How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
Supervisors support joining state of Jefferson movement
LAKEPORT, Calif. – The majority of a split Board of Supervisors on Tuesday voted to consider placing before Lake County voters a ballot measure to withdraw from the state of California and join the movement to create a 51st state.
The board voted 3-2 – with Anthony Farrington and Jim Steele dissenting – to move forward with support for forming the state of Jefferson.
There was, however, some confusion about the precise action the board took on Tuesday.
The motion, made by Supervisor Jim Comstock and seconded by Supervisor Rob Brown, stated, “Upon approval by the State Legislature of the petition for withdrawal from the state of California and to form the state of Jefferson, the Lake County Board of Supervisors will consider the measure for placement on the ballot of the next general election.”
However, when clarified later in the meeting, County Counsel Anita Grant raised issue with the motion's wording, suggesting that bringing it back to local voters after the approval of the State Legislature suggested a fait accompli.
In an effort to clarify the language, the board will bring it back for further discussion and action at 9:15 a.m. at its meeting on Tuesday, March 3.
Jefferson – a concept that began in the 1940s – would include Butte, Colusa, Del Norte, El Dorado, Glenn, Humboldt, Lake, Lassen, Mendocino, Modoc, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou, Sutter, Tehama, Trinity and Yuba, and several Southern Oregon counties.
With Tuesday's action, Lake County becomes the seventh Northern California county to show some kind of official support for the idea.
Formal actions to support joining the Jefferson movement already have been made in Glenn, Modoc, Siskiyou, Sutter, Tehama and Yuba counties. Shasta and Plumas counties last year declined to take part.
Making the argument
The audience that filled the board chambers on Tuesday included a number of Jefferson proponents from other parts of the state, including Mendocino, Placer, Shasta, Siskiyou and Tehama counties.
During just under two hours of public comment, the board heard from people on both sides of the argument on whether to stay or to go.
Twenty-one people spoke in favor of the proposal, 16 others spoke against it or raised questions that indicated a lack of support. Eight of the speakers were not from Lake County.
Advocates argued that California is ungovernable, that the urban areas carry more sway and that regulations and taxation are unfair. They believe the business climate and job opportunities will improve.
Those against the Jefferson proposal argued that it was more important to try to fix what's wrong with California rather than create an impoverished new state that would require its own separate bureaucracy. They also raised issues related to loss of state universities and other social impacts, and lack of environmental regulations.
Among those who addressed the board was Mark Baird, spokesman for the Jefferson Declaration Committee.
“This is quite frankly about representation” – even more than about forming a new state, said Baird, who asserted that Northern California counties have no representation in state government. He pointed out that a majority of Lake County voters had supported a measure in 1992 to withdraw from the state
Baird cited a number of regulatory and governmental issues with California, including higher prices of some commodities – like eggs and gasoline – with the latter a result of what he and fellow advocates hold is the onerous regulations of the California Air Resources Board.
Should the Jefferson formation effort be ignored at the state level, Baird said supporters were fully prepared to sue the state for dilution of vote and lack of representation, adding that the federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has a strong record on the voter dilution issue.
Kelseyville resident and county historian Ruby Glebe told the board that Jefferson was the last chance to gain back land and rights, and shed heavy tax burdens.
“What a future to hand our upcoming young people,” she said. “No wonder they flee front this state,” noting her granddaughter and other family members have left because opportunities were better in other states.
Glebe, who last year turned 100 years old, said she worked on the Jefferson movement in 1940, the first time it came around. “It looked as if it would go and then the war came,” she said, noting she supported it on its next go-round in 1951.
Jefferson advocate Sally Rapoza of Redding raised issues about state legislation – insurance, tax refunds and driver's licenses for undocumented workers; water bonds; anti-car bills – and the California Air Resources Board when explaining her support for leaving California.
She said Northern California has a tiny fraction of the government representation seen in the rest of the state. “If we don't have our own state we'll be living with what we have right now.”
Hidden Valley Lake resident David Jones said he was excited about the prospect of having more freedom.
Jones said it didn't make sense that the rural counties didn't have control of their timber and mining resources, and he believed the north's business climate would improve thanks to Jefferson.
Ken Delfino, a city councilman from Colfax, said he supported Jefferson due to lack of representation for rural areas. As an example, he shared about his city's inability to get a state parks grant to renovate its swimming pool on the basis of not being diverse enough.
Delfino – like others during the discussion – also would take issue with big state projects like the high speed rail plan.
Lake County resident Marcia Chauvin said it costs nothing to support the plan, adding that – like the original reason for the colonies breaking away from Great Britain – a key factor was taxation without representation.
Finley resident Phil Murphy said he was concerned with statements that strong environmental regulations, treating animals too humanely or protections for people who work in the agriculture industry are the problems. “I don't think there's much validity to those statements.”
While Murphy believes the northern counties could do better for themselves, “Until people demonstrate a clear plan for doing that, I've got some real reservations about joining this effort.”
Lower Lake resident Victoria Brandon said the board needed to look at everything the county would lose in the proposed split. That included access to higher education, the tax dollars from other parts of California that subsidize K-12 and other sources needed for a prosperous future.
Jefferson, she said, would not be a viable economic engine, and she questioned the idea of promoting economic growth by getting rid of environmental regulations. She said Lake County depends on protecting its environment for its future.
Several speakers – including Gillian Parrillo of Buckingham – asked for the county to complete a financial analysis before taking any such action. She pointed out that such an analysis had been mentioned the last time the board discussed the matter.
Farrington, the board chair, said that analysis hasn't been done. Parrillo held that taking such an action without the analysis to back it up, seemed irresponsible. “By you joining this petition, things are going to happen. It is not nonbinding.”
Clelia Baur, a former county planning commissioner who lives in Kelseyville, said she saw a lot of idealism in the discussion about Jefferson. She said it's an idealistic approach to think that all that has to be done to solve California's problems is to cut off a new state.
While acknowledging that California has long had a complicated management history due to the differences between north and south, Baur noted, “I'm idealistic, too,” seeing the potential in continuing to work together to make California stronger.
Carlos Negrete, a Middletown Rancheria council member and president of Callayomi Water District, asked the board not to support the Jefferson proposal.
“I don't think everyone really understands the repercussions of this,” he said, explaining that the region benefits from the larger economies around it.
Tom Jordan of Lakeport also emphasized the need for a thorough financial and policy analysis of the proposal. “It needs to be fully understood.”
Board members share perspectives
A Jefferson supporter told the board that a financial analysis of how the new state would work for the various counties is available at www.soj51.net .
That analysis, based on fiscal year 2014-15 numbers, concludes that Jefferson would have an operating budget of $3 billion, which supporters said proves it's viable.
Farrington noted that while he previously had asked staff for a separate financial analysis, it was a “gargantuan” task.
He said he'd looked at the financial feasibility that the Jefferson proponents had prepared, and called the analysis “problematic,” as he said it didn't take into consideration education issues, rural law enforcement monies, Medi-Cal funds provided to fire departments, state royalties for geothermal projects, many social services funded through realignment, court funding, money for game wardens and trapping, fire suppression and the prison system.
Farrington said he also found the Jefferson name problematic, as it was not as well branded as that of California. He said those who didn't believe him could ask people in agriculture, technology and tourism.
A Northern California state would be a different discussion, said Farrington.
Supervisor Jim Comstock said California's “one size fits all” approach to addressing problems led to the state's current situation. He said he wanted to create a viable place for his family, adding he wanted to put the matter before voters.
Steele said he felt the focus should be on the counties. “It's a geographical issue that's driving all of the problems.”
He added, “The state has not created all of the problems the county has.”
Steele said he would much rather stay part of California and try to address the problems. “Pulling out of the world's sixth largest economy seems counterintuitive to me and I just can't support that.”
Supervisor Jeff Smith said the emails he was getting from constituents were split down the middle on the matter.
He said there are many questions he has about the plan that he hasn't yet been able to answer.
Brown said he wanted the choice, ultimately, to be up to voters. “It's a huge decision.”
He said there is no way that the formation of Jefferson could happen in as short a time as a year, adding that he doubted that many of the people involved would see it in their lifetime.
Email Elizabeth Larson at
- Details
- Written by: Elizabeth Larson
Diseased blue oak at schoolhouse museum set to be removed
LOWER LAKE, Calif. – County officials are making preparations to have a diseased and dying blue oak at the Lower Lake Schoolhouse Museum taken down.
The oak is located next to the museum sign and entry gate at the corner of Mill and Main streets.
Public Services Director Caroline Chavez said the tree has been there a long time, and can be seen in old pictures of the museum.
However, Chavez said the tree is “very dangerous” and has been in a state of decline for many years.
Arborist Steve Garoutte of Lake Tree Design assessed the tree in September and concluded that it is now a hazard, as half of it is dead.
Oak root fungus may be the culprit in the tree's declining condition, although Garoutte said in his report that he hadn't examined the tree to confirm that.
“Given the location of this oak, its current condition, and what I consider its bleak prognosis, I recommend its removal as soon as possible,” Garoutte wrote.
He added, “I am very sorry to see this magnificent old oak dying.”
Garoutte further suggested planting a new valley oak in the vicinity of the dying tree, noting valley oaks are more resistant to oak root fungus and grow faster than blue oaks. There also is a local oak tree purveyor, he noted.
At its Jan. 27 meeting, the Board of Supervisors approved Chavez's request to hire Northcoast Tree Care to remove the heritage oak at a cost of $8,000.
Chavez said the higher cost for the tree's removal is due to the need for a crane to lift the tree up and over the iron fence to prevent damage to the fence and the nearby landscaping.
She said a brief closure of the museum entrance may be necessary while the tree is being removed.
Traffic control – provided by a county road crew – also will be necessary during the removal, Chavez said.
Chavez told the board that it's not her usual practice to bring a tree removal matter to the board, however, “We know that this is a sensitive issue.”
She told Lake County News in a separate interview that scheduling the tree's removal is largely dependent on when the crane is available.
She said a big branch of the tree recently fell off of it. A large portion of the tree is hollow, she added.
“We don't want to take it down, but when it becomes a hazard, we have to,” she said.
Chavez added, “We want people to know, we're not just doing this lightly. It’s a necessity.”
Email Elizabeth Larson at
- Details
- Written by: Elizabeth Larson
Supervisors set to discuss State of Jefferson petition to withdraw from state, hold midyear budget review
LAKEPORT, Calif. – This week the Board of Supervisors will take up a request from supporters of a 51st state to formally join the movement and hold a midyear review of the county's budget.
The board will meet beginning at 9 a.m. Tuesday, Feb. 17, in the board chambers on the first floor of the Lake County Courthouse, 255 N. Forbes St., Lakeport.
The meeting can be watched live on Channel 8 with the video available online at http://www.co.lake.ca.us/Government/Boards/Board_of_Supervisors/calendar.htm . Accompanying board documents and the agenda also are available at that link.
At 9:15 a.m., the board will consider a request from the supporters of the State of Jefferson to adopt the “Declaration and Petition to the California State Legislature for Withdrawal of Lake County from the State of California and to Form the State of Jefferson.”
A handful of counties have joined the movement, which would split a number of Northern California counties – Butte, Colusa, Del Norte, El Dorado, Glenn, Humboldt, Lake, Lassen, Mendocino, Modoc, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou, Sutter, Tehama, Trinity and Yuba – along with several Southern Oregon counties into a new state.
So far, the county boards of supervisors for Glenn, Modoc and Siskiyou have voted to adopt a declaration and petition to the state Legislature to withdraw from California and join the new state, with Tehama County voters in June approving the same action by their board. The boards of Sutter and Yuba counties have passed resolutions supporting the idea in concept.
However, last year, the boards of Shasta and Plumas counties declined to join the movement.
In other business on Tuesday, at 9:45 a.m., county staff will present the midyear budget review and consideration of resolution amending the FY 2014-15 Adopted Budget and the position allocation for selected budget units.
County Administrative Officer Matt Perry's report to the board explains that county departments have reviewed revenues and expenditures through December 2014 and submitted requested budget adjustments.
He said the proposed midyear budget resolution makes necessary adjustments to selected budget units “to continue to provide funding for special projects and to continue County operations through the remainder of the fiscal year.”
Perry added, “County department heads and their fiscal staff continue to monitor expenditures closely and provide the necessary information for your Board to make budget decisions.”
In an untimed item, the board will discuss the intent to create a working group to coordinate efforts regarding Clear Lake and its watershed.
The full agenda follows.
CONSENT AGENDA
7.1: Authorize Destruction of Documents.
7.2: Approve first amendment to the agreement between the county of Lake and Hilltop Recovery Services for Lake County residents for fiscal year 2014-15 in the amount of $30,000 (for a total contract amount of $60,000).
7.3: Approve first amendment to the agreement between county of Lake and Modesto Residential Living Center LLC for adult residential support for fiscal year 2014-15 in the amount of $30,000 (for a total contract amount of $65,000).
7.4: Approve agreement between the county of Lake and California Institute for Behavioral Health Solutions for Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) Training for fiscal year 2014-15 in the amount of $43,810.
7.5: Approve appointments to the Child Care Planning and Development Council.
7.6: Consideration of request to waive consultant selection process and approve five-year contract with county of Lake Solid Waste and SHN Consulting Engineers in the amount of $13,000 per year.
7.7: Consideration of request to waive consultant selection process and approve five-year contract for sampling and laboratory analysis of landfill surface and groundwater in the amount of $25,000 per year.
7.8: Approve amendment one, including additional insurance language but not affecting the cost of the project, to the agreement between the county of Lake and Quincy Engineering Inc. for engineering services for replacement of Dry Creek Bridge on Dry Creek Road (14C-0070) in Lake County and authorize the chair to sign.
7.9: Approve lease agreement between the county of Lake and Senior Support Services to lease the former Upper Lake Justice Court building in the amount of $1,000 per year.
TIMED ITEMS
8.2, 9:15 a.m.: Consideration of request from supporters of State of Jefferson to adopt the “Declaration and Petition to the California State Legislature for Withdrawal of Lake County from the State of California and to Form the State of Jefferson.”
8.3, 9:45 a.m.: Presentation of midyear budget review and consideration of resolution amending the FY 2014-15 Adopted Budget and the position allocation for selected budget units.
NONTIMED ITEMS
9.2: Discussion of intent to create a working group to coordinate efforts regarding Clear Lake and its watershed.
9.3: Consideration of memoranda of understanding between county of Lake and Lake County Employee’s Association Units 3, 4 and 5 for the Period from July 1, 2014, through Dec. 31, 2016.
9.4: Consideration of resolutions establishing salaries and benefits for employees assigned to confidential units "A" and "B" for the period from July 1, 2014, through Dec. 31, 2016.
9.5: consideration of resolution establishing salaries and benefits for employees assigned to the management unit for the period from July 1, 2014, through Dec. 31, 2016.
9.6: Continuing the proclamation of emergency declaration for a) drought conditions; and b) 2014 statewide December winter storms.
9.7: Consideration of request to waive normal bidding requirements and authorize the Public Works director/assistant purchasing agent to issue a purchase order for the purchase and reconditioning of a used Kenworth T-800 truck for county road maintenance.
9.8: Consideration of request to waive normal bid process and authorize sheriff to issue a purchase order in the amount of $26,859 to Ukiah Ford for a replacement evidence van.
CLOSED SESSION
10.2: Conference with legal counsel: Decision whether to initiate litigation pursuant to Gov. Code Sec. 54956.9 (d)(4): One potential case.
Email Elizabeth Larson at
- Details
- Written by: Elizabeth Larson
General plan updates, midyear budget review on Lakeport City Council agenda
LAKEPORT, Calif. – This week the Lakeport City Council will host public hearings on a right-of-way abandonment and general plan updates, and hold a midyear budget review.
The council will meet in closed session at 5:30 p.m. Tuesday, Feb. 17, in the council chambers at Lakeport City Hall, 225 Park St., to discuss a lawsuit with the county of Lake over records access – a suit begun in response to actions taken by the county's former sheriff, Frank Rivero – before convening in open session at 6 p.m.
At the start of the meeting, the council will be introduced to new Public Works employees Jay Strugnell and Steven Rodrigues.
The council will host two public hearings, the first regarding an abandonment of a narrow strip of right-of-way on Martin Street between Main and Forbes streets in order to allow the Soper Reese Theatre to move forward on its renovations.
The second public hearing is for the proposed adoption of a resolution that includes approval of the 2014 addendum to the city of Lakeport General Plan as prepared by De Novo Planning Group. The addendum includes the Lakeport General Plan text and map amendments.
In other business on Tuesday, Finance Director Dan Buffalo will take to the council the midyear budget review and a budget amendment recommended by staff.
Public Works Director Mark Brannigan will ask the council to authorize a request for additional funds and grants from the US Department of Agriculture to complete water and wastewater projects.
Brannigan also will seek authorization from the council to purchase an excavator and accessories.
On the meeting's consent agenda – items considered noncontroversial and usually accepted as a slate on one vote – are ordinances; the warrant registers from Jan. 6; minutes from the Feb. 3 council meeting; approval of Application 2015-001 for Lake County Family Resource Center for its annual Child Festival in the Park on Saturday, April 11, from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. with requested street closures on Park St.; and approval of Application 2015-004 for the Clearlake Club for the Care for Scarlett Michelle fundraiser in the alley behind the club on Saturday, Feb. 28, from 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Email Elizabeth Larson at
021715 Lakeport City Council agenda packet by LakeCoNews
- Details
- Written by: Elizabeth Larson