Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM08258181? _~ OF CALIFORNIA ) SS. ' OF BUTTE ) August 25, 1981 The Board of Supervisors met at 9:fl0 a.m. pursuant to recesso Present:- Supervisors Dolan, Saraceni, Wheeler and Chairman Moseley. Clif Mickelson, administrative officer; Del Siemsen,, acting county counsel; and Clark A, Nelson, county clerk-recorder, by Nancy Wilson, deputy clerk. Absent: Supervisor Lemke 279 Ledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America Invocation by Clay Castleberry Approval of the minutes of August 3, 1981 were continued to ust 26, 1981. . On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler and tied, the minutes of August 4, 1981 and August 18, 1981 were approved as led with the following corrections: August 4,1981 minutes, minute order 81-2194, page 129, to reflect: county was liable, instead of libelo August 18, 1981 minutes, minute order 81-2273, page 163, to reflect: ona Flynn, instead of Mona Flynn, 80 IflPPROVAL OF ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS BY BOARD MEMBERS TO BE ADDRESSED AT THE Supervisor Wheeler sugges•t'ed~the title be changed on the agenda to itional items at the end of the day, SESSION: The Board recessed at 9:08 a.m. to hold a closed session on litigation and meet and confero NE: The Board reconvened at 10:31 a.m. following a closed session regarding litigation and meet and confer. No announcements were made at this time. 281 UBLIC HEARING: FISCAL YEAR 1980-81 REVENUES - APPROPRIATION OF E%CFSS ES RECEIVED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 29130 AS AMENDED The public hearing on appropriation of excess revenues for fiscal 1980-81 received in accordance with Government Code Section 29130 as ed by Chapter 168. was held as advertised, James Johansen, auditor, set out the background on the hearing, t last weeks meeting Budget Transfer 353 was approved, later in the meeting t was explained this was a final adjustment transfer appropriation of over ealized revenues and because of Proposition 4 legislation this transfer must e approved at a public hearing which has been noticedo He provided the embers with an explanation, After the public hearing it would be appropriate o approve the budget transfer. Basically it is a paper work item. Hearing open to the public. Appearing: No one. Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board. On motion of Supervisor Wheeler, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni carried, the ,following budget transfer for 1980-81 was approved: B-353 - Estimated Revenue Transfer -„.P,ronosition 4 This is a cleanup Page 168. August 25, 1981 b 2282 August 25, 1981 -_ _ _ _ _ = _ transfer appropriating $3,046,968008 in over-realized 1980-81 revenue in accordance with the requirements of Proposition 4, The over-realization is due exclusively to the initiation of accrual accounting procedures during the fiscal year, The transfer recognizes increases in revenues totalling $3,841,432,15 and decreases of $794,4b4o07 for an overall over-realization of $3,04609680080 This represents a year end closing bookkeeping entry and has already been recognized as a part of the year end fund balance, CONTINUE TO SEPTEMBER 22, 1981 - PUBLIC HEARING: MEL MULLEARY APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND ADVISORY AGENCY'S DENIAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, AP 27-29-14, FOUR LOTS, PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF CRIER AVENUE EAST OF RESERVOIR ROAD, PALERMO -The public hearing on Mel Mulleary appeal of conditional negative declaration and Advisory Agency's denial of tentative parcel map, AP 27-29-14, four lots, property located on the west side of Grier Avenue, east of Reservoir Road, Palermo was held as continuedo Supervisor Dolan stated this hearing had been continued as the Board was dead locked and unless there had been a change of mind, it was a waste of time to continued She had not changed her minds Supervisor Wheeler indicated she had not changed her mind, Supervisor Saraceni stated he was in favor of taking action, Del Siemsen, acting county counsel, stated to stay within the statutes they must continue the hearing as an open hearing if they are to wait for Supervisor Lemke's return, Supervisor Lemke getting all the backup and listening to the tapes is not the same as attending the meeting, Robert Huskey, engineer, stated he would be going on vacation and would like it continued until he had an opportunity to talk wLth Supervisor Lemkeo The hearing was continued to September 22, 1981 at 10:15 aomo 2283 PUBLIC HEARING: GERALD W, QUIST - APPEAL OF PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATTON AND ADVISORY AGENCY'S DENIAL OF A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, AP 22-25-05, TWO PARCELS, PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF KOFFORD ROAD, NORTH OF COLUSA HIGHWAY, GRIDLEY AREA The public hearing on the Gerald W, Quist appeal of proposed ',negative declaration regarding environmental impact and the Advisory Agency's denial of a tentative parcel map, AP 22-25-05, two parcels, property located 'on the west side of Kofford Road, north of Colusa Highway, Gridley area was held as advertisedo Lynn Vanhart, environmental health director, stated this was a parcel map that was recommended for denial by the Health Departmento It did not comply with provisions of the ordinanceo There was a problem with the reclamation drainage ditch, They have considered the drainage ditch as a perennial stream with a 100 foot set-backo If it could be considered a ephemeral stream it would require a 50 foot set-backo With those conditions it would meet provisions of the ordinanceo It does carry water the major part of the yearn As of last week it did have one foot of watero There is a house currently on the parcel within the set back, The set back requirements came after the house was builta His office did not receive comments from the drainage districto Chairman Moseley suggested changing the ordinanceo Mro Vanhart stated these requirements are part of water quality control as well as other lot req.u,~ements, It is a storm drainage ditcho Page 169a August 25, 1981 August 25, 1981 81;- Hearing open to the publico Appearing: 3'', to Gerald Quist, applicant, stated he was trying to split a parcelo A Mro Bill Owens had a map split down the stream £rom his propertye The water in the ditch is fromirrigation; In order to be a perennial stream there must be water in the ditch a minimum of nine months out of the year, It is dry a great deal of the yearn There is water in the ditch an excess of three monthse Years ago there was water in the ditch year round, He does not have enough ground for the 100 foot set-backo _: : - _ Mr, Vanhart stated the ephemeral stream or drainage course is a channel carrying,short;term tir.intermittent flown Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board, Chairman Moseley stated there was one other project that was within the 50 foot set-backo She has no problem with this project, He would have to keep all of the drainage within the 50 foot set-backo Supervisor Saraceni stated he agreede There-is an indication there is year a~roundand non-year around flow thereo He has looked at the area and it is consistent with the area, There was a motion by Supervisor Saraceni, finding that .~ the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environ- ment that a negative declaration was recommended; the appeal on the tentative parcel map, AP 22-25-05, two parcels, property located on the west side of Kofford Road, north of Colusa Highway, Gridley area for Gerald W, Quist be upheld and subject to the following conditions: 1, Provide two-way traversable access RS-9-LD-II to each parcel from a county maintained road or state highwayo 2, Access to be reserved in deeds as per county ordinanceo 3o Provide road maintenance agreemento 4o Deed to the County of Butte 30 ft, right-of=way from the centerline of Kofford Avenues 5o indicate a 50 ft, building setback from the centerline of Kofford Avenueo 6o Show all easements of record on the final mapo 7o Provide street name signs per requirements of the Department of Public Works prior to recordation of the final map> 8e Provide permanent solution for drainageo 9o Pay off any assessmentsa 10o Provide cul~-de-saw at the end of the streeto llo Obtain encroachment permit and construct standard driveway approach providing adequate sight distance at the intersection of access ease- ment and Kofford Avenue, l2, Obtain encroachment permit for all driveways, new or existing, and construct to nounty standard so 13o Pay any delinquent taxeso 14o Meet the requirements of Reclamation District #833, Page 170, August 25, 1981 81- a August 25, 1981 Del Siemsen, acting county counsel, questioned Supervisor Saraceni if he was making a defining that this was not a year arouiE~ stream but rather an intermittent streamo Supervisor Saraceni stated basically that is the content they have to decide on, Yes it wasp Mro Siemsen stated this was the findings they have to make one way or the others Supervisor Wheeler stated she had difficulty with the definition of stream design, Chairman Moseley stated maybe they should investigate and change this some where down the linen Chairman Moseley seconded the motiono Vote on motion: AYES: Supervisors Saraceni, Wheeler and Chairman Moseley NOES: Supervisor Dolan ABSENT: Supervisor Lemke Motion carried, 2284 PUBLIC HEARING: RUSSELL DARLING APPEAL OF ADVISORY AGENCY'S CONDITION N0, 5 ON TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, AP 45-412-78, FOUR PARCELS, PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF VALLOMBROSA AVENUE, APPROXIMATELY 1,000 FEET EAST OF JUNIPER STREET. CHICO The public hearing on Russell Darling appeal of Advisory Agency's Condition Noo 5 on a tentative parcel map, AP 45-412-78, four parcels, property located on the north side of Vallombrosa Avenue, approximately 1,000 feet east of Juniper Street, Chico was held as advertised, Clay Castleberry, public works director, set out the location of subject property, It is located on Vallombrosa Avenue, east of Chicoo The property is along a cul-de-sac and there is development on this sided They are appealing the condition of frontage conditions on thoseroe.ds,.of curbs gutters and sidewalkso Hearing open to the publico Appearing: 1, Russell Darling, applicant, stated Mr, Castleberry had outlined his appealo Supervisor Wheeler stated it is within the interior of the private road, She went through there this morningo Mre Johnson-had a project_thereo They upheld his appeal, Mro Castleberry stated they are not similar roads as this one, The Board has the right to do that, Both are on private roadsa If they da grant the appeal, he would recommend against it, but if the Board wants to on the private roado They will have to maintain the maintenance earlier, It is not good in the long runo It is good for economicso The Johnson appeal was upheld against their wishesa Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Boardo Mro Castleberry stated he would ask for a reduced road section and would suggest they grant the appeal for consistencyo On motion of Supervisor Wheeler, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni and carried, the appeal of Cond~,t,3on Noo 5 on tentative parcel map, Page 1710 August 25, 1981 ', August 25, 1981 _ 81= AP 45-412-78, four parcels, property ^located on the north side of Vallombrosa ~}' Avenue, approximately 1,000 feet east of Juniper Street, Chico for Russell ', Darling be upheld for reductions of the road section. 2285 PUBLTC HEARING: CONTINUED - LEE R. HAMRE APPEAL OF NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND DENTAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, AP 47-32-18, TWO LOTS, PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF TCEEFER ROAD, APPRO%IMATELY ONE-HALF MILE EAST OF STATE HIGHWAY 99 CHICO AREA "The public hearing on Lee Ra Hamre appeal of a negative declaration regarding environmental impact and denial of a tentative parcel map, AP 47-32-18, two lots, property located on the south side of Keefer Road, approximately one-half mile east of State Highway 99, Chico area was held as continued. Lynn Vanhart, environmental health director, stated he and Supervisor Wheeler had met with Mr. Hamre. He indicated there was no water in the holes on the property. In the spring time of the year the water does rise in the holes. In 1978 there was some seven inches of ground water from the surface, it may not happen this year. He suggested they wait and see. If it only happened every three to four years, they could live with it. He had no objections to waiting to see this winter.,. He,suggested they uphold the appeal and condition it on meeting the minimum standards of the ordinance. He would have 18 months from the time the tentative map was approved. He could not get final approval on the map until this condition was meta He felt early spring would be a good indication. They would have to wait to see if this was a drought year. It should be a fair test. Hearing open to the public. Appearing: 1, Lee Hamre, applicant, stated he had met with Supervisor Wheeler and Mra Vanhart on his property. He questioned what months would be considered winter. The last test was conducted in May 1981 and~e-was told that was not winter. Mr. Vanhart had earlier stated spring, Prior testing was Sept- ember 13, 1978, It will depend on the winter. He felt February, March or April could be considereda Mr, Hamre stated a real estate agent indicated a testing was done in a near by area which passed the requirement, His parcels are smaller. He would like approval today. Mr. Vanhart indicated there is good soil on that same property, This parcel did not pass the tests, Del Siemsen, acting county counsel, suggested they keep in mind approval would be subject to the testingo If this is a drought year, it will not meet the condition or prove anything as it is based on a specific condition. Mr. Hamre stated the project is 1x66 acres total. The requirement is for 60 foot of septic lines for a one bedroom home. He believes there is enough room for 80 feet for a one bedroom homed He would like it approved now. Mr. Vanhart stated the lot size depends an the size. There must be enough useable area. The systems have to work in the winter as well as summer. The requirements are set out in the ordinance, it does - .- establish lot size. Mr. Hamre indicated his neighbors have not had problems in the past. Page 172, August 25', 1981 81 a August 25, 1981 Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board. J Supervisor Wheeler stated she did not want to deny this project. There is a question that possibly the ground can support it, On motion of Supervisor Wheeler, seconded by Supervisor Dolan and carried, finding that although the propased project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case.. because of the following mitigation measure described as follows and a negative declaration is recommended: 1, Comply with the Subdivision Ordinance requirements for sewage disposal systems with regard to soil depth, percolation rate and depth to groundwater, further finding; the appeal of the tentative parcel map, AP 47-32-18, two lots, property located on the south side of Keefer Road, approximately one- half mile east of State Highway 99, Chico area for Lee R. Hamre be upheld and subject to the following conditions: Mitigation measure 1. Comply with the Subdivision Ordinance requirements for sewage disposal systems with regard to soil depth, percolation rate and depth to groundwatero Public Health Conditions 2, Demonstrate that the soil conditions meet the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance during the rainy season of the yearn 3. Provide an area for a well and 100 feet of leach field free area around the well and parcel one, 4. Provide a 100 foot leach field free area around .existing wells within the property and within 100 feet of the property boundarieso"~ Public Works Conditions 5. Provide two-way traversable access RS-8-LD-II to each parcel from a county maintained road or state highway, 6. Access to be reserved in deeds as per county ordinance and offered for dedication on the final map. 7o Show 50 ft. building setback line measured from centerline of access easement. 8. Provide road maintenance agreement. 9. Indicate a 50 ft. building setback from the centerline of Keefer Road, 10. Show all easements of record on the final map. 11. Provide street name signs per requirements of the Department of Public Works prior to recordation of the final map. 12. Provide permanent solution for drainage, 13. Pay off any assessments. 14. Provide cul-de-sac at the end of the street. 15o Obtain encroachment permit and construct standard road approach pro- viding adequate sight distance at the intersection of Keefer Road and access road. Page 173. August 2'S, 1981 A_ugust_25_,_1981 _ _ _ _ 16. Obtain encroachment permit for all driveways, new or existing and construct to county standards, 2286 17. Pay any delinquent taxes. Supervisor Wheeler clarified her motion to read Condition No. 2: rainy season that is coming up prior to July 1, 1982, CONTINUE TO SEETEMBER 1, 1981 - PUBLIC HEARING: DISCUSSION OF VICTIM'S BILL OF RIGHTS INITTAfiIVE The public hearing on discussion of Victim's Bii1 of Rights Initiative was held at thisrtimeo; Hal Brooks, district attorney's office, indicated he was represent- ing Mr. Manly as he is in Superior Court. Mr. Mattly does want to speak to this matter, He would like to be on 30 minute call fox this afternoon. Hearing open to the public, Appearing: 2287 1. James Hansen, Oroville, questioned if the members had read the complete document. He cautioned them to be careful in taking any action. He suggested they write back and suggest the criminal work off his debt. He felt it was sad the people had to carry the load because the court systems are too weak to say stay out of the peoples pocket. There is welfare to take care of these people, 2, Dennis Hoptowit, Chico, stated he was an attorney in private practice, He was not prepared to speak on the issue, he felt it was important. He felt a public hearing should be set and give the public an opportunity to respond. A public hearing was set for September 1,1981 at 1:30 p.m. for consideration of adoption of a;' resolution regarding the Victim's Bill of Rights Initiative, ~Mr _De~lucc,,he_,Br.,us~h_Creek:I~,, spoke-regarding the snow pl©wing policy changes for the mountain areas. There are 23 families effected by this change. One i5 on a life support system. He has a tractor and has helped in the '-past but is in poor health now. He was referring to the area from Mountain House to Berry Creek. There is a law that says safety comes first. This will be discussed during budget session tomorrow. 2288 2289 George Engasser, Palermo, presented a recall petition to Supervisor Saraceni. He felt the representatives should be held accountable for their actions. This Board, like past Board's, have gone against the will of the people. He cited the library issue, Veteran's Halls and Sheriff Department, They could save $150,000 by cutting the positions of Administrative Officer, his two assistants and the Personnel Directoro Chris Borman, Chico, presented a recall petition to Supervisor Dolan. t was due to the actions of the past few weeks. 2290 APPEARANCES: OTfiO HANSON Otto Hanson spoke regarding-the snow p3,owing policies,. in the Berry area. Page 174. August 25, 1981 August 25, 1981 _ _ Supervisor Wheeler stated she was working with constituents in the Butte Meadows area to form their own community group and attempt to find a way to fund and continue the level of services necessaryo They will attempt to form a special district for snow removal, '2291 APPEARANCES: JAMES HANSUN ', James Hanson, Oroville, gave the Board a vote of confidenceo It would be a sorry thing if they were to change their mind or decision because of provication or threatso It was good to see people doing their job for a changed Mr, Hanson was critical of the news median, He felt they were wrecking good governments He went to the District Attorney's Office to ', report a crime and was told to return in four days because of staff being on vacation or unavailableo 2292 2293 Ramona Flynn, Chico, felt the'-Board was acting in the best interests of Butte Countya The Sheriff's Department had increased their budget 78 percent in the last three yearso The libraries in the Chico and Gridley area have been promised for six years or longero Revenue shar=mg money was set aside and then used for other than librarieso The majority voted for Proposition 13o This is a difficult time for-the Supervisorsa RECESS: 11:35 a,ma RECONVENE: 11:48 aomo $UPERVISORS DOLAN AND SARACENI ABSENT AT THIS"TIME`a CONTINUE TO SEPTEMBER 22, 1981 - PUBLIC HEARING: BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMTSSION, GRIDLEY-BiGGS AREA REZONE The public hearing on the Butte. County Planning Commission, Gridley- Biggs area rezone (item on which an environmental impact report was previously certified) in order to bring the zoning into consistency with the recently adopted General Plan for that area as required by state lawn Parcels designated for the various land uses may be rezoned to the consistent or conditionally consistent zones of orchard and field crops; agricultural-- residential; low density residential; medium density residential; high density residential; commercial; industrial; and publics The area under consideration contains approximately 42 square miles of publicly and privately owned unincorporated land bounded generally by Highway 162 on the north, the Feather River on the east, the_Butte County line on the south, and a line extending south from the Richvale South Highway on the west, and including the unincorporated areas surrounding Gridley and Biggso The hearing was held as advertised, Supervisor Wheeler questioned Planning Director Bettye Blair regarding when the "green line" would be coming forward to the Board for hearingso She has received a number of inquirieso Bettye Blair, planning director,st'atedatthE~ext Planning Commission meeting they expect to make a final motiono It will c me forward after thato She did not feel the Board would be in a position to act on the Chico urban area until their final wish later this yearn She would like the Commission to go through the draft final piece by piece so it may not get a final . motion after one meeting, Mso Blair stated the Planning staff had been working on the Gridley- Biggs __.,._: project for two years with the General Plan amendment and now the rezoned There was a lot of effort put into the projects SUPERVISORS DOLAN ANA SARACE[~I PRESENT AT THIS TIME Page 1750 August 25', 1981 August 25, 1981 b 1. Clancy Soody, Grace Luthern Church., Gridley, stated they had purchased property to build a hall and church, The property is surrounded on three sides by smaller parcels and a few larger oneso They are asking for a 240 foot frontage split of 120 feet for each parcel, The Planning Commission has placed them in an agriculture five acre designation, This would leave them with almost two acres amongst a little house, It is hard to farm two acres . The area from Grace Road to Jones Road was requested by the city to be zoned SR-1. Hearing open to the publico Appearing: Chairman Moseley stated they are going by the recommendation of the Planning Commission. She suggested the church apply ,for a variance. *~ Mso Blair stated there was a map depicting the zone and General .Plan amendmento There were meetings with the Committee and the community. This is the recommendation from the Planning Commission to the Board. They have copies of the minutes. and all correspondence relating to the project. They have formed a motion for their convenience in the event they wish to take final action todaye 2. Jean Jackson, Gridley, has lived in Gridley for a number of years. She wanted to protest the A-5 zoning in the Gridley zone and in the closest of the Gridley city limits, The City has had growing pains. They are building homes in the countyo She feels five acres is too small unless you raise kiwis. People are unable to find adequate housing in the areao The A-5 comes to the city limits and against city lots. Koffer to Gridley is primarily 1/2 acres and houses. She feels it should be an SR-1 zone, She felt the variance process was quite lengthy:o She felt there should be another meeting with the citizens of ~.Gridleyo She brought the map that was the result of the citizen's committee meeting. Their plan was not adopted. Chairman Moseley stated they were trying to set up a buffex zone, Maybe they should hold off adoption and hold a meeting with the citizenso Mrs. Jackson stated there is no place for the people to live, This area would be in the City limits sphere. She asked that the present proposal not be adopted today. She lives outside of the city limits so is not able to participate in the committees> She does not think the citizens of the Gridley area are aware of this change. Ms. Blair stated she provided working copies of the Gridley-Biggs zoning area which represents the existing parcelso There axe large parcels still available. The map reasonably reflects the sphere and the City of Biggs and Gridley, They did delete some A-5. Mrs. Jackson stated the SR-1 is going north. Mast of that area is already developed into one-half and one acres and less than one-half acres lots. A good share of the land is not open land. 3, Jerre Reynolds, Gridley-Biggs Road, stated he was surprised at the expanded area of Manzanita and around Gridley. He is concerned about the area in the county, By breaking the acreage down and having more residents there are complaints of dust and other activities related to farming, He was not notified of this change. Ms. Blair stated when there is a large area involving more than 100 people they do a display ad in both the Gridley and Biggs newspapers. 4. Ray Robinson, farmer, Gridley-Biggs area, owns 200 acres. A few parcels in the Watts and Darsarea area-have been split into five acres. Page 176, August 25, 1981 August 25, 1981 _ _ _ _ There are problems with neighbors complaining about the dusto~ To split into 81 one..: acre parcels would create more problems. The more homes in the farming ~''' area makes~aheir job more difficult, 5o Norm Weiser, Gridley-Biggs Road, stated he did not see the noticed He was a member of the committee that worked with Planning staff, Their direction was go out into the area of the sphere of influence and determine where all the houses are presently and already have houses in the agriculture land, The cluster of homes already effect agriculture. Some areas are zoned A-5 and were recommended for A-1 to provide a buffer zone. He does not think there is enough SR-1 to meet the needs in the areao He felt it is difficult to get a bariance through. After 3z years he is still trying to get a subdivision through, He felt kiwis:,was a big item in Gridley. He questioned how this problem could be solved if they change the zone. SUPERVISOR WHEELER ABSENT AT THIS TIME 6. George Cox, Gridley, was from the Manzanita area and concerned about the proposal. It is good soil, A lot of residents are in the middle of harvesting and were unable to attend today, He felt-you cannot make a living on five acres. 7. Marvin Stolle, Manzanita area, stated he agreed with Mrs. Jackson's statementso The community has not been very well informed. He would appreciate it if before final action is taken they could hold a community meeting. Chairman Moseley stated she would like to meet with the people before action is taken, SUPERVISOR WHEELER PRESENT AT THIS TIME Ms. Blair stated she had no problem with that but was concerned these comments were not made before the Planning Commission hearing level. They can refer it back to Planning for another public hearing, They-would have to continue this hearing and give direction to Planning to receive additional information. Del Siemsen, acting county counsel, stated the problem with sending it back to Planning Commission they must be specific. Planning Commission cannot give them input on the total zoning. Ms. Blair stated the area of East Biggs, Dos Rios and Manzanita was not discussed by the Planning Commission. Did the Board have a specific recommendation. They could send those two points back for smaller acreage in those areas. Tt is not outside of the area in question. 8. Rae Wheeler, Gridley, stated the issue of Kiwis and smaller parcels in agriculture were not addressed at the Planning Commission level. They discussed the East Biggs, Watson area. If they could be assured that a piece of ground would be put into-kiwi then it would be a viable economic unit and could be under the General Plan conditionally, they have the mechanism for that, Perhaps they could consider another zone to take in special crops. Ms. Blair suggest an agriculture zone that does not allow residents< There must be a specific recommendation for it ~o go to Planning, She felt the question was broader than that. Mr, Siemsen stated if they want to ga to a broad area to reject this area and send it back to Planning for themato go:aback=and start over. Supervisor Dolan stated they are not saying reject the A-5 designation area, Maybe there is a trade off of A-5 where A-40's are. She does not want .Page 177. August 25, 1981 81- ~' August 25,1981 _ _ _ to send all the A-40 to A-5. They know there is an economic interest there to go to kiwisa Mse Blair felt it would be costly to deny the entire project todayo Possibly the Board could move forward on a portion of the project or the entire project and the Commission could do an independent study of specific areas. There are zones in the agriculture area that da not allow residentsa They co~ild possibly go down to five acre parcels without residents, not even agriculture employees. She could be supportive of this. Chairman Moseley stated she would like this continued so she can meet with residents. She would like to pursue this specific zoning for less than 40 acres. They could bring back a specific recommendation on the Manzanita area. Mr. Wheeler stated he would not contain this to the Manzanita areao He would like to include the Gridley Colony area. They should not stick to one zone. There was a motion by Chairman Moseley to send the Gridley-Biggs rezone back to the Planning Cammission not designating any particular spot area in the A-40 that could be considered specialty crops for review of those area that have been spoken to today. Mr. Siemsen stated if there was any special zone or special type of zoning that may change or modify, as it must be specific what you want to designate or what that zone would be. 9, Fred Greir, Gridley, stated the SR-1 would have an effect on the farming community. There is three miles from Gridley and into Biggs that is SR-1 and this would add to the existing problem. The hearing was continued to September 22, 1981 at 10:30 a.m. 22 94 RECESS: 1:06 pom, RECONVENE: 2:15 p,mo SUPERVISOR DOLAN ABSENT AT THIS TIME CONTINUE TO SEETENIBER 29, 1981 - PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF CONSOLI- DATION OF THE BIGGS AND GRIDLEY JUDICIAL DISTRICTS The public hearing on consideration of consolidation of the Biggs and Gridley Judicial Districts was held as advertised, Clif Nickelson, administrative afficer, stated this has been discussed far many years. Should the Board decide to consolidate the courts they should make a decision prior to the December deadline for the judges to file for election. There could be a savings of money. The consolidation would not qualify for a municipal court. Hearing open to the public. Appearing: 1. Norris Goodwin, Biggs Judicial Court Presiding Judge. He, felt Biggs would suffer should the courts be consolidated. SUPERVISOR DOLAN PRESENT AT THIS TIME Judge Goodwin stated it will have some personal effect. There would be a runoff f'or the jgdge. He was concerned about the loss of the facility of the Biggs Court to the City of Biggsa Judges come and go, but once the court issue is taken away it will stay gone forevero Being a Page 178. August 25, 1981 August 25, 1981 gl!_ small community you have personal knowledge of people in the area, There is ai the convenience of the public and participation of the local level with the courts and the law enforcement agencies, He feels it is important to the ', City of Biggs and that it be thereo There were a number of people from Biggs ', present today to show their support of maintaining the court in Biggso The ', Biggs court generate income to the County budget over the expenses or costse Half of hi s. salary as judge has been returned to the General Eundo He felt Judge Rix being compensated with the two sal•aizes for presiding over the Paradise and Oroville Courts was justifiede In the Gridley Biggs area one judge will be receiving one salary and doing the work of two judgeso His services have been used throughout the counfiyo He has not taken a vacation in the past five yearso He is not here today because of his job, he still has a law practice and is able to retire and work as a circuit judged He did not feel the Gridley half time clerk would be sufficiento Biggs has extra help on a regular basiso Mro Mickelson stated he felt the Gridley judge could hold court as necessary in Biggs for certain infractions or misdemeanorsa It would not be that much of an inconvenience for the people in Biggso There is only four miles between the communitieso They appreciate the fact they bring in revenueo They are not necessarily self supporting financially, There is the costs of police, investigation and District Attorney'so This county 'has serious financial problems and they must make some distasteful decisionso There are many areas where they cannot cut backo Judge Goodwin stated there was no mention of keeping the Biggs Court open in the information he received, They will need staff to keep the building open, There will be the expense to travel to and from Gridleyo It would leave Biggs without police protection-should they be in court in Gridleyo He is here to protect the court in Biggso He did not see why their budget should he reduced, Supervisor Wheeler stated the Board directed the Administrative Officer's staff to look into the feasibility of consolidating the courtso Services in the outlying areas are going to have to be cut because of Proposition 13, Judge Goodwin stated they bring in about $60,000 a yearn The county makes $30,000 from the Biggs Courto 2, Max Koenig; Biggs, set out the figures for the various courts from the proposed budgeto He felt maybe some of the courts were dogging it> Supervisor Dolan stated she would not make her decision on whether it was a money making operationo She does not see the court as sucho 3udge Goodwin stated he did not think either court was big enough for the functionso There will have to be a bigger staff, He felt before long the county will be required to make a municipal court out of the four courts with one, two or three judgeso If both courts are used there will be maintenance and upkeep to the buildingse 3o Steve McNelis, Gridley Judicial Court Presiding Judged He was not an advecate or against the consolidations He felt the facility in Gridley was a beautiful;-facility for a mini court rooms It is only utilized two to three and one-half days a week, it could handle more raorko The Gridley Court budget is about $96,000, The court brings in somewhere from $150,000 to $200,000 in revenueso He does not feel there would be a loss to the Biggs Court should it be moved to Gridleyo There will continue to be fines and revenue returned to the countyo The report from the Board indicated there would be some cost savings that could be achieved, Judge McNelis responded to Supervisor Saraceni`s question,. t~~t yes there could be a savings if the two Page 179, August 25, 1981 8] 3 August 25, 1981 courts were combined and-there were two buildings. If the two courts are cnnsal,da ed he and JudgetGoodwin may be running against each other for the position, Mr. Mickelson stated it was difficult times. The Board is trying to make a decision necessary to save local government and controls which can be saved. There is an allowance that off sets the utilities, telephone and other items with the City of Biggs. People from the City of Biggs stood to show their support of keeping the court in their town. 4. Edward Gauger stated the people from Nelson and Richvale must travel 16 miles as they are within the Bugg"s:Judici al District. Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board. 2295 Chairman Moseley stated she would like to continue this matter in order to digest the information received, So John ..Geese, Biggs, has lived in the area 21 years. He was concerned about the number of trips-the police would have to make should the court be held in Gridleya This would leave the City of .,Biggs unprotected. He could not see a savingse He felt if a fine of $25 was imposed, there would be more expense having the officer make from one to three or more trips to and from Gridley. Judge Goodwin stated they are cutting at,the bottom not at the top, Biggs will suffer greatly, Mr. Mickelson stated they could get the Board more material on figures concerning the consolidation. They need not make the decision before the final adoption of this years budget, They should make a decision two weeks prior to filing a notice of intention for the judges which would be in December, Supervisor Dolan stated the analysis from the Administrative Office was received on Saturday. She would like longer time to study the matter. Consideration of .consolidation of the Biggs and Gridley Judicial Districts was continued to September 29, 1981 at 1:30 p,m. RECESS: 3:15 p,mo RECONVENE: 3:29 porno SUPERVISORS DOLAN AND WHEELER ABSENT AT THIS TIME CONTINUELTO.~SEPTEMBER 29, 1981 - PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF CONSOLI- DATION OF THE PARADISE AND OROVILLE JUDICIAL DISTRICTS_.____- The public hearing on consideration of consolidation of the Paradise and Oroville Judicial Districts was held as advertised, 1. -Judge Rix,; Paradrse-Oroville Pr~siding~Judge,;Wh.ad ,__ ..,, prepared and submitted to the Board figures on what they thought could be saved from the two courts budgetso The figures includes the increased costs of salaries. A municipal court would be created by their action. All of the figures were reviewed by the Auditor, If they wish to erase the miles as far as the citizens of Paradise having to commute to Oroville, they could continue to provide court in Paradise for traffic and small claims. SUPERVISOR WHEELER PRESENT AT THIS TIME Judge:_ltix- stated if felony cases were moved to Oroville that would change the total filings by 9 percent. This would leave 91 percent actual Page 180. August 25, 1981 81 a. August 25, 1981 filings in Paradise. 2. Dr. Patterson, O.roville, attempted to question 3ud~ge Rix. SUPERVISOR DOLAN PRESENT AT THIS TIML Chairman Moseley stated Dr. Patterson was out of order. If he wished to hold a discussion with Judge Rix he could do so after the hearing. Dro Patterson felt it was depriving the taxpayers representation when one judge conducted two courts in different areas. He understood there was a salary increase of 150 percento ~.No man can serve two masters. Every appellant should be given full and fair hearings and time for rebuttal. He was denied this. He felt it should be placed to the vote of the people. They should be allowed to vote for all five supervisors not just the one within their district. Fifty percent of his tax bm11 is for schools and he has no children in school. He felt the consolidation would be more expensive. 3. Henry McCall, Oroville, stated he felt the main concern was saving the court in Oroville. They are aware of the crime rate and it is going higher and higher. Judge Rix's case .load is tremendous. He would be willing to work with the Board and City of Oroville to construct a new court facility. He does not feel the City has been too supportive of the County. G., Lynn Hubbard, Chico, stated about 70_percent o£ his practice is criminal and he spends a great deal of time in the courts. He felt it would be convenient to the local bar and was in the best interest of the defendants. The public defenders office is in Oroville and many people must travel to Oroville for appointments with the attorneys. He felt it would be a savings. CHAIRMAN MOSELEY ABSENT AT THIS TIME Mr. Hubbard set out the procedures for arraignment, preliminary hearing and the court appearances He felt there would be an advantage to consolidation, Judge Aix bends over backwards to meet suitable terms. CHAIRMAN MOSELEY PRESENT AT THIS TIME 5. Brig Jones, District Attorney's Office, stated hd~ass a resident of Paradise. It would cause a hardship on the citizens of Paradise. A much bigger one than the citizens of Biggs or `_Gridley, There will be a financial cost for travel expense of jurors._ Some°people are 30 miles away, It will diminish police protection. Felonys are down in the Faradise areao The Board should consider potential effect and where the court would be housed, The Board recently expended funds for the structure in Paradise. It would be closer for residents of Paradise to commute to .Chico. He did not feel one judge would be able to operate and take care of the work load in both Paradise and Oroville. There would be an increase in expenses. It would become a municipal court and one judge could not handle it. A letter from Darrell w. Stevens of Oroville, attorney, in favor of the consolidation was read into the record at this time. Judge Rix stated if they chose to erase the line, do so because there will be a tax saving, Tf they cannot, do not do it. Gerald Lively, deputy administrative officer, stated the present court facility in Oroville is not owned by the County. There are no plans for expansion at that sites There is a problem with security and maintenance at the present facility. There is discussion regarding AB 189 imposing a surcharge on fines. There are plans five years ahead for new construction. Page 181, .August 25, 1981 b 2296 2297 August 25, 1981 They have already contacted the City of Oroville staff in purchasing or lease arrangements with the existing .court in Oroville. It is anticipated it would cost!- $1 million. This is s11 very preliminary. Continued to September 29, 1981 at 2:00 pom, consideration of consolidation of the Paradise and Oroville Judicial Districts. A public hearing date of September 22, 1981 at 10:45 a.m. was set for county service area service chargeso APPROVE ADMINISTRATION AND OPERATION ITEMS - ADOPT RESOLUTION 81-191 On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler and carried, the following Administration and Operation items were approved: 1. Approved the final FY 82 CETA plan to be submitted to the of Labor and authorized the Director to sign. 2, Approved the CETA Title IIB classroom training eleimentt.and authorized the Director to negotiate and execute the implementation contract with the vendar subject to review by the Auditor and County Counsel. 3. Approved relief from accountability for Gridley Judicial Court pursuant to Government Code Section 25257 on certain fines and penalty assess- ments. 4, Adopted Resolution 81-191 making application to LAE'C8 for consideration of the conversion of the Stirling-City Sewer Maintenance District to a county service area with map and legal description and the Chairman authorized to sign. 5, Rejected the claim of Curt Johnson in the amount of '$1 million as a result of not issuing the necessary permits and approvals to enable claimant to complete a development project in the area of Nelson; and referred to ,County Counsel and Risk Manag~:ment Coordinator. 6. Approved budget transfers as follows: a. 8-11 - Community Action Procram. Item to increase appropria- tion in the 1981 CAA Head Start Program utilizing additional-unanticipated revenues previously approved by the Department of Health and Human Services. b. B-12 - Community Action Program. To establish budget for the Community Action Agency 1981 Senior Programs. 7. Approved penalty relief for Richard Saundry for AP b4-S4-002, 8. Denied:-:penalty relief for Yolanda Diaz for AP 21-132=036. 9. Denied penalty relief for Richard Payne for AP 54-21-008. 10. Denied penalty relief for Camille A. Foster for AP 141-090-019. 11. Approved facilities and rates': for child. care institutions as submitted and recommended for 24-hour child care institutions as recommended by the Welfare Director. 2298 ACCEPT'_sCOMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY INFORMATION Accepted from the Executive Director of Community Action Agency his six-month program progress report as information. Page 182, August 25, 1981 81-2299 $''. 2300 2301 2 302 2303 _ August 25, 1981 _ APPROVE TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF RACKERBY BRIDGE ON NOVEMBER 21, 1981) Supervisor Saraceni asked that there be a notice in the newspaper informing people there would be a temporary closure of Rackerby Bridge in Yuba County on November 21, 1981. On motion of Supervisor Saraceni, seconded by Supervisor Dolan and carried, the temporary closure of Rackerby Bridge in Yuba County on Nov- ember 21, 1981 between 2:00 p.mo and 4:00 pam, to accommodate a wedding on the bridge was approved, CLOSEDHEP.RING:=` THERESA GEORGE, APPEAL OF CONDITION N0. ~+ ON A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, AP 42-14-74, TWO LOTS, PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF NORD AVENUE AT THE INTERSECTION OF OAK_WAY, CHICO AREA The closed hearing on Theresa George appeal of Advisory Agency's Conditon No. 4 (provide permanent solution for drainage) on a tentative parcel map, AP 42-14-74, two lots, property located on the south side of Nord Avenue at the intersection of Oak Way, Chico area was held as continued, Supervisor Dolan stated this one parcel split will not eliminate the dilemma and attach other conditions. The point has been madeo On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler and carried, the appeal of Condition 4~4 (provide permanent solution for drainage) on a tentative parcel map, AP 42-14-74, two lots, property located on the south side of Nord Avenue at the intersection of Oak Way, Chico area for Theresa George was upheld. CONTINUE TO SEPTEMBER 1, 1981 - REPORT BY LAND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE CONCERN- ING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RESOLUTION Continued to September 1, 1981 the report by Land Development Committee conerning Development Agreement Resolution, CONTINUE TO SEPTEMBER 1, 1481 - APPOINTMENT TO THE HOUSING ELEMENT- TASK FORCE - DISTRTCT 4 Continued to September 1, 1981 the appointment to the Housing Element Task Force - District 4a REPORT ON NORTHERN CALIFORNIA EMERGENCY MEDICAL COUNCIL FUNDING - TO BE CONSIDERED AT BUDGET_SESSION AUGUST 26, 1981 There was a report on the Northern California Emergency Medical Council funding by Supervisor Saraceni at this time, Supervisor Saraceni stated he was doing some work on this iteme He is prepared to submit this even though funds are available that will help us. Supervisor Wheeler questioned if they shouldn't consider this during budget session, They are asking for $25,000, She had received a call from Steve Blacet~: of Glenn County. Of the nine nor't'hern eounti'es"each has agreed to give half of the request. Supervisor Saraceni stated for a number of years they have been trying to bring the cost to the private sectoro He would like a chance to bring this back. He stated the vote was divided and they were to bring the matter back to the members. Lassen and Shasta Counties have agreed to fund 100 percents The matter is to be considered at budget session on August 26, 1981. 2304 CONTINUE TO SEPTEMBER 1, 1981 - APPOINTMENT TO THE OVERALL ECONOMIC DEVELOP- MENT PROGRAM COMMITTEE - DISTRICT 1 Continued to Septembe~~~~ 1981 the appointment to the Overall Economic Development Program Committee - District 1. Page 183. August 25, 1981 II~ ,^ - =,;~ ;i' ~~ ';, August 25, 1981 81-2305 3', 2306 DISCUSSION: DATA PROCESSING UNIVAC 90/30 EQUIPMENT NOTICE OF CANCELLATION Discussion was held regarding the notice of cancellation for Data Processing Univac 90/30 equipment at this time. The Board only has a few days left to take official action to defund the current hardware of the Data Processing Center, C1if Mickelson, administrative officer, stated they must decide before the adoption of the budget whether to fund the lease payment on the 90/30 for the following yearn The lease will not run out for 4-5 years. The rental payments will be $14,377 monthly if they should chose to continue with the agreement, Supervisor Wheeler stated the Data Processing Department and she had spoken with~~le Auditor. They are concerned because of budget constraints. It would not lock them into Univac for another year. They do not have to make a decision on what part of the hardware. Mr. Mickelson stated Mro Hazelwood needs to send the notice should they chose to cancel, The contract reads Univac'f: guarantees the use of equipment for six months by paying monthly they can take.it back or charge the commercial rate instead of the ,current rates They could rent the 90/40 with similar use with a savings of $20,000 a yearn Bill Hazelwood, Data Processing, stated he was an advocate. It is a viable proposal from a third party. They must make a decision by September 1 to defund or continue to September 1, 1982. There have been a lot of proposals. He is not recommending the CRA facility or the five mini computers. The offer coming from Univac will pick up maintenance for the $14,000 a month, but does not include maintenance on the 90/40 through CRA. Decision on the Univac 90/30 equipment notice of cancellation to be continued to August 26, 1981 during budget session. Supervisor Wheeler stated the on-line computer is working in the Clerk's Offices The Wants and Warrents are on-line also, COMMUNICATIONS Scott Smith, Chicoa Mro Smith submits his resignation from the Child Health and Prevention Disability Boardo Accepted resignationo Carl La Mor-ton', treasurer-tax collectoro Mr. Morton submits his resignation as Treasurer-Tax Collector effective January 1, 1982, Accepted resignationo Contra Costa County Water Agency. The agency is conducting a water policy reform workshop and invites the Board of Supervisors to co-sponsor. and participate. Information; acceptable to co-sponsor and to participation with no money involved. Southern Adjustment Bureau, Tnc., San Diegoo The bureau submits claims for excess tax sale proceeds for AP 65-36-027 and AP 35-10-2-002 in accardante with the Revenue and Taxation Code Section 4675, Referred to Auditor and Treasurer-Tax Collector. Mrs, William A, Bohan, Chien, Mrs, Bohan writes in opposition to reductions in the Sheriff's Departments Information; no action taken, Administrative Office to respond. R. Wayne Houseworth, Orovillee Mr. Honseworth writes in opposition to reduct- ions in the Sheriff's Departmento Information; no action taken. Administrative Office to respondo Page 1840 August 25, 1981 v August 25,-1981 Walter N. Wilson, Biggs. Mr. Wilson writes in opposition to reductions in the Sheriff's Departmento Information; no action taken. Administrative Office to respond. Department of Housing and Urban Development9 Elizabeth M. Tapscott. The program manager of HUD provides information regarding rule changes and labor standards enforcementa HUD Handbook 6500 3. Information; no action takena Gene H. Phillips, Orovilleo Mro Phillips requests action regarding alleged illegal construction of housing in the vicinity of his residences Referred to Public Works, Zoning Investigator and Sanitation. McKinney Enterprises, Inc. Mr. McKinney requests status of a rezone request on AP 47-26-1830 Referred to Planning Department. Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, Red Bluff. The corporation submits a petition to rezone AP 73-04-016 and 73-04-018 to TPZ in accordance with Government Code Section 51113.5. Referred to Planning Department. A, Raymond Schoenfeld, Chicoe Mro Schoenfeld writes in opposition to a proposed 45 unit planned area cluster, (Giampaoli at Joshua Tree Road and Posada Way), Information; to be considered at September 15, 1981 hearing. California Supervisors Association of California, The association requests support in its opposition to bilingual ballots for election (SJR 72) sponsored by Senator Hayakawa. 'See motion following communicationso Interstate Commerce- Commission. The commission provides the information advising the Supervisors of possible discrimination indicated in a preliminary investigation of interstate motor carrier rate structures and requests assistance in identifying specific shippers or receivers who may be burdened by discriminatory rate treatmento Referred to Administrative Office for report back. 2307 APPROVE LETTER OF SUPPORT REGARDING BILINGUAL BALLOTS FOR ELECTION (SJR 72) On motion of Supervisor Wheeler, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni and carried, a letter of support to its opposition to bilingual ballots for election (SJR 72) was approved per California Supervisors Association of California requesto RECESS: The Board recessed at 4:38 pom, to reconvene on Wednesday, September 26, 1981 at 11:00 aomo in closed session to consider meet and confer and litigation i~. ~ =a`<: ... _._~ Page 1850 August 25; 1981