HomeMy WebLinkAboutM072782July 27, .19.82
STATE OF CALSFORNIA )
SS.
COUNTY OF BUTTE )
81-''' The Board of Supervisors met at 9:00 a.m. pursuant to recess.
-~ Present: Supervisors Fulton, Moseley, Saraceni, and Chairman Wheeler.
Mike Pyeatt, interim administrative officer; Del Siemsen, county
counsel; and Eleanor M. Becker, county clerk, by Cathy Pitts, assistant
clerk to the Board. Absent: Supervisor Dolan
Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America
Invocation by Supervisor Saraceni
'1191 ADDITIONAL ITEMS FI20M BOARD MEMBERS TO BE ADDRESSED AT THE END OF THE DAY
Supervisor Saraceni would be talking about the Bingo games.
'..1192 ADOPT RESOLUTIONS 82-117 and 82-118: APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA
', The following items were pulled from consideration at this
time: greenline finalization of General Plan amendment, Chico/Gridley
Libraries furnishings and equipment, and Chico Library contract change
order No. 11.
On motion of Supervisor Saraceni, seconded by Supervisor
Fulton and carried, the following action was taken:
1. Acknowledged notification from the Auditor, set public
hearing date for August 3, 1982 at 11:15.a.m. authorized notice to each
legislative body of the special districts not governed by the Board of
Supervisors, and authorized publication of the notice not less than
three days prior to the hearings on the distribution of special
district augmentation funds pursuant to AB 8.
', 2. Approved request for relief from accountability for
. the Butte County Sheriff's Department for shortage of $20.00 occuring
at the Chico office, Sheriff's Service Division, l~,arch 12, 1982.
' 3. Approved the contract with the Department of Food and
Agriculture in the total amount of $2,5b4.00 for certification and
surveillance of eggs to U.S. standards with funding from the State
Department of Food and Agriculture, egg and poultry quality control
contract No. 4191 and the Chairman authorized to sign.
', 4. Approved the contract with the Oroville Medical Center
for medical and psychiatric evaluation and transportation to the
Residential Treatment Center in Chico for an amount not to exceed
$70,000 for fiscal year 1982-83 and the Chairman authorized to sign.
S. Approved contract with Modoc County to recover the cost
of out-of-county use for the Butte County in-patient facility in Chico
with a maximum of $15,000 reimbursement and the Chairman authorized to
sign.
6. Approved contract with Trinity County to recover the
costs of out-of-county. use of the Butte County in-patient facility,
Chico with a maximum of $4,500 reimbursement and the Chairman authorized
to sign.
', 7. Approved contract with Glen County to recover t:~e
cost of out-of-county use of the Butte County in-patient care facility,
Chico with a maximum of $34,440 reimbursement and the Chairman authorized
to sign.
', Page 259.
July 27, 1982
82
July 27, 1982 _ _ _ _ _ _ _
8. Approved contract with Creekside Community Living
Centers in the maximum amount of $118,030 for the chronically disordered
and gravely disabled for fiscal year 1982-83 services and the Chairman
authorized to sign.
9. Approved contract with Crestwood Hospitals with a
maximum amount of $10,000 for fiscal year 1982--83 to make use of
their skilled nursing facilities fox clients requiring a higher level
of care and maintenance and the Chairman authorized to sign.
10. Approved the preliminary alcohol budget and plan for
fiscal year 1982-83, authorized the alcohol program administrator
to submit the budget and plan to the Department of Alcohol and Drug
Program for funding.
11. Approved contract with Solway, Znc. for 24-hour
residential care and alcohol recovery for female paxticipants in the
Butte County program in the maximum amount of $21,009 and the Chairman
authorized to sign.
12. Adopted Resolution 82-117 approving the Butte County
Mental Health Plan Update and authorizing submittal to the California
State Department of Mental Health per requirements of SB 401, Chapter
1005, Statutes of 1981, for Short-Doyle funds and the Chairman.
authorized to sign.
13. Authorized the three-year renewal of the test security
agreement with the State Cooperative Personnel Services commencing on
October 1, 1982, ending September 30, 1985 and the Chairman authorized
to sign.
14. Approved request for release from hiring freeze of two
public health nurse positions in the Department of Public Health.
15. Approved release from hiring freeze for three
sanitariun positions located in Environmental Health Department.
16. Approved release from hiring freeze for one account
clerk and four eligibility worker positions in the Welfare Department.
17. Approved release from the hiring freeze for one typist
clerk position in the Elections Department.
18. Authorized removal of the formal hiring freeze.
. 19. Approved renewal of variance of Sections. 19-10 and or/
19-12 of the Butte County Code for placement of a mobile home on AP 36-22-
22, 4400 Lower.Wyandotte Road, Oroville Area, zoning: "AR-MEi" for
Ernest Harris.
20. Approved renewal of variance to Sections 19-10 and/
or 19-12 of the Butte County Code for placement of a mobile home
on AP 39-31-06, 816 North Graves Ave., Chico Area, zoning: "A-l0"
for William Stephens.
21. Approved plans and specifications for South Oroville
Improvement Project, Phase 1V, Project No. 25505E-82-1; authorized
the Chairman and Director of Public Works to sign plans; adapted wage
scales; and set the bid opening for 11:00 a.m. on August 19, 1982,
Public Works Office.
Page 260.
I July 27, 1982
July 27, 1982
8
193
22. Adopted Resolution 82-118 of intention to rename a
private road in Butte County: Settler Lane (Stoney Oaks Blvd. to.end)
.o Rattlesnake Gulch Road, setting a public hearing date of August 31,
X982, at 10:00 a.m. and the Chairman authorized to sign.
23. Authorized the Chairman to sign dedication of water
Facilities, noting that the water system is free and clear of all liens
and encumburences and other expenses, for the water system constructed
~y the East Ridge Assesment District for OWID.
?UBLIC HEARING: DICK CHAPPEL APPEAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP CONDITIONS
The closed public hearing on Dick Chappel appeal of conditions
~n tentative parcel map (conditions 12, 13, and 14) on property
Lacated on AP 41-01-141,, Hummer Road approximately 1,000 feet west of
Doe Mill Road, Forest Ranch area, was held as continued. ,
Bettye Kircher, planning director, stated the applicant
submitted a plan delineating the areas to be maintained for homesites.
Tn her opinion, this does not meet the cluster development. Other
areas were referred to the Department of Fish and Game that have
clustered homesites.
SUPERVISOR DOLAN PRESENT AT THIS TIME
She did not feel comfortable that these plans or meeting
with the Department of Fish and Game are trying to achieve. She
felt if the two parcels were taken and placed down to one lot line
to the lot frontage, that would be more in alignment with what the
Department of Fish and Game have asked for.
Del Siemsen, county counsel, advised the board that in the
redisigning of this map, the map may be different than. the one the
3oard approved, and conceivably whatever the Department of Fish and
Same would require .might not be what the Board would want. His
recommendation was that the Board not approve the map as it is now.
Supervisor Saraceni stated the Department of Fish and Game
teemed to be suggesting locations to allow for space between the
Locations as indicated pn the map. Whenevex there is room for septic
systems and water supplies that the clustering be done close to the
property line. The Board has .continually heard people saying that
=heir neighbors are placing something near their wells. He felt that
whoever bought the property should have the ability to have the space
m the lot in order to have room.
Ms. Kircher advised the two improvements might be required
.o be located closer to the lot and the lot lines, which would leave
an open area in the middle. She explained the relationship of this
project to Bidwell Heights. It is part of the specific plan and is
physically located in what is known as Bidwell Heights. It is not in
.he perimeter, but on the fringe area. This parcel is included in
chat is known as the Hummer Subdivision and there are two ox three
ether parcels in that same subdivision as far as actual petitions for
.he specific plan. They were just included by the applicant. On
advise of Counsel specific plans can only be initiated by the legislative
Body, Planning Commission or private individuals. Since the indi-
~iduals did not petition specifically, if they requested to be removed
From the specific plan, there would be no option on it.
The hearing was continued to August 10,1982 to resolve the
plan itself.
Page 261.
July 27, 1982
~~,
~,. .~ ~J 9 T 3 ~ ~ 3 ~ ~' 9 3n ~ S 7~ 19 V 2 3 n 3 ~ ~ 3. ~ ~! e 3 ~ a _ ~ '3
82-'1194 APPROVED PLANS AND SPECIFICATION FOR CHI CO/GRIDLEY LIBRARY FURNISHINGS
{~ ', AND E UTPTr1ENT: APPROVED CHICO.LIBRARY CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER Ifll.
Discussion open to the public. Appearing:
1. Arthur Eamon. Mr. Eamon,was concerned that snore money.
would be spent on the libraries and the furniture and fittings would
not be utilized, He was concerned about the spending on the libraries,
since he was a county employee. Before any action was taken, he asked
that the breakdown information on how much was contemplated to be spent
on both libraries and how much the cost of .going out to bid would be,
be furnished to-the public.
Chairman Wheeler advised that she would have copies made
available to Mr. Garcon. This is a call for bids for the plans and
specifications for bids, for the furnishings of two libraries. If the.
county had not been involved in litigation, there would be $50,000
to furnish the Gridley Library. Because of the law suit, there has been
$50,000 worth of taxpayers money lost forever. She has met with the
Friends of the Library and they have made a sound commitment to fund
a good protion of the furnishings. The facilities are being constructed.
Part of the bonding was a commitment by the Board that the county would,
in fact, use the facility and furnish the facilities as a library.
There is a need to go to bid to see what the cost of the furnishings
will be. This is in no way a commitment by the Board for funding.
She was hoping that the Board and the Friends of the County would
be able to offset the cost. The money for the furnishins had been
appropriated from federal revenue sharing funds and had to be used
~as offset for other projects for several years.
Mike Pyeatt, interim administrative officer, advised there
was not an appropriation for the furnishings.
Chairman Wheeler advised there were facilities built in
Oroville and Paradise and promises were given to Chico and Gridley.
Each year the revenue sharing allocations went to some other area.
It was this Board that made the commitment. Sbe would like to be able
to go to bid to see what the cost would be. This is not for the
landscaping, because the communities will do the landscaping themselves.
They have made a commitment to the furnishings with a total of $231,854
as a rough estimate. The estimate for the furnishings is $48,189 for
Gridley and $183,655 for the Chico Library, In discussions with the
Librarian there is a chance the figures might be cut down, but they
will not know that until they go tc bid.
Mr. Eamon had no objections to the private sector paying to
furnish the libraries . He understood that the Board had made a
commitment, but times have changed. He felt that the county was talking
about paying the commitment out of the pockets of the employees. He
felt there were furnishings in the library today that could be placed
into the new library. He felt they should make due with what they have.
Mr. Pyeatt advised the general specifications that were
done and the list of.all of the equiptment was a matter of public
record for anyone interested in reviewing the document. As far as the
employees paying for the furnishings, the county in good faith after
negotiating with the union's negotiation team reached an agreement with
the union.
Chairman Wheeler advised that as fax as the expenditure of
money for the county, there are 145,000 people in the county that the
Board represents also.. She hoped that the employeeswould work with
the Board, as they have wanted to work with and shown good faith to the
employees. An effort is coming~,fo~ward from the private sector.
Page 262.
July 27, 1982
~l
8
b
1195
~.~~~~~~~~~~J~uly27~ 1982 =-~~~~~~~~~~~~=~__
2. Rod Weyand, BCEA, commented on Mr. Pyeatt's statement
relative to good faithbaxgaining. The last offer made by the county
was only tentively accepted by the bargaining. unit in order to take
the package back the the employees for a vote. The members have to
vote on the package and until it is voted on, it is not accepted.
Mr. Pyeatt realized that but as far as the negotiating team
was concerned, there was general agreement.
Mr. Weyand stated when the county set up the corporation and
the bonds were sold, it was understood that the expenditures would come
out of the reserve. The money is the taxpayers money. This was part
of the agreement that was made when the bonding deal was set out and
yet no one had an opportunity to say anything about it. He felt that
this was the thing that people were concerned about.
Chairman Wheeler reaffirmed the fact that the geople did not
have a vote on the new facilities for Oroville or the maintenance and
upkeep for Paradise.
Mr. Weyand stated he had not seen the package on the plans
and specifications. He felt there might be several things that could
be postponed until later. He asked if the Board was only going to
consider the bids for Che entire thing or were they going to consider
possibly doing without certain things? He hoped this package did not
include first line everything.
Gerald Livelq, deputy administrative officer, advised this
was not a money item but part of the bidding process. They have to
know what, the maximum cost will be. The Board's direction in the past
has been to look at all items. This is a further estimate toward
information to make a decision. The plans and specifications were
prepared be the library consultants before any of the bonding was
thought of. This is just a continuation of the contract administration
for the library.
3. Gene'Mercer, 1153 Palmetto Avenue, Chico, felt if it
was necessary to effectively furnish the libraries, there were enough
people in the Chico and Gridley areas who would be more than happy
to have a tax increaselto take care of this.
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler
and carried, the following action was taken:
I. Approved plans and specifications for the Chico/Gridley
Library furnishings and equipment and sot the bid opening for August
3I, 1982 at 10:00 a.m. in the County Administrative Officer's
conference room.
2. Approved contract change order No. 11 providing support
or field authorization provided for capping of an abandoned well
ncovered during the installation of the sprinkler system at the
ibrary construction site at increase cost of $900 for the Chico
ibrary with funding to come from the construction contingentcy fund.
DISCUSSION: MCRINNEX BROT
ESTABLISHMENT OF A NON-CONFORMING USE
Discussion of establishment of a non-conforming use for
Brothers was held at this time.
Del Siemsen, county counsel, advised the-Board had received
letter from his office setting out the basis of his opinion that
is would not be an established non-conforming use at the time that
Page 263.
.Tuly 27, 1982
_5~
1 -~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 9 ~ ~ ~ mum-27,982 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ s
the zoning was changed. If there had been an established .use, then
they could have continued with~it. According to the evidence, it was
not in existence. The-other point was raised that McKinney Brothers
had applied for building permits. The only building permits issued
were for mobile homes.. The application for the commercial building
was never_retuxned by,McKix3ney Brothers. The Board adopted a policy
of not accepting appl,icatiQns~as vested rights.
• Bettye Kircher, Planning Director, advised the only thing
that had been done by ,McKinney Brothers as far:.as commercial use was
the plan checking and the fees which were paid in July, 1980 and the
"SR-1" was established January, 1981. The germit expired on July, 1981.
1196
1197
1198
Mr. Siemsen'stated this was never a legal application for
a building. The application was given by the Building Department to
the applicant and was never returned, There is just no use and they
cannot„start operating.
No action was taken on a request for an establishment for
a non-conforming use for the McKinney Brothers, since there is no action
that the Board can take pursuant to the legal opinion from County Counsel.
DISCUSSION OF GENERAL PLAN CHANGE AT THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 99
AND PENTZ ROAD PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65356.1 CONTINUED
TO AUGUST 3 1982
The discussion on the General Plan change at the intersection
of Highway 99 and Pentz Road pursuant to Government Code Section
65356.1 was continued'to August 3, 1982.
REFER ORDINANCE ADDING SECTION 24-36 TO THE BUTTE COUNTY CODE RELATTVE
TO ZONING USES TO THE,PLANNING COMMISSION FOR HEARING, ADULT ENTER-
TAINMENT BUSINESS
Discussion of the ordinance adding Section 24-36 to the
Butte County Code relative to zoning uses, adult entertainment
business, was held at this time. This ordinance is fashioned after
the ordinance from Shasta County. Tt is the only one they have had
so far and the Board might want to direct that the Planning Commission
hold hearings not only on this but on possible changes.
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor
Saraceni and.unanimousley carried, the Planning Commission was directed
to commence hearings on the ordinance adding Section 24-36 to the Butte
County Code relative to zoning uses, adult entertainment business,
on the pxoposed ordinance or other related ordinances.
DISCUSSION: SB 1920-JOHNSON LANDS: UNAUTHORIZED ENTRY
Mike Pyeatt, intern administrative officer, stated a gentleman
from Colusa County had given a presentation to the Fish and Game
Commission and asked that the commission oppose SB 1920. Originally
the :bill was to change the Navigational Code and now it is to amend
the Fish and•Game regulations. He beleived the real intent of this
legislation was to correct a long standing groblem regarding Butte
Creek and the people trespassing within the duck clubs.
Supervisor Dolan stated"the duck clubs feel there is
trespassing. People will travel to a county road and put their boats
into the Sutter Sinks. There is also a conflict due to the immense
amount of litigation,,when there was an Attorney General's opinion
in 1978. She has talked with people from the Department of Fish and
Game and was aware of, a Supreme Court decision dating back to 1812
stating there cannot be state codes on navigable waters.
Page 264.
July 27, 1982
~~
~ ._
8 2-
July z7, 19.a2
Supervisor Saraceni stated during the Fish and Game Commission
meeting, a gentleman did discuss this bill.. He has tried to get.as
much information as he could and people might lie. confused about the bill.
There is parcel splitting of property near the water. There has to. be.
easements or right-of-way for people to get to the water. Some people
might be confused that those easements or right-of-way would be
eliminated.. The bill does allow navigable water to be equal to the
property line when it is flooded. Originally the bill was written
for navigable purposes, which allowed the use of the water wherever it
went into the land.
Gene Mercer, ,Chico, stated he had checked with the Department
of Fish and Game and they have no objection to the amendments at the
present time. The problem is that during extreme water years, whenever
a creek rises to flood ,stage and blocks off the county road, there are
hunters that take small boats and go out and go onto private land that
normally would not be flooded in order to hunt waterfowl and anything
they can kill. This is very similar to cases where people take their
boats next to gun clubs and do their hunting. When the caretakers tell
them they are trespassing, they just thumb their noses at the caretaker
and fire their shots at the waterfowl. There is a certain element to
people who seem to feel that the law was made for them. He saw nothing
wrong with the law and would like the Board to take no action whatever
on this particular legislation.
No action taken.
RECESS: 10:02 a. m.
RECONVENE: 10:18 a.m.
PUBLIC HEARING: BUDGET TRANSFERS - SUPPLEMENTAL MANPOWER PROGRAM AND
PUBLIC HEALTH
The public hearing on the two sugglemental Manpower Program
and Public Health budget transfers was held as advertised.
1199
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 Fulton
and unanimously carried, the following budget transfers were approved.
1• Supplemental Manpower Program. Establishes appropriations
totalling $86,846 from unanticipated revenues, `state Vocational
Education Project, to be appropriated to professional and specialized
services, $9,565 and special department expense, $77,281.
2. Sppplemer.tal Manpower Program. Appropriates unanticipated
revenues in the amount 'of $65.22 to appropriation for clothing and
personal supplies to cover actual expenditures in the CETA Program for
federal fiscal year 1982.
3. Public Health. Appropriates $16,108 of unanticipated
revenues from the State Drug Prevention Education Program per an
amendment to the Dental Disease Prevention Program and the subcontract
with the, Northern Sacramento Valley Rural Health Project. Also to
appropriate to the amendment to the contract with the Prevention Project
Program contract and subcontract with the North Valley Parent Education
Network.
Page 265.
July 27, 1982
8 2-
'~
Jul 27 1982
s~ .a e a a a e m~ m m o a~ m ~= a e o a. = a a~= m~ a n a m s= a a v
ADOPT RESOLUTION 82-119: PUBLIC HEARING: RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO
RENAME PRIVATE ROADS IN BUTTE"COUNTY
The public hearing on the resolution of intention to rename
private roads in Butte County, Braun Lane (Drescher Tract to Bohemia
Avenue) to Stageline Road and Bourdan Lane (Rattlesnake Road-to...end)..to
Deer Trail was held as advertised:
Clay Castleberry, public works director, set out the background
of the resolution of intention.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: No one.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
12011
On motion of Supervisor Saraceni seconded by Supervisor
Moseley and unanimously, carried, Braun Lane (Dresher Tract to-Bohemia
Avenue) to Stageline Road and Bourdan Lane (Rattlesnake Road to end) to
Deex Trail, renaming a private road in Butte County was approved;
Resolution 82--119 was adopted and the Chairman authorized to sign.
PUBLIC HEARING: WILLIAtI HOFFMAN PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
The public hearing on William Hoffman proposed negative
declaration and tentative parcel map, AP 71-40-37, to create two parcels,
one at more or less 4.4 acres, and one at more or less 5. acres,
from a 9.5 acre parcel,, property located on both sides of Simmons Road,
approximately 7/10 mile north of Oroville-Quincy Road, ten miles
northeast of Oroville was held as advertised.
Bettye Kircher, planning directar, set out the background
of the tentative parcel'.. map. The Advisory Agency could not approve this
parcel map based on not', being able to find confarmity with the General
Plan. The subject property is surrounded by like size parcels except
for one large parcel. The parcel is in the agricultural residential
designation of the General Plan. There is certain criteria that must
be met. The mere fact that the road splits the property is not
justification to create parcels.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: Mike Evans, Ron Graves
and Associates, representing Mr. Thompson. Mr. Evans advised that Ms.
Thompson was one of the.. owners and has requested that this mataer be
continued for one week.'.
The hearing eras.continued to August 3, 1982 at 11:30 a. m.
1202
ADOPT RESOLUTION 82-120.: PUBLIC HEARING RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO
ESTABLISH CSA 79 (BIG CHICO CREEK ESTATES, SACRAMENTO PARK - STORM
DRAINAGE AND STREET LIGHTING.)
The public hearing on the resolution of intention to
establish CSA No. 79 (Big Chico Creek Estates, Sacramento Park - storm
drainage and street lighting.) was held as advertised.
Bi11 Turpin „LAFCO,_set out, the ..background of the resolution
of intention.
Hearing open 'to the public. Appearing: No one.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
On motion af,Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor
Fulton and unanimously carried, establishment of County Service Area
Page 266.
July 27, 1982
8 2W
1203
July 27, 1482
'! d'3 ~ J~ J 3~ 3~~~ S G~~ S~~ 3 3 3 J~ 3 9 7~~ C 'S 9 J
79 (Big Chico Creek Estates, Sacramento Park-Storm drianage and street
lighting) was approved; Resolution 82-:120 was adopted and the Chairman
authorized to sign.
DISCUSSION: UPLAND"GAME'BIRD HUNTING, LAKE OROVILLE
Discussion of'the Fish and Game Commission recommendation
supporting the opening of the west branch and Potter's Ravine area to
upland game bird hunting was held at this time.
Gene Mercer stated a Mr. Bradshaw from Aepartment of Parks
and Recreation had asked that the Fish and Game Commission approve
two areas being .opened to the public for hunting, since there are quite
a few turkeys in that area. The commission approved the request by
Mr. Bradshaw. Mr. Mercer stated he-was opposed to this, becuase the
turkeys were on pr~:vate property. He did not believe in opening up
private property and encouraging people to go out in their boats on
someone else's property to hunt without permission. In the fall and
spring, there are cattle in the area until they are taken to their summer
range. The other area is subdivided land directly across form Lime
Saddle Marina. All the Department of Parks and Recreation, is doing
is trying to get people to trespass and he was opposed to this.
it was moved by Supervisor Saraceni, seconded by Supervisor
Moseley that the Board approved the Fish and Game Commission's recommended
support for opening the west branch and Potter's Ravine area to upland
game bird hunting. .
Supervisor Saraceni stated he did not want to encourage
ple to go onto private property. The Department of Park and Recreation
opening up state land for this hunting.
Mr. Mercer did not want the Board to be on record recommending
meshing that, will allow trespassing on private groperty. He felt
th the support of this, that this is exactly what would happen.
Second by Supervisor Moseley withdrawn at this time.
Mr. Mercer stated the turkeys are located on private property
d the Department of Park and Recreation is asking the Board to allow
ople to go in there with boats and go beyond the state property to shoot
e turkeys. Once the area is opened up, people will not stay on the
blic land, but will trespass onto private property. If there was
study done within the public land, it would be found that as'part of
man nature, people do not. always stay within the public land.
e Department of Parks and Recreation can open this area, but what
ey are trying to do is use the Fish and Game Commission and Board of
pervisors to encourage people to trespass. Let the Department of
rk and Recreation open this area up without the Board's approval,
ich they can do,
Supervisor Saraceni stated the Fish and Game Commission voted
mously to support the opening of these lands and the fish and game
e had no problems with this recommendation. They felt it would
more people off private land by utilizing more public land.
Supervisor Dolan would like to know if the Board was being
ed to support the position of one state department in opposition
another state department.
Mike Pyeatt, interim administrative officer, advised that
e Department of Fish and Game Wardens, who attended the meetings,
commended this action, as well as the Department of Parks and Recreation.
Page 267.
July 27, 1982
c,7
a a a a- a m 3 a a oaTulya2~ ,~ ~8 = a a, a a~ a c a a n a o a a s x. a .~
8 2-
a
S.uperyisor Saraceni stated the commission made the vote the
way they did in trying to get people off private property to allow
enough public land for hunting. This is adjacent to hunting land
already.
Supervisor Fulton was concerned about the Board being
asked, to be the political pressure point between the Department of
Park and Recreation and the Department of Fish. and Game. He felt they
should take some time to try to acertain what position they were being
put into.
Motion dies for lack of a second.
Mr. Pyeatt stated the minutes of the Fish and Game Commission
were available in draft form. Many times the county is critical of
the state, but his observation was, the Department of Park and Recreation
was attempting to go to forums to secure input to advise the $oard
of action they were contemplating rather than just to open up the land
for public use. They are at least trying to distribute information
to the Fish and Game Commission and to the Board.
The Administrative Office to bring the minutes back to the
Board when they are available.
ADOPT ORDINANCE 2301: URGENCY ORDINANCE ADDING SECTION 1-7 TO THE BUTTE
COUNTY CODE RELATIVE TO GENERAL PENALTIES; CONTINUING VIOLATIONS
On motion of Supervisor Fulton, seconded by Supervisor
Dolan and unanimously carried, Ordinance 2301 an urgency ordinance
amending Section 1-7 of the Butte County Code relative to general
penalties; continuing violations was adopted and the Chairman
authorized to sign.
APPOINTMENT OF SECRETARY TO THE BUTTE COUNTY FISH AND GAME COMMISSION
Gene Mercer thanked-the Board far the Resolution that was
passed thanking him .for his time and efforts as secretary of the Fish
and Game Commission. N1r. Gillum had instructed him to appear before
the Board to explain his vote during the commission hearing. There
were three applications',, two were written and one was from the floor.
Ron Graves received three votes dviring the hearing. Sob Baiocchi
received two votes. Mr. Gillum was under the impression that he
was not to vote as chairman unless there was a tie vote. He has
been instructed to appear to advise the Board that Mr. Gillum's lvote
would go for Bob Baiocchi.
It was moved by Supervisor Fulton, seconded by Supervisor
Dolan that Bob Baiocchi be appointed as secretaxy to the Butte County
Fish and Game Commission.
Supervisor Saraceni stated during the Fish and Game Commission
hearing, the vote was three votes for Ron Graves and two votes for
Bob Baiocchi. Mr. Graves has stated in his written information that
he had the ability to give the time that was necessary for this position.
Secondly, Mr. Graves has also offered that should the opportunity
arise, he would donate the time on his aircraft. The third reason for
the vote for Mr. Graves is that he has secretarial service in his
business that would be of help in filing and doing some of the heavy
typing and things necessary as far as correspondence to the state and
letters in and out.
Supervisor Moseley stated Mr. Graves was interested in the
position and submitted his resume early. The other person required
holding up action for one week in order to get the information in.
Page 268.
.7uly 27, 1982
i ~'~
8 2-
b
July 27, 1982
~ ~a ~a a a a m a as a 3 0= c~ a a c a e a 3 a a sa a c c c a= e a a a m
Mike Pyeatt, interim administrative officer, stated he has
discussed this matter with County Counsel. The question came up from
several members of the Butte County Fish and Game Commission as to who
is responsible for appointing the secretary and under what basis was
the secretary established. He has researched back to I940 and there
are several inconsistencies that will have to be clarified. The secretary
was evidentley established by the commission itself, since the original
Resolution in 1940 does not address the position. Sometime in 1941,
Mr. Townsend was representing the Fish and Game Commission in that
capacity. As far as volunteering the use of aircraft, he would defer
to a piece of litigation that the county is now involved in, which
involves the use of voluntary aircraft. He did not have a recommendation
to make on this appointment.
Supervisor Saraceni was not suggesting that Ron Graves had
to be appointed. Whatever aircraft was used, the county would still
be liable. There is also secretarial services available with the
appointment of Mr. Graves.
Supervisor Fulton questioned when, once the Board made the
appointment fox secretary, do they determine whether they were right
or not. If there is a,cloud over the way it is done, that should be
removed prior to any appointment.
Mr. Pyeatt advised his position has been that the Board appoints
the Fish and Game Commission.
Supervisor Dolan stated Mr. Gillum is indicating through
Mr. Mercer that he was aware that he was entitled to vote. There is
some dispute as to whether Supervisorial votes were ever taken. She
agreed there should be .some procedural clarifications in this matter.
Supervisor Saraceni stated the Fish and Game Commission took
a vote which was three to two. If the commission sets forth that vote,
that is what the vote is.
Vote on Motion:
AYES: Supervisors Dolan, Fulton and Chairman Wheeler
NOES: Supervisors Moseley and Saraceni
Motion Carried.
1206
Mr. Mercer stated when they first placed the money into the
budget for the aircraft for survailance, he discussed the matter with
County Counsel and they advised him what could and could not be done.
At that time, the insurance had to be looked after and the flying had
to be done by someone in the business. The maximum that has been used
is about $1,200. The other $500 is set aside for the commission and
the secretary for traveling expenses.
APPEARANCE ARTHUR GAMON, OROVILLE
Mr. Garcon spoke regarding the current negotiations between
Butte County and BCEA.' He was sure the Board was aware of the
negotiations with BCEA and the fact that the negotiator for BCEA either
accepts or rejects as far as transmittal back to the membership. The
negotiator for BCEA accepted the take=home package only within a
limited concept of pxesenting the matter for a vote by the membership.
Three times the membership has turned down the county's offer. Three
times the employees have asked the county to keep the existing
setup with no changes. Mr. Garcon spoke regarding the purchase of a
vehicle for the County'. Administrative Officer. He felt that this was
a waste of money. I Page 269.
July 27, 1982
/f
_. l
S 2-
'~
12071
1208
July 27, 1982
~ ~s a a a a a a a s a a a a a a e a s a 3 x a a s= a a a n t s x~ s a a
The county accepted the'. idea of going out to bid for various items on
the library equipment which included projector tables and record.
holders. The libraries are also having financial problems and he felt
it was ridiculous to purchase these items at this time. He asked that
the Board excerise the same sort of restraint in spending that every
taxpayer has to excercise.
APPEARANCE RUSS CRONINGER, RINGLE AND ASSOCIATES
Mr. Groninger stated he had been working on a record of
survey for a waiver application on an approximately 450---acre homestead.
The owner does not live in the homestead house and has found a person
who would buy the house plus 200 acres. He filled out the waiver
application and now finds he has to pay for an environmental fee of
$220. He read from the CEQA guidelines on page 44, Section 15037
at this time. He could not see how drawing a line on apiece of paper
created any physical appearances.
Del Siemsen, county counsel, stated a division of land is
not exempt from CEQA. The county has no choice but to require that the
CEQA procedures be followed. ,
Mr. Groninger stated there could be a gift deed and they
would not even have to ,file a record of survey. A condition of this
waiver application will be to file a record of survey. This is one
parcel now and since it is over 160 acres they can divide it into
208 and 230 plus acres.. They are not changing anything within the
parcels. '
Mr. Siemsen understood what Mr. Groninger was talking about.
The only people who can make an exemption are the state and since there
are no exemptions from the state, the county cannot do so.
Mr. Groninger advised if the county wants them to do something
different, the county will not get the record of survey. The fee
structure at Public Works is $115 for an application for a parcel map
and $75 for a waiver. If he filled out the forms for environmental
review could the fees be waived?
Mr. Siemsen advised that would be getting into a gift of
public funds. There would be staff time to fill out the forms, they
would be doing a certain amount of work and there is a cost for that
work. If the applicant does not pay for that work, it would be a gift
of public funds. Mr. Groninger was advised that he might want to
contact the Office of Planning and Research regarding this matter.
PUBLIC HEARING: DONALD L. LUCAS APPEAL OF REQUIREMENT FOR EIR ON
WILLIAMSON ACT CONTRACT CANCELLATION APPLICATION
The public hearing on Donald L. Lucas appeal of the requirement
,for an EIR on an application to cancel a Williamson Act contract was
'.held as continued.
Bettye Kircher, planning director., set out the background
of the appeal.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: Bernard C. Richter,
representing Donald L. Lucas. Mr. Richter advised they would like to
have a negative declaration and go with 40-acre parcels like recommended
by the Planning .Director.
Mrs. Kircher recommended that the Board continue action on
this matter until the zoning is in place or they could not allow for'
a negative declaration'.
' Page 270.
July 27, 1982
;~
July 27, 1982
''.. ~J ~3 ^..1 ~ iR S ~ ~ ~ 9 ~ -J C S '3 -J ~ ~ ~ > > ~ a ~ 9 J 3 ~! 3 J -~ 9' = ~ ~ ~ ~
82-', The hearing was continued to October 12, 1982 at 10;00 a.m.
d
1209 PUBLIC HEARING;"MICHAEL G. DAWSON PROI?OSED NEGATIr7E DECLARATION AND
APPLICATION-FOR CANCELLATION OF ZCA AGREEMENT
The public hearing on Michael G. Dawson proposed negative
declaration and application for cancellation of Land Conservation Act
aereement on AP 41-15-3.1 was held as advertised.
Bettye Kircher, planning director, set out the background
of the application. This is not a window provision but immediate
request for cancellation from the Williamson Act. This was taken
before the Land Conservation Act Committee on June 14,1982 and the
Committee recommended denial. The contract is currently for two
parcels and this is cancellation for only one of those parcels.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: Michael Dawson. Mr.
Dawson stated the reason he would like to have this property withdrawn
from the LCA would be to allow him to work the other 189 acre parcel
that is currently under LCA provisions. This would make it more
appealing to a perspective buyer. By having this one parcel out of the
Williamson Act, he would be able to liquidate his assets in that parcel
and, thereby, put in irrigation and water on the other property.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
Supervisor Moseley stated she has never been for Land
servation Act agreements, because they did not do what they were
ended to do. They were put in to stop development around the cities
there were people who did not put their land into the LCA.
It was moved by Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor
araceni that the Land Conservation Act agreement on AP 41-15-31
or Michael G. Dawson be cancelled because it is not inconsistent with
he purposes of Chapter 51282 and that the cancellation is in the public
nterest, finding that although the proposed project could have a
ignificant effect.on the environment, there will not be a significant
ffect in this case because the mitigation measures described below
ave been added to the project and the negative declaration is recommended,
nd that all necessary required fees be paid:
1. 6btain zoning consistent with the general plan by
either a} the applicant initiating the rezone, b) the supervisors
initiating the rezone, or c) the Board of Supervisors adopting a
interim zone of A-40 for the area.
Vote on motion:
AYES: Supervisors Fulton, Moseley, Saraceni and Chairman Wheeler
NOES: Supervisor Dolan
Motion carried
SED SESSION: The Board recessed at 11:14 a.m. to hold a closed
Sion regarding .meet and confer.
ONVENED: The Board reconvened at 12:27 p.m. following a closed
sion regarding meet and confer. No decisions we're made at this
._ page' 271.
July 27, 1982
82-
July 27, 1982
-a a a¢ x a- a i m- a, a x a e x= a x x a a a a a a a a G a x x a x x m a
RECESS: 12:28 p.m.
RECONVENE: 2:06 p. m. "
10 PUBLIC HEARING: BUTTE COUNTX PLANNING COMMISSION GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT:
CONCOW AREA GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, BUTTE COUNTX PLANNING COMMISSION
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION REZONE
The public hearing on the following Butte County Planning
Commission General Plan amendments and rezone was held as advertised:
A. Concow Area General Plan Amendment (item on which an
environmental impact report has been required) for-the Concow area,
including the Yankee Hill, Big Bend, Jarbo Gap, Concow Lake, and 3ordan
Hill areas. Designations under consideration are: Timber Mountain,
Grazing and Open Land, Agricultural Residential, Low Density Residentail,
Commercial, Industrial and Public. The establishment of a new Foothill
Area Residential designation will also be considered for the Concow
area.
B. Butte County Plannin~_Commission (item which is not
subject to environmental review) General Plan Amendment.
1. Unadopting and eliminating from the General Plan
the operational sewer and water element, the
recreation element, the people element, the economy
element, and the public facilities element.
2. Revising the implementation program of the .Land
Use Element to allow for geographic policies by
appendices or as a supplement, provide consistency
with the Housing Element on Planning areas, and to
clarify map scale.
3. Revising the Land Use Element to delete references
to the wildlife and vegetation maps.
C. Butte County Planning Commission - rezone (item on which
an environmental impact report has been required) of the Concow area,
including the Yankee Hill, Big Ben, Jarbo Gap, Concow Lake, and Jordan
Hill areas.
Charlie Woods, planning department, set out the background
of the General Plan amendments and rezone as recommended by the Planning
Commission. This project involves 35,000 plus or minus acres, and is
located east of Paradise and north of Oroville.~ The property was
zoned "A-2" (general) when the 1979 land use plan was adopted. The
community was involved in this proposal. An EIR was prepared, and on
the basis of that EIR, it was felt that the agricultural residential
designation, which currently applies, shows a difficulty in the
foothill areas where the agricultural areas are not specifically
outlined as designated. As a result the Planning Department made the
suggestion to amend the General Plan to put in a similar designation
known as foothill area residential designation. He set out the exhibit
maps at this time. He set out the types of significant impacts, which
are indicated in the EIR. The areas designated for commercial activ-
ities are almost totally confined to the existing commercial uses
along the highway and the occupancy standards would deal with any
problems. The number of deputies would be corrected in the final EIR.
In preparing the EIR, it is necessary to look at the worst case
situation in agricultural residential, which is one acre in size,
although they discussed this as a more realistic two acre figure. The
EIR covers what the existing situation is, the effect of the proposed
designation, and establishes thep~olicy framework for additional
ge 272.
July 27, 1982
8 2-
a
July 27, 1982
embers, and then a specific zone which reduces the potential number.
th the existing General Plan designation and current zoning, this
Auld allow for a greater buildout.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing:
1. Howard Clark, 3998 Yellowood Road, Oroville. Chairman
of the Golden Feather Community Association. Mr. Clark stated he had
been heavily involved in working on this plan. It is the recommendation
of the association that'the plans be viewed favorably and passed
at this time. There have been four years of hearings on this matter
already. Although there is a potential for development of many.
building sites, since this area is not located on the valley floor, the
topography and water availability would determine how many building lots
could be arrived at. Some areas could be broken down into one-fourth
acre lots and a person would never be able to build on them. The
heaviest concentration is along Highway 70 and the intersection of
two-lane county roads that are maintained throughout the year. They
tried to keep developments centralized around those points. The sizes
of the lots should be larger as they go out from that point. In Concow
Valley, the parcels would be rather large because of the movement
of water along that land. They have taken into account information
provided by lifetime residents who are aware of the problems. They
tried to answer every possible question that might arise. The volunteer
fire station is probably one of the most successful fire departments
within the county for response time. In addition to that there are
also two stations. manned by volunteer fire fighters for Jarbo Gap.
The school board provides fulltime staff members with time off for
fighting fires. The school is located within .400 feet of the fire
station. As far as law enforcement services are concerned, for .all
practical purposes, those services are non-existent. Fire protection
and roads are the most '.important to them in their consideration. They
have very little crime,. and what crime there is, is basically vandalism.
There is one road in and one road out and a radio network, so most
people do not create too many problems.
2. Jack Bryson, 4141 Jackdale Way, Oroville, first vice-
chairman of the Golden Feathex Volunteer Association and secretary
of volunteer fire department. Mr. Bryson felt that what was being
presented was probably about as satisfactory as could be presented.
IHe would actually like to maintain the "A-2" zoning, but it is not
(practical. He supported the "FR-2D" to "FR-5" zoning. He cou13 not
see anyone even considering anything under two acres. He felt this
was the best proposal they could expect.
3. Bill Wooby, chairman of the volunteer fire department.
Mr. Wooby concurred with Messrs. Clark and Bryson. There have been
meetings for the last three or four years. Everyone has had an
ample opportunity to express what they want in the way of zoning.
He felt that this was a very reasonable and acceptable proposal for
the community.
4. Russ Knoltman, owning property off of Hoffman Road.
Mr. Knoltman stated he owned 14 acres of agricultural land that would
be changed under the new proposed plan to 10-acre minimum. He had
planned on dividing his 14 acres since there is a portion on the hill
and a gortion at the bottom of the hill. He felt that his property
would yeild two parcels. There are 2.5 acre parcels around his
property, a number of 5-acre parcels, and he is surrounded by other
5-acre parcels.
Page 273.
July 27, 1982
8 2-
July 27,.1982
s -S .~ O ~ ~ ... ~. a ~ a -1 7 -mot C a R a a a ~ -1 ~ ~ yt ~ J 0 3 O 0 ~. = ~ - ~ 6
Mr. Woods advised this property is located in the foothill
area residential General Plan designation and the zoning proposal, is
"k'R-10" zoning.
5. Jeff Boggs. Mr. Boggs advised he had attended a Planning
Commission meeting on May 13, 1982 and again on June 17, 1982. At the
June 17, 1982 hearing Commissioner Lambert suggested that he shauld
bring his comments to the Board rather than speak to the Planning
Commission. The parcels, his family is involved in, are AP 58-17-05
and AP 58-17-18. Property is located along Highway 70 with the
southern most portion of the property being the Jarbo Gap Store and
the northern most portion is almost across from the Grandview Resturant
and Bar. The property is entirely east of the highway and is comprised
of about 260 acres. The Planning Commission has suggested a designation
of "FR-10" zoning. They also own another 30 acres located in the
"PR-5" zoning proposal, which is behind the Jarbo Gap Store. That property
borders Highway 70, where the association has recommended a commercial
development for that particular area. There are existing powerlines, an
abundance of water with two or more creeks flowing through the property.
There was a commercial precedent set for operations of a sdw~ll. The
orchard still exists. There were five or six houses on the property. The
property has, been cleared by bulldozers to facilitate commercial development.
The 30 acres that is on a level area near the creek would be ideal for a
number of homesites. He requested parcel sizes of two to three acres to be
not more than five acres, and that the property along Highway 70 be zoned
"H-C" or "C-1".zoning.
6. Don Ashbaugh, Grant Ridge, Concow. Mr. Ashbaugh did not see any
reason to change the current zoning. He felt that if someone had five or ten
acres and wanted to sell out a portion of it that they should be allowed to do
so.
7. Ray Taylor, Jarbo Gap. Mr. Taylor stated the plan had been worked
out and there are some inadequacies. There are areas near Highway 70 that should
be developed, but the others should be kept in a rural configuration. He felt
the Board should look at the problems and accept the plan.
8. Richard Brawn, 11692 Nelson Bar Road, Concow. Mr. Brown stated he
lived across from the school. He wondered whether the home occupations would
still be allowed after the zoning was enacted. He would like to have his
property zoned commercial since the property across the street is also zoned
commercial. He owns a ten-acre parcel and everyone around him has three or
five-acre parcels. On Che corner he has almost one acre.
9. Russ Knoltman. Mr. Knoltman wondered what this would do to the
taxation of the property and would it change it from agricultural land.
Ms. Kircher advised she could not respond to how the property was
assessed. She keeps hearing comments relative to agricultural land and felt
that some people take the agricultural residential designation on the General
Plan to mean agricultural land. Often people misinterpret the "A-2" (general)
as being agricultural land. This is not a designation for primarily agricultural
uses.
l0. Richard Campbell, Paradise. D4r. Campbell advised he owned property
on Granit Hill Road and there is no power to this particular area. Many people
have discussed this matter with PG&E. If the people are held to a ten-acre
minimum, there is no chance to bring power into the area. He was against the
ten-acre zoning for that area.
11. Jack Bryson, real estate broker. Mr Bryson advised that many
le did not realize 'that they might not be able to split their acreages
Page 274.
3uly 27, 1982
`.
8e
3
~k~sY
July 27, 1982
s ,3 e e ss m = ~ a ~ a ~ ~ a 3 e m ~ ~ ~ = s_ a ~ a n o ~ e ~ = ~ ~ = ~ ~
even if the property were left under the "A-2" zoning because of sanitation.
The Board will not leave this area in the "A-2" zoning and he felt the foothill
area residential designation would be a happy medium. There are many people
with 10, 14, 20 and 30 acres that do not know whether they can divide their
land at all. He felt that the Planning Commission took this into consideration
when they studied the area.
12. Gary Hout, Concow area. Mr. Hout stated it could be true that
he might not be able to split his 13-•acre parcel, but if it were zoned ten
acres, it is a fact he could not split the property. He owns six acres in
Concow and fourteen acres in Big Bend. The 14-acre parcel could support two
houses very adequately.
Chairman Wheeler advised many people feel when an area is zoned, they
will never be able to change that zoning. Application can be made to change the
General Plan and the zoning. There is also requirement to provide water and
sewage disposal.
Mr. Hout stated the mechanics worked both ways. He would not be able
to split his 14-acre piece unless he could prove water and sewage disposal.
Unit that time, he did '.not believe he should be limited to ten acres. He
requested a minimum of five acre zoning.
13. Thomas Crook, Big Bend. Mr. Crook stated one of the discrepancies
is that the minimum acreages required were based on the largest acreages of
15 acres on Jordan Hill Road. That will be considered 20 acres. Did that mean
he had to buy a 5-acre parcel to comply with the zoning? Parcels in that area
are smaller than the minimum parcel size Being considered for that area.
Ms. Kircher advised that becomes a non-conforming use. In the Jordan
Hill area, there are some parcels that will not meet the minimum zoning sizes.
Most of the existing parcels sizes are not all smaller. There are many large
parcels in the area. There were many parcels created by four-parceling, which
ended up in litigation. To say that the property must be smaller does not
necessarily indicate the terrain would allow for this.
RECESS: 3:05 p.m.
RECONVENE: 3:24 p.m. ',
14. Tony Argento, Big Bend Road. Mr. Argento stated across the
street from the 20-acre minimum there are three-acre parcels. He would like
his property in the "FR-5" zoning. The adjoining property owners live out
of town and own 40 acres and 14 acres. This property is all located on the
same slope. '
15. Jim Laird, off Detlow and Yankee Hill Roads. Mr. Laird supported
the people and their input. The county cannot have a no-growth area and they
are planning for little growth. This is better than taking out a peach orchard
and should be allowed for and balanced aut. He felt that is what the plan did.
16. Gene Miller, Yankee Hill. Mr. Miller stated he worked with the
community on this proposal. He felt that for the past four years they had
been working on this project and had developed a map. He urged the Board to
accept the plan.
17. Anthony Burnick, Concow Road. Mr. Burnick stated he had eight
acres on the upper part of the lake. He wanted to divide this land into
three and five acres. Camlot Subdivision is above his property.
l8. Laurine Hansen. Ms. Hansen stated she and four other people
owned property in the Yankee Hill area, which consisted of 80 acres, which
they are trying to parcel. This property was Located off Yankee Hill Raad,
Page 275.
July 27, 1982
a 2-
d
July 27, 1982
.a a a a a Y, a a x a e a s= s s- a a= a a a a e a a a e s a= s s a a a
me mile above Dark Canyon. She was concerned that this project might have
in effect on the tentative parcel map they had in process. She would like
~o know what the designation is being proposed for the property.
Ms. Kircher advised it appeared the property was in the "FR 5"
coning proposal.
Ms. Hansen stated she was under the impression that this was in
she "FR-20" zoning proposal. Stie had no objections to the "FR-5" zoning.
Chey are undertaking soil tests at this time. It does show they could have
Eive-acre parcels.
19. Gary Hout. Mr. Hout was not really objecting to the proposed
plan but felt some of the parcels that were in 8, 13 and 14 acres were not
Being considered.
Supervisor Dolan asked since the Board had received information from
she Planning Commission in a memo dated June 2, 1982 that outlined the request
Eor zoning change that was different than the original proposal, if the Board
could have a brief analysis from staff that would tell the Board why the
?lanning Commission did, not agree, that would help her to organize her thoughts
m this matter.
24. Don Ashbaugh. Mr. Ashbaugh requested that his 20 acres be zoned
into two, three, four or five acre parcels at 471 Granite Ridge Road.
25. Unidentified person. This person stated he had 9.7 acres off
Jordan Hill Road, which is presently designated as "FR-20", and would like
~o see either "FR-3" or "FR-5" zoning.
26. Rudolph Schott. Mr. Schott asked that his eleven acres that
were proposed for ten-acre minimum zoning be reduced to the adjacent parcel
sizes that run from three, five, and seven acres.
27. Richard Brown, off Hoffman Road. Mr. Brown requested either
=hree or five acre minimum. He owns ten acres that are proposed for the
'FR-10" zoning.
28. Thomas Crook, Jordan Hill Road. Mr. Crook stated he owned 15
acres and the road splits the parcels into 11.2 and 4.2 acres. All of the
parcels are one-half mile long and 250 feet wide. This property is located
~n a ridge top and he requested three to five acre zoning.
29. Ray Taylor, Jarbo Gap. Mr. Taylor advised he owned property
along Deadwood Road and would like to see that area zoned in three acre
parcels. There were 41 acres involved. The gentleman who lived below him
requested a change for his 21 acres to five and ten acre parcels. 'The reason
~e requested it be reduced along Deadwood Road is because of access and the
area should be developed.
On motion of Supervisor Fulton, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and unanimously carried, a motion of intent was made on the EIR and General
Plan amendment with staff directed to bring back a prepared motion for
August 3, 1982 for the Concow area General Plan amendment.
RECESS: 4:00 p.m.
RECONVENE: 4:08 p.m.
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and unanimously carried„ a motion of intent was made to adopt the Butte
County Planning Commission General Plan amendment, which is not subject to
environmental review on the following items:
Page 276.
July 27, 1482
~`~
.Tiny 27, 1982 _ _ _
~a e m m m a s a m m~ ax m= a ro m a== m a o m c i n a m e m a m _. --
92- 1. Unadopting and eliminating from the. General Plan the operational
3 sewer and water element, the recreation element, the people element, the economy
element, and the public facilities element.
2. Revising the implementation program of the L"and Use Element to
allow for geographic policies by appendices or as a supplement, provide
consistency with the Housing Element on Planning areas, and to clarify map
scale .
3. Revising the Land Use Element to delete references to the wildlife
and vegetation maps.
Consideration'of the final motion continued to August 3, 1982.
The hearing on the Butte County Planning Commission rezone for the
Concow area was continued to August 17, 1982 at 1:30 plm. The analysis
requested of the Planning staff to be available and any requested changes
would then have to be referred back to the Planning Commission at that time.
li APPEARANCE: ED BROWN, ASSESSOR
Mr. Brown requested that the Board might want to allow him one of
the $5,000 used cars like evexyone else had. He set out the statistics on
the 1982-83 assessment rolls. The secured roll is up ten percent and the
unsecured is up 22.93 percent. The total unsecured roll is a little less
of an increase than the previous year. There are still a great many new
businesses. On the other hand, the had about 600 fewer property title changes
over the previous year. They had over 13,000 last year. The big problem is
new construction directly affected by the interest rates. There are over
2,000 odd parcels publically owned. Much of this property should be sold.
Chairman Wheeler asked that the Assessor's Office look at all the
Williamson Act contracts and what the back taxes would be for cancellation
on those taxes.
Mr. Brown advised three property owners were allowed to cancel their
contract and have not paid the cancellation fees for three years. He has
recommended in past budget proposals that the Board take a long, hard look
at the Williamson Act contracts. For those contracts allowed in since 1975,
there is no substantial difference in taxes. The county does not get the
benefit of the two percentincrease. It takes about two-man years to
administer it. The taxes in the Williamson Act went down. His recommendation
in the budget proposal was that the Board should enter into no new Williamson
Act agreements from the standpoint of equity to the other taxpayers and the
cost to administer and the little impact on the major contractees. He felt
that in the future, if the Board allowed immediate cancellation of a
Williamson Act contract, there should be some stipulation that if the penalty
fees were not paid within 90 days, the cancellation would be void.
Mr. Brown advised he had provided the Board with a memo and asked
to be placed on the ,Tiny 1, 1982 agenda relative to transfer of funds in
his department.
Mike Pyeatt, interim administrative officer, stated he had submitted
the information requesting a transfer of funds to acquire a mini-computer,
He had initially sent a memo to Mr. Brown advising him that until the final
budget was adopted the Board could not do a budget transfer or acquire fixed
assets. He felt there should 6e more information submitted before this
matter was placed on the agenda. He had not had an opportunity to respond
to Mr. Brown's memo.
Chairman Wheeler advised she had just received a copy of the memo
and would suggest that copies be made available to the Board and the matter
Page 277.
.Tu1y 27, 1982
I `i
8'.
b
July 27, 1982
a~ -m n a a x m es x as ~ a m x- e x_~~ x, e x x a x a xa a a= ze a= x x x
be referred back to staff to do^any analysis and research to look seriously
at possible cost savings back to the county.
Mr. Brown stated his memo was dated July 1, 1982 to the Board and
he would have thought the Board would have received copies of it before now.
It was his opinion, after talking to the people in the financial county
system, that led him to believe that it probably would be better to amend the
preliminary budget rather than to wait for the funds allocated for the full
SCT contract. This proposal does not impact another department, it only impacts
the countract amount to SCT. He has received a quote from a vendor who is
a full-service vendor in hardware and software that is sufficient to meet the
needs of the Assessor's Office. In using this, cost savings against the direct
labor cost for the first year would be over $7,500, the second year would be
$1,500, and the thixd year would be $48,500 in direct money savings. He
asked for time to discuss this matter with the Board in detail before approval
of the final budget.
Chairman Wheeler stated one of her concerns was the other outside
users that use the system and who depend a great deal on the programming by
the county. As the law changes, this means changing of the software and a
need for a programmer analyst within theAssessor's Department.
9ca4 ~e4c~s
Mr. Brown felt the proposal touched other points and questions in
the past. He felt if the outside users needed something done, they should
pay the costs. The proposal would save the county money.
Chairman Wheeler stated she would refer this to the Administrative
Office staff since they are the contract administrators and tliE Board will
consider the matter at 'budget time.
Mr. Pyeatt advised he had several questions which he would put into
writing and share with the Board prior to the Assessor responding to the
questions. There are other counties using Butte property system. When there
have been law changes, Butte County has been a leader in modifying programs.
A major portion of the cost has been impacted. If the Assessor is given his
own computer and there is nothing in the proposal that speaks to the services
in other counties, how are they going to service the other counties. Many
years ago, Butte County made the decision to allow other counties to utilize
the system for Butte County. That use has offset the cost of the central
90/40 computer. There would be an increased Univac cost and impact on county
users if Glenn County and the other counties dropped off the computer. E1
Dorado County has developed an on-line system for the Univac 90/40 and this ,
is available to Butte County at virtually no cost except for the xeroxing.
Mr. Brown stated that system would not be satisfactory. He was
aware of the background development and the level of the program and it is not
developed to the extend the program is developed for Butte County. He has
worked in the center and knew the assessors in the other counties are not
using Butte County's cycle exactly. They have made modifications. A11 he
was asking was that the Board put him on the agenda before the final budget
was approved to discuss this matter.
Chairman Wheeler stated the Data Processing Committee had met
yesterday and they set, very explicit policy that will be coming to the Board
and other users. The Board chose to remain with the mainframe when they went
to the Univac 90/4b computer. They would have to analyze possible decentral-
ization. Other departments need to access the information from the Assessor's
Office. There is a sharing of information and that is why it is important
to have the data base.'
Mr. Brown stated he controlled his f31es and no one was allowed
access without his permission. He is presenting a proposal that will save money.
Page 278.
Juiy 27, 1982
'?
8 2-
July 27, 1482 _
e .a m== s=~ x a a o. a a o ai == a ~ = a e a a a o a= a =_ = a a
He was interested in saving money and increasing efficiency, since he now has
eighteen fewer positions. He was looking for a way to do a better job. He
felt SCT should also be willing to take the budget cuts like the rest of the
departments did.
Chairman Wheeler recognized that fact and that was one of the issues
that the committee was dealing with. She felt the proposal was something the
committee and staff needed to look at.
The matter to be brought foward to the Board before the final budget
is adopted.
APPOINTMENTS CONTINUED TO AUGUST 3 1982
The following appointments were continued to August 3, 1982;
1. Appointments to the Community Action Agency Board of Directors
2. Appointment to the Butte County Council of Senior Citizens
FINANCIAL TMPACT STUDY PROPOSAL CONTINUED TO AUGUST 3, 1982
Consideration of the financial impact study proposal was continued
to August 3, 1982.
14
COMMUNICATIONS
Archie & Ruth Paterson, Chico. The Patersons write providing information
on a use permit for Mr. Lugenbeel, AP 39-18-31, allowing a studio
foundry. Referred to Zoning Tnvestigator.
Gladys' H. Miller, Pacific Heights Mobile Home Park. The Millers write
regarding fees to operate a community water system. Referred to
Lynn Vanhart,' environmental health director, to report back to
the Board.
Department of Mental Health. Douglas G. Arnold, chief deputy director,
responds to the Board of Supervisors request for a hardship
waiver for Short-Doyle funding match requirements. Information;
no action taken.
Steven R. McNelis, judge, Gridley 3udicial District. The Judge provides
information of consequences of budget actions affecting the Gridley
Justice Court. Information; iio action taken.
Greater Chico Chamber of Commerce. Sally M. Liston, chairman Transportation
Committee, requests the Board of Supervisors re-examine its priorities
to focus on the traffic problems at Rio Lindo and Cohasset. Referred
to Department of Public Works to respond before July 29, 1982.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Elizabeth Tapscott,
program manager, provides advance information on a monitoring visit
for August 12 and 13, 1982 to review the Butte County Community
Development Block Grant Program in South Oroville. Information;
no action taken.
Norman S. Waters, assemblyman, Seventh District. The Chairman of the Water,
Parks and Wildlife Assembly Committee requests the Board of
Supervisors " thoughts on the concept of a northern effort to
protect water interests in order to begin working on legislation
in that regard. Information; no action taken.
Office of Ray Johnson, state senator. The Senator's staff provides
information on how SB 1326 (trailer bill} affects air pollution
control districts. Referred to Air Pollution Control Office for a
report back. Page 279.
July 27, 1982
~%
8
July 27, 19"82
Doyle McCoy, Palermo. Mr. '~1cCoy writes protesting the fees to operate a
community water system. Referred to Lynn Vanhart, environmental
health director, for a report back. to the Board.
Butte County Special Districts Association. Elden J. Brown, president,
writes regarding the Special District Augmentation fund distribution
for fiscal year 1982-83. Continued to August 3, 1982.
Albert N. Baxter, Palos Verdes. Mr. Baxter writes in protest on the raising
of taxes on a specific parcel in Thermalito. Referred to the
~15sessor.
Louis M. Fiorini, audio visual equipment and supplies, Chico. Mr. Fiorini
expresses concern on a rezone project in north Chico involving
the sale of pornographic materials. Referred to the Planning
Commission.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Elizabeth Tapscott,
program manager, provides information on their review of the
Butte County Community Development Corporation articles and bylaws.
Information; no action taken.
5iskiyou County Mental. Health Services. Gary De Salvatore, director, provides
information on user pay theory and alcohol drug interface and other
comments. Information; no action taken.
County employees. Various county employees have written the Board of
Supervisors providing their thoughts on employee negotiations.
Information; no action taken.
Maxim N. Bach, attorney. The attorney, on behalf of Ronald I. Dean, submits
a claim for $500,000 regarding an incident involving a barking dog.
See motion following communications.
City of Biggs. Arturo. Marquez, mayor, expresses concern over the general
law enforcement agreement which enables the Sheriff's Department
to provide municipal police services to the City of Biggs.
Referred to Administrative staff with response to be sent to the
city of Biggs and copies to the Board members.
Oroville-Wyandotte Irrigation District. Fritz C. Steppat, general manager,
offers two resolutions which authorize the addition to the tax
rolls of Improvement District No. 5 assessments and authorize the
addition to the tax rolls of delinquent accounts under the heading
of "OWID - prior charges." Referred to the Auditor.
Kenneth E. Haddick, Forbestown. Mr. Haddick appeals the decision of the
Advisory Agency concerning the negative declarations and tentative
parcel maps,. which divides property owned by James Bamford,
AP 73-30-22, 73-30-i9 and 20 in the Forbestown area. Set for
hearing August 17, 1982 at 10:15 a.m.
5
REJECT LATE CLAIM OF RONALD I. DEAN
On motion of Supervisor Saraceni, seconded by Supervisor Fulton
and unanimously carried, the late claim of Ronald I. Dean in the amount of
$500,000 regarding an incident involving a barking dog was denied as not
being timely filed and referred to County Counsel and Risk Management
Coordinator.
Page 280.
July 27, 1482
;;
July 27, 1982
a?- 1216 REJECT Lt1TE CLAiM OF SUSAN Mu5~5
$' On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and unanimously carried, the late claim of Susan Moses in the amount of
$2 million was rjected as not being timely filed and referred to County
Counsel and Risk Management Coordinator.
S: The Board recessed at 5:04 p.m. to reconvene on Wednesday,
July 28, 1982 at 10:00 a.m.
3'age 281.
July 27, 1982