HomeMy WebLinkAboutM062282June 22, 19.82
OF CALIFORNIA )
58.
' OF BUTTE )
82
The Board of Supervisors met at 8;00 a.m. pursuant to adjournment.
Present: Supervisors Dolan, Fulton, Moseley, Saraceni, and Chairman Wheeler.
Mike Pyeatt, interim administrative officer; Del 5iemsen, county counsel; and
Eleanor M. Becker, county clerk, by Catliy Pitts, assistant clerk to the Board.
CLOSED SESSION: The Board recessed at 8:0.1 a.m. to hold a closed session
on meet and confer.
RECONVENE: The Board reconvened at 9:07 a.m. following a closed session
on meet and confer. No decisYons were made.
RECESS: 9:08 a.m.
RECONVENE: 9:15 a.m.
Pledge of allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America
Invocation by Clay Castleberry
1028 ADDITIONAL MATTERS PRESENTED BY BOARD MEMBERS
Chairman Wheeler announced that the Board will be going into closed
session tomorrow on meet and confer and would be meeting in closed session
later today on litigation.
',10291 APPROVAL OF MSNUTES CONTINUED TO JUNE 29, 1982
Consideration of approval of the minutes of June 8;and 15, 1982
was continued to June 29,-1982.
10301 CHANGE PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR M. W. BALKEN PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
erm u~vnN~
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Fulton
and unanimously carried, the public hearing date set for June 29, 1982
was changed to July 13, 1982 at 10:15 a.m. to consider the M. W. Balken
negative declaration and rezone from "TM-5 acid 10" (timber mountain - 5 and
10 acre parcels) to "TM-3" (timber mountain - 3 acre parcels) located on
the west side of Coutolenc Road, approximately 1/2 mile north of Skyway,
identified as AP 65-22-4, 65-22-6, 65-23=01, 65-23-05 and 65-23-06, north
of Paradise.
ADDITIONAL ITEMS FROM BOARD MEMBERS TO BE ADDRESSED AT THE END OF THE DAY
Supervisor Moseley asked to be excused from the meeting before
11:00 a.m. to attend a funeral.
10
Supervisor Saraceni would be discussing the new state mandates
and Fish and Game.
Chairman Wheeler had questions that would be directed to staff
on the Forest Service activity in the Butte Meadows area. Directed to
Agricultural Commissioner.
ADOPT RESOLUTION 82-101; APPFOVE CONSENT AGENDA
Consideration of the following was pulled from the consent agenda:
Amendment to Butte County Code Section 24 to provide for consideration of
conditional zoning; application under State Homeownership Assistance Program;
consideration of resolution setting office hours for Butte County Library
System.
la
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Fulton
and unanimously carried, the following action was taken:
Page' 136.
June 22, 1982
S 2-
3''
June 22, 1982
- 1. Approved budget transfers as set forth_in the June 18, 1982
memo from Administrative Office attached as Addendum 1 to the minutes.
2. Ordered the Auditor to distribute the excess tax proceeds
from the sale of the subject propertg in accordance with. Revenue and Taxation
Code Section 4675 as follows;
Esther R. Browse $1,348.13 ALA Q71-25-0-024-0
Carole :Murphy 4,598.02 AP 06-2-04-0-180-0
County of Butte 7.00 AP 062-04-0-180-0
11:00 a.m.
to sign:
3. General Assistance fair hearing set for June 29; 1982 at
4. Approved the following agreements and authorized the Chairman
a. Addendum No. 1 to agreement-for bus services that
provides for payment to the contractor of $20 per vehicle hour of service
during fiscal year 1982-83 for the base level of transit service with a net
cost to Butte County of $69,000 to be funded from SB 620 funds.
b. Amendment No. 1 to agreement for special bus services on
Butte County Transit System that continues payment to the contrator of
$25 per day through fiscal year 1982-83 for bus- runs which were originally
non-compensated deadheads but are now used for carrying passengers with the
cost of these runs to be fully funded from passenger revenues.
5. Approved amendment No. 7 to agreement for Gridley transportation
services that extends Butte County's support of the Gridley Flyer through
fiscal year 1982-83 and provides for payments to the contractor of $2.40 per
ticket and $3.OO.per ticket for county residents depending upon length of
trip with the net cost being projected at $3,500 to be funded from SB 325
funds and the Chairman authorized to sign.
6. Approved amendment No. 4 to agreement with Chico Clipper,
transportation services in the Chico urban area for handicapped citizens
and senior citizens, that provides for continuation through fiscal year
1982-83 and payment to the contractor of $3.70 per ticket coll-cted at a
net cost to Butte County of $82,000 to be funded from SB 325 funds and the
Chairman authorized to sign.
7. Authorized an increase in the Oroville Express fare to $.90
per ticket.
8. Authorized the Chairman to sign the amended conveyance of
development rights and open area easement for Leonard C. McKee to comply
with condition of approval of use permit for AP 39-24-10.
9. Public hearing date set for .July 13, 1982 at 11:15 a.m. for
consideration of Michael G. Dawson proposed negative declaration and application
for cancellation of Land Conservation Act Agreement on AP 41-15-31, 28.93
acres located on both sides of Clark Road 1/2 mile north of Highway 70 .
10. Approved agreement (4012) for medfly detection during fiscal
year 1982-83 in the amount of $60,268 with the Department of Food and
Agriculture and the Chairman authorized.to sign.
11. Approved payment. of $300 from the Community Development Block
Grant Program funds for the purpose of relocation allowance to Mrs. Ruth
Zlatik as a result of the county's acquisition of 2255 Fort Wayne Street,
Oxoville. Page 137.
June ~22, 1982
June 22t 1982
12. Adopted Resolution 82-10.1 setting a.~ublic hearing date of
July 27, 1982 at 10:30 a.m. for consideration of establishment of county
Service Area No. 79 (Big Chico Creek Estates, Sacramento Park - storm
drainage and streetlighting) and the Chairman authorized to sign.
13. Approved amendment to contract between Family Service
Association andButte County to cover expenses incurred in fiscal year
1981-82 for child protective counseling, family therapy agreement and
the Chairman authorized to sign.
14. Approved amendment to contract with Step II Psychological
Services and Butte County to cover. additional expenses incurred in fiscal
year 1981-82 for child protective counseling and the Chairman authorized
to sign.
1033 ADOPT RESOLUTION 82-102 SETTING OFFICE HOURS FOR BUTTE COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEM
Biscussion of the proposed new office hours for the Butte County
Library System held at this time.
Jo Terry, librarian, set out the proposed hours at this time.
In the past, they have discussed the compromise between having Saturday
service and not having service on Saturday. It is essential to have all.
three of the large branches open at tfie same time so there can be backup
from the headquarters library in Oroville. This schedule averages about
32 hours per week. During the summer months there is less use of the
libraries than during the winter months. She felt the Board might want
to consider the summer hours at this time and make a decision, on the winter
hours later.
Rod Weyand, BCEA, advised he had received numerous calls from
employees and members of the public relative to the library hours. Statistics
show that the day the libraries are used the least is Saturday. He suggested
that the workday be Monday through Friday as a good work schedule.
Mrs. Terry advised that she had received numerous letters requesting.
the Saturday service. There are many other services that are provided by
the libraries that do not reflect in the circulation count.
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Fulton
and unanimously carried, Resolution 82-102 reflecting summer office hours
for the Butte County Library System was adopted and the Chairman authorized
to sign.
1034 DISCUSSION OF BUDGET TRANSFER B-246 FISH AND GAIL
Supervisor Saraceni questioned the transfer of $1,100 from Fish
and Game to the Administrative Office in budget transfer B-246.
8
Mike Pyeatt, interim administrative officer, explained that
Administrative Office staff would be taking minutes of the Fish and Game
Commission and their time would be charged to the Fish and Game budget.
1035 WAIVE FIRST READING OF ORDTNANCES: ADOPT RESOLUTION 82-103
Del Siemsen, county counsel, explained the procedure for readoption
of ordinances that had not been published within the required time required
by statute. The interim ordinance zoning a portion of the County of Butte
an "RT-1-A" (minimum density residential trailers district would not be
necessary because it is an accomplished ,f act and would be a non-conforming
use for that purpose.
On motion of Supervisor Saraceni, seconded by Supervisor Fulton
and unanimously carried, the following action was taken;
Page 138.
June 22, 1982
8 2-
1036
1037
__ June 22, 1982 ____ ________
1. Waiyed the first reading of an ordinance amending Ordinance
2252 of the County of Butte known as the .salary ordinance regarding the
Veterans Service Office.
2. Waived the first reading of an ordinance zoning portions of
the County of Butte, pursuant to Chapter 24-29 of the Butte County Code
and making the previous findings relative to the Gridley-Biggs rezone.
3. Waived the first reading of an ordinance amending Ordinance
2252 of the Ccunty of Butte known as the salary ordinance regarding the
law enforcement unit salary raise.'
4. Adopted Resolution 82-103 of intention setting a public
hearing date of July 27, 1982 at 10:00 a.m. for renaming private roads
in Butte County: Braun Lane (Drescher Tract to Bohemia Avenue) to Stageline
Road and Bourdan Lane {Rattlesnake Rcad to end) to Deer Trail and the
Chairman authorized to sign.
ADOPT RESOLUTION 82-104 -PROTECTING INSURANCE FUNDS
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and unanimously carried, Resolution 82-104 protecting the Self-Insurance Fund,
Workmens' Compensation Insurance Fund and the Unemployment Insurance Fund
was adopted and the Chairman authorized to sign.
ACCEPT THREE MONTH RECOMMENDATION OF STAFF RE: SMALL CLATMS ADVISOR>
Mike Pyeatt, interim administrative officer, set out the recommenda-
tion and summary of all alternatives relative to a Small Claims Advisor.
County Counsel would work with Personnel in order to obtain one or two
interns to assist in this program. The purpose of having this program
on a trial basis in that no one knows what the demands for the service
will be. They anticipate doing the program for less than the revenues
that are generated for this program. Hopefully the additional revenue
that is saved from this program will help to offset some of the increased
workload and night court costs.
Del Siemsen, county counsel, anticipated contacting CSUC
Paralegal program to see if interns could be assigned to help with this
program.
Supervisor Dolan understood that the individual who complained
and who is now suing the county was not concerned that the county did not
have the service but that they were paying for something that was not there.
Even though they have received proposals that .may have a greater expense
than the fees, that does not mean they have to accept it. Her concern was
that the implication was that through the mail-in procedure, Counsel's
Office could absorb this program without reimbursement of costs. There
will be time taken away from county legal work to oversee this program
and will be costs for clerical assistance. She wanted to know if there
would be a handle on those costs as well.
Mr. Pyeatt explained that on particular aspects of the
program that is accounted for, the Auditor's Office would attempt to cost
apply the expenses of Counsel's Office against the revenue in the trust
for this program. They did not want to overburden Counsel's Office and
that was why the three-month trial basis was suggested. They could then
make a determination relative to the cost of the program and the amount
of service that was needed. A program started during the course of a year
cannot have the level of service reduced. This was why they were proposing
the start up of the program on a small scale.
Page 139.
June 22, 1982
8 2-
~ '
- - - ?~~ ?2~. X9.82 ~ .: .. ~ . - _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _
I,t was moved by Supervisor Saraceni, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
:hat the Board accept the recommendation of staff for a three month trial
nail-in Small Claims Advisor service through.-County Counsel's Office.
Supervisor Dolan was concerned with, the state mandate that requires
:hat once the service is established the amount of service could not be
reduced. Was there any way to set the services at the demand rate rather
than letting it set itself. If everyone sent in questions, that would be
the level of service.
Mr. Siemsen advised that the level of service would be what was
provided back. to the applicants. Either party can avail themselves of the
service. In theory, they could have two requests per claim. At this point,
their responses would be primarily procedural responses. There is no
requirement in the law that requires that someone be paid for providing the
service. If a county could find someone to volunteer their time, that would
be the level of service. The people are not required to pay any more than
the fees generated by the revenue. There is no set level of service specified.
The trial basis will give the county an idea of the amount of requests, the
time involved and the cost for services and whether this 'would be covered
by the fees paid for the service.
Supervisor Dolan would like to see additional information regarding
this service before the county agrees to provide the service. Could the
county limit one intern for four to five hours per day and say that was
the level of service provided by the County.
Mr. Siemsen advised that the county should not be considering what
the service would be on the basis of a person's time but on the responses
back to the people.
Vote on motion:
AXES: Supervisors Fulton, Moseley, Saraceni and Chairman Wheeler
NOES: Supervisor Dolan
Motion carried.
1038
RECESS: 9:54 a.m.
RECONVENE: 10:05 a.m.
(DISCUSSION OF RESOLUTION ON REVENUE ANTICIPATION NOTES
~i Ev Bosworth, treasurer-tax collectors set out the proposed
resolution on the revenue anticipation notes at this time. The resolution
is in draft form with some changes that had dust been made.
The matter was continued to later in the uiee~ting.
1039
PUBLIC HEARING: BUDGET TRANSFER B-239 MENTAL HEALTH
The public hearing on budget transfer B-239, Mental Health, was
held as advertised.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: No one.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to th.e Board.
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded. by Supervisor Fulton
and unanimously carried, the following budget transfer-was approved:
B-234 - Mental Health. Establishes various appropriations from
unanticipated revenues in the amount of $84,0.0.0.
Page 140.
June 22, 1982
62"' 1040
b!
_ _----June 22, 1982-_=-____________-__
PUBLIC HEARTNGF THAD WAKED1t1N-APPEAL QF CONDi:TION ON TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
ON AP 30=10=2=0& P"ROPE"RTY LOCATED'ON'16TH AND GRAND THERMALITO
The public hearing on Thad Wakeman appeal of condition (provide
a 60-foot right-of-ways on tentative parcel map, AP 30-10-2-06, four parcels,
property located on 16th and Grand, Therinalito was held as advertised.
Clay Castleberry, public works .director, set out the background
of the appeal. Staff had indicated that with. the past experiences in
Thermalito, since these are one acre parcels, there would probably be future
division of the property and therefore the condition was required to
allow for access to the back parcels. If there are no further divisions
there would not be a,problem with waiving the condition. '
Bettye Kircher, planning director, advised that the density in
the Thermalito area had been increased from four unit s. per acre to six units
per acre for public water and sewer.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: Thad Wakeman. Mr.
Wakeman stated there was a demand for one acre parcels in Thermalito. The
zoning is "A-2" zoning. The Planning Department had sent the Advisory
Agency information suggesting an easement, which he did not take too
seriously. He did not feel it was appropriate because it was not economically
feasible to divide-one acre parcels and put in curb, gutter and sidewalks
and put in streets. After the suggestion was made, four days later he
received a letter advising that the condition was to provide a 50-foot
right-of-way. If someone wants to divide the property later on, they
can acquire the right-of-way.
2. Mike Evans, Ron Graves and Associates, representing Mr.
Wakeman. Mr. Evans felt tFie potential buyer"could look into the possibility
of additional right-of-way if they were looking at the property for future
division. He felt there would be sufficient handles on the matter in the
future without requiring the condition at this time.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
1041
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and carried, the appeal of Thad Wakeman of condition (provide a 60-foot
right-of-way) on tentative parcel map, AP 30-10-2-06, four parcels,
property located on 16th and Grand, Thermalito was upheld and the condition
was deleted noting the project is consistent with the General Plan. AYES:
Supervisors Moseley, Saraceni andChairman Wheeler. NOES: Supervisors
Dolan and Fulton.
PUBLIC HEARING: GERALD LUGENBEEL PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPEAL
OF APPROVER USE PERMIT TO ALLOW HOME OCCUPATION WHICH MAY BE OBJECTIONABLE
BY REASON OF NOISE, AND A VARIANCE TO THE SIDEYARD SETBACK TO ALLOW A STUDIO
THREE FEE FROM PROPERTY LINE AND A TOOL SHED AT PROPERTY LINE, ON PROPERTY
ZONED "A-10" (AGRICULTURAL - 10 ACRE PARCELS), LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER
OF ELK AVENUE AND PIERCE AVENUE APPROX. THREE MILES SOUTHWEST OF CHI CO
The public hearing on Gerald Lugenbeel proposed negative declaration
and appeal by Archie and Ruther Paterson of an approved use permit to allow
a home occupation which may lie objectionable by reason of noise, and a variance
to the sideyard setback to allow a studio three feet from the property line
and a taol shed at the property line, on property zoned "A-10" (agricultural -
10 acre parcels, located on the northeast corner of Elk Avenue and Pierce
Avenue, approximately three miles southwest of Chico was held as continued.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing:
Page 141.
June 22, 1982
', sane 22, 1982
82-, 1. Gerald~Lugenbeel. Mr. Lugenli~el spoke in favor of the use
~ permit and variance.- He has complied with the county requirements. He was
present to defend property rights,.
2. Kathy Shifferly, chairperson for Omni Arts. Ms. Shifferly
described the art foundery being used by Mr, Lugenbeel. It is the size
of something a person would use to do woodworking and a Kirby vacuum cleaner
is used to heat the metal for pouring. Because of the other buildings in
the neighborhood that close to the fence line, Mr. Lugenbeel felt there was
', nothing wrong with building in the location wHere he built. The first
reading on-the noise was 85 decibels. That amount of noise is equal to a
lawnmower. The last reading was b2 decibels. The decibels for a voice is
about 72 decibels. She submitted letters from people thanking'Mr.
Lugenbeel for hs work and contribution to the art community. She introduced
the people who were present on Mr. Lugenbeel's behalf.
3. Vince Edwins. Mr. Edwins did not feel that the neighbors
underdtood all the facts. The contractor Mr. Lugenbeel hired was a relative
of Mr. and Mrs. Paterson. The tool shed location was discussed with the
neighbors and the neighbors said they would rather have the shed, He wondered
why the masonry wall was never mentioned.. They had put up a seven-foot
high pecky cedar wall.
4. Jeff Lindsay. Mr. Lindsay stated he had first-hand experience
at the foundry. This is a free learning situation. The longest the furnace
is on is two hours. All the people sgeaking on Mr. Lugenbeel's behalf have
first hand knowledge of what happens at the site.
5. Robin Masyhur. Ms. Masyhur stated there was an eight-foot
birch wall between the furnace and the neighbor's property.
6. Stan Fortier. Mr. Fortier presented pictures showing equipment
for farming that was made in the 1920s. He explained how he had been unable
to have some of the. pieces made for his equipment until he discovered Mr.
Lugenbeel could do the work for him. He did the work with Mr. Lugenbeel
watching him. He is an orchardist and was aware that in agricultural areas,
there are noises that disturb him. They have to work together.
7. Margaret Brown. Ms. Brown spoke in favor of the use permit
and variance.
8. Ann Fisher, Fisher Art Gallery. Ms. Fisher could not comment
on the noise level. She has been at Mr. Lugenbeel's property many times
and the noise does not seem to be anything exceptional. This is a unique
educational experience. and is of benefit to the community.
9. Neil McCabe, representing Mr. and Mrs. Paterson. Mr. McCabe
responded to comments that had been made during the hearing. The Paterson's
property rights have been infringed upon. The statement was made that
all county requirements had been met but people were surprised when there
was discussion of the masonry wall. There was reference made to the
fact that the furnace uses part of a Kirby vacuum cleaner. That is not
what makes the noise. It is the roar of the burning process. The Patersons
would deny that their son-in-law or his workers made any statement about
placement of the buildings. Mr. Lugenbeel was asked if he had obtained
permits and the Patersons were told that permits had been obtained from
the county. The permit applications were tardy. Since the last Board
meetings there have been two additional .firings. This raises considerable
concern as to what type of compliance of the conditions will be done if this
is allowed. These firings were on June 16, 19.82 at 6:40 to 7:30 p.m. and
7:40 to 8:50 p.m. Conditions were imposed to make the operation safe.
After testings by the county, the results indicate the standards exceed
Page 142.
June 22, 1982
**
8
June 22, 1982--- --- --__-__-__
:hose in the county requirements. There is no mention of a new device to
cold this to the acceptable decibels. Thep were not here to argue against
irt. The fact there are so many people involved is a concern since this
Cs an application under the home occupation provision. He referred to
gage 24 of the zoning ordinance book and set out the definition of home
occupation which makes it subject to ~members•of the family residing on the
premises. His position was that the Board could not grant a use permit
Eor home occupation -under the testimony that had. been given.
iUi'ERVISOR MOSELEY ABSENT AT THTS' TIME
Mr. McCabe felt that this would be an enforcement problem and
asked that the Board deny the application. If the Board determined this
aas a home occupation and granted the use permit, they would still have
Co consider the variance and there are findings that. have to be made. This
does not comply with the findings under the variance applications.
RECESS: 11:04 a.m.
RECONVENE: 11:09 a.m.
10. Beth Stilson, Mr. and Mrs. Paterson's daughter. Ms. Stilson
spoke regarding the. extreme noise from the firings when she has been
in her parents patio. They have to move inside in order to carry on a
conversation. Her parents have had to curtail their hobby of gardening
because of the extreme noise.
11. Katby Shifferly. Ms. Shifferly advised that Mr. Lugenbeel
was granted a permit. He did not receive anything with contingencies.
He was not trying, to defy anyone. The people who are using the facilities
are not being paid to work there. There are probably two or three people
during the day and sometimes there is a larger group~of people.
12. Neil McCabe: Mr. McCabe spoke regarding the fact that the
definition of home occupation speaks to employment and work. The fact
that people are not getting paid does not matter.
13. Gerald Lugenbeel. Mr. Lugenbeel stated there were two
lists of mitigations and one was complied with. Several days ago Supervisor
Dolan came to his house and had another set of mitigations. He did not
know about the masonry wall. As far as ceasing and desisting, the newspaper
can tell him to do so all they want but that will have no effect on him.
He was not aware of a cease and desist order. He uses propane gas for
the firing of the furnace.
Mr. Lugenbeel answered Supervisor Saraceni's question about
how difficult it would be to move the furnace. It would be a rather
complex operation and would cost about $3,000 to move the furnace. There
would still he grinding and tapping noises in the building. To move the
furnace would not be the solution to the noise Level.
14. Pat McClure. Mr. McClure spoke regarding the requirements
of having family members involved in home occupation.- If this is an
issue then people could not have their neighbors or friends over to help
them do anything. There are nine easement violations on the
block of houses directly adjoining Mr. Lugenb.eel's property.
Chairman Wheeler asked that this hearing be continued because
of concerns-she had regarding au issue in the Cohasset area in which the
Board denied the use permit and she wanted to research. the matter to see
i~f this were a similar situation.
Page 143.
June 22, 1982
8'.
,Tune 22, 1982
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ ~ W ~ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _
The hearing was contYnued tp ,Tune 29, 1982 at 2;30.p.m.
ADOPT ORpINANCE,229Q; PUBLIC HEARING BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION CODE
AMENDMENT TO-ALLOW-~UBLI,C UTILITY k'AGILTIES TILTHTN THE SIDE AND REAR YARD
SETBACK AREAS IN ALL ZONES IN THE [ININCORPORATED PORTIONS OF BUTTE COUNTY
The~publi.c hearing on Butte County Planning Commission code amendment
to allow public utility facilities within the side and rear yard setback
areas in all zones in the unincorporated portions of Butte County was held
as advertised.
1042
Clay Castleli.erry, gublic works director, set out the background
of the request by the utility companies to have their facilities within the
side and rear yard setbacks.
Bettye Kircher, planning director, set out the background of
the concerns that had been raised about the side yard setbacks. There
were .hearings by the Planning-Commission that came forward to the Board
and the requests were denied. The Board agreed to the commission recommenda-
tions. Subsequent to that, concerns were voiced to Public Works and the
Board directed that the Planning Commission go back into hearings. The
Board has received recommendations back from the commission.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: Ed Reed, electrical
engineer for PG&E. Mr. Reed was concerned in giving the customer a place
to put the electrical meter without having to put it in the front yard.
They do not allow meters in the rear of the house because of meter reading
problems.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
On motion of Supervisor 5araeeni, seconded by Supervisor Dolan
and carried, the amendment to the code to allow public utility facilities
within the side and rear yard setback areas in all zones in the unincorporated
portions of Butte County was approved; Ordinance 2290 was adopted and the
Chairman authorized to sign. AYES: Supervisors Dolan, Fulton, Saraceni
and Chairman Wheeler. ABSENT: Supervisor Moseley.
ADOPT ORDINANCE 2291: PUBLIC HEARING: CHARLES V. NEEL PROPOSED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND REZONE FROM "C-1" (LIGHT COMMERCTAL) TO "C-2" (GENERAL
COMMERCIAL), PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF NORD AVENUE, APPROX. 800
FEET SOUTH OF WEST SACRAMENTO AVENUE, IDENTIFIED AS AP 043-29-0-044 &
043-29-052, CHICO
The public hearing on Charles V. Neel proposed negative declaration
and rezone from "C-1" (light commerical) to "C-2" .general commercial),
property located on the west side of Nord Avenue, approximately 800 feet south
of West Sacramento Avenue, identified as AP 043-29-0-044 and 043-29-052, Chico
was held as advertised.
1043 I
rezone.
Bettye Kircher, planning director, set out the background of the
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: No one.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and carried, noting the provisions of CEQA have been satisfied and
considered in making this decision, a negative declaration was adopted;
finding that a rezone to "C-2" in consistent with the policies of the Butte
County General Plan; the rezone from "C-l" (light commerdcal) to "C-2"
(general commercial), property located on the west side of Nord Avenue,
Page 144.
June 22, 1982
8
v
1044
_______J_une 22, 1_98_2_===_--_-____-__ ______
.__-
3pproximately 80Q'feet south of West Sacramento Avenue, identifiedoved•
~P 043-29-0--044. and 043-29-052, Chico for Charles V. Neel was app ,
)rdinance 2291 was.adopted.and the Chairman authorized to sign. AYES:
supervisors Dolan, Saracens and Chairman Wheeler. NOES: Supervisor k'ulton.
SBSENT: Supervisor"Moseley.
PUBLIC HEARING: D1CK CHAPPELL APPEAL OF CONDITIONS 12,.1`3'& I4 ON TENTATIVE
2ARCEL 2iAP, AP 41-01--141, PROPERTY LOCATED ON HUMMER' ROAD, APPROX. 1,000
FEET~WEST OF DOE S'iTLL ROAD; FOREST RANCH AREA
The public hearing on Dick Chappell appeal of conditions 12, 13
and 14 on tentative parcel map, AP 41-01-141, property located on Hummer
Road, approximately 1,000 feet west of Doe"Mill Road, Forest Ranch area
was held as continued.
Bettye Kircher, planning director, set out the background of the
appeal. They have prepared written responses to the questions asked
at the previous hearing. There are additional concerns raised by the
Department of Fish and Game regarding wildlife. She had just received
a copy of a memo from Supervisor Saracens on this matter. She could
not respond why this map was included in the specific plan.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: Russ Croninger, Ringel
and Associates, representing Mr. Chappell. Mr. Croninger was upset that:
there was another request for a continuance. He did not see where the
Planning Department was following policy. In April 26, 1982, the Planning
Department was directed to work with the property owners and appropriate
policy was discussed. He read the memo fxom Planning at that time. He
had two more maps in the general area. He heard from one of the clients
who had discussed his map with the Planning Department and was told there
were no problems whatsoever. They talked about the Fish and Game and
clustering of housing and making a statement on the map. There have
been no response. These peoplec:wanted into the specific play because the
county said let's do the entire area now. He did not care if the hearing
was continued but felt that he should have access to the information also.
SUPERVISOR MOSELEY PRESENT AT THIS TIME
The hearing was continued to 3une 29, 1982 at 10:00 a.m.
1045
PUBLIC HEARING: MARINO GARBIS APPEAL OF DENIAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP,
AP 56--05-61, FOUR PARCELS., ON ALTA TINA DRIVE, l/2 MILE NORTH OF TEN MILE
HOUSE TRAIL FOREST RANCH AREA (ITEM ON WHICH EIR WAS RE VESTED)
The public hearing on Marion Garbis,appeal of denied tentative
parcel map, AP 56-05-61, four parcels, on Alta Tina Drive, 1/2 mile north
of Ten Mile House Trail, Forest Ranch area (item on which EIR was requested)
was held as continued.
Clay Castleberry, public works director, set out the background
of the appeal. He read a proposed condition that was acceptable to both
Public Works and the applicant. The condition is that approval of the
final map may not be recommended until the California State Transportation
Commission has approved the public road connection at the intersection of
Alta Tina Drive and Highway 32.
Del Siemsen, county counsel, advised that this would not extend
the time set out in the State Map Act for final recording of the map.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: Russ Croninger,
representing Mr. Garhis. 'Mr. Croninger had no problems with the time
or the condition.
Page 145.
June 22, 1982
8 2-
b ',
1046
1047
1048
June. 22, 1982
Bettye Kircher, planning director, referred to a memo dated
April 23, 1982 relative to the Department of 'Fish. and Game letter of
!larch 3, 1982.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
It was. moved by Supervisor Saraceni, that the approval of the
final map may not be recommended .until the California State Transportation
Commission has. approved the public road connection at the intersection of
Alta Tina Drive and Highway 32 and that the map b.e approved subject to the
conditions set-out in the Advisory Agency minutes of June 9, 1982.
The-matter was continued until later in the meeting.
CHANGE HEARING DATE FOR CONSIDERATION OF ADULT DAY CARE COUNCIL
Archie T1cDonald asked that the Board consider changing the date
for consideration of the Adult Day Health Care Council in the county from
July 13, 1982 to July 20, 1982.
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and unanimously carried, the public hearing date of July 13, 1982 was
changed to 3u1y 20, 1982 at 11:15 a.m. for consideration of intention to
form an Adult Day Health Care Council in the county for the purpose of
investigating the possible development of an Adult Day Health Care Center
as set out in Resolution 82-96.
REPORT' JACK VANELLA REQUEST FOR EXPANSION. OF AGRICULTURAL, CHEMICAL OPERAT
Mrs. Lord asked if the Board could consider the report on the
Jack Vanella request for a building permit to expand his agricultural
chemical operation on Dayton Road, Chico. There are people present in the
audience who would like to speak to the matter and they would be unable
to attend the meeting this afternoon.
Ruby Stilley spoke against the building permit for expansion
of an agricultural chemical operation on Dayton Road.
Sonna Noyes was against the expansion of the chemical operation
and lived approximately 500 feet from this operation.
the plant.
Mrs. Lord stated that Mrs. Stilley is approximately 300 feet from
RECESS: 13:55 a.m.
RECONVENE: 1:30 p.m.
CLOSED SESSION: The Board recessed at 1:31 p.m. to hold a closed session
on litigation.
RECONVENE: The Board reconvened at 2:22 p.m. following a closed session
on litigation.
PUBLIC HEARING: MARINO GARBIS APPEAL OF DENIAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP,
AP 56-05-61, FOUR PARCELS, ON ALTA TINA ARIVE, 1/2 MILE NORTH OF TEN MILE
HOUSE TRAIL, FOREST RANCH AREA (ITEM ON WHICH EIR WAS REQUESTED).:
The closed public hearing on xlarino Garbis appeal of denial of
tentative parcel map, AP 56-05-61, four parcels, on Alta Tina Drive, 1/2 mile
north of Ten Mile House Trail, Forest Ranch area (item on which EIR was
requested) was held as continued:
Bettye Kircher, planning director, advised the Board had
information in the form of a~memo dated June 10, 1982 relative to additional
mitigations that could be imposed on a negative declaration.
Page 146.
June 22, 1982
8;
_ June 22, 1982 ___ ___ _____
On motion of Supervisor Wheeler, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and carried, the Marino Garbis tentative parcel map, AP 56-05-61, four
parcels, on Alta Tina Drive, 1/2 mile north of Ten"Mile House Trail, Forest
Ranch area was approved; finding a conditional negative declaration referencing
the below mitigation measures as set out in memo dated March 3 and memo
dated June 10; finding consistency with the General Plan; and subject to
the following conditions:
Mitigation Measures
1. Erosion control-measures shall be implemented at the time of
construction. These measures shall include:
a. Revegetate all exposed soil surfaces or use other soil stabilization
techniques.
b_. Stabilize all graded areas with surfacing of gravel or pavement,
perimeter berms, or equally effective measures.
c. Stabilize storm water runoff channels with installationof culverts,
riprap rock lining, energy dissipating structures, or equally
effective measures.
d. Conduct earthwork during the dry season only. No exposed soil
surfaces shall be left unprotected during the winter rainy season.
2. Place properly sized and installed culverts in any drainage courses
crossed by roads or driveways.
3. Design and build roads that conform to the terrain, following contours
as much as possible and avoiding steep embankment cuts. Road grades
shall not exceed 15%.
4. Locate building sites on areas of less than 20% slope, unless unique
site factors or site design demonstrates mitigation of erosion hazards.
5. Retain natural vegetation where removal is not essential for site
development.
6. Perimeter fencing shall not be constructed which would create a barrier
to the normal movement of wildlife.
7. Conform to the following protection measure recommended by the Butte
County Fire Department/California Department of Forestry:
_Water Supply: A water supply for fire protection will not be required.
However, if the domestic water storage has a capacity of 1,000 gallons
or more, afire department connection shall be installed. The fire
department must be notified of any such connection. Such a connection
point must be so located that it is readily accessible to fire
department equipment.
8. Arrange for an archaeological survey of the site by a qualified profes-
sional archaeologist before any site preparation or development occurs.
If any significant cultural resources are discovered, the tentative map
is to be referred back- to the Advisory Agency for redesign of the map
and/or determination of appropriate mitigation measures.
9. Show (on the tentative and final maps the proposed building sites in
a cluster arrangement. Sites would be around a limited developable area
adjacent to the access road and sewage disposal areas., thereby reducing
Page 147.
June'22, 1982
8 2-
a
.Tune 22, 1982
impacts of vegetation clearing, earthwork and road building costs and
encroachment upon deer range.
Conditions of approval:
1. Verify legal access.
2. Provide 2-way traversable access RS-B-LD-T to each parcel from a county
maintained road or state highway.
3. Access to be reserved in deeds as per County Ordinance and offered for
dedication on the final map.
4. Show 50 ft. building setback line measured from centerline of access
easement.
5. Provide road maintenance agreement.
6. Show all easements of record on the final map.
7. Provide street name signs per requirements of the Dept. of Public
Works prior to recordation of the final map.
8. Pay off any assessments.
9. Provide cul-de-sac at the end of the street.
10.. Pay any delinquent taxes.
11. Meet the requirements of the Butte County Fire Department.
12. Provide evidence that adequate domestic water is generally available
in the vicinity.
13. Indicate on the map that areas with slopes in excess of thirty percent
are unsuitable for sewage disposal.
14. Show the usable sewage disposal area proven to meet the requirements of
the Subdivision Ordinance on parcels 1, 2, 3 and 4.
Prove that the required quantities of domestic water are available to
each parcel or place the statement on the map that "there is no evidence
of domestic water is available".
1049
10 50
Show a fifty foot leachfield setback from the drainage way.
17. Final parcel map may not be recorded unless or until the California
State Transportation Commission has approved the public road connection
at the intersection of Alta Tina Drive and Highway 32.
AYES: Supervisors Fulton, Moseley, Saraceni and Chairman Wheeler. NOES:
Supervisor Dolan
ADOPT RESOLUTION 82--105 PROVIDING FOR BORROWING OF FUNDS FOR 1982-83 FLSCAL
YEAR AND ISSUANCE OF TAX AND REVENUE ANTICIPATION NOTES.
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Fulton
and unanimously carried, Resolution 82-105 providing for borrowing of funds
for 1982-83 fiscal year and the issuance of tax and revenue anticipation
notes was adopted and the Chairman authorized to sign.
POLICY RE: TECfiNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR APPLICATIONS UNDER STATE HOMEOWNERSHIP
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (HCD)
i = Ward Connerly, Connerly and Associates, set out the request from
Mr. Leon E. Mayer of Mayer Development Company, Inc. for assistance in
Page 148.
3une 22, 1982
8 2-
b ',
1051
1052
_ June 22, 1982 __________~_____
preparing and submitting an application under the.State Homeownership Assistance
Program. He had souse reservations about the request. There is .no money
currently- available under that program. Tf there were~inoney available, there
is no administrative ~cnoney for the county to '.use to implement the program.
One developer is asking for assistance in applying to the s ate for funding
and they have an obligation to assist. They are interested in assisting but
felt the county should defer applying .until the money is available and felt
there should be a fee levied against the developer for preparation of the
applications.
On motion of Supervisor Saraceni, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and unanimously carried, a policy was established that when State Homeownership
Assistance Program funds are available, the county would assist in applications
and encourage those who want to get involved in this type of program or would
be interested in getting into the program at such time as there is money for
the program and those interested in the program would pay for the cost in
fees when the application is made.
ANNOUNCEMENT BY CHAIRMAN WHEELER
Chairman Wheeler announced the Board was in closed session on two
issues involving litigation and here were no: decisions made.
APPROVE ANIMAL CONTROL SERVTCES CONTRACTS: SHOW INTENT OF PHONE SERVICE AND
HOUSING IN CHICO
Discussion of the proposed animal control services contract with
the Northwest SPCA and Superior California Humane Society for the next three
years was held at this time.
Mike Pyeatt, interim administrative officer, gave the Board an
update of the summary relative to the two contracts being proposed. These
contracts are virtually identical and split the county into two sections,
north and south.. Both contracts total $140,000, which is less than the
county was proposing to pay with. ACHS. As far as the split of licenses,
there would be a 60 -40% split, with the county receiving 60% of the
licenses.
Chairman Wheeler stated she had been in contact with the Chico
Humane Society and wondered if the contractors for the Chico urban area
could contract with the local society rather than transporting the animals
to Paradise.
Phil Mace, representing Superior California Humane Society, advised
,that he would be happy to discuss this matter faith the Chico Humane Society.
Butte County Humane Society in Chico has never been geared up to provide
(public service. If they are serious, he has indicated they would sit down
'and talk with them. In order to have public service, there must be paid
staff and the society in Chico is basically volunteer.
Discussion of an enterprise telephone number held at this time.
It was felt that the matter would be looked into.
Kent Robertson, Northwest SPCA, would be happy to provide the
service to the people in Gridley. He felt it was very important to be
able to have a local call.
Supervisor Dolan questioned how the contracts came about. It was
her understanding in looking back through the discussions that the Board was
given legal advise that going out to bid was necessary.
Mr. Pyeatt advised that they never went out to bid but solicited
proposals. Page 149.
June 22, 1982
a:
~~~
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
June 22, 1982 _ _
On motion of Supervisor Fulton, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler
and unanimously carried; the agreements with,:ahe:Northwest $,P CA. and Superior
California Humane Sockety to provide animal control servzces for unincorpo--
rated areas of Butte County for the nexC three._years with each agreement
being $70,000 'for fiscal year 1982-83 were approved; the Chairman authorized
to sign; and showing intent to provide telephone service toll free and housing
in Chico.
APPROVE SITE LEASE WITH CHARLES L. AND-BEATRICE L. HERMANN AND ASSIGNMENT OF
LEASE TO PIONEER yOLUNTEER'FTRE COMPANY
On motion of Supervisor Saraceni, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and unanimously carried, the site lease between Charles L. and Beatrice L.
Herman and the County of Butte and the assignment of lease between the County
of Butte and the Pioneer Volunteer Fire Compnay for construction of afire
statement were approved and the Chairman authorized to sign.
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Dolan
and unanimously carried, the second reading of the salary ordinance
amendment which implements the personnel actions indicated in the proposed
budget was waived; Ordinance 2292 was adopted and the Chairman authorized
to sign.
ADOPT ORDINANCE 2292: WAIVE SECOND READING OF SALARY ORDINANCE AI~NDMENT
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and unanimously carried, the second reading of the salary ordinance
amendment that implements the personnel actions within the Sheriff's
Department indicated in the proposed budget was waived; Ordinance 2293
was adopted and the Chairman authorized to sign.
ADOPT ORDINANCE 2293: WAIVE SECOND READING OF SALARY ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
REPORT RE: OOUNTY OF SACRAMENTO RESOLUTION 82--511 SUPPORTING BENEFIT
ASSESSMENTS FOR AMERICAN RIVER FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT AND STATE MAINTENANCE
AREAS
Mike Pyeatt, interim administrative officer, advised the Board
that the basic concern with state maintenance areas as a whole was the
amendment being proposed to AB 3737 that would provide for benefit assess-
ments on the maintenance districts. Sacramento County was asking that the
Board adopt a resolution in support of their resolution.
The matter taken off the agenda at this time to find out where
the legislation is in the process.
CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING: DAN HAYS PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND REZONE FROM
"A-2" (GENERAL} AND "A-40" (AGRICULTURAL - 40 ACRE PARCELS) TO °M-I" (LIGHT
INDUSTRIAL), PROPERTY LOCATED ON BOTH SIDES OF STATE AIGHWAY 99~AT DURHAM-
OROVTLLE HIHGWAY PENTZ ROAD INTERCHANGE, IDENTIFIER AS AP 40-12-22, 23 & 24,
SOUTHEAST OF CHICO - CONTINUED TO JUNE 29, 1982
The closed public hearing on Dan Hays proposed negative declaration
and rezone from "A-2" (general) and "A-40" (agricultural - 40 acre parcels)
to "M--1" (light industrial), property located on both sides of State Highway
99 at Durham-Oroville Highway, Pentz Road interchange, identified as AP 40-12-22,
23 and 24, southeast of Chico was held as continued.
The hearing was continued to June 29, 1982 since the State
Clearinghouse review comments have not bee received..
DTSCUSSION: JACK VANELLA REQUEST FOR BUILDING PERMTT TO EXPAND HIS AGRICUL-
TURAL CHEMICAL OPERATION ON DAYTON ROAD, CHICO
Bettye Kircher, planning director, set out the background of
the request for a building permit to expand the agricultural chemical
operation on Dayton Road, Chico by Jack Vanella.
Page 150.
June ~22, 1982
.7une 22, 1982 _ _
82- Rick. Booth, air pollution control office, set out the inspection
~ that was made on the Sack Vanella property'. There was no visible
emission coming out of-the control device.'
Alice Lord advised that for eighteen years there were all
residences- on Dayton -Road. The first time they appeared before the Board
was on April 27, 1982 before the building of the plant was finished. She
felt there should have been an EIR required. There is the possibility of
contamination to their water well which is about fifteen feet from their
property line. She was concerned about the health hazards presented by the
plant. Mrs. Lord set out the definition of agricultural devinded
assessory uses and agricultural chemical plants- are not one of them. They
should be located in industrial locations.
L. W. Lord w3s•concerned about :his wife's health problems due to
the location of the-chemical plant. Mr. Lord referred to the report by
the Air Pollution Control Office on their inspection of the premises. He
felt the standard had been developed for industrial areas. They were
exposed to the contamination each and every day. He was concerned about the
contamination to the fruit trees by non-visible items.
Mr. Booth responded to the standards that are required and what
the tolerance level is set at.
Neil McCabe, representing Mr. and Mrs. Lord, spoke regarding
the law as it relates to the "A-10" zoning and possible remedies. The
primary concern is to ask the Board to take appropriate action to stop the
expansion of the use. He felt that a zoning ordinance could be adopted
that would prevent the expansion of the use by adoption of an interim
zoning that would be effective immediately. He felt that the Board could
make an interpretation even though the Planning Commission made an
interpretation in~1977. He set out page 48 of the zoning ordinance. The
county has a section in the ordinance on page 9 that defines agricultural
processing plants. He set out the definition of agriculture on page 4.
He asked that the Board make an interpretation to stop the use in the
future and expansion of the use. He set out industrial zones from page
83 in the zoning ordinance book.
Discussion of how the Board would proceed on making a change
in the wording to prevent retail sales of agricultural products held at
this time. Del Siemsen, county counsel, recommended that the Board do
an amendment to the "A-10" zoning ordinance to prohibit the use or require
a use permit in the "A-10" and all agricultural zones. He was not sure what
position a court might take with regard to an interim ordinance. The
interpretation was issued by an agent of the county. He felt that if the
Board went with the prohibiting of retail operations, then the farmers
who run hulling operations would be prohibited also.
Mr. Lord felt that the use should not be expanded and the business
should be relocated. He wondered why they were the only family exposed to
this type of thing.'
Chairman Wheeler suggested that each of the Board members take the
opportunity to visit the area and contact both air. Vanella and Mr. and Mrs.
Lord.
RECESS: 3:50 p.m.
'RECONVENE: 4:10 p.m.
Page 151.
Sune '22, 1982
June 22Z 1982
82-1059
a
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
DENY REQUEST FOR .WAIVER OF BUILDING PERMIT FEES BY THERMALITO IRRIGATION
DISTRICT FOR 'RESERVOIR PROJECT WHICH INCLUDES A $2:5 MILLION CdATER STORAGE TANK
Jim Glander, building department, felt that since work was involved
in the inspection of the Thexmalito Irrigation District Reservoir project
which includes a $2.5 million water storage tank, that the building permit
fees should be required.
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and unanimously carried, because of the county's.financial situation, the
request by Thermalito Irrigation District for a waiver of building permit
fees for the Thexmalito Trrigation District Reservoir project which includes
a $2.5 million water storage tank was denied with a letter to be sent advising
them of the action by the Board.
CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING "K" CODE HOUSING WAS CONTINUED TO
JUNE 29, 1982
Consideration of waiving the first reading of an ordinance
implementing "K" Code housing was continued to June 29, 1982..'_._..
AUTHORIZE RELEASE OF HIRING FREEZE'--- CHICO MUNICIPAL COiJRT AND PROBATION
DEPARTMENT
Discussion of the release of hiring freeze fox the Chico Municipal
Court and Probation Department held at this time.
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Fulton
and unanimously carried, the release from the hiring freeze for one typist
clerk I position for Chico Municipal Court and the positions requested by
Probation Department was authorized.
APPOINTMENT TO THE BUTTE COUNTY' COUNCIL OF SENIOR CITIZENS CONTINUED TO
JULY' 13, 1$82
• Appointment to the Butte County Council of Senior Citizens
continued to July 13, 1982.
APPOINTMENT TO THE PARADISE CEMETERY DISTRICT
On motion of Supervisor Fulton, seconded by Supervisor Dolan
and unanimously carried, Mrs. Roy Stanton was reappointed to the Paradise
Cemetery District.
DISCUSSION OF CSAC ASSESSMENT TO FINANCE RENOVATION OF SACRAMENTO BUILDING
PULLED OFF AGENDA
Discussion of the County Supervisors Association of California
assessment to finance renovation of Sacramento building pulled off the
,agenda at this time.
LETTER OF SUPPORT TO BE SENT FOR NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PROMOTIONAL CAMPAIGN
TO STIMULATE THE ECONOMY
~ On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and unanimously carried, a letter of support for the Northern California
promotional campaign to stimulate the economy was authorized to be sent.
APPOINTMENT TO BIGGS MEMORIAL HALL COMMITTEE
Qn motion of Supervisor 3loseley, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and unanimously carried, Glen A. Davis was appointed as the alternate
member to the Biggs Memorial Hall Committee representing the Marine Corps
League North Valley Detachment.
COMMUNICATIONS
Aepartment of Water Resources. The DWR will conduct a public hearing July l5,
1982 at 7:30 p.m. at the West Cottonwood School, Cottonwood, CA to
discuss the Cottonwood Creek Project. Information; no action taken.
Page 152.
June 22, 1982
8
v
1068
1069
.Tune.22z1982_ ____--_~
iachman & Associates.. The engineers., on behalf o~ Frieda E. Hart Martin, appeal
condition 6 on their subdivision, Copley-Acres Unit No. 2, AP 36-54-18,
20 and 21, which. requires an RS-2B standard per Public Works require-
ments. Set for hearing July 13, 1282 at 11;.30 a.m.
Fred Gerst, Gridley. "Mr. Gerst appeals tfie Advisory Agency's approval of
Jaswant Singh Bains proposed negative declaration and tenative parcel
map, AP 25-~21-•22, 9 parcels, located on East Gridley Road (Oroville-
Gridley Highway), immediately south and east of the Feather River.
Set for hearing July 13, 1982 at 11:45 a.m.
Leslie A. MacKowiak,"Mesilla Valley. Ms. MacKowiak requests time on the
June 29 Supervisors agenda to offer a proposal establishing the
Community of Mesilla Valley. Taken off agenda at this time until
such time as 1v1s. MacKowiak is ready to make presentation.
Ron Max, Paradise. Mr. Max submits his resignation from the Butte County
Planning Commission effective June 30, 1982. See motion following
communications.
Mayor Mardi Worley, City of Chico. The Mayor writes submitting information
on the Chico City Council's position regarding closure of the Chico
Welfare Office. Referred to County Counsel and Administrative Office.
Animal Control & Health Services, Oroville. ACHS submits information to inform
the Supervisors of their action to file bankruptcy in the Federal
District Court in Sacramento. •Information; no action taken.
Department of Water Resources, Sacramento. DWR provides certification of
the amounts required for the cost of operation and maintenance of
Maintenance Area No. 5, 7, 13 and 15 in various zones. Referred
to the Auditor for necessary action.
Audit report - Head Start Program. Matson and Isom submit their audit report
on the CAA's Head Start Program. ~ Referred to CAA and Auditor for
comments as directed.
RESIGNATION OF RON MAX FROM PLANNTNG COMMISSION NOT ACCEPTED
On motion of Supervisor Fulton, seconded liy Supervisor Saraceni
and unanimously carried, the resignation of Ron Max from the Planning
Commission was not accepted and a letter under Supervisor'Fulton's
signature will be sent.
ADDITIONAL MATTERS PRESENTED BY BOARD MEMBERS
Supervisor Fulton mentioned an editorial in the Oroville Mercury
relative to the special interest groups on issues and how theSoard was
dealing with these issues.
Chairman Wheeler related a telephone call she had from one of
the employees who had been layed off. He asked if there was anything the
Board could do and understood if they could do nothing for him. She felt
the employees who had jobs should be thankful they had jobs.
Supervisor Saraceni advised there would be a Fish and Game
Commission meeting coming up in July and it would be nice to have the
people interested in becoming secretary of the organization considered
at that time.
Supervisor Saraceni commented on the inspection permit increases
through Public Works and the state energy requirements.
RECESS: The Board recessed at.~;5l-prm. to reconvene on Wednesday, June 23,
1982 at 9:00 a.~m. Page 153.
June 22, 1982