HomeMy WebLinkAboutM102478October 24, 1978
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF BUTTE
SS,
The Board reconvened at 9:00 a.m. pursuant to adjournment.
Present: Supervisors Madigan, Moseley and Acting Chairman Lemke.
Clif Mickelson, administrative officer; Dan Blackstock, county counsel;
and Clark A. Nelson, county clerk, by Cathy Pitts, assistant clerk to
the Board, ABSENT: Supervisor Richter and Chairman Winston.
Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America,
Invocation by Supervisor Moseley
78-2015 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Madigan
and carried, the minutes of October 17, 1978 were approved as mailed with
the correction to minute order 78-1972 to show that Supervisor Lemke
abstained on the vote.
78-2016 ACCEPT REGOMNJENDATION OF CETAC: AUTHORIZE SUBMITTAL OF CETA TITLE III
XCCIP GRANT; AUTHORIZE SUBGRANTTNG OPERATION OF GRANT TO EOC
On motion of Supervisor Madigan, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and carried, the recommendation of CETAC was accepted; submittal of YCCIP
grant was authorized; and subgranting operation of grant to EOC was
authorized and the Director authorized to sign grant and subgrant.
78-2017 APPROVE MINOR MOBIFICATION TO CETA TITLE III YET GRANT INCORPORATING
NONFINANCIAL AGREEMENTS WITH SUPERTNTENAENT OF SCHOOLS AND THE AREA JOB
CORPS REPRESENTATIVE
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Madigan
and carried, minor modification to the CETA Title III YET grant incorporating
nonfinancial agreements with Superintendent of Schools and the area Job
Corps representative Was approved and the Director authorized to sign
modification and agreements.
78-2018 ADOPT CETA TITLE VT PROJECT PROPOSAL RECOMMENAATIONS FROM CETAC
On motion of Supervisor Madigan, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and carried, the recommendations of CETAC regarding CETA title VI project
proposals were adopted.
78-2019 AUTHORIZE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN LETTER COVERING CETA PROJECT POLICIES
Jim Rackerby, personnel director, stated that the Council
had discussed involved monitoring of title VI program. There seems
to be some misunderstanding between agencies and supervisors of CETA.
He would like to have a letter sent to make everyone aware of what
the projects area- Project workers are required to work on a specific
project and not be shifter over to do other work. Such actions can result
in denial of pay for the people working outside of the project. He
felt there were a lot of usefui things that can be done with title VI
but it has limitations. The Board of Supervisors should realize these
are not substitutes for other positions. The letter would go to all
elected officials and to organizations stressing the benefits of CETA
and that the projects are done properly. CETAC recommends that a letter
be sent out. If these people are taken off the project they were
assigned to that agency may be forces to refund the .money paid for them.
On motion of Supervisor Madigan, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and carried, the Chairman was authorized to send a letter covering CETA
project policies.
Page 382.
October 24, 1978
October 24, 1978
78-2020 ACCEPT. WORK OF FISCI BROS „ INC. FOR WORK ON PARADISE ADDITION/REMO-EL
AND AUTHORIZE EYEING OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Madigan
and carried, the work of Fisci Broso, Ince for the work on Paradise
Addition/Remodel was accepted; Chairman authorized to sign notice of
completion and Clerk authorized to file notice of completion with. the
Recorder.
78-2021 APPROVE CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER N0. 3 - NORD FIRE STATION
On motion of Supervisor Madigan, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and carried, contract ckiange order No. 3 to credit the county for $25.27
for six door stops which were specified but not installed was approved
for Nord Fire Station and the Chairman authorized to sign.
78-2022 ACCEPT 1978/79 VETERANS SERVICE OFFICE SUBVENTION IN THE AMOUNT
OF $12,660
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Madigan
and carried, the 1978/79 Veterans Service Office subvention in the amount
of $12,660 was accepted .and the County Administrative Officer authorized
to execute acknowledgement.
78-202"3 ADOPTING OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING DISTRICT ATTORNEY TO SIGN
CONSUMER PROTECTION UNIT GRANT APPLICATION HELD OVER TO LATER IN THE
MEETING
The adoption of the resolution authorizing the District
Attorney to sign the Consumer Protection Unit grant application was
held over to later in the meeting.
78-2024 APPROVE BUDGET TRANSFERS
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Madigan
and carried, the following budget transfers were approved:
B-16 Public Library Services Grant. Transfers prior year
allocations from extra help, $2,164.16; office expense, $2,602.81; and
equipment, $102.95; with $4,869,92 going toward special department
expense pursuant to approval granted by the California State Librarian
in a letter dated August 2, 1978.
B-17 Community Action Program - 1979 Rural Senior Service Project.
Establishes an appropriation for the Rural Senior Service Grant Project as
follows: salaries and wages, $61,127; benefits, $12,791; travel, $10,074;
consumable supplies, $2,917; and matching in-kind contributions, $28,970.
Anticipated revenue - state aid, $86,909 and in-kind contributions, $28,970.
B-18 Community Action Program - 1978 Rural Senior Services Project.
Increases the appropriation for salaries and wages, $6,250 and employee
benefits, $2,732. This increase represents fees collected from senior
citizens as of September 30, 1978 and is within the State Department of
Aging guidelineso
B-19 Central Services - DuDu l~icati~. Transfers $25 from office
expense to overtime to provide an appropriation to cover overtime expenses
required for printing additional assessment appeal forms.
78-2025 AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF $799,44 FROM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
FUNDS RESULTING FROM CANCELLED REHABILITATION LOAN TO DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD)
On motion of Supervisor Madigan, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and carried, payment of $799.44 from Community Development Block Grant
funds resulting from a cancelled rehabilitation loan to the -epartment
of Housing and Urban Development was authorized,
Page 383.
October 24, 1978
October 24, 1978
78-2026 APPROVE BOARDING HOME AND INSTITUTION RATE INCREASES RETROACTIVE
TO JUNE 1, 1978
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Madigan
and carried, Board home and institution rate increase retroactive to
June 1, 1978 was approved per memo from Bob Crisan, welfare director,
.dated October 17, 1978.
78-2027 APPROVE CHICO CLIPPER CONTRACT AMENDMENT N0. 4
On motion of Supervisor Madigan, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and carried, the Chico Clipper contract amendment No. 4 extending the
contract through June 30, 1979 was approved and the Chairman authorized
to sign,
78-2028 ACCEPT IMPROVEMENTS - RANCHO DE THUNDER UNIT NOo 1
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Madigan
and carried, the improvements for Rancho De Thunder Unit No. 1 were approved;
the performance and labor and materials bond was authorized to be released
and commencement of the one-year maintenance period was authorized.
78-2029 ADOPT RESOLUTION 78-179 SUMMARY ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF CHICO
RIVER ROAD NO LONGER NEED FOR, ROAD PURPOSES: APPROVE AGREEMENT FOR SALE_
ki00RiiSURPI:UB':;:P$~EERTY.~ ['3~ FOR J. MOREHEAD ET UX (CHIGO RIVER ROAD) : APPROVE
~UITGLAIM DEED
On motion of Supervisor Madigan, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and carried, the agreement for sale for surplus-property': :-._:.:: to J,
Morehead et ux in the amount of $100 was approved; Resolution 78-179 for
summary abandonment for a portion of Chico River Road no longer needed
for road purposes was adopted; approved quitclaim deed conveying portion
of Chico River Road to Jo Morehead et ux and Chairman authorized to
sign agreement, resolution and deedo
78-2030 ADOPT RESOLUTION 78-180 SUMMARY ABANDONMENT FOR PORTION OF SKYWAY:
APPROVE QUITCLAIM DEED TO H. MG REYNOLDS ET UX AS CONDITION OF AGREEMENT
FOR SALE '
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Madigan
and carried, Resolution. 78-180 for summary abandonment for a portion of
Skway was adopted; the quitclaim deed to H. McReynolds et ux was approved
as a condition of .agreement for sale and the Chairman authorized to sign
said resolution and quitclaim deed.
78-2031 AUTHORIZE PURCHASING AGENT TO ISSUE PURCHASE ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF
$6,390 TO ROBINSON CONSTRUCTION CO. FOR CULVERT MODIFICATION PROJECT
FOR EDEN ROC SUBDIVISION SUBJECT TO RIGHT OF ENTRY BEING GRANTED BY
PROPERTY OWNERS FOR COUNTY TO DO THE WORK
Hal McDonald, public works, stated that their department had
received two quotes for the culvert modification project for Eden Roc
Subdivisiono They are: Robinson Construction Co., $6,390; and Butte
Creek Rock Co., $8,050.
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Madigan
and carried, the Purchasing Agent was authorized to issue a purchase order
in the amount of $6,390 to Robinson Construction Co. for culvert modification
project for Eden Roc Subdivision subject to right-of entry being granted by
property owners for county to do the work.
78-2032 PUBLIC HEARING DATES SET
The following public hearing dates were set:
1. A public hearing date of November 14, 1978 at 10:00 a.m.
was sent for consideration of Paula Nelson proposed negative declaration
and rezone from "TM-10".(timber mountain - ten acre parcels) property
located approximately 600 feet east of Schott Road approximately one
mile south of Doe Mi11 Road, identified as AP 63-01-96 (portion), all
Page 384.
October 24, 1978
October 24, 1978
of Lot 9 of Section 17, T23N, R3E, MDB&M, containing 42.31 acres, more or J
less north of Chico.
2, A public hearing date of November 14, 1978 at 10:15 a.m,
was set!. for consideration of William B, Hamilton - proposed negative
declaration and rezone from "A-2 limited" to "C-2" (general commercial)
property located on the south side of Bi11e Road approximately 300 feet
west of Clark Road, identified as AP 53-011-24, containing 0.10 acres,
more or less, Paradiseo
78-2033 ADOPT RESOLUTION 78-181 GIVING NOTICE. OF. INTENTION TO ABANDON
A UTILITY EASEMENT, LOT_47, PARADISE PINES UNIT ~~15
On motion of Supervisor Madigan, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and carried, Resolution 78-181 giving notice of intention to abandon a
utility easement, lot 47, Paradise Pines Unit ~k15 and setting a public
hearing date of November. 28, 1978 at 10:00 a.mo was adopted and the
Chairman authorized to (sign.
78-2034 DEFER CONSIDERATION OF REQUESTS OF ARNOLD JENSEN AND FLOYD STRANGE
(AP 44-40-16 AND 19), A-2 TO R-3: AND STEVE CUNNINGS (AP 41-09-024),
A-2 TO SR-10 FOR 60 DAYS UNTIL COMPREHENSIVE PROPOSAL FOR INTERIM ZONING
IN A-2 ZONE IS PREPARED
Bettye Blair, planning director, set out the backgrounds of
the requests. 3.4te wouldt~like to:have the matter defex+med=.until they have
a chance to work on the proposals. They are working on some of the areas
currently. She felt there would be a recommendation on the Jensen and
Strange requests before the end of November. The request of Cummings is
in the area of Butte College generally. They have not been working on
that area as diligently. Hopefully there will be recommendations on
that request before the end of November also.
On motion of Supervisor Madigan, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and carried, consideration of the requests of Arnold Jensen and Floyd
Strange.- (AP 44-40-16 and 19), A-2 to R-3; and Steve Cummings (AP 41-09-024),
A-2 to SR-10 was deferred for b0 days until Planning can make the
proper report.
78-2035 DISCUSSION: MEMO TO BOARD REGARDING RECISSION OF FREEWAY AGREEMENT,
HIGHWAY 99 FROM GARNER LANE NORTHERLY TO T?sHAMA COUNTY LINE CONTINUED
TO OCTOBER 31, 1978
Bettye Blair, planning director, set out the background of
the memo. This matter was referred from the Board as a result of a
request from William Attinger. The Planning Commission held a published
public hearing on October 4, 1978 to consider thine The Board received
copies of the Commission's recommendation which was in minute line form
regarding option 3.
The matter was continued to Octobex 31, 1978.
78-2036 DISCUSSION OF SHASTA COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY PROPOSAL FOR
DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED PROJECT FOR BUTTE COUNTY - CONTINOED TO OCTOBER 31,
1978
Discussion of Shasta County Community Action Agency proposal
for developmentally disabled project for Butte County was continued to
October 31, 1978.
78-2037 AUTHORIZE LETTER SIMILAR TO THE ONE FROM TEIiAMA COUNTY RE: SUPPORT
OF CONCEPT TO TRY TO GET DEFINITE ALLOCATION FROM SHASTA DAM FOR BANK
PROTECTION ALONG SACRAMENTO RIVER
Supervisor Madigan stated that Tehama County is working on
a program to try and get some definite allocation from Shasta Dam to
be able to have a certain amount to use year after year for bank
protection along the Sacramento River. Bi11 Turpin has been trying
Page 385.
October 24, 1978
October 24, 1978
to get figures on this. Sacramento says there are no figures available.
He asked Mr. Turpin to call Congressman Johnson's office in Washington.
This year all projects along the Sacramento River were killed, Tehama
County is asking for a letter of support from the Board. There is a
need to get some figures as to income and then talk to the Corps of
Engineers as the figures for maintenance.
On motion of Supervisor Madigan, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and carried, a letter was authorized similar to the one from Tehama
County supporting the concept to try to get a definite allocation from
Shasta Dam for bank protection along the Sacramento River.
The letter is to go to the Nine Northern Counties Asspciation,
Senator Cranston and Hayakawa, Congressman Johnson and Barbara Crowley,
Tehama County Board of Supervisorso
SUPERVISOR RICHTER PRESENT AT TH25 TIME.
78-2038 INVITE PROPOSALS AND STUDY FROM COMPANIES RE: DATA PROCESSING
FACILITIES MANAGMENT CONCEPT AND PRESENTATION TO BOARD ON NOVEMBER 28 1978
Supervisor Lemke stated that the Data Processing Committee had
a meeting yesterday. They looked over various proposals. It was the
Committee's recommendation that the Board hear the proposals and allow
the three companies to investigate the county's operation and make a
report to the full Board as to how they could handle the matter.
On motion of Supervisor Madigan,. seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and carried, the following companies were invited to study the county's
Data Processing system and present proposals to the Board on November 28,
1978:
Sierra National Corporation
Computer Sciences Corporation
Systems & Computer Technology Corporation
78-2039 ADOPT RESOLUTION 78-182AUTHORIZING DISTRICT ATTORNEY TO SIGN
CONSUMER PROTECTION UNIT GRANT APPLICATION
A third year grant has been prepared for continuing the Consumer
Protection Unit at a total project cost of $123,390 (federal $61,670;
state, $3,426; and local $58,294).
On motion of Supervisor Madigan, seconded by Supervisor Richter
and carried, Resolution 78-182 authorizing the District Attorney to sign
the Consumer Protection Unit grant application at a cost of $58,294 to
the county was approved ,and the Chairman authorized to sign.
AYES: Supervisors Madigan, Richter and Acting Chairman Lemke
NOES: Supervisor Moseley
ABSENT: Chairman Winston
78-2040 COMMUNICATIONS
Ben and Ruth Laskey, Biggs. Mr. and Mrs. Laskey write opposing the
closure of the Biggs Memorial Hall. Information; no action taken.
Robert S. Anderson and Alva M. Magnuson, Paradise. A letter has been
received from the gentlemen indicating that they support the
Brian Heinz use permit that is set for hearing at 10:30 a.m.
Matter referred to hearing later in meeting.
County of Shasta. The County writes concerning a meeting to be held in
Redding November 9 to discuss becoming a part of an economic
development district. The matter should be looked at carefully.
Chairman Winston and Clif Nickelson to attend meeting.
Page 386.
October 24, 1978
October 24, 1978
Richvale irrigation District. The District writes concerning the Butte
Gounty water entitlement from the State Water Project in the
future. T,nformation; no action taken.
Northern California Assessor's Association. The Association forwards its
response to the Attorney General concerning assessment method
comments. information; no action taken.
Mrs. Katharie Whitney, Chico. Mrs. Whitney writes requesting answers to
questions with regard to the Sacramento Avenue Assessment
District. Referred to Administrative Office to work with
Counsel and Public Works for answers to her questions.
Paul Ellcessor, Chico. Mr. E1lcessor writes requesting a variance for
right-of-way to public roads for his property in Durham identified
as AP 40-09-30. Referred to Planning and Public Works for
answer,
Bachman & Associates, Chico. The Engineers, on behalf of Elizabeth V.
Eisenhour, appeal the Planning Commissions` denial of the
rezone from "A-5" (agricultural - five acre parcels) to "S-R"
suburban-residential) property located on the south side of
Bell Road, approximately 50 feet west of Alamo Avenue, identified
as AP 42-02-13, Chico. Set for hearing November 21, 1978 at
10:00 a.me
Bill Baylesso Mr. Bayless writes in favor of the granting of the
Brian Tieinz use permit. Referred to hearing later in the
meetingo
Juel R, and Ruth L. Bjorg, Magalia. Mr. and Mrs. Bjorg write in opposition
to the granting of the Brian Heinz use permit. Referred to
hearing later in the meeting.
78-2041 ADDITIONAL MATTERS PRESENTED BY BOARD MEMBERS
Supervisor Madigan stated that he had received.a call from a
rice grower complaining that Butte County has had no burn days for the
last five days. A week ago Sunday was a no burn day in Butte County.
The county is getting smoke from other areas.
Clif Nickelson, administrative officer, stated that there are
several things that can.be done. Butte County has had more burn days
than Yolo and Sacramento Counties. When Butte County is allowed to
burn, there can be no wind to the south. They want to guard against
smoke inundation into Sacramento, The cities of Oroville, Chico and Red
Bluff do not carry clout in keeping the smoke away as does Sacramento.
Even though there is a no burn day the Agricultural Commissioner can
stall issue certain amounts of permitso A letter has gone off to the
ARB. On November 6, 1978 there will be a hearing in Sacramento on
agricultural burning. Mro Bandy is concerned that there may be more
severe restrictions on burning.
Supervisor Madigan stated that maybe the rice growers would
want to have representatives at that meetingo
Supervisor Richter felt there was a real concern. There is
a need for the agriculture factors to burn. The county had some very
critical aversion days that there was no burning allowed. He received
calls from Durham and was told it was very difficult to breathee The
other counties burn and their smoke is coming up to Butte Gounty.
Mx. Nickelson stated that they are watching for the wind change
at the present time.
Page 387.
October 24, 1978
October 24, 1978
Supervisor Richter stated that he was concerned regarding the
notices of assessment. :There is a memo from the Administrative Office
that says the Assessor because of workload cannot justify allocation of
staff to go back and report to the few citizens who may be affected.
The Board has said they wanted everyone who got an increase that they
would be notified. The Assessor's Office is now saying they cannot
do the job. He wanted the job done and the people notified. There is
a big mess on the reassessments. Many people do not know they have
received an increase.
Dan Blackstock, county counsel, stated the Board could instruct
the Assessor or Data•Processing to do this. The entire assessment roll
is on data processing.
Mr. Anderson and Mr. Brown to present later in the meeting to
discuss the matter.
Supervisor Lemke referred a letter from Mr. Clark regarding
a zoning violation that has not been cleared up yet to the Planning
Department.
EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Board recessed at 9:50 a.m. to hold an executive
session regarding litigation.
RECONVENE: The Board reconvened at 10:00 a.m.~~following.an~executive
sessioxr regarding: lri.tiga:ti,on. Nothing tb~•-report at this time.
78-2042 PUBLIC HEARING: THEODORE LETTER - PETITION FOR VARIANCE TO SECTIONS
19-10 AND/OR 19-12 OF THE BUTTE COUNTY CODE FOR PLACEMENT OF MOBILE HOME
AT ROUTE 2. BOX 5, YOCUM STREET. AURHAM. ZONING: A-5
The public hearing for Theodore Leiter petition for variance
to Sections 19-10 and/or 19-12 of the Butte County Code for placement of
a mobile home at Route 2, Box 5, Yocum Street, Durham, zoning: A-5 was
held as advertised. Lynn Vanhart, environmental health director, set
out the background of tlie~ petition.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: No one.
Hearing closed to the public. and confined to the Board.
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Madigan
and carried, the petition fox variance to Sections 19-10 and/or 19-12
of the Butte County Code for placement of a mobile home at Route 2,
Box 5, Yocum Street, Durham, zonings A-5 fox Theordore Leiter was
approved for a period of one year,
78-2043 PUBLIC HEARING: COUi~]TY SERVICE AREA ~~21 - ESTABLISHMENT OF RATES
The public hearing on the County Service Area ~~21 (Oakridge
sewer) establishment of rates was held 'r.as advertised. Clif Miekelson,
administrative officer, stated that the Board had taken care of County
Service Area ~~21 with bail-out funds. The Board is planning on having
a election in March. The Board should open and close the hearing without
setting rates.
Dan Blackstock, county counsel, did not believe the Board could
anticipate legislation to come up with means to provide for elections for
taxes at this timed The only type of tax allowed is ad valorem. There is
nothing to call an election on. idith regard to lighting districts, the
Board could try to push the PUC to try and have the public utilties take
care of instead of the county. He suggested the Board hold the hearing
and set the rate and have as a record that the Board is going to take care
of the rate and if a problem comes up and the county does not have any
funds then the rate can be put on the April tax bill.
Page 388.
October 24, 1978
October 24, 1978
Supervisor Lemke stated that the election would have been to
give the citizens the ability to raise the AV with 2/3 vote to provide
the necessary services.
Mr. Blackstock stated that Proposition 13 prohibits thiso
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: Ingrid DuFore.
Ms. DuFore stated that she was representing most of the sellers of
the property involved. She was present to get information on the
mattero
Bill Turpin, administrative analyst, skated that a report
has been filed with the Clerk that details the parcels within CSA d~21.
It suggests a per parcel rate of $48.57 per lot per year to offset the
1978-79 budget that has been computed by the Public Works Department.
The estimate is that it .will take $1,700 to run the service area
and last year the amount of the budget was $700. The increase is
to cover additional use.. This amount would build a small contingency
in case of problems with the sewer ponds.
Mr. Mickelson stated there has been some discussion that the
rate would not be fair on a per parcel rate because the Mesa is the
biggest user.
Ms. DuFore stated that the Mesa pays four times more for
their water. She could not see why you would have to pay the same if
you are not using the serviceso There are still only five houses in the
areao
Mr. Turpin set out the reason for the increase in the budget
over last year. There have been houses built. The area ran in the
red last year. Part of the $1,700 is to make up the money spent but
not budgeted.
Supervisor Richter asked if it would be possible for the
county to develop a formula for providing fees not on a per parcel
basis. He also asked if alI of the~~people served by the sewer are
served by a mutual3.water service.
Ms. DuFore stated that they were not but can be on the
mutual water service. Each lot pays the same for the water except
for the Mesa which pays four times as much.
Supervisor Richter felt there should be a formula worked
out in which 50% is raised in the same ratio as the water services
and the other 507, on all lots equallyo
Ms. DuFore set out the way the water services are provided for.
At the present time the owner is paying for the water and the users are
paying $8 per month. This is being revamped so everyone pays equally.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
The matter was continued to October 31, 1978 at 10:45 a.m.
for computations on rates for the area.
78-204%~ADOPT~RESOLUTION 78-I83: PUBLIC HEARTNG: WYNORA HOMES & ZEE COLBY
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT TO BUTTE COUNTY GENERAL
PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT PLAN
The public hearing on the Wynoka Homes & Lee Colby proposed
negative declaration and request for amendment to the Butte County General
Plan Land Use Element Plan from low density residential, 1-4 dwelling
units per acre to medium density residential, 9-12 dwelling units per
Page 389.
October 24, 1978
October 24, 1978
acre, retail commercial, and industrial for their property located
south of Oroville~ was held as advertised.
Earl Nelson, environmental review director, set out the
background of the negative declarationo An extensive initial study
was prepared fox the negative declaration. The project involves a
General Plan change for 12b acres in south Orovillee This is a large
project and the uses are very intense. On the surface it would look
like an EIR would be necessary.. After getting into the analysis of
the specific impacts he found there was nothing in the area that would
have an impact. It is not suited for agriculture. The area has public
services. The major impacts were the projected increase in traffic and
drainage. Both of these can and will be accomplished as development
proceeds. He recommended a negative declaration be adopted.
Bettye Blair, planning director, set out the background of
the General Plan amendment request. The Board has received copies of
the Planning Co~a,ssion minutes and staff recommendations. This is a
General Plan amendment. It was held by itself and would be the second
amendment in this calendar year. The text amendment of the land use
element is in process and is scheduled for hearing on November 15, 1978.
She hopes this will be brought farward before the end of the year. There
are no other projects coming up that would require a,General Plan
amendment.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing:
1. Lee Colby. Mr. Colby stated that he hoped the Board would
give approval to the request for the amendment to the General Plan.
2. Ingr~~d Hunter. Mrs. Hunter stated that she was against
big business on the corner close to the cemetery. There is already a
drainage and traffic problem on Farley Street.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
On motion of Supervisor Richter, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and carried, on the basis of the initial evaluation, finding the
proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment,
a negative declaration was adopted.
On motion of Supervisor Richter, seconded by Supervisor Madigan
and carried, the amendment to the Butte County General Plan Land Use
Element Plan from low density residential, 1-4 dwelling units per acre
to medium density residential, 9--12 dwelling units per acre, retail
commercial, and industrial for ~Tynoka Homes and Lee Colby property
located south of Oroville was approved noting the area lends itself to
this amendment and it will be consistent with. the land use now in the
axes finding consistency of policy with the elements of the Plan and
using larger land for urban development and being consistent with the
other elements of the General Plan; that the provider meets the public
housing needs of the county which is critical and it is consistent with
the rating of the environmental review with. the other elements in which
a very specific evaluation is made and referring to the writings in the
review as the basis for approval; Resolution 78-183 was adopted and the
Chairman authorized to sign..
78-2045 PUBLIC HEARING: 1978/79 HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAI3 TO BE SUBMITTED TO
HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD): ADOPT 197'8/79 HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN
The public hearing on the 1978/79 Housing.~ssistance Plan to be
submitted to Housing and Urban Development (HUD) was held as advertised,
Page 390.
.October 24, 1978
October 24, 1978
Ward Connerly stated that this was a required public hearing
for the purpose of the Community Development Block grant application;
now pending. There are many issues which may arise. The document
does not include the City of Chico and the City of Oroville. It only
includes the unincorporated area and the City of Gridley and the City
of Biggs. The City of Chico will have their own housing assistance
plan. The Housing Assistance Plan covers about 40,400 dwelling units.
The vacancy rate is less than 3%; 3.3% for rentals and 2.7% for home
owners bringing a total vacancy rate of 2.9%. The plan shows the total
number of substandard units at 4,900. The City of Chico came up with
3,700 units that were substandard or about 40%. He did not think it
is realistic in the county to say that 40% of the homes are substandard.
For planning purposes if a large number are defined as substandard
HUD gets the county to adopt those and the county would be rated on the
goals. If we adopt needs unrealistic to us this obliges the county to
adopt goals and then the county will not perform as we have agreed.
The county has put about 12% substandard housing in the county and
the cities of Gridley and Biggs. A large percentage is in El Medio
and Chapmantown. The county is required to adopt a three-year summary
of goals and commit themselves to solving 15% of the goals. The needs
are 5,000 units and the county will have to commit themselves to 750 units.
The plan shows about 1.,000 familes in need of assistance. There are over
5,000 that need some assistance in rentals. There are about 6,000 famines
in the county that require some form of assistance. This would be less
than the $13,300 county median income. During the three year period of
1979,1980 and 1981 they eould~ well provide housing assistance to about
1,006 people (925 renters and 230 home owners).
Mr, Connery stated that for ownership purposes they will rely
on 312 program, FHA program and the Community Development Block Grant
program. The rental area will rely on the Housing Authority to provide
assistance. This will be with Section 8 program, Community Development
Block grant program and FHA, He is interested in trying to link up
with the Housing Authority for the Community Development program.
This is to make sure the resources will be made available to the county.
The referendum on the ballot is important to the assistance plan.
He hoped there would be a closer link established between the Community
Block Grant program dnd the Housing Authority, Possibly a joint powers
agreement or direction from the Board to the Housing Authority could be
done.
Supervisor Richter stated that he understood there is a lot
of discussion going on regarding the problem in Chapmantown. He understood
there is difficulty in getting the rehabilitation going in Chapmantown
due to the need for sewer.
Mr. Connerly felt that the Housing Assistance Plan did not
address the question of sewer in the report. There can be no rehabilitation
without sewer, He and harry Brooks had a meeting with the City of Chico
regarding this matter<and how they can get the City to commit itself to
providing sewer to provide new rehabilitation. No t~new construction can
take place. They are not in the sewer business right now but are trying
to work with the City of Chico. It is a capacity problem. There is a
capacity problem if certain things happen. They do not anticipate
allocations sufficient to construct the sewer this year. There is
about 35,000 for public works facilities in Chapmantown. Hopefully
the Board will be generous with the program through revenue sharing
or whatever. El Medio is the priority for this year on the ditch.
If they can acquire land they can sell the land to the Housing Authority
and this will provide money for housing and take the money allocated
for housing and be able to put into public works.
Page 391.
October 24, 1978
October 24, 1978
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: No one.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
On motion of Supervisor Moseley, seconded by Supervisor Madigan
and carried, the 1978/79 Housing Assistance Plan to be submitted to
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) was adopted.
78-2046 PUBLIC HEARING: BRIAN HEINZ - PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND USE
PERMIT FOR A MINI STORAGE COMPLE% ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE SKYWAY BETWEEN
EVERGREEN DRIVE AND CEDAR LAKE DRIVE, AP 65-21-2, PARADISE
The public hearing on the Brian Heinz proposed negative declaration
and use permit for a mini storage complex on the east side of the Skyway
between Evergreen Drive and Cedar Lake Drive, AP 65-21-2, Paradise was
held as advertised.
Earl Nelson, environmental review director, set out the background
of the negative declaration. The mitigation measures were such on the
conditional negative declaration to preclude impacts and the requirement
for an EIR. The site is 1.06 acres on the east side of Skyway in Paradise
Pines. There is dense tree cover of cedar, pine and oak. A portion will
be removed for construction of four buildings. The applicant has
volunteered to retain 88 feet of buffer strip in the front. This will
block the view from Skyway. The concerns are noted in the checklist.
Mr, Nelson set out the mitigation measures at this time.
Bettye Blair,. planning director, set out the background of
the use permit, The area is zoned A-2 limited. The Board has received
a copy of the BZA minutes and staff recommendations and findings. The
Board also has a copy of the development plan that was submitted by the
applicant for the proposed development. The A-2 limited zoning resulted
after extensive hearings by the Planning Commission to consider specific
zoning. At that time this area was proposed for A-2 limri;ted: at the
request of the property owners.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing:
1. Brian Heinz. Mr. Heinz presented the Board with a pamphlet.
Some of the problems presented at the BZA meeting were brought to his
attention. He has a letter from the assistant chief of the Paradise
Fire District that states the proposed facilities were more than adequate
in regards to fire hazards. He went out and talked to the people and
asked them if they would or would not support the project. There is a
copy of the petition signed by the property owners supporting the project
in the pamphlet. He tried to take the project and make it to conform to
the area creating a buffer area. There is one residence behind the
project which he talked to trying to satisfy to help alleviate the problem.
He suggested that he would put up a wooden fence to screen the project
and landscape the area. The tree committee will be supervising the removal
of the trees, He felt that he had done an adequate job in trying to go
along with the people of the area. The buildings will be built as the
need comes up.
2. Ralph Beemer, Mr. Beemer stated that he was most concerned
about the zoning. In 1975 he appeared before the Board requesting a
change of zoning in the entire area, The people did something about
zoning in 1975. He met with Mr. Lawson and there was a decision to
change the area from A-2 to RT-1 MH zoning for the entire area.
They received a blanket RT-1MEI for the entire area including the
Fortino commercial property and the La~rwin properties. He knew at the
time of the zoning that there would be a need to have planned commercial
through public hearings. The old Skyway has bean reverted not back to
commercial but back to the A-2 limited zoning. Tt was under interim
', Page 392.
October 24, 1978
October 24, 197$
for residential and thought that through county government that would be
reasonable and give them some sort of planned zoning. The end result was
that it reverted back to A-2 limited zoning. He felt that mini storage
should be in industrial. zoning and not commercial zoning, He hoped the
Board would consider thiso
Supervisor Richter stated that he was on the Board when the
area was rezoned. He realizes that the final proposal was changed,
This was referred back to the Planning Commission for consideration
at that time. You are saying you wished it was not zoned that way but
it is. It creates a dilemma for him. The Board is now faced with the
approval of the use permit.
Mr. Beemer stated that he felt that aesthetics should be
considered.
3. Ruth Bjorg. Mrso Bjorg stated that their property is
bordering on the applicant's propertyo They are in a R-1 zone.
The project will take up almost all of the trees on the property.
This would not add to the beauty of the area. She felt that it would
be a fire hazard. There are just wells in the area. .She did not feel
the area was suited to mini storage. She presented a letter from
Henry D. and Vera H, Hamon in opposition to the use permito
Mrs. Bjorg stated that five people sent letters in to the
BZA meeting and they are not in the filed Jack C, (Yrubbes, Henry D.
and Vera Hamon, Don and Arlene Darby and Ethel Larsen.
The Administrative Office was instructed to look into what
happened to the letters prior to the BZA hearing.
~. Mr. Heinz stated that he had told Mrs. Bjorg that they
would be willing to put in an 8-foot fence and whatever they couldo
The buildings are hardly unattractive. They will be painted green and
there will be a buffer of 88 feet. There is all business on the
proposed property. The zoning should be changed to commercial.
5. Lloyd Steel. Mro Steel lives across the street from
the proposed projecto He was neither in favor of or against the project.
He would like to see the signs for the business restricted,
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
Supervisor Richter stated that the county does not have an
ordinance for cutting of treeso This is an A~2 limited zone. This
is a bad zone. He is entitled to the use permit regardless of his beliefs.
The Board zoned the area A-2 limited. There would be less traffic than
for other useso
Supervisor Lemke was impressed with the applicant's attempt
to try to mitigate some of the bad criticism regarding the project.
A 88 foot buffer is a pretty good dedication to the aesthetics of the
area. He would entertain a committment to putting up a fence for shielding
the property in the rear of the property,
On motion of Supervisor Richter, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and carried, finding that although the proposed project could have a
significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant
effect in this case because the mitigation measures described below
have been added to the project and a negative declaration was adopted;
1, A drainage plan shall be submitted to the Butte County Public Works
Department and the required facilities shall be constructed.
Page 393.
October 24, 1978
October 24, 1978
2, The natural vegetation within the 88 foot frontage of the property
along the Skyway shall be preserved to provide a visual screen consistent
with fire protection considerations (clearing of underbrush for example).
Where feasible, the trees within the development area shall be preserved.
3. Combustable, flammable, and other hazardous substances shall not be
stored within this mini-storage complex.
4o Any lighting facilities placed on the site shall be located and
shielded so as to not create glare on adjacent properties or onto
the Skyway.
5, Locate the storage buildings a minimum of 20 feet apart to ensure
adequate access to the development of fire protection purposes.
On motion of Supervisor Richter, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
and carried, noting a negative declaration has been adopted and finding that
the proposed use of the property will not impair the integrity and character
of the zone in which the land lies and that the use would not be unreasonably
incompatible with, or injurious to surrounding properties or detrimental
to the health and general welfare of the persons residing or working in
the neighborhood or to the general health, welfare and safety of the County,
the use permit was approved and the appeal was overrides subject to the
following conditions:
1. A drainage plan shall be submitted to the Butte County Public Works
Department and the required facilities shall be constructeda
2, The natural vegetation within the 8H foot frontage of the property
along the Skyway shall be preserved to provide a visual screen consistent
with fire protection considerations (clearing of underbrush for example).
Where feasible, the trees within the development area shall be preserved.
3o Combustable, flammable, and other hazardous substances shall not be
stored within this mini-storage complex.
4o Any lighting facilities placed on the site shall be located and
shielded so as to not create glare on adjacent properties or onto
the Skyway.
5, Locate the storage buildings a minimum of 20 feet apart to ensure
adequate access to the development of fire protection purposes..
6. Deed 40 ft. right-of-way to County of Butte measured from the
centerline of Skyway.
7. Submit storm drainage plan to Department of Public Works for approval
and install required facilities.
8o Obtain encroachment permit for driveways.
9. Install 6 ft. sight-obscuring fence to the rear of the installation.
Applicant must also comply with all other applicable State and local statutes,
ordinances and regulations.
78-2047 PUBLIC HEARING: CENTER AGC-RELATE, INC, - USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A PORTABLE
AGGREGATE PLANT ON PROPERTY ZONED "A-2" (GENERAL) LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE
OF VANCE AVENUE, EAST OF THE SACRAMENT-NORTHERN RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAX,
IDENTIFIED AS AP 25-042-12, NORTHEAST OF GRIDLEY.
The public hearing on Centex Aggregate, Inco use permit to allow
a portable aggregate plant on property zoned "A-2" (general) located on
the north side of Vance Avenue, east of the Sacramento-Northern railroad
Page 394,
October 24, 1978
October 24, 1978
right-of-way, identified as AP 25-042-12, northeast of Gridley was held
as advertised, Bettye Blair, planning director, set out the background
of the use permit. The Board certified the EIR last week. She has submitted
minutes of the BZA and minutes of the previous Board hearings. This use
permit was approved by the Board in October 1977. With the court determination
the use permit is back before the Board.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing:
1, Neil McCabe, representing Centex and Matthews Ready-Mix,
Mr. McCabe stated that nothing is different about the project than it
was back in September, 1976 when the application was made. The"current
proceedings were required due to court proceedings. The court did not
deal with the merits but dealt with a technicality of the environmental
quality act so that in fact future processing was required. He would
like to summarize the highlights of the prajecto The Board has a certified
EIR and have complete copies of it include the transcript of one year
ago, He asked to respond to comments of the public and would be available
to answer questions. Mr. McCabe .presented a copy of the previous use
permit as evidence. A11 of the conditions are acceptable to the applicant.
He asked that the use permit be approved as before with the conditions.
He suggested one additional condition: Specifyyrequire compliance with
the reclamation plan. Mr. McCabe presented a copy of the reclamation
plan as part of the record of the hearing and for consideration. This
plan was submitted April, 19770 It is unchanged except that where the
operator is mentioned of physical operations instead of Centex it will
be by Matthews. Regarding condition ~k2 he would like clarification.
It requires the applicant to pay the cost of well testing. That condition
is acceptable to the applicant. He would like clarification to relate
to excavation below ground water. This would allow maybe not proceeding
with the testing of the wells until the excavation is getting down to the
ground water level. There is no change in the requirement. They would
just like clarification so they know they can wait until they get down
to ground watere
Discussion of when testing of water should be done. Possibly
this could be limited to a certain number of feet before testing was
required,
Mr. McCabe felt that the testing was a one time thing. If the
testing was done before any excavation was done and then the excavation
was put off for one year there could be contamination that was caused
from the time of the testing to the time the work was started. The
applicant would like to test before digging into the ground water level.
Mr. McCabe presented information about building trends for the
record and consideration. This is information from the City of Gridley,
City of Oroville and the County of Butte. Building trends are up.
He also presented a copy of a document from EDD indicating the unemployment
rates in the area. This project would provide some business to the area.
The .number of building permits are up. The EIR is very complete.
The question about dust, noise etc. are answered in the final EIR.
He felt the well impact can be mitigated by conditions previously suggested
and the reclamation plan. Mr. Matthews now has a plant in Gridley similar
to and more intense than the one proposed. The county has a plant on
Almond Avenue. The Gridley plant is used to produce aggregate materials
and is sold to Gridley and transported down a narrow road like Vance.
There are pictures in the EIR that shows passing of vehicles. The county
may wish to make improvements to Vance. The applicant supports a speed
limit on the road. This particular site was dredged previously. It was
a source of material for tihe State. It is adjacent to the old county
aggregate site. The zoning allows this. It is not in conflict with the
General Plan. Mr. McCabe presented a portion of the document submitted
Page 395.
October 24, 1978
October 24, 1978
to the court which summarizes their position of why the use permit is
not inconsistent with the General Plan for consideration and for the
record. The overall conclusion would be to reclaim the site and revert
back to useful purposes. The land cannot do a goad job of supporting
wildlife. It will provide a breeding ground for mosquitoes due to the
ponds on the property at the present time. The project will provide
materials needed to help provide jobs, It will not impair the integrity
of the community because of the conditions. He felt that it would be
beneficial to the county. He asked for favorable consideration of the
project .
Supervisor Richter stated that the area is designated as
agricultural, This is basically tailings. Tf there is an area designated
as orchard and field crop that allows excavation. It would seem to
indicate that in some agricultural zones excavating is allowed, If
zoning allows the use, it would be consistent with the General Plan.
Dan Blackstock, county counsel, stated that assuming that the
zoning is consistent with the General Plan that statement is correct.
The use is consistent with the zoning and therefore consistent with
the General Plan.
Mr. McCabe thought the question was is there any problem
between agriculture and this use. The General Plan makes clear that
the land it is trying to protect can produce food. He ~felt.that.even
if the area was zoned A-10 or A-20 it would permit this use. Mr. McCabe
asked that the Board make the finding that the project is consistent
with the General Plan as part of the issue. He did not think it was
a requirement but he felt the evidence did support the findings.
2, Gordon Matthews, Centex and Matthews heady-Mix, Mr.
Matthews felt that he needed a clarification regarding the testing
of the wells. They want to take the tests before they begin excavation.
He felt it needs to be spelled out,
3. James Ferria, Matthews Ready-Mix, Mr. Ferria stated that
there is a need for these materials, The other plants are being rapidly
depletedo
4. Wes Paulsen, geological engdneer, representing Matthews
Ready-Mix. Mr, Paulsen stated that he would like to go back to the
original Letter to the Board and not change the conditions. There has
been discussion of holding these tests of existing wells for turbity and
pathogenic tests some stage after excavation starts but before reaching
the ground water table. He recommended that the tests be done immediately
prior to any excavation. It is a protection for the company as well as
the owners. He did not think it made that much difference if the testing
were done before any excavation as opposed to testing when the excavation
would get to ground water. He asked if there was any possiblity that the
County Health Department would make the tests. Anyone could collect the
samples and have the county make the tests for a determination on the water
or it could be done by a private lab.
Mr. Blackstock stated this could be done assuming the county
could test the wells and assuming the developer would pay for the tests.
Supervisor Lemke questioned Mr.Paulsen regarding the removal
of the surface tailingso Is there any possibility that during the removal
of the tailings above the. ground level or of heavy equipment causing
damage to the water table.
Mr. Paulsen did not feel there would be any problem if it were
compactible clays and silts. He did not think it would be significant.
Page 396.
October 24, 1978
October 24, 1978
Mr. Paulson felt that for the protection of Matthews Ready-Mix the testing
should be done before .any excavation takes place.
5. Ralph Wood. Mr. Woad stated that he was opposed to the
granting of the use permit on the grounds given to the Board. It is
hazardous to the health and there would be noise and traffic. He did
not feel it had much benefit to the county. This area is a nice quiet
place.
6. Wayne Perkins, Mr. Perkins stated that there is a question
of digging into the soil 50 feet being into mining. He argued with the
fact that Mr. Paulsen said there were no family wells within 500 feet
of the sited There is a well within 120 feet. He said bacteria would
not travel further than 50 feet. Mr. Perking questioned the trucks
traveling on Vance Avenue. There is a two inch blacktop on the road.
The county knows how long that road will hold up. He has 37-1/2 acres
of walnut orchard. Dust does create termiteso
7. Richard Hanub. Mr. Hanub stated that he was new to the
area. He has asthma. If the trucks go by and there is no way to control
the dust it will be detrimental to his health. He would like to know if
the applicant can prove how they can control the dust. Mr. Hanub set
out where his property and home are located,
Mr. Paulsen stated that the gentlemen who spoke regarding
the location of the well was correct. The well is 135 feet from the
boundary line. The permit requires that the applicant go south to the
one corner of Section b which is some 600 feet awayo No excavation
would be done within 600 feet of the well.
8. Adale Hanub, Mrs. Hanub stated that they had moved away
from the smog to come to this area. She has one lung. They have three.
children who go down Vance Avenue on their horses. They cannot ride
on Larkin, Road. She questioned the big heavy trucks that will use
the road and the noise. Is this going to increase their taxes? She
did not feel this was the place for the project,
9. Dane Andreas. Mr. Andreas opposed the project.
Mr. Matthews presented a picture showing Vance Avenue for the
record. He would like to know where they could go to get aggregate
sources. The Department of Water Resources owns 100s of acres of aggregate.
At this date it is unavailable.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Soard.
On motion of Supervisor Richter, seconded by Supervisor Madigan
and carried, the Board made a motion of intent to support the project with
the environmental findings as suggested by staff with conditions attached
to the original proposal that was appraved and that condition dkl state
that permitee be responsible for repair of Vance Avenue if Departmentrof.
Public Works determines that trucks have caused damage to the road and
that the reclamation plan will be certified and the testing of the wells
to start prior to any removal of any aggregate.
The matter was continued to next week for approval of the
project.
Page 397.
October 24, 1978
October 24, 1978
78-2048 DISCUSSION WITH ASSESSOR AND. DATA PROCESSING REGARDING SENDING OF
NOTICE OF INCREASED ASSESSMENTS O'VER 1975-76 ROLL
Discussion with the Assessor and interim Data Processing Director
regarding the sending of notice of increased assessments over the 1975-76
roll was head at this time,
Supervisor Richter stated that he was concerned that the Board
took the position that anyone who had recenred an increase in evaluation
that was greater than the 1975-76 value as shown on the tax bill plus
2% should be notified. He understood from the memo from the Administrative
Officer that the Assessor's Office would be unable to do thiso
Al Anderson, assessor;,, stated that it was his understanding
that the vote was that there would be cards going out for all properties
for increase in value over last year's value. At this time he felt it
would be most difficult to get the cards out. This is due to the workload
in the Assessor's Office of still trying to get caught up so they can
do the appraising this year.
Supervisor Richter stated that according to Mre Black stock
the Data Processing Department could come up with notices by programing
to make the cards to send out.
Mr. Anderson stated that if the people did not get cards alI
they had to do was pick up the phone and call his office. By the time they
go through the program and get through the program center and stuff and
mail the notices it would be about two days ahead of the tax bill. He
did not know if they would gain much.
Supervisor Richter realized that this would be an added expense,
He felt the people should be entitled to know. If the assessment is greater
than the 1975-76 rate, the people may want to appeal their assessment.
Mr. Anderson stated that his office was not trying to hide the
values from the people. They have a right to receive theses. There are
about 14,000 parcels with no increase. His office is receiving about
600 calls. About 53,000 notices went out and there are about 67,000 active
parcels. This leaves about 14,000. The 600 calls per week does not
include the Paradise and Chico offices. His office had to notify people
if they gat an increase even if it was a 6% increase,
Supervisor Richter stated that he had wanted everyone notified
that had received an increase over. the 1975-76 rate greater: than the 2%.
Apgarently that has nat been done.
Mr. Anderson felt that everyone has been notified that needs to
be notified, If you had an increase in 1977 it was higher than it was
before.
Supervisor Lemke felt the Assessor did what the Board asked. The
actual mail out was an overkill of what the Board proposed.
Supervisor Richter stated that the increase in the 1978-79 value
over the 1977-78 value is not the information that the people wanted to
be able to make a judgment as to whether to make an assessment appeal.
They needed to know whether the assessment was greater than shown on the
1975-76 rate. The value could be less than 1977 but more than 1975-76
and they did not have a notice of that.
Mr. Anderson was of the opinion that the time involved both
staff wise and postage wise that this cannot be done. There are very
few people who do not know. If the people wanted to do something they
have had all the notice ,that is necessary.
Page 398.
October 24, 1978
October 24, 1978
Bd Brown, interim data processing director, stated that the
basic program made comparisons to the previous assessments to decide
whether to generate notices. He can modify that program or take a
couple of days to write a program to compare to the 1975-76 roll to
determine if it was more than 2% and produce notices for them. This
could probably be done in about one week`s time, It would then be
up to someone else to stuff and mail the notices.
Mr. Anderson felt that if they had the notices in one week it
would take several days to stuff the envelopes in his office, This would
be at least two weeks total time before they could get them in the mail.
The tax bills would be out. The entire file has to be searched.
Supervisor Richter wondered if extra help would be of any
benefit.
fir. Anderson felt that the notices would go out just a few days
ahead of the tax bills anyway.
Discussion of appeal time held at this timed Mr. Blackstock
stated that there is no 30 days after receiving notice to appeal an
assessment. Under the present language of the Revenue and Taxation
Code whether you receive a notice or not you have to file within the
time frame for appeals. This is not an assessment outside of the normal
scopeo However, we have been liberal on that and assume the Board would
be. There would have to be corrective legislation to extend the time.
Supervisor Richter wonder if they could allow appeals if they
have said that it would run from the time that they received notice.
Mr, Blackstock stated that he is not telling the Board that
under the law that it is necessarily correct.
Supervisor Richter felt that if they would say that they are
notifying everyone over the past year the people could take the action.
they felt necessary. He thought there would be an increase in the
appeals.
Mr. Anderson felt the increase could be very slight after
the tax bills are received. He felt the appeals that have been posted
will be eliminated.
It was moved by Supervisor Richter, seconded by Supervisor
Madigan that the Board ask the Assessor to notify all citizens of the
county who received an increase in assessment of 1975-76 tax bill that
are greaters than the value shown on the bill plus the computer increase
of 2% per year that all citizens be notified and done through data processing
program and whatever extra help that is necessary be made available with
the vote on where the funding is coming from to be considered next week.
Supervisor Lemke stated that he was going to vote against the
motion because of the cost involved and the fact that the tax bills will
be forth coming.
Supervisor Madigan stated that if the people cannot treat
their tax bill as notice they will be deprived of their rights to appeal.
Mr. Blackstock stated that what he would do would be to advise
the Assessment Appeals Board to consider the tax bills as notification.
Vote on motion:
AYE5: Supervisors Madigan and Richter
Page 399.
October 24, 1978
October 24, 1978
NOES: Supervisors Lemke and Moseley T
ABSENT: Chairman Winston
Motion fails.
SUPERVISOR MADIGAN EXCUSED AT THIS TIME.
RECESS: 12:45 p.~m.
RECONVENE: 12:55 p.m.
78-2049 APPEARANCE: GLEN DOUTHIT
Mr. Douthit spoke regarding the bail-out money for the special
districts. He presented a written statement to the Board regarding
possible unconstitutional loans or gifts of public moneys.
78-2050 APPEARANCE: DON BLAKE
Mr. Blake spoke regarding the PC&E coal fired power plant.
Mr. Blake presented material he received from Carolyn Stromberg, Air
Resources Board. This is regarding the air basins of California<
The air basins do not follow county lines. He attended a meeting
in Davis a week ago last Monday. One of the main points we are talking
about in regard to the coal power plant is the atmosphere conditions
in Butte County as opposed to Centralia. Dr. Myra of UC Davis and Dr.
Evans spoke at the meeting. The county is in a bubble. It is just
like a balloon. The nitrous oxide stays in the air and collects.
The winds in Centralia carry these off. He observed the amounts of
smoke in the area. If'you were in Centralia this would not happen.
The smoke cannot go away here because of the winds. J. Jacobs Cornell
spoke on the changes in. land value because of the plant. Clif Taylor
spoke about lettuce growers as far north as Stockton. Agriculture
damage due to smog or ozone losses was $248 million.. As far as the
crop loss was concerned it was as follows: 70% kidney beans and corn;
50% oranges; and 35% lemons. The tragic thing was the timber loss.
This will be felt in the Paradise area.
78-2051 APPEARANCE: PEGGY'HALLWAY
Mrs. Hallway'spoke regarding the proposed PG&E coal fired
power plant. She Iives in Ke11y Ridge. She has an•asthma condition.
She lived in Santa Rosa and was advised by her doctor to move as a
result of the geothermal smog in the area.
78-2052 APPEARANCE: DR. STUTZMAN
Dr. Stutzman spoke regarding herbicide damage due to drift.
He was told that the report on the state monitoring would be available.
He had a letter from Duncal and it was not Guite ready. He wondered
what the Board has found out. He would like to assure Supervisor Richter
that he is not playing games. He felt the matters he had discussed
with the Board were relevant regarding the problem of MCPA and is important
to health. Dr. Stutzman left information for each Board member regarding
studies that have been made. He would like to see this resolved.
78-2053 APPEARANCE: DAN HUTFLESS
Mr. Hutfless spoke regarding the information that had been
distributed by Dr. Stutzman. This is regarding herbicide damage.
He read from portions of the report.
78-2054 APPEARANCE: LOUIS CAMENZIND, JR.
Mr. Camenzind spoke regarding an item that appeared in the
Nevada State Journal. Esmeralda County enacted an ordinance to approve
or di&approve any federal action in their county. He left the copy for
copies to be made for the Board members.
78-2055 APPEARANCE: JERRY HOLCOMB
Mr. Holcomb stated that he tried to supply information to the
Board on August 22, 1978. Because of;;lack of cooperation with the
Page 4000 October 24, 1978
October 24, 1978
District Attorney who has the file he could not supply this information.
He asked the Board to contact the District Attorney for copies of the
14 page report. He was appearing on behalf of the Butte County Jail
inmates to explain the conditions that are detrimental to the inmates
and the deputies. Some of the men are treated as animals in zoos.
There is overcrowding with some of the inmates having to sleep on the
floor. There are increasing number of escapes. The temperature is
unbearable at 1l0° at 2;00 in.the morning. There are inadequate number
of guards pursuant to Title 15 of the State of California Correctional
Code. He asked the Board for a hearing to resolve the situation and
felt this would be a major step in resolving the inhuman things.
He had evidence with himo He also discussed the lack of Writ of Habeas
Corpus forms available to the inmates. The Court directed the Sheriff
to have the forms available,
Dan Blackstocly, county counsel, stated that Mr. Holcomb is
in contempt of court by the Board's case. He is in jail because of a
civil contempt. The Court allowed Mr, Holcomb to be out of jail during
the day on the theory he is to comply with the Court order. With regard
to the hearings relative to the jail, there are regulatory bodies that
review the situation within the jail and this is also handled by state
agencies. The issue of Writs of Habeas Corpus is beyond the jurisdiction
of the Board. It is a judicial matter. There are strict rules and
regulations xelative to prisoners having an opportunity to be present
at the courts.
Mr. Holcomb was advised that he should take his information
to the Grand Jury.
Mr. Holcomb also complained that he was not given his medication
while he is in jail.
78-2056 APPEARANCE: HAP PENN VETERAN'S SERVICE OFFICER
Mr. Penn stated that he had a memo addressed to the Board:
He~waAted to make the Board aware of a problem caused by recent legislation.
This has made the work beyond his capacity. This is HB 101730 He is
requesting additional personnel for his office to handle the additional
workload. Under the bill about 5,000 Butte County residents are going
to be affected in their pensionso This has to do with. income questionnaires.
The agreement that was made at budget time was that a position would be
vacated but not removed from the personnel rules. He received a memo
stating that the Board ttad removed the position from the rules. This
will be an on-going program, He has taken emergency action. He has five
students with the VA to help him at present. He must have personnel
before the first of Novembers If he does not have the personnel there
could be a loss in pensions of about 25% within the county.
Clif Nickelson, adminstrative officer, stated that the Board
would have to go to the reserve for the moneys He would hope the Board
would not go to the reserve for contingencies to supply needs to Glenn
County.
Supervisor Richter suggested that the Administrative
Officer look into the claims made and bring a xeeommendation back to
the Board,
78-2057 APPEARANCE: ADRTAN BILL THOMPSON
Mr. Thompson stated that he had been inflicted with a: neck
injury by a~: deputy `.~Slnariff. Since then he has been spending time in
jail on weekends. He has prescribed medication which he has been unable
to have while in the jail.
Administrative Officer was instructed to get in touch with
the jailer and make sure Mro Thompson is~given medication as prescribed
by his doctor. Page 401. October 24, 197,8
October 24, 1978
78-2058 APPEARANCE: PAUL ELLCESSOR
Mr. E1lcessor was present to discuss his correspondence to
the Board regarding a request for a variance for right-of-way to public
roads for his progerty.
Mr. Ellcessor was advised the letter was referred to Planning
and Public Works.
78-2059 APPEARANCE: JOLENE BLAKE
Mrs. Blake spoke regarding the question of spontaneous combustion
with regards to coal storage, She read from the fire protection handbook.
She set out the recommended fire prevention measures.
78-2059 APPEARANCE: DON BLAKE
Mr. Blake stated that with the trains leaving coal dust
along the tracks this could be bad. He was concerned with the
coal storage piles.
78-2061 REPORT BY SUPERVISOR LEMKE ON TRIP RE: COAL POWERED PLANTS
Supervisor Lemke stated that he was having copies made of his
report. The report is a transcript of the tapes he took< He held
interviews with plant managers and citizens on the trip. The tapes
are on file and can be listened to by contacting the Clerk. He
left Butte County on September 26, 1978. He traveled 4,684 miles.
Supervisor Lemke set out the charges he made to the county for his
trips He made a comment regarding the statement of the State Air
Pollution Officer in Washington. This is in regard to the difference
between Butte County and Washington.. as far erology. There are
instances in aversion in the Pugent '•]W' amette are reater and hold
longer periods of time than Los Ange~ s basin.
ADJOURNMENT :
There being nothing fur her before the Boar at th` s ti e the
meeting was adjourned at 2:10 p.m to reconvene on T sday, ctobe 31,
1978 at 9:00 a.m. A ~ A ~~
ATTEST : CLARK A .NELSON, COUNTY CLERK \ \ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'I ~ ~L`.-.J ~
and ex-officio Clerk of the \\\\\ \\\JIE`,
Board of Supervisors
B /J ~ ~ ~ ~~ Chair3~n, Board of Supervisors
y [~_
Page 402.
October 249 1978