HomeMy WebLinkAboutM121174December ll, 1974
RECONVENED: 9:00 a.m.
Present: Supervisors Cameron, Gilman, Ladd, McKillop and
Chairman Madigan; Dan Blackstock, County Counsel,
Jim Lawson, Planning Director, and Bettye Blair,
Planning Department, and Clark A. Nelson, County
Clerk, by Margie Catt, Board of Supervisors Clerk.
Pat Hildenbrand, Court Reporter.
74-1851 CONTINUATION OR HEARINGS ON SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE APPEALS
Darryl Stevens, attorney at law, representing North Western
Title Company, stated that they had been served with a subpoena last
week. He said the man that would have to testify for the company is not
present;he is under subpoena and is testifying in Stockton at this time.
Brian Rix, deputy county counsel, stated that the title company had told
them that they were unable to give the records in the absence of Mr. KibocT~sax:
Mr. Rix explained how contingent on todays testimony these records were;
he said they had some information from the Dept. of I:eal Estate. Mr. Rix
would still like to have the. files from the Title co:apany.
Supervisor Ladd felt that the Board should proceed with the hearing
and i fis later felt that the records are important, then the hearing
could be continued to another day.
needed.
The Board will inform Mr. Stevens when his client will be
Mr. Rix called the Concow-Bangor matters for hearing at this time.
Mr. Rix stated that Mr. Culet had bean served with a subpoena. He explained the
exhibits on the wall and the package that has been provided for Board members
regarding the transfers of the property. Assessor's parcel numbers have been
placed on the files. Background of Chese transactions set out by Mr. Rix.
Ben Culet was called as a witness at this time. Bob Aisthorpe,
attorney at law, stated he represents Mr. Culet. Mr. Aisthorpe made a
statement concerning the land divisions made by Mr. Culet. He feels that
the land divisions were in order and that the County will allow permits to be
issued. He said he cannot permit Mr. Culet to say anything today that might be
incriminating to him at a later date. It is not a desire nor lack of cooperation;
it is simply a legal problem.
Mr. Culet was sworn in by the Clerk and testified. Mr. Rix questioned
Mr. Cu1et; Mr. Culet answered all questions with the statement that "I refuse
to answer on the grounds that it might tend to increiminate me."
Witness excused.
Mrs. Potter was called and gave testimony.
Mr. Bob Lenhardt, attorney at law., representing the private
property owners in the Ba-gor and Concow Areas was present and stated he
had letters from private property owners that he would like to present.
The letters were marked as a "C "for Concow and "B" for Bangor. Letters
were from Richard Ball, Willard & Ada Potter and Mr. & Mrs. Richard Markland.
Letters received by Clerk.
Gene Ringel, ChiYO, said he heard this morning that Counsel for
Mr. Cu1et state..- that Mr. Culet would comply with the requirements for the developmen
Mr. Ringel suggested that the Board tell them that they should comply with the
requirements for the development of any qualified subdivision. He feels that
this would be the only clean approach.
Page 455.
' December 11, 1974
__-___ v W W =_= December 11~ 1974_=_ _____--___--
Supervisor Gilman asked Mr. Ringel if he was involved at all in
the property under discussion. Mr. Ringel stated that the property is adjacent to
a subdivision that he developed in the area and they spent about a year
complying rith the requests of the County. Time spent discussing the
requirments that would have to be met.
Supervisor Ladd said it was his belief that the purpose of this
hearing was to try to determine the guilt or innocence of these people.
Mr. Rix said that the hearing today is for an appeal filed by the property owners.
The Board is not holding this hearing to determine if any crimes have been
committeed. They are going to try to present evidence that violations have
been made. He said he would make an honest attempt to end the presentation of
the evidence by noon.
Mrs. Elizabeth A, Potter was celled and was sworn and presented
testimony. Mr. Rix questioned her about the purchase of her property. The
property was purchased through a newspaper ada They answered the ad and
made an appointment with the owner to see the property. Mr. Culet met them
at Prospectors Village and took them out to see the property. They purchased
the property through Mr. Culet. They signed the escrow papers at
Mr. Culet's home in Dansville. They make their payments to Mr. Cu let.
Mrs. Potters escrow papers were received into evidence at an earlier meeting.
Witness questioned by the Board members and then excused.
Mr. Rix presented a re-cap sheet of these property transactions.
He stated that the envelopes from the Escrow Companies show Mr. Ben Cu let's
name on them all, Mr. Rix filed a couil;.e of escrows that he felt were
interesting. These go back to the time when the property was first acquired
by Mr. Cu let. Mr. Rix set out the various escrow transactions; he explained
the exhibits involved. He said it seems clear to him that Air. Cu1et is
deeply involved in these transactions.~7~'. Rix said it seems clear to him that
the Board should make the decision that there was a scheme to circumvent the
map act; he would ask the Board at this time to consider denying the appeals
of the property owners in this area so that notices of violation may be filed.
Supervisor Gilman set out his observations of this matter. lie
said he would suggest that the Board has heard enough evidence beyond a reasonable
doubt, to be able to sustain the Subdivision Committee's recommendation of
denial of the appeals. He feels that it is the Board's duty to do something to
satisfy these i~*snocent people that are at the end of these transactions.
Supervisor Ladd questioned Mr. Rix about the statement concerning
reasonable doubts in this hearing. Mr. Rix stated that this was not a
criminal proceeding; it is not a court of law. He said that in looking
at the evidence presented, it would appear that there is sufficient evidence
to file a notice of vicilation.
On motion of Supervisor Gilman, seconded by Supervisor McKillop
and unanimously carried, the appeals filed concerning the Concow property
violations were denied as recommended by the Subdivision Committee because
reasonable evidence was not submitted.
RECESS: 10:10
RECONVEKED: 10:20
The hearing on the Bangor area appeals now heard. The records
concerning these transactions have been subpoenaed. The title company
presented the escrow documents yesterday to County Counsel's office.
Mr. Cu1et is the applicant on ail the escz~ow documents and his name
appears on all the escrow documents.
Mr. Lenhard spoke concerning conditions; he feels that the
conditions sho~zld be clarified. He €iied points of authorities with the
Board. The conditions should be clarified so the people can resolve their
conditions. It was stated that Mr. Culet sold the property and he should
have to take care of the conditions; he should have to handle the problem
of roads and drainage. Mr. Lenhardt said he would like to have the Board refer
the matter back to thesubdivision Committee to review the conditions and set
Page 457. December 11, 1974
=DECQmber 11~ 19Z4_
out the conditions and inform the people what conditions would have to be
met. Supervisor Gilman said that the same conditions should be required as
those conditions that have to be met for a subdivision. Time spent
discussing the conditions that should be met by these innocent buyers.
Supervisor McKillop felt that there should be a mechanism that these
innocent purchasers could utilize so that roads could be built and drainage
taken care of.
Mr. Aisthorpe agreed with Mr. Lenhardt's statements. The purchasers
have to be made aware how to remove the cloud. There has to be some fact finding
body to look into the matter in order to have the land handled properly.
Supervisor Gilman stated that if the counsels would be patient, when the
hearings are finished, the Board will consider how the conditions will be
handled and met. Mr. Lenhardt stated he wants the burden put back to
Mr. Culet to meet the conditions.
Mr. Rix stated that if the Board was going to make a decision
regarding theBangor area today, then a letter addressed to Mike McEnespy from
Mr. Whitfield should be considered. A lease agreement is attached to the letter
of Mr.Whitfield. Mr. Rix said he would recommend that the Board deny the
appeals as recommended by the Subdivision Committee.
Mr. Lenhardt stated that there were a number of people from the
Bangor area that would like to be heard. Appea°ing:
1. Mrs. Lois Finley, she purchased 10-acres in the Bargor area
from Mr. Cu let.
2. Mr. Don Fournour, San Jose. He purchased parcels 99 and 110.
Ile is satisfied with the property but would like better drainage and better
roads into the property. He set out the background of his purchase of this
property. He makes his payments to Ben Culet.
3. Mr. Robert Crayton, Milpitas. He was sworn and presented
testimony. He purchased the property from Ben Cu1et.
4. Mrs. Donna McMartin. Witness sworn and testified.
On motion of Supervisor McKillop, seconded by Supervisor Gilman
and carried, the appeals filed in the Bangor area were denied, as recommmended
by the Subdivision Committee because reasonable evidence was not submitted.
AYES: Supervisors Cameron, Gilman, McKillop and Chairman Madigan
NOES: Supervisor Ladd. He said he could not find evidence enough to justify
the denial.
RECESS: 11:10
RECONVENED: .11.:.20
MERIDIAN & MUNJAR AREAS
Mr. Rix stated that they have subpoenaed additional records of
Mid Valley Title Company. Mr. Tony Santos has also been subpoenaed.
This is a large division of land. Size of area set out and explained by Mr. Rix.
The Subdivision Committee are concerning themselves with the two parcels
on each side of the road. Mr. Rix requested that the Board hear both of
the Meridian Road and Munjar area appeals together. Background of the area
and property involved set out. He recommended that the Board call Mr. Tony
Santos at this time.
Mr. Tony Santos was called as a witness in this matter and was
sworn in by the Clerk. Mr. Santos was cross-examined by Mr. Rix. He stated
why the property was in his name and in Jacqueline Santos's name. Mr. Rix
questioned him about the holding ~Igteements. Mr. Rix offered the Holding
Agreement into evidence. Time spent by Mr. Rix cross-examining the witness.
Mr. Santos explained how he had sold the parcels and how the buyers had divided it
Page 4.5.8. December 11, 197'4
Dece nber 11, 1974
into other parcels. Mr. Santos stated that his original intent for use
of this land was for a cow ranch. Mr. Santos said he had not set this up
as a subdivision. He purchased the land for $150 per acre. Witness
excused.
Palmer Hatch, appearing as representative far May Wright and
Mr. Hoiland, spoke at this time. He said his clients would be willing to
submit the matter on the basis of the past hearings. He asked if he could
receive a copy of the decision.
Mr, Rix had a copy of the escrow file which apparently pre-dates
the transfers of the Santos property. He presented .the ..document for the
Board to examine. Supervisor Ladd questioned Mr. Rix about the escrow
findings.
Mr. Santos stated that the Hornings had no interest in the
property other than the 160 acres that they purchased. Mr. Rix stated that
if you go through the entire analysis, you will see deeds going back to
Jacquieline Santos and there were other devices showing property transactions.
Supervisor McKillop stated that he did not see any intent of Mr. Santos
to circumvent the subdivision Map Act. Supervisor Gilman said that whether
there was any intent or not, cannot deny that a subdivision does exist.
Mr. Rix explained the purpose of this hearing. If the entire
file was studied, it could be seen that there was intent to further divide
the property. Sales set out and discussed.
Mr. Rix said there are 1140 acres involved. He does not want the
Board t think he is trying to have Mr. Santos stand alone as the violator.
He thinks that the Board has sufficient evidence to deny the appeals.
The whole parceling transaction was developed on little or no cash. He
requested that the Board deny the appeals.
Supervisor Gilman said the Board cannot deny that a subdivision
was created. It did not happen of its awn accord. He feels that there is
enough evidence to sustain the recommendation of theSubdivision Committee.
Supervisor Ladd said he is not saying that it is desirable to have
that group of parcels in that area but he cau find no basis for finding
that these people are in 5'tiolation of the map act.
Time spent discussing the matter of intent of whether the
subdivision map act was violated. Ban Blackstock, County Counsel, stated
that Mr. Rix was appearing before the Board as an advocate. He does not
want the record to show that the Board closed off the applicants. -They
should be given the opportunity to talk. Appearing:
1. Mr. Forrest Young, Chico. He did not think that the division
of land in that area should be called a subdivision. He said he did not
think the Board should be swayed by Mr. Rix.
2. Tony Santos. He set out the sales of the property in that
area. If he knew that the land had that value, he would have gone through
a legal subdivision, he said.
Chairman Madigan said he did not want to make a decision on this
matter before lunch. County Counsel has requested an executive session
and a decision could be made later in the afternoon.
Supervisor Ladd said he felt in his mind that there were schemes
galore _oncerning this property. If you ask him if there was any evidence
introduced to show that there was a violation, he said he would have to say
"No". He could not say that the person that started the matter was guilty
of a crime. If there could be any evidence prresented that *aould lead him
to believe tha anyone, or all of thaw, comiinittee a cXirte; he would vote for
it.
Supervisor Gilman said he did not c~~ant his intelligence insulted
by telling him that there was no conspiracy, A subdivision has been created,
He said that someone was going to have to find the solution to these matters.
Page 459. December 11, 1974
December_11,_1974
On motion of Supervisor Cameron, seconded by Supervisor Gilman
and carried, the appeals on the Meridian-Munjar areas were denied, and the
Board concurred with the subdivision couanittee, because reasonable evidence
was not sub~itYed...
AXES: Supervisors Cameron, Gilman, McKillop and Chairman Madigan
NOES: Supervisor Ladd
Supervisor McKillop said these appeals that have been denied
will have to go back to the subdivision committee; they will have to come
up with the conditions in the matter.
Mr. Rix requested that theBoard receive the exhibits on the wall
as evidence; exhibits received as evidence.
RECESS: 12:45
RECONVENED: 2:OS
1tECESS: The Board recessed at 2:05 for an executive session.
RECONVENED: The Soard reconvened at 2:55 following an executive session.
Chairman Madigan said there was no announcement to be made
concerning the executive session.
Mr. Blackstock commented on the decision of the Board made this
morning denying the appeals. He said the County is not anxious to damage
innocent buyers. It was his suggestion that the seller should put in the
improvements; he should have put in the improvements at the time a€ the
sale. County Counsel suggested that these appeals be referred back to
the Subdivision Committee with the hope that they come up with some suggested
standards and who the innocent purchasers will proceed against for the
improvements. It will be a Legal decision. This would need the help of
Planning, Public Works and the Health Department. Someone should decide
what the standards should be at this time. This may work a hardship on some
of the innocent buyers; they could appear before the Board and apply for
a variance.
Mrs. Blair said the Committee would have to know if these matters
were to be reviewed under the current standards or the standards that were in affect
at the time of the violation. Would the property be considered as a private
road subdivision or a regular subdivision where the roads would have to be up to
County standards. It was felt that the roads should be built to subdivision
standards, which would include private road subdivisions.
Time spent discussing what can be done with the property that is
under this violation. Certificates of compliance discussed. Mrs. B1sir
said it was going to take time to bring back a recommendation to the Board.
Mrs. Blair asked if the Committee could report to the Board on their
progress or procedure of whatever they have accomplished by January 7th.
Mrs. Blair will report back to the Board on January 7th, concerning the
progress of the Committee.
On motion of Supervisor Gilman, seconded by Supervisor Cameron
and unanimously carried, the appeals that were denied today were referred
back to the Subdivision Committee for their perusal and their recommendation,
that they consider the matter iu total, and come up with some suggested
standards that will.,apply to these parcels, which would include the subdivision
standards~,~~ahich:states.that the roads would have to be brought up to County
standards. ~
ledge 460.
December 11, 1974
_________T~__Decemberlls 1974___=_____~______
74-1852 APPROVE MOTION OF INTENT TO ENTER INTO CONTRACT^WiTH CHITTAM & ASSOC.
FOR A HOUSING STUDY
It was moved by Supervisor Cameron, seconded by Supervisor McKillop
and unanimously carried, that it was the intent of this Board to enter into
a contract with Chittam & Associates, effective January 1, 1974, for a housing
study, subject to the approval of County Counsel and County Auditor.
Funds for funding this contract discussed. It was stated that the
funds would have to be out of Revenue Sharing Funds in the Reserve for
Contingency.
74-1853 MATTERS PRESENTED BY THE SUPERVISORS
Chairman Madigan brought up the matter of one of the surveyors
that did the work on one of the parcels that were appealed. He feels that this
matter should be pareued. This matter should go on record with Che State
Licency Agency in Sacramento about his not following through with the law.
Supervisor Ladd said he had specifically asked County Counsel if it
was a violation of the law because the record of survey had not been recorded.
He feels that all the surveyors should be treated the same. Should call each
and all of them under oath and ask them if they filed a record o£ survey.
Mr. Blackstock said he would check this matter out and report back to the Board.
Chairman Madigan asked how much of Lindo Channel did CARD control.
Mr. Blackstock explained the situation. He feels it would be helpful to the
County in getting some type survey from Public Works that would indicate what
the County owns and what the County doesn't own. Matter discussed; Board
felt it would be helpful to secure a survey from Fublic Works.
Chairman Madigan asked County Counsel about the cases that are
pending as of this time. He said he would Like to know how many pending law
suits the County has going. Mr. Blackstock will secure this information and
will report back to~he Board.
Supervisor McKillop brought up the matter of the proposed amendments
to the California Environmental Impact Reports that had been presented to the
Board members by Mr. Dawson. He feels that the amendments give too much
lattitude; the County should write to CSAC and object to the lattitude given
by the amendments. He requested that a letter be written to CSAC and to the
County's representatives in Sacramento objecting to the lattitude that could
develope.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being nothing further before the Board at this time, the
meeting was adjourned at 3:40 p.m. to reconvene on Tuesday, December 17, 1974
at 9:00 a.m.
ATTEST: CLARK A. NELSON, COUNTY CLERK
By~-..._.~ ~~,__ airman of the Board
Board of S ervisors Clerk
Page 461,
December 11, 1974