #2406, section 38.2, for the purchase of two F-250 pick-ups; and (b) Authorize the Sheriff/Coroner or his designee to issue a purchase order to Downtown Ford in the amount of $57,310.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Anthony Farrington, Chairman, Board of Supervisors
FROM: Brian L. Martin, Sheriff/Coroner
DATE: November 21, 2015
SUBJECT: The Sheriff's Department requests approval to waive the normal sealed bid process under Ordinance #2406, section 38.2 and award the bid to Downtown Ford in the amount of $57,310, for the purchase of two F-250 pick-ups, and authorize the Sheriff/Coroner or his designee to issue a purchase order.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Sheriff's Department is requesting Your Boards' approval to purchase two (2) 2016 F-250 4x4 pickups. These vehicles will be used by the Search and Rescue division.
Vehicle quotes were requested from Kathy Fowler Chrysler Jeep Dodge, Corning Ford, Ukiah Ford and Downtown Ford. The bids are as follows:
Kathy Fowler - $36,676.55
Corning Ford - $29,294.98
Ukiah Ford - $29,105.90
Downtown Ford - $28,654.85
Copies of the vehicle quotes are attached for your review.
The Sheriff's Department currently has $80,000 budgeted for the purchase of these vehicles.
We are asking that your Board waive the normal sealed bid process under Ordinance #2406, section 38.2 and award the bid to Downtown Ford in the amount of $57,309.64 and authorize the Sheriff/Coroner or his designee to issue a purchase order.
FISCAL IMPACT: __ None x_Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost: 57,310
Amount Budgeted: 80,000
Additional Requested: N/A
Annual Cost (if planned for future years): N/A
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative):
Funds are budgeted in the Sheriff's Search and Rescue budget 2218/62.72 and there is no cost to the County at this time.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable): N/A
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
(a) Waive the normal sealed bid process under Ordinance #2406, section 38.2, for the purchase of two F-250 pick-ups; and (b) Authorize the Sheriff/Coroner or his designee to issue a purchase order to Downtown Ford in the amount of $57,310.
7.13Adopt Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2015-120 Establishing Position Allocations for Fiscal Year 2015-2016 for Budget Unit Number 5012 – Social Services Special Programs
Report
passed on consent
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Staff is requesting Board approval to eliminate one vacant Social Services Aide I/II/III position and replace it with one Public Authority Specialist (PAS) position.
Originally allocated for our Child Welfare Services branch, some years ago, we transferred all Social Services Aides to Adult Services and Public Authority (PA). For the last few years, the Social Services Aide assigned to PA has been performing duties which are very similar to PAS, with the exception of home visits. By making this change, the PA unit will be able to conduct additional home visits to ensure IHSS care provider and recipient interviews, matches and relationships are more successful. This is critical as the number of IHSS recipients continues to rise as is the frequency of IHSS care provider orientation and training.
FISCAL IMPACT: _X_ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost:
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative):
There is no County cost associated with this change.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):
None
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2015-120 Establishing Position Allocations for Fiscal Year 2015-2016 for Budget Unit Number 5012 - Social Services Special Programs, authorizing the Chair to sign.
Thank you for your consideration.
cc: Jennifer Fitts, Deputy Social Services Director
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Carol J. Huchingson, Social Services Director
DATE: December 2, 2015
SUBJECT: Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2015-120 Establishing Position Allocations for Fiscal Year 2015-2016 for Budget Unit Number 5012 - Social Services Special Programs
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Staff is requesting Board approval to eliminate one vacant Social Services Aide I/II/III position and replace it with one Public Authority Specialist (PAS) position.
Originally allocated for our Child Welfare Services branch, some years ago, we transferred all Social Services Aides to Adult Services and Public Authority (PA). For the last few years, the Social Services Aide assigned to PA has been performing duties which are very similar to PAS, with the exception of home visits. By making this change, the PA unit will be able to conduct additional home visits to ensure IHSS care provider and recipient interviews, matches and relationships are more successful. This is critical as the number of IHSS recipients continues to rise as is the frequency of IHSS care provider orientation and training.
FISCAL IMPACT: _X_ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost:
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative):
There is no County cost associated with this change.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):
None
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2015-120 Establishing Position Allocations for Fiscal Year 2015-2016 for Budget Unit Number 5012 - Social Services Special Programs, authorizing the Chair to sign.
Thank you for your consideration.
cc: Jennifer Fitts, Deputy Social Services Director
7.14Adopt Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2015-120 Establishing Position Allocations for Fiscal Year 2015-2016 for Budget Unit Number 5164 – Housing
Report
passed on consent
approved
Carried 5-0 — moved by Smith
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Staff is requesting Board approval to add one Staff Services Analyst position.
Prior to unprecedented disaster, we reached verbal agreement with the County Administrative Officer that this position would be added to 5164, subject to Board approval on 09/22/15. However, in the wake of other priorities, this did not happen at that time and is still needed.
The position is needed to oversee the impending Homeless Study (funded with CDBG T/A Grant funds) and to carry out Continuum of Care (COC) functions. This includes coordinating with partner agencies to provide general administrative structure for COC meetings, agendas, minutes, to develop the required consolidated plan, to collect relevant data and to oversee the work of a consultant approved by HUD.
FISCAL IMPACT: _X_ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost:
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative):
There is no County cost associated with this change.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):
None
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2015-120 Establishing Position Allocations for Fiscal Year 2015-2016 for Budget Unit Number 5164 - Housing Administration, authorizing the Chair to sign.
Thank you for your consideration.
cc: Jennifer Fitts, Deputy Social Services Director
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Carol J. Huchingson, Social Services Director
DATE: December 2, 2015
SUBJECT: Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2015-120 Establishing Position Allocations
for Fiscal Year 2015-2016 for Budget Unit Number 5164 - Housing
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Staff is requesting Board approval to add one Staff Services Analyst position.
Prior to unprecedented disaster, we reached verbal agreement with the County Administrative Officer that this position would be added to 5164, subject to Board approval on 09/22/15. However, in the wake of other priorities, this did not happen at that time and is still needed.
The position is needed to oversee the impending Homeless Study (funded with CDBG T/A Grant funds) and to carry out Continuum of Care (COC) functions. This includes coordinating with partner agencies to provide general administrative structure for COC meetings, agendas, minutes, to develop the required consolidated plan, to collect relevant data and to oversee the work of a consultant approved by HUD.
FISCAL IMPACT: _X_ None __Budgeted __Non-Budgeted
Estimated Cost:
Amount Budgeted:
Additional Requested:
Annual Cost (if planned for future years):
FISCAL IMPACT (Narrative):
There is no County cost associated with this change.
STAFFING IMPACT (if applicable):
None
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2015-120 Establishing Position Allocations for Fiscal Year 2015-2016 for Budget Unit Number 5164 - Housing Administration, authorizing the Chair to sign.
Thank you for your consideration.
cc: Jennifer Fitts, Deputy Social Services Director
On motion of Supervisor Smith, and by vote of the Board, approved Consent Agenda Items 7.1 - 7.14. The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5- Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
8. Timed Items
8.19:05 A.M. - Public Input
Clerk’s notes: Kevin Waycik spoke.
8.29:15 A.M. - PUBLIC HEARING - Consideration of Appeal (AB 15-04) of Planning Commission's denial of Cobb Vista Subdivision Unit No. 1 SD-14-01 and Initial Study IS 14-11; project located at 15385 Stonefield Court, Middletown (APN 014-11-21); applicant is Damon Fanucchi
Public Hearing
denied
Carried 5-0 — moved by Comstock
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Staff memo
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Plat Map showing proposed pedestrian line
2. Appeal request submitted by Mr. Fanucchi
2. Minutes of the Planning Commission July 23, 2015 meeting
3. Staff Report for Planning Commission July 23, 2015 meeting
I. SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting approval of a tentative subdivision map to allow for the division of a ?0.82 acre parcel in Middletown. The resulting two (2) parcels will be �0.41 acres each. The proposed parcels have adequate frontage along Stonefield Court, an existing improved road. The current lot configuration is the result of both a previous parcel map, PM 05-07, recorded in 2005, and a subdivision map, SD 06-14, recorded in 2011. Because the same developer, Damon Fanucchi, completed the two previous land divisions, resulting in the creation of more than four (4) parcels, this application must be processed as a subdivision map in accordance with the California Subdivision Map Act.
On July 23, 2015, the Planning Commission denied the project, with the discussion centering around curb, gutter and sidewalks in subdivisions with parcels less than one acre. This was also their requirement in the previous Subdivision project SD 06-14, which was later overturned by the Board of Supervisors in Appeal AB 07-03. Commissioner Sullivan expressed concern that the twelve foot proposed parking area, an alternative approved for SD 06-14 by the Community Development and Public Works Departments, would not be sufficient to protect the pedestrian traffic in this instance. The Planning Commission denied the subdivision project as presented in a 2-3 vote, and Mr. Fanucchi subsequently filed an appeal to the Board of Supervisors. He has since suggested a 4" wide solid white stripe to identify the pedestrian area in lieu of curb, gutter and sidewalks, as seen in Attachment 1.
There was further discussion by the Planning Commission regarding the rural nature of the neighborhood and how curb, gutter and sidewalk would seem too urban for the surroundings. Although this subdivision now has lots smaller than one acre, the cul-de-sac will serve no more than seven parcels including this subdivision project. Curb, gutters and sidewalks could be a high level of service to demand for so few housing units. The County of Lake Road Design and Construction Standards, Chapter 3.C.4 states:
Subdivisions shall be required to improve new roads to the applicable minor road standard based on the number and size of the proposed lots, adjoining land use, or other factors affecting the circulation and livability of the subdivision. Alternate designs intended to enhance the livability, appearance, health, safety, convenience and general welfare by using new concepts in the arrangement of lots and circulation pattern will be considered.
Staff requests Board direction regarding the development of a more diverse set of standards for road cross sections based on the number of households served, and connectivity of through streets. The Middletown Area Plan does not address this issue.
..Recommended Action
II. OPTIONS and SAMPLE MOTIONS:
The Planning Commission did approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Tentative Subdivision Map SD 14-01, subject to the conditions and with the findings listed in the staff report dated June 24, 2015. Should the Board intend to uphold the appeal there is no need to re-approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Should the Board partially grant the appeal, with the 4" wide striping indicating the pedestrian walkway, staff recommends a modification to condition D2 to read as follows:
Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall extend the existing alternative parking/pedestrian lane along the property frontage of the proposed lots (12-foot paved shoulder). Alternatively, the subdivider may construct another means for pedestrian access and drainage, in substantial compliance with County Road Standard 224, subject to approval of the Public Works and Community Development Departments.
Sample Motions:
A. Appeal Partial Approval
I move that the Board of Supervisors make an intended decision to partially approve the appeal of Damon Fanucchi to allow, instead of curb, gutter and sidewalk, another means for pedestrian access, in substantial compliance with County Road Standard 224, subject to approval of the Public Works and Community Development Departments and direct County Counsel to prepare proposed findings of fact.
B. Appeal Denial
I move that the Board of Supervisors make an intended decision to deny the appeal of Damon Fanucchi and direct County Counsel to prepare proposed findings of fact.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Richard Coel, Community Development Director
Prepared by: Mireya G. Turner, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: Appeal to the Board of Supervisors (AB 15-04) of Planning Commission's Denial of Cobb Vista Subdivision Unit No. 1; SD 14-01 and Initial Study; IS 14-11. Supervisorial District 1
DATE: November 18, 2015
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Plat Map showing proposed pedestrian line
2. Appeal request submitted by Mr. Fanucchi
2. Minutes of the Planning Commission July 23, 2015 meeting
3. Staff Report for Planning Commission July 23, 2015 meeting
I. SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting approval of a tentative subdivision map to allow for the division of a ?0.82 acre parcel in Middletown. The resulting two (2) parcels will be �0.41 acres each. The proposed parcels have adequate frontage along Stonefield Court, an existing improved road. The current lot configuration is the result of both a previous parcel map, PM 05-07, recorded in 2005, and a subdivision map, SD 06-14, recorded in 2011. Because the same developer, Damon Fanucchi, completed the two previous land divisions, resulting in the creation of more than four (4) parcels, this application must be processed as a subdivision map in accordance with the California Subdivision Map Act.
On July 23, 2015, the Planning Commission denied the project, with the discussion centering around curb, gutter and sidewalks in subdivisions with parcels less than one acre. This was also their requirement in the previous Subdivision project SD 06-14, which was later overturned by the Board of Supervisors in Appeal AB 07-03. Commissioner Sullivan expressed concern that the twelve foot proposed parking area, an alternative approved for SD 06-14 by the Community Development and Public Works Departments, would not be sufficient to protect the pedestrian traffic in this instance. The Planning Commission denied the subdivision project as presented in a 2-3 vote, and Mr. Fanucchi subsequently filed an appeal to the Board of Supervisors. He has since suggested a 4" wide solid white stripe to identify the pedestrian area in lieu of curb, gutter and sidewalks, as seen in Attachment 1.
There was further discussion by the Planning Commission regarding the rural nature of the neighborhood and how curb, gutter and sidewalk would seem too urban for the surroundings. Although this subdivision now has lots smaller than one acre, the cul-de-sac will serve no more than seven parcels including this subdivision project. Curb, gutters and sidewalks could be a high level of service to demand for so few housing units. The County of Lake Road Design and Construction Standards, Chapter 3.C.4 states:
Subdivisions shall be required to improve new roads to the applicable minor road standard based on the number and size of the proposed lots, adjoining land use, or other factors affecting the circulation and livability of the subdivision. Alternate designs intended to enhance the livability, appearance, health, safety, convenience and general welfare by using new concepts in the arrangement of lots and circulation pattern will be considered.
Staff requests Board direction regarding the development of a more diverse set of standards for road cross sections based on the number of households served, and connectivity of through streets. The Middletown Area Plan does not address this issue.
..Recommended Action
II. OPTIONS and SAMPLE MOTIONS:
The Planning Commission did approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Tentative Subdivision Map SD 14-01, subject to the conditions and with the findings listed in the staff report dated June 24, 2015. Should the Board intend to uphold the appeal there is no need to re-approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Should the Board partially grant the appeal, with the 4" wide striping indicating the pedestrian walkway, staff recommends a modification to condition D2 to read as follows:
Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall extend the existing alternative parking/pedestrian lane along the property frontage of the proposed lots (12-foot paved shoulder). Alternatively, the subdivider may construct another means for pedestrian access and drainage, in substantial compliance with County Road Standard 224, subject to approval of the Public Works and Community Development Departments.
Sample Motions:
A. Appeal Partial Approval
I move that the Board of Supervisors make an intended decision to partially approve the appeal of Damon Fanucchi to allow, instead of curb, gutter and sidewalk, another means for pedestrian access, in substantial compliance with County Road Standard 224, subject to approval of the Public Works and Community Development Departments and direct County Counsel to prepare proposed findings of fact.
B. Appeal Denial
I move that the Board of Supervisors make an intended decision to deny the appeal of Damon Fanucchi and direct County Counsel to prepare proposed findings of fact.
On motion of Supervisor Comstock, and by vote of the Board, denied the appeal of Damon Fanucchi and directed County Counsel to prepare proposed Findings of Dact. The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5- Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Clerk’s notes: Chair Farrington opened the Public Hearing and Asst. Clerk of the Board swore in Community Development Director Richard Coel, Assistant Planner Mireya Turner, Appellant Damon Fanucchi and citizens Barbara Galvin and Greg Scott. Ms.Turner gave the staff report and Mr. Coel also spoke.
Mr. Fannuchi gave his testimony and both Ms.Galvin and Mr. Scott spoke.
No one else wished to speak and Chair Farrington announced the public hearing was now closed.
8.39:20 A.M. - PUBLIC HEARING - Consideration of request for General Plan Amendment (GPA 15-01) of one parcel from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential and a Rezone (RZ 15-02) from "PDR-SC" Planned Development Residential-Scenic Combining to "R3" Multi-family Residential; project applicant is Mark Tanti; located at 500 Whalen Way, Lakeport (APN 029-371-01)
Public Hearing
Motion carried · 6 motions
Carried 5-0 (recovered from the archived minutes by OCR)
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Carried 5-0 (recovered from the archived minutes by OCR)
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Carried 5-0 — moved by Comstock (recovered from the archived minutes by OCR)
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Carried 5-0 — moved by Comstock (recovered from the archived minutes by OCR)
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Carried 5-0 (recovered from the archived minutes by OCR)
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Carried 5-0 — moved by Steele (recovered from the archived minutes by OCR)
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Staff memo
EXHIBITS: A. Planning Commission Staff Report dated October 8, 2015
B. Excerpt from Draft Planning Commission Minutes
C. Exhibit "A" Rezone Map
D. Exhibit "A" General Plan Map
E. Planning Commission Resolution 15-01
F. Initial Study 15-02
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This project request is to amend the General Plan designation on a parcel from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential and to rezone it from "PDR-SC", Planned Development -Scenic Combining District; to "R3" Multi-Family Residential. The primary reason for this proposal is to possibly develop a multi-story apartment building for a maximum of forty-eight units. The owner intends to later apply for a minor use permit to facilitate the development proposal.
The Planning Commission reviewed this proposal on October 8, 2015. One of the considerations presented to the Planning Commission that did not exist when this application was submitted in February of 2015 is the tremendous loss of residences in the three wildland fires that have devastated a significant amount of Lake County this past summer. This has negatively affected the number of residential rental units available in not only Lake County, but also the surrounding counties of Mendocino, Napa and Sonoma, as displaced residents scramble to locate housing to replace their lost units, whether owned or rented. While this application is not an approval for the proposed construction of the apartment units, it would provide the applicant with the required land use designations to facilitate their construction. Further environmental review would be required to be done for the development proposal, as it has not been formally considered with this application, nor has the applicant submitted the required review materials for any development plan, other than a conceptual design. The Planning Commission voted five to zero to recommend adoption of a negative declaration and approval of the general plan amendment and rezone to the Board of Supervisors.
Two issues associated with this proposal could prove to be controversial in nature as outlined below:
The applicant has requested as part of his application that the "SC" Scenic Combining District be eliminated as part of the rezone request. The subject parcel is approximately two and one-half acres is size and roughly triangular is shape. Also, the property has three road frontages with State Highway 29 located along the western boundary, Whalen Way along the southern boundary and Lakeshore Blvd. along the easterly boundary (see site photographs below). The Scenic Combining Overlay District's purpose, as stated in the County of Lake's Zoning Ordinance is: " To protect and enhance views of scenic areas from the County's scenic highways and roadways for the benefit of local and resort development, the motoring public and the recreation based economy of the County." To further this purpose, properties encumbered with the "SC" overlay district have a decreased maximum allowed building height along with increased setbacks from property lines for any structures as opposed to properties not located within this particular overlay district. These restrictions substantially limit any future development of this property to primarily low density single family residential housing, which is consistent with the current land use designations. With the proposal to high density multi-family residential land use designations, the "SC" overlay district would be inconsistent with the proposed amended land use designation, hence the proposal to remove the overlay district.
Two views looking east and southeast from State Highway 29
At issue is the precedent this could be setting for other development proposals within Lake County. If this overlay district removal is granted it could be construed as a green light for other developers to also request the "SC" overlay district be removed on their properties, as it hinders their proposed development. As stated above, the purpose of the "SC" overlay district is to preserve views of scenic areas in Lake County. This application's location is along State Highway 29, which is elevated approximately fifteen feet above the subject property. As conceptually proposed, a two story apartment building would intrude into any scenic views from the highway if allowed to construct to a higher elevation than allowed by the "SC" overlay district and also would possibly be constructed closer to Highway 29 if the "SC" overlay district is removed by the elimination of the increased setbacks from roadways. While the Scenic Combining overlay district could be deemed to have more importance for viewshed protections along highway sections fronting Clear Lake, the importance of scenic views in all areas of Lake County should be taken into consideration as well.
View looking southwest from Lakeshore Blvd. View looking north from Whalen Way
The second issue affecting this entitlement application is the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone could be construed as being labeled a spot zone. The definition of spot zoning is "...the application of zoning to a specific parcel or parcels of land within a larger zoned area when the rezoning is usually at odds with...current zoning restrictions." Surrounding General Plan and; Zoning designations consisting of; General Plan: Low Density Residential, Rural Residential, Resource Conservation and Rural Lands and Zoning: 'RR", Rural Residential; "SR", Suburban Reserve; "RL", Rural Lands and "R1", Single Family Residential. There is a townhouse development of attached residences (Lakeside Heights) located approximately one-half mile to the south along with a higher density mobile home park (Sterling Shores) approximately two-thirds of a mile east of the project parcel. While these existing developments fall far short of the density the applicant is proposing for possible future development, which would equal nineteen units per acre. The Planning Commission determined that the applicant's future proposal to develop apartments on the subject parcel would not be a spot zoning since all adjacent uses and zoning is residential.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommends that the Board of Supervisors take the following actions:
A. Adopt a negative declaration for GPAP 15-01 and RZ 15-02 with the following findings:
1. This rezoning is consistent with the Lake County General Plan and the Lakeport Area Plan.
2. The uses permitted in the "R3" district are compatible with the surrounding land uses.
3 This project will not result in the need for increased public services.
4. This rezoning will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts and a negative declaration has been recommended.
B. Approve GPAP 15-01 for the following reasons:
1. This amendment is consistent with the Lake County General Plan and the Lakeport Area Plan.
2. The uses allowed in the High Density General Plan designations are compatible with existing land uses in the vicinity.
3. This project will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts, and a negative declaration has been recommended.
C. Approve RZ 15-02 for the following reasons:
1. This rezoning is consistent with the Lake County General Plan and the Lakeport Area Plan.
2. The uses allowed in the "R3" district are compatible with existing land uses in the vicinity.
3. This project will not result in any significant adverse environmental impact, and a negative declaration has been recommended.
Sample Motions:
A. Proposed Negative Declaration
I move that the Board of Supervisors find that on the basis of the Initial Study No. 15-02 prepared by the Planning Division that the General Plan Amendment and Rezone as applied for by Mark Tanti will not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, a negative declaration shall be adopted with the findings set forth in the Board Memorandum dated November 16, 2015.
B. General Plan Amendment Approval
I offer the resolution.
C. Rezone Approval
I move that the reading of the ordinance be waived and be read in title only.
I offer the ordinance.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Richard Coel, Community Development Director
Prepared by: Keith Gronendyke, Associate Planner
DATE: November 16, 2015
SUBJECT: Tanti General Plan Amendment and Rezone;
GPAP 15-01, RZ 15-02, IS 15-02
Supervisorial District 4
EXHIBITS: A. Planning Commission Staff Report dated October 8, 2015
B. Excerpt from Draft Planning Commission Minutes
C. Exhibit "A" Rezone Map
D. Exhibit "A" General Plan Map
E. Planning Commission Resolution 15-01
F. Initial Study 15-02
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This project request is to amend the General Plan designation on a parcel from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential and to rezone it from "PDR-SC", Planned Development -Scenic Combining District; to "R3" Multi-Family Residential. The primary reason for this proposal is to possibly develop a multi-story apartment building for a maximum of forty-eight units. The owner intends to later apply for a minor use permit to facilitate the development proposal.
The Planning Commission reviewed this proposal on October 8, 2015. One of the considerations presented to the Planning Commission that did not exist when this application was submitted in February of 2015 is the tremendous loss of residences in the three wildland fires that have devastated a significant amount of Lake County this past summer. This has negatively affected the number of residential rental units available in not only Lake County, but also the surrounding counties of Mendocino, Napa and Sonoma, as displaced residents scramble to locate housing to replace their lost units, whether owned or rented. While this application is not an approval for the proposed construction of the apartment units, it would provide the applicant with the required land use designations to facilitate their construction. Further environmental review would be required to be done for the development proposal, as it has not been formally considered with this application, nor has the applicant submitted the required review materials for any development plan, other than a conceptual design. The Planning Commission voted five to zero to recommend adoption of a negative declaration and approval of the general plan amendment and rezone to the Board of Supervisors.
Two issues associated with this proposal could prove to be controversial in nature as outlined below:
The applicant has requested as part of his application that the "SC" Scenic Combining District be eliminated as part of the rezone request. The subject parcel is approximately two and one-half acres is size and roughly triangular is shape. Also, the property has three road frontages with State Highway 29 located along the western boundary, Whalen Way along the southern boundary and Lakeshore Blvd. along the easterly boundary (see site photographs below). The Scenic Combining Overlay District's purpose, as stated in the County of Lake's Zoning Ordinance is: " To protect and enhance views of scenic areas from the County's scenic highways and roadways for the benefit of local and resort development, the motoring public and the recreation based economy of the County." To further this purpose, properties encumbered with the "SC" overlay district have a decreased maximum allowed building height along with increased setbacks from property lines for any structures as opposed to properties not located within this particular overlay district. These restrictions substantially limit any future development of this property to primarily low density single family residential housing, which is consistent with the current land use designations. With the proposal to high density multi-family residential land use designations, the "SC" overlay district would be inconsistent with the proposed amended land use designation, hence the proposal to remove the overlay district.
Two views looking east and southeast from State Highway 29
At issue is the precedent this could be setting for other development proposals within Lake County. If this overlay district removal is granted it could be construed as a green light for other developers to also request the "SC" overlay district be removed on their properties, as it hinders their proposed development. As stated above, the purpose of the "SC" overlay district is to preserve views of scenic areas in Lake County. This application's location is along State Highway 29, which is elevated approximately fifteen feet above the subject property. As conceptually proposed, a two story apartment building would intrude into any scenic views from the highway if allowed to construct to a higher elevation than allowed by the "SC" overlay district and also would possibly be constructed closer to Highway 29 if the "SC" overlay district is removed by the elimination of the increased setbacks from roadways. While the Scenic Combining overlay district could be deemed to have more importance for viewshed protections along highway sections fronting Clear Lake, the importance of scenic views in all areas of Lake County should be taken into consideration as well.
View looking southwest from Lakeshore Blvd. View looking north from Whalen Way
The second issue affecting this entitlement application is the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone could be construed as being labeled a spot zone. The definition of spot zoning is "...the application of zoning to a specific parcel or parcels of land within a larger zoned area when the rezoning is usually at odds with...current zoning restrictions." Surrounding General Plan and; Zoning designations consisting of; General Plan: Low Density Residential, Rural Residential, Resource Conservation and Rural Lands and Zoning: 'RR", Rural Residential; "SR", Suburban Reserve; "RL", Rural Lands and "R1", Single Family Residential. There is a townhouse development of attached residences (Lakeside Heights) located approximately one-half mile to the south along with a higher density mobile home park (Sterling Shores) approximately two-thirds of a mile east of the project parcel. While these existing developments fall far short of the density the applicant is proposing for possible future development, which would equal nineteen units per acre. The Planning Commission determined that the applicant's future proposal to develop apartments on the subject parcel would not be a spot zoning since all adjacent uses and zoning is residential.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommends that the Board of Supervisors take the following actions:
A. Adopt a negative declaration for GPAP 15-01 and RZ 15-02 with the following findings:
1. This rezoning is consistent with the Lake County General Plan and the Lakeport Area Plan.
2. The uses permitted in the "R3" district are compatible with the surrounding land uses.
3 This project will not result in the need for increased public services.
4. This rezoning will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts and a negative declaration has been recommended.
B. Approve GPAP 15-01 for the following reasons:
1. This amendment is consistent with the Lake County General Plan and the Lakeport Area Plan.
2. The uses allowed in the High Density General Plan designations are compatible with existing land uses in the vicinity.
3. This project will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts, and a negative declaration has been recommended.
C. Approve RZ 15-02 for the following reasons:
1. This rezoning is consistent with the Lake County General Plan and the Lakeport Area Plan.
2. The uses allowed in the "R3" district are compatible with existing land uses in the vicinity.
3. This project will not result in any significant adverse environmental impact, and a negative declaration has been recommended.
Sample Motions:
A. Proposed Negative Declaration
I move that the Board of Supervisors find that on the basis of the Initial Study No. 15-02 prepared by the Planning Division that the General Plan Amendment and Rezone as applied for by Mark Tanti will not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, a negative declaration shall be adopted with the findings set forth in the Board Memorandum dated November 16, 2015.
B. General Plan Amendment Approval
I offer the resolution.
C. Rezone Approval
I move that the reading of the ordinance be waived and be read in title only.
I offer the ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommends that the Board of Supervisors take the following actions:
A. Adopt a negative declaration for GPAP 15-01 and RZ 15-02 with the following findings:
1. This rezoning is consistent with the Lake County General Plan and the Lakeport Area Plan.
2. The uses permitted in the “R3” district are compatible with the surrounding land uses.
3 This project will not result in the need for increased public services.
4. This rezoning will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts and a negative declaration has been recommended.
B. Approve GPAP 15-01 for the following reasons:
1. This amendment is consistent with the Lake County General Plan and the Lakeport Area Plan.
2. The uses allowed in the High Density General Plan designations are compatible with existing land uses in the vicinity.
3. This project will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts, and a negative declaration has been recommended.
C. Approve RZ 15-02 for the following reasons:
1. This rezoning is consistent with the Lake County General Plan and the Lakeport Area Plan.
2. The uses allowed in the “R3” district are compatible with existing land uses in the vicinity.
3. This project will not result in any significant adverse environmental impact, and a negative declaration has been recommended.
Sample Motions:
A. Proposed Negative Declaration
I move that the Board of Supervisors find that on the basis of the Initial Study No. 15-02 prepared by the Planning Division that the General Plan Amendment and Rezone as applied for by Mark Tanti will not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, a negative declaration shall be adopted with the findings set forth in the Board Memorandum dated November 16, 2015.
B. General Plan Amendment Approval
I offer the resolution.
C. Rezone Approval
I move that the reading of the ordinance be waived and be read in title only.
I offer the ordinance.
Clerk’s notes: Due to improper notification in the paper, this item was continued to January 19, 2016 at 9:45 a.m.
8.49:30 A.M. - Discussion and consideration of a request to rescind Resolution No. 2015-22, a Resolution to Put an Advisory Question Concerning the Adoption of a Declaration Calling for State Split Pursuant to Article IV, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution on the Ballot for the Next General Election so to Determine the Will of the Voters regarding support for the State of Jefferson.
Resolution
approved
Carried 5-0 — moved by Farrington
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Earlier this year our Board on a 3-2 split vote decided to place the formation of a new state called the State of Jefferson on the November 2016 ballot. I am asking this Board to reconsider this decision based upon a myriad of reasons with the most compelling being the obvious reliance on the State of California during catastrophic events.
This Board should recall that the proponents of the State of Jefferson at this Board's request failed to provide a clear and competent financial analysis as to how the poorest 7-8 counties in California and Oregon could create the tax base necessary to provide the most basic of public services. Their financial analysis conveniently only considered property and sales tax revenues generated within our county jurisdiction and annual expenditures, while failing to take into consideration the following monies that come back from the state: realignment funding for public safety; social services, mental health services; AODS, and public health; funding that the state provides by way of grants for law enforcement and infrastructure; and low interest loans for water and sewer infrastructure, to name a few. These examples do not include the financial harm that would be realized by our farmers who rely on the branding of California agricultural crops and produce.
The State of Jefferson proponents also fail to quantify the amount of financial support that our county realizes for court services; public schools K-12; state and university education systems; funding for state highways and CalTrans; correctional and prison services; the California Highway Patrol and highway safety; state funding for law enforcement for the enforcement of drugs and illicit narcotics; funding for the management of state public lands and state parks; funding for our libraries; and as evident more than ever due to recent events, state support for fire suppression during catastrophic events such as wildfires; and funding for the rebuilding of our communities that have been devastated these unprecedented events.
These wildfires that our county has endured, and our dependence on state financial resources and assets requires this Board to reconsider its previous position; and in so doing, this Board should request that the proponents of the State of Jefferson engage in democracy from the bottom up by reaching out to the great people of our community by collecting signatures for petitions to place this issue before the electorate on the November 2016 ballot. This endeavor and approach would be consistent with a showing of whether there truly is support by the people to carve out Lake County from the Golden State of California.
I thank this Board in advance for its consideration.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Chair Farrington
DATE: December 8, 2015
SUBJECT: Discussion and consideration of a request to rescind Resolution No. 2015-22, a Resolution to Put an Advisory Question Concerning the Adoption of a Declaration Calling for State Split Pursuant to Article IV, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution on the Ballot for the Next General Election so to Determine the Will of the Voters regarding support for the State of Jefferson.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Earlier this year our Board on a 3-2 split vote decided to place the formation of a new state called the State of Jefferson on the November 2016 ballot. I am asking this Board to reconsider this decision based upon a myriad of reasons with the most compelling being the obvious reliance on the State of California during catastrophic events.
This Board should recall that the proponents of the State of Jefferson at this Board's request failed to provide a clear and competent financial analysis as to how the poorest 7-8 counties in California and Oregon could create the tax base necessary to provide the most basic of public services. Their financial analysis conveniently only considered property and sales tax revenues generated within our county jurisdiction and annual expenditures, while failing to take into consideration the following monies that come back from the state: realignment funding for public safety; social services, mental health services; AODS, and public health; funding that the state provides by way of grants for law enforcement and infrastructure; and low interest loans for water and sewer infrastructure, to name a few. These examples do not include the financial harm that would be realized by our farmers who rely on the branding of California agricultural crops and produce.
The State of Jefferson proponents also fail to quantify the amount of financial support that our county realizes for court services; public schools K-12; state and university education systems; funding for state highways and CalTrans; correctional and prison services; the California Highway Patrol and highway safety; state funding for law enforcement for the enforcement of drugs and illicit narcotics; funding for the management of state public lands and state parks; funding for our libraries; and as evident more than ever due to recent events, state support for fire suppression during catastrophic events such as wildfires; and funding for the rebuilding of our communities that have been devastated these unprecedented events.
These wildfires that our county has endured, and our dependence on state financial resources and assets requires this Board to reconsider its previous position; and in so doing, this Board should request that the proponents of the State of Jefferson engage in democracy from the bottom up by reaching out to the great people of our community by collecting signatures for petitions to place this issue before the electorate on the November 2016 ballot. This endeavor and approach would be consistent with a showing of whether there truly is support by the people to carve out Lake County from the Golden State of California.
I thank this Board in advance for its consideration.
On motion of Supervisor Farrington, and by vote of the Board, rescinded Resolution No. 2015-22 and suggested the proponents of the State of Jefferson collect signatures for petition to place before the electorate on the November 2016 ballot. The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5- Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Clerk’s notes: Chair Farrington passed the gavel to Vice Chair Brown and presented the item to the Board. Vice Chair Brown asked if anyone present wished to speak and the following people spoke: Randy Sutton, Truman Bernal, Tom Reed, Karen MacDougall, Kevin Waycik, Larry Anderson, Greg Scott, Victoria Brandon, Jillian Purillo, Cynthia Cowen, Nancy Harby, Pete Chandre and Shirley Helen. No one else present wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
8.510:30 A.M. - Swearing in ceremony for Correctional Officers Susan West and Wesley Besgrove.
Action Item
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Sheriff's Department requests 10 minutes at the December 15, 2015 Board of Supervisors meeting for a swearing in ceremony for newly hired Correctional Officers Susan West and Wesley Besgrove.
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:
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Anthony Farrington, Chairman, Board of Supervisors
FROM: Brian L. Martin, Sheriff/Coroner
DATE: November 25, 2015
SUBJECT: Request for swearing in ceremony for Correctional Officers Susan West and Wesley Besgrove
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Sheriff's Department requests 10 minutes at the December 15, 2015 Board of Supervisors meeting for a swearing in ceremony for newly hired Correctional Officers Susan West and Wesley Besgrove.
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:
Clerk’s notes: Sheriff Martin introduced Susan West and Wesley Besgrove and administered the Oath of Office.
8.611:00 A.M. - Consideration of the Request for Proposals for Community Choice Aggregation Development and Operations Services.
Action Item
approved
Carried 5-0 — moved by Smith
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
As your Board is aware, Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) is an emerging topic of interest to California local governments. The County of Mendocino and Redwood Coast Energy Authority (located in Humboldt County) are also researching CCA.
In order to leverage our dollars, these three entities have agreed to share in the costs of Andrew Brown's special legal counsel professional services. This partnership will more than double the amount of funds available to research CCA issues without any additional cost to the County beyond the $10,000 that your Board has already authorized. Staff will sign the cost-sharing agreement since it simply provides for the receipt of funds from the other agencies and does not involve the expenditure of County funds.
Staff is pleased to present the much anticipated Request for Proposals (RFP) for Community Choice Aggregation Development and Operations Services. This RFP was developed in partnership with Mr. Brown, LEAN Energy US, Redwood Coast Energy Authority (RCEA), and the County of Mendocino. Your Board's previously set forth criteria for Mr. Brown's scope of work provided the framework for the RFP. Special focuses include: financial safeguards and transparency, start-up financing, and staff impact. Your Board should note the supporting objectives found on Page 3 of the RFP and ensure that each of these goals is of importance to Lake County, keeping in mind the potential cost implications of specific requests.
The RFP document contains painstaking detail that was reviewed by multiple industry experts. Staff is confident that it will yield competitive proposals from the various firms that have expressed an interest in Lake County's potential CCA program. It should be noted that the broad language in the RFP is meant to be inclusive of all types of firms that may be interested in submitting a proposal including: California Clean Power, Community Choice Partners, Local Power Inc., and Sonoma Clean Power.
In terms of a timeline, which you will find in the RFP document, staff recommends that we release our RFP on February 1st with a due date of March 11th. RCEA has already released their RFP and releasing ours within the same time frame would likely strain the firms that would be interested in responding to both RFP processes. By separating our process from RCEA's process we can better ensure that respondents will be focused on Lake County's needs and not too busy preparing responses to RCEA, participating in interviews with RCEA, etc. In addition, since it is anticipated that a new County Administrative Officer will begin work in April, it would be to his or her advantage to not enter this process too late before major long-term decisions are made that will affect County staff and resources - particularly in the Administrative Office. Lastly, as much as Lake County has been a trailblazer in this area, we will surely benefit from observing RCEA's process and learning from it.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Direct staff to release the Request for Proposals for Community Choice Aggregation Development and Operations Services.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Josh Jones, Deputy County Administrative Officer
DATE: December 2, 2015
SUBJECT: Consideration of the Request for Proposals for Community Choice Aggregation Development and Operations Services
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
As your Board is aware, Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) is an emerging topic of interest to California local governments. The County of Mendocino and Redwood Coast Energy Authority (located in Humboldt County) are also researching CCA.
In order to leverage our dollars, these three entities have agreed to share in the costs of Andrew Brown's special legal counsel professional services. This partnership will more than double the amount of funds available to research CCA issues without any additional cost to the County beyond the $10,000 that your Board has already authorized. Staff will sign the cost-sharing agreement since it simply provides for the receipt of funds from the other agencies and does not involve the expenditure of County funds.
Staff is pleased to present the much anticipated Request for Proposals (RFP) for Community Choice Aggregation Development and Operations Services. This RFP was developed in partnership with Mr. Brown, LEAN Energy US, Redwood Coast Energy Authority (RCEA), and the County of Mendocino. Your Board's previously set forth criteria for Mr. Brown's scope of work provided the framework for the RFP. Special focuses include: financial safeguards and transparency, start-up financing, and staff impact. Your Board should note the supporting objectives found on Page 3 of the RFP and ensure that each of these goals is of importance to Lake County, keeping in mind the potential cost implications of specific requests.
The RFP document contains painstaking detail that was reviewed by multiple industry experts. Staff is confident that it will yield competitive proposals from the various firms that have expressed an interest in Lake County's potential CCA program. It should be noted that the broad language in the RFP is meant to be inclusive of all types of firms that may be interested in submitting a proposal including: California Clean Power, Community Choice Partners, Local Power Inc., and Sonoma Clean Power.
In terms of a timeline, which you will find in the RFP document, staff recommends that we release our RFP on February 1st with a due date of March 11th. RCEA has already released their RFP and releasing ours within the same time frame would likely strain the firms that would be interested in responding to both RFP processes. By separating our process from RCEA's process we can better ensure that respondents will be focused on Lake County's needs and not too busy preparing responses to RCEA, participating in interviews with RCEA, etc. In addition, since it is anticipated that a new County Administrative Officer will begin work in April, it would be to his or her advantage to not enter this process too late before major long-term decisions are made that will affect County staff and resources - particularly in the Administrative Office. Lastly, as much as Lake County has been a trailblazer in this area, we will surely benefit from observing RCEA's process and learning from it.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Direct staff to release the Request for Proposals for Community Choice Aggregation Development and Operations Services.
On motion of Supervisor Smith, and by vote of the Board, approved the February 1, 2016 release of Request for Proposals for Community Choice Aggregation Development and Operations Services. The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5- Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Clerk’s notes: Deputy County Administrative Officer Josh Jones presented the item to the Board. Chair Farrington asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
8.711:05 A.M. - Consideration of a letter of opposition to the California Public Utilities Commission regarding the proposal by Pacific Gas & Electric to increase the Power Charge Indifferent Adjustment
Letter
approved
Carried 5-0 — moved by Steele
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An emerging issue in the world of Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) is Pacific Gas & Electric's (PG&E) proposal to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to increase the Power Charge Indifferent Adjustment (PCIA). This charge is only applied to CCA customers since PG&E does not generate power for these customers. Such a change, if approved by the CPUC, would be detrimental to existing and future CCA programs as it would make it difficult for CCA programs to be cost-competitive with PG&E's rates.
As difficult as the current PCIA makes it to compete with PG&E, the proposed increase could very well be the competitive end for some or all of the state's existing CCA programs. As Lake County seeks to implement its own CCA program, the CPUC's decision will directly affect the advisability of launching a program.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that your Board send the attached letter of opposition to the California Public Utilities Commission regarding the proposal by Pacific Gas & Electric to increase the Power Charge Indifferent Adjustment.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Josh Jones, Deputy County Administrative Officer
DATE: December 2, 2015
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Letter of Opposition to the California Public Utilities Commission Regarding the Proposal by Pacific Gas & Electric to Increase the Power Charge Indifferent Adjustment to the Detriment of Community Choice Aggregation Programs
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An emerging issue in the world of Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) is Pacific Gas & Electric's (PG&E) proposal to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to increase the Power Charge Indifferent Adjustment (PCIA). This charge is only applied to CCA customers since PG&E does not generate power for these customers. Such a change, if approved by the CPUC, would be detrimental to existing and future CCA programs as it would make it difficult for CCA programs to be cost-competitive with PG&E's rates.
As difficult as the current PCIA makes it to compete with PG&E, the proposed increase could very well be the competitive end for some or all of the state's existing CCA programs. As Lake County seeks to implement its own CCA program, the CPUC's decision will directly affect the advisability of launching a program.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that your Board send the attached letter of opposition to the California Public Utilities Commission regarding the proposal by Pacific Gas & Electric to increase the Power Charge Indifferent Adjustment.
On motion of Supervisor Steele, and by vote of the Board, approved the letter of opposition to the California Public Utilities Commission regarding the proposal by Pacific Gas & Electric to increase the Power Charge Indifferent Adjustment. The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5- Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Clerk’s notes: At the request of Chair Farrington, Deputy County Administrative Officer Josh Jones presented the item to the Board.
Chair Farrington asked if anyone present wished to speak and the following people spoke: Victoria Brandon, Randy Sutton, Peter Rumble, Brian Pierson, Phil Murphy, Farrahlene Aldridge. No one else wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
8.811:30 A.M. - South Main Street, Lakeport, Water Project Update
Report
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
At the request of Chair Farrington, Special Districts will provide the Board of Supervisors with an update on the South Main Water Project.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
This item is informational only.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Mark Dellinger, Special Districts Administrator
DATE: December 8, 2015
SUBJECT: South Main Water Project Update
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
At the request of Chair Farrington, Special Districts will provide the Board of Supervisors with an update on the South Main Water Project.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
This item is informational only.
There was Board consensus to bring item back to the January 5, 2016 to formally appoint County representatives to meet with the City of Lakeport representatives to negotiate an out-of-area service agreement to provide water to the South Main Street/ Soda Bay Road corridor.
Clerk’s notes: Special Districts Administrator Mark Dellinger stated that the hydrology report and pump test at the Carter well site has been completed and the report was submitted to Community Development. Staff is currently waiting for that to go before the Planning Commission. Supervisor Brown recommended appointing two Board members to reach out to the City of Lakeport to initiate discussion surrounding possible water system and revenue sharing before staff spends any more time on other options. Chair Farrington asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
8.911:45 A.M. - Consideration of Resolution Opposing Annexation by the City of Lakeport of South Main Street/Soda Bay Road Corridor
Resolution
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This matter is being brought before our Board so that we can take a public and formal position against the City of Lakeport, and its desire to annex the South Main Street and Soda Bay Road Corridor. The city's proposal to annex this corridor provides zero benefit to the county; and in fact if the city were to be successful in its application to annex this corridor the county would realize a significant loss of tax revenues (approximately $500,000), revenues that currently benefits all the people in the unincorpated areas of Lake County. In addition, if the city were successful in the annexation of this area, the increased jurisdicational boundaries and geography would put greater financial strain on the City of Lakeport and its residents who have already realized diminished public services.
Most importantly, for the past 15 years that I have been in office the property owners and businesses along this corridor have consistently opposed the City of Lakeport annexing this corridor. I will continue to stand by these business and property owners, many of which have ties to each of our supervisorial districts. Make no mistake, my position standing with the people and businesses along this corridor has historically caused tension between various Lakeport City Council Members and staff. While this is unfortunate, I make no apologies for my position on this matter, and I respectfully request that this Board take a similar position. I take tremendous pride in the fact that I have never been a rubber stamp for city hall - we all live in a small community, and in so doing each of us forge personal bonds and friendships with other elected officials and governmental employees; however these relationships should not dictate this Board's decision as to what is best for the county and its people.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
I respectfully request that this Board support this resolution in opposing annexation of the South Main Street and Soda Bay corridor. I thank this Board in advance for its consideration.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Chair Farrington
DATE: December 8, 2015
SUBJECT: Consideration of Resolution Opposing Annexation by the City of Lakeport of South Main Street/Soda Bay Road Corridor
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This matter is being brought before our Board so that we can take a public and formal position against the City of Lakeport, and its desire to annex the South Main Street and Soda Bay Road Corridor. The city's proposal to annex this corridor provides zero benefit to the county; and in fact if the city were to be successful in its application to annex this corridor the county would realize a significant loss of tax revenues (approximately $500,000), revenues that currently benefits all the people in the unincorpated areas of Lake County. In addition, if the city were successful in the annexation of this area, the increased jurisdicational boundaries and geography would put greater financial strain on the City of Lakeport and its residents who have already realized diminished public services.
Most importantly, for the past 15 years that I have been in office the property owners and businesses along this corridor have consistently opposed the City of Lakeport annexing this corridor. I will continue to stand by these business and property owners, many of which have ties to each of our supervisorial districts. Make no mistake, my position standing with the people and businesses along this corridor has historically caused tension between various Lakeport City Council Members and staff. While this is unfortunate, I make no apologies for my position on this matter, and I respectfully request that this Board take a similar position. I take tremendous pride in the fact that I have never been a rubber stamp for city hall - we all live in a small community, and in so doing each of us forge personal bonds and friendships with other elected officials and governmental employees; however these relationships should not dictate this Board's decision as to what is best for the county and its people.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
I respectfully request that this Board support this resolution in opposing annexation of the South Main Street and Soda Bay corridor. I thank this Board in advance for its consideration.
As stated in the previous item, there was Board consensus to bring item back to the Board January 5, 2016 to formally appoint County representatives to meet with the City of Lakeport representatives to negotiate an out-of-area service agreement to provide water to the South Main Street/ Soda Bay Road corridor.
Clerk’s notes: Chair Farrington presented the item to the Board. There was discussion to table annexation and approach negotiations on water options. Chair Farrington asked if anyone present wished to speak on this item. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
9. Non-Timed Items
9.1Supervisors’ weekly calendar, travel and reports
9.2Status Reports/Updates of response and recovery efforts from OES, assisting agencies and/or community groups consequent to 2015 wildland fires.
Clerk’s notes: Recovery Coordinator Carol Huchingson reported that there are Manufactured Home units which 12 families are now occupying (7 renters in mobile and RV parks and 5 owners on private property); Additional sites are being prepared throughout the county. Ms. Huchingson provided a brief update on Department of Public Works flood prevention. Mendocino and Sonoma County have loaned crews to assist with ditch cleaning efforts. Uninsured individuals who want to rebuild have the option to invoice to non profit groups collecting funds in order to obtain monetary assistance for building permit costs. Staff is working on a call out survey to those not currently utilizing FEMA in order to capture rebuild intentions. Community Development DIrector Richard Coel reported 5 building permits have been issued for rebuild.
Chair Farrington asked if anyone present wished to speak and Victoria Brandon spoke. No one else present wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
9.3Ratification of Valley Fire related contracts entered into between September 12, 2015 and December 1, 2015, over $10,000 for services and over $25,000 for materials, supplies, and equipment.
Agreement
approved
Carried 5-0 — moved by Comstock
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Your Board authorized department heads to enter into Valley Fire related contracts of up to $1 million dollars on September 18, 2015. While your Board's previous direction to have department heads give updates after entering into contracts was appropriate, staff feels that formal ratification would be a more defensible position to take in preparation for an inevitable audit. Staff now recommends that the Board ratify all contracts for services over $10,000 and for materials, supplies, and equipment over $25,000.
Staff presents the following for your ratification:
* Agreement with Pacific Tree Care, a Division of the J. Allan Schneider Corp. for specialized tree removal, arboricultural, and related services not to exceed $400,000. Actual expenses incurred total $143,936.25 from September 19th to September 30th, 2015 and the Agreement is now terminated.
Additional contracts may be forthcoming at future meetings. It should be noted that the Departments of Public Works, Public Services, and Special Districts as well as the County Purchasing Agent have the authority through County Code Section 2-53.4 to enter into contracts of up to $175,000 and as such contracts under this amount will not be brought before your Board for ratification per normal procurement protocol (there is one caveat to this since the Federal Emergency Management Agency's small project limit is $150,000, the County must abide by this more restrictive amount so you will see contracts above this amount).
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends your Board ratify the Agreement with Pacific Tree Care, a Division of the J. Allan Schneider Corp. for specialized tree removal, arboricultural, and related services not to exceed $400,000.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Matt Perry, County Administrative Officer
Josh Jones, Deputy County Administrative Officer
DATE: December 10, 2015
SUBJECT: Ratification of Valley Fire Related Contracts Entered into between September 12, 2015 and December 1, 2015 Over $10,000 for Services and Over $25,000 for Materials, Supplies, and Equipment
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Your Board authorized department heads to enter into Valley Fire related contracts of up to $1 million dollars on September 18, 2015. While your Board's previous direction to have department heads give updates after entering into contracts was appropriate, staff feels that formal ratification would be a more defensible position to take in preparation for an inevitable audit. Staff now recommends that the Board ratify all contracts for services over $10,000 and for materials, supplies, and equipment over $25,000.
Staff presents the following for your ratification:
* Agreement with Pacific Tree Care, a Division of the J. Allan Schneider Corp. for specialized tree removal, arboricultural, and related services not to exceed $400,000. Actual expenses incurred total $143,936.25 from September 19th to September 30th, 2015 and the Agreement is now terminated.
Additional contracts may be forthcoming at future meetings. It should be noted that the Departments of Public Works, Public Services, and Special Districts as well as the County Purchasing Agent have the authority through County Code Section 2-53.4 to enter into contracts of up to $175,000 and as such contracts under this amount will not be brought before your Board for ratification per normal procurement protocol (there is one caveat to this since the Federal Emergency Management Agency's small project limit is $150,000, the County must abide by this more restrictive amount so you will see contracts above this amount).
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends your Board ratify the Agreement with Pacific Tree Care, a Division of the J. Allan Schneider Corp. for specialized tree removal, arboricultural, and related services not to exceed $400,000.
On motion of Supervisor Comstock, and by vote of the Board, approved ratification of Agreement between the County of Lake and Pacific Tree Care A Division of the J. Allan Schneider Corp., for specialized tree removal, arboricultural, and related services in an amount not to exceed $400,000. The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5- Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Clerk’s notes: County Administrative Officer Matt Perry presented the item to the Board. Mr. Perry noted that while the Agreement for specialized tree removal, arboricultural, and related services was not to exceed $400,000, actual expenses incurred were a total of $143,936.25 from September 19th to September 30th, 2015. The Agreement is now terminated. Chair Farrington asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one present wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
9.4Consideration of using Juvenile Hall for Probation Department’s Day Reporting Center and for Behavioral Health programs and eventual re-location of Emergency Operations Center to Alternative Work Program building
Action Item
approved
Carried 5-0 — moved by Comstock
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
As the Board is aware, the Juvenile Hall is now vacant. To determine the most appropriate use of this space, the Office Space Committee recently met with Chief Probation Officer Rob Howe, Sheriff Brian Martin and Deputy Behavioral Health Director Kevin Thompson. We discussed the possibility of using the Juvenile Hall as the Probation Department's Day Reporting Center (DRC) and for Behavioral Health programs.
Moving the DRC from Alternative Work Program (AWP) building near the Central Dispatch facility will allow the Emergency Operations Center to be located in the AWP Building. Sheriff Marin supports this proposal. The AWP building provides many advantages for an Emergency Operations Center. It has adequate size; it is near the Central Dispatch facility; and it would not require the renovation needed of the Air Quality building.
The Behavioral Health Department staff is also exploring the possible use of the former Juvenile Hall for two different programs: crisis center and substance abuse prevention.
The former Juvenile Hall is more than adequate to serve both as the DRC and for Behavioral Health program space. Some modifications will be required to change the look and feel from a correctional facility to one that is more inviting. Rob Howe and I have discussed the possibility of using AB109 funds for these modifications. If your Board supports using the former Juvenile Hall for the DRC, we will present the AB 109 funding request to the Executive Committee of the Community Corrections Partnership in the near future.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends your Board approve the following:
1. Allocating space in the former Juvenile Hall for Behavioral Health programs if the space and location is suitable for Behavioral Health programs.
2. Moving the Day Reporting Center to the former Juvenile Hall.
3. Moving the Emergency Operations Center to the Alternative Work Program building once the DRC is relocated.
cc: Sheriff Brian Martin
Chief Probation Officer Rob Howe
Deputy Behavioral Health Director Kevin Thompson
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Matt Perry, County Administrative Officer
DATE: December 1, 2015
SUBJECT: Consideration of using Juvenile Hall for Probation Department's Day Reporting Center and for Behavioral Health programs and eventual re-location of Emergency Operations Center to Alternative Work Program building
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
As the Board is aware, the Juvenile Hall is now vacant. To determine the most appropriate use of this space, the Office Space Committee recently met with Chief Probation Officer Rob Howe, Sheriff Brian Martin and Deputy Behavioral Health Director Kevin Thompson. We discussed the possibility of using the Juvenile Hall as the Probation Department's Day Reporting Center (DRC) and for Behavioral Health programs.
Moving the DRC from Alternative Work Program (AWP) building near the Central Dispatch facility will allow the Emergency Operations Center to be located in the AWP Building. Sheriff Marin supports this proposal. The AWP building provides many advantages for an Emergency Operations Center. It has adequate size; it is near the Central Dispatch facility; and it would not require the renovation needed of the Air Quality building.
The Behavioral Health Department staff is also exploring the possible use of the former Juvenile Hall for two different programs: crisis center and substance abuse prevention.
The former Juvenile Hall is more than adequate to serve both as the DRC and for Behavioral Health program space. Some modifications will be required to change the look and feel from a correctional facility to one that is more inviting. Rob Howe and I have discussed the possibility of using AB109 funds for these modifications. If your Board supports using the former Juvenile Hall for the DRC, we will present the AB 109 funding request to the Executive Committee of the Community Corrections Partnership in the near future.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends your Board approve the following:
1. Allocating space in the former Juvenile Hall for Behavioral Health programs if the space and location is suitable for Behavioral Health programs.
2. Moving the Day Reporting Center to the former Juvenile Hall.
3. Moving the Emergency Operations Center to the Alternative Work Program building once the DRC is relocated.
cc: Sheriff Brian Martin
Chief Probation Officer Rob Howe
Deputy Behavioral Health Director Kevin Thompson
On motion of Supervisor Comstock, and by vote of the Board, approved Staff's recommendations to allocate space in the former Juvenile Hall for Behavioral Health programs, move the Day Reporting Center (DRC) to the former Juvenile Hall, and move the Emergency Operations Center to the Alternative Work Program building once the DRC is relocated. The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5- Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Clerk’s notes: County Administrative Officer Matt Perry presented the item to the Board. Chief Probation Officer Rob Howe was also present and spoke.
Chair Farrington asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
9.5Consideration of (a) Resolution authorizing an increase in the County’s cash contribution to the proposed adult local criminal justice facility project; and (b) Resolution amending Resolution No. 2015-119 to amend the Adopted Budget for FY 2015-16 by cancelling obligated fund balance in fund 153 and transferring funds for the SB 1022 jail expansion project to appropriate money in Fund 960 to provide the necessary cash contribution.
Resolution
Adopted
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In October of 2013, your Board authorized the Sheriff to submit a grant application to the California Board of State and Community Corrections requesting $20 million, the maximum funding amount available to small counties, for the purpose of accommodating the AB 109 Realignment Act which impacted the availability of space at local jail facilities, like Hill Road Correctional facility, because of the 1) increasing number of locally incarcerated defendants who would have previously been given State Prison sentences. 2) the longer sentences that accompany these types of defendants and 3) the jail's lack of space for inmate programs and services ( drug and alcohol treatment, mental health services, life skills development, cognitive behavioral counseling) that the Act requires be provided for the growing population of these longer term inmates. Based on conceptual layouts, the estimated project cost reflected in the grant application totaled $21,360,000 of which $16,832,000 was the estimated construction cost and was proposed to be funded as follows:
State Grant funding: $20,000,000
County Cash $ 650,000
County in-kind services: $ 710,000
$21,360,000
On January 16, 2014, the Board of State and Community Corrections announced that Lake County had been awarded the $20 million grant. Despite that award, the State is not obligated to actually provide the funding until the County meets certain project planning obligations, the most notable being preparation of satisfactory approved architectural plans and construction documents. Similarly, the County is not obligated to actually accept the grant funding until the State approves the plans and construction documents and the County actually executes Agreements with the State that reflect the County's commitment.
REVISED CONSTRUCTION COST:
As the design development phase of the jail expansion project approaches it's conclusion, the architect, Nacht and Lewis, has secured an updated engineer's estimate of the total construction cost that reflects a total construction cost estimate of $18,604,000 which is almost $1.8 million more than the construction cost estimate on which your Board based its authorization to proceed in October of 2013.
PROPOSED COST REDUCTIONS:
In light of the estimated construction cost increase, Sheriff's Department executive staff, working in collaboration with the architect, has identified an estimated $976,000 in cost reductions. These reductions include:
* Reduced building footprint.
* Reductions in landscaping,
* Removal of tubular skylights
* Remove plaster ceilings in exercise yards
* Modify security ceiling in the dormitory day room to "lay-in acoustic."
* Remove security ceiling in the housing day room
* Reduction in some conference room equipment
* Reduction in paving footprint
* Modification of the type of masonry utilized.
* Remove a handrail
Application of these reductions still results in a net cost increase of $796,000 which is a cost that must be born solely by the County since the total project cost, which includes: construction, architectural services, construction management, etc., already exceeds the State's contribution of $20 million. There is potential to reduce this additional cost by as much as $350,000 if it is determined that the sewer grinder and/or the water pressure booster pump are not needed. The current design plan provides for installation of a sewer grinder which is commonly needed in correctional facilities to protect against prisoners attempting to disrupt facility operation by flushing contraband materials, shoes, towels and rags. The design plan (and consequently the engineer's estimate) also provide for a water pressure booster pump to mitigate the low water pressure to the site. The architect and jail staff are both evaluating alternative approaches that may alleviate these the need to incorporate these two items in the budget. Nonetheless, until otherwise determined, those two items are incorporated in the project.
It may be helpful for the Board to know that the architect is considering a reduced construction period as well which could save additional costs related to the inflation factor that is applied to the engineer's estimate. The construction phase is currently scheduled to be conducted in phases over a 24 month period in order to mitigate operational impacts on the jail. The architect is evaluating an elimination of the phased approach which, if feasible, would reduce the construction period to 18 months. This could save approximately six months of cost escalation. On a project of this magnitude, this approach holds the potential to save as much as $40,000.
COUNTY REAFFIRMATION OF ITS FUNDING COMMITMENT:
As a result of the $796,000 increase in the estimated construction cost, as well as the cost of architectural services contract costing $200,000 more than was estimated in the October 2013 grant application, the County's required cash contribution to the project has risen from $650,000 to $1,644,000. In light of this increase, the State is requiring that your Board formally commit to funding this revised cash requirement.
STAFFING COSTS:
A requirement of the State's $20 million grant funding, is that the County prepare and submit a staffing plan to the State that reflects the County's assessment of the staffing requirements and additional costs thereof that will be required to operate the expanded facility in accordance with state standards. Sheriff's department staff recently finalized the staffing plan. Although it has not yet been officially approved by the State, it recommends an additional 18 positions will be needed to staff the expanded facility that will result in an increase of $1,119,338 in the first year of the jail's expanded operations which is expected to be FY 2019-20.
The construction funding agreement that the County will ultimately be required to sign in order to secure the $20 million grant funding specifies that the County must "adopt a state approved staffing plan for staffing and operating the facility in accordance with the state standards." The agreement goes on to say that failure to comply with that requirement could result in the County being required to repay the grant funding.
In order to maintain compliance with the staffing plan, it seems reasonable to construe the foregoing language as requiring the County's Position Allocation as reflected in its annual budget, to continually reflect allocation of this staffing level and as long as actual jail staffing levels are sufficient to maintain compliance with state operating standards, then the County would be in compliance with the staffing requirement articulated in the construction funding agreement even when some positions are vacant.
AVAILABILITY OF FUNDING:
As a result of the increased cost for the architectural contract, Fund 960, Budget Unit 1785, which supports this project already reflects an appropriation of $853,000 towards the cash contribution as approved in the FY 2015-16 Adopted Budget. Consequently, an additional $791,000 needs to be appropriated to fund the $1,644,000 cash requirement. There is sufficient funding in the County's Building/Infrastructure Reserve to support this additional appropriation.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Should your Board determine to support the increased cash match, it will be necessary to adopt the following Resolutions:
(a) In order to comply with the State's request that the County reaffirm its commitment to provide the necessary cash contribution to the project, your Board will need to approve the attached "Resolution Authorizing an Increase in the County's Cash Contribution to the Proposed Adult Local Criminal Justice Facility Project."
(b) In order to transfer the additional cash contribution of $791,000 from the Building/Infrastructure Reserve, your Board will need to approve the attached Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2015-119 to Amend The Adopted Budget For FY 2015-16 by Cancelling Obligated Fund Balance In Fund 153 and Transferring Funds For The SB 1022 Jail Expansion Project to Appropriate Money in Fund 960 for Local Matching Funds.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Jeff Rein, Interim Chief Deputy Administrative Officer
DATE: December 4, 2015
SUBJECT: Consideration of (a) Resolution authorizing an increase in the county's cash contribution to the proposed adult local criminal justice facility project; and (b) Resolution amending resolution no. 2015-119 to amend the adopted budget for FY 2015-16 by cancelling obligated fund balance in fund 153 and transferring funds for the SB 1022 jail expansion project to appropriate money in fund 960 to provide the necessary cash contribution.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In October of 2013, your Board authorized the Sheriff to submit a grant application to the California Board of State and Community Corrections requesting $20 million, the maximum funding amount available to small counties, for the purpose of accommodating the AB 109 Realignment Act which impacted the availability of space at local jail facilities, like Hill Road Correctional facility, because of the 1) increasing number of locally incarcerated defendants who would have previously been given State Prison sentences. 2) the longer sentences that accompany these types of defendants and 3) the jail's lack of space for inmate programs and services ( drug and alcohol treatment, mental health services, life skills development, cognitive behavioral counseling) that the Act requires be provided for the growing population of these longer term inmates. Based on conceptual layouts, the estimated project cost reflected in the grant application totaled $21,360,000 of which $16,832,000 was the estimated construction cost and was proposed to be funded as follows:
State Grant funding: $20,000,000
County Cash $ 650,000
County in-kind services: $ 710,000
$21,360,000
On January 16, 2014, the Board of State and Community Corrections announced that Lake County had been awarded the $20 million grant. Despite that award, the State is not obligated to actually provide the funding until the County meets certain project planning obligations, the most notable being preparation of satisfactory approved architectural plans and construction documents. Similarly, the County is not obligated to actually accept the grant funding until the State approves the plans and construction documents and the County actually executes Agreements with the State that reflect the County's commitment.
REVISED CONSTRUCTION COST:
As the design development phase of the jail expansion project approaches it's conclusion, the architect, Nacht and Lewis, has secured an updated engineer's estimate of the total construction cost that reflects a total construction cost estimate of $18,604,000 which is almost $1.8 million more than the construction cost estimate on which your Board based its authorization to proceed in October of 2013.
PROPOSED COST REDUCTIONS:
In light of the estimated construction cost increase, Sheriff's Department executive staff, working in collaboration with the architect, has identified an estimated $976,000 in cost reductions. These reductions include:
* Reduced building footprint.
* Reductions in landscaping,
* Removal of tubular skylights
* Remove plaster ceilings in exercise yards
* Modify security ceiling in the dormitory day room to "lay-in acoustic."
* Remove security ceiling in the housing day room
* Reduction in some conference room equipment
* Reduction in paving footprint
* Modification of the type of masonry utilized.
* Remove a handrail
Application of these reductions still results in a net cost increase of $796,000 which is a cost that must be born solely by the County since the total project cost, which includes: construction, architectural services, construction management, etc., already exceeds the State's contribution of $20 million. There is potential to reduce this additional cost by as much as $350,000 if it is determined that the sewer grinder and/or the water pressure booster pump are not needed. The current design plan provides for installation of a sewer grinder which is commonly needed in correctional facilities to protect against prisoners attempting to disrupt facility operation by flushing contraband materials, shoes, towels and rags. The design plan (and consequently the engineer's estimate) also provide for a water pressure booster pump to mitigate the low water pressure to the site. The architect and jail staff are both evaluating alternative approaches that may alleviate these the need to incorporate these two items in the budget. Nonetheless, until otherwise determined, those two items are incorporated in the project.
It may be helpful for the Board to know that the architect is considering a reduced construction period as well which could save additional costs related to the inflation factor that is applied to the engineer's estimate. The construction phase is currently scheduled to be conducted in phases over a 24 month period in order to mitigate operational impacts on the jail. The architect is evaluating an elimination of the phased approach which, if feasible, would reduce the construction period to 18 months. This could save approximately six months of cost escalation. On a project of this magnitude, this approach holds the potential to save as much as $40,000.
COUNTY REAFFIRMATION OF ITS FUNDING COMMITMENT:
As a result of the $796,000 increase in the estimated construction cost, as well as the cost of architectural services contract costing $200,000 more than was estimated in the October 2013 grant application, the County's required cash contribution to the project has risen from $650,000 to $1,644,000. In light of this increase, the State is requiring that your Board formally commit to funding this revised cash requirement.
STAFFING COSTS:
A requirement of the State's $20 million grant funding, is that the County prepare and submit a staffing plan to the State that reflects the County's assessment of the staffing requirements and additional costs thereof that will be required to operate the expanded facility in accordance with state standards. Sheriff's department staff recently finalized the staffing plan. Although it has not yet been officially approved by the State, it recommends an additional 18 positions will be needed to staff the expanded facility that will result in an increase of $1,119,338 in the first year of the jail's expanded operations which is expected to be FY 2019-20.
The construction funding agreement that the County will ultimately be required to sign in order to secure the $20 million grant funding specifies that the County must "adopt a state approved staffing plan for staffing and operating the facility in accordance with the state standards." The agreement goes on to say that failure to comply with that requirement could result in the County being required to repay the grant funding.
In order to maintain compliance with the staffing plan, it seems reasonable to construe the foregoing language as requiring the County's Position Allocation as reflected in its annual budget, to continually reflect allocation of this staffing level and as long as actual jail staffing levels are sufficient to maintain compliance with state operating standards, then the County would be in compliance with the staffing requirement articulated in the construction funding agreement even when some positions are vacant.
AVAILABILITY OF FUNDING:
As a result of the increased cost for the architectural contract, Fund 960, Budget Unit 1785, which supports this project already reflects an appropriation of $853,000 towards the cash contribution as approved in the FY 2015-16 Adopted Budget. Consequently, an additional $791,000 needs to be appropriated to fund the $1,644,000 cash requirement. There is sufficient funding in the County's Building/Infrastructure Reserve to support this additional appropriation.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Should your Board determine to support the increased cash match, it will be necessary to adopt the following Resolutions:
(a) In order to comply with the State's request that the County reaffirm its commitment to provide the necessary cash contribution to the project, your Board will need to approve the attached "Resolution Authorizing an Increase in the County's Cash Contribution to the Proposed Adult Local Criminal Justice Facility Project."
(b) In order to transfer the additional cash contribution of $791,000 from the Building/Infrastructure Reserve, your Board will need to approve the attached Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2015-119 to Amend The Adopted Budget For FY 2015-16 by Cancelling Obligated Fund Balance In Fund 153 and Transferring Funds For The SB 1022 Jail Expansion Project to Appropriate Money in Fund 960 for Local Matching Funds.
Supervisor Smith offered Resolution No. 2015-178 - Amending Resolution No. 2015-119 to Amend the Adopted Budget for FY 2015-16 by Cancelling Obligated Fund Balance in Fund 153 and Transferring Funds for the SB 1022 Jail Expansion Project to Appropriate Money in Fund 960 to Provide the Necessary Cash Contribution.
Ayes - Supervisors: 5 - Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Supervisor Smith offered Resolution No. 2015-177 - Authorizing an Increase in the County's Cash Contribution to the Proposed Adult Local Criminal Justice Facility Project and it was passed by roll call vote:
Ayes - Supervisors: 5 - Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Clerk’s notes: County Administrative Officer Matt Perry presented the item to the Board. Chair Farrington asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
9.6Consideration of Salary Adjustment for Certain Classifications in Social Services Department and Child Support Services Department.
Resolution
Adopted
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Before the wildfires took so much of our time this summer and fall, the Classification and Compensation Committee had not completed its work on requests submitted last year. Before beginning the next cycle of requests next month, we wanted to complete these few outstanding items and present our recommendations to your Board.
The Social Services Director had requested the following salary adjustments:
Staff Services Manager - increase salary from Grade A27 to A29:
The salary of the Staff Services Manager is currently at Grade A27, which is only 5% greater than the highest paid subordinate, which is the Social Services Information Systems Supervisor at Grade A26. The typical spread between highest paid subordinate and first-line supervisor is 15%. Increasing the salary for Staff Services Manager to Grade A29 will establish the appropriate internal relationship between those two classifications.
Program Manager - increase salary from Grade A28 to A30:
Program Managers have a larger work unit and more complex job responsibilities than a Staff Services Manager and thus should be at a higher pay grade. Increasing the salary for Program Manager to Grade A30 would restore the historical internal relationship of 5% between those two classifications.
Deputy Social Services Director - increase salary from Grade B32 to B33:
The salary of the Deputy Social Services Director over Child Protective Services (CPS) was increased earlier this year along with all related classifications in CPS. This increase resulted in the Deputy over CPS being paid 10% more than the other Deputy Social Services Directors. The proposed increase would restore the historical internal relationship of 5% between the Deputy over CPS and the other Deputies.
Deputy Director of Child Support Services- increase salary from Grade B28 to B30: The Staff Services Manager classification is allocated in the Department of Child Support Services as well as the Department of Social Services. Increasing the salary of Staff Services Manager will create an internal inequality with the Deputy Director of Child Support Services. To maintain the historical and appropriate difference between these two classifications, staff recommends increasing the salary of the Deputy Director of Child Support Services.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends your Board adopt the attached resolution to implement the salary adjustments described above.
cc: Carol Huchingson
Gail Woodworth
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Classification and Compensation Committee
By: Matt Perry, County Administrative Officer
DATE: December 5, 2015
SUBJECT: Consideration of Salary Adjustments for Certain Classification in Social Services Department and Child Support Services Department
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Before the wildfires took so much of our time this summer and fall, the Classification and Compensation Committee had not completed its work on requests submitted last year. Before beginning the next cycle of requests next month, we wanted to complete these few outstanding items and present our recommendations to your Board.
The Social Services Director had requested the following salary adjustments:
Staff Services Manager - increase salary from Grade A27 to A29:
The salary of the Staff Services Manager is currently at Grade A27, which is only 5% greater than the highest paid subordinate, which is the Social Services Information Systems Supervisor at Grade A26. The typical spread between highest paid subordinate and first-line supervisor is 15%. Increasing the salary for Staff Services Manager to Grade A29 will establish the appropriate internal relationship between those two classifications.
Program Manager - increase salary from Grade A28 to A30:
Program Managers have a larger work unit and more complex job responsibilities than a Staff Services Manager and thus should be at a higher pay grade. Increasing the salary for Program Manager to Grade A30 would restore the historical internal relationship of 5% between those two classifications.
Deputy Social Services Director - increase salary from Grade B32 to B33:
The salary of the Deputy Social Services Director over Child Protective Services (CPS) was increased earlier this year along with all related classifications in CPS. This increase resulted in the Deputy over CPS being paid 10% more than the other Deputy Social Services Directors. The proposed increase would restore the historical internal relationship of 5% between the Deputy over CPS and the other Deputies.
Deputy Director of Child Support Services- increase salary from Grade B28 to B30: The Staff Services Manager classification is allocated in the Department of Child Support Services as well as the Department of Social Services. Increasing the salary of Staff Services Manager will create an internal inequality with the Deputy Director of Child Support Services. To maintain the historical and appropriate difference between these two classifications, staff recommends increasing the salary of the Deputy Director of Child Support Services.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends your Board adopt the attached resolution to implement the salary adjustments described above.
cc: Carol Huchingson
Gail Woodworth
Supervisor Smith offered the Resolution and it was passed by roll call vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5- Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Clerk’s notes: County Administrative Officer Matt Perry presented the item to the Board. Chair Farrington asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
9.7Consideration of revision to Sick Leave Policy
Action Item
approved
Carried 5-0 — moved by Comstock
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Staff submits for your Board's consideration and approval the attached revision to County Personnel Rule 1503 Sick Leave. This Personnel Rule defines the County's sick leave policy for employees.
This revision incorporates changes mandated by SB 579 expanding sick leave coverage for extended family members and victims of domestic violence, sexual assault and stalking.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve the revised Personnel Rule 1503 Sick Leave to be effective January 1, 2016 and authorize the Human Resources Director to conduct any necessary Meet and Confer with the bargaining groups.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Kathy Ferguson, Human Resources Director
DATE: December 8, 2015
SUBJECT: Revisions to Personnel Rules 1503
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Staff submits for your Board's consideration and approval the attached revision to County Personnel Rule 1503 Sick Leave. This Personnel Rule defines the County's sick leave policy for employees.
This revision incorporates changes mandated by SB 579 expanding sick leave coverage for extended family members and victims of domestic violence, sexual assault and stalking.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve the revised Personnel Rule 1503 Sick Leave to be effective January 1, 2016 and authorize the Human Resources Director to conduct any necessary Meet and Confer with the bargaining groups.
On motion of Supervisor Comstock, and by vote of the Board, approved the revised personnel rules regarding sick leave to be effective January 1, 2016 and authorized the Human Resources Director to conduct any necessary meet and confer with the County's bargaining units. The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5- Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Clerk’s notes: Human Resources Director Kathy Ferguson presented the item to the Board. Chair Farrington asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
9.8Consideration of Applicant Interview Travel Expense Reimbursement Policy
Action Item
approved
Carried 5-0 — moved by Steele
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Staff submits for your Board's consideration and approval the attached policy implementing an Applicant Interview Travel Expense Reimbursement.
Human Resources receives frequent requests from applicants for reimbursement for their travel expenses to interviews. These requests are especially common for key management level positions. It is customary in private sector and increasingly so in public sector that the employer reimburse applicants for travel expenses to attend interviews.
The County of Lake has not traditionally provided for this reimbursement, however, staff recommends that such a policy be adopted for applicants to positions that report directly to your Board and who will interview directly with your Board. Staff is recommending a $1,500 limit per applicant per recruitment for specific types of reimbursement.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that your Board approve the Applicant Interview Travel Expense Reimbursement Policy.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Kathy Ferguson, Human Resource Director
DATE: December 8, 2015
SUBJECT: Consideration of Policy for Travel Reimbursement for Applicants to Select Positions
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Staff submits for your Board's consideration and approval the attached policy implementing an Applicant Interview Travel Expense Reimbursement.
Human Resources receives frequent requests from applicants for reimbursement for their travel expenses to interviews. These requests are especially common for key management level positions. It is customary in private sector and increasingly so in public sector that the employer reimburse applicants for travel expenses to attend interviews.
The County of Lake has not traditionally provided for this reimbursement, however, staff recommends that such a policy be adopted for applicants to positions that report directly to your Board and who will interview directly with your Board. Staff is recommending a $1,500 limit per applicant per recruitment for specific types of reimbursement.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that your Board approve the Applicant Interview Travel Expense Reimbursement Policy.
On motion of Supervisor Steele, and by vote of the Board, approved the Applicant Interview Travel Expense Reimbursement Policy. The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5- Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Clerk’s notes: Human Resources Director Kathy Ferguson presented the item to the Board. Chair Farrington asked if anyone present wished to speak on this item. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
9.9Consideration of Resolution Adopting Amendment Number Two to the Memorandum of Understanding by and Between the County of Lake and the Lake County Safety Employees Association, for the Period from July 1, 2014 Through December 31, 2015.
Agreement
Adopted
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
As you no doubt recall the Lake County Juvenile Hall closed on October 15, 2015. This has created the need to have probation officers on stand-by to take juvenile intakes should they occur. As a result of the fact that this had never been needed before, the LCSEA MOU does not have a provision for stand-by pay. At the moment the probation department is utilizing a modified call-back provision. Therefore, a "stand-by" provision, similar to the one in the LCEA MOU, needs to be added to the MOU.
The LCSEA and The County have agreed to the following:
1) Stand-By Pay: Fifty ($50) dollars for weekdays and seventy-five ($75) dollars for weekends and holidays. An employee assigned to stand-by on their regularly scheduled day off shall receive the weekend and holiday rate.
2) Management to retain rights for schedules (i.e. not based on seniority but on department needs).
Therefore, presented for approval by your Board is the Second Amendment to the MOU's to include the above referenced change for the LCSEA. The specific changes resulting in the amendment to the current MOU is listed below:
1. That Article III (3.8) STANDBY ASSIGNMENTS is added to the MOU to read as to read as follows:
3.8 STANDBY ASSIGNMENTS
3.8.1 ELIGIBILITY
Employees specifically assigned and authorized by the department head (or designee) to remain available at all times to receive and to respond to calls for service by telephone, by electronic device (pager, "beeper", etc.) or in person are eligible for standby pay. While on standby, an employee must either wear a County-supplied pager or cell phone or be at their telephone at all times, must refrain from the use of alcohol and/or illegal and/or controlled substances, must remain within the County of Lake if the employee has been supplied a County vehicle, and must remain within forty-five minutes of the area to which the standby employee would be called to report. In situations where the employee has received in advance the express permission of his/her department head, the employee on standby may exceed the 45-minute restriction.
3.8.2 ASSIGNMENT PERIODS
a. Daily
Daily assignment shall include the hours when the office is closed Monday through Friday (normally from 5:00 p.m. until 8:00 a.m. of the next day).
b. Weekend
Weekend assignment shall include the period from 8:00 a.m. Saturday, until 8:00 a.m. Sunday or from 8:00 a.m. Sunday, until 8:00 a.m. Monday.
c. Holiday
Holiday assignment shall include the period from 8:00 a.m. of a holiday, during which the COUNTY offices are closed because of that holiday, until 8:00 a.m. the following morning.
3.8.3 STANDBY PAY
The COUNTY shall pay fifty ($50.00) dollars per day for each daily assignment and seventy-five ($75.00) per day for each weekend or holiday assignment. An employee assigned to stand-by on their regularly scheduled day off shall receive the weekend and holiday rate.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends the Board approve the proposed amendment and authorize the Chair to sign
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors
FROM: Shanda Harry, Deputy County Counsel
Sarah Jansen, Deputy Human Resources Director
DATE: December 10, 2015
SUBJECT: Consideration of Amendment Number Two to the Memorandum of Understanding By and Between the County of Lake and the Lake County Safety Employee's Association, for the Period from July 1, 2014 Through December 31, 2015
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
As you no doubt recall the Lake County Juvenile Hall closed on October 15, 2015. This has created the need to have probation officers on stand-by to take juvenile intakes should they occur. As a result of the fact that this had never been needed before, the LCSEA MOU does not have a provision for stand-by pay. At the moment the probation department is utilizing a modified call-back provision. Therefore, a "stand-by" provision, similar to the one in the LCEA MOU, needs to be added to the MOU.
The LCSEA and The County have agreed to the following:
1) Stand-By Pay: Fifty ($50) dollars for weekdays and seventy-five ($75) dollars for weekends and holidays. An employee assigned to stand-by on their regularly scheduled day off shall receive the weekend and holiday rate.
2) Management to retain rights for schedules (i.e. not based on seniority but on department needs).
Therefore, presented for approval by your Board is the Second Amendment to the MOU's to include the above referenced change for the LCSEA. The specific changes resulting in the amendment to the current MOU is listed below:
1. That Article III (3.8) STANDBY ASSIGNMENTS is added to the MOU to read as to read as follows:
3.8 STANDBY ASSIGNMENTS
3.8.1 ELIGIBILITY
Employees specifically assigned and authorized by the department head (or designee) to remain available at all times to receive and to respond to calls for service by telephone, by electronic device (pager, "beeper", etc.) or in person are eligible for standby pay. While on standby, an employee must either wear a County-supplied pager or cell phone or be at their telephone at all times, must refrain from the use of alcohol and/or illegal and/or controlled substances, must remain within the County of Lake if the employee has been supplied a County vehicle, and must remain within forty-five minutes of the area to which the standby employee would be called to report. In situations where the employee has received in advance the express permission of his/her department head, the employee on standby may exceed the 45-minute restriction.
3.8.2 ASSIGNMENT PERIODS
a. Daily
Daily assignment shall include the hours when the office is closed Monday through Friday (normally from 5:00 p.m. until 8:00 a.m. of the next day).
b. Weekend
Weekend assignment shall include the period from 8:00 a.m. Saturday, until 8:00 a.m. Sunday or from 8:00 a.m. Sunday, until 8:00 a.m. Monday.
c. Holiday
Holiday assignment shall include the period from 8:00 a.m. of a holiday, during which the COUNTY offices are closed because of that holiday, until 8:00 a.m. the following morning.
3.8.3 STANDBY PAY
The COUNTY shall pay fifty ($50.00) dollars per day for each daily assignment and seventy-five ($75.00) per day for each weekend or holiday assignment. An employee assigned to stand-by on their regularly scheduled day off shall receive the weekend and holiday rate.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends the Board approve the proposed amendment and authorize the Chair to sign
Attachments
Supervisor Comstock offered the Resolution and it was passed by roll call vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5- Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Clerk’s notes: County Counsel Anita Grant presented the item to the Board. Chair Farrington asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
9.10Consideration of Amendment Number Two to the Memorandum of Understanding by and Between the County of Lake and the Lake County Correctional Officer's Association, Unit 6, for Calendar Years 2014 and 2015.
Agreement
Adopted
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
As you no doubt remember, in the 2011-2013 MOU, the County and the LCCOA agreed to have the County reallocate funding to provide a salary increase for safety members of LCCOA. In that same MOU, the County and LCCOA agreed to have safety members pay the 9% employee's contribution to PERS. At the present time, the County and the LCCOA agreed that the remaining (non-safety) members of the bargaining unit will receive a salary increase for recruitment purposes. In addition, the County and LCCOA agree that Classic Miscellaneous PERS members will begin making the employee's contribution to PERS effective December 21, 2015.
The LCCOA and the County agreed to the following:
1) Non-safety (Miscellaneous) members of the bargaining unit will receive a 7% increase effective 12/21/15 for recruitment purposes.
2) Classic Miscellaneous PERS members of the LCCOA will begin paying the employee contribution to CalPERS effective 12/21/15.
Therefore, presented for approval by your Board is the Second Amendment to the MOU's to include the above referenced change for the LCCOA. The specific changes resulting in the amendment to the current MOU are listed below:
1) Effective on December 21, 2015 - Article 2.2 - Salary shall be replaced in its entirety in the MOU:
The County deems it necessary to increase salaries, at this time, for non-safety Association members, for recruitment purposes, by seven percent (7%) as shown in Attachment "A" which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference.
2) Effective on December 21, 2015 - Article 5.2.1. Employee's PERS Contribution
Safety employees defined as "classic" members, pursuant to the California Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013, shall pay the employee's contribution to PERS equal to 9% of the employee's gross pay to be paid as a pre-tax payment as currently provided by IRS Code Section 414(h)(2).
Safety employees defined as "new" members, pursuant to the California Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013, shall pay 50% of normal costs and the County shall not pay any of the required employee contribution in accordance with the aforementioned law.
For non-safety employees who are defined by California Public Employee's Retirement Law as Classic Miscellaneous PERS members, the employee shall pay the employee's contribution to PERS (currently equal to approximately seven percent (7%) of the employee's modified gross pay under the PERS 2% at 55 retirement benefit formula). For the term of this MOU, Classic non-safety PERS employees shall not be responsible to pay any more than the employee's share of 7% of the employee's modified gross pay.
For non-safety employees who are defined by California Public Employee's Retirement Law as New Miscellaneous PERS members, the County is prohibited from paying any portion of the employee's share of PERS, and therefore will not pay any portion of the employee's contribution to PERS for the 2 % 62 retirement benefit formula.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends your Board Adopt the Resolution Approving Amendment Number Two to the Memorandum of Understanding By and Between the County of Lake and the Lake County Correctional Officers Association (LCCOA), for calendar years 2014 and 2015
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors
FROM: Shanda Harry, Deputy County Counsel
Sarah Jansen, Deputy Human Resources Director
DATE: December 10, 2015
SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution Approving Amendment Number Two to the Memorandum of Understanding By and Between the County of Lake and the Lake County Correctional Officers Association (LCCOA), for calendar years 2014 and 2015
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
As you no doubt remember, in the 2011-2013 MOU, the County and the LCCOA agreed to have the County reallocate funding to provide a salary increase for safety members of LCCOA. In that same MOU, the County and LCCOA agreed to have safety members pay the 9% employee's contribution to PERS. At the present time, the County and the LCCOA agreed that the remaining (non-safety) members of the bargaining unit will receive a salary increase for recruitment purposes. In addition, the County and LCCOA agree that Classic Miscellaneous PERS members will begin making the employee's contribution to PERS effective December 21, 2015.
The LCCOA and the County agreed to the following:
1) Non-safety (Miscellaneous) members of the bargaining unit will receive a 7% increase effective 12/21/15 for recruitment purposes.
2) Classic Miscellaneous PERS members of the LCCOA will begin paying the employee contribution to CalPERS effective 12/21/15.
Therefore, presented for approval by your Board is the Second Amendment to the MOU's to include the above referenced change for the LCCOA. The specific changes resulting in the amendment to the current MOU are listed below:
1) Effective on December 21, 2015 - Article 2.2 - Salary shall be replaced in its entirety in the MOU:
The County deems it necessary to increase salaries, at this time, for non-safety Association members, for recruitment purposes, by seven percent (7%) as shown in Attachment "A" which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference.
2) Effective on December 21, 2015 - Article 5.2.1. Employee's PERS Contribution
Safety employees defined as "classic" members, pursuant to the California Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013, shall pay the employee's contribution to PERS equal to 9% of the employee's gross pay to be paid as a pre-tax payment as currently provided by IRS Code Section 414(h)(2).
Safety employees defined as "new" members, pursuant to the California Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013, shall pay 50% of normal costs and the County shall not pay any of the required employee contribution in accordance with the aforementioned law.
For non-safety employees who are defined by California Public Employee's Retirement Law as Classic Miscellaneous PERS members, the employee shall pay the employee's contribution to PERS (currently equal to approximately seven percent (7%) of the employee's modified gross pay under the PERS 2% at 55 retirement benefit formula). For the term of this MOU, Classic non-safety PERS employees shall not be responsible to pay any more than the employee's share of 7% of the employee's modified gross pay.
For non-safety employees who are defined by California Public Employee's Retirement Law as New Miscellaneous PERS members, the County is prohibited from paying any portion of the employee's share of PERS, and therefore will not pay any portion of the employee's contribution to PERS for the 2 % 62 retirement benefit formula.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends your Board Adopt the Resolution Approving Amendment Number Two to the Memorandum of Understanding By and Between the County of Lake and the Lake County Correctional Officers Association (LCCOA), for calendar years 2014 and 2015
Supervisor Comstock offered the Resolution and it was passed by roll call vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5- Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Clerk’s notes: County Counsel Anita Grant presented the item to the Board. Chair Farrington asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
9.11Consideration of Amendment Number One to the Memorandum of Understanding by and Between the County of Lake and the Lake County Sheriff's Association, Unit 16, for Fiscal Years 2014-15.
Agreement
Adopted
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
As you may recall it was brought to our attention that several things were either inadvertently changed or omitted from the recent LCDSA MOU. As a result of the fact that the particular provisions did not take effect immediately, these problems only became recently apparent.
The LCDSA and the County have agreed to the following:
1) Section 7.15: Section 7.15 was "Association Time Bank" in the 2011-2013 MOU, was changed back to "Release Time Bank" in the most recent MOU. There was no intent to make this change. Thus the original "Association Time Bank" will be added back into the MOU.
2) Section 2.6.5 of the MOU "Intermediate, Advanced and Supervisory Post Differential": The MOU changed the language from all employees to "Deputy Sheriffs". This left the DA investigators out of this provision a provision they would have benefited from in the past. Therefore, it will be returned to the MOU.
.
Therefore, presented for approval by your Board is the First Amendment to the MOU's to include the above referenced change for Units 3, 4, and 5. The specific changes resulting in the amendment to the current MOU's are listed below:
1. That Section 7.15 be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following effective October 14, 2014:
7.15 ASSOCIATION TIME BANK
1) Purpose. An Association Time Bank (ATB) has been established for
the purpose of allowing DSA members to request paid time off for Association business, including participation in Association sponsored training, conferences, and workshops.
2) Subject employees. Those employees meeting each of the following criteria shall be subject to this section: a) members of the Association and b) have completed one year of service with the County.
3) Contributions to the ATB. Upon execution of this MOU, each subject employee shall contribute two and a half (2.5) hours of vacation leave to the ATB. In August of each year, each subject employee shall contribute an equal amount of hours, or a portion thereof as determined by the Association President, up to two and one half (2.5) hours of vacation leave to the ATB. The Association authorizes the Auditor's Office staff to conduct the initial and subsequent contributions automatically without further permission from each employee. If not utilized by the Association within the year it is contributed, time in the ATB shall not be returned to the contributing members, nor shall this time be subject to cash-out, but rolled over to the next year's ATB. This time shall become property of DSA and shall be banked.
4) Use of Time from the ATB. ATB requests shall follow the same policy for approval as vacation time. ATB time requests shall be approved unless staffing is required on an overtime basis in order for the request to be approved. The Sheriff's management staff reserves the right to approve ATB requests which incur overtime costs. ATB time shall not supersede previously approved vacation requests of other Sheriff's personnel. Any request of ATB time shall require the approval of the President prior to submission. When requesting the use of time from the ATB, the employee shall submit a form, mutually agreed upon by the Association, the Sheriff, and the County Auditor-Controller.
5) Hold Harmless. The Association shall hold the COUNTY, its officers and employees harmless for transferring the vacation time from subject employees as provided for in this Section.
2. Section 2.6.5 shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:
2.6.5. Intermediate, Advanced and Supervisory Post Differential
From the effective date of this MOU through July 20, 2015, each employee who has achieved and been awarded an Advanced Post Certificate shall receive an additional two and one-half percent (2.5%) of his/her base pay rate. An employee who has achieved the above Certificate is eligible for Advanced Certificate differential regardless of whether the Certificate was obtained prior to employment or during employment with the COUNTY
Effective July 21, 2015, each employee who achieves POST certification as described below shall receive an additional 2.5% of his/her base pay upon official recognition by the Sheriff or his/her designee that such certification has been achieved.
Intermediate POST Certificate 2.5%
Advanced POST Certificate, an additional 2.5%
Supervisory POST Certificate, an additional 2.5%
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends the Board Adopt Resolution Adopting Amendment Number One to the Memorandum of Understanding By and Between the County of Lake and the Lake County Deputy Sheriff's Association Unit 16, and the County of Lake, for fiscal Years 2014-2015
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors
FROM: Shanda Harry, Deputy County Counsel
Sarah Jansen, Deputy Human Resources Director
DATE: December 10, 2015
SUBJECT: Consideration of Resolution Adopting Amendment Number One to the Memorandum of Understanding By and Between the County of Lake and the Lake County Deputy Sheriff's Association Unit 16, and the County of Lake, for fiscal Years 2014-2015
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
As you may recall it was brought to our attention that several things were either inadvertently changed or omitted from the recent LCDSA MOU. As a result of the fact that the particular provisions did not take effect immediately, these problems only became recently apparent.
The LCDSA and the County have agreed to the following:
1) Section 7.15: Section 7.15 was "Association Time Bank" in the 2011-2013 MOU, was changed back to "Release Time Bank" in the most recent MOU. There was no intent to make this change. Thus the original "Association Time Bank" will be added back into the MOU.
2) Section 2.6.5 of the MOU "Intermediate, Advanced and Supervisory Post Differential": The MOU changed the language from all employees to "Deputy Sheriffs". This left the DA investigators out of this provision a provision they would have benefited from in the past. Therefore, it will be returned to the MOU.
.
Therefore, presented for approval by your Board is the First Amendment to the MOU's to include the above referenced change for Units 3, 4, and 5. The specific changes resulting in the amendment to the current MOU's are listed below:
1. That Section 7.15 be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following effective October 14, 2014:
7.15 ASSOCIATION TIME BANK
1) Purpose. An Association Time Bank (ATB) has been established for
the purpose of allowing DSA members to request paid time off for Association business, including participation in Association sponsored training, conferences, and workshops.
2) Subject employees. Those employees meeting each of the following criteria shall be subject to this section: a) members of the Association and b) have completed one year of service with the County.
3) Contributions to the ATB. Upon execution of this MOU, each subject employee shall contribute two and a half (2.5) hours of vacation leave to the ATB. In August of each year, each subject employee shall contribute an equal amount of hours, or a portion thereof as determined by the Association President, up to two and one half (2.5) hours of vacation leave to the ATB. The Association authorizes the Auditor's Office staff to conduct the initial and subsequent contributions automatically without further permission from each employee. If not utilized by the Association within the year it is contributed, time in the ATB shall not be returned to the contributing members, nor shall this time be subject to cash-out, but rolled over to the next year's ATB. This time shall become property of DSA and shall be banked.
4) Use of Time from the ATB. ATB requests shall follow the same policy for approval as vacation time. ATB time requests shall be approved unless staffing is required on an overtime basis in order for the request to be approved. The Sheriff's management staff reserves the right to approve ATB requests which incur overtime costs. ATB time shall not supersede previously approved vacation requests of other Sheriff's personnel. Any request of ATB time shall require the approval of the President prior to submission. When requesting the use of time from the ATB, the employee shall submit a form, mutually agreed upon by the Association, the Sheriff, and the County Auditor-Controller.
5) Hold Harmless. The Association shall hold the COUNTY, its officers and employees harmless for transferring the vacation time from subject employees as provided for in this Section.
2. Section 2.6.5 shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:
2.6.5. Intermediate, Advanced and Supervisory Post Differential
From the effective date of this MOU through July 20, 2015, each employee who has achieved and been awarded an Advanced Post Certificate shall receive an additional two and one-half percent (2.5%) of his/her base pay rate. An employee who has achieved the above Certificate is eligible for Advanced Certificate differential regardless of whether the Certificate was obtained prior to employment or during employment with the COUNTY
Effective July 21, 2015, each employee who achieves POST certification as described below shall receive an additional 2.5% of his/her base pay upon official recognition by the Sheriff or his/her designee that such certification has been achieved.
Intermediate POST Certificate 2.5%
Advanced POST Certificate, an additional 2.5%
Supervisory POST Certificate, an additional 2.5%
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends the Board Adopt Resolution Adopting Amendment Number One to the Memorandum of Understanding By and Between the County of Lake and the Lake County Deputy Sheriff's Association Unit 16, and the County of Lake, for fiscal Years 2014-2015
Attachments
Supervisor Comstock offered the Resolution and it was passed by roll call vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5- Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Clerk’s notes: County Counsel Anita Grant presented the item to the Board. Chair Farrington asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
9.12Consideration of Approval of Correspondence to the Robinson Band of Pomo Regarding an Obstruction to a Public Roadway
Letter
Adopted
Carried 5-0 — moved by Steele
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Robinson Band of Pomo has erected a gate blocking Foothill Oaks Drive in Upper Lake, which is a road through fee lands to Trust property. Members of the public have complained about this obstacle.
This road was accepted as a public roadway, although not for maintenance purposes, by the Board of Supervisors in two separate, adjacent final parcel map approvals. These acceptances occurred in 1983 and 1988.
Section 25, subdivision (b) of the Streets and Highways Code includes among the definitions of a county highway any road that has been dedicated to the county. In the instant case, that dedication has occurred not once, but twice. Section 1486 of the Streets and Highways Code prohibits anyone from constructing a gate on a county highway unless the Board of Supervisors approves it. It does not appear that any such approval has been obtained.
Supervisor Steele has requested this item be presented to your Board in the hope that initiating a dialogue with the Robinson Band of Pomo will lead to a mutually acceptable resolution of this matter.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
A draft letter requesting that dialogue is included here for your Board's review. If acceptable, your Board may approve the letter by motion and authorize all Board members to sign.
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors
FROM: Anita L. Grant, County Counsel
DATE: November 30, 2015
SUBJECT: Consideration of Approval of Correspondence to the Robinson Band of Pomo Regarding an Obstruction to a Public Roadway
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Robinson Band of Pomo has erected a gate blocking Foothill Oaks Drive in Upper Lake, which is a road through fee lands to Trust property. Members of the public have complained about this obstacle.
This road was accepted as a public roadway, although not for maintenance purposes, by the Board of Supervisors in two separate, adjacent final parcel map approvals. These acceptances occurred in 1983 and 1988.
Section 25, subdivision (b) of the Streets and Highways Code includes among the definitions of a county highway any road that has been dedicated to the county. In the instant case, that dedication has occurred not once, but twice. Section 1486 of the Streets and Highways Code prohibits anyone from constructing a gate on a county highway unless the Board of Supervisors approves it. It does not appear that any such approval has been obtained.
Supervisor Steele has requested this item be presented to your Board in the hope that initiating a dialogue with the Robinson Band of Pomo will lead to a mutually acceptable resolution of this matter.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
A draft letter requesting that dialogue is included here for your Board's review. If acceptable, your Board may approve the letter by motion and authorize all Board members to sign.
On motion of Supervisor Steele, and by vote of the Board, approved the Letter to Robinson Rancheria of Pomo Indians of California regarding an Obstruction to a Public Roadway. The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5- Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Clerk’s notes: County Counsel Anita Grant presented the item to the Board at the request of Supervisor Steele. Chair Farrington asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
9.13Consideration of Resolution Approving an Application for Funding under the United States Department of Agriculture's Rural Development Community Facilities Program for the Lakeport Library Modernization Project.
Action Item
Adopted
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Lake County Library requests your Board approval to submit a grant application to the United States Department of Agriculture's Community Facilities Grant Program to renovate and modernize the Lakeport branch of the Lake County Library.
Through the USDA Grant Program, the Lakeport branch of the Lake County Library is eligible for grant funding of 75% of the project costs or $30,000, whichever is less. This project's total cost is $40,000 with $10,000 required from local sources which will be provided by monies in the Library Fund.
The Main Branch of the Lake County Library was built in 1986 and has served the community well, but as the population of Lake County has increased and the use of the library has changed, changes need to be made to the library space as well. Working with the Friends of the Lake County Library, the Library Advisory Board, and using feedback from library staff and the public, the County Librarian created a list of priority projects to modernize the Lakeport branch of the Lake County Library so that it continues to be able to fulfill its mission to provide access to shared community resources and promote literacy.
These priorities include:
1. Renovation of Current Facility
2. Reorganizing Existing Space
3. Expand the Parking Lot
4. Creating a meeting space
5. Accommodating new and existing technology
6. Increasing space for special library collections/uses
7. Increase staff space
This application for the USDA's Community Facilities Grant Program addresses the first two of those priorities: replacing the aging carpet and providing more effective use of library space by replacing and relocating the circulation desk. This project will help provide the foundation for addressing other needs in the future.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends your Board adopt the attached, "Resolution Approving an Application for Funding Under the United States Department of Agriculture's Rural Development Community Facilities Program for the Lakeport Library Modernization Project."
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Christopher Veach, County Librarian
DATE: December 2, 2015
SUBJECT: Consideration of USDA Grant Application for Lakeport Library Modernization Project
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Lake County Library requests your Board approval to submit a grant application to the United States Department of Agriculture's Community Facilities Grant Program to renovate and modernize the Lakeport branch of the Lake County Library.
Through the USDA Grant Program, the Lakeport branch of the Lake County Library is eligible for grant funding of 75% of the project costs or $30,000, whichever is less. This project's total cost is $40,000 with $10,000 required from local sources which will be provided by monies in the Library Fund.
The Main Branch of the Lake County Library was built in 1986 and has served the community well, but as the population of Lake County has increased and the use of the library has changed, changes need to be made to the library space as well. Working with the Friends of the Lake County Library, the Library Advisory Board, and using feedback from library staff and the public, the County Librarian created a list of priority projects to modernize the Lakeport branch of the Lake County Library so that it continues to be able to fulfill its mission to provide access to shared community resources and promote literacy.
These priorities include:
1. Renovation of Current Facility
2. Reorganizing Existing Space
3. Expand the Parking Lot
4. Creating a meeting space
5. Accommodating new and existing technology
6. Increasing space for special library collections/uses
7. Increase staff space
This application for the USDA's Community Facilities Grant Program addresses the first two of those priorities: replacing the aging carpet and providing more effective use of library space by replacing and relocating the circulation desk. This project will help provide the foundation for addressing other needs in the future.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends your Board adopt the attached, "Resolution Approving an Application for Funding Under the United States Department of Agriculture's Rural Development Community Facilities Program for the Lakeport Library Modernization Project."
Supervisor Comstock offered the Resolution and it was passed by roll call vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5- Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Clerk’s notes: County Administrative Officer Matt Perry presented the item to the Board. Chair Farrington asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
9.14Consideration of Agreement between the County of Lake and Kitchell CEM, Inc. for Construction Management Services for the Hill Road Correctional Facility Expansion Project.
Agreement
approved
Carried 5-0 — moved by Brown
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Brown: aye Comstock: aye Farrington: aye Smith: aye Steele: aye
Staff memo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The County of Lake has been approved for $20M of conditional funding by the California Board of State and Community Corrections for the design and construction of an expansion to the existing Hill Road correctional facility. The expansion will consist of a new medical/mental health services unit, a new public entry, a new women's dormitory, a new administration building, and numerous other changes to the existing facility and site.
The County Administrative Office solicited a Request for Proposals to provide comprehensive construction management services for the project. Three proposals were received and a consultant selection panel was convened to review and rank the proposals. Kitchell CEM, Inc. (Kitchell) was ranked as the most qualified firm in accordance with the County policy for review and selection of professional consultants. Staff has negotiated the scope of work, project team, and proposed fee with Kitchell. The negotiated fee for their services as scoped out in the agreement is $842,630.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the Agreement for Construction Management Services for the Hill Road Correctional Facility Expansion with Kitchell in the amount of $842,630 and authorize the Chairman to execute said Agreement.
SD:le
Original memo text
..Title
..Body
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Scott De Leon, Public Works Director
DATE: December 4, 2015
SUBJECT: Consideration of Agreement between the County of Lake and Kitchell CEM, Inc. for Construction Management Services for the Hill Road Correctional Facility Expansion Project
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The County of Lake has been approved for $20M of conditional funding by the California Board of State and Community Corrections for the design and construction of an expansion to the existing Hill Road correctional facility. The expansion will consist of a new medical/mental health services unit, a new public entry, a new women's dormitory, a new administration building, and numerous other changes to the existing facility and site.
The County Administrative Office solicited a Request for Proposals to provide comprehensive construction management services for the project. Three proposals were received and a consultant selection panel was convened to review and rank the proposals. Kitchell CEM, Inc. (Kitchell) was ranked as the most qualified firm in accordance with the County policy for review and selection of professional consultants. Staff has negotiated the scope of work, project team, and proposed fee with Kitchell. The negotiated fee for their services as scoped out in the agreement is $842,630.
..Recommended Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the Agreement for Construction Management Services for the Hill Road Correctional Facility Expansion with Kitchell in the amount of $842,630 and authorize the Chairman to execute said Agreement.
SD:le
On motion of Supervisor Brown, and by vote of the Board, approved the Agreement between the County of Lake and Kitchell CEM, Inc. for Construction Management Services for the Hill Road Correctional Facility Expansion Project. The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes- Supervisors: 5- Comstock, Smith, Steele, Brown and Farrington
Clerk’s notes: Deputy Public Works Director Lars Ewing presented the item to the Board. Chair Farrington asked if anyone wished to speak. No one wished to speak and the public input portion of this item was closed.
10. Closed Session
10.1Conference with Labor Negotiator: (a) County Negotiators: A. Grant, S. Harry, M. Perry, K. Ferguson and S. Jansen; and (b) Employee Organizations: DDAA, DSA, LCCOA, LCEA and LCSEA
10.2Conference with Legal Counsel: Significant Exposure to Litigation pursuant to Gov. Code Sec. 54956.9 (d)(2) (e) (3) - Claim of Gilmore
Closed Session Item
10.3Public Employment pursuant to Gov. Code Sec. 54957 – Interviews
Title: County Administrative Officer
Closed Session Item
Clerk’s notes: The Board reconvened into Regular Session at 3:15 p.m. having taken no action.