HomeMy WebLinkAboutM05188282 -
a
8'6 0
~ ...,
861
862
May ls, 19az .
'ATE OF CALIFORNIA )
SS.
~UN1'Y OF BT7TTE )
The Board of Supervisors met at 9:00 a.m. pursuant to adjournment.
esent: Supervisors Dolan, Fulton, Moseley, Saraceni and Chairman Wheeler.
ke Pyeatt,.interim administrative officer; Del Siemsen, county counsel; and
eanor M. Becker, county clerk-recorder, by Nancy Wilson, deputy clerk.
edge of allegiance to the Flag"of the United States of America
vocation by Supervisor Saraceni
PROVAL OF MINUTES - CONTINUE TO M11Y 25, 1982
Continued-to May 25,_1982. approval of the minutes of May 11, 1982.
DITIONAL ITEMS FROM BOARD MEMBERS TO BE ADDRESSED AT THE END OF THE DAY
Chairman Wheeler indicated there was a memo from staff.
Supervisor Saraceni indicated he would talk about Emergency Medical
re Council and air Pollution Control fee meetings.
Chairman Wheeler stated County Counsel would comment on the Small
aims Court Advisory.
PPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
The following consent agenda items were pulled from consideration
t this time:
1. Butte County Planning Commission - Gridley-Biggs area rezone
(item on which the environmental impact report has previously been certified) -
in order to bring the zoning into consistency with the adopted General Plan for
that area as. required by state law. The area under consideration contains
pproximately 42 square miles of publicly and privately owned unincorporated
' and bounded generally by Highway 162 on the north, the Feather River on the
ast, the Butte County line on the south, and a line extending south from
he Richvale-South Highway on the west, and including the unincorporated
yeas surrounding Gridley and Biggs.. Adoption of ordinance.
2: Salary ordinance amendment deleting the existing Veterans'
ervice Officer and Representative positions and creates a new Veterans'
erviee Officer position at range 7.4.0.
3, Waive second reading and adoption of salary ordinance amendment
hich eliminates three eligibility worker positions in the Welfare Department.
4, Accept audit reports of CAA annual financial audits far Head
tart Program, Community Services Administration grants and three energy
ontracts with the State Office of Economic Opportunity. They show no
aestionable costs and copies of the reports are available for examination.
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
nd unanimously carried, the following consent agenda items were approved:
1. Public hearing date was set for Charles V. Neel consideration of
roposed negative declaration regarding environmental impact and rezone from
'C-1" (light commercial) to "C-2" (general commercial), property located on the
est side of Nord Avenue, identified as AP 043-29-0-044 and 043-29-052, Chico
o be held on June 22, 1982 at 10:30 a.m.
2. Public hearing date was set for June 22, 1982 at 10:15 a.m. for
utte County Planning Commission - code amendment to allow public utility
Page _ ~ 1.
May 18, 1982
8 2-,
'863
',864
--- M~is, i9s2 ----------------____
facilities within the side and rear yard setback areas in all zones in the
unincorporated portions of Butte County.
3. Approved CETA Summer Youth Transportation Services contract
(SYEP) with Patchett`s Bus and Transporation Company; the contract was
reviewed by the County Purchasing Officer, County Risk Manager, County Counsel
and Auditor-Controll; and the Purchasing Officer authorized to sign.
4. Approved California Department of Transportation weed control
contract in the amount not to exceed $7,000 for the fiscal year 1982-83 and
the Chairman authorized to sign.
5. Approved contract amendment for Women, Infants and Children
(WIC> increasing the county's participation for an additional amount to be
paid by the state, $7,169 for the current fiscal year and the Chairman
authorized to sign.
6. Approved Contract Change Order No. 4, Table Mountain Bridge
across the Feather River, Project No. 28491-76-1 in the increasing amount
of $1,110 to provide for removing unsuitable foundation material in the pier
footing and the Chairman authorized to sign.
7. Accepted 3600 mobile equipment management/3610 acquisition of
federal equipment as the California Department of Forestry has two surplus
vehicles which are requested to be reassigned to Butte Meadow and Clipper
Mills at no cost was approved.
WAIVE FIRST READING OF SALARY ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - LAW ENFORCEMENT UNIT
It was moved by Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni,
to waive the first reading of a salary ordinance amendment increasing compen-
sation for members of the Law Enforcement Unit by 7 percent pursuant to the
Memorandum of Understanding with the union.
Jim Rackerby, personnel director, set out the categories and the
range from the ordinance.
Supervisor Dolan stated they are obligated to fulfill the MOU of
years ago. It involves $200,000 to $300,000. They want to open the
~tiations.
Chairman S4heeler indicated they had asked the unit to open. She
t further consideration should be given by this unit before the ordinance
omes effective. They all need to share in F~udgetary considerations. She
ld hope they would go back and once again in the period of time it takes
ore this is ratified to share in this fiscal responsibility.
Mr. Rackerby responded to Supervisor Fulton that next week would be
late to turn back. Once an ordinance is adopted, it would take a second
Hance to change it. The increase could amount to elimination of nine
ty sheriffs.
Vote on motion:
AXES: Supervisors Dolan, Fulton, Moseley, Saraceni and Chairman
Wheeler
NOES: None
Motion carried.
TO THE BOARD ON CONCERN OVER A CHEMICAL OPERATION ON DAYTON ROAD, CHICO
Lynn Vanhart, environmental health director, gave a report to the
Page 2.
May 18, '1982
a z-
b'
865
=_=______ __=1'~d~Y~8~ 1982 =_________ -_-_-
- _ _ _ _ -
Board over concerns of a chemical operation on Dayton Road, Chico at this time.
He had forwarded a memo on his opinion. There was a certain amount of risk
involved. In this case, the site is a:aegal operation and conforms to
requirements. They have a,dealer license. Zoning is really the only tool
for this type of operation.
Supervisor Dolan stated it is there legally as an agriculture use.
They will have problems in the future if they were to allow intrepretations
at the Planning Commission level. Had it come before the Board, it could have
been changed.
RELEASE OF POSITION FROM HIRING FREEZE - DEPUTX COUNTY COUNSEL _ CONTINUE TO
MAY 27, 1982 BUDGET SESSION
Discussion was held regarding the release of position from a hiring
frezze for the position of deputy county counsel at this time.
Mike Pyeatt, interim administrative officer, stated there was a
memo from Del Siemsen. The Board could release the position to allow hiring
a deputy county counsel or the alternative would be to contract outside for
-legal services as Counsel feels necessary for a minimum of $55 an hour.
Del Siemsen, county counsel, stated last year when Mr. Battle
left the county, he was the only attorney at the time handling litigation
which required work to be done and could not be sent on_ There were 18
cases and it cost close to between $140,000 and $150,000 to conclude. Some
cases alone have cost $16,000 and are not at the trial level.They do assign
out a number of cases. Of the some 30 cases are just in the discovery stage,
that would be a considerable amount of money. which would be more than
releasing the one position. The cost for an attorney is about $32,000 per
year. Many of the duties his office handles cannot be sent out. They are
to provide legal service to irrigation districts, schools and in house.
Some money is transferred back to the General Fund, but not very much. The
schools did hire an attorney, but occasionally they do call for legal service.
The 30 to 40 cases are split between the three attorneys. Mr. Sims has been
handling the tax cycle, Parks and Recreation Aistrict and others. They
could contract out and then handle all of the departments with the three
attorneys. He would assign the litigation out to someone who could handle
it. Everything cannot be placed on a back burner.
Chairman Wheeler asked that the item be continued to budget session
on May 27th. At that time it would give them a firmer picture of what
direction they will be going.
Mr. Siemsen stated he may have to assign some of the cases. The
longer the delay, it is going to take some time to come up with an attorney.
He stated Mr. Wallace would be taking at least two weeks from the month of
June to reserve duty in the Marines, which he has no control. Litigation
matters must be handled promptly. He would check with Mr. Johansen, but he
felt the county is paying their attorneys $25 an hour.
Chairman Wheeler asked Mr. Siemsen to get the statistics finalized
for the Board.
It was moved by Supervisor Dolan, to release the position of deputy
county counsel on a cost basis.
Motion died for lack of a second.
The matter was continued to Thursday, May 27, 1982, budget session.
Page 3.
May 18; 1982
82-, 866
a'
May 18, 1982 _ _
.~ -. _ - - - - - - - - _ _ ~ a n ~ - - - - _ - - - - -
aAIVE FIR5T READING OF ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO ANIMAL CONTROL CONTRACT
A report from the committee of Supervisors Dolan and Saraceni on
animal control contract was held at this time.
Supervisor Dolan stated they had all received the memo which outlines
the discussion. The first item was licensing costs which was not agreed upon.
A11 of the others were increase in penalty and impounding fees.
Supervisor Saraceni felt the licensing fees were within reason.
It can be decided by the Board. Presently they are $2.50 for spaded and
$5 for unspaded animals. The request was for $10 and $5. A range of fees
was discussed.
Supervisor Dolan stated part of the problem is you have to sell
the licenses. People have to know it is appropriate. People do get the
rabies shots, but not the licenses. It was felt if they reduced the services
they could reduce the costs. Either one they are liable for.
Supervisor Saraceni stated there would be an increase in impounding
fees. It could generate lower costs for. housing. It is,a matter of how the
Board feels. There is still one year left in the contract.
Supervisor Fulton questioned if there had been a careful study done.
There were two animal control people with different proposals.
Mike Pyeatt, interim administrative officer, stated there were no
studies. The county handled the program at one time. Local veterinarians
stated they would not participate in the shot clinics if people were forced
to buy dog licenses. There was a problem.
Chairman Wheeler felt they were working within the existing contract.
She would prefer they not negotiate the raising of fees until the completion
of the existing contract. Maybe they need to go out to bid.
Supervisor Saraceni stated that was basically one of his concerns.
They may be faced with that possibility. xe was not sure they were under
control of that contract.
On motion.of Supervisor Saraceni, seconded by Supervisor Dolan,
to waive the first reading of an ordinance to increase the present fee
schedule to $3.50 and $7.
AYES: Supervisors Dolan and Saraceni NOES: Supervisors Fulton, Moseley and
Chairman Wheeler.
Motion failed.
RECESS: 9:98 a.m_
(RECONVENE: 9:55 a.m.
Chairman Wheeler indicated staff had commented the Animal Control
agreement was $148,060.
It was moved by Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni .
to waive the first reading of an ordinance deleting Section 1, 4-4 and 4-11
deleting the fee schedules for licensing.
Mr. Pyeatt stated the ordinance would have to be rewritten for the
fee change.
Amended motion:
Including Section 1 aid $5 in the first blank and $2.50 in the second.
- age 4.
May 18, 1982
~,
8 2-
867
868
May 18, 1982
Vote on motion:
AYES: Supervisors Dolan. Moseley, and Saraceni
NOES: Supervisor Fulton and Chairman Wheeler
Motion carried.
Mr. Pyeatt read the ordinance into the record at this time.
PUBLIC HEARING: MATT PEARSON, ABANDONMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES EASEMENT, LOT
282, UNIT 3, KELLY RIDGE ESTATES, OROVILLE - CONTINUE TO JUNE 8, 1982
The public hearing for Matt Pearson, abandonment of public utilities
easement, Lot 282, Unit 3, Kelly Ridge Estates, Oroville was not held at this
time to legal requirements necessary to publish. The hearing .was continued
to June 8, 1982 during the May 11, 1982 Board meeting.
ADOPT RESOLUTION 82-8D - PUBLIC HEARING: BUTTE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
WORKS, ABANDONMENT OF ALL EASEMENTS WITHIN PARADISE PINES UNITS 2, 4, 5, 6,
8, 10, 11, 13, 14 AND 15, AND PARADISE PINES COUNTRY CLUB ESTATES UNITS 1, 2,
3 AND 4, EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL DRAINAGE EASEMENTS AND ANY EASEMENTS WHICH
THE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC, PACIFIC TELEPHONE
AND DEL ORO WATER COMPANY WISH TO RETAIN
The public hearing on Butte County Department of Public Works,
abandonment of all easments within Paradise Pines Units 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11,
13, 14 and 15, and Paradise Pines Country Club Estates Units 1, 2, 3 and 4,
excepting therefrom all drainage easements and any easements which the Prop-
erty Owners Association, Pacific Gas and Electric, Pacific Telephone and
Del Oro Water Company wish to retain was held as advertised.
Clay Castleberry, public works director. stated this is the cul-
mination of effort on the part of the Property Owners Association and the
people in Paradise Pines. All requests for exclusion were granted.
Bettye Kircher, planning director, stated this Board and previous
Boards asked for the mass abandonments. It was a combined effort.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: No one.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
869
On motion of Supervisor Fulton, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni and
unanimously carried, Resolution 82-80 abandoning all easements within Paradise
Pines Units 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13. 14 and 15, and Paradise Pines Country
Club Estates Units 1, 2, 3 and 4, excepting therefrom all drainage easements
and any easements which Property Owners Association, Pacific Gasand Electric,
Pacific Telephone and Del Oro Water Company wish to retain and as set out
on Maps A through H was adopted and the Chairman authorized to sign.
REPORT TO THE BOARD ON SETTING HEARING FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR CONCOW
AREA, INCLUDING THE YANKEE HILL, BIG BEND, GARBO GAP, CONCOW LAKE AND JORDAN
HILL AREAS
A report to the Board by Planning Director Bettye Kircher for setting
a hearing for General Plan amendment for Concow area, including the Yankee
Hill, Big Bend, Jarbo Gap, Concow Lake and Jordan Hill areas; and Butte
County Planning Commission initiated General Plan amendments as follows:
a. Unadopting and eliminating from the General Plan the optional
sewer and water element, the recreation element, the people
element, the economy element, and the public facilities
element;
b. Revising the implementation program of the Land Use Element
to allow for geographic policies by appendices or as a supple-
ment, provide consistency with the Housing Element on planning
areas, and to clarify map scale;
Page 5.
May 18; 1982
8 2-
870
871
May 18, 1982 _______
~ c. Revising the Land Use Element to delete references to wildlife
and vegetation maps.
aas held at this time.
Mrs. Kircher, planning director,. reported they have two General Plan
amendments which could be set for hearing at this time. She would like them
to hold them until they have completed the Concow area. It would be cost
affective. She recommended that in the near future the county code and
3overnment code changes that are requested by the state law be changed.
Some are not mandated. Some show the General Plan as it presently exists.
The matter was continued until the Concow area zoning comes out
of Planning Commission level. At that time a public hearing date will be
set.
REPORT FROB1 PLANNING ON REVIEW OF REVISED APPLICATION FORMS - REFERRED TO
LAND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
A report to the Board from the Planning Department relative to
review of revised application forms held at this time.
Bettye Kircher, planning director, stated she had requested
direction some time back on composition of application forms. She would
request the documents be referred to Land Aevelopment Committee. The Planning
Commission felt it was a good move.
Referred to Land Development Committee for review of forms.
PUBLIC HEARING: JOHN D. DRAKE AND HOWARD ISOM, REZONE (ITEM ON WHICH AN
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT WAS PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED) FROM "A-2" (GENERAL)
AND "S-H" (SCENIC HIGHWAY) TO "PA-C" (PLANNED AREA CLUSTER) TO ALLOW A
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF 109 PARCELS OF 1/2 TO 3 ACRES EACH AND A COMMON
OPEN SPACE WITH PUBLIC FACILITIES TO BE MAINTAINED BY A HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
ON APPROXIMATELY 1,050 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 32 AND
HUMBOLDT ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 5 MILES NORTHEAST OF CHICO, IDENTIFIED AS
AP 46-71-17, 46-71-18 (PORTION), 46-35-4 AND 46-35-23- CONTINUE JUNE 8, 1982
The public hearing on John D. Brake and Howard Isom, rezone (item
on which an environmental impact report was previously certified) from "A-2"
(general) and "S-H" (scenic highway} to "PA-C" (planned area cluster) to
allow a residential development of 109 parcels of 1/2 to 3 acres each and a
common open space with public facilities to be maintained by a homeowners
association on approximately 1,050 acres located on the east side of State
Highway 32 and Humboldt Road, approximately 5 miles northeast o£ Chico,
identified as AP 46-71-17, 46-71-18 (portion),,. 46-35-4 and 46--35-23 was
held as continued.
Bettye Kircher, planning director, indicated a map posted on the
board regarding the "PA-C", they have received copies of the map, impact
report which was previously certified with a specific plan. They have formed
a motion which is dated May 13th. If there was additional information, she
would request a continuance in order for staff to respond. There was a
meeting in Rancho Cordova with the~Fish-and Game. They had received a copy
of the modified cluster plan. -They felt the modified plan left the open space.
They have shoved the cluster into one corner. There is 30 acres per dwelling
unit. Water Quality Control does not have final approval. Mrs. Kircher
stated Concern 20 was a recommendation of staff into the development for a
covenent. It has been approved by LAFCo for assessment districts of some
type.
Supervisor Fulton voiced his concerns regarding assessment districts,
sheriff's responsibilities and a need for a fire station. Another concern is
drainage, where does it go.
Page 6.
May 18 ,' 1982
8 2-
~ ''
* ~t
May 18, 1982
Hearing open-to the public. Appearing:
1. Jere Bolster, planning administrator, Drake Homes, indicated
there was approval for a specific plan, county service area and Fish and
Game permission to build a bridge. There are changing the zoning from "A-2"
which is no zone. The zoning is not a guarantee of other special needs.
Conditions are in the speci€ic plan. Discussion .was held about €orming
what would be up to 800 acres in open space. An easement would be given to
that trust. They would continue to pursue the zoning of "PA-C" as it covered
the individual lots. They must obtain further permits from Fish and Game.
The developer has to obtain waste disposal permits, he does not have Board
approval for them. If he does not achieve them ,. he does not have a project.
There are two or three steps to go through. Sewage will be controlled by
Regulatory Quality Control. The hearings will be public and have asked that
they be held in Chico. Should they receive a permit it would include a
series o€ monitoring. It would not degrade water quality. The county service
area would pay for itself, then it would go to property owners. They are
in agreement with 30 plus conditions.
2. Pat Burke, Stilson Canyon, stated he had been before the Board
many times. They are still concerned about the EIR mitigation measures.
They are not convinced they will live in a healthy and safety environment.
He requested Supervisor Wheeler's support that there would be a fire station.
There are concerns about sewage disposal. They are looking to her for an
answer.
3. Margaret Revius, Stilson. Canyon, stated her property backs up
to the creek. She was concerned about open ponds. There is concern about
drainage. Most residents have been unable to attend the meetings. She would
like to see a meeting in the evening.
4. Yoland GVestcott, Stilson Canyon, physician, stated she had
experience in Irvine area with open treatment plants. They were away from
the residences. It was good control and irrigation so people would be more
comfortable.
5. Harry Cozad, Chico 2000, was before the Board previous on this
project. He was asking for consideration from a health and fiscal point of
view. There are three in support on the Board. He has asked them on numerous
occasions to look into different planning matters. He asked them to look at
health, water quality and sewage. They have been approved without adequately
addressing the issues. This is leap frog developing. Tt is in a high fire
hazard zone. The county has a record deficit ,because of allowing develop-
ment in the rural areas. Planning has been very inadequate. This project
will not pay for itself. He is concerned about response time. He does not
feel they have adequate knowledge to approve the project. Many questions
have not been answered by residents and interested individuals. He questioned
what happened if there was pond seepage. How far were the holding tanks
from the creek. Would the spayed liquid. affluent go back into the creek.
Will it get into the water table. What is the volumne of capacity for-the
pond. How long can they spray the liquid up the slopes before it seeps
down through the strata. There is a steep area where they have an of€luent
drop. There would be contamination of well water. There is no place to
legally drop septage waste.
6. Richard Redman, concerned citizen, felt the rural setting would
be destroyed. It will clear the way for two more projects above the proposed
one. This would create a new community. It would be a reduction in fire
and police protection services. There would be an impact. Road maintenance
in the county is poor at best. It is not fiscally responsible for the county.
Page 7.
May 18; 1982
8 2-
M a y_ 18 ,=1, 4 8~ _ _ _ _ _ _
7. Rogex Cole, Chico, stated it is the local governments right to
protect the citizens. This project would be leap frogging and degrading.
Yolo and Lassen County da not allow development outside the urban areas.
He spoke to page 19 and 24 of the EIR as it relates to erosion. He was
concerned about the high chapperel. The 1956 fire moved with rapid speed.
He was concerned about wood roofs. There would be an abundance of mosquitoes.
what happens to the quality of education for the children. Who will share
the cost. He urged them to reject the proposal. He lives in Upper Stilson
Canyon. He has no lawn and is on septic tank system. His tap water comes
from the creek. He lives on 40 acres.
8. Ellen Sander, Little Chico Creek Canyon, was concerned about
the cummulative effects. The EIR the Board approved did not answer concerns.
He felt this was urban development. It does not address the eco system.
She was concerned about the deer herd. There would be noise, fire hazards
exist. The Land Use Element states there will be no development if there is
not adequate fire protection. chapperel is designed to burn at least once
every three years.
Chairman Wheeler stated she understood there was to be a county
fire department burn in the area. In the Doe Mill area this summer. That
would be on state and federal lands.
9. John Luvaas, Chico, speaking as an individual, stated the have
the opportunity to act or continue the policy of approving projects at any
time or place_ He was concerned about their decision in the Gridley area.
He felt this project was related to the Gridley area decision. It is putting
the county into bankruptcy. who was to pay for transportation. There is no
need for the project economically. There would be an increase of 109 homes.
Dan Hays has filed for three projects above this proposal. They are presently
talking of slashing the buget and cutting services. They have already approved
the specific plan. There are three members who are voters for developers.
Because of Proposition 13 there is a one percent limit on taxes to provide
for services. They have been asked for years to not approve leap frogging.
The costs of schools was not considered. Maintenance on Highway 32 was not
considered. There has been no discussion on the accumulative effects if
the other projects are approved. They will destroy the deer herds. County
government has been advocates of responsibility to the state. If the state
does not furnish funds, tell the state no. The General Plan prohibits this
type of development. There are going there own rules. It states develop-
ment next to town. They are to preserve the land. They should make a
decision today. Much more information would be needed before they could
legally and rationally approve the project. if the decision is delayed until
after the June 8th election, it will be obvious because of politics.
Supervisor Saraceni stated Mr. Luvaas kept citing things out of
the General Plan, they are one way. He wanted to talk about people living
there by choice. He felt they have based their decisions on wishes of the
property owners. He would like to see the documentation which Mr. Luvaas
is talking about. Where was he getting the information for his study.
10. Kelly Meagher, 98 Honeyrun Road, Butte Creek Canyon, was a
veteran of the condominium referendum. Mr. Meagher questioned if Mr. Bolster
would speak regarding open space and land districts. Was a deed granted.
Mrs. Kircher indicated county staff is not aware of any such
Mr. Meagher indicated he understood a deed was necessary to provide
is land trust so people who live on the area have control. He did not feel
e project could move forward without this document. It was a condition of
Page e.
b5ay 18, 1982
8 2-
V
May 18, 1982 _
pproval. He was concerned about the deer herd. He felt the numerous projects
Which are planned would have an economical impact. It was encouraging to know
.he Board members had walked the area project. There are concerns with the
:IR. To open up the land would cause full scale development. Building should
occur close to the urban area. There will be fiscal impacts on public services.
Manning staff attempted to put together a cost review analysis and he felt
.t was poor. He felt this project would be leap frogging. He was concerned
regarding the level of services, public safety and human lives were being
:ndangered. There would be fiscal impacts. What would the accumulative
impact be. The cost review analysis does not meet CEQA guidelines. It
vas done at the request of Supervisor Fulton. There was no adequate data
available.
The matter was continued to later in the day.
872
873
HEARING: CLOSED - DAN HAYS PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION REGARDING ENVIRON-
yENTAL IP4PACT AND REZONE FROM "A-2" (GENERAL) AND "A-40" (AGRICULTURE - 40
ACRE PARCELS) TO "M-1" (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL), PROPERTY; LOCATED ON BOTH SIDES
DF STATE HIGHWAY 99 AT THE DURHAM-OROVILLE HIGHWAY PENTZ ROAD INTERCHANGE,
IDENTIFIED AS AP 40-12-22, 23 AND 24, SOUTHEAST OF CHICO,- CONTINUE TO
MAY 25, 1982
The closed hearing on Dan Hays proposed negative declaration
regarding environmental impact and rezone from "A-2" (general) and "A-40"
(agriculture - 40 acre parcels) to "M-1" (light industrial), property
located on both sides of State Highway 99 at the Durham-Oroville Highway
Pentz Road interchange, identified as AP 40-12-22, 23 and 24, southeast of
Chico was continued to May 25, 1982 at the request of applicant.
RECESS: The Board recessed at 11:46 a.m. to hold a closed hearing on
General Assistance fair hearing, Case No. 04-95-46216. Copy of
minutes are in a vault in the Clerk's office.
RECONVENE: 1:45'p.m. ._
PUBLIC HEARING: JOHN D. DRAKE AND HOWARD ISOM, REZONE (ITEM ON WHICH AN
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT WAS PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED) FROM "A-2" {GENERAL)
AND "S-H" (SCENIC HIGHWAY) TO "PA-C" (PLANNED AREA CLUSTER) TO ALLOW A
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF 109 PARCELS OF 1/2 TO 3 ACRES EACH AND A COMMON
OPEN SPACE WITH PUBLIC FACILITIES TO BE MAINTAINED BY A HOMEOWNERS ASSOC-
IATION ON APPROXIMATELY 1,050 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY
32 AND HUMBOLDT ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 5 MILES NORTHEAST OF CHICO, IDENTIFIED AS
AP 46-71-17, 46-71-18 (PORTION), 46-35-4 AND 46-35-23 - CONTINUE TO JUNE 8, 1982
The public hearing on John D. Drake and Howard Isom, rezone (item
on which an environmental impact report was previously certified} from "A-2"
(general) and "S-H" (scenic highway) to "PA-C" (planned area cluster) to allow
a residential development of 109 parcels of 1/2 to 3 acres each and a common
open space with public facilities to be maintained by a Homeowners assoc-
iation on approximately 1,050 acres located on the east side of State Highway
32 and Humboldt Road, approximately S miles northeast of Chico, identified as
AP 46-71-17, 46-71-18 (portion), 46-35-4 and 46-35-23 was held as continued
from earlier in the meeting.
11. Jere Bolster, Chico. stated the buildings will have fire
retardent roofs and exteriors. There would be clearing of vegetation. A
fire station will be built in the Doe Mill area. They are aware a fire
could take over the whole canyon quite quickly. The plans will be more
exact before the tentative parcel map comes before them. Public hearings
will be held on the sewage disposal system. The Board has not approved a
system. It cannot be accomplished until there is approval of the Water
Quality Board. Storm drainage is as it exists on the property today. The
EIR addresses problems which would not cause erosion. The project can be
Page 9-
May 18, 1982
May 18, 1982
82- amended. The people down stream from the project are there concern. He would
~ like the Board to continue the matter for two weeks. They would like to
include in the report discussion of accumulative effects of other projects in
the area.
12. Kelly Meagher, Chico, questioned the deed that involves the
open space area. He was concerned about the relationship of other projects
to this one. At the May 6th hearing LAFCo indicated a county service area
would be formed for this project for sewage disposal.
13. Jere Bolster, Chico, stated the dots on the map are existing
roads, they will install no roads offsite. They are dirt roads and will be
scraped once a year. The dry grass will be cut. The deed to the ranch is
something which the county has suggest be done. The developers have agreed
to do this. The outside lots would be held as permanent open space. A
county service area has been formed for maintenance of the sewage disposal
in the area. For them to provide the service to a larger area, the service
area would need to be enlarged.
14. John Luvaas, Chico, stated there is no information to indicate
the accumulative effects of other projects. There have been no details of
the sewage project for the property owners in the area. It was the respon-
sibility of the Board to get the information they need, they should have had
*** it long ago. The property could have been placed in a land trust, then the
people would know the intent.
Supervisor Dolan stated this was a "PA-C" zone on approved specific
plan. They did not know of the other projects in the area until recently.
They must follow the law.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
Chairman Wheeler stated it was important to deal with specific
projects and zoning in the area. The economic analysis was prepared for the
Board by staff. Some have indicated it is irrelevant, but it was prepared.
She is pleased everyone is aware of the budget deficit. They are not in
deficit spending, the budget must be balanced by law. The comparison of
Y olo and Lassen Counties was unfair. This project has been approved economic-
ally by Planning staff. She represents and is familar with the area. It is
presently zoned "A-2". Chairman Wheeler read the definition of "A-2" zoning
at this time. There is no controls if there is open zoning. The "PA-C" zone
is very restrictive. The area is beautiful. There has been a great deal of
concern from the applicant, staff and people in the area. Chairman Wheeler
read into the record a letter from Chico 2000~dated P4ay 1982. She stated
that California has one of the most regulated map act in the country. They
are protecting this fragile area.
Supervisor Fulton felt once they receive the accumulative effects
they can speak to sewage and the other projects. He was concerned about the
water problems, wells and the data in the impact report. He questioned the
income of $100,000 of residents in the area. There are drainage and solid
Ovate problems to be addressed.
Mrs. Kircher stated in the past the Board has allowed staff several
', weeks to respond to comments made at hearings.
Supervisor Dolan stated they have approved the specific plan. The
issue now is the zoning. There is still concerns of traffic.
Supervisor Moseley stated she appreciated staffs willingness to
bring the issues back.
Page 10.
May 18; 1982
82-
~'
874
875
_ - - May 18, 1982 - _
Supervisor Saraceni had no problem spending more time if it was
necessary to accomplish the effects. He did not feel the person coming in
for the project should address ali of the accumulative effects.
Continued to 3une 8, 1982 as a closed hearing. Send it back to
staff to deal with the applicant and address the accumulative effects for
final disposition.
Supervisor Dolan stated they do have an approved project. They
will reconsider the mitigated measures and such to points to that. They
have approved what is there. Now they must address density and fire pro-
tection.
APPEARANCES: EDWIN HUNT
Edwin Hunt, representing five Upper Ridge groups, thanked Mr.
Castleberry and Mr. Cheff and the Planning Department for the action on
the abandonments. Mr. Hunt indicated the residents are concerned about the
located of a Sheriff's substation in the Upper Ridge. He felt with the
budget crunch, it would be an economic move.
CONSIDERATION OF RELOCATING PUBLIC WORKS' TRAILER TO PARADISE PINES TO
FUNCTION AS SHERIFF'S SUBSTATION - MOTION FAILS - MATTER TO BE STUDIED
FURTHER
Consideration of relocating Public Works' trailer to Paradise Pines
to function as Sheriff's Substation was held at this time:
Supervisor Fulton indicated several weeks ago he found an office
trailer in Public Works surplus property. He would like it moved to the
Upper Ridge by Fire Station No. 33. Former Supervisor Lemke had planned
this. It could be used by deputies to change clothes and write reports.
A fiscal analysis completed by Administrative staff indicated a cost of
$2,000. He felt he could obtain volunteers to move and located the trailer.
It was moved by Supervisor Fulton, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler
that Supervisor Fulton be allowed to over see the conveyance of a particular
trailer to Station 33 in Paradise Pines to be utilized by the Sheriff's
Department.
Supervisor Dolan felt unless there was an elimination of the cost
to off set the on going costs such as heating, lights and telephone, it will
be additional costs. She understands the concerns of the Upper Ridge. There
are proposals to close substations in Gridley and Chico.
Supervisor Saraceni indicated he would like to see the Sheriff's
budget prior to making this decision.
Bernard Knapp, Paradise, stated he had looked at the trailer being
discussed, he is aware of four or five trailers which were in better condition.
He felt it was not in good condition. At present the deputies are spending
time in the city to do there work by driving out of the city. Most of the
work is in the Upper Ridge.
Vote on motion:
AYES: Supervisor Fulton
NOES: Supervisors Dolan. Moseley, Saraceni and Chairman Wheeler
Motion failed.
Mike Pyeatt, interim administrative officer, indicated they would
look into the matter further. Supervisor Fulton could look at it further.
Page 11.
May 18; 1982
82- 87b
b'
877
878
879
49ay-18,-1982 ___________________
1PPEARANCES: PATRICK PORGANS
Patrick Porgans, research specialist, Chico, stated he had a water
report he had paid for himself. He would present two copies to the Board.
ie has been studying water for ten years. After the Board has reviewed the
report he would like to come back and discuss it in the near future.
Chairman wheeler indicated they would hold a public discussion.
APPEARANCES: GARY YOUNGER
Gary Younger, stated he and Bernard Knapp were running for Sheriff.
there were concers of the department and whats was going to be considered.
Chairman Wheeler indicated they would not be considering any budget
at this time. They would take the information under submission and consider
it at budget session on May 27, 1982 at 1:30 p.m.
APPEARANCES: L. G9. LORD
L. W. Lord, Dayton Road, Chico, presented a booklet of data he
and his wife had accumulated regarding the selling of fertilizer in an
agriculture zone. Mrs. Lord read from the report for the Board members.
The matter was submitted to Planning Department to see if there
was a zoning issue. They are within the law. The matter was taken under
submission.
ADOPT RESOLUTION 82-81 - HONORING RAY COBBLER, PUBLIC WORKS
Rod Weyman,.BCEA representative, stated a former Butte County
employee of approximately 27 years had recently passed away. He was a
dedicated worker and liked by everyone. He would like the Board to adopt
a resolution.
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and unanimously carried, Resolution 82-81 in honor of Ray Cobbler a former
Public Works employee for 27 years was adopted and the Chairman authorized
to sign.
RECESS: 3:24 p.m.
RECONVENE: 3:37 p.m.
880 ADOPT ORDINANCE 2285 - BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, GRIDLEY-BIGGS AREA
', REZONE
Consideration of adoption of an ordinance on the Butte County
Planning Commission, Gridley-Biggs area rezone. (item on which the environmental
impact report has previously been certified) in order to bring the zoning-into
consistency with the adopted General Plan for that area as required by state
law. The area under consideration contains approximately 42 square miles of
publicly and privately owned unincorporated land bounded generally by Highway
162 on the north, the Feather River on the east, the Butte County line on the
south, and a line extending south from the Richvale-South Highway on the west,
and including the unincorporated areas surrounding Gridley and Biggs was
held at this time.
Chairman Wheeler indicated there was concerns from residents in
id ley over the area around the Sphere of Influence of City of Gridley.
Supervisor Moseley stated Mr. Tanimota had a petition he wanted to
sent. This would cause complications in the county. There will be a
flirt if they open the hearing. They had indicated earlier the hearing
closed.
Chairman Wheeler indicated they were just going to allow him to
t a document. 'Pa$e 12c
May 18, 1982
82-
a'
- - - Maw 18 , 7.982 = _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ -- _ _ _ _ _ -
Supervisor Moseley stated she understood they were names from people
n the 42 mile area. There have been numerous hearings held. People asking
zow should make requests individually for zone changes. She has problems with
>pening the hearing.
Petitions from Gridley residents presented to the Clerk at this
rime.
Chairman Wheeler stated she would consider holding this until such
time and take more testimony. The issue is underlying factors. There is a
passive amount of "A-2" zoning. It could create a lot of problems in agriculture
Supervisor Moseley indicated this is not going to stop anything.
It is required by law that they update the zone every so many years.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing:
***~
1. Gene Tanimoto, Gridley. stated he was in favor of agriculture
land. This would be out of the "A-40" zoning. He was referring to the
area east of Highway 99E and south of Gridley. The "A-4Q" zoning will
prevent housing development from occurring.
Supervisor Dolan stated they received imput from City of Gridley
for special clause for kiwi on five acres. Where is the balance for the
five acres. There was to be a tool of a use permit.
Supervisor Moseley indicated this was when people in the Manzanita
area came in. They wanted five acres for special crops. When it was sent
back to Planning they changed it to ten acres.
Mr. Tanimoto felt they were placing a burden on people living in
these areas. Tt would stop and hinder those in the "A-40" zone. It will be
impossible to break up 40 acres. The people in Gridley are asking for an
extension of the hearing.
Supervisor Moseley stated she represented that area. There has
been considerable time spent on this area. She has a motion today to accept
the proposal.
Steve Streeter, planning department, stated it would have to go
back to the Planning Commission. Tt was not an area of conflict. Tt would
delay it for four to five months. Tt involves about 42 square miles.
Mr. Tanimoto stated they are requesting a delay. They are not
talking about down zoning it.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
'and carried, the EIR for Gridley-Biggs area was previous7.y certified by the
~BOard of Supervisors on April 21, 1981, decribing the various significant
impacts and mitigation measures as part of approval of the General Plan
Amendment for the Gridley-Biggs area in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act, the State EIR Guidelines and the Butte County
Enviornmental Review Guidelines; the final environmental impact report having
been reviewed and considered the following findings were made:
1. Development which is anticipated to occur within the project area in
compliance with the zoning district and General Plan criteria may have a
significant effect on the environment in the areas of: surface drainage
accommodation, potential loss of riparian woodland, traffic noise exposure,
Page 13.
May 18,• 1982
8 2-
b
May 18, 1982
agricultural/residential interface conflicts, potential loss of agriculture
land, traffic increases and congestion, energy consumption, and potential
loss of archaeological sites. Many, but not all, of the above-listed
impacts can be mitigated on a project-by-project basis, or in connection
with community improvement projects which may be undertaken in the future
with public or private funding. The likelihood of such mitigation is too
speculative for evaluation at this time.
with the exception of the "No project" alternative, the alternative listed
on Page 41 of the EIR have been incorporated into the current proposal
where such incorporation has been found consistent with community desires
for rezoning specific areas and General Plan goals and policies.
Specific findings with regard to the alternatives are as follows:
a. Alternative l - No Project. The "No project" alternative can be divided
into two categories, the first being no building or development within
the project area whatsoever, and the second being simply to retain the
existing zoning districts. The first of these is being rejected
because it is not politically feasible or realistic or consistent
with the desires of the community. Zoning tools to implement this
alternative are not likely to be adopted. Leaving the zoning districts
as they are is being rejected because the proposed zoning districts
more accurately reflect community goals and the policies of the
General Plan.
b. Alternative 2 - Modify Proposed Land Use Categories. This alternative
was applicable far the General Plan Amendment. Modifications were
implemented in portions of the project area.
c. Alternative 3 - Relocate Land Use and Zoning Boundaries. Several
locations within the project area have been modified from the original
zoning proposal. Approximately 140 acres adjacent to the City o€
Siggs are proposed for "R-1" and "R-3" rather than the originally
proposed "SR-1".
Approximately 210 acres near the City of Gridley have been changed
from "SR-1" to "A-5", and approximately 370 acres have been changed
from "A-S" to "SR-1", resulting in a 160 acre increase in the amount
of "SR-1". Also near Gridley, 175 acres have been changed from "A-5"
to "A-10", and 660 acres in the Manzanita District have been modified
from "A-40" to "A-10". These changes were made to reflect recent
development and the desires of residents in the subject areas; and,
Although there may be a significant adverse environmental effects
esulting from development which would be allowed pursuant to approval of this
roject, there are overriding considerations which justify project approval.
hese overriding consideration include:
1. The Butte County General Plan has been amended for the subject area and
State Iaw requires that zoning districts be established which conform to
the General Plan designations. This project is a part of an ongoing process
to phase out "A=2" zoning.
2. The zoning districts being established represent an improvement over
present zoning districts for the area in that they were fomulated with the
help of citizen input to more effectively implement the goals and object-
. fives of the Butte County General Plan.
The zoning districts being established are potentially Less environmentally
damaging at full buildout than the zoning districts which previously were
Page 14.
May 18, 1982
82-
b'
May_18, 1982 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
in effect for the area, while still providing room for community expansion.
4. The zoning districts under consideration provide areas for rural homesites
on large parcels which will offer area residents the opportunity to offset
food and energy resource demand by becoming partially self-sufficient
through producing on the premises a portion of their food and energy
needs; and addendum from memo dated May 18, 1982 from Planning Department
as follows:
Area 1: "A-5" zoning is appropriate since the predominant parcel size
are less than 5 acres in size with parcels that axe 10 acres or larger,
thus available for further division. "A-20" zoning would not make a
great differecne in the agricultural viability of Area 1.
Area 2: "SR-1" zoning is appropriate since the predominant parcel size
is 1 acre or less in size. The 1/2 mile, more or less, distance from the
city limits would not preclude annexation of intervening large parcels
proposed for "A-5" zoning. "A-5" zoning would preclude further land
division, but the existing parcels would represent infilling of an area
which currently is not conducive to commercial agricultural operations.
Area 3: "A-5" zoning is appropriate for the western half of Area 3. The
eastern half of Area 3 has existing small parcels (down to 1/3 acre)
around the periphery, thus compromising the viability of commercial
agricultural operations. For these reasons, "SR-1" zoning is deemed
more appropriate than "A-5" iri the eastern half.
Area 4: Area 4A, proposed for "SR-1" zoning, is designated Low Density
Residential by the Butte County General Plan; a zone larger than a 1 acre
zone is not listed as a consistent zone.. For that reason, "A-5" zoning
is not considered appropriate for this parcel.
Area 4B & C: "SR--1" zoning is appropriate rather than "A-5" or "M-2"
due to the existing predominant parcel size, generally less than 2 acres,
and the fact that "M-2" (heavy industrial) zoning is not appropriate
immediately adjacent to or on existing residential properties.
Area 5: "A-5" zoning is appropriate for the eastern half of Area 5. "SR-1
zoning is appropriate, rather than "A-5", for the western half since it
is designated Low Density Residential by the General Plan; a zone larger
than a 1 acre zone is not listed as a consistent zone.
Area 6: "A-10" is appropriate for the northeast portion of Area 6. How-
ever, the remaining portion of Area 6 is predominantly less than 10 acre
parcels. For that reason "A-10" zoning was not considered appropriate,
"A-5" zoning is proposed.
Area 7: "SR-1" zoning would be consistent with the current parcel sizes.
The configuration of the area and its physical constraints, such as a
large/pond drainage area west of the railroad track, would limit potential
land divisions. Since the majority of the parcels are 3 acres or less
in size, "A-5" zoning was not deemed appropriate.
Area 8: "AR-MH-1" zoning is proposed to recognize the predominant parcel
size; most of the parcels are less than 3 acres in size. For that reason,
"A-5" zoning was not considered appropriate.
Area 9: "SR-1" zoning was agreed upon by both the City of Gridley and
the County of Butte as being consistent with existing parcels.
Area 30: "SR-1" zoning was proposed since the predominant parcel size is
Page 15.
May 18 ,' 1982
82-
3'
881
882
883
°_ ° _____ =_= May=1$.. ~28~==_..'_____ _____ _____
2 acres or less. For that reason, "A-5" zoning was not deemed appropriate.
Only 3 parcels are 5 acres.or more in size.
Area 11: "A-10" zoning was agreed upon by both the City of Gridley and
the County of Butte as being consistent with the underlying subdivision
for the entire area.
Area 12: "M-2" zoning was proposed though "M--1" zoning reflected the
earlier interim zoning. Heavy industrial use is represented by the rice
drying operation.
Area 13: "A-5" zoning is considered consistent with the physical con-
straints of the property involved.. "AR-MH-1" and, "SR-1" zoning would
require additional study to warrant parcel sizes of down to 1 acre.
Area 14: "SR-1" zoning is proposed. This represents enlarging the allowed
parcel size from what would have been allowed under the existing "A-R"
(agricultural-residential) zoning (1/5 acre under "A-R" and 1 acre under
"SR-1" zoning". "A-R" zoning would have allowed multi-family residential
uses with a use permit. "A-5" zoning would represent a drastic down-
zoning from the existing "A-R" zoning (1/5 acre to S acres).
Having made the above findings for the Gridley-Biggs rezone, Ordinance
2285 establishing the zoning districts for the Gridley-Biggs was adopted and
the Chairman authorized to sign.
AYES: Supervisors Moseley, Saraceni and Chairman Wheeler
NOES: Supervisors Dolan and Fulton
SUPERVISOR MOSELEY ABSENT AT THIS TIME
SALARY ORDINANCE AMENDMENT DELETING THE EXISTING VETERANS' SERVICE OFFICER
AND REPRESENTATIVE POSITIONS AND CREATES A NEW VETERANS' SERVICE OFFICE
POSITION AT RANGE 14.0 - CONTINUE TO MAY 25, 1982
Continued to May 25, 1982 consideration of a salary ordinance
amendment deleting the existing Veterans` Service Officer and Representative
positions and creates a new Veterans' Service Officer position at range 14.0.
SALARY ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ELIMINATING THREE ELIGIBILITY WORKER POSITIONS IN
WELFARE DEPARTMENT - CONTINUE TO LATER IN THE MEETING
Continued to later in the meeting the salary ordinance amendment
eliminating three"eligibility worker positions in the Welfare Department.
SUPERVISOR MOSELEY PRESENT AT THIS TIME
APPROVE BOARD COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS
Time spent discussing the various Board committee assignaments.
Changes were made in the original recommendations.
On motion of Supervisor Fulton, seconded by Supervisor Dolan and
unanimously carried, the Board committee assignments were approved as
corrected during discussion as follows:
1. Butte County Health Planning Council - Supervisor Moseley
2. Local Agency Formation Commission - Supervisors Dolan and Saraceni,
regular members; Supervisor Fulton, alternate
3. Northern California Emergency Service Technical Advisory Committee -
Supervisor Wheeler, organization and management
4. Civil Disaster Council - Supervisors Moseley and Wheeler
5. Combined Employment and Training Advisory Council - Supervisor Dolan
Page 16.
May 18; 1982
82-
~'.
May18~ 1982 ____________ ____~
~.~ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - T -
6. Data Processing Executive Committee - Supervisors Fulton and Wheeler
7. Historical Advisory Committee -- Supervisor Moseley
8. Intercity Transit Committee -- Supervisor. Dolan
9. Law Library Trustees - Supervisor Saraceni
10. Mental Health Advisory Board - Supervisor Dolan
11. Butte County Council for Senior Citizens - Supervisor Fulton
12. Solid Waste Review Committee - Supervisors Dolan and Wheeler
13. Fish and Game Commission - Supervisor Saraceni
4. CSAC - Supervisor [Vheeler, director; Supervisor Dolan, alternate
5. NCCSA - Supervisor wheeler, president; Supervisor Saraceni, director;
Supervisor Moseley, alternate
6. Air Pollution Coordinating Council - Supervisor Moseley
7. Inter-County Coordination Committee for the Inter-Governmental Board on
EDP - Supervisor Wheeler
18. National Guard Commission - Supervisor Saraceni
19. Grand Jury Audit Commission - Supervisors Dolan and Fulton
20. NCCSA Committees •-
water and Agriculture - Supervisor Wheeler
Health and Welfare - Supervisor Moseley
Public Works and Transportation - Supervisor Fulton
Public Lands and Planning - vacant
Government Operations - Supervisor Saraceni
1. Health Manpower Planning Council - Supervisor Moseley
22. Chico Airport Committee -- Supervisors Wheeler and Dolan
3. Central Valley Flood Control Association - Supervisor Dolan
4. Chico Sewer Facilities - Supervisors wheeler and Dolan
5. Northern California Emergency Medical Care Council - Supervisor Saraceni,
member; Supervisor Moseley, alternate
6. Timber Yield Tax Committee - Supervisors Wheeler and Saraceni
7. CSAC Committees -
Revenue and Taxation Committee - Supervisor Saraceni
Transportation and Public works - Supervisor Fulton
Energy - Supervisor Dolan
Resources - Supervisor ~4heeler
Health and Welfare - Supervisor Moseley
3. Sacramento Valley Air Basin Coordinating Council - Supervisor Moseley,
regular member; Supervisor Dolan, alternate
a. Employment of the Handicapped - Supervisor Moseley
Page 17.
May 18, 1982
8 2-
~'
'._____ _-=====MaY=7,$._1382______________ _____
30. Land Development Process Reorganization - Supervisors Saraceni and Fulton
31. Solar Energy Committee - Supervisor Dolan
32. Energy Conservation Committee - Supervisor Dolan
33. Land Use Committee for the Chico Urban Area -- Supervisors Dolan and Wheeler
34. Chico Urban Area Transit System Advisory Committee - Supervisors Dolan
and Wheeler
35. Building Committee on Libraries - Supervisors Wheeler and Dolan
36. CSAC Excess Insurance Authority - Supervisor Saraceni
37. Area Agency on Aging - Supervisor Moseley
38. Biggs Swimming Pool District, CSA 31 - Supervisor Moseley
39. Gridley Swimming 1'001 District, CSA 34 - Supervisor.Moseley
40. Public Defender Advisory Committee -- Supervisor Dolan
884
41. CSAC -- Butte Co. Director - remove from list
42. Butte County Water Representative - Supervisors Wheeler and Fulton
43. Policy Committee (agenda) - Supervisor Fulton
ADDITIONAL MATTERS PRESENTED BY BOARD MEMBERS
Chairman Wheeler advised she had read a news article about Barry
Myers application on the claim for the refund of $4 relative to the small
claims advisor. She thought there was a misunderstanding as far as the
Board's consideration in dealing with the small claims advisor. Supervisor
Dolan had said the Board was in violation of the law.
Chairman Wheeler stated she did not feel they were in violation
of the law. She went on record as not being the responsible agency for
collecting the fees. The Board did not vote to continue to collect these
fees from people. She thought the responsibility was with the courts and
the Board should be writing them a letter. The responsible agency is not
the Board, it is the courts because they are the clerk designated to collect
the fees.
Mike Pyeatt, interim administrative officer, advised that the
legislation directed the court to collect that fee. The legislation made
it permissible for the Board to establish a small claims advisory. Tn talking
with Counsel, the fees and advisor are not necessarily tied together.
Supervisor Dolan disagreed. The fee and implementation of the
small claims advisor were done with the same piece of legislation. Both are
dealt with under subparagraphs a and b.
Mr. Pyeatt advised the Board he was planning on getting in touch
with the court since the information being handed out is erroneous as it
indicates a small claim advisor is available.
Supervisor Fulton asked whether the Solyd could tell the court not
to collect the fee.
Chairman Wheeler instructed the Administrative Office to contact
Page 18.
May 18 ,' 1982
B 2-
3'
- - - -May 18 , 1982 - - - - - -
the courts for a response back to the Board on May 25, 1982.
the fee.
Mr. Pyeatt stated that the section says the court shall collect
Chairman Wheeler directed the Administrative Office to place this
matter on the agenda for May 25, 1982. Her interpretation was the Board was
not the responsible agency for collecting the fees .and implementation of the
program when the Board denied the program.
DISCUSSION: SALARY ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO ELIMINATE THREE ELGIBILITY WORKER
POSITIONS IN THE WELk'ARE DEPARTMENT
Discussion regarding the salary ordinance amendment to eliminate
three elgibility worker positions in the Welfare Department held at this time.
885
Supervisor Dolan indicated she could vote for the waiving of the
reading of the ordinance, but not on the adoption. The motion could be split.
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and unanimously carried, the seconded reading of the salary. ordinance amend-
ment which eliminates three eligibility worker positions in the Welfare
Department was waived.
Rod Weyand, BCEA, spoke regarding the proposed action on elimination
of the eligibility worker positions. He had listened to the tapes and dis-
cussed this matter with Mr. Robinson. He did not think Mr. Robinson had
gotten the point across to the Board. They are already in the red. Through
the years, Butte County has prided itself in Welfare for one of the lowest
error rates in the State of California. The elgibility workers job is to keep
the people who are not entitled to receive welfare from doing so. Since the
positions came open, well beyond the 25-day limit, the county has gone from one
of the lowerest error rates to over 3.75, and are now at 4.75. The county is
now at the $90,000 level and going into the $180,000 level. According to
the MOU, the Board must either fill or defunct these positions. The MOU
also stated that the county can defunct the positions only permanently. Mr.
Robinson did not intend for the positions to be lost this year or next year.
This is a savings to the county of $9,000 i^ discretionary money for elimination
of these positions.
Chairman Wheeler realized the bulk of the money comes from the state
and the money comes from her pocket.
Mr. Weyand advised that now the perpentage is up to $90,000 but
there are also people getting welfare that should not be and that probably
adds up to more than what the county would be paying out of discretionary money,
The $90,000 will no longer be coming into this county, but ill be sent to
another county because the state has the money and will be spending it. By
not spending $9,000 next year to keep these positions in order to save money,
the county will actually be spending more money for the people on welfare that
should not be. If the error rate is too high the state can come in and take
over the entire operation.
Supervisor Dolan stated they would maintain the program at local cost,
Mr. Weyand stated the state would run the program at the level they
want and would bill the county for their share. There is other money coming
into the county from the state and the amount of this program could be taken
off the top of those funds before the county ever saw any of the money.
Mr. Weyand stated that the workers are working hard in that depart-
ment. They are working harder than most people. They are at a great stress
Page 19.
May 18 , 1982
~~__-_-_-_-_-_-___M_ay__18,__1982-_-_____ _ _ _ _
82- factor. Many of the workers-are at the stage of going on workers' compen-
~ sation. That will cost the county more money. They are not asking for the
addition of 30 or 40 people but asking that the Board fund three positions
I because the county will end up with funding losses or having the state come
in and take over the program. Mr. Robinson presented the Board with all the
facts, but he wanted the county to know they were already there. They have
only saved $1,000 from the time the positions became open until June and
the county is already $90,090 in the red.
Chairman Wheeler stated that $90,000 was a drop in the bucket
considering the MIA. The state is talking about transferring the entire
amount to the county.
Mr. Weyand stated that the $90,000 would be compounded to $180,000
and then there would be the workers' compensation claims on top of that.
It is a drop _in the bucket that will create serious problems down the line.
His personal advise to the woerkers is to only maintain 330 cases, which is
the state fiture for maximum workload. These workers are handling 38S cases
and with the unemployment in the county the caseload-will get to 985 cases
per worker. It is getting worse and worse.
Chairman Wheeler felt that maybe welfare funds were too accessible.
Mr. Weyand stated the point was not in stopping people from getting
welfare but the problem of letting people obtain welfare who might not be
eligible. That is where the error ratio is. Those people are draining the
system even more. These are the front line people and if the Board does not
help them do their job, they will cave in and the door will be open to all
kinds of things. These positions are needed now and have been for the last
30 days.
Supervisor Dolan stated that the. claim cut that occurs as the error
rate goes up is a fiscal and emotional issue. When one person has from 330
Bogle to 585 people, the issues will go up and so will the error rate.
Mr. Weyand stated the Board had allowed department heads to look
at the places where they feel cuts can be made. He liked that concept in the
budgeting process. He would think that in this case, the Board might ask the
Welfare Department whether they wanted to keep the positions and allow them
to make their cuts elsewhere. This move is not saving money, but causing
money to be lost.
Chairman Wheeler stated she would lixe to discuss this matter with
Mr. Crisan and Mr. Robinson.
SUPERVISOR MOSELEY ABSENT AT THIS TIME
886 ACCEPT COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY ANNUAL FINANCIAL AUDITS
On motion of Supervisor Saraceni, seconded by Supervisor Fulton and
carried, the CAA annual financial audits for the Head Start Program, Community
Services Administration grants and three energy contracts with the State
Office of Economic Opportunity were accepted.
887 REPORT BY SUPERVISOR DOLAN CONCERNING RESEARCH ON AB 90 APPLICATION FOR FUNDS
', - CONTINUE TO MAY 25, 1982
Continued to May 25, 1982 report by Supervisor Dolan concerning
research on AB 90 application for funds as new information on workload
statistics were just received on Friday.
888 ENDORSE SB 1526 RE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
On motion of Supervisor Saraceni, seconded by Supervisor Fulton and
Page 20.
May 18, 1982
8 2-
~'.
889
890
891
May 18, 1982
carried, SB 1526 was endorsed as requested by the Butte County Economic
Development Corporation.
AUTHORIZATION DELEGATED TO ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE FOR APPROVING USE OF COUNTY
FACILITIES FOR PURPOSES OF A4EETINGS
Discussion of the request by the Republican Central Committee for
use of county facilities for the purpose of meetings was held at this time.
Supervisor Dolan asked that the policy and procedure manual be
amended to allow for use of the facilities.
Mike Pyeatt, interim administrative officer, felt their office
could handle this matter and it would not have to come to the Board. If the
Board is willing to delegate the duties to their office, they would make a
determination on whether organizations meet the criteria for use of the build-
ings.
Supervisor Dolan stated this is the first time a request has been
brought to the Board. She knew others used the court facilities. She wanted
the manual amended.
Chairman Wheeler delegated the duties to the Administrative Office.
COMMUNICATIONS
Paradise Council on Aging. Ralph Willson, executive director, submits a
budget request in the amount of $6,200 from revenue sharing for
the Paradise Meals on Wheels Program. To be considered at budget
hearings.
Department of Transportation. Leo J. Trombatore, district director, provides
information on the Route 162 project being advanced in the 1982
State Transportation Improvement Program. Information; no action
taken.
Petitioners - Durham. The petitioners submit their objections to possible
closure of the Durham branch of the County Library. To be placed
for library budget consideration.
Senator Ray Johnson. The Senator provides information on SB 1616 which calls
for clearing and desnagging of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers.
Information; no action taken.
DISCUSSION: AIR POLLUTION CONTROL FEES
Supervisor Saraceni stated that Joe Bandy, agricultural commissioner,
had been trying to get this budget in. He had written the Board a memo relative
to the fees for air pollution control.
Supervisor Dolan stated it was her understanding that the task force
would meet and review the recommendations and present them to the Board next
Tuesday.
Supervisor Saraceni stated that the Agricultural Commissioner has
advised the Board he could not meet the deadline for the budget until he knows
where he stand as far as the fees are concerned.
Mike Pyeatt, interim administrative officer, stated that as far as
a planning tool, if the Agricultural Commissioner knew what would be recommended
he could proceed accordingly unless the Board makes changes.
Rick Booth, air pollution control, stated there were proposed
additions and amendments that the task force recommended. They held their
Page 21.
May 18, 1982
8 2-
~'
May 18, 1982
last meeting on Thursday andthe information was taken to the Board on an
informational basis. The reas this discussion was being held is because they
wanted tentative figures for the budget to be presented to the Administrative
Office staff.
Chairman Wheeler felt the Board should take the information under
submission and keep it until budget considerations.
Time was spent discussing a possible date for a public hearing
and how the notice would be prepared.
The matter was continued to May 25, 1982 for consideration of a
public hearing date and format of the notice.
ADDITONAL MATTERS
Chairman Wheeler presented two letters from the Butte County
Farm Bureau and requested that copies be made for the Board members. One
letter was requesting that the Board drop any proposal for a soils conser-
vation district and the other letter had to do with budgetary considerations
for the Farm Advisor's Office.
892
Chairman Wheeler advised that staff would like to comment on the
CSAC fiscal rally at the State Capital on May 19, 1982.
Mr. Pyeatt stated their office had presented information to the
Board earlier this morning and the Board could make any changes they wanted
to make.
Chairman Wheeler thought the motor vehicle in-lieu funding would
be over $1 million.
P4r. Pyeatt advised the Auditor had indicated there would be another
$1 million after they were left with the 40 percent.
Chairman Wheeler thought the MIA was over $2 million.
Mr. Pyeatt explained this was just for six months considering
buying 34 percent of the funding. The total county money for six months is
$1.2 million.
Chairman Wheeler stated the state was trying to transfer the medical
indigents to the counties that would cost this county $1.2 million for six
months.
Chairman Wheeler directed that the meeting in Chico between the
City of Chico and the Federal Aviation Administration be attended by a
member of the Planning Department staff who is to make a report back to the
Board. This meeting will be held on May 26, 1982.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Board at this time, the
meeting was adjourned at 4:39 p.m. to reconvene on Tuesday, May 25, 1982 at
9:00 a.m.
ATTEST: LEANOR M. BECKER, COUNTY CLERK-
CORDER and ex-officio Clerk
of the Board f Sup isors man, Board of Supervisors
By
Page 22,
May 18; 1982