HomeMy WebLinkAboutM060382June 3, 1982
8 2-
a
RECONVENE; The Board.reconyened at 10,30.a.m. pursuant to recess. Present;
Supervisors Dolan, Fulton, Moseley,.Saraceni and Chairman Wheeler.
Mike Fyeatt, interim administrative officer; Jim Johansen, auditor;
and Eleainor M. Becker, county clerk, by Nancy_Wilson, deputy clerk.
BUDGET REVIEW, FOR PROPOSED BUDGET I`OR 1982=8.3
The budget review for proposed budgets for 1982-83 was held as
continued.
939
Mike Pyeatt, interim administrative officer, advised the Board wauld
be considering every budget unit that has not been approved to date. They are
reaching time deadline's as far as the time limitations for staff to compile the
proposed budget document to bring back to the Board by June 30, 1982. From there
they will set the final budget hearings.
~ Jim Johansen, auditor, advised the Board had before them the budgets
prepared by department heads and tree Administrative Office essentially match
'revenues and expenditures. This is the first time in two or three years the
county has been in that position. The county has been living off the reserves.
Between not and the final budget, there will be an opportunity for changes.
They are still in the process of making projects on the fund balances anticipated
for June 30, 1982 to help fund the budget. The state budget will have a signif-
icant impact on Butte County and must be adopted by June 15, 1982. The county
will be in a position to know what the impact will be after that date. There
is the possibility of $2 million in cuts in subvention or additional programs
being shifted to the counties.
FIRE DEPARTMENT BUDGETS, UNITS 450-001 & 450-002
Bi11 Teie, fire warden, stated if the county wanted to keep 12 stations
open they would have to provide an additional amount of just less than $l million.
The chart that was present previously shows the cost of reinstatement of priorities.
There is an additional problem for the constraints of preparing the budget, which
is the contract with the Department of Forestry due for renewal July 1, 1982.
He needed some indication whether the Board was going to have to reduce services.
Once the proposed budget,is set, maybe the Administrative Officer or the Chairman
could write him a letter giving the Board's intent.
Supervisor Fulton asked Mr.
additional allocation of $1/2 million.
would leave Richvale, Bangor and Biggs
$200,000 beyond that would that bring
staffing?
Teie what would happen if there were an
That would bring Nord station in and
stations out. If there were another.
n the three stations at some reduced
Mr. Teie responded that the next jump beyond $1/2 million would be
$816,000. kTith,that they could fund everything that exists now except for
a couple of staff people. They have already taken steps to absorb those
staff positions. If they had the $816,000, they would close Biggs and have
Bangor open eight hours per day five days a week. Everything else would remain
the same. .By adding another slightly less than $1 million would keep everything
open. ,
Mr. Johansen responded to the question from Chairman Wheeler relative
to the special district augmentation funds.. In the anticipated revenues they
projected essentially the same share of the augmentation fund which the Board
has provided to the Fire Department in the past.
Mr. Teie found it rather difficult to recommend any cuts since they
aad been rather austere in their requests in the past. He would support the
existing system. He realized the fiscal problems and would work with the
Board every way possible. What he needed from the Board was how much money
Page 58.
June 3', 1982
82-
June 3, 1482
and what the Board wants. If he knew how~:much..money-the Board would gipe
hime, he would be able to say what he could.:bup, If the Board told him
what they wanted~in the raay of fire protection,-he could tell them what
it would cost.- The amount to draw,:~the line.under`Bangor part-time would
be $2.16 million. An additional $871,000. would ,keep Bangor open 24-hours
per day. He was concerned with opening too many stations part-time. This_
creates a burden and he would rather run a amaller fire department well
than a larger department not too well.
Supervisor Fulton stated $1.9. viillion would bring in Nord and
$2.2 million would draw the line under Bangor. What would b.e the figure
to put the line under Biggs.
Mr. Teie responded that if the Board came up with $871,000 he
could keep Biggs and Bangor open eight hours per day.
Mr. Johansen advised the figure would be $2.3 million.
Supervisor Moseley had a number of letters from people in Biggs
and Richvale in support of not closing the two stations.' She submitted
them far the record at this time.
Supervisor Fulton wondered if it was possible to look at for
future possibilities of combining some of the smaller stations in some
way or combining staffing of them since there are five stations in the
north county and seven stations in the south county.
Mr. Teie advised he had looked at quite a few of these items.
The problem is the stations are historical in placement and also the centers
of rural population and where the majority of the volunteers live. He felt
there were same things that 'could be done. There is a problem with fire
protection and medical aid with first response type of thing if they had to
travel too far, they might as well show down because the value of the service
when they arrived would be diminished considerably. If the fiscal problem
were not here and there was $7 million extra he would be asking for additional
funds for holes in the system.
Supervisor Dolan felt the issue was whether the directed development
of a proposed budget based on stations opened or closed. If the budget is
based on stations closed, what stations would be closed and what level.
They need to direct a proposed budget equal to the revenues they anticipate
getting. She knew all the commitment was to keep as many stations open as
possible and if possible to find funding for all to remain open. Since that
is their commitment, it seems more drastic and unreasonable to direct that
there be closures and then a few months from now determine they can find
the financing necessary to open the stations up. She would rather direct
budget development on a plan that they will all be open at the $2.2 million
rully recognizing there is discussion that will need to be done between the
proposed and final budgets.
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and unanimously carried, the proposed budget was directed to be developed
based on $2,3~million for the Fire Department.
FARM AND"'HOME ADVISOR BUDGET, UNIT 633-001
Jerry Smith, farm advisor, set o.ut what the job in this office
covers. They work with the farmers and offer advise to them. as to whether
something is economical and whether it returned more than it cost. He was
very conscious of economics at all times. He reviewed the department at
this time. The cooperative program is funded by the federal, state and
county governments. They have been in Butte County since 1981. The University
Pag~9 .
June 3, 1982
8 2-
~'
__ __ __,Tu_ne_3_,=1982 --_-_-_-__-_-_-__-_--_-___
_ -
provides seven academic staff members in-the county. There are five people
involved in educational aspects of agricultural production. and two people
involved in the 4-H. club program which has 950 to. 1;000 young people from
24 clubs through the county, There-are approximatei~r-.250 to 2b0 volunteer
leaders who give untold numbers of hours to this program. The agricultural
gross in the county is $230. pl:us'niillion for last ..year. According to .the
U.S. Department of Agriculture figures, the farmers spend 87~ of every gross
dollar on goods and supplies. Out of the $320~nillion, about $200 million
is immediately put ,back into the economy of this county which is new wealth
each year. This is not recycled tax dollars. In fiscal 1981-82, the
University of California through the state and Congress .put in over $600,000
in this program in Butte County. That pays the salaries of the seven academic
people, provides postage, bulletins and the cost of the print shops. They
received research information from the specialists located on the campus.
He presented a document with the figures on the last four years budgets for
the department. The figures which show as department head total are the
figures he had discretion over. On the bottom totals, there are figures
added by the Auditor for overhead expenses associated with running an office.
The budget unit total shows almost the very same budget total for the last
four years. '
Mr. Smith stated last year in September he came at the request
of the Board that they needed some money given back. He offered 100 percent
of his fixed assets and overnight out-of-county travel which the Board took.
The overnight travel is for planning and training sessions at Davis where
all farm advisors in a particular commodity get together to make plans for
the year and discuss some of the research aspects of what they have done.
He also offered to give up the full--time secretary position and make it a
one-half time position. When there is one-half taken from three positions
that is a significant proportion of the clerical help. They are now operating
with 2-1/2 positions. With all the days off and shortened workweek he had
22 percent less clerical help than last year or all the years before. The
department had three people back to 1970 and before that four positions.
The same vehicle that was needed last year is needed this year. He was
also asking for the out-of-county travel for his budget. He did not know
how he could make any more cuts. without effecting the program. If the
support level is too low, the University will look at the program and could
move their people somewhere else. When there is the loss of academic
staff, they cannot provide answers to the questions being asked. The last
vacancy he had took 18 months to fill, which was the almond position.
Mr. Pyeatt advised the figures in the allocation showed a reduction
related to equipment items, cutting back on t]~e travel and staff reductians
also. The heart of the budget other than occupying space is that they provide
assistance to the farmers and the 4-H organizations. They do operate a
frugal operation. Their recommendation was a matter of dollars and other
services the county performs and some of the mandates that are required.
Mr. Smith stated they did not just provide services to the farmers
and the 4-H organizations but to the public in two main areas of family
consumer sciences relative to canning process and drying of foods.
Supervisor Fulton asked if Mr. Smith. was suggesting, realizing
the $58,000 originally cut on the allocation plan was a little extreme,
in view of the fact much of the budget is not discretionary to the Farm
Advisory, that the current operating budget is $113,000 and asking for
$115,000. The suggestion would b.e that there be no cuts taking place
within this budget. He wondered if there was some way cuts could be
made within the department.
Page 60.
J.une~3, 1982
8,2-
June_ 3, 1982
a L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _
Mr. Smith. stated the problem he had was. to take the $48,000 cut
out of the $bT,000 portion of his budget. There were some errors in the
original figures that did not show. He was.s.uggesting a final level budget
of $115,317. That includes the travel. The figures in erxor did not include
the one-half time secretary position in salaries and benefits so he had to
add those figures back in.
Mr. Pyeatt stated with the $73,000 figure they-had figured a
reduction to 1-1/2 positions. The figures should show 1-12 positions
taken out of the $115,00-0. They had not been aware that one-half position
was not included in the figures. At the $73,000 figure there would be only
one person.
Mr. Smith stated at the $115,000 level there would be 2-1/2 positions
hich is fewer than they had in the past ten years. They are not keeping up
ith inflation if the figures in the budget are compared.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing:
1. Len Monocco, vice president in charge of agricultural division
of the Chico Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Monocco was speaking on behalf of the
Chico Chamber of Commerce and the Chico Agricultural Council. Both of these
organizations after discussion voted to support the Farm Advisor's quest
for their full budget request.- The action was taken because of two main
reasons. The most important is agriculture base of the county has a direct
income of between $200 and $300 million annually. The Farm Advisor's
activities have a very definite and positive impact on that income. Many
of the procedures agriculturists use today and take for granted were developed
locally as well as throughout the state and the information was distributed
throughout the state tend used extensively. It is very beneficial for
businesses in the community to have the commodity cost studies on crops
grown in this area. The other area of importance is the 4-H program which
is beneficial to the 'youth in the area. He hoped the Board would support
funding for these programs.
2. Walton Walker, first vice president of Butte County Farm
Bureau and vice president of the California Bee Breeders Association.
Mr. Walker stated the Butte County Farm Bureau supported the proposed
budget for the Farm Advisor. He did not see how they could take many
more cuts in the budget. He could not empathize enough the importance
of the extention service not only for the farmers but also on behalf of
the beekeepers in the county and state.
3. Hugh Santos, past president of Butte County Farm Bureau.
Mr. Santos stated the productivity of the American farmer has had to increase
over the past since the industrial revolution in order to keep pace with
the ever rising costs of doing business. The extension service has played
a tremendous role in helping to provide consumers with cheap, very inexpen-
sive, very good food in this county. They are unbiased and non-prejudice
doing research and providing new technology along with industry which has
kept farming and the consumer from being ripped off through salespeople.
His ranch has been used by the extension services several times in the
past_at no benefit to him except the ultimate research that all farmers
and consumers eventually obtain. He set out his childhood and the fact
he had participated in the 4-H program. The program teaches the principle
of hard work in order to make it. This is a very frugal budget and a
minute portion of what the Board is looking for.
4. Boly Chambers, orchardist in Gridley. Mr. Chambers presented
letters from Sun Diamond Growers of California and Sunsweet Growers in
support of the Farm Advisor Department, which were submitted for the record
Page61.
June 3, 1982
__ June3~ 1982 __-- _ _-- --_____
82= The farmers give a great deal of their time and-equipment to help prove or
~', disprove some of the products and tdchniques'. They are willing to keep
doing this because they see the benefits from day to day~in energy savings,
their dehydrators and the :unbiased opinions on liow to grow crops. He felt
the budget should not be cut disproporY.ionately. He would not suggest a
figure for the .budget. ht was not for him to-say what could be cut from
this budget.
5. Nancy Luder. Ms. Luder stated there was not one part of the
extension service she had not used during her life. She spoke regarding the
4-H group in Gridley and the work they had done. There is a 4--H group
raising money to buy the trees which will be planted by the group at the
police-fire facility in Oroville. She felt before the Board cut a department
completely out of existence, they should consider the return they were
getting from the department. The 4-H program helps to keep young people
out of trouble and teaches children moving into-the area about government
and to be a part of the community.
6. Gloria Bickley. Ms. Bickely stated she was a member of a
farm family and her husband's family had farmed in Butte.County since Before
the turn of the century. She would be speaking about 4-H programs. It is
an extremely important program to the youth of the county. The program
teackes the young people to have pride in themselves and what they do. There
fare leadership skills and abilities built with this program. There is
community service provided by this program.
7. Al Stepple, Oro-Bangor Highway. Mr. Stepple set out his
'relationship with Butte County since he moved here. He found the Farm
(Advisor's Office to be very helpful and did not tell him to move to
Nevada or laugh at him like other departments within the county did.
He asked that the Board continue this service.
ht wasFmoved by Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor
Saraceni that the Farm and Home Advisor Budget, 633-001, be funded at the
(($115,000 level.
~ Supervisor Dolan could agree with and understand the importance
sand support the program. This would be .the only budget .the Board has funded
at the requested level if the motion passed. The Board just took action to
ireduce the Fire Department below this year's budget. The Sheriff's Department
~iwas reduced below what some people have let the Board know is comfortable.
They have virtually eliminated the road building program: They are looking
at reducing maintenance of buildings and structures and toward more major
'repairs in the future. They have cut salaries and are looking at cutting
hours. She was looking for something between two positions and one and
lone-half positions. She felt they needed to make cuts but she had heard
from people the request to keep the office open furnishing staff assistance
necessary so the Farm Advisor could be in the field and so the 4-H program
could continue.
Chaf:rman Wheeler could vote for the motion because in looking at
the figures in total, this has probably been one of the most fiscally
responsible departments as far as Budgetary considerations and have shown
major decreases in the past and have indicated a willingness to cooperate
with the Board. If they make some major in-roads into the department, they
are looking at losing the entire program. She could not support that.
Supervisor Wheeler stated on small budgets it was difficult to
cut much out of them. This is a bare bones budget and last year they did
not argue but came in with a figure as requested by the Board and it was
difficult.
Page 62.
June 3, 1982
June 3, 1982
8 2-
~'',
Supervisor Fulton felt the proposed allocated-share originally
suggested to the department was too severe iri many ways. He agreed with
Mr. Chambers that some cuts would have to take place in eyerg.department.
He could not support funding of ttis.budget at_the full level for any depart-
ment and then try. to explain to the other 30.departu~ents why they were being
cut. He could-support the 198182 level of $104,913.
Supervisor Dolan stated part of the requested budget was for a
vehicle and for all travel. The request was not even to forego the vehicle
in order to keep staff. She felt the Board needed to look at this.
Mr. Pyeatt spoke regarding the vehicle and out-of-county travel.
The vehicle is a verl real consideration. There was no out-of-county travel
allocated for the Farm Advisor last year. Some of the employees may be paying
for the trips themselves.
Vote on motion;
AYES: Supervisors Moseley, Saraceni and Chairman ?dheeler
NOES: Supervisors Dolan and Fulton
Motion carried.
CLOSED SESSION: The Board recessed at 12:15 p.m. to hold a closed session
on meet and confer.
RECONVENE: The Board reconvened at 1:05 p.m. following a closed session
regarding meet and confer. No decisions were made at this time.
RECESS: 1:Ob p. m.
RECONVENE: 1:18 p.m.
FIRE DEPARTMENT BU]JGET
Chairman Wheeler sulimitted letters from the grade school children
in Bangor relative to support for the Fire Department for the public record.
PUBLIC WORKS ROAD AND BRIDGE PROGRAM BUDGETS: GENERAL SERVICES, 181-001;
LITTLER CONTROL, 181-002; ADMINISTRATION, 530-002; MAPPING, 530-003;
ENGINEERING, 530-004; YARDS AND STORES, 530-005; CONSTRUCTION, 530-006;
MAINTENANCE, 530-013; FIXED ASSETS, 530-018, RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION,
530-010; CONTINGENCIES, 690-121; TRANSPORTATION PLANNING, 5'31-001; &
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS2 531-002
Clay Castleberry, public works director, stated unless there was
additional money, he requested the Board approve the budget that had been
proposed. They can keep the roads patched up on a limited basis and can
provide a reasonably good road system with a lower level of service. He
hoped the Board would stick with the policy on snowplowing that the county
would only plow snow on the main roads. He asked for authorization
immediately to make the reorganizational changes necessary to fit with
the salary ordinance on positions approved or vacant. He was asking for
approval to purchase the equipment previously approved and held up with
some variations like the purchase of the trailer at one-half the previous
price and the stencil truck with the elimination of the dump truck.
They reduced their staff by four employees in December and would be cutting
the engineering staff considerably again. Snow plowing would not be done
to Inskip but would go as far as Stirling City. The county has given some
of the people in the Forest Ranch and Clipper Mills area persmission to
plow on county roads.
On motion of Supervisor Fulton, seconded b_y Supervisor
and unanimously- carried, the budget for Public Works road and bridge program
as proposed was approved and Public Works Director was authorized to proceed
immediately with. the reorganizat-~oiial changes requested.
Page 63.
June 3, 1982
8 2-
.b
June 3, 1982
PUBLIC WORKS BUDGETS, HCD ADMINISTRATION, 180-DO1; $UB-IyISION INSPECTION,
440=004;'MEMORZAL"HALLS, 641-001,__&_BUILDINGS~~IND-GROUNDS TSF, 720-001
SubdiviSioxz'Inspecfion Budget
Mr. Castleberry advised he had no oti~jections-to the proposed
Subdivision Inspection Budget as proposed with-the reduction of one
additional position.
Buildings and Grounds ISF Budget
Mr. Castleberry tated Che budget allocation for this budget was
for approximately a 45 percent reduction. He proposed a budget to try to
meet this reduction by a reduction of staff of .about 18 out of some 40
employees. The Administrative Office proposed the reduction of an additional
four more employees, as one way of meeting the budget allocation. They
cannot do the full program far the amount of money that has been allocated
and can only do about one-half of the program. He did not believe they
could do additional buildings and the county had additional buildings coming.
The grounds crew, which is already short, will be cut by one-half and the
building maintenance section will be cut down tremendously. He has indicated
several of the problems such as eleven buildings that need reroofing at this
time with no provisions to meet the need. He asked the Board what level of
service they wanted in the building maintenance program.
Mr. Pyeatt advised the document on page 24 shows what Public
Works submitted in the way of reductions. They had to supplement that
reduction in order to come up with the money allocated. That would equate
into some additional positions because the rest of the department budget
had been reduced as far as they could.
~~
Subdivision Tnspection Budget
Gerald Lively, deputy administrative officer, felt the important
question that needed to be asked relative to this budget had not been
addressed. That unit is supported by fees and last year the operating
budget was $212,000 and they collected $190,000 in fees so the reduction
in the budget was to meet the money guidelines the Board layed out. He
questioned the wisdom of cutting back on the fees when this is a fee
supported department.
Mr. Castleberry had no problems with subdivision inspection or
building inspection because whenever there is a reductions in fees coming
in they came in a recommended a reduction in the workforce or a proposal
for limited hours. If he could not do without the increased fees, he would
be back before the Board.
Buildings and Grounds ISF Budget
Mr. Lively stated they could not recommend the proposed budget
for buildings and grounds. The budget going into this year had suffered
a series of cuts over the past years. They have looked at contracting out
and a number of angles.
Mr. Castleberry stated the figure in the budget was not acceptable
to him, but the Board had the ultimate decision of setting the level of
service. This does not provide any maintenance or new buildings and cuts
down on the frequency of maintenance of the existing buildings from every
night to maybe every third night. There are problems of security and
maintenance. There are approximately 44 employees in the budget and the
proposal is to reduce this number by 22 positions. He had proposed in
the first budget that 18 of the 44 be reduced, which. would be a fairly
substantial reduction when someone looks at the rest of the budgets being
considered. He still did not recommend the budget that included the
reduction of 18 employees since this is a 45 .percent reduction. He would
live with the recommended reductions 'but there would be reduction in service.
Page 64.
June 3, 1982
3une 3,_1982
a2- Mr. ~yeatt stated one o£. the tha.ngs,that had not been mentioned
b' was that even~in good times, one of the things lacking was preventative
', maintenance:- Many things have been reactions to breakdowns.
Mr. Castleberry stated fie would like a decision on the budget
so the employees in the .division are aware of what is happening. Some
of the employees are adjusting their retirement schedules and doing all
kinds of great things in consideration of their coworkers. He asked for
direction so they could start sending out layoff notices and shift some
of the employees.
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Fulton
and unanimously carried, a proposed budget for Buildings and Grounds ISF
budget, 720-001, was directed~to be developed as presented by the Public
Works Director in the amount of $800,000.
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and unanimously carried, the Public Works Director was authorized to make
adjustments and reorganizations that he feels necessary to keep the budget
within the amount allocated in the previous motion.
Veterans Memorial Hall Budget
Mr. Castleberry read the Iasi sentence of the budget submitted
May 5, 1982 relative to the Memorial Halls. They were asking the Board to
maintain and operate only the buildings necessary to provide the patriotic
meeting space and not community meeting halls considering the Board's action
in other parts of their budget. He felt this could be accomplished with some
difficulty with one or two buildings of the veterans' chosing. If the Board
wanted to continue maintaining community meeting halls, the budget as
submitted does not do that. The tiudget was $85,000 and with the action of
the Board is cut another $13,000. He had listed the roofing, ganic hard-
ware, the Fire Marshall requires and a few other items in the budget.
This is a budget that does not address maintaining all of the Memorial
Halls. He was requesting direction from the Board.
Supervisor Saraceni questioned the $6,000 for the sprinkler
system in the Chico Memorial Hall and wondered what had happened to that
amount.
Mr. Castleberry advised that amount was in the budget for 1981-82
and the sprinkler has been installed or is being installed. With the budget
that has been given to the Board and the percentage reduction, the county
cannot provide a community meeting hall and a veterans' meeting hall. The
Board could close all the rooms in the halls except one, ,if they were just
maintaining all the halls for patriotic purposes.
Supervisor Dolan would like to review the matter to see if that
put the county in jeopardy of having the Third District Court of Appeal
determine whether it was one room in every hall or it was one hall in the
entire county or what it was. If the county is still subsidizing the
custodial services for the community meetings and social events then they
should not be doing so. The Board will certainly comply with the court
order to provide space for patriotic meetings but should not subsidize
custodial services for social events. She wanted an analysis of what the
cost is for what they are doing.
Supervisor Fulton questioned whether the veterans had been asked
to develop a plan so that the community functions are paid for.
Mr. Castleberry stated the Board could ask. him to investigate
this matter with the Veterans Cou~.cil for ways of getting rid of the
subsidy for other than patriotc'meetings away from the county through either
Limiting use of the halls or raising fees or limiting the number of buildings.
Page 65. June 3, 1982
8 2-
b,
June 3, 1982
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and unanimously carried, the direction of the Board is that the community
meetings and social functions will be self supporting and not be subsidized
by the county any- longer..
GIELFAI2E DEPARTMENT BUDGETS: DOMESTZC'vlOLENCE; 560-003; WELFARE ADI~NISTRATION,
-570-001; WELFARE~AIDES; 580-001•, & GENERAL RELIEk'; 590-00i
Mr. Liyely~stated they-had been working with the Welfare Department
beyond the deadline in order to come up with. some proposals for the Board's
consideration. The problem relative to this department is since the state
does not adopt their budget until later, whatever is done is virtually
hypothetical.
Bob Robinson, assistant welfare director, advised he had to
proposals to make to the Board. The instructions they received was to reduce
the local county match by $64,800. The two proposals would exceed that
amount. He asked for some latitude in the area of reorganization in order
to implement the proposals and give the services needed. The first proposal
involved the closure of the Chico branch office. In all of their pxograms
there is between five percent and 20 percent of county matching money
involved. The reduction resulting from closure of the Chico office would
be approximately $49,190 in county funds. The second proposal deletes
dome positions from the existing budget. They would offer back in the
way of reductions approximately $35,722 in county funds. In addition to
the positions they are asking be deleted, they are not going to request
purchase of three automobiles, which have also been included in their
budget for 1982-83. He asked that the Board give consideration of these
two proposals with a change in each of the proposals to allow for retaining
of an account clerk position from the first position at a cost of approxi-
mately $12,454, with the county match being approximately $2,500. In the
second proposal, he was also asking retention of an account clerk position.
That would be retaining two accounty clerk positions which would amount to
approximately $5.,156 in county matching funds. The original projection
for the two proposals of county matching funds was $75,412 and with the
reinstatement of the two account-clerk-:positions, the reduction in county
matching funds would be approximately $70,000.
Their initial response to the Auditor's memo had been it would
be difficult to give the precise dollar amounts because they are contingent
in operating capital upon the state budget. The Department of Social Services
tells them how much money they will have to operate on. Probably the best
news is the Senate committee voted a zero cost-of-living increase for the
aid programs for the 1982-83 fiscal year and the Assembly side voted for
a maximum of 2.8 percent cost-of-living increase. This means when they
go into negotiations there should not be any higher cost-of-living increase
than the 2.8 percent of that much. What this would mean would be between
$650,000 and $700,000 reduction in the initial 1982-83 budget as submitted
with between $35,000 to $40,000 reduction of local county matching funds.
Those were the types of things he had been eluding to when he suggested
they might have problems giving the kinds of figures the Auditor would
like to have at this time. If he was permitted to do so, he would like
to be given the flexibility of restructuring the organization, which is
something they have discussed for some time. He felt confident there
would be additional savings but no real decrease in the Level of services,
the department would lie able to offer.
The elimination of the three eligibility workers that has been
under consideration by the-Board was taken into consideration when preparing
the proposals. The figures from the proposals include the elimination of
those three positions.
Page 66.
June'3, 1982
8 2-
~'.
940
____ ____Jun_e_3,_1982 __________ _
L On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and unanimously carried, the proposals as presented by the Welfare Department
including restoring the two account clerk positions and the ability and
latitude for the Welfare Department to reorganize to render better services
for the department was accepted.
ADOPT ORDINANCE 22$8A: @IATVE SECOND ""READING OF SALARY ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
On motion of Supervisor Saraceni, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and .unanimously carried, the second reading of the salary ordinance amendment
which deletes three eligibility worker. positions in the Welfare Department
was waived; Ordinance 2288A was adopted and the Chairman authorized to sign.
941 (ADOPT RESOLUTION 82-8J PARKING TICKET SURCHARGE; BUDGET REVIEW PROPOSED BUDGETS
The budget review for pooposed budgets for 1982-83 was held as
continued.
RAPE CRISIS INTERVENTION BUDGET, 184-001
Mike Pyeatt, interim administrative officer, stated he had informed
Mrs. Bowen months ago, he found great difficulty in recommending funding
for the Rape Crisis organization because of the drastic reductions in
mandated services and levels of services in the county. They requested
$10,000 this year and were funded at $7,000 last year.
Supervisor Fulton stated the committee had recommended $3,834
allocation for this program and now there is a recommendation for zero
funding.
Pam Bowen, director, Rape Crisis Intervention Group, outlined
the services performed by her organization. In 1981, the Bureau of Crime
Investigation reported there were 80 reported forceable rapes in the Butte
County area, which put Butte County 17th in the state on a per capita basis.
Rap Cris reported 165 rapes during that same period because they receive
more reports coming forward from those victims wishing to remain anonoymous
or who refuse to report the crime to law enforcement. Out of the 80 rapes
reported, there were 27 arrests and 9 convictions. They have been in service
for approximately eight years because no agency has provided the on-going
service they provide. This year they were requesting $10,000 which represents
the total of the sexual abuse and public educational information that is
offered to the community. The $10,000 represents 1/70th of the budget.
They still only operate on 2-1/2 paid staff people and about 70 volunteers.
They seek other sources of funding from other counties, cities, state and
federal and the United Way.
Ms. Bo*„en advised she had been given a letter earlier this morning
from a victim who was unable to attend the Board meeting. She read the
letter relative to a rape that occurred on November 11, 1981. She withheld
the name of the person involved and advised the Board members they would
be receiving a copy of that letter.
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and carried, the Rape Crisis Intervention budget was funded at the level
of last year in the amount of $7,000.. AYES; Supervisors Dolan, Fulton,
Moseley and Chairman Wheeler. NOES: Supervisor Saraceni
RECESS: 2:27 p.m.
RECONVENE: 2:35 p.m.
FEDERAL REVENUE 'SHARING BUDGET
Mr. Pyeatt explained the revenue sharing budget at this time. He
proposed $130,000 in the capital expenditure budget. The jail and major
maintenance projects were budgeted in this portion of the budget in 1981-82
Page 67.
June 3, 1982
8 2-
bi
June 3, 19.82
and proposed to carry .over $400,000.from.that budget and.put it into on-going
operations. There. was $530,000 budgeted this fiscal year and they are proposing
to keep" $130,000 for jail major maintenance and $400,000 'carried over into
next fiscal year for funding on-going county operations. virtually every
dollar of the next entitlements of revenue sharing are being put into on-
going operations, which amount to about $1,8 million total.
Ahi issue that was before the Hoard-was the resolution to implement
the surcharge on tickets, including parking. He asked that the Board adopt
a resolution that will raise between $300,000 'and $400,000 per year. There
is 60 to 70 percent of the-money estimated to be coming from parking tickets.
Unless the resolution is adopted, they will have to maintain a portion of the
revenue sharing money for the jail. The parking ticket surcharge from AB 189
would create a mechanism to raise money for not only the jail project but to
plan for the future as far as other criminal justice activities are concerned.
Supervisor Dolan questioned what the status of the Sebastani
Bi11, which would allow a split in the surcharge and separate out the parking,
was.
Mr. Pyeatt advised it looked like the bill would pass. The reason
they were asking for the Board's consideration of the parking is because
60 to 70 percent of the revenue is from the parking citations. If the
parking tickets are not included, the county will not get the money to do
the work that needs to be done. There has been no opposition to this
except from the City of Chico. If the parking is really that much of a
problem they could take out the parking meters. The money from the parking
violations would help the county with their situation and this is authorized
and other cities are doing this. if the county went with the split fees
when the legislation is adopted, there will be 30 to 40 percent of the
projections in revenue and that will not be enough money to do what the
county needs done.
Supervisor Dolan stated there were many other discussions on
this matter besides whether the downtown business in Chico are going to
be hurt if the additional $1.00 surcharge is added to the parking tickets.
There was a great deal of discussion as to whether this was appropriate
means of taxation to raise money for jail cells. This is not a user pay
situation because parking ticket violators do not go to jail except for
those who fail to pay and are picked up on a bench warrant and arrested.
This is a revenue generating matter. The Board adopted the resolution
at one time, rescinded their action because of the public input received.
She questioned taking action on this matter without a public hearing.
During previous discussions of this matter, the Chico Municipal Court
Judge, Downtown Business Association and Chamber of Commerce opposed
adoption of the resolution.
Mr. Pyeatt stated one of the reasons for restricted parking in
downtown Chico is to provide a mechanism to have college students find
another place to park and at the same time to generate revenue for the
city. He believed the funds provided by this mechanism funded at least
the people who were involved in enforcing the parking violations within
the city.
Gerald Lively, deputy administrative officer, stated the fines
on parking are fines because someone violated an ordinance. This is a
form of citation release, which means instead of being put into jail the
person is given a ticket to be paid, which is a type of bail. They are
only talking about people who violate an ordinance. The real topic is
the overriding need in the jail because of the big problem they are up
against. On Tuesday, they will be having a proposal coming forward, which
Page 68.
June 3, 1982
8 2'-
a.
June 3,_1982 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
will be a bandaid measure and will use abovt.one~half of the $130,000 for
the air conditioning and some of the.yentilatign. .The $400;000 is actually
a trade off. That is the:.amount they project as immediate .need in about
twelve to eighteen months..
Ia was moved by Supervisor Fulton, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
that the Board adopt Resolution 82-$7 as proposed by the Administrative Office
on the park surcharge pursuant to AB 189
Supervisor Fulton questioned wkiether there would be money available
at a later date to help lower some of the personnel costs in the jail?
County major remodeling in the jail be accomplished with this-money?
If the jail were redesigned to operate with one-third of the personnel
it currently takes, it would amoratize the cost of the remodeiling in
five years.
Mr. Lively stated under the current architectual design, it is
labor intensive for security purposes. The have explored the cost of
remodeling or rennovating the existing structure to come up with modules
where 48 inmates would be supervised by a single jailer.• It could be
done, but it is expensive. The funding mechanism in AB 189 would help
obtain the dollars necessary. There is also a sunset clause on this
funding and once the fund is started, it has a 20-year life and automatically
ends after that time. It is limited to the construction activities being
placed in a restricted fund pursuant to the Government Gode section re-
quirements.
Vote on motion:
AYES: Supervisors Fulton, Saraceni and Chairman Wheeler
NOES: Supervisors Dolan and Moseley
Motion carried.
Mr. Pyeatt advised that one matter with regard to revenue
sharing funds that could lie handled during the final budget hearing process
was the funding for the 1982-83 Chico and Paradise .Meals-on-Wheels programs.
ASSESSOR'S BUDGET, 080-001
Ed Brown, assessor, showed the Board a chart he had prepared of
the staffing in the Assessor's 0£f ice since 1979. Some of the people were
CETA positions, which he did not ask to be made permanent positions. There
have been permanent positions eliminated over xhe.last seven years and not
all of those were lower paying positions. They eliminated a supervising
appraiser, assessment standards officer, appraisers, auditor-agpraisers
and a clerk. The office over the past years has been Baring down to make better.
use of the people. He handed the Board a list of the duties of the Assessor's
Office. He asked the Board for a commitment that would give the general
employees a salary reduction and to consider giving the department heads
the authority to close the department a necessary number of days to meet
certain budget consteaints. He realized the Board was not in a position
to implement his proposal at this time. This would result in a decrease
in his. salary and benefit propsal by six percent.
Chairman Wheeler advised the Board would take the proposal under
submission. The Administrative Office had prepared an alternative proposal
to that proposal and came up with the recommendation to eliminate one
mapper, one typist-clerk and one appraiser along with some equipment to
effect what this plan would effect.
Page 69.
.7une ~3, 1982
8 2-
a
_ __ __ _ June 3, 1982 _ _ _ __ __ __
_ - Mr. Brown.£e1C if another zttapping.technician were eliminated,
this would effect.the.department because every configuration change had to
eminate.from.the'mapping department. He asked-that the Administrative Office
proposal be amended to .leave the mapping technician in the budget. That
would amount to an additional $22,000 over the amount specified. The
Administrative Office is recommending'$5y80.0 be taken out of equipment,
which leaves $5,000 in the equipment account. He had wanted to replace a
four-wheel drive vehicle with the $10,,800 in the equipment account and
would not be able to do so with the $5,000 remaining. He recommended the
$5,000 that was remaining in the equipment account also be taken out of
his budget. With the retention of.tlie mapper position and the elimination
of the additional $5,000 in equipment, this would still be over the $206,000
budget reduction requested. This would allow him to preserve the integrity
of the mapping department which is essential for many functions, not only
the Assessor, but other people who use the parcel maps.
He had submitted in his proposed budget and request to change the
method in which they are obtaining copies of deeds. They now purchase
the deeds at a cost of $11,000 per year. If he were allowed to purchase a
xerox copier with necessary paper and supplied for $7,000, this could save
them $4,000 the first year and probably $10,000 the next year and from then
on. He has received a letter from the current supplier of the deeds advising
him the cost will be going up eight percent the first of July. This is a
copy machine which would take 35mm or 16mm film out of the Recorder's Office.
This money is located in the specialized services account and it would take
Board approval to purchase the machine.
Mr. Pyeatt stated ultimately $7,000 would have to be budgeted
back into the equipment account from the professional and specialized
service account in order to make a major capital outlay purchase fox the
machine. This amount is in addition to the $17,000 in dispute relative to
the position and equipment account discussed earlier. Of the three
additional positions their office identified, the draftsman is the only
one the Assessor is speaking to.
On motion of Supervisor Fulton, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and unanimously carried, the Assessor's budget was approved at the level
as requested by the Assessor with the cuts made by the Administrative Office
staff with the exception of the mapper position and acquisition of the
copy machine was approved.
LIBRARY BUDGET, 630--011
Jo Terry, librarian, stated she was under the impression the
last proposed reduction offered by her office`vras agreed to by the Admin-
istrative Office. She had one minor change in the position reduction that
she felt was needed until both the Chico libraries are moved into one
huilding. She would like to have the librarian III position retained until
the move is eemplefed and then have it reduced to a librarian II position.
The funds would come from extra help and would involved no difference in
money. The proposal creates drastic consequences in terms of the levels of
the library services. The list includes the elimination of the bookmobile
services, elimination of the Biggs and Durham branches and reduction in
hours for the remaining branches. She had a new proposal on the hours
for the three large libraries which would be. to maintain Saturday services
in the winter time only, at roughly 32 hours per week in the winter and
28 trouts per week in the summer. If there are position reductions and
changes in hours, the employees and the public should be notified as soon
as possible. The reduction in the material budget is approximately 77
percent. This would allow $30,000 for materials and periodicals. They will
just not b.e ah.le to give good service. It will not even pay to barely keep
up with the basic reference collection. There has been one position
transferred to the Administxati~~~ffice and there will be seven full time
70.
June 3, 1982
8 2-
a
June 3,_19.82 _ _ _ _ _
equivalent lay offs in addition to the seven positions from last year. This
actually leayes~the library. with the 50 percent reduction set opt in the
decision package from two years- ago. That.zaeans they are down to four libraries.
She asked-for a determination on the lay offs.
Mrs. Terry- explained the positions she had discussed earlier. She
asked to eliminate one librarian II position instead of one librarian III
position. She was_ not proposing any cost difference because she would retain
this position for-six months at a difference of approximately $840 which
would come from extra help funds, When they move the two libraries into one
building in Chico she could probably reduce the position.
Chairman Wheeler commented the landscaping and furnishings for the
Chico Library are being donated by the community and the Friends of the Library.
It would not be county funds that pay for the furnisfiings or the landscaping
for the Chico Library.
Mrs. Terry stated two of the most serious deficiencies in the budget
are the reduction of the Durham Library and the book material budget. She
understood the community of Durham had some suggestions to make to the Board.
Tt was not her recommendation to close any library.
~*~'' ~ APPearing:
1. Lynn Dempsey, Durham. Ms. Dempsey stated the community was
concerned about the local fire station being cut, the rural deputies being
cut and the Durham Library hours being further reduced or closed altother.
Last week she presented petitions with a total of 776 signatures and letters
from local third graders urging the Board to keep the local library open.
Last week there were some figures presented briefly and because of the
miscommunications between herself and the Auditor, the figures were not
quite correct. They were grossly in error. She would like to go into the
figures, into what is in the budget for the local library and then to suggest
some ways they could cut that library budget. The total property taxes
collected in Butte County are $36 million and $2.2 million are from Durham.
The county received $6,780,000 and those .coming from Durham were $660,000.
This is ten percent of the property taxes for the county budget. She
apologized for the error. If the Fire Department and library are closed,
they would be receiving little or no services from the discretionary funding.
The total budget for the Durham Library is $23,500. She set out where the
money was spent. If the Durham Library were closed, all libraries in the
county system would be located in the incorporated areas of the county.
The people in Durham would like to have their .library remain open. This
is a community that works together. They are building concrete slabs at
the memorial hall and have provided $1,5D0 in labor for this property.
They also have a bike path fund going on.and have collected $3,000.
There was a suggested that possibly Durham Recreation and Park District
could assume the janitorial services. The total $10.,700 reserve for
maintenance and janitorial services could be reduced by $6,000 which would
alto enough to cover-gas and electricity and maintain $2,00.0 for janitorial
services. They could reduce 'the overall library budget for Durham to $17,500.
Their library is more than just a book lending establishment. She asked
that the Board continue these important and vital services to their community.
2. Jan Holman, Durham. 1~lrs. Aol~nan set out the lunch that was
held once a Month for the senior citizens. She objected to the possible
cuts. She set out the personal service-that is given to the citizens by
the library staff. It is hard for them to be able to follow the budget.
She requested at the end of each year a final cost for each service be
put together. This would allow the citizeua to get involved and work
together to support the Board in obtaining the bottom line figure that is needed,
Page 71.
June 3, 1982
8 2--
~'.
.June 3, 1982
3. Nancy .Kepner, Durham. Ms..Kepixer advised the usage of the
Durham Library actually-.went up 6x1/2 percent as compared to the Chico Library
usage of both branches o£ only going up T,9 percent. If the Durham Library
is closed it would make it. hard on the children. She asked that the Board
consider their imput from their taxes-and not close the library.
Mx. Pyeatt sated there is a 50 percent library assistant II position
for the Durham Library and the cost for that position is $7,410 in salaries
and the benefits would have to be computed.
On motion of Supervisor Fulton, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and unanimously carried, the Durham Library is to remain open with $17,500
to be added to the current Library budget as they had proposed.
DISTRICT ATTORNEX BUDGET, 320-001, FATLY SUPPORT DIVISION ,_320-002
Will Mattly, district attorney, advised he was in compliance with
the request submitted for the amended budget. He was happy the Board had
received a letter for informational purposes. He submitted the budget and oxen
found the Board wanted another $19,000 reduction. He faund there was $9,259
placed in the professional and specialized services account for prosecution
of various capital cases, murder cases. He would be prosecuting these cases
himself and could reduce the professional and specialized services account
by that amount. He could not give theBoard the additional $10,000 being
requested without cutting a staff position he desperately needed. The
reason his proposal would work is because of the capable person who would
be taking over the administrative position of the Family Support Division
and this person needed to be upgraded to b.e given the incentive. This
person will be doing his own Sob along with the responsibilities of the
person who is retiring. The Family Support Division collected almost
$2 million last year in order to help the county to supplement the welfare
grants and to restore the general budget. During the month of May, they
collected $187,000. Another thing he requested was when there is the
retirement of the family law technician, that the position be filled right
away.. He asked that the Board not reduce his budget by the additional
$10,000. The Board originally asked for a reduction of $52,004, which
he complied with. Now the request is a reduction of $71,405 and he was
not aware of where that came from.
Mr. Lively advised there was a great deal of confusion among
departments who had mxed:.fundi:ng mf which some was subvention and some
was discretionary monies. The District Attorney's budget is one of those.
The instructions for the reductions from the Auditor fox a total amount
of $87,000 in xeductions was not enough to comply with the Board's policy
£or just a cost in the discretionary funds so they countered that instruction
to the District Attorney to come up with the full package. He believed
the total package reduction was $87,859 and that was what the District
Attorney did no.
Supervisor Dolan stated there were two figures in her mind that
should be the same and were not. The proposed reductions by account are
$87,000 and a total of $61,000 discretionary funds. These are all listed
by line items and'the bottom line figure is the Board requested a reduction
of $52,054. She wanted to know why one total of $61,000 and the other
was $52,000.
Mr. Johansen responded he was not sure where the $61,000 came
from. The net sayings his office calculated included the funding in
the Family Support Division came up to $52,00.0- of discretionary money,
which was what the District Attorney~arri~yed at.
Mr.'Mattly responded if the $9,254 in professional and specialized
services was added to the $52,000, the total would he $61,313.
Page 72.
June 3, 1982
_ June 3, 1982____________ ______
. ~ _ _ _ - -- _ _ _ _ ~ W ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
~pn:motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Fulton
and unanimously carried, the District Attorney`s proposed budget is to
be submitted based on showing a net discretionary reduction of $52,054
with a total reduction of .$87,859.
LIBRARY BUDGET, 630-011
Supervisor Moseley advised slie would like to discuss the Biggs
Library. According to the action taken liy the Board earlier, the Biggs
Library would be closed.
RECESS: 3:46 p.m.
RECONVENE: 4:08 p.m.
There is very little money involved for this library. She did
not want it to appear in the newspapers that the library had been closed.
She would like the matter brought back up for discussion.
Consideration of the Biggs Library continued to June 4, 1982.
PUBLIC HEALTH BUDGET; GENERAL SERVICES, 540-001; COUNTY MEDICAL SERVICES,
540-002: ENVhRONMENTAL HEALTH 540-003• AND DCRC 540-004
Dr. Svifius, public health director, advised he had submitted
their originally proposed budget reductions as directed by the Administrative
Office and the Auditor. These proposed reductions were carefully tailored
to yield the net savings to the General Fund and at the same time to retain
as much revenue from other sources as possible to continue providing the
maximum services to the public. The total net savings were $118,541 in
discretionary funds. He has been informed this amount did not meet the
directions of the Board and he was somewhat confused at this point. He
had been informed on May 25, 1982, this did not meet the Board's direction
even though they had complied with the memo from the Administrative Office
and the Auditor. He had submitted a revised proposed reduction in the
amount of $243,000 gross. This is not discretionary funds but a gross
budget. As they moved into this they began making reductions of state and
federal monies.
Mr. Lively clarified the report from Dr. Svihus at this
time. The original budget submitted reduced the amount of discretionary
funds that were required but the total package reduction was missed.
Their instructions to the department was to try again and the result
was the revised budget, which meets the Board's guideline. The proposed
reductions do not appear to require any AB 8 or Bealson hearings as
the two acts currently stand. The Administrab~ive Office has offered
the content of the study which was only partially complete at this
time, that involves consolidation of the Public and Mental Health
Departments. There are a great deal of potential savings beyond
what they have identified at this point. The study shows a total
reduction of approximately $240,0.00. This study is an organizational
model roughly equivalent to the old health services agency. They have
spent time doing research relative to the legal aspects rather than
the organizational aspects since there are 150 to 250 people involved.
The revised budget submitted by Dr. Svihus on June 2, 1982, compares
with the other proposals., in-that, the money amounts are the same
but the methods: of arriving at that amount are entirely different.
Dr. Svihus advised they had put together the revised budget
in accordance with revised instructions from the administrative
Office. They •made adjustments, and yeilded-the exact gross total by
keeping with the decision package submitted to the Board several
months ago. This budget has the least impact on the basic operation and
services of the department as possible.
Page 73
June 3, 1982
8 2-
~''
_ .Tune 3, 19_82 _ _
Mr. Pyeatt stated the Administrative Office staff had
undertaken a study the first of 1982, which was abandoned about 1-1/2
months ago as a result of some of the budgetary work. During the time
they were identifying some of the organizational changes within the
Public Health Department and nearing completion of some of the work,
they were approached be the Mental Health Director requesting some
help as far as changes in his department. At that time, they had
indicated, as a result of looking at both departments, it might be an
appropriate time to include one option, which is the merging of both
the departments into one department. This is similar to the agency
that was in existence prior, He still believed that was a viable
option. If the Board chooses not to look at or implement the .
organizational concept, after the budget is finished their office will
be commencing with the fine tuning of those organizational changes
within the department, which would be brought to the Board at a later
date.
Chairman Wheeler directed that staff prepare a proposal
speaking to the coordination of the two efforts. The Board would
address only the budget item for this department at this ,time and consider
the consolidation matter at another time.
Discussion of the differences between the Administrative
Office and the Public Health Department proposals held at this time.
Supervisor Dolan stated as she xead the Administrative
Office reduction, it was not the reduction of the department head's
salary by ten percent but the reduction of the department head
position. She questioned whether the organizational study included
the elimination of the services that were before the Board under the
Public Health Department proposal. She had difficulty in just dealing
with the budget cuts and not considering the reorganization at the
same time, because the proposal before the Board eliminates programs
and perhaps the reorganization would mean just the opposite.
Consideration of the Public Health Budget was continued
to June 4, 1982 in order for the Board to consider the points raised
by Supervisor Dolan.
SUPERIOR COURT BUDGET: FAMILY CONSILIATION COURT, 230-001; COURT
REPORTERS, 330--001; INSTITUTE AND CORRECTIONS, 602-001; SUPERIOR
COURT 240-001; GRAND JURY, 230-001
On motion of Supervisor Fulton, seconded by Supervisor
Moseley, and unanimously carried, the proposal as submitted by the
Superior Court on the following budget units were accepted: Family
Conciliation Court, 230-001; Court Reporters, 330-001; Institute and
Corrections, 602-001; Superior Court 240-DO1; and Grand Jury, 230-001.
TREASURER-TAX COLLECTOR BUDGET, 070-001
Ev Bosworth, treasurer-tax collector, advised he responded
by memo in the only way he could. He was to make a net reduction of
$66,021 to expenditures supposedly under his control as indicated on
the tab sheet totaling $377,572. The services and supplies account
covers mandated expenses such as legal advertising tax bills and
envelopes and can be dismissed except for about $600. This leaves
only people and would translate to approximately 3-1/2 positions.
A reduction in staff of this number or any major portion would
materially effect their ability to process over $36 million in tax
collections in a timely and efficient manner. This would result in
a loss of revenues and lead to, late distribution of tax monies to
schools, cities and special districts.
Page 74
June 3, 1982
s 2-
a
June 3, 1982 _ ______ ________
Singe he could not project anything hu.t net losses of discretionary
revenue on this basis, he could not complete the form except to check
the-box that he would appear before the Board regarding the budget
reductions. The elimina$finn of the 3-1/2 positions from the budget :,
would generate a loss in revenue that would greatly exceed the amount
of proposed budget reductions requested by the Auditor. He passed
out inf ormation to the Board show3.ng a schedule of the revenue produced
by the Treasurer-Tax Collector's Office.
Supervisor Dolan questioned how they had gotten to the point
of not being able to cut a X66,000 increse in the budget.
Mr. Johansen advised a substantial portion of the increase
was the result of allocated costs, primarily data processing. This is
a fairly small department and a sizeable portion of the budget is in
data processing because of tax collections. They are dealing with data
processing as an internal service fund and the loss of outside user
costs has to be distributed among all county users. Those departments
w3.th high instances of data processing represented in the budget
reflects inordinately in the 1982-83 budget. There was ,no request for
any additional positions or an increase in the level of service for
this budget. It was simply a matter of an increase in the allocated
costs that caused the budget to increase.
Mr. Bosworth stated the on7yy place he could make the reduction
was in people. He had no new people and no new rec7.ass3.fications or
positions. They are working with the exact same number of positions.
With regard to any services and supply accounts, the Board could do
whatever they want, because he had no control over those accounts.
The portions he budgets out of those accounts are for tax bills,
postage to mail the tax bills, and legal advertisements. In order
to achieve the reduction level, he would have to reduce 3-1/2 positions.
If the Board was going to reduce personnel, he requested they let him
know where the reductions would be made. If the reductions are to be
made in the Collection Agency, he would like to address the revenue
factors for that section. The total revenues collected, which include
the actual ten~onth figures in two month projections for 1981-82 fiscal
year, are X571,672. That amount is split up with $!,22,000 going to the
general fund as discretionary revenue and the rest going to other
agencies. That agency handles the Superior Court restitution program.
If it were eliminated from their department and placed back in the
Superior Court, he assumed they would need at least one or perhaps
two people to take the program back. The other collections that are
made are primarily in the Probation Department. The Probation Department
has said they could take the collections back into their office, if they
were given three additional people. There is a new program being
discussed by the Probation Department and Superior Court relative to adult
probationers. The court will set up a system, where each adult as a
conditi~an of probation rr3.11 pay for the Probation Department report
based on their ability to pay. The Auditer bas computed this amount
as slightly over X200 pex report. There are about /+5 adult probation
reports done during the month. This will be approximately X60,000 per
yeax that will be going into the general fund in discretionary revenue.
Their office would ba taking on additional workload in order to evaluate
each person as to their financial situation, to set up the accounts on
the books, and to handle as a normal collection account, so the revenue
will probably come close to X500,000 net next year for the general fund.
This is primary service to the Judicial system.
Supervisor FYzlton stated he had a statement to make abrnzt
the revenue generating departments.
Page 95
June 3, 1982
s 2-
~'
June 3, 1982
Virtually everyone that had come before the Board had been a revenue
generating department. The same X70,000 used as revenue being generated
by the Treasurer-Tax Collector's .Office will be used also by the Court's.
The Court's are also telling the Board they are revenue generating.
The Assessor's argument is that he assesses property and therefore is
counting the same property revenue that everyone else is, including
the Treasurer-Tax Collectors Office. If everyc;department generated
revenue, the county would not be in the shape they are in. He had
trouble with that thought.
Mr. Bosworth stated once the court turned over collections
to their department it was out of their hands. It costs personnel time
and effort to collect these fines and fees and Public Defender fees.
They have projected court restitution for one year in the amount of
X90,553. They have contracted with collection agencies in the past
but do not do so until they have an account they cannot collect on.
Most of the accounts they maintain in their office axe good accounts.
They do not go to cut side contracts with most of these, because the
collection agency will take 50 percent right off the top. The only
time they turn over accounts to a collection agency is when they cannot
generate enough revenue to justify the efforts that are expanded. Many
of the functions that sre performed for the courts cannot be legally
handled on the outside. They cannot send delinquent unsecured tax bills
to an outside collection agency. Much of the service of financial
evaluations which is done for the courts cannot be done by an outside
collection agency.
Data processing does the entire production of the tax bills.
The Treasurer-Tax Collector's Office does the stuffing of the bills
into the envelopes and mailing out-the tax bills. They are working on
trying to find an automatic staffer that will work for the tax bills.
If this is possible, it will save 'soome extra help from the budget. The
new program being considered by data processing will be of greater help
to the Auditor than to his office. He does transfer people around in
the department during their heavy tax time and he does get some help
from the Collection Agency section. He does not like to pull those
people off for any length of time for processing the tax bills. He
set out what would happen if one parson was eliminated on the tax
collection side of the department. During the tax cycle, they have
~3 million to ~5 million sitting on the floor of the vault-each evening.
That tax money is taken out the following day and they start processing
of the tax bills and the payments at that time. When the money is
sitting in their office, it does not earn any.. interest. With the
reduction of people, it will still not reduce 75,000 secured roll tax
bills or the 11,000 to 12,000 unsecured roll tax bills. Someone suggested
that maybe the county should shut down one day par week. The Treasure-
Tax Collector's Office could not be shut down one day a week because
the money travels around the banking system every day. If they are
not open for one day they will be charged for it and the county will be
losing money. The increase to his budget is made up of items that he
had absolutely no control over. There are fourteen positions in the
department at the present time. The only way he could suggest that they
could save money in the budget, which would not be reducing the budget,
would be if he could hire two experienced clerks who knew tax collections
to work December and April, at a cost of approximately X4,000 to X5,000.
That would speed up the processing of X16 million to X18 million in tax
money. He was not proposing the addition of these two positions.
Chairman Wheeler stated the budget impact is not only by the
data processing but the other ISF budgets as well. The ISM' budgets are
split and spread througkz all the departments who ar~ erli~pcing the
kind of increase which is Page 76 pra.mar~ly due o ~nz a a.on.
June 3, 1982
June 3, 1982
~w
~~
Mr. Bosworth advised his office produced ~p2-1/2 million in
discretionary revenue, which: includes interest. The reductions the'
Board asked were for the reduction of 3-1/2 positions out of his
budget. Three and one-half positions would cripple his office to the
point where the county would loose hundreds and thousands of dollars.
They are completely automated now. The new system will mean more
direct access and will help somewhat inr:.the telephone calls. They
will. not be able to use the new on-line system for processing the
tax payments.
Supervisor Dolan felt any real reductions would be the
reductions in the costs allocation budgets and wondered when the Board
would be considering the ISF budgets.
Mr. Lively advised the Board had adopted most of the ISF
budget already.
Mr. Johansen stated there would be reductions in the Treasurer-
Tax Collectors budget, along with all the other budgets, because of
action taken by the Board with regard to Buildings and fh•ounds and all
the other internal service accounts. Tha:'differences between last
years budget and the requested budget as far as the computer is concerned
is approximately X25,000.
Chairman Wheeler felt it was interesting the Sheriff's Office
had proposed in-lieu of the new computer program for their on-line
system, they would rather not have the system and would rather have a
clerk. It might have appeared to be a savings for the Sheriff's Office
but, it was not a savings because the computer costs are picked up
by the other users.
Mr. Bosworth advised if the 3-1/2 positions were eliminated
that would leave him with one position in the Collection Agency. That
ixzdividual would not be able to keep the bookkeeping done. Tf that
happened, he would have to immediately notify the court and the
Probation Department that he could no longer give direction to that
agency and the person would have to answer directly to the court. The
court would have to decide which one .of the legal mandates would go
first before they dropped the rest of the programs. This would be a
drop of at least X200,000 to X300,000. The court would have to make
the decision as to which programs would be eliminated. With the committee
recommendations of X531,000, he would have to eliminate at least 3-1/2
people. He has two people in the Treasury section who handle nothing
but 1911 and 1915 Act bonds. There are about 3,800 bands outstanding
at the present time. The estimated serv3.ce of the bonds for the entire
life of ten to fifteen years is taken off the top of the proceeds on
every bond issue. This money is deposited in the general fund. Those
bond holders are entitled to that bond service because they have paid
for it. The county would be :i..n deep trouble if they could not service
the bonds.
Russ Addy, collection agency, stated that if they had two
people instead of the four people that are currently ~ the section, they
would be where they were 3-1/2 years ago. At that time, the only thing
they ware dealing with was the unsecure property taxes and the Probation
Department accounts. If they lost two positions, they would have to
drop back to those two programs, which would save approximately $35,000
with the reduction of the two positions. There would be a loss to the
general fund of revenue generated by the Public Defender program and
the reimbursments for the Probation Department. services that is an
ongoing program. Page 77
June 3, 1982
8 2-
b'''
June 3, 1982 _
This would include the reimbursements for juvenile offender costs.
He believed the revenue coming. in at the current time would exceed the
reduction by X50,000. If the two positions were reduced the shortfall
would have to be increased by an additional X50,000.
It was moved by Supervisor Saracens, seconded by Supervisor
Moseley, that the Board use the allocated share Funds in the amount of
X571,569 for the Treasurer-Tax Colleetor~s budget.
#~#~
Mr. Pyeatt stated the motion raised a question as far as the
allocation. There is going to have to be some decision made by the
Board as to where the money is going to come from in the way of
reductions from the requested budget. If the Board goes with the
X571,000 figure, they are going to have to have some basis for reducing
the requested budget to that level.
Supervisor Dolan stated it could be that all the reductions
would be made in the services and supplies, extra help, overtime,
maintenance of equipment, and office expense accounts as recommended
by the Administrative Office as well as one position, Those reductions
would amount to more than the reduction that is being requested.
Supervisor Saracens felt Mr. Bosworth was running the department
and was doing everything possible and his direction would be what they
would except. It might not include the taking of any positions. Maybe
they could work something out.
Mr, Bosworth stated he would give the budget to the Auditor
and whatever he could work out with the services and supplies budget
the Board could have. He had nothing to say about that side of the
budget.
CharrIDan Wheeler asked sf the senior account clerk position
elimination was being included in the motion?
Supervisor Saracens felt st was the Treasurer-Tax Collectorts
decision to make.
Mr. Bosworth stated his responsibility was to come before the
Board and give them any information he could. If a cut is made in a
position, he would like for the Administrative Office to tell him where
it is going to be. That was not hss responsibility.
Chairman Wheeler felt what she had heard, and if it was
acceptable to Supervisor Saracens, under accounts 12, 11,., 30, 35 and
37 deductions could be made comparable to the total figure to reach
~571,5b9. At the same time, this would no doubt mean one positron
that would have to be eliminated to meet that figure.
Supervisor Dolan felt there might be a possibility of a person
ng layed off but there might not be. The Board would be giving
action that the budget be prepared so it totaled X571,000 approximate.
added up the line stems of recommendations by the Administrative
ice not including the position and the reductions added up to X16,050.
the reductions in the Buildings and Grounds Department means a ~L~,000
action in the cost allocation to the Treasurer's Department, then
re would not be the reduction of the position, If it is not a
000 reduction that will mean one position and the Administrative
ice could pick the position, The Board is only talking about a
action fxom the requested budget of about X21,000 to $22,000.
Page 78
June 3, 1982
June 3, 1982
'.~ _ _ _ - - - - - T _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Mr. Pyeatt stated if there was an effect on staff, the
Auditor would have to know in order to recognize a decrease in the
revenue side of the budget. If the reductions of the appropriations
for the services and supplies account is made, the best he could do
was to try to watch that account. When there are letters to send out
and tax bills that have to be processed, those costs will be very real.
If they exceed what the appropriation is, the Board will have an
obligation to come up with the money.
Mr. Bosworth stated last week he mailed out 8,800 deliquent
tax notices. This took data processing production time to produce
them and took postage to mail them. They are not required bylaw
to mail out the delinquent tax notices. If they did not mail out
those notices the delinquency rate would be at about ten percent. By
sending out these notices the delinquency rate will be reduced by
3-1/2 to 4 percentage points before June 30,1982 when they are sold
to the state. If the property is delinquent June 30, 1982, he would
be paying the newspapers hundreds and hundreds of dollars just to
advertise, which has to be done by law. When his office does something,
it is only to produce revenue.
Vote on motion:
AYES: SUPERVISORS DOLAN, FULTON, MOSELEY, SARACENI AND
CHAIRMAN WHEELER.
NOES: NONE. MOTION CARRIED.
AGRICULTURAL COMMISSIONER BUDGETS UNITS: AGRICULTURE, 460-001; POISON
SALES, 460--002; AND CONTRIBUTIONS TO AIR POLLUTION, .183-001.
Joe Bandy, agricultural commissioner, stated he would like
to clarify the requested budget for the Agricultural Commissioner.
Under the requested budget, $735,388 is an incorrect figure. The
amount requested was $770,518, which does not include $12,000 in the
enterprise fund, which they have for bait sales for rodentcides and
grasshoppers. The $838,637 includes both the $12,000 enterprise fund,
which is a separate unit, and the $91,191 for air pollution fees, which
overall they zeroed out until such time as there is an opportunity to
discuss the fees. He was looking at $770,518, which was the original
amount requested. This would accomplish $110,343 in reductions which
leaves a total of $660,175. This is the amount for the Agricultural
Commissioner, Weights and Measures and Predatory Animal costs. The
allocation of $637,000 included the $12,000 enterprise fund. The
revised budget is $625,000 plus $35,000 for fixed assets, that were
requested in the budget, which comes to a total of $660,000 with the
elimination of the $12,000 enterprise fund.
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor
Saraceni and unanimously carried, the proposed budget as submitted by
the Agricultuxal Commissioner for reductions was accepted and a budget
was directed to be prepared in the amount of $660,175 with the
reduction of $110,347 in the Agricultual Commissioner, Weights and
Measures and Predatory Animal budget.
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor
Saraceni and unanimously carried, the Board authorized initiating
a change in personnel immediately to accomplish the reductions.
Page 79
3une 3, 1982
S;
June 3, 1482 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
LOWER COURT BUDGETS: CHTCO MUNICIPAL COURT, 242-001; COURT WORKS
REFP'ERAL PROGRAPI, 247-001; OROVILLE JUSTICE COURT, 244-001; PARADISE
JUDTCAL COURT, 254-001; GRTDLEY JUDICIAL COURT, 243-001; AND BIGGS
JUDICTAL COURT, 241-001.
Juddge Rutherford, Chico Municipal Court, stated she
did not turn in a-fat budget but turned in a budget which was absolutely
needed. The court does all mandated services. She had no control
over the jury and witness fees or the professional and specialized
services. These were estimates to begin with and they are mandated
services. She could not send notices to the Sheriff and the police
departments telling them to arrest only two out of three defendents
in a case. She did not feel that was a way to run a court, since
they only have two contract Public Defender services. The court
interpreters are the same. They do not know when a Spanish-speaking
person might be arrested. They have no control over these items.
There is also no control over the number of campus parking tickets
that will be written. The estimate she had given for her budget did
not include multiple murder cases. The Board can do what they want with
these items in the budget with the understanding that on the current
level they will probably run out of money in April and the money
will have to come from the general fund. Under maintenance of
equiptment, two typewriters have ben deleted-along with other mainte-
nance in the budget. She did not know how they were to maintain old
typewriters without maintenance in the budget, but if the typewriters
break down, she would bring the matter back to the Board. There are
mandated costs under the Government Code section that says the courts
have to be provided with supplies. She advised they could delete
$240 from transportation and travel. The dues for the Judges Association
fees could be eliminated. She has paid for them for the past five
years. Another $250 could be taken from that category. She and her
clerk will be happy to pay their own costs as they have done for the
past five years. Office expenses are about the same as jury and witness
fees. She has to have one docket for each ¢ase.
Beginning in June or July of 1981, they eliminated the use
of the computer batch system and went on a manual system adding two
extra help clerks. Those two extra help clerks were two typist clerk
I's and she had requested $24,000. This is the first time in five
years they are totally current with warrants and accounts receivable.
They produce 45 percent in revenue for a total of $250,000 in one
year over and above the $500;000 that they normally collect. This
goes to prove that two employees being able to do warrants and accounts
receivable are able to add eleven times their awn costs to the county
and city revenue. She could live with the extra help and was not
requesting that these positions be made regular help. That would save
in employee benefits. This will give them an opportunity to look at
computerization in the future as they continue to grow. She has a
number of employees who are extra help that are there to do the basic
work of the court. If the other two extra help positions were eliminated,
this would eliminate the courtesy notices that are sent out. if these
positions are cut, the notices will not be sent out and an individual
will not know how much to pay on their traffic ticket. They will no
longer be arrested for not paying those tickets. There will no
longer be liens against that persons driver's license. She believed
a court that was unable to issue warrants and compel attendance of
defendants in court is a non-existent operation. A court which is
unable to enforce it's orders by collecting accounts receivable is
also a non-existent operation. She took an oath of office and did
not believe that she could tolerate a system that never sent bills and
did not compel attendance at court and could not collect or enforce
court revenues and orders. They_have done other things to reduce the
workload in their office such as. allowing warrants to be signed by
the clerk. Page 80
3une 3, 1982
8 2-
a
.Tune 3, 1982
Her first memo said she was unable to make cuts in the budget. Her
second memo was concerning the-Administrative Office cuts of $76.,000.
What she was saying in the second memo was, the items that have been
deleted by the Administrative Office are concerning a great number
of mandated services that will have to be paid for if she ran out of
money during the budget year. She had a real concern with the
elimination of the extra help positions which would put them in a
position where they would be unable to thoroughly administrate the
laws, unable to compel attendance of people in court and unab7:e to
send courtesy notices. She predicted there would be a loss of revenue
of over $400,000. She spoke relative to the procedure used for,
visiting judges. If a judge comes from out of county, they are paid
a municipal court rate, milage and state Per diem if they stay overnigfit.
If they use a judge within the county, they are paid the differential
between what they make and what the municipal court rate makes. It is
much. cheaper and they will be in better shape in January because there
will be four justice court judges and some of them will have spare
time. They have done several kinds of things at municipal court to
save money. They have a pro tern program in which the attorneys serve
free of charge, an answering device which explains one-ha'lf of all
questions people ask, and she had started clerking her own jury trials
on Tuesdays and Wednesdays.
Chairman Wheeler stated the Board was asking all the lower
courts and the Superior Court to maintain and have no increase for
this fiscal year and to cooperate with their effort in balancing the
budget for this year.
Judge Rutherford agreed but she could not guarntee she could
reduce her professional budget because she did not know who was going
to be arrested this year, in what combinations, and whether they
needed attorneys. Once there are over two people arrested, there is a
need to appoint outside attorneys.
Mr. Pyeatt stated there were two ways the Board could look
at these budgets. The Board could budget to the hilt initially and
then carry those amounts over as fund balances if things did not
materialize. Another way is to budget the appropriations conservatively
and then hope the court uses due discretion, but if the need arises
during the course of the fiscal year, then the Board would have to
provide a budget transfer. There were some rather substantial budget
transfers from the reserve around January or Feburary of this year.
Judge Rutherford did not think that any of the courts could
guarantee that the professional services or -jury and witness fees could
be cut and that they would be able to stay within that reduction. She
has had an average of forty to fifty every year since she had been
on the bench and had no reason to suspect she would have one-third
less this year. She suspected she would have more workload this year,
because of the new drunk driving law. She calculated the net effect
of laying off the entire Sheriff`s Office in the Chico Judicial
District and her workload would be lowered approximately eight percent
if there were no arrests from the Sheriff's Office.
Chairman Wheeler felt when they proposed the reductions and
sent the figures to the administrators, including the judicial system,
it was that they be able to balance the proposed budget. If they
felt it was necessary to come back to the Board on July 1, 1982, the
Board would look at the budgets again before it was finalized. This
gives the Board a structure by which to work. She knew Judge Rutherford
was not comfortable with the proposed reductions.
age 81
June 3, 19$2
June 3, 1982
Judge Rutherford was only concerned with what might possibly
happen with item 2 forward. Item number 1 Ys-a July 1, 1982 issue.
Once they are behind they will need more extra help to get caught
up. She did not plan to get behind again and go through the same
crisis they did with the parking a number of years ago when the
county threw in the towel and gave it to the city.
Chairman Wheeler felt maybe they needed to give the court to
the city or give the court system to the State of California to assume
the costs.
Mr. Lively stated what will happen in the accounts not
involving personnel is the court will continue to operate in a deficient
status. They will receive a deficiency notice in the Administrative
Office, which is essentially acknowledging there has been an
expenditure of funds in excess of the appropriation and they will do
one of two things. They will ask the court to pull the money from
somewhere else or, if it is a substantial amount, the money will come
from the reserve which will require a public hearing be held. Whatever
the situation is, the process is an after the fact process and they have
no control aver that.
Judge McNelis, Gridley Justice Court, stated that since
1980 the court had an increase of about 57 percent in activity and
the budget increased by about 2b percent.. All during that time, there
were increased legislative mandates. As of the first of the year, they
will have to send out a letter to another court anytime there is
someone charged with a drunk driving offense who has a prior conviction
in another court. While the workload has increased, they have done
many things to attempt to cut costs. He has done the same as Judge
Rutherford in relieving a clerk during jury trials and has tried to
.schedule cases to reduce the appearances by court interpreters, who
are paid for, and to reduce appearances by the District Attorney's
i0ffice, or at least to consolidate them so that they only have to
appear one day a week. Fine schedules have been increased where
appropriate, they have scavengered furniture and equipment and
curtailed maintanence of many of the books they feel are necessary.
The baliff services were curtailed by the Board substantially and
courier services were also curtailed. When he has taken a vacation
the last two or three years he has used a judge pro tem, who comes in
at no cost to the county, as opposed to bringing in a visiting judge.
Their budget requests was up some $17,600 from last year and a large
percentage of that increase was in areas they fiad no control over such
as buildings and grounds maintenance.. He was asked to reduce .the
budget by $17,000 and did not feel he could do sb. He did reduce the
budget by $8,000 and told the Board the reasons why; pointing out what
he thought the effects of further cuts would tie. The $8,000 in cuts
included the ten percent decrease in salaries and the majority was
made up in equipment purchases, which they have been requesting for
about theee years now, which have been put off for each of the past
three years. He understood that the Board committee took $8,000
and attempted to get them to the level of last year and cut another
$10,000 which was a deputy court clerk. They have 2-1/2 employees.
He pointed out the effects of that action in that they have priorities
they have to follow by statute that takes about twenty to twenty-five
hours a week for the clerk in processing of parking and traffic.
If the employee is eliminated, they would have to stop those things
and go to a voluntary pay basis. He would put an answering service
on the phone and the office would only be open four hours a week
so that the employee would have a chance to do her work.
Page g2
June 3, 1982
June 3, 1982
a e- c o s o 0 0 c e .- ~-- o c- s-- o n c--- o- ma c
Their^court generates about $250 in the form of parking and traffic
.fines. Tf they went to a voluntary pay basis, they would lose
$3,250 by not processing warrants and not sending out courtesy notices.
The county share of that is 51 .percent. By cutting one position, they
would save $10,740 in the county and lose revenue of $19,300. There
is nothing else they could stop doing. The other two items that
would have to go if the reduction were made would be the small claims
and civil matters, which amounts to about five to ten hours per week
in clerical time. If they have to stop processing those items, this
will result in a lawsuit against the county. He did not know if they
would have to stop processing violations of probation and failures
to pay fines. If that did happen, there would be an additional
decrease in revenue of $10,000.
Judge Goodwin, Biggs Justice Court, handed out information
to the Board at this time. When he was asked to prepare a budget,
he reduced the budget to comply with the requests by reducing $1,950.
After making that decrease, he had a demand to decrease another
$4,5$8, which includes the reduction in the salaries of himself.
What the Board has done is put the court in a position o£ trying to
operate on a budget of about $1,700. He brings revenue into the
county of approximately $5,000 per year by traveling to other courts.
This does not reflect in his budget. The county is asking him to
make reductions in his budget of almost the exact amount he contributed
to the county funds by being an assigned judge. He asked the Board
allow them a budget as requested. He noticed in the newspaper the
Oroville clerk did not have to make a reduction because they did not
request more in the budget. He made a reduction voluntarily when he
prepard his first budget, and now, he was asked to reduce more. The
court is still a money-making court. He will still continue the court.
He reiterated the remarks of the other judges. He has a one-half
time secretary and clerk and they have made every effort to cooperate
with the county in reducing the budget, but they are down to where
they cannot even function. The Board was ignoring the fact they
produce more revenue than they spend. They were ignoring the fact that
he had contributed his salary to the total of about one-half back to
the county each year.
Chairman Wheeler stated as a traveling judge taxpayers of
this state had compensated him in many, many ways. The county has
been most judicious in the attention toward the Biggs Judiciary District,
in the very fact that the court still exists.
Mr. Pyeatt was at a loss relative to the information. His
records showed Judge Goodwin had not prepared a budget and submitted
it to the Administrative Office in at least three years. The Auditor
and the Administrative Office had prepared the budget under Government
'i Code Section 29045. The budget was put together by the Auditor and the
Administrative Office and the reductions proposed wexe coming from
that budget. He received absolutely no information from Judge Goodwin.
Judge Goodwin stated they did prepare a budget for last year.
Mr. Pyeatt stated they did receive a budget this year from
Biggs Court, but they did not receive the responses to the follow
up on the allocations.
Judge McNelis, Gridley Justice Court, stated if the Board
deleted $10,740 from his budget the county would lose at least $19,300
and probably more. He could live with that.
Page 83
June 3, 1982
_ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ =June 3, 1982 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
62- Chairman Wheeler stated proportionally the revenue. that
$'' would be lost in the Chico 'Municipal Court would be much greater.
Mr. Pyeatt stated they had received a memo from the Paradise
Justice Court dated June 1, 1982 and as far as the Oroville Justice
Court was concerned there were no reductions proposed.
Supervisor Saxaceni stated in his investigation, the county
was sharing about 55 percent with the cities and the unincorporated
areas. The court system only goes to show that it is difficult to
meet the cost for the services on the division of the income that is
coming out of the cities for those services. He was trying tb
negotiate fair share for the county and it was unfortunate to have to
reach the bottom before they can start coming back up again.
On motion of Supervisor Fulton, seconded by Supervisor
Saraceni and unanimously carried, the budgets for the Chico Municipal
Court, Oroville Justice Court, Paradise Justice Court, Gridley Justice
Court, and Biggs Justice Court were to be prepared pursuant to the
committee recommendations. '
Chairman Wheeler stated the criminal justice committee for
CSAC was seriously looking at putting together a proposal to lobby
the state to consider 100 percent take over of the court system.
She hoped that would happen.
Judge McNelis thought the state take over of the court
system would happen in the next five years..
Recess: The Board recessed at 6:06 p.m. to reconvene on June 4, 1982,
at 8:00 a.m.
Page 84
June 3, 1982