The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutALUC STAFFING / BUDGETING HISTORICAL DOCUMENTSALUC STAFFING / BUDGETING HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS i h To: Donald Wallrich . Fax #: 891-7113 fffilhff Re: ALUC Date: August 12, 1999 Pages: 2, including this cover sheet. Hi 7 Don, Attached is one page of budget information. This information iri conjunction with the staff report from the last meeting should be enough information for you to organize what you want to say. We do need to talk though so I can fill you in of Tom's position and what type of presentation the Board expects. I'll call you about 11:30 this morning. Paula Leasure From the desk of... Paula Leasure Executive Officer. Local Agency Formation Commission 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 951 530538-7601 Fax: 530 538-7785 BUDGET INFORMATION 1. Trained Staffing a. Maintain trained staff. . b. Untrained staff will result in major setback to Commission. 2. Consulting Services a. Retain PMC on contract as they have been for over one year. b.' Staff, at the levels recommended by the Director, cannot pick up the extra workload. 3. Co-ordination with LAFCo a. Agrees that ALUC will only agree to reorganization plan if one additional planner allocated to staff ALUC/LAFCo. 4. Figures Total Work Hours per Year 2080 Average Vacation Hours (112) Average Holiday ( 96) Average Sick Leave ( 96) Administrative Leave ( 40) Mandatory Breaks (130 Mandatory Time Accounting ( 26)— Mandatory 6)—Mandatory Staff Mtgs 52 Available Work Hours 1528 1998-1999 Estimated ALUC Hours 1400 In reality we're looking at a need for a minimum 92% staff person in order to work at existing levels which is not adequate to bring ALUC up to an acceptable standard. Additionally, the hours calculated above do not account for time spent in answering the public questions on the telephone; or at the counter. I also used 112 hours per year vacation, but in reality we have long term employees with vacation allocations ranging from 112 hours per year to 192 hours per year. The hours do not include mandatory management meetings where ALUC is discussed with Tom; These are bi-weekly meetings where ALUC takes approximately .25 hours. This time is accounted as management meeting time. K. ULUCICORMPOI WALLRICH. WPD C� July 26, 1999 Jane Dolan, Chair Board of Supervisor's County of Butte 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 L] ��Q,- L'�� c0 RE: Specific Budget Request for Operation of the Airport Land Use Commission Dear Chair Dolan: The Airport Land Use Commission met July 21, 1999 to discuss the proposed reorganization of the Department of Development Services which will result in the Airport Land Use Commission, and the Local Agency Formation Commission being provided dedicated staffing. The Commission unanimously supports distancing staff from the Department of Development Services, Planning Division, due to the sometimes conflicting mission of the Commission. However, the Commission has conditioned its support of the reorganization subject to the following: 1. The Commission wants to maintain staff that has prior training in airport land use Planning. Providing untrained staff will result in a major setback to the mission of the Commission. 2. The Commission wants Consultant staffing to continue. Pacific Municipal Consultants has for the past year provided staff to administer preparation of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and prepare project staff reports. It is the Commission's understanding that the Consultant contract is scheduled to expire at the end of the year with assigned County staff to pick up the consultant workload. Based on the proposed reorganization plan, this isnot acceptable as assigned staff will have a greater workload than prior to the reorganization. 3. The Commission Chair has consulted with the Chair of the Local Agency Formation Commission and will support the reorganization only if one additional associate planner is allocated to the ALUC/LAFCo staffing. This is essential if the Commission is to meet its mandate under state law. The Vice -Chair of the Airport Land Use Commission, Dr. Norman Rosene; requests the Board of Supervisors reserve time for him to address the Board to explain the request of the Commission at the August 12, 1999 Special Board meeting. Respectfully, Paula Leasure Principal Planner cc: Dr. Norm Rosene, ALUC Vice -Chairman John Blacklock, County Administrative Officer Dave Houser, Auditor July 26, 1999 Jane Dolan, Chair Board of Supervisor's County of Butte 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 RE: Specific Budget Request for Operation of the Airport Land Use Commission Dear Chair Dolan: The Airport Land Use Commission met July 21, 1999 to discuss the proposed reorganization of the Department of Development Services which will result in the Airport Land Use Commission and the Local Agency Formation Commission being provided dedicated staffing. The Commission unanimously supports distancing staff from the Department of Development Services, Planning Division, due to the sometimes conflicting mission of the Commission. However, the Commission has conditioned its support of the reorganization subject to the following: 1. The Commission wants to"maintain staff that has prior training in airport land use Planning. Providing untrained staff will result in a major setback to the mission of the Commission. 2. The Commission wants Consultant staffing to continue. -,Pacific Municipal Consultants has for the past year provided staff to administer preparation of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and prepare project staff reports. It is the. Commission's understanding that the Consultant contract is scheduled to expire at the end of the year with assigned County staff to pick up the consultant workload. Based on the proposed reorganization plan, this is not acceptable as assigned staff will have a greater workload than prior to the reorganization. 3. The Commission Chair has consulted with the Chair of the Local Agency Formation Commission and will support the reorganization only if one additional associate planner is allocated to the ALUC/LAFCo staffing. This is essential if the Commission is to meet its mandate under state law. The Vice -Chair of the Airport Land Use Commission, Dr. Norman Rosene, requests the Board of Supervisors reserve time for him to address the Board to explain the request of the Commission at the August 12, 1999 Special Board meeting. Respectfully, Paula Leasure Principal Planner cc: Dr. Norm Rosene, ALUC Vice -Chairman John Blacklock, County Administrative Officer Dave Houser, Auditor TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: _R MEMORANDUM DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT' SERVICES DIRECTOR'S OFFICE Butte County Airport Land Use Commission Thomas A. Parilo, Director Brian A. Larsen, Principal Analyst FISCAL YEAR 1999/2000 BUDGET Meeting of July 21, 1999 DATE: July 21;,1999 as The Department of Development will propose the following changes to the 1999/2000 budget submittal. Attached is a proposed schedule 9 detailing the budgetary commitment to ALUC. These amounts will be contained within the Planning Division budget. It is my hope that this proposal will produce positive results for ALUC. Among the changes and potential results are the following: ■ To meet the combined goals of providing for a viable Long Range Planning Program and address the needs of ALUC. • Add one Principal Planner - as of 10/2/99. ■ Ongoing Long Range Planning program will provide current and relevant planning documents. ■ Provide budgetary guidelines by clearly identifying resources available to ALUC. ■ Provide planning documents that are not dated, written concisely, and not open to many different interpretations ■ Have a program for providing'up to date and ongoing plans for the future. ■ Eliminate the perception of a conflict by county staff who also serve as staff to ALUC. ■ Provide 'a more realistic ratio of planning staff to citizens as noted below in a survey taken in May, 1999. • Addition of staff still leaves Butte County with a very low ratio of staff to citizenry compared to the other couniies surveyed. ` PROFESSIONAL STAFF AND UNINCORPORATED POPULATION COUNTY STAFF SIZE UNINCORPORATED POPULATION STAFF TO POPULATION RATIO Napa 17 29,900 1 to 1,759 Monterey 28 103,300 1 to 3,689 Sutter 8 35,280 1 to 4,410 Butte 1 10 102,200 1 to 10,220 ■ Part of the proposed increase in expenditures will be offset by elimination of the ongoing Professional Services commitment to ALUC for a contract planner. Annually this amounts to $25,000. This year the reduction is shown as .$10,000 so the contract planner can complete work on the CLUPs and provide for a smooth transition from contract staff to in house staff. K:\DDS\J3UDGET\ALUC-00.WPD TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES $76,559.00 571 A87 DIR. BILLED $1,000.00 573 DIR. SER. TRNSFR. $0.00 574 INTRA DEPT. TRNFR'S. $0.00 TOTAL INDIRECT $1,000.00 TOTAL: $77,559.00 TOTAL NEW BUDGETS: ALUC STAFFING 511 SALARIES & WAGES $41,950.00 512 EXTRA HELP' $0.00 514 OVERTIME $0.00 ' 518 BENEFITS $8,390.00 TOTAL SALARIES & BENEFITS $50,340.00 523 COMMUNICATIONS $408.00 526 HOUSEHOLD EXPENSE $420.00 527 GENERAL INSUR. $58.00 530 MAINT. EQUIP. $200.00 ' 531 MAINT. STRUC & GRND'S. $503.00 533 MEMBERSHIPS $0.00 535 OFFICE EXP. (ISFA3,820) $1,270.00 536 PROF. SERV. $20,000.00 Conslt. $5,000 - CLUPs $10,000 - Transition, $5,000 537 PUB. & LEGAL NOTICE $530.00 ALUC* 539 RENT AND LEASES EQUIP. $0.00 PRINCIPAL PLANNER 1 @ 10% • 541 SPECIAL DEPT. EXPENSE $500.00 SENIOR PLANNER 1 @ 40% 542 DATA PROCESSING $350.00 ADMIN. ASST. 1 @ 25%- 543 TRANS. & TRAVEL $1,214.00 544 UTILITIES $766.00 *PROPOSED BY DEPARTMENT TOTAL SERVICE & SUPPLIES $26,219.00 554 INTERFUND EXPENSE $0.00 563 FIXED ASSETS $0.00 TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES $76,559.00 571 A87 DIR. BILLED $1,000.00 573 DIR. SER. TRNSFR. $0.00 574 INTRA DEPT. TRNFR'S. $0.00 TOTAL INDIRECT $1,000.00 TOTAL: $77,559.00 TOTAL NEW BUDGETS: ALUC STAFFING 511 SALARIES & WAGES $41,950.00 512 EXTRA HELP $0.00 514 OVERTIME $0.00 518 BENEFITS $8,390.00 TOTAL SALARIES & BENEFITS $50,340.00 523 COMMUNICATIONS $408.00 526 HOUSEHOLD EXPENSE $420.00 527 GENERAL INSUR. $58.00 530 MAINT. EQUIP. $200.00 , 531 MAINT. STRUC & GRND'S. $503.00 533 MEMBERSHIPS $0.00 535 OFFICE EXP. (ISF.=$3,820) $1,270.00 536 PROF. SERV. $20,000.00 Conslt. $5,000 - CLUPs $10,000 - Transition_, $5,000 537 PUB. & LEGAL NOTICE $530.00 ALUC* 539 RENT AND LEASES EQUIP. $0.00 PRINCIPAL PLANNER 1 @ 10% 541 SPECIAL DEPT. EXPENSE $500.00 SENIOR PLANNER 1@40% 542 DATA PROCESSING $350.00 ADMIN. ASST. 1 @25% 543 TRANS. & TRAVEL $1,214.00 544 UTILITIES $766.00 *PROPOSED BY DEPARTMENT TOTAL SERVICE & SUPPLIES $26;219.00 554 INTERFUND EXPENSE $0.00 563 FIXED ASSETS $0.00 TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES $76,559.00 571 A87 DIR. BILLED $1,000.00 573 DIR. SER.•TRNSFR. $0.00 574 INTRA DEPT. TRNFR'S. $0.00 TOTAL INDIRECT $1,000.00 TOTAL: $77,559.00 TOTAL NEW BUDGETS: July 26;'1999 Jane Dolan, Chair $oard of Supervisor's County of Butte '25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (530) 538-7601 FAX: (530) 538-7785 RE: Specific Budget Request for Operation of the Airport Land Use Commission Dear Chair Dolan: The Airport Land Use Commission met July 21, 1999 to discuss the proposed reorganization of the Department of Development Services which will result in the Airport Land Use Commission and the Local Agency Formation Commission being provided dedicated staffing. The Commission unanimously supports distancing staff from the Department of Development Services, Planning Division, due to the sometimes conflicting mission of the Commission. However, the Commission has conditioned its support of the reorganization subject to the following: The Commission wants to•maintain staff that has prior training in airport land use Planning. Providing untrained staff will result in a major setback to the mission of the Commission. The Commission wants Consultant staffing to continue. Pacific Municipal Consultants has for the past year provided staff to administer preparation of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and prepare project staff reports. It is the Commission's understanding that the Consultant contract is scheduled to expire at the end of the year with assigned County staff to pick up the consultant workload. Based on the proposed reorganization plan, this is not acceptable as assigned staff will have a greater workload than prior to the reorganization. The Commission Chair has consulted with the Chair of the Local Agency Formation Commission and will support the reorganization only if one additional associate planner is allocated to the ALUC/LAFCo staffing. This is essential if the Commission is to meet its mandate under state law. The Vice -Chair of the Airport Land Use Commission, Dr. Norman Rosene, requests the Board of Supervisors reserve time for him to address the Board to explain the request of the Commission at the August 12, 1999 Special Board meeting. Respectfully, Paula Leasure Principal Planner cc: Dr. Norm Rosene, ALUC Vice -Chairman John Blacklock, County Administrative Officer Dave Houser, Auditor Leasure, Paula From: Leasure, Paula Sent: Monday, August 09,19992:28 PM .To: Don Wallrich (E-mail) Subject: Board of Supervisors Budget Hearing Don, John Blacklock, Chief Administrative Officer, has requested you address the Board of Supervisors following the Development Services Department presentation. That presentation is scheduled for Friday, August 13, 1999, from 1:00- 1:30 pm. After the department head has addressed the Board (appro)amately 10 minutes), the floor will be opened to the public where both you and Carl Leverenz will be able to address the Board: Time available for your presentation will be eAremely limited. Do you still want me to get detailed information for you regarding staffing hours? Please let me know what information you need as soon as possible. Paula IVTEROFFICE ILM6 DUM TO: FROM: FiLe- All JJepartment Heads Admi istrative Office Phone: 538-7631 Cynthia Mann, Deputy County Administrative Office Fax: 538-7120 SUBJECT: FY 1999/00 Final Budget Hearing DATE: August 6, 1999 Provided for your reference are the materials distributed to the Board of Supervisors for the Final Budget hearings which are scheduled to begin on Thursday, August 12, 1999, at 9:00 a.m. The individual requests submitted by County departments are not being. attached, however are available for review in our office. The Final Budget hearing materials included with this memorandum are as follows ❑ The Schedule of Departmental Presentations. ❑ The CAO's transmittal letter to the Board of Supervisors. f ❑ The CAO's Recommendations for Final Budget Adjustments (includes four tables of revenue and expenditure adjustments). The Board has requested that Department Heads limit their presentations to no more than 10 minutes, which will allow time for questions, answers, dialogue between departments and Board members, and public comments. Each discussion period is limited to 30 minutes total. ' Please feel free to contact me at 538-7632 if you have any questions regarding the attached materials or the hearings. PIannin9J)IV i' AUG 0 91999 orovlll®,Camomla cc: John Blacklock, CAO COUNTY OF BUTTE 1999/00 FINAL BUDGET HEARINGS SCHEDULE OF;DEPARTMENTAL PRESENTATIONS 3 The budget hearing convenes at 9:00 a.m. on Thursday, August 12, 1999, with a one hour. introduction, overview and.recommendations from the'Chief Administrative Officei and Auditor -Controller. Department presentations are scheduled for a 30 -minute period each. Each 30 -minute period allows for a 10 -minute presentation by the Department Head, and the remaining 20 -minutes is provided for questions/answers from Board members and public comments. THURSDAY, AUGUST 12,1999 9:00 am to 10:00 am 10:00 am to 10:30 am 10:30 am to 10:45 am 10:45 am to 11:15 am 11:15 am to 11:45 am 11:45 am to 12:15 pm 12:15 pm to 1:30 pm 1:30 pm to 2:00 pm 2:00 pm to 2:30 pm 2:30 pm to 3:00 pm 3:00 pm FRIDAY, AUGUST 13,1999 9:00 ain to 9:30 am 9:30 am to 10:00 am 10:00 am to 10:15 am 10:15 am to 10:45 am 10:45 am to 11:15 am 11:15 am to 11:45 pm 11:45 pm to 1:00 pm 1:00 pm to 1:30 pm 1:30 pm to 2:00 pm 2:00 pm to 2:30 pm 2:30 pm to 3:00, pm 3:00 pm MONDAY, AUGUST 16,1999 9:00 am to 9:30 am 9:30 am to 10:00 am 10:00 am to 10:15 am 10:15 am to. 10:45 am 10:45 am to 11:15 am 11:15 am CAO and Auditor Introduction & Overview Don Turko, Personnel Director Break Gary House, Public Health Director Pat Cragar, Welfare Director Ron Erickson, Behavioral Health Director Lunch Bill Sager, Fire Warden Scott Mackenzie, Sheriff -Coroner Helen Harberts, Probation Officer Public Comment Nancy Brower, Librarian Ken Reimers, Assessor Break Candace Grubbs, Clerk -Recorder Mike Ramsey, District Attorney Dick Puelicher, Treasurer Lunch Tom Parilo, Development Services Director Richard Price, Agriculture Commisser Bill Olson, Farm and Home Advisor Susan Misasian, County Counsel Public Comment John Blacklock, Chief Administrative Officer Dave Houser, Auditor -Controller Break Mike Crump, Public Works Director Bob Barnes, Information Systems Director Public Comment and Board Deliberations k V DAVE DOODY Senior Planner Planning Division Land of Natural Wealth and Beauty DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965 (530) 538-7601 FAX (530) 538-7785 'PORT LAND UPO, COMMISSION + ,ville, CA 96965 • (530) 538-7601 FAX (530) 538-7785 • RPORT LAND USE COMMISSION OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given by the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) that a public hearing will be held on AUGUST 18, 1998 at 9:00 a.m. in the Butte County Board of Supervisors' Room, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California, regarding the following: ITEM TO BE CONSIDERED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF AERONAUTICS CODE SECTION 21671.5 (F) WHICH PROVIDES ALUC MAY ESTABLISH A SCHEDULE OF FEES. and PURSUANT TO SECTION 15378 (a) OF CEQA, THIS ACTION IS NOT A "PROJECT" SUBJECT TO ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW BECAUSE SECTION 15378(x)(5) STATES THAT THE CREATION OF GOVERNMENT FUNDING MECHANISMS WHICH DO NOT INVOLVE ANY COMMITMENT TO ANY SPECIFIC .PROJECT THAT MAY LEAD TO SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. THIS PROJECT IS THE ADOPTION A FEE SCHEDULE ONLY. Establishment of an ALUC Fee Schedule: The Airport Land Use Commission will review and consider fee information prepared by staff and consider adopting a fee for project processing.. Aeronautics Code Section 21671.5 (f) provides that the Commission may establish a schedule of fees for reviewing and processing proposals. Those fees charged to theproponents of actions, regulations, or permits shall not exceed 'the estimated reasonable cost of providing service. (IZecommendalioll: Staff recommends the Commission adopt a Resolution establishing fees.for pr(liect pl-oce.ssing as proposed by staff.) The above-mentioned staff report and fee schedule is on file and available for public viewing at the office 'of the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission, 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. If you have any further questions or desire additional information, please contact Dave Doody, of the ALUC staff; at (530) 538-7601. At the meeting, the Commission will consider oral and written testimony by any interested person(s) or affected agencies and the report of staff. Should your need special accommodations to attend the meeting due to a physical disability or impairment, please contact staff in advance of the hearing so that reasonable accommodations can be made. Thomas A. Pardo ten, dZ /QpqDirector of Development Services N D�DM (It C I A: A99-08 I AV P D • Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission • 1 0 : 0 ��&' `e'V d.t- m om/ MEMORANDUM DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR'S OFFICE TO: Butte County Airport Land Use Commission: FROM: Thomas A. Parilo, Director BY: Brian A. Larsen, Principal Analyst SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR 1999/2000 BUDGET FOR: Meeting of July 21, 1999 DATE:- July 21, 1999 The. Department of Development will propose the following changes to the 1999/2000 budget submittal. Attached is a proposed schedule 9 detailing the budgetary commitment to ALUC. These amounts will be contained within the Planning Division budget. It is my hope that this proposal will produce positive results for ALUC. Among the changes and potential results are the following: ■ To meet the combined goals of providing for a viable Long Range Planning Program and address the needs of ALUC. • Add one Principal Planner - as of 10/2/99. ■ Ongoing Long Range Planning program will provide current and relevant planning documents. ■ Provide budgetary guidelines by clearly identifying resources available to' ALUC. ■ Provide planning documents that are not dated, written concisely, and not open to many different interpretations ■ Have a program for providing up to date and ongoing plans for the future. E Eliminate the perception of a conflict by county staff who also serve as staff to ALUC. ■ Provide a more realistic ratio of planning staff to citizens as noted below in a survey taken 0 • in May, 1999. • Addition of staff still leaves Butte County with a very low ratio of staff to citizenry compared to the other counties surveyed. PROFESSIONAL STAFF AND UNINCORPORATED POPULATION COUNTY STAFF SIZE UNINCORPORATED POPULATION STAFF TO POPULATION RATIO Napa 17 29,900 1 to 1,759 Monterey 28 103,300 1 to 3,689 Sutter 8 35,280 1 to 4,410 Butte 10 102,200 1 to 10,220 ■ Part of the proposed increase in expenditures will be offset by elimination of the ongoing Professional Services commitment to ALUC for a contract planner. Annually this amounts to $25,000. This year the reduction is shown as $10,000 so the contract planner can complete work on the CLUPs and provide for a smooth transition from contract staff to in house staff. C KADDSWDGET\ALUC-00. WPD e ALUC STAFFING 511 "SALARIES & WAGES $41,950.00 EXTRA HELP $0.00 514 OVERTIME $0.00 518 BENEFITS $8,390.00 TOTAL SALARIES & BENEFITS $50,340.00 523 COMMUNICATIONS $408.00 526 HOUSEHOLD EXPENSE $420.00 527 GENERAL INSUR. $58.00 530 MAINT. EQUIP. $200.00 531 MAINT. STRUC & GRND'S. $503.00 533 • MEMBERSHIPS $0.00 535 OFFICE EXP. (ISF.=$3,820) $1,270.00 536 PROF. SERV. $20,000.00 Conslt. $5,000 - CLUPs $10,000 - Transition, $5,000 537 PUB. & LEGAL NOTICE $530.00 ALUC* 539 RENT AND LEASES EQUIP. $0.00 PRINCIPAL PLANNER 1 @ 10% 541 SPECIAL DEPT. EXPENSE $500.00 SENIOR PLANNER 1 @ 40% 542 DATA PROCESSING $350.00 'ADMIN. ASST. 1 @ 25% 543 TRANS. & TRAVEL $1,214.00 544 UTILITIES $766.00 *PROPOSED BY DEPARTMENT -)TAL SERVICE & SUPPLIES $26,219.00 554 INTERFUND EXPENSE $0.00 563 FIXED ASSETS $0.00 TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES $76,559.00 571 A87 DIR. BILLED $1,000.00 573 DIR. SER. TRNSFR. $0.00 574 INTRA DEPT. TRNFR'S. $0.00 TOTAL INDIRECT $1,000.00 TOTAL: $77,559.00 TOTAL NEW BUDGETS: • • • • • • Tom 'Parilo -July 10, 1997 Page 11 commission shall not employ any personnel either as employees or independent contractors without the prior approval of the board of supervisors." One might contend that by not mandating that counties utilize a budget appropriations process to fund ALUCs, by not requiring that counties fund ALUCs at the level that the ALUC determines is necessary and by providing that the board of supervisors must approve any hire of ALUC employees or independent contractors at county expense, that the Legislature meant to allow counties to refuse to appropriate a future annual budget to an ALUC and/or refuse categorically to dedicate county staff or hire independent contractors at county expense for an ALUC. Such an approach would be fraught with danger, however, as a county which refused to appropriate my budget for an ALUC, or which refused categorically to dedicate county staff or to hire independent contractors for an ALUC might very well be viewed by the courts as attempting to circumvent statutory requirements to pay an ALUC's necessary expenses. This might be particularly true if the ALUC had demonstrated a necessity for the dedication of county staff or the hiring of independent contractor(s). Thus, although the above referenced statutes discussing ALUCs appear to grant county boards of supervisors discretion in the actual process they use to fund ALUCs, there is definitely a legal duty imposed on counties to provide necessary expenses for ALUCs. The difference between the statutory responsibilities imposed on counties funding ALUCs and LAFCos is mainly that the actual determination of what is "necessary and usual," and, in particular, whether the hiring of ALUC employees or independent contractors at county expense is necessary, is left up to the discretion of the board of supervisors. .r'Apparently, members of the Airport Land Use Commission have expressed their desire for a dedicated staff, independent of any existing county agency, yet paid for by the county. Although the question of whether the county must merely provide staff assistance to the commission or whether the county must provide a dedicated staff was not resolved for every future situation by the legislature, it is apparent that the legislature provided language which each county may use to resolve the question. For instance, if conflict(s) develop between the county and the commission, then it may become quite difficult for county staff members, who answer to a county department head, to perform tasks requested by the Commission. r- Thus, if ALUC's request for dedicated staff were accompanied by an explanation of why ALUC members believe a dedicated staff is necessary to 1i, do the agency's business, the Board of Supervisors would be much more able to assess whether a dedicate is necessary n er the man a e o §21675(c)_: III. CONCLUSION The Legislature did not provide a blueprint with which to decide all future ALUC funding issues. The Legislature did, however, provide county boards of supervisors with a standard by which each board could determine whether or not to grant specific requests for funding and/or staff on a 11 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF BUTTE AND THE BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION DESIGNATED AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION STAFFING WITHIN THE BUTTE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Section 21674 of the Public Utilities Code (PUC) sets forth duties of Airport Land Use Commissions which include assisting local agencies in ensuring compatible land uses in the vicinity of airports; coordinating orderly development of air transportation; adopting airport land use plans; and reviewing airport related plans, regulations, and other actions of local agencies as specified in Section 21676. Counties provide staff assistance to Airport Land Use Commissions in accordance with PUC, Section 21671.5. In, Butte County, this staff support is provided by the Department of Development Services. It is agreed between the County of Butte and the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission that: 1. The Director of Development Services shall designate a primary staff member (other than himself) to the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission; 2. The primary staff member shall be the primary point of contact for Airport Land Use Commission business; 3. The Director of Development Services shall have full discretion in managing the workload of staff in meeting the requirements of PUC, Section 21671.5 and other department responsibilities; 4. The staff assigned, subject to item 3 above,.shall be directly responsive and responsible to the Airport Land Use Commission when engaged in Commission business mandated by the requirements of the Public Utilities Code; 5. Staff assigned shall cant' forward and convey all recommendations and official actions.of Airport Land Use Commission to the appropriate jurisdiction; 6. Staff shall be provided reasonable funding and opportunity for training related to unique aspects of Airport Land Use Commission business. 7. Either party may terminate this MOU with 30 days prior written notification. For the County of Butte: Fred C. Davis, Chairman Board of Supervisors For the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission: j �j. Jo ranklin, Chairman Butte County Airport Land Use Commission Date: No 2 5 0997 APP&EA B BY Date: Z z Ige K ALUCWGREEMT 10991-- 2000 W3�,� I,, ficl a -t In MEMORANDUM DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR'S OFFICE TO: Butte County Airport Land Use Commission FROM: Thomas A. Parilo, Director BY: Brian A. Larsen, Principal Analyst SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR 1999/2000 BUDGET' f FOR: Meeting of July 21, 1999 DATE: July 21, 1999 The Department of Development will propose the following changes to the 1999/2000 budget submittal. Attached is a proposed schedule 9 detailing the budgetary commitment to ALUC. These amounts will be contained within the Planning Division budget. It is my hope that this proposal will produce positive results for ALUC. Among the changes and potential results are the following: ■ To meet the combined goals of providing for a viable Long Range Planning Program and address the needs of ALUC. • Add one Principal Planner as of 10/2/99. ■ Ongoing Long Range Planning program will provide current and relevant planning documents. ■ Provide budgetary guidelines by clearly identifying resources available to ALUC. ■ Provide planning documents that are not dated, written concisely, and not open to many different interpretations I ■ Have a program for providing up to date and ongoing plans for the future. ■ Eliminate the perception of a conflict by county staff who also serve as staff to ALUC. 0 Provide *a more realistic ratio of planning staff to citizens as noted below in a survey taken s �► in May, 1999.r • Addition of staff still leaves Butte County with a very low ratio of staff to citizenry compared to the other counties surveyed. PROFESSIONAL STAFF AND UNINCORPORATED POPULATION COUNTY STAFF SIZE UNINCORPORATED POPULATION STAFF TO POPULATION RATIO Napa 17 29,900 1 to 1,759 Monterey 28 103,300 1 to 3,689 Sutter 8 35,280 1 to 4,410 Butte 10 '102,200 1 to 10,220 ■ Part of the proposed increase in expenditures will be offset by elimination of the ongoing Professional Services commitment to ALUC for a contract planner. Annually this amounts to $25,000. This year the reduction. is shown as $10,000 so the contract planner can complete work on the CLUPs and provide for a smooth transition from contract staff to in house staff. KADDS\BUDGE'IWLUC-00. WPD ALUC STAFFING 511 SALARIES & WAGES $410950.00 : EXTRA HELP $0.00- 514 OVERTIME $0.00 518 BENEFITS $8,390.00 TOTAL SALARIES & BENEFITS $50,340.00 523 COMMUNICATIONS $408.00 526 HOUSEHOLD EXPENSE $420.00 527 GENERAL INSUR. $58.00 530 MAINT. EQUIP. $200.00 531 MAINT. STRUC & GRND'S. $503.00 533 MEMBERSHIPS $0.00 ` 535 OFFICE EXP. (ISF.=$3,820) $1,270.00 536 PROF. SERV. $20,000.00 Conslt. $5,000 - CLUPs $10,000 - Transition, $5,000 537 PUB. & LEGAL NOTICE $530.00 "ALUC* ' 539 RENT AND LEASES EQUIP. $0.00 PRINCIPAL PLANNER 1 @ 10% 541 SPECIAL DEPT. EXPENSE $500.00 SENIOR PLANNER 1 @ 40% 542 DATA PROCESSING $350.00 ADMIN. ASST. 1@25% 543 TRANS. & TRAVEL $1,214.00 544 UTILITIES $766.00 *PROPOSED BY DEPARTMENT jTAL SERVICE & SUPPLIES $26,219.00 554 INTERFUND EXPENSE $0.00 563 FIXED ASSETS $0.00 TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES $76,559.00 571 A87 DIR. BILLED $1;000.00 573 DIR. SER. TRNSFR. $0.00 574 INTRA DEPT. TRNFR'S. $0.00 :TOTAL INDIRECT $1,000.00 TOTAL: $77,559.00 TOTAL NEW BUDGETS: , 1998• 1999 - '7°'�°0 3 facsimile TR AN S M I T T A••L . to: Paula Leasure, Butte County DDS fax M 538.7785 ®: Budget Status - ALUC Contract date: January 6, 1999 pages: 2, including this cover sheet. Please give me a call if you have any questions or need additional information, for your staff report. From the desk of.,, Laura Webster seeiar Planner Pacific Municipal Consufta is 1455 L%rws street Development Services orwAgev, cn Asea (5�) 533-„3, JAN 0.7 1999 Fax 530) 533a099 2�• 1] Memorandum To: Tom Parilo, Director Butte County DDS Paula Leasure, Principal Planner From: Laura Webster, PMC Date: January 6, 1999 Subject. Summary of ALUC Contract Staff Budget Expenditures (July 1, 1998 through December 31, 1998) The following summary is being provided to assist County staff with the preparation of a staff report regarding the remaining budget for ALUC contract staff services. This information will be presented to the Commission at their January 20, 1999 meeting. Total Annual Budget for Contract Staff Services; $20,000.00 Total Expenditures (July 1 through December 31); $12,000.00 Remaining Budget: $ 8,000.00 Average number of hours spent per month during the first 6, month period. 33.33 Average number of hours available per month based upon the remaining budget - balance for the period between January 1, 1999 and June 30, 1999: 22.22 It is important to note that most of the hours spent during the first 6 months did not involve tasks related to the CI UP update. The CLUP iupdate is expected to take morc staff attention dumig the remaining portion of the contract. Therefore, the amount of time available for ongoing mandatory ALUC activities is even more limited. Please give zine a call if you have any questions regarding the above summary or if you need additional information in order to complete the staff report. BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES May 20, 1998 (Item #5) Mr. Parilo said no budget resources for preparation of the CLUP's were included in the budget which was submitted since the funding source for the CLUP's is not secured. Once the grant is secured a budget adjustment can be made. Since the State will pay in various "draws" after work is complete the actual budget resources will be less than the total amount of the grant. Chairman Hennigan asked for clarification on the requirement for a secure budget source since preparation of the CLUP's is mandated by the State. Mr. Parilo explained that it is a matter of form over substance. He noted that if a consultant is selected who will exceed the cost of the grant, the Board will have to approve the additional appropriation. He noted the grant resources are much greater than originally expected, but the true costs are unknown at this time. Once the true costs are known the Board can be asked for additional budget resources. Butte County Airport Land Use Commission minutes - May 20, 1998 -Page 1 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: MEMORANDUM Airport Land Use Commission Airport Land Use Commission Staff Monthly Status Report For Meeting of May 20, 1998 1. City Selection Committee Commissioner Appointment. On Thursday, April 30, 1998, the City Selection Committee appointed Art Hatley to fill the unexpired term of Alan Campbell. Commissioner Hatley's term will expire May 3, 1999. 2. Board of Supervisors Commissioner Appointment. The Board of Supervisors will appoint a representative to the Commission on May 12, 1998. ' The new. appointments term of office will be May 3, 2002. 3. Status of Chico Municipal Airport Master Plan - The City of Chico has officially initiated the preparation of its Airport MasterPlan. The City's Airport Commission conducted public workshops on April 17th and April 28th to.introduce the project to the community and give interested persons the opportunity to express they recommendations and opinions regarding the development of the Chico Municipal Airport over the next 20 years. Presentations were made by the project consultant, Reinard Brandley. The project is expected to be completed within the next twelve months. 'The first phase will focus on completing: :/ An inventory of existing facilities • Activity forecasts and aviation demands • A demand capacity analysis DL • A facility requirements determination /" Preliminary portions of the environmental assessment • rY One particular area of consideration during the study will be to determine the most suitable types of development for the west side of the airport. Initial public input was supportive of A new terminal building on the west side and possible conversion of the existing terminal to a fixed base operator and airport conference facility. Other comments supported the extension of both runways, improvements to accommodate heavier aircraft, lighting of runway 31L, accommodations for aeronautic related and/or dependent businesses, and some hotel and restaurant development. A Technical Advisory Committee will be created to provide additional input during the preparation of the Master Plan. Periodic public ■ Airport Land Use Commission • Butte County ■ Monthly Status Report ■ Page 1 ■ • workshops will be scheduled as the project progresses to present and discuss interim work products. 4. Status of the Northern California Aviation Systems Plan - According to discussions with BCAG representatives, work has riot yet been initiated on the Northern California Aviation Systems Plan. Caltrans will actually be the lead agency on the project. It is anticipated that start up activities will begin in October 1998. ALUC staff requested to be advised as more information on the details of the project become available. 5. Status of 1998 -1999 ALUC Budget - The Department of Development Services, Planning Division budget was submitted to Administration in early April. The ALUC operating monies are included within this budget item. 6. Status of Caltrans Grant Application to the CTC -The Caltrans application has been submitted for review during the CTC meeting scheduled for May 6th and 7th. Caltrans representatives will inform the Butte County ALUC of the CTC's decision immediately following formal action on the request. A verbal update and any associated correspondence will be provided at the ALUC meeting on May 20, 1998. 7. Status of Caltrans Conditions Placed on Butte County, per letter from Marlin Beckwith dated December 2. 1997) - Use of the Airport Master Plan for the Oroville Municipal Airport has been approved by the Department of Transportation Aeronautics Program as the basis for the CLUP for that facility. Layout Plans for the Chico Municipal Airport, Paradise Skypark Airport and Ranchaero Airport were submitted to Caltrans for approval on April 6, 1998. According to subsequent telephone discussions with Caltrans staff (April 28, . 1998), the Layout Plans were received and are in the process of being reviewed.. Official correspondence from that agency regarding the use of the Layout Plans as the basis for the CLUPs is expected to be provided to ALUC staff on or before May 7, 1998. The Draft RFP for preparation of the CLUP was submitted to Caltrans on May 6, 1998, for that agency's review and comment. Following receipt and incorporation of Caltrans' comments, the RFP will be distributed to a list of qualified consultants. The tentative due date for proposal submittal is June 5, 1998. 8. Reminder: At the March 18, 1998 ALUC meeting .the ALUC Policy Plan was tabled for six months pending progress on the CLUPs and the Caltrans grant. It will only be placed on the agenda of September 16, 1998 if the grant is not awarded. -- • Airport Land Use Commission ■ Butte County ■ Monthly Status. Report • Page 2 ■ 0 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES March 18, 1998 Ms. Leasure noted approximately $76,000 in specialized services has been budgeted for ALUC. Butte County Airport Land Use Commission - March 18, 1998 - Page 1 61, BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 18, 1998 Planning Division Budget Request for the 1998-1999 Budget Year: Presentation of a draft work program for the 1998-1999 fiscal year. Staff is requesting Commission input to the work program in order for staff to augment the draft budget request being presented to the Commission. The Draft Work Program was distributed to the commissioners. Mr. Parilo said the CLUP's are being viewed as the major work program. A proposal is being put forth that would identify an additional $20,000 for the Comprehensive Land Use Plan updates since the $41,000 state grant would probably not cover the total expense. The 10% matching will hopefully be accomplished through staff services. The $5,000 for professional and specialized services could be applied to legal expenses that would not be provided by County Counsel for one reason or another. And $5,000 for travel. Mr. Parilo clarified that education is part of transportation and travel. Commissioner Hennigan saggested including an expenditure of $70,000 for the CLUP updates. The $41,000 Caltrans funds could be shown as input and any other funds that may be discovered. Mr. Parilo said the cost is not really known. Staff might be able to do the CLUP's for the smaller airports. Until the RFP process, the cost really can't be known. Commissioner Hennigan said there should be a realistic amount in the Work Program and it should be made clear to the Board of Supervisors that ALUC's intention is to update the CLUP's for all the airports this year -- within a year.. The County will be involved in a lawsuit unless a contemporary plan is created and that should be included in.the Work Program and be made clear to the Board that within a year ALUC wants to have a contemporary CLUP. Mr. Parilo said the 1998-99 budget will accommodate that. If ALUC wants an additional $30,000 that could be done. Until the costs are known it will be hard to communicate to the Board, what additional amount will need to be picked up by the County. He agreed that ALUC has been stopped "dead in the water" and in order to get off dead center, it needs to.go through the RFP process. Once that is done, the total cost will be known and the budget can be built around what that total cost is ultimately, and hopefully that amount will be known before the final budget is prepared. He said noted that the MOU with the City of Chico, which Caltrans had tied to release of the grant funds, never materialized. Mr. Lucas said the only reason not to go out with an RFP is because Caltrans indicated that would be premature and might affect their ultimate decision. Mr. Lucas said the last indication from Butte County Airport Lane Use Commission minutes - February 18, 1998 - Page 1 !,fir ' • • r Caltrans is that they -had reviewed the scope of work and the RFP which was submitted. There were problems with some aspects of the scope of work. Before Caltrans will enter into an agreement and release those funds they want to have an approved scope of work. They intended to contact staff this week and iron out those last few points of scope. If ALUC were to issue an RFP on its own, Caltrans could consider that an out of process action which could jeopardize the grant. It is correct that ALUC has a choice of continuing with the Caltrans process in hopes they will ultimately release those funds or put those funds at risk or forget about them and move forward with the RFP process on its own. Mr. Lucas said an RFP is prepared and could be sent out. The RFP was sent to Caltrans for their review along with the scope of work. Commissioner Hennigan asked if staff will sort that situation out with Caltrans. Mr. Lucas said he is in regular contact with Caltrans. He said the RFP is ready to be sent out subject to Caltrans approval. Commissioner Hennigan said that there could conceivably be a response to that within 60 days. Chairman Franklin said 120 days is more likely. Mr. Parilo suggested the Commission identify costs. Once those costs are known and with the state's commitment, things can move forward. He suggested budgeting $70,000 for the cost of the CLUP's. The grant would credited to the department's budget. Commissioner Lambert asked about any future monies possible from Caltrans. She also asked what if Caltrans doesn't like the plan upon completion -- does Caltrans have the authority to approve or disapprove? Mr. Lucas said Caltrans does have complete authority over the RFP since it is their money, and also the scope of work must meet their standards in order to receive their funds. A separate issue is the policy plan which is an internal document and has no potential land use application but is merely a policy guideline. Caltrans will review it but they have no statutory obligation to approve it nor does ALUC have to accept any approval or comment from Caltrans on that document. The CLUP's need to be submitted to Caltrans for their review and they will ultimately determine if they feel the CLUP's are adequate. ALUC can still adopt a CLUP even if Caltrans does not feel satisfied. There appears to be some confusion over the level of Caltrans control over the CLUP process. Commissioner Hennigan wanted to know if there is anything ALUC can do to hasten that process. Mr. Lucas suggested a letter from the Chairman indicating that is ALUC's wish. Caltrans has asked for a response to their December 2, 1997 letter to Chairman Franklin from Marlin Beckwith itemizing the 4 or 5 points that were potentially deficient at this time. It was moved by Commissioner Hennigan that the staff be authorized to respond to the December 2, 1997 letter in the affirmative and that ALUC direct the staff to proceed as rapidly as they can Butte County Airport Lane Use Commission minutes - February 18, 1998 - Page 2 /T • • consistent with the Caltrans process, and to circulate that Request for Proposal and get some proposals to ALUC. Mr. Parilo said the RFP that was sent to Caltrans describing the work program has parameters which are open-ended. Everyone acknowledges the plan will cost more than $41,000 and the County will have to pick up a substantial amount of expenses just because of the very vague nature of the RFP. For instance there are no limits placed on meetings or interaction with other agencies or the public and processes like that can take up a significant amount of financial resources. Chairman Franklin said he is inclined to limit those process since they eat up not only money but years of time. ALUC members are to receive copies of letters that are sent out. Mr. Lucas is to respond to the December 2 letter from Caltrans. Mr. Lucas said the December 2 letter discussed the process and included six items that need to be followed: approval of the scope of work, review and approval of the RFP, approval of the consultant selection, drafting of the grant agreement for the release of the funds, and hiring the consultant. The letter outlined those steps and Caltrans wants a response back saying that ALUC accepts, understands, agrees and knows its responsibility regarding those items. Once the scope of work is approved, the RFP can be modified as necessary. Chairman Franklin said ALUC apparently agrees on the $70,000 cost to be budgeted for the cost of the CLUP preparation and for staff to respond to Beckwith's December 2, 1997 letter. Butte CountyAirport Lane Use Commission minutes - February 18, 1998 - Page 3 • +B=IE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE OOK�USSION+ ■ Department of Development Services ■ 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 ■ (530) 538-7601 FAX (530) 538-7785 ■ REGULAR. MEETING NOTICE OF THE COMMISSION Location: Butte County Administration Building, Supervisors' Chambers, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California Date/Time: February 18, 1998:- 9:00 a.m. AGENDA ALL ITEMS ARE OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT 5. Division Budget Request for the 1998-1999 Budget Year: Presentation of a draft work program for the 1998-1999 fiscal year. Staff is requesting Commission input to the work - program in order for staff to -augment the draft budget request being presented to the Commission. ■ Butte County m Airport Land- Use Commission ■ +B=E COUNT?AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION + • Department of Development Services • 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 • (916) 538-7601 FAX (916) 538-7785 • AGENDA ITEM E.5 TO: Honorable Chair and Airport Land Use Commission FROM: Department of Development Services DATE:. February 10, 1998 SUBJECT: Draft Work Program. FOR: Airport Land Use Commission Meeting of February 18, 1998. SUMMARY: The County is presently preparing budget requests for the 1998/1999 budget cycle. Staff has prepared a draft work program and budget for Commission discussion. After approval by the Commission, the budgetary request will be submitted to the Department of Development Services for inclusion in the Planning Division budget. The Commission was provided staffing and office support by the Department of Development Services, Planning Division to meets its legal obligations under Public Resources Code 21670. This staff support was intended to conduct the regular business of the Commission and the updates of the Comprehensive Land Use Plans for the County's four public use airports. The Commission made no specific budget requests during the beginning of the budget cycle. The Commission did discuss and consider the need for independent legal counsel during the review of several City of Chico land use proposals. Budgetary support for ALUC legal counsel was provided for in the 1997/98 Planning Division budget by the Board of Supervisors at the close of final budget hearings. The Commission discussed the possibility of requesting the Board of Supervisors to establish a Fee Schedule to offset the some of the Commission's cost of operating. No action was taken on this matter and the Commission concluded to discuss this option at a later date. In February 1998 the Commission signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Board of Supervisors. This agreement established the responsibility of the Department of Development Services to provide a Primary Staff Member to the Commission and provide reasonable funding and opportunity for training related to ALUC business. The Commission will continue to be provided staff and office support by the Department of Development Services, Planning Division for the 1998 -1999 budget cycle. This support will include professional planning services, office support, and all costs related to public hearings and regular Commission business mandated by Public Resources Code 21670 and the Memorandum of Understanding. • Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission • • Beyond regular Commiss0 business, the Commission will have t e responsibility of completing the Comprehensive Land Use Plans for Paradise, Ranchaero, Oroville and Chico Airports. The cost of preparing these CLUP's is anticipated to be supported by the $41,000.00 State grant from the Capital Improvement Program administered through the Caltrans Aeronautics Program. There is a 10% matching funds requirement that will be provided through ALUC staff services. This grant funding may not cover the total cost of preparing the CLUP's and may require supplemental funding from the Board of Supervisors. At this time, the total cost of preparing the CLUP's is unknown. The Commission may, again, wish to consider the need for independent legal counsel as it has been 'suggested that Butte County Counsel's Office may not be able to provide such legal services. The request for funding of legal counsel is presented under Professional and Specialized Services in the list of draft budget requests below. Other budget items the Commission has considered in the past year have been professional memberships in airport planning organizations and transportation/travel allowances for conferences, meals and mileage. These items should be discussed by the Commission and budgetary requests should be made based on the anticipated need. Typically, ALUC support has been funded through the Planning Division budget. Budget instructions for Fiscal Year 1998/99 require that two budgets be submitted for each budgetary unit. One budget must be less 5% from the base budget as of January 31, 1998. The second budget must not exceed the budget as of January 31, 1998. Additional specific requests are allowed beyond the base budget. Any specific budget requirements requested by ALUC will be contained in this category. The following are some specific requests the Commission may wish to consider: Comprehensive Land Use Plan updates Professional and Specialized Services Transportation and Travel 20,000.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 (for Commissioners and Staff) At the request of several Commissioner's, the 1997-1998 LAFCo Budget report is attached for comparison purposes. The line items above reflect similar expenses found in the LAFCo budget. It should be understood that the LAFCo process is separate from the Department of Development Services budget and cannot be used as direct reflection of ALUC's budgetary needs. RECOMMENDATION: The Commission should direct staff to submit a budget request and accompanying work program to the Department of Development Services for review and inclusion into the Department of Development Services, Planning Division budget. klaludmeetings/feb 18-98.mtg/budget.pgm • Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission • 2 +BUTTE COVNIAIRPORT LAND U SACOMMISSION • Depa ent of DevelopmentServices • Mounty Center Drive, rove e, CA538-7785 • • AGENDA ITEM E.5 -TO: Honorable Chair and Airport Land Use Commission: FROM: Department of Development'Services DATE: February,10, 1998 REQUEST: Discussion and Consideration of ALUC Work Program and Budget Request for the 1998-1999 Budget Year: The Commission will discuss items for inclusion in the work program and budget requirements for Commission business. FOR: Airport Land Use Commission Meeting'of February 18, 1998. SUMMARY: The County is presently preparing budget requests for the 1998/1999 budget cycle. Staff has prepared a draft work program and budget for Commission discussion. The draft work program,and budget will be handed out at the meeting. After approval by the Commission the budgetary request will be submitted to the Department of Development Services for inclusion in the Planning Division budget. } i k:/aluc/meetings/febl &98.mtg/budget.rpt • Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission • 1997 =1 r OBUiTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSIONO ❑Department of Development Services ❑ 7 Countyenter Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 ❑ ❑ To: Airport Land Use Commission From: Paula Leasure, Principal Planner Re: ALUC Annual Work Program Date: March 11; 1997 .for Meeting of March 19, 1997 Attached is a copy of the 1995/96 ALUC Work Program which was approved by the Commission and I ubmitted to the Development Services Department for inclusion in the Planning Division budget. Please review this work program and be prepared to make recommendations to ALUC staff for 1997/98 budget year. Steve Lucas, Associate Planner, is currently developing the work program to tie submitted to CalTrans, to secure the grant funding that is available for preparation of the Comprehensive Land Use Plans. Quarterly meetings have become monthly meetings, requiring additional staff time for preparation of packets, supplies, copying, etc. Travel expenses cannot be paid to the Commissioner's at this time. The proposed By -Laws tie payment of a travel stipend to development of a fee schedule. Additional information will be presented to the Commission on March 19, 1997. Attachments, 1995/96 ALUC Budget Memo dated April 13, 1995 from Bill Farrel k:l planninglaluclmar97.mtglworkplan.mem 0 Butte County 0 Airport Land Use Commission 0 • MEMORANDUM TO: Bill Farrel FROM: Stephen Lucas DATE: March 28, 1995 RE: 1995/96 Budget for the Airport Land Use Commission. NEED: COST: TIME: 10C opies of Oroville ALUP (1985) 20.00 1 Week 10 Copies of Paradise ALUP 20.00 1 Week 10 Copies of Ranchero ALUP 20.00 1 Week 10 Copies of Caltrans Handbook 20.00 1 Week /SF 2 Meetings 80.00 1 week --- TASK: HRS/COST: TIME: Prepare needs assessment 2 120.00 1 Day Prepare detailed work program 8 480.00 1 Week Prepare draft County Policy Plan 30 1800.00 1 Month _ Approval, comment period 8 480.00 2 Meetings Prepare draft ALUPS's (4) 60 3600.00 4 Months Approval, comment period 16 960.00 4 Meetings Prepare staff responsibility format 2 120.00 1 Week Present format to Commission 8 480.00 1 Meeting Total 8040.00 GIS MAPPING Preparation of maps, with parcels, 40/ 2400.00 4 Months zones, layouts, features, safety zones, overflights. Supplies 500.00 Total 2900.00 Total cost for preparation of required Airport plans. 11,020.00 ON-GOING ORGANIZATION: Review projects for consistency (12) 12/2 1440.00 1 Year Quarterly meetings (4) 4/4 960.00 1 year Preparation of packets, maps, etc ... (12) 1/12 720.00 1 year Publications & Legal Notices 12 500.00 1 year Supplies, copying, etc... - 5000.00 1 year Memberships - 1000.00 1 year Professional Services - 1000.00 1 year Travel - 1000.00 1 year 11,620.00 1 year TOTAL BUDGET REQUEST . 22,640.00 MEMORANDUM TO: Barry Hogan, Paula Leasure and Steve Lucas FROM: Bill Farrel SUBJECT: ALUC BUDGET AND STAFFING DATE: April 13, 1995 This is a follow up to the discussion Paula, Steve, Brian and I had Wednesday morning, April 12, 1995. There is currently no separate budget unit established for ALUC, and at this point in the budget preparation cycle, it is too late to entertain establishment of a separate unit. I would not in any case support separating ALUC functions from other functions of the department because it would tend to reduce internal flexibility in allocating staff time between different functions. ALUC work obligations have been highly variable, which also makes separation impractical. In years past, the Planning Department always provided support for ALUC as part of it's scope of responsibilities. Development Services is obliged to staff and support ALUC at a level necessary to do' KiFjob." This requirement remains whether or not ALUC is identified as a separate budget unit. Staffing of normal operations, and reproduction of basic materials and documents will be absorbed by the department. Based on Steve's review of annual budget needs, we have evaluated the proposed: 95/96 Planning Division budget to ensure adequate funds will be there: Brian is making several -adjustments accordingly. One of those is to establish funds to cover meeting attendance by ALUC members ($30.00 per meeting). We will need to modify the County Code later to provide for claims and payment, the same is also needed for LAFCo. The time and cost burden resulting from revising the several ALUP's is something out of the ordinary, in that it occurs only periodically. Steve made a good case that revision of the ALUP's is a prerequisite to updating the General Plan. In that light, we can justify moving ahead this year with Steve's work on Ranchiera and Paradise airports. He will using a model plan recommended by the Division of Aeronautics, and estimates about one quarter of his annual work effort will be needed: Brian will designate $5,000 in the Planning Division 95/96 budget for a consultant noise study of Ranchiera and Paradise airports. • Barry Hogan, Paula Leasure and Steve Lucas April 13, 1995 Page 2 It was not clear how the Chico and Oroviile plans can best be done, and I would like to talk further with you before proceeding. In the case of Chico, it may be beneficial to try to get an outside consultant to do the whole thing, if we could get the City to pay for it. We would do -the RFP and run the whole process, with Chico depositing the funds with the county. This would offer the benefit of freeing our staff from the time involved, and minimize direct conflicts with the city over the planning. How to handle the Oroville ALUP revision also needs more discussion. In any case, before we dive into these plans, we need to let our Board of. Supervisors know what we are doing. I have discussed the budget situation with Nina Lambert, assuring her that normal support will be available, but through the Planning Division budget. BF:jb I,C Bill Farrel j:\docs\memos\ALUC8.jb ■ Butte County ■ Department of Development Services ■ Director's Office ■ 1996-1997° 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Airport Land Use Commission FROM: William Farrel, Director Development Services SUBJECT: 96/97 F.Y. BUDGET AND GRANT FUNDING DATE: May 13, 1996 96/97 BUDGET: In F.Y. 95/96 an appropriation of $5,000 was made to conduct noise studies for the Ranchearo and Paradise Airports. Staff is currently completing contract negotiations to have those studies done. It was intended that the 4 Comprehensive Land Use Plans (CLUP's) would be done in house. At this time staff has completed a tentative Policy Plan. Completion of this plan will facilitate the work necessary to complete the CLUP's. Development Services will continue to provide support for the work of the Airport Land Use Commission. Long term formal budget commitments can not be made given the size of our staff and overall work load. Flexibility in the use of resources allows the department to meet minimal requirements in servicing the many demands placed upon it. The department will request that the County Code be amended to allow payment of a meeting stipend for Airport Land Use Commissioners on the same basis as that paid to the Planning Commission. To illustrate the plight of our Planning Division a recent survey of some selected California Counties produced the following, and not so surprising, information. Ar Butte County Ar Department of Development Services z Director's Office Ar COUNTY STAFF SIZE UNINCORPORATED POPULATION STAFF TO RANK POPULATION RATIO Butte 8 110,000 1 to 13,750 4TH Monterey 28 98,000 1 to 3,500 2ND Napa 17 29,900 1 to 1,759 1ST Sutter 8 35,280 1 to 4,410 3RD Ar Butte County Ar Department of Development Services z Director's Office Ar GRANT FUNDING: The purpose of the $40,000 grant application is to aid in the completion of the CLUP's. This grant will ensure that there is adequate funding to support in house staff work as well as any outside consultants, if needed. The Auditor's Office, when the grant money is received will place it in a trust account. When expenses are incurred against the grant, for the intended purpose, an accounting transaction is made that moves grant funds into an account that will allow those expenses to be paid. Work chargeable to the grant will be documented by time cards or other pertinent records. I hope this information answers your questions about the budget and protection of grant funds. W' arrel JAMEM0S\13ILUALUC%97. WPD Ar Butte County Ar Department of Development Services Ar Directors Office Ar 2 1995-1996 []BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSIOND ❑ Department of DevelopmentServices ❑ 7 CountyCenter Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 ❑ ❑ To: Airport Land Use Commission From: Paula Leasure, Principal Planner Re: ALUC Annual Work Program Date: March 11, 1997 for Meeting of March 19, 1997 Attached is a copy of the 1995/96 ALUC Work Program which was approved by the Commission and submitted to the Development Services Department for inclusion in the Planning Division budget. Please review this work program and be prepared to make recommendations to ALUC staff for 1997/98 budget year. Steve Lucas, Associate Planner, is currently developing the work program to be submitted to CalTrans, to secure the grant funding that is available for preparation of the Comprehensive Land Use Plans. Quarterly meetings have become monthly meetings, requiring additional staff time for preparation of packets, supplies, copying, etc. Travel expenses cannot be paid to the Commissioner's at this time. The proposed By -Laws tie payment of a travel stipend to development of a fee schedule. Additional information will be presented to the Commission on March 19, 1997. Attachments 1995/96 ALUC Budget Memo dated April. 13, 1995 from Bill Farrel k:l planninglaluclmar97.mtglworkplan.mem 0 Butte County 0 Airport Land Use Commission 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Bill Farrel FROM: Stephen Lucas DATE:. March 28, 1995, RE: 1995/96 Budget for the Airport Land Use Commission. NEED: COST: 1440.00 TIME: 10 Copies of Oroville ALUP (1985) 20.00 • 960.00' 1 Week 10 Copies of Paradise ALUP 20.00 720.00 1 Week 10 Copies of Ranchero ALUP 20.00 500.00 1 Week 10 Copies of Caltrans Handbook 20.00 5000.00 1 Week ASF. Memberships 80.00 1000.00 1 week TASK: HRS/COST: 1000.00 TIME: Prepare needs assessment 2 - . 120.00 1 Day Prepare detailed work program 8 480.00 1 Week Prepare draft County Policy Plan 30 1800.00 1 Month _ Approval, comment period 8 480.00 2 Meetings Prepare draft ALUPS's (4) 60 3600.00 4 Months Approval, comment period 16 960.00 4 Meetings Prepare staff responsibility format 2 . 120.00 1 Week Present format to Commission 8 480.00- 1 Meeting Total 8040.00 GIS MAPPING Preparation of maps, with parcels, 40/ 2400.00 4 Months zones, layouts, features, safety zones, overflights. Supplies 500.00 Total 2900.00 Total cost for preparation of required Airport plans. 11,020.00 ON-GOING ORGANIZATION: Review projects for consistency (12) 122 1440.00 1 Year Quarterly meetings (4) 4/4 960.00' 1 year Preparation of.packets, maps, etc:.. (12) 1/12 720.00 1 year Publications & Legal Notices 12 500.00 1 year Supplies, copying, etc... - 5000.00 1 year Memberships - 1000.00 1 year h Professional Services - 1000.00 1 year Travel - 1000.00 1 year 11,620.00 1 year TOTAL BUDGET REQUEST 22,640.00 MEMORANDUM TO: Barry Hogan, Paula Leasure and Steve Lucas FROM: Bill Farrel SUBJECT: ALUC BUDGET AND STAFFING DATE: April 13, 1995 This is a follow up to the discussion Paula, Steve, Brian and I had Wednesday morning, April 12, 1995. There is currently no separate budget unit established for ALUC, and at this point in the budget preparation cycle, it is too late to entertain establishment of a separate unit. I would not in any case support separating ALUC functions from other functions of the department because it would tend to reduce internal flexibility in allocating staff time between different functions. ALUC work obligations have been highly variable, which also makes separation impractical In years past, the Planning Department always provided support for ALUC as part of it's scope of responsibilities. Development Services is obliged to staff and support: ALUC at a level necessary to d6"the job." This requirement remains whether or not ALUC is identified as a separate budget unit. Staffing of normal operations, and reproduction of basic materials and documents will be absorbed by the department. Based on Steve's review of annual budget needs, we have evaluated the proposed 95/96 Planning Division budget to' ensure adequate funds will be there: Brian is making several adjustments accordingly. One of those is to establish funds to cover meeting attendance by ALUC members ($30.00 per meeting). We will need to modify the County Code later to provide for claims and payment, the same is also needed for LAFCo. The time and cost burden resulting from revising the several ALUP's is something out of the ordinary, in that it occurs only periodically. Steve made a good case that revision of the ALUP's is a prerequisite to updating the General Plan. In that light, we can justify moving ahead this year with Steve's work on Ranchiera and Paradise airports. He will using a model plan recommended by the Division of Aeronautics, and estimates about one quarter of his annual work effort will be needed: Brian will designate $5,000 in the Planning Division 95/96 budget for a consultant noise study of Ranchiera and Paradise airports. .:: •'. . � ,t n. n.;lyr...�.,, "saris.:.. ,ry' a•... I I - b _n i Barry Hogan, Paula Leasure and Steve Lucas - .April 13, 1995 :;�;;,k;:,;.t..-,.:x_�,._.::...:,.:: • Page 2 It was not clear how the Chico and Oroville plans can best be done, and I would like to talk further with you before proceeding. in the case of Chico, it may be,beneficial to try to get an outside consultant to do the. whole thing, if we could get the City to pay for it. We would do -the RFP and run the whole process, with Chico depositing the funds with the county. This would offer the benefit of freeing. our staff from the time involved, and minimize direct conflicts with the city over the planning. How to handle the Oroville ALUP revision also needs more discussion. In any case, before we dive into these plans, we need to' let our Board of Supervisors know what we are doing. . I have discussed the budget situation with Nina Lambert, assuring her that normal support will be available, but through the Planning Division budget. BF:jb Bill Farrel j:\docs\memos\ALUCB.jb ■ Butte County ■ Department of Development Services ■ Director's Office ■ r� .•.r .. 41 MEMORANDUM TO: Airport Land Use Commission FROM: William Farrel, Director Development Services SUBJECT: 96/97 F.Y. BUDGET AND GRANT FUNDING DATE: May 13, 1996 96/97 BUDGET: In F.Y. 95/96 an appropriation of $5,000 was made to conduct noise studies for the Ranchearo and Paradise Airports. Staff is currently completing contract negotiations to have those studies done. It was intended that the 4 Comprehensive Land Use Plans (CLUP's) would be done in house. At this time staff has completed a tentative Policy Plan. Completion of this plan will facilitate the work necessary to complete the CLUP's. Development Services will continue to provide support for the work of the Airport Land Use Commission. Long term formal budget commitments can not be made given the size of our staff and overall work load. Flexibility in the use of resources allows the department to meet minimal requirements in servicing the many demands placed upon it. The department will request that the County Code be amended to allow payment of a meeting stipend for Airport Land Use Commissioners on the same basis as that paid to the Planning Commission. To illustrate the plight of our Planning Division a recent survey of some selected California Counties produced the following, and not so surprising, information. •iiia:.•.•.w:?vi•,:.?...:.�}v.::::w:::.iwy':m:•Y:•.:x;:p;: ?: •.:4;y}•::•. u4: •.;; .......,....:.}i:?:•,�^•:.�:::4{.?:r.:r.,vx??.::??{{;::':i{r:,.,,+.x.•?:•:::ti:;?•}i:n�;.:?{?.}::i :?i... .. rl. r:.... COUNTY STAFF SIZE UNINCORPORATED POPULATION STAFF TO POPULATION RATIO RANK Butte 8 110,000 1 to 13,750 4TH Monterey 28 98,000 1 to 3,500 2ND Napa 17 29,900 1 to 1,759 1ST Sutter 1 8 35,280 1 to 4,410 3RD Ar Butte County Ar Department of Development Services AF Director's Office Ar GRANT FUNDING: - - The purpose of the $40,000 grant application is to aid in the completion of the CLUP's. This grant will ensure that there is adequate funding to support in house staff work as well as any outside consultants, if needed. The Auditor's Office, when the grant money is received will place it in a trust account. When expenses are incurred against the grant, for the intended purpose, an accounting transaction is made that moves grant funds into an account that will allow those expenses to be paid. Work chargeable to the grant will be documented by time cards or other pertinent records. I hope this information answers your questions about the budget and protection of grant funds. W arrel W- JAMEM0S\BU,L\ALUC9697.WPD Ar Butte County Ar Department of Development Services Ar Directoes Office Ar 2 0 COMMISSIO N" + +BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND. e Department of Development Services e 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 • (916) 538-7601 FAX (916) 538-7785 • 4 TO: - Bill Farrel, Director of Development Services FROM: Airport Land Use Commission DATE: May 3, 1995 RE: Proposed 1995/96 ALUC Budget Dear Bill, The Butte County Airport Land Use Commission has endorsed the 1995196 budget proposal prepared by staff. The Commission is pleased that you have taken steps to include this proposal into the Planning Division budget and is hopeful that the funding will become available as requested. As you know, there is considerable work that is in need of completion over the next year, the paramount task is of course the updates necessary for each of the four established airport Comprehensive Land Use Plans (CLUP's). These CLUP's are essential in order to allow the County's general plan process to move forward as all county plans must be consistent with the CLUP's according to state law. The Commission is looking forward to working closely with the Planning Division to complete the required updates. We feel that the anticipated airport planning documents will place the County in a positive position of protecting the essential uses that the various county airports provide and ensure compatible land uses within the airport planning boundaries. Sincerely, Nina Lambert, Chairman, Butte County Airport Land Use Commission cc: Barry Hogan, Planning Manager Board of Supervisors 0 Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission 0 .. _sZ • +BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND UACOMMISSION + • Department of Development Services • 7 Countyenter Drive, Oroville, CA 9 • TO: Honorable Chair and Airport Land Use Commission FROM: Stephen Lucas, Planner DATE: April 16,1996 ITEM: Progress report on work program of March 28, 1995. FOR: Airport Land Use Commission Meeting of April 17, 1996. SUMMARY: This report is submitted to the Commission in order to indicate the progress that has been made with the respect to the operation of ALUC. ANALYSIS: The following list of items have been accomplished by Planning staff beginning in January 1995. This list is included to show the progress made to date. January 18, 1995. Staff presented the Commission with a proposed outline for the preparation of a draft Butte County Airport MasterPlan (which is now referred to as the "Policy Plan's and an update to the Chico Municipal Airport Land Use Plan that would be developed by a Planning Seminar class at Chico State. The Commission directed staff to have the class proceed with this work which was to culminate with a final document being adopted in August 1995. The work was completed by the class and although very informative and useful, it was not in a form that could be adopted as a Policy Plan. The Commission directed staff to utilize this work into the development of the Policy Plan and the Chico Airport Plan. February 15, 1995. At the direction of the Commission, staff planned a first ever Airport Planning Conference in Butte County that was intended to provide a thorough review of all airport planning issues. Staff brought representatives from Caltrans, the Pilots Association, and other interested parties to the conference. Much valuable information was discussed and guidance was offered to staff and the Commission. March 15, 1995. The Commission directed staff to develop a budget for the operation of ALUC and the preparation of the Policy Plan/CLUP's. Staff met with a subcommittee a prepared a budget. April 19, 1995. Staff presented and distributed a sample Policy Plan/comprehensive land use plan to the Commission for review and comment. Staff recommended the Commission consider the sample be used as the standard format for the revision of all airport CLUP's and direct staff to begin preparation of the Policy Plan. Staff presented the Commission with a review of the 1995/96 work program and budget that was prepared with cooperation from Bill Farrel. ALUC prepared a letter endorsing the proposed budget which was sent to Development Services. July 10, 1995. In response to Commission questions regarding funding for CLUP's, staff researched and solicited funding support from Caltrans. A letter and specific funding request was made to Caltrans for Capital Improvement Program funds. July 19, 1995. The Commission held on-going discussions concerning the content and preparation of Policy Plan/CLUP's. October 18, 1995. The Commission continued discussions pertaining to the content and preparation of Policy Plan. Staff also requested that Commissioners respond with comments in a timely manner so that progress remains constant on the Policy Plan preparations. • Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission • January 17, 1996. On-goildiscussions on the draft Policy Plan. StaSquested that Commissioners review the draft Policy Plan and submit comments to staff for analysis. January 26, 1996. Letter received from Caltrans indicating that ALUC was scheduled to receive $41,000.00 in the 1996-97 Transportation Improvement Program funding cycle. March 20, 1996. Staff prepared a report responding to the few comments submitted by Commissioners. The Commission began to discuss the comments and continued the discussion to the April meeting. April 1, 1996. Staff met with Mike McClintock of PD Technologies to discuss the preparation of the Chico Municipal Airport CLUP and provide him with direction as to ALUC concerns. April 3, 1996. Continued discussions as to the content and function of the Policy Plan. Of the items on the above list, the March 28,1995 memo indicated what the Commission needed, the tasks expected to be completed by the Planning Division staff, the anticipated requirements for the on-going operation of ALUC, and the necessary budgets. This memo is reproduced below with comments and progress indicated in italics. NEED: COST: TIME: 10 Copies of Oroville ALUP (1985) 20.00 1 Week 10 Copies of Paradise ALUP 20.00 1 Week 10 Copies of Ranchero ALUP 20.00 1 Week 10 Copies of Caltrans Handbook 20.00 1 Week Approval, comment period 80.00 1 week As of this date all airport planning documents have been distributed to the Commission. TASK: HRS/COST: TIME: Prepare needs assessment 2 120.00 1 Day Prepare detailed work program 8 480.00 1 Week Prepare draft County Policy Plan 30 1800.00 1 Month Approval, comment period 8 480.00 2 Meetings Prepare draft CLUPS's (4) 60 3600.00 4 Months Approval, comment period 16 960.00 4 Meetings Prepare staff responsibility format 2 120.00 1 Week Present format to Commission 8 480.00 1 Meeting Total 8040.00 ` As of this date staff has competed a needs assessment and this memorandum represents the work program/budget. Staff has presented a draft Policy Plan to the Commission for review and comment. Discussions are continuing as to function and content of the Plan. Staff will begin the CLOP preparations upon the Commissions acceptance of the Policy Plan standards and format. The City of Chico has a consultant currently preparing a CLOP for the their airport and this is anticipated to be completed in June 1996. Paradise and Ranchearo airports require a noise study to be completed prior°to the preparation of their CLUP's. It is anticipated that these two CLUP's can be finished within a month of completion of the noise studies and the acceptance of the guidelines in the Policy Plan. Oroville Airport will require additional time to complete due to significant changes in the airport layout and the potential need for more expansive noise studies. The staff responsibility format is intended to clarify the Commissions views on the function of staff to include the level of service, review of projects, and continual updates of the CLUP's. • Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission e GIS MAPPING Preparation of maps, with parcels, 40/ 2400.00 4 Months zones, layouts, features, safety zones, overflights. Supplies 500.00 Total 2900.00 The Planning Division GIS lab has completed several draff airport land use maps for incorporation into the CLUP's and to serve as exhibits forALUC meetings. It is anticipated that the GIS lab will continue to provide mapping services and will complete the final graphics for all AL UC prepared CLUP's. Total cost for preparation of required Airport plans. 11,020.00 ON-GOING ORGANIZATION: Review projects for consistency (12) 12/2 1440.00 1 Year Quarterly meetings (4) 4/4 960.00 1 year Preparation of packets, maps, etc ... (12) 1/12 720.00 1 year Publications & Legal Notices 12 500.00 1 year Supplies, copying, etc... - 5000.00 1 year Memberships - 1000.00 1 year Professional Services - 1000.00 1 year Travel - 1000.00 1 year 11,620.00 1 year TOTAL BUDGET REQUEST 22,640.00 In conclusion, staff has met or exceeded the requested needs and responsibilities as outlined by the ALUC. Much of the delay in the preparation and adoption of revised CLUP's is tied to the expected and necessary Commission discussions that continue to this date. Staff is hopeful that the process will continue to progress and that all CLUP's ( can be completed and adopted by December 1996. • Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission • Annual Work Program and Cost Estimates. Each January, with the assistance of Development Services Department staff, the Commission shall conduct a workshop to identify and prioritize - those studies, plans, and other related activities the Commission desires to be performed in the following fiscal year. Following this workshop, the Development Services Department staff shall obtain any necessary estimates of outside consulting costs or other costs necessary to perform the Commission's tentative work program and shall then confer with the Commission and Development Services Director to resolve issues of funding feasibility or work prioritization. Subsequesntly, in March of each year, the Commission shall submit its recommended annual work program and cost estimates to the Director of Development Services, who shall include these in the Department's annual budget proposal to the Board of Supervisors. Program Funding. Funding for the operational needs of the Butte ALUC shall be through a combination of application fees and charges (21671 (f)) and such additional funding as may be approved by the Board of Supervisors as part of the Department of Development Services budget. (Aeronautics Act..... ON-GOING ORGANIZATION: v X03.,0 12/2 -1440.00 1 Year Quarterly meetings (4)' 4/4 • 1 year MEMORANDUM 1/12 720.00 TO: Bill Farrel Publications & Legal Notices 12 500.00 1 year ' FROM: Stephen Lucas - . 5000.00 1 year Memberships DATE: March 28, 1995 1000.00 1 year Professional Services' - RE: 1995/96 Budget for the Airport Land Use Commission. Travel - NEED: COST: TIME: 11,620.00 10 Copies of Oroville ALUP (1985) 20.00 1 Week 10 Copies of Paradise ALUP 20.00 22,640.00 1 Week 10 Copies of Ranchero ALUP 20.00 1 Week 10 Copies of Caltrans Handbook - 20.00 1 Week /sF. 80.00 1 week TASK: HRS/COST: TIME: Prepare heeds assessment 2 120.00 1 Day - Prepare detailed work program 8 480.00 1 Week Prepare draft County Policy Plan .30 1800.00', 1 Month _ Approval,,comment period 8 480.00 2 Meetings Prepare draft ALUPS's (4) 60 3600.00 4 Months Approval,, comment period 16 960.00 4. Meetings Prepare staff responsibility format `' 2" 120.00 1 Week • . Present format to Commission 8 480.00 ' 1 Meeting Total 8040.00 GIS MAPPING Preparation of maps, with parcels, 40/ 2400.00 4 Months zones, layouts, features, safety zones, . overflights. Supplies 500.00 Total 2900.00 'Total cost for preparation of required Airport plans. 11,020.00 ON-GOING ORGANIZATION: Review projects for consistency (12) 12/2 -1440.00 1 Year Quarterly meetings (4)' 4/4 960.00 1 year Preparation of packets, maps, .etc ... (12) 1/12 720.00 1 year Publications & Legal Notices 12 500.00 1 year ' Supplies, copying, etc... - . 5000.00 1 year Memberships - 1000.00 1 year Professional Services' - 1000.00 1 year Travel - 1000.00 1 year 11,620.00 1 year • REQUEST TOTAL BUDGET 22,640.00 r^ � TO: r VI ` L1� MEMORANDUM. Barry Hogan, Paula Leasure and Steve Lucas FROM: Bill Farrel SUBJECT: ALUC BUDGET AND STAFFING DATE: April 13, 1995 x This is a•follow up to the discussion Paula, Steve, Brian and 1 had Wednesday morning, April 12, 1995. There is currently no separate budget unit established for ALUC, and at this point in the budget preparation cycle, it is too late to entertain establishment of a separate unit. I would not in any case support separating ALUC functions from other functions of the department because it would tend to reduce internal flexibility in allocating staff time between different functions. ALUC work obligations have been highly .variable, which also makes separation impractical. In years past, the Planning Department always provided support for ALUC as part of it's scope of responsibilities. Development Services is obliged to staff and support ALUC at a level necessary to do the job. This requirement remains whether or not ALUC .is identified as a separate budget unit. - Staffing of normal operations, and reproduction of basic materials and documents will be absorbed by the department. Based on Steve's review of dnnual budget needs, we have evaluated"the proposed 95196 Planning Division budget,to ensure adequate furids will"be"there; Brian is making several-adjustments•accordingly. One of those is to establish funds to cover meeting attendance by ALUC members ($30.00 per meeting).' We will need to_ modify the County Code later to provide for claims and payment, the same is also needed for LAFCo: The time and cost burden resulting 'from revising the several ALUP's is something out. of the ordinary, in that it occurs only periodically. Steve made a good case that revision of the ALUP's is a prerequisite to updating the General Plan. In that light, we can justify moving ahead this year with Steve's work on Ranchiera and. Paradise airports. He will using a model plan recommended by the Division of Aeronautics, and estimates about one quarter of his annual work effort will -be needed Brian will designate $5,000 in the Planning Division 95%96 budget for a consultant noise study of Ranchiera and Paradise airports. T r CA ' :� . ' 'ti a f�.'"'1�f3d`,.6e j Js �,�"•,7y .�f��4t�.� <�-P� r� s. ra, <�yS'��-,�r :r 1�`\' 4 yt.�i4L'.�... �`S K;"41r, ��'� �� + V -0 'Sa• � �Z. • titer. c• {t4pkrdLr�}�s�1, ,f • r l�r e x �. ear vr�� *:1yw r+'' +' � F �; �4 i f 9�r 1 4%_• • 3k•�@°}6t �'f '1 �•r't t "G" •�j ut alp P •� a "Ca ` L 7 rd r q.. t �� . � tv t k 1-!a. k "%1^v �.• � r � Y rC�,Y� it ; �,> e ' <t3 qh: Barry Hogan'; Paula`Leasure'arid=Steve Lucas , _ �r{ r • •r": .r+Y.Y '� � 5$. a•'.• y ry rr. iM �' S 'r"i- i J$�� Y.e fir. April 13 1995 Page 2 ` • Y:�.� ';;vii'" ��u e It was notrclear how the Chico and Oroville plans can best be done,. and''I:'would like to talk further with you before proceeding. In the case of Chico, it may, be, beneficial to try to get an outside consultant to do the whole•thing, if we could get-the City to pay for it. We would do-the RFP and run -the .whole process,. with -Chico depositing the * funds with the county. This would offer the benefit of freeing our staff from the time involved, and minimize direct conflicts with the city over the planning. How to handle the Oroville ALUP revision also needs more discussion. In any case, before we dive into these plans, we need to let our Board of Supervisors know what we are doing: , I have discussed the budget situation with Nina Lambert, assuring her.tliat normal support will be,available, but through the Planning Division, budget. • -. rJ ♦ • • BF:jb Bill Farrel ' j:\docs\memos\ALUCB.jb SUGGESTED OPTIONS FOR ALUC AND FUNDING BUDGET SEPARATE BUDGET FOR ALUC WITH SPECIFIC AMOUNT DESIGNATED FOR ALUC AND EACH SEGMENT OF. THE BUDGET. 1. Paula = 1/4 time for Aluc,(or by hours); 2. 1 Secretary = 1/4 time (or by hours); . 3. Pos. Steve Lucas = 1/4 time (or by specified number of hrs.) Mileage for ALUC members ( not driving public vehicles or being paid while attending ALUC meetings. (Examples: Fred & Nina) Per diem (?) Publications required notices/ printing/ postage for packets. Preparing ALUP's for all airports (State requirement PUC Code). Preparing packets for ALUC meetings. 1. Staff reports with background information; 2. Staff Analysis of project.- 3. roject;3. Relative -portions of County and City General Plans, zoning, Airport Handbook, PUC requirements, etc. 4: Affected Airport Plan involved (Chico Muni, Oroville, Paradise, Ranchaero, etc.) 5. Staff's recommendation, maybe, with basis for recommendtion. Need to provide suggested amounts of money needed for each item listed. Attendance of Seminars - Field Trips -fly-overs, etc. Grant applications require matching funds (?) be figured in for consideration. Cost of Consultant(s) - if used. Source of funding: 1. Seperate budget? 2. Take from Planning Dept. budget? 3. Portion of Development Services Budget? 4. Cities contribute? 5. Fees charged to applicants? 6. Airport owners contribute?