HomeMy WebLinkAboutM10068181-
3
2 483
2484
2485
2486
2 487
October 6, 1981
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
SS.
BOUNTY OF BUTTE )
The Board of Supervisors met at 9:00 aom, pursuant to adjournment.
Present: Supervisors Dolan, Lemke, Saraceni, Wheeler and Chairman Moseley.
Clif Nickelson, administrative officer; Del Siemsen, acting county counsel;
and Clark A. Nelson, county clerk-recorder, by Nancy Wilson, deputy clerk.
Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America
Invocation by Supervisor Lemke
CLOSED SESSION: The Board recessed at 9:02 aomo to hold a closed session
on litigation and personnel mattero
RECONVENE: The Board reconvened at 10:22 aom. following a closed session
regarding litigation and personnel matter. See motions following.
On motion of Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor Dolan and
nanimously carried, the settlement in the matter of Hill vs Butte County
as accepted.
On motion of Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor Dolan and
arried, a contract far employment as County Counsel be offered to Del
iemsen.
YES: Supervisors Dolan, Lemke, Wheeler and Chairman Moseley:
DES: Supervisor Saraceni
ecision,
Personnel Office is to notify other applicant of the Board's
NUE TO OCTOBER 13, 1981 - APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of August 2, September 22 and September 29, 1981 were
Hued to October 13, 1981 for approval.
Supervisor Lemke stated he would like to designate the railroad depot
n Paradise at Pearson and Olive as a historical site.
Supervisor Lemke stated he would like to discuss the letter received
y the Board on September 17, 1981 regarding the opening of a substation or
ome type of police operation in Paradise Pines area.
Supervisor Wheeler noted the Butte Meadows Volunteer Fire Department
ad been formedo
DOPT RESOLUTION 81-225 - PUBLIC HEARING: STANLEY WEBB (WEBB HOMES) ABANDONMENT
E PUBLIC UTILITIES EASEMENT, WALNUT WOODS SUBDIVISION, LOTS 1 THROUGH 4 (P$~ERS)
The public hearing on the Stanley Webb (Webb Homes) abandonment of
ublic utilities easement, Walnut Woods Subdivision, Lots 1 through 4 {3'eters)
as held as advertiseda
Hearing open to the publico Appearing: No one.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler and
nanimously carried, Resolution 81-225 on the abandonment of public utilities
asement, Walnut Woods Subdivision, Lots 1 through 4 (Peters) for Stanley Webb
Webb Homes) was adopted and the,.:Chairman authorized to signo
Page 3130
October 6, 1981
.~~ -
•,
October 6, 1981
81- 2488 ADOPT ORDINANCE 2251T-TPUSLIC HEARING: BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
~, AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 24 OF THE_BUTTE COUNTY CODE, SECTION 24-141, ','R-3"
ZONE AND SECTION 24-144, "R-4" ZONE TO SET DENSITY LIMITATIONS AS SPECIFIED
IN THE BUTTE COUNTX GENERAL PLAN
The public hearing on the Butte County Planning Commission amend-
, went to Chapter 24 of the Butte County Code, Section 24-141, "R-3" zone and
Section 24-144, "R-4" zone to set density limitations as specified in the
Butte County General Plan was held as advertised.
Bettye Blair, planning director, stated this was a follow-up. Tt
is an amendment to the zoning ordinance to provide for the density limits
that were adopted in the Housing Elemeat last week. fine language is the
same as proposed, just the densities have changed,
Tt was moved by Supervisor Saraceni, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler,
noting that this project is not subject to CEQA (California Environmental
Quality Act); finding that approval of this project is necessary to bring
the zoning into conformity with the Butte County General Plan, per the
requirements of Section 65860 of the Government Code; the amendment to
Chapter 24, Secton'24-141, "R-3"-zone and Section 24-14~, "R-4" zone to
set density limitations be approved; Ordinance 2251 be adopted and the
Chairman authorized to signo
Supervisor Lemke questioned why they excluded mobile homes in the
"R-3" under uses of mobile homes. Why would a mobile home be excluded through
foundation and mobile home laws.
Mso Blair stated if the mobile home was placed on a footing it was
no longer defined as mobile home and it would not be necessary to refer to
the designation. If the mobile home is on axels it is defined ~ by law as a
mobile home,
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: No one.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board,
Vote on previous motion:
AYES: Supervisors Dolan, Lemke, Saraceni, Wheeler and Chairman
Moseley
Motion carried,
2
ADOPT RESOLUTION 81-226 - PUBLIC HEARING: NOTICE OF INTENTION TO RENAME PRIVATE
ROADS
The public hearing on the notice of intention to rename private roads
Turkey Avenue (Alta Airosa Drive to end) to Apache Hill Road; and Bluffside
Drive (Honey Run Road to end) to Butte Creek Island Road was held as advertised,
Clay Castleberry, public works director, set out the backgrounds
He suggested the Board adopt the resolution changing the nameso He set out
the areas on a map.
Hearing open to the public> Appearing: No oneo
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by".:Supervisor Wheeler .and
unanimously carried, Resolution 81-226'"renaming private roads in_Butte County
as follows was adopted and the Chairman authorized to sign:
Page 314.
October 6', 1981
October 6, 1981 _ _ _
S1_ Y Existing Name Termini Proposed NameT
~ Turkey Avenue Alta Airosa Drive to End Apache Hill Road
Bluffside DriveHoney Run Road to End Butte Creek Island Roae
2490 PUBLIC HEARING: TOM DUNCAN APPEAL OF THE ADVISORY AGENCY'S CONDITION N0. 8
ON TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, AP 37-47-23, TWO PARCELS, PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE
SOUTH SIDE OF KEEPER ROAD WEST OF HICKS LANE NORTH CHICO AREA
The public hearing on the Tom Duncan appeal of the Advisory Agency's
Condition Noo 8 (provide permanent solution to drainage) on a tentative
parcel map, AP 37-47-23, two parcels, property located on the south side of
Keefer Road, west of Hicks Lane, north Chico area was held as .advertised,
Clay Castleberry, public works director, stated this is similar to
the project approved several weeks ago for Bruce McCrea in the same area,
He felt the Board should be consistent, The drainage study in the area is
pending and is not completed
Hearing open to the publico Appearing:
to Tom Duncan, applicant, stated his name was on the letter
presented several weeks ago regarding compliance with the condition on
provide permanent solution to drainageo They do not feel there is a
drainage problem, If a drainage district is formed, they will join the
district,
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Boarde
On motion of Supervisor Wheeler, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and unanimously carried, the appeal of Condition Noo 8 (provide permanent
solution to drainage) on a tentative parcel map, AP 37-47-23, two parcels,
property located on the south side of Keefer Road, west of Hicks Lane, north
Chico area for Tom Duncan was upheld; subject to all other Advisory Agency
l!conditionso
249iCOMMENTS TO THE FINAL GRAND JURY REPORT FOR 1980-81
The Board of Supervisors comments to the final report of the 1980-81
Grand Jury report was held at this timed
Clif Nickelson, administrative officer, stated the Board must put
together their comments to the recommendations of the Grand Juryo There are
eighto They are only required to comment to the recommendationse
Supervisor Lemke stated he appreciated the comments and recommend-
ations of the Grand Juryo He wanted to point out they are under budget
constraints and the recommendations cannot be followedo This should be
considered in their recommendatianso They would adopt the recommendations
if the money was available to theme
Supervisor Wheeler stated she agreed with Supervisor Lemkeo
Chairman Moseley stated this has been pointed out to previous
Grand Juries,
MreiMickelson set out page 2 relative to formal evaluations of the
performance of all appointed Department Headso He stated their office agrees
with the Personnel Director's comments, Department Heads are before the
', Board on a weekly basiso
Supervisor Saraceni stated he felt there should be a task force
from the private businessesa They could show them how to be more efficient
Page 3150
October 6,1981
81-
~'
October 6, 1981
and could adviserthemoW It would show how each department was being managed,
He did not feel it would come .out during budget reviewo It could be economical
Supervisor Lemke stated he felt the Grand Jury was a "Blue iiibbon
Panel" and you cannot get people who were any better qualified.
Supervisor Saraceni stated they already have people from each district
which could give additional comments during the year that could be
beneficial.
Chairman Moseley questioned how much they were obligated to
individuals who were appointed to commissions and boards.
Bel Siemsen, acting county counsel, stated should an individual
be doing normal activities and there were problems the county could be
liablea If it was something nobody else was doing, it was possible they
would not be responsible.
Supervisor Lemke stated one problem area was in working with the
layman on the Grand Jury to evaluate government, It would be difficult to
apply.
Supervisor Dolan stated many department heads appear on a weekly
basis before themo The department heads know which law they must comply
with on the state and federal level, It would be difficult fora Board
member to define if they are doing the job properly, She agreed with the
statement of the Personnel Director.
Supervisor Lemke stated the Grand Jury is instructed to do some
kind of an evaluations If there is a problem they can look into it,,;They
should set up some kind of guarantee where the elected official is overseeing
the policy and general direction of the countyo If the department heads
do not the Board can remove them,
Mr. Nickelson stated anytime they feel there is a department head
not doing the job they can bring a charge, then it could be handled in
closed session. An annual review of each department head could not be handled
in closed session and it could be a most difficult situations You may not
want to publicly say something. The Board can always ask fora study of a
department.
Supervisor Wheeler stated they are in the process of doing this
study now. The study process and analysis or evaluar.ion of all departments
and their department heads-: is being done. whey should have ah a°ctive part.
Board comments to Grand Jur a e 2: Agree with the comments of
the Personnel Director.
Mro Nickelson set out page 3, Grand Jury recommendation regarding
the Data Processing (Executive) Committeeo
Supervisor Wheeler stated she felt they should hold the discussion
and response until the item regarding the SCT contract and technical advisor
listed on the agenda had been handled, She felt any action taken would be
their response to the Grand Jury.
Mr. Nickelson set out page 5.and 6, Grand Jury recommendation
regarding Public Works Department.
Board .comments to Grand Jur a e 5'' and 6: Agree with the Public
Works Directoro There is coordination between the three departments, They
are addressing the problemso Page 316a
October 6 ; 1981
October 6, 1981
81- Nr. Nickelson stated part of it will be handled when they look at
5 the Health Department. They have already combined Planning and Environmental
Review.
Nr. Nickelson set out the recommendation on page 7, Purchasing
Department, of the Grand Jury.
Board comments to Grand_Jury. vase 7: The storage facilities in
Purchasing was discussed during budget session, there is no funding.
Mro Nickelson set out page 8, 9 and 10, Grand Jury recommendation
regarding the Sheriff's Department.
Board comments to Grand Jur a e 8 9 and 10: The Jail Needs
Assessment Committee is progressing rapidly on this issued
Supervisor Saxaceni suggested they utilize ground around the
jail-for a vegetable garden. There could be a saving.
Supervisor Lemke stated this has been done in the past. They have
u ed deer whi~gg had bee hit and the,sal~on from thy.river that were milked.
3st must be•volunteer help and not violate their civil rights.
Mr. Nickelson set out the recommendation on page 11 and 12, .
Sheriff's Department, of the Grand Jury.
Board comments to Grand Jur a e I1 and 12: They are supportive
of the Purchasing Officer's commentso
Discussion was held regarding the safety of patrol cars and the
performance of the tires. The Purchasing Officer should work closely with
the Sheriff on this matter.
Mr. Nickelson set out the recommendation on page 13, regarding
per diem to Trial Jurors, of the Grand Jury.
Board comments to Grand Jur a e 13: They would like comments
£rom the courts regarding this matter, No comment.
Mr. Nickelson set out the recommendation on pages I4 through 20,
Audit and Finance Committee (Data Processing)o He stated they have been
working on this and several of their recommendations have been implemented.
Supervisor Wheeler stated they have been working on the recommend°
ations of the Grand Jury regarding long range plan for Data Processing.
There is a problem with finances.
Board comments to Grand Jury pages 14 through 20: They are working
on implementing the recommendations regarding Data Processing,
2492 AUTHORT2E NEGOTIATIONS WITH SCT FOR A THREE YEAR CONTRACT - SPECIFIC JOB
DESCRIPTION TO BE OUTLINED FOR A TECHNICAL ADVISOR AND IF THERE CAN BE A
SAVINGS WITH THE POSITION
Discussion was held regarding the Data Processing Executive
Committee recommendations concerning hiring a tehhnical advisor and the
contract extension for SCT was held at this time.
Supervisor Wheeler stated the Board had received copies of the
Committee's minutes relative to the contract and technical advisoro She
set out the background of the minutes. They propose using the money saved
through lower computer lease costs at $19,500, by not proceeding with Phase
II of the Gillinger contract. ;;~~ey could hire a technical advisor. They
Page 317.
October 6, 1981
October 6., 1981
81- can get a six-month. extension with SCT until July and go.month by month. She
3' felt it was a misnomer. Some of the Executive Committee members,-would like
to comment.
1.• Jim 3ohanseri, auditor, stated the request before them is an
extension of the subcommittee and the committee.
Supervisor Wheeler stated the committee did recommend going to
the 90/40. computer.
Mr. Johansen stated they recognize the Gillinger report was
presented and SCT responded to the report and left some questions. The
Administrative Officer, Welfare llirector, Assessor and himself met-with
Mr. Gillinger and it was felt the basic recommendation-was sound. Some
of their concerns did have some limitations. They felt some of the costs
could be reduced. Mr. Gillinger felt the vendors submitting proposals
on the RFP and RFI would be possible, but it would require additional costs
of $11,000 or above what was budgeted. The discussion progressed to the
reduction of costs for the hardware with SCT and the 90/40 computer was
approved by the Board last week. They are attempting to~achieve the
recommendation and goals with a minimum of cost. He is pleased with the
progress. He recommended encumbering the $19,500 and not proceeding with
Phase II of the report as recommended by Gillinger and Associates.
Why not use the savings of $19,500 and in addition to the savings on the
96/40, begin the RFI and RFP and softvrare. for the new facilities management.
If the alternative processes would be to have that one person primarily
the one being here, implementing and responsible far the workings of the
program, the committee would have interaction and be involved in that
process and there would be cost analysis of the costs of data processing.
The cost benefit is going to be very important. The enhancement would
be to the public services because they want specific and very detailed
evaluations for data processing in order to assure the highest and greatest
value for the money. The technical advisor would monitor and evaluate
the performance in a long term grocess similar to that used in the Auditor`s
Office by CPAs for the records of the county.
Supervisor Wheeler stated it seemed to her from the meeting held
this past week, the committee's support of a technical advisor was not as
strong as the six-month contract. It is in the minutes regarding the clause
they use as a governmental agency for the six-month period.
2. Ed Brown, assessor, stated he would like to speak t~o the plan
for the extension. He hoped they could find a lower effect cost for data
pracessing for the county. Concerning the technical advisor, it has been
the tendency for three years to delay and delay. They need to pursue the
matter and find out what some of the vendors have to offer or are willing
to offer. He would ILike to put this issue to bed. He strongly recommended
they go with the six-month•extension and allow them to formulate the long
range plan. It would give a great deal of flexibility.
Supervisor Lemke stated for six years that he knows of, or
possibly nine years, there have been the same questions. He does not believe
it will happen that data processing is not a problem.
Mr. Brown stated the issue has come up and whether he agrees he
will go along with it. Before ~.specifie plan can. be formulated, they must
find what the alternatives are and this has not been done in a logical precise
and actual way. The Gillinger-report was used as a-basis and he felt this
was the opportunity to formulate-the long range plan.
Fage 318.
October 6, 1981
October 6 L 181
81- Superyisor.Lemke stated. the Grand Jury started talking about technical
~, advisor positions and he has not seen the job .description and what the advisor
would do for the community, the Board and data processing in.general. For
20 years and prior to that; the Board-had a department head, who was an expert
in data processing on staff, working and advising the Board and everyone as
to what should be done. The county kept buykngmore machines. The county had
the equipment and facilities and were lacking management of the Facility.
They did not have the technical expert to run the productions that the
departments wanted. The county hired that technicah expert, known as SCT,
who are managing the facility and were to know what the departments wanted.
The Board established an Executive Committee on Aata~'Processing. The person
that was hired was not the one he felt should have been hired. He then
was off the committee and Supervisor wheeler had the .job. The Executive
Committee was established to tell the facilities management people what
', programs were~to be handled. The county is paying a good deal of money for
a prior year. He was concerned because he was hearing that the Executive
committee and the Grand Jury are advising that the Board-hire another technical
advisor to look over the management people who were suppose to know what they
were doing. He did not think a tehnical advisor would straighten everything
out. He wanted to know when the county was going to have someone to lmow
what must be done. There have been millions of dollars spent and decades
spent and the people are still paying. The Grand Jury is still involved
in this matter.
Mr. Brown stated if they wanted to say he politicized this matter,
then he is guilty. He was trying to save the people money. He did not think
that Mr. Johansen had envisioned the technical advisor as a person that would
be looking over someone's shoulder. There has been the problem of inadequate
staff or employees of SCT all of these years. He felt the technical advisor
would be taking on minor duties. This person would prepare and follow
through with the necessary technical steps to finalize the programs.
The person would have to do this with the specific resources available from
the vendors as to what they would need and with the amount of money available.
He felt it was to the county's advantage to have this person prepare specific
', results. They have never had a system produced whereby the users could use
the results.
Chairman Moseley felt they were going backward. She felt they
were going back to an in-house operation with a technical advisor. That
person would probably have to be paid $45,OD0 to $55,000 per yeax.
to do.
Supervisor Lemke would like to know what the technical advisor
3. Bob Crisan, welfare director, stated that when the technical
advisor was discussed, there would be no one unless there would be a savings
shown. This would be a savings through the long-term contract with the
90/40 and from equipment rental on a monthly basis that could be changed to
a lease. He had some problems with the six-month period. They would be
going into a four year contract with a six-month option and someone is not
', going to devote their best people in that instance.
Mr. Nickelson stated that in looking at the technical advisor, this
would not be someone that would be hired tomorrow. The specifics need to
be developed as to the requirements for the classification of the position,
the salary schedule and the job description. There is no way to immediately
accomplish this and have the plans for the RFI and RFP ready by the first
of next July. The six months will not work. He felt they should negotiate
the contract for three years with the six-month clause.
rage 319.
October 6, 1981
gctober 6,L 1981
81- Supervisor Wheeler advised that the six=month: clause would put
them back into renegotiations and would cosE ~gore.~oney over a long period
of time. She felt the six months would have an adverse effect. if there
was a phase-hack, it would 6e advserse. She would like to see a six--month
extension or a three-year plan. The delay by six months would be more
expensive.
', It was moved by Supervisor Lemke, that negotiation for a three
year contract with SCT be authorized; and whi1~ negotiations are going on
with the Data Processing Committee or somone, that a specific or job
description be put together for a technical advisor and a cost proposal
be prepared showing a savings with the position.
Supervisor Wheeler questioned if the negotiations could be done
by a committee member and the Administrative Officer to show how much
and how many outlines be done by people that have knowledge of data processing.
Supervisor Lemke wanted to know .what happened when the Board hired
', a technical advisor and the advisor came back with proposals and the Board
would not accept them. What would happen i"f the Board di'd not accept
the advise by this person?
Supervisor Wheeler seconded the motion.
Supervisor Wheeler felt the Administrative Officer, Personnel
Director and Auditor should handle-the negotiations.
Supervisor Saraceni felt they should keep the annual clause in
the contract.
Supervisor Lemke stated the contract required two signatures
showing agreement on both sides.
Supervisor Wheeler stated that politics keep this issue in turmoil
and there really has been cooperation. The system is up and running.
It is not such 'a mess and is working better than before. There is going to
be a cost savings by the recommendation for the 90/40. This would be a
', $50,000 savings to the county. She would prefer this to along term
plan by operating the center at a lower cost. The Sheriff's wants and
warrants system, and Elections voter on-line are up and running. They are
working on the stolen goods program for the Sheriff and the plans for
the Welfare Department master file and jail management change.
4. Carl Morton, treasurer-tax collector, stated the committee
had received a series of criticism. They have pushed to provide the Board
ith information and the recommendations which-were given to the Board.
It was not a spur of the moment thing. He is not a member of the committee.
', The committee affirmed the recommendations with the exceptions of the
Administrative Officer and Supervisor Wheeler. The Board has not listened
to the committee and therefore what use is the committee.
Mr. lKickelson stated that the committee listens to everyone
weigh the information that has been presented.
Supervisor Lemke stated there were two recommendations made, one
listened to and the other was not. There is a difference of opinion
een the members of this board. The final decision must be with the
d. The Board is the one that receives the heat from the public if
thing is wrong.
Chairman Moseley was d'sappointed because it did not look as if
groblem had been solved. age 320.
October 6, 1981
81-
•d
~*
October 6, 1981
5. James Hanson, Oroville, questioned who had been advising the
Grand Jury to make the various questionsm He felt the Grand Jury was an
elite group.
.Supervisor Lemke stated two or three members investigate and go back
to the Grand Jury with recommendations. and they make their own decisions.
Supervisor Dolan .felt people know who the Grand Jury was and they~re~o•
labeled elite. They are looking into Qata processing management and submit ed
their report six months ago to the Board. She did not feel the process was
a secret and it is as it should be.
6. Clark Nelson, clerk-recorder, would like to address the technical
advisor position. Approximately nine months ago, he and the Auditor were
appointed as a subcommittee and held meetings on data processing. They went
to see Supervisor Lemke and recapture the information. They were seeking an
alternative method for data processing to find what the costs were and who
would be making the decisions. A technical advisor is the only avenue ha
could see that would work. SCT started as the technical advisor for the county.
He was not in agreement with the Assessor and Tax Collector on decentralization.
SCT has done the work he has needed accomplished. He is able to have data
submitted at night and receive the information in the morning. The problem
has been a burden for the county and felt the questions should be asked as
to what was good for the county, what the costs were and should they go back
in-house. Maybe this would keep some of the .outside burden from the department
heads and the advisor could come up with a plan since the departments do not
know the costs.
Supervisor Wheeler felt this was the full intent of the Board. They
would set down the types of guidelines and adopt them.
Vote on motion:
AYES: Supervisors Dolan, Zemke, Saraceni, Wheeler and Chairman
Moseley
NOES: None
MOTION CARRIED.
2493
Supervisor Lemke questioned the use of the users in the county that
were on the committee and felt they should put down their ideas and forward
them to the committee. This would be put in a package and submitted to the
vendors.
Mr. Brown felt this would take a great deal of time. He would like
to see it cost effective. He has been hurt by budgetary cuts and Data
Prcessing has not felt that impact.
Mr. Mickelson stated they would begin negotiations with SCT and have
a proposed contract within 30 days and would have the job description for
the techical advisor to the Board by January 1, 1982.
PUBLIC HEARING: BOB C. TUTTLE APPEAL OF DENIED VARIANGE TO ALLOW STRUCTURES
TWO FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE ON PROPERTY ZONED "S-R" (SUBURBAN -
RESTDENTIAL), AP 39-38-30, PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF DAYTON ROAD,
APPROX. 350 FEET SOUTH OF MARIAN ROAD, CHICO AREA
The public hearing on Bob C. Tuttle appeal of Planning Commission's
denial of variance (categorically exempt from environmental review) to allow
structures two feet from the side property line on property zoned "S-R"
(suburban-residential), AP 39-38-30, property located on the east side of
Dayton Road, approximately 350 feet south of Marian Road, Chico area was
held as advertised.
Page 321.,
October 6, 1981
81-
b
October 6, 1981
Bettye Blair, planning director, set out the background on the appealo
It was denied by the Planning Commission. They have the minutes, staff
findings and all information that came into the hearingo
Chairman Moseley noted letters have been received from the
following individuals:
1. Mro and Mrso Edward E. Wiftmeier, Chico - opposed,
2, John D, and Loreto Jo Cunningham, Chico - opposed.
Hearing open to the publico Appearing:
1. Bob C. Tuttle, applicant, stated he understood his application
for a var"lance was denied because it was within the side yard set back. He
showed where there was a structure that sets on the easement line on Lot 13,
There is another structure on the easement~•line of Lot 13 in the Sunset Park
Subdivisions There was some question from the Commission that the alley
easement was abandonedo The information he received is that it was not
abandoned, There is access for a new house being constructed. There is a
structure that is behind Lot 13 which is 20 feet from the property line of
Dro Cunningham's house to the south of the easement. The variance he is
asking for is a fence 2 feet inside the easement line to shade the structure.
There is support for it on the fence linen There is a 24 foot easement that
goes through there and not impeded. There is nothing further than the
fence line already. He needs it to shade the structure and will be on the
fence line to his housed
SUPERVISOR WHEELER ABSEI3T AT THIS TIME
Mro Tuttle stated it was possible to place another three feet,
but did not provide that much shade. He presented a map and pictures to
the Board at this time. Discussion was held regarding the map and pictureso
There is a storage shed placed within the last two years, the company has
since moved.
SUPERVISOR WHEELER PRESEfIT AT THIS TIME
Mr. Tuttle stated there is another structure behind the property
line which was visable across to the new structure,
Supervisor Dolan stated there were a couple comments from property
owners in the area, If this was approved, that easement would still be there
and there would be access, legally it has not changed.
Ael Siemsen, acting county counsel, stated the only problem was
whether this is a transfer with the use of the easemento If it is inside
of the easement,there is no effect, Since it sets on the line and will be
five feet set back there is no problem. It is whether to allow it within
the set back of the property line.
Ms, Blair stated to allow it would require the variance for the
garage and to the two points of structure for the garage and shaded The
structure has been built along the side of the garage, carport for shade.
This whole issue resulted when Public Works noted the structure without the
proper permits. The zoning Investigator was involved, There are two issues
to be addressed.
Mr. Tuttle responded to Supervisor Saraceni there was no concrete
hinder this shade structured It will be attached to a pre-existing fences
They are both two feet higher than the existing fence, There is no solid
structure between the property line and fenced It will only be for shaded
Page 322,
October 6, 1981
October 6, 198]
gl.. Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board,
~ On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni and
unanimously carried, to allow the variance for two structures to be located
two feet from the side property line on property zoned "S-R" (suburban -
residential), AP 39-38-30, property located on the east side of Dayton Road,
approximately 350 feet south of Marian Road, Chico area for Bob C. Tuttle;
subject to the following conditions:.
1. No structures are to be nearer than 5 feet to any part of the sewage
disposal system.
2, Applicant is to comply with all applicable State and local statutes,
ordinances, and regulationso
Amended:
Finding that the project is categorically exempt (Class 5 (a)) from
the requirements of CEQA; and further finding that, because of special circum-
stances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography,
location, or surroundings, the strict application of the 5 foot side yard.
setback requirement would deprive said property of privileges enjoyed by
other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classificationo
RECESS: 12:08 pom.
RECONVENE: 12:18 p.m.
AUTHORIZE DRAFTING OF RESOLUTION RE: VICTIM'S BILL OF RIGHTS INITIATIVE
Discussion regarding the Victim's Bill of lti.ghts initiative held
at this time.
1. Quinton Kopp, member, Board of Supervisors, San Francisco.
Mr, Kopp is the president of the County_:__, Supervisors Association of
California of which members of Butte County are active in participation.
Mr. Kopp provided each member a copy of the initiative measure to be
submitted to the voters regarding the Victim`s Bill of Rights. He is the
Northern California Chairman backing the initiative. Pete Wilson is the
Southern California Chairman for Mro Paul Gann. He became interested three
months ago when he heard about ita He is a lawyer and practiced for 26
years in both civil and criminalo He worked in New York City for 10 years.
Their goal is to obtain the necessary signatures by December 3 so it can
be placed on the June 1982 balloto They need 515,000 signatures, but hope
to obtain 625,000, In the criminal courts the victim has been ignored.
Enormous time and effort has been spent to protect the accused and the guilty,
The victim has been left behindo That is the reason it is called the Victim's
Bill. There is a specific provision referred to in Section 28. We have
Grand 3ury protections. Under Sub-section (b) it provides for restitution.
It is only used in cases where a fine is placed or a part of probation,
Restitution should be ordered from every convict regardless. Of course that
does not mean there will be a collection of damages. In many cases people
are unable to as they do not have the facilities or means to make restitution,
People have a right to safe schools. It changes the rules on excluding
evidence. There are so many acquitals when cases go up on appeal to Supreme
Court telling us what the rules on search and seizure and self incrimination
are, The Galifornia Supreme Court based on evidence based on search of the
defendant which came from the neighbors apartment. He felt the Right to
Truth-in-Evidence would handle this. All evidence should not be excluded,
SCA 7 (Presley) would do the same thing, The media asks why use the initiative
process. The legislation is not doing their jobo Bi11s like SCA 7 were
stopped, They adjourned September 13 before putting this into full gear.
They would not need the initiative process if they were doing their jobo
Page 323.
October fi, 1981
SI-
b'
October 6, 1981 _ _
fir Kopp spoke to the issue of diminished capacityo This would free- up the
judge to decide an public safety or for a higher amount of bail, At present
it is the nature of the crime or previous criminal recordo The California
Supreme Court through out the rule evidence regarding prior crime could be
usedo It is unlikely the diminished capacity rule would be used at the
time of sentencingo The insanity rule is weak, it only shows he could not
help himselfe He feels it is important a judge take into consideration
the victim or the next of kin or an attorney representing the victim at
the time of sentencingo When they are applying for parole the victim or
their attorney should be notifiedo
Mro Kopp stated the issue of plea bargaining can only be used
where there is insufficient evidence or to testimony of material witnesses
It did not result in a sufficent change in sentencingo Insignificant
evidence or material witnesses should not be used by District Attorney's,
It is a weak conditiono He spoke to Section 8, sentencingo It provides that
everybody who is 18 years of age or older convicted of rape or murder cannot
be committed to the Youth Authorityo Legislation can be enacted only on
two-thirds of the Assembly and Senate votes He is satisfied with the
provisions and feels the people will vote for its It is flexible and if
the people feel strongly enough about these issues they will vote approval,
He would like to see as many Board's of Supervisors adopt resolutions urging
residents of the county to sign the petition which are being circulatedo
They are being sent out in bulk from Sacramento,
2, James Hanson, Oroville, stated Mro Kopp did not address the
issue of a felony against a police officero He is not against law enforce-
ment, He wants the people to know what is in the initiativeo If it is
passed, it will be a part of the California Constitutiono He is worried
about thato The law, per say, was set up to protect the people, Give the
peoples right they already haven You cannot give any more rights to the
police than we have ourselveso Sometimes people become so over educated
they cannot see the forest for the treeso The people are paying the law
enforcement and the protections He would not like to see a police stated
He would not like to see police get more protection than himself, Do not
set them above men He would like to see us keep our freedoms He would like
to see some of these things changedo If a guy commits a crime, let him pays
If he takes an officers life, take his lifeo He was concerned most of the
people do not read what they vote ford He feels the media influences theme
3o Orrin Stratton, Chico, stated he felt Mra Hanson was picking
at fly speckso The police give him protection tone He has worked for this
measure and other constitution amendments and he feels .this will worko
He urged the Board to endorse ito '
Mro Kopp stated he did not address the issue of the police officer
as fie was only going over the important partsa He read from Section 1192e7(c}o
He felt it was the same protection for both,
Supervisor Dolan questioned if anyone was going to speak to the
issue of costso
Mro Kopp stated when you talk about costs, you have to Zook at the
cost of crime nowo It is astronomicalo Not just in human mi§ery''bt~t in the
monitary lawso He feels it is going to be cost.savinga Maybe not this year,
but in 5 or 10 years from nowo: There_is_.a bond issue for $495 million for
state and county prisons and jail facilitieso It will be on along with the
Victim's Bill~of ltightso It is more important, part of this will mean in
terms of reduction to amount of money in the criminal justice system because
there is so much of an increase in crimeo These axe technical points by
which the courts, appel.la-te courts, judges and superior courts can uses
Page 3240
October 6', 1981
81-
October 6, 1981 _ _ _
Supervisor Aolan stated there is a wide difference in the number of
crimes committed and people sentencede We put them away once we get them here
in Butte Countyo She agrees there is no guarantee it will reduce crime.
She brought up the issue of cost because it will increase because of the
jail population, It is a real serious problems It may change by 40 or 50
more a year, but nobody knowse It may be 10 years dawn the road, she questioned
if this will work,
Mr. Kopp felt if people want this they will sacrifices Ours is the
only system that the person is presumed innocento Our laws are to protect
the innocent. Now they will be used to protect the guilty from law enforce-
went.
Supervisor Dolan stated she was happy to see the diminished capacity
deference gone. While it is not legal, that to take it into consideration on
bails. She feels there are areas which need changing> She questions placing
them all under one initiative and all in on constitution amendment>
Supervisor Lemke stated several years ago as a director on CSAC
they presented a plank on restitution, but no action was taken. Some of
the stories were horror storieso
It was moved by Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni,
a ._' resolution in support of the Victim's Bill of Rights initiative
and in keeping with the legislation for being placed on the ballot be
drafted o
Supervisor Saraceni stated he looked at this issue very closelyo
They are fiscally responsible and looking at costs. He feels it would be
justified, Maybe those incarcerated will realize there is more to it than
what it appears, Maybe this will show some changes.
Supervisor Dolan stated she has talked with the legal community
and there are many provisions by ,` report to a judge and consideration
of sentencing making judgment'-for restitution when feasibleo This is being
done actively through the Victim Witness Programo The Aistrict Attorney
should set up the policy and procedure for plea bargaining. Members of the
legal community found support in ito It might make it easier. It is a
whole new governmental burden.
Vote on motion:
AYES: Supervisors Lemke, Saraceni, Wheeler and Chairmam Moseley
NOES: Supervisor Dolan
Motion carried,
2495
APPEA[tANCES: BOB CRISAN
Bob Crisan, welfare director, spoke regarding the recent meeting
of CSAC held in southern California. The State of California did not pass
legislation placing the counties out of conformity with the Block Grant
Federal Legislationo All aid cases which defer.- the county costs 'share
on a per rate of 5.5 percent will increase 1008 percente Assembly Bi11 799
was not passed and they went out of conformance. Unless they convene in
emergency session to review this it will be March 1982 befare it is considered,
He is concerned about losing administrative costs. You are looking at a great
expensed This will be passed on to the counties, all those operative costs.
Quinton Kopp, supervisor, San Francisco, stated they held a
special meeting of the Board of Airectors last Friday. The letter was
received from the Federal representative of Health and Health Services.
Page 325,
October 6•, 1981
81-
~'
24961
October 6, 1981 _
The meeting was held in the afternoon.^ They were notified AB 799 was not
acted upon. It would have eliminated 90 percent of the costs of mandated.
It would pick up $58 to $68 milliono The bill 2815 which is a do nothing
bill and would study it for one yearn The state lawyers stated there was
no "emergency". The Board of Directors adopted five resolutions. 1) To
bring into conformance with the block grant, 2) To encourage the administrative
law to employ the process needs to get it into parameter. 3) Resolution
urging the government exercise their power. There was a debate whether the
government has that power. We have asked the government and there is a
change they may do that. 4) Asked not to call a special session, the legis-
~ature ?s capable of more mischiefs We were informed even if the legislation
adopted, it will take time to implement them and get them into effecto The
administrative offices did not want to prepare for a change and then go back
later and make different changes. 4) They asked the Governor to place
expert personnel on the task force,
Mr. Crisan stated if the _legislature would reconvene and pass
some kind of legislation and implementation the month of November could be
saved and they would be in compliance with the mandate. It takes 30 days
to do the paper work. Things change in the Federal requirementso Restrictions
are about half and others must have legislation. Even i~f they know, they
are out of conformity for not having administrative costs in the future.
That legislation is needed>
Mr. Kopp stated the -irector of Office of Research of the agency
felt the earliest~aould be November 10 the legislature could reconvene. A11
of their resolutions were passed unanimously except for one which was on.
special session, The vote was 28 to 9. Help is on the way.
Mr, Crisan stated he was looking for some type of information from
the State notifying them of the court decisiono Nothing is defined, Even
if people are laid off, it will cost the county moneys The only solution
is immediate contact from the legislature so that they will provide the funding
SUPERVISOR WHEELER ABSENT AT THIS TIME
Clif Mickelson, administrative officer, stated the money would
have to be expended from the reserve.
Supervisor Dolan stated those at the State and Federal level
just make tax cuts and the County must determine how to make those cuts>
You follow every regulation in the State and Federal government and do with
less moneyo The issue was do it with less money and that is the surge.
APPEARANCES: MONA SLATER
Moaa Slater, Berry Creek, spoke regarding the application of 24D
by the Forest 5erviceo She is concerned about the health of the people in
that area. They took their complaint through the appeal, public hearing
process and their testimony was not given much weights Senior citizens are
concerned about their health, The Forest Service began spraying .September 25,
1981 before they were notified of the hearing decisiono They could appeal
to Washington within the next 40 day s, but it would be of no consequenceo
There are loop holes, she feels it is a breach of trust and is unethicalo
SUPERVISOR WHEELER PRESENT AT THIS TIME
Mrso Slater stated the Forest Service is using armed guards when
doing the hand application, Next year they might do aerial. They did not
notify anyone they would be spraying.
Supervisor Wheeler stated she knew the Forest Service was consider-
ing spraying Lassen National Forests They reexamined and heard all of the
Page 326.
October 6, 1981
81-
a
2497
~~~
2498
October 6, 1981
testimonyo^ Her understanding is they do not have the~funding~to process it
any furthero She noted for 40 years 24D has been applied to grain crops.
James Hanson, Oroville, spoke regarding the application of 24D,
It was used because of the broad leaf plant to kill it. He spoke regarding
the spraying of _malathi:on and the fruit flies and how it is killing the fish,
He felt broad leaf brush was about one-third. of the forest, He did not feel
the spraying would stop forest fires. A statementi has been made, sometimes
the people do not know what is good for theme They do not have to pay for
peoples lost children or mutilated children,
APPEARANCES: KELLY MEAGHER
Kelly Meagher, Chico, stated he had a major area of concern about
the document which. was submitted by County Counsel's Office to be placed on
the ballot regarding the Butte Creek Canyon Rezone, It is stated in the
wildlife refuge there will remain 300 acres which will be reserved for the
use of property owners. He referred to page 12, section 2 in changing the
zoning from "FR-5" to "PAC". He set out condition no, 30, It appears to
him there was a mistake.
SUPERVISOR WHEELER ABSENT AT THIS TIME
Mro Meagher stated it will tell the votex there will be no develop-
ment in this area, ."The.. condition of approval they go by determines there
will be, It is unfortunate, the ballots are being printed right now. There
has to be a correction madeo This. article in the newspaper Will '
-not -sh'ow all of the ballot argument for or against .
He felt they should be changed or corrected. The County must take
some correcting action.
Del Siemsen, acting county counsel, stated Mr. Meagher is talking
about the impartial analysis of the "PAC" rezone. The ordinance does not
allow for development, If it is another ordinance that comes before the
Board, they might decide to change the zoning. This particular "PAC" zone
we gave the analysis that it does not permit development in this area. He
felt it only fairo
Mr. Meagher stated he was not a lawyer, the people that are going
to be reading this impartial analysis will be making; a determination on
this analysis. He felt it was misleading and unfair to tell them these things.
One of their major concerns is whether it would be developed in the future,
He felt it was a disservice to the public and it be detailed in the•fut~re.
He felt there should be a retraction from County Counsel and correct the
printing in the newspaper. It angered many residents. It is a question of
trust.
Supervisor Lemke stated he appreciated Mr. Meagher's position. What
the newspaper'~"does is;therbusiness. He will go along with County Counsel's
document until he is informed it is incorrecto If it is faulted it should be
correctedo He suggested Counsel and the Elections clerk meet and discuss this.
If there is fault>:with.the statement, it should be correctedo
Mro Siemsen stated he did not know if they were at the printers if
they could be changed. The Board does not have the authority to change it.
The ordinance says what it says, he was. not talking about any future ordinance
the could be conditioned, Any property owner can petition the Board for a
change.
County Counsel and Elections clerk to study the mattero
Page 3270
October b', 1981
81- 2499
~'
', 2500
2501
2 502
25031
October 6, 1981
APPROVE ADMINISTRATION AND OPERATION ITEMS - W11TVE FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE -
ADOPT RESOLUTION 81-227
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor 5araceni and
carried, the following Administration and Operation items were approved:
1. Waived the first reading of a salary ordinance which consolidates
all previous amendments and modifies several departments and classifications,
2. Approved contract with Family Services Association of Butte and
Glenn Counties to perform mediation services for fhe Family Conciliation Court
in the amount of $30 per hour not to exceed $6,390; and the Chairman authorized
to sign.
3. Approved the deposit of Highland Acres Subdivision Noo 2 (Town
of Paradise) in the amount of $453.81 for taxes or special assessments which
are a lien, but not yet payable.
4. Approved the penalty abatement requests - change of ownership
reports on the following:
a. Robert Eo Humpert, AP 039-31-0-059-0
b, Steven Jo Goetz, AP 064-26-0-020-0
co Mark Ko Richards, AP 051-01-0-131-0
5o Adopted Resolution 81-227 implementing a change of office hours
as authorized by Butte County Code Section 2-1 (Ordinance No, 2241) for the
various library branches; and the Chairman authorized to signs
6. Approved the following budget transfers:
B-26 - Housing and Community Development, This transfer
corrects an $8,941 amount erroneously entered in the 1981-82 final budget...
B-37 - Road Construction. Transfers $6,710 from the road
construction reserve to cover the overrun of the original low bid for the
Lincoln Boulevard Project in accordance with Board of Supervisors action on
September 15, 1981; minute order 81-2360.
CONTINUE TO OCTOBER 13 1981 - DESIGNATION OF PUBLIC GUARDIAN
Continued to October 13, 1981 discussion and policy direction on
designation of Public Guardian.
APPROVE BUILDING PERMIT REFUND - MILLIE TAYLOR
On motion of Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor Dolan and
carried, the building permit refund of Millie Taylor in the amount of $106,70
on AP 68-14-78 was approved,
CONTINUE TO OCTOBER 13, 1981 - ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION ON SB". 215 (FORAN)
TRANSPORTATION FINANCING IMPLEMENTATION
Continued to October 13, 1981 the adoption of a resolution regarding
SB 215 (Foran) transportation financing implementation,
ADOPT RESOLUTION 81-228 - ESTABLISHING FEES FOR PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING
DIVISION FOR BUILDING, PLUMBING, MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL AND MOBILEHOME
PERMITS AND PROVIDE AUTHORITY FOR REFUNDS - CONTINUE FOR 30 DAYS AN
ORDINANCE ADOPTING 1979 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE AND 1979 UNIFORM PLUMBING
CODE
Clay Castleberry, public works director, stated they revised the
fee scheduled The fire department requirements they brought bads.
On motion of Supervisor Saraceni, seconded by Supervisor Lemke
and carried, Resolution 81-228~s:rablishing fees to be charged by the Public
Page 328.
October 6, 1981
81-
3'
2504
2505
2506
2507
October 6, 1981
Works Building Division for building, plumbling, mechanical,Teiectrica'C and
mobile home permits and provid:eauthority for refunds was adapted and the
Chairman authorized to sign,
Continued for 30 days the ordinance adopting 1979 Uniform Building
Code and 1979 Uniform Plumbing Code as required by state housing lawn
CONTINUE TO OCTOBER 13, 1981 - REPORT TO, THE BOARD CONCERNING REQUEST OF
MAGALIA COMMUNITY CHURCH TO WAIVE BUILDING PERMIT FEES
Continued to October 13, 1981 the report to the Board from County
Counsel concerning the request of Magalia Community Church to waive building
permit fees.
CONTINUE TO OCTOBER 13, 1981 - APPOINTMENT TO NORTHERN CALIFORNIA HEALTH
SYSTEMS AGENCY
Continued to October 13, 1981 the appointment to the Northern
California Health Systems Agency.
ADOPT RESOLUTION 81-229 - DEVELOPM&NT AGREENII:NT - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and carried, Resolution 81-229 regarding development agreements was adopted
and the Chairman authorized to signo
COMMUNICATIONS
Robert M, Huskey, civil engineero The engineer, on behalf of Joe Nichols,
appeals the Advisory Agency's Condition No. 11 (pay $750 per parcel
into the Swedes Flat Road fund) on a tentative parcel map, three
parcels, property located on Spring Creek Road, north of Swedes.
Flat Road, Bangor areao Set for public hearing on October 27,
1981 at 10:00 a,m,
Lippincott-Guth Associates. The engineers, on behalf of Richard Hare, appeal
the Planning Commission's denial of negative declaration and
variance to minimum lot size requirements to allow the creation
of two parcels about 1,8 acres (gross) on property zoned "ARMH-3"
(agricultural residential mobile home - 3 acre parcels), property
located on the north side of Magalia-Nimshew Road at Carnegie
Road, north of Paradise, property identified as AP 64-65-14. Set
for public hearing on October 27, 1981 at 10:15 a.m,
Ronald R. Logan, Oroville. Mr. Logan writes appealing the Planning Comm-
ission's denial of negative declaration and use permit, mining
permit and reclamation plan on property zoned "A-2" (general),
AP 41-08-27, property located on the west side of Dry Creek Road,
approximately three miles north of Pentz Road, south of Paradise.
Set for public hearing on October 27, 1981 at 10:30 a.ma
McCain Associates, Chico. The engineers, on behalf of William R. Starr,
appeal the Planning Commission's denial of negative declaration
and variance to minimum lot area requirements to allow the creation
of a 2.55 and a 3,01 acre parcel in the "A-20" (agricultural - 20
acre parcels) zone, AP 39-39-72, property located on the south side
of Edgar Slough, approximately 400 feet south of the intersection
of Stanley and Diamond Avenues, two miles southwest of Chico. Set
for public hearing on October 27, 1981 at 10:45 a.m.
Mre and Mrs. Edward E. Wittmeier, Chico, Mr. and Mrs. Wittmeier write
stating their opposition to the Tuttle appeal of variance denial
which is scheduled on the Board's agenda, Handled earlier in the
meeting,
Page 329,
October 6', 1981
81-
25081
2509
___O_ctob_er_6, 1981_____ ____ _____
John D. and Loreto J. Cunningham, Chico. Mr. and Mrse Cunningham write stating
their opposition to the Tuttle appeal of variance which is scheduled
on the Board's hearing agenda, Handled earlier in the meeting.
Reginald A, Loftus, Los Gatose Mr, Loftus writes the Board again requesting
a hearing on his extension to file a parcel map (the second 18 month
extension expired 9/7/81) on a tentative parcel map, AP 27-18-14,
four lots, property located on Mackintosh Avenue at the easterly
end, Palermo areao Referred to Public Works for responseo
William Mazurek, Oroville. Mro Mazurek writes concerning the restoration
of lot sizes. Referred to Public Workse
Warren A. Tinsley, Marysville. Mro Tinsley writes concerning a possible
solution to the closure of Bean Clipper Road which has been
previously discussed by the Board. Referred to County Counsel
for report back,
Treasurer appointment, Several letters have been received concerning
candidate endorsements for the Treasurer-Tax Collector position,
Information; to be filed.
Fleet Reserve Association Branch 48, San Francisco, The association writes
concerning the operation of memorial halls in the countyo Infor-
mation; no action taken.
County of Sacramento. The Board of Supervisors forwards its Resolution 81-1076
concerning calling upon the Governor to calla special session of
the state legislature fox the purpose of implementing federal laws
with regard to welfare and other programs. Information; no action
taken.
State Department of Veterans Affairso The department writes concerning the
Governor's proclamation designating October 23 through November 23,
1981 as Veterans Recognition Month. Information; no action taken,
Administrative Office to send letter.
Robert A, Winston, Orovilleo Mro Winston writes requesting consideration
of the appointment of Treasurer-Tax Collector. Information; to be
fileda
PARADISE DEPOT TO BE DESIGNATED AS HISTORICAL SITE APPLICATION TO THE STATE
On motion of Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni and
carried, the Paradise Railroad Depot at Pearson and Olive Streets to be
designated as a historical site by application to the State Historical
Society and the Chairman authorized to sign application.
ADDITIONAL MATTERS BY BOARD MEMBERS
Supervisor Lemke statedseveral weeks ago the Board received
correspondence from Laverne Hadley regarding housing the Sheriff's operations
in the Upper Ridge area. Supervisor Lemke and Sheriff Gillick have been up
there and discussed the issued There is available land next to the Fire
Departments They have gasoline storage and the county could make it•,avail--,.
able to their unitsQ ~He would .l-ilse to bring it back at a later date when
they have the costs, They have approval for physical help. There is
monitory help from a group of businesseso There would not be a lot of cost
to the countyo It would provide services he feels is necessary and could be
operated at half or less of the cost of the operation.
Chairman Moseley presented a letter from National Association of
Counties requesting a copy of our county seal or logo to be bronzed at the
headquarters in Washington, DovC~~'Administrative Office to respond.
Page 330,
October 6, 1981
81-
3'
October 6, 1981 _ _ _ _
s ~ _ _ _ - -~ - - - - - - - - ~- - -
Supervisor Saraceni reported an the Northern California Emergency
Care Council funding within the various countieso
ADJOURNMENT
There being nothing further before the Board at this time, the
meeting was adjourned at 2:08 p,m, to reconvene on Tuesday, October 13,
1981 at 9:00 aoma
ATTEST: CLARK A, NELSON, COUNTY CLERK-
R~CORDER and ex-officio Clerk
of the Board of Supervisors
~,,L ~
/Chairman, Board of S ervisors ~
By
Page 331,
October 6, 1987.