How to resolve AdBlock issue? Supervisors to get Lakeside Heights update, consider treasurer-tax collector appointment
LAKEPORT, Calif. – An update on a landslide that has damaged a north Lakeport subdivision as well as the appointment of a treasurer-tax collector are on the Board of Supervisors' agenda this week.
The meeting will begin at 9 a.m. Tuesday, June 4, in the board chambers on the first floor of the Lake County Courthouse, 255 N. Forbes St., Lakeport. It will be broadcast live on TV8.
At 9:15 a.m., county staff will update the board on the latest on the Lakeside Heights Subdivision, with consideration of continued response to the county emergency, which the board declared in April.
Several homes have been red-tagged and several more have been issued voluntary evacuation notices, but more recently subdivision residents have reported that there hasn't been significant land movement and that water that was coming out of the hillside and going into a storm drain on Downing Drive has nearly stopped.
In other business, at 9:30 a.m., the board will hear about the report regarding local impacts of implementation of the provisions of the Mental Health Services Act.
In untimed items, the board will continue its consideration of appointing a new treasurer-tax collector, discuss approval of a notice of completion for the Middletown Library/Senior Center, consider a request for a letter of opposition regarding the governor’s May budget revision to redirect county health care funds.
A proposed property purchase at 8250 Reclamation Road, Upper Lake, as part of the Middle Creek Flood Damage Reduction and Ecosystem Restoration Project, also will be taken up as an untimed item.
The full agenda follows.
TIMED ITEMS
9 a.m., A-1 to A-4: Approval of consent agenda, which includes items that are expected to be routine and noncontroversial, and will be acted upon by the board at one time without discussion; presentation of animals available for adoption at Lake County Animal Care and Control; consideration of items not appearing on the posted agenda, and contract change orders for current construction projects.
9:05 a.m.: Citizen's input. Any person may speak for three minutes about any subject of concern, provided that it is within the jurisdiction of the Board of Supervisors and is not already on the agenda. Prior to this time, speakers must fill out a slip giving name, address and subject (available in the clerk of the board’s office, first floor, courthouse).
9:10 a.m., A-5: Presentation of proclamation commending Donna Gitchell for her years of service to the county of Lake.
9:15 a.m., A-6: (a) Update on Lakeside Heights Subdivision; and (b) consideration of services recommendations for continued response.
9:30 a.m., A-7: Presentation of report regarding local impacts of implementation of the provisions of the Mental Health Services Act.
NONTIMED ITEMS
A-8: Supervisors’ weekly calendar, travel and reports.
A-9: Consideration of appointment of treasurer-tax collector.
A-10: Carried over from April 23, May 7 and 14, consideration of proposed resolution authorizing the chair to sign a notice of completion for the Middletown Library/Senior Center.
A-11: Consideration of request for letter of opposition regarding the governor’s May budget revision to redirect county health care funds.
A-12: Consideration of proposed purchase contract for property located at 8250 Reclamation Road, Upper Lake (APN 004-014-19 - Brad Floyd and Mary Floyd) for the Middle Creek Flood Damage Reduction and Ecosystem Restoration Project.
CLOSED SESSION
A-13: 1. Conference with Labor Negotiator: (a) county negotiators: A. Grant, L. Guintivano, S. Harry, M. Perry, A. Flora and C. Shaver; and (b) employee organizations: Deputy District Attorney's Association, Lake County Deputy Sheriff's Association, Lake County Correctional Officers Association, Lake County Employees Association and Lake County Safety Employees Association.
A-13: 2. Conference with legal counsel: Existing litigation pursuant to Gov. Code Sec. 54956.9(d)(1): California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) (CalWater).
A-13: 3. Conference with legal counsel: Significant Exposure to litigation pursuant to Gov. Code Sec. 54956.9(d)(2),(e)(5): City of Lakeport.
A-13: 4. Conference with legal counsel – significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(2),(e)(2): Public Records Act request of Lake County News.
CONSENT AGENDA
C-1: Approve minutes of the Board of Supervisors meeting held on May 21, 2013.
C-2: Adopt proclamation commending Donna Gitchell for her years of service to the county of Lake.
C-3: Carried over from May 14 and 21, approve plans and specifications for construction Clearlake Oaks Senior Center, and authorize the county administrative officer/purchasing agent to advertise for bids.
C-4: Adopt resolution to amend Resolution 2010-177, “A Resolution authorizing Mental Health Director to participate in the California Mental Health Services Authority and approval of the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement,” and authorizing the Behavioral Health director to sign.
C-5: Approve first amendment to agreement between the county of Lake and Crestwood Behavioral Health for FY 2012-13 adult residential and mental health services, an increase of $350,000, and authorize the chair to sign.
C-6: Health Services Adopt Resolution approving the Medi-Cal Targeted Case Management (TCM) provider participation agreement between the county of Lake and the California Department of Health Services and authorize the director of Health Services to sign.
C-7: Adopt resolution approving agreement between the county of Lake and the county of Marin for Medi-Cal Administrative Activities (MAA) and Targeted Case Management (TCM), and authorizing the director of Health Services to sign.
C-8: Approve agreement between the county of Lake and Dazzling Janitorial, for FY 2013-14 janitorial services at the Redbud Branch Library, in the amount of $11,700, and authorize the chair to sign.
C-9: (a) Approve grant deed and direct clerk to certify for recordation (a portion of APN 014-210-33 - Dwight Holford and Joelle Holford), and approve purchase agreement between the county of Lake and
Dwight Holford and Joelle Holford for the Hilderbrand Road Bridge Project, and authorize the chair to sign agreement.
C-10: (a) Approve grant deed and direct clerk to certify for recordation (a portion of APN 008-029-15 - Diane Beverlin and Dale Beverlin), and approve purchase agreement between the county of Lake and Diane Beverlin and Dale Beverlin for the Soda Bay Road/Cole Creek Bridge Project, and authorize the chair to sign agreement.
C-11: Approve Drug Enforcement Administration Marijuana Eradication (DEA) agreement between the county of Lake and Drug Enforcement Administration of the United States Department of Justice (DEA will pay Lake County $170,000 to defray the cost relating to the eradication and suppression of illicit marijuana), authorize the sheriff to sign the letter of agreement and authorize the chair to sign the workplace certifications and grant assurances.
C-12: (a) Adopt resolution amending Resolution No. 2012-106 to amend the Adopted Budget for FY 2012-13 by adjusting revenues and appropriations in Budget Unit 2203 - Sheriff - Marijuana ($20,000 for flight time); (b) approve first amendment to agreement between the county of Lake and A&P Helicopters for FY 2012-13 marijuana reconnaissance and eradication on public and private lands, an increase of $20,000, and authorize the chair to sign; and (c) approve agreement between the county of Lake and A&P Helicopters for FY 2013-14 marijuana reconnaissance and eradication on public and private lands, in an amount not to exceed $60,000, and authorize the chair to sign.
C-13: Approve request to waive 900 hour limit for the following extra help employees: Sheriff/Marine Patrol – Jim Campbell, Dane Hayward, Robert Piveronas and Lloyd Wells; Sheriff/Court Security – Wes Frey, James Everhart and Duayne Emis; and interim OES Coordinator Willie Sapeta.
C-14: Approve retroactive agreement between the county of Lake and the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) for transitional adoption services from July 1, 2012 through March 31, 2013, amount not to exceed $25,000, and authorize the chair to sign.
C-15: Approve third amendment to agreement between the county of Lake and North Coast Opportunities/Rural Communities Childcare for administration of the Stage One Child Care program for CalWORKs recipients (changing the compensation allocation from 25 percent of total provider payments to 25 percent of annual CalWORKs allocation for Stage One childcare), and authorize the chair to sign.
C-16: Adopt resolution amending Resolution No. 2012-107 establishing position allocations for Fiscal Year 2012-2013, Budget Unit No. 5011, Department of Social Services (delete one Eligibility Worker III position and add one Staff Services Analyst I/II position).
C-17: Amend Bid Award for Bid No. SD 13-05 to a total amount of $31,275, an increase of $217 for increased sales tax (previously awarded on March 26, 2013).
LAKE COUNTY WATERSHED PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
C-18: Approve amendment one to agreement between the Lake County Watershed Protection District and the University of Southern California for Clear Lake Limnological Analysis (modifying the scope of work with no additional cost to the County), and authorize the chair to sign.
C-19: Approve amendment one to agreement between the Lake County Watershed Protection District and the Regents of University of California for Clear Lake Limnological Analysis (modifying the scope
of work with no additional cost to the county), and authorize the chair to sign.
Email Elizabeth Larson at
- Details
- Written by: Elizabeth Larson
Council to hold budget workshop and regular meeting this week
LAKEPORT, Calif. – The Lakeport City Council this week will hold a budget workshop before its regular meeting, which has a short agenda.
The council will meet at 4:30 p.m. Tuesday, June 4, in the council chambers at Lakeport City Hall, 225 Park St., to conduct a workshop on the 2013-14 budget before convening the regular meeting at 6 p.m.
On the consent agenda, which includes items that are not considered controversial and which usually are accepted on one vote, are ordinances; minutes; warrants; a staff report including a police operation plan for illegal fireworks; approval of Application No. 2013-011 for Sponsoring Survivorship to hold its annual walk/run on Oct. 5 to assist Lake County women and men in their battle against breast cancer; approval of Application No. 2013-012 for the annual opening day of the fair parade, to be held Aug. 29; and reappointment of Lynn Andre to the Parks & Recreation Commission.
Council business for the Tuesday night meeting includes a public hearing to consider City Manager Margaret Silveira's recommendation to continue the scheduled public hearing on Community Development Block Grant Close Out of 09-EDEF-6531 to June 18.
Email Elizabeth Larson at
060413 Lakeport City Council agenda packet by LakeCoNews
City of Lakeport 2013-14 Budget - Recommended (Draft)
- Details
- Written by: Elizabeth Larson
City of Clearlake considers contracting with county for animal control services
CLEARLAKE, Calif. – After several years of offering its own animal control services, the city of Clearlake is negotiating a new agreement that would have Lake County Animal Care and Control provide the services once more.
At its Thursday night meeting, the Clearlake City Council gave City Manager Joan Phillipe approval to continue negotiations with the county.
Because of the city’s financial situation, in 2009 it ended its contract with Lake County Animal Care and Control, with the annual contract at that point totaling about $200,000.
Since then, animal control services have been offered by city staff supervised by the Clearlake Police Department. Phillipe’s report to the council said that the city and county have had an agreement in effect since 2009 for animal shelter services.
If the city continues to provide animal control, it will need a better facility, and that will cost money the city doesn’t have, Phillipe said.
Continuing to staff and fund the services going forward has been a topic of ongoing discussion for city staff, Phillipe reported. She said the funding request for animal control-related services for the coming year – including the addition of a permanent employee – was more than $160,000, which doesn’t cover shelter improvements.
City staff has considered a number of options, including expanding services to include local veterinarians, contracting with a local organization or kennel owners, or contracting with a neighboring county, according to Phillipe’s report.
She said the option offering the most promise was to return to a contract with Lake County Animal Care and Control, which in preliminary discussions has proposed taking over services for an annual cost of $145,000.
That proposal so far includes having Animal Care and Control provide services that would be available 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Monday through Friday, and would include sheltering, office staff and stray animal medical expenses, but wouldn’t include picking up animals, according to Phillipe.
Fine-tuning still needs to take place to reach a draft contract, which would need to take into account licensing fees, handling of vicious animals and large animals, and a contract term, she reported.
During the Thursday, discussion, Police Chief Craig Clausen said animal control staff does a good job, but it’s nevertheless challenging.
“It’s strictly financial,” he said.
Clausen said he has to backfill animal control staff shortages with unpaid volunteers, adding that police staff is not trained to deal with animals.
Phillipe told the council that she and Clausen have been working on reaching a proposed contract with the county.
Council member Joyce Overton said that when the council canceled the contract with Animal Care and Control in 2009, the intent had always been to renegotiate the costs, and she supported moving forward with talks with the county.
Mayor Jeri Spittler agreed, noting that it was obvious that staff had worked hard on the conceptual proposal.
The council agreed with Phillipe’s concept and gave her support to move forward to bring back a final agreement with the county.
Email Elizabeth Larson at
- Details
- Written by: Elizabeth Larson
Clearlake City Council approves first reading of proposed medical marijuana cultivation ordinance
CLEARLAKE, Calif. – The Clearlake City Council on Thursday night gave unanimous approval to a first reading of a new ordinance to establish rules for medical marijuana cultivation.
The proposed ordinance mirrors a county ordinance implemented last year, prohibiting grows on vacant parcels.
It suggests plant limits on residential parcels ranging from six plants on parcels of half an acre or less up to 48 plants on 40 acres or more; prohibits growing in mobile home parks – unless specified garden areas are designated – and multifamily dwellings; requires grows be screened from view; and requires processing amounts to match the number of plants that can be grown on parcels where the processing is taking place.
The approval followed a council discussion and only a small amount of public comment. The main concern from a couple who use the plant to manage pain and other health issues was that the plant limits don’t allow them to grow enough to use the plant in edibles.
City Manager Joan Phillipe introduced the ordinance, and told the council she received two communications from community members about it. One supported it, another, from Lower Lake attorney Ron Green, pointed out a need for clarification in wording regarding a proposed 10-foot setback on the smallest parcels.
Phillipe also explained that the Clearlake Planning Commission had recommended the council approve the ordinance at its May 7 meeting.
The commission had proposed some changes, including adding complaint-driven language that is broadened to include the ability for enforcement outside of complaints; reducing setbacks on parcels smaller than half an acre to 10 feet from the property line rather than 25 feet; and including daycare centers in the definition of “school” facilities.
The document said that cultivation within 600 feet of a public or private school is prohibited, and the suggestion to add private daycares to the school definition was an issue for Mayor Jeri Spittler.
She said the large distance requirement was a problem because it meant that if such a daycare opened in a residential area, it would prevent people from growing the marijuana they needed for health issues.
Spittler suggested that “activists” who oppose use of the drug could go around opening daycare centers to prevent marijuana growing.
The question of private daycare centers and distance from growing activity proved the main area of concern during the discussion.
Council member Denise Loustalot said the distance requirement was meant to help buffer schools and other areas where children frequented from the crimes that come to areas associated with marijuana growing.
In response to Spittler’s concerns about activists opening daycare centers, Council member Gina Fortino Dickson pointed out that licensed daycare providers must meet state requirements.
There were proposals to reduce the distance requirement, however, the council ultimately removed the reference to private daycares from the ordinance’s definition of schools.
The council approved the planning commission’s other proposed changes, including the setback reduction from 25 to 10 feet on smaller parcels and the complaint driven language.
At Fortino Dickson’s suggestion, the council also added a requirement that the person with the medical marijuana recommendation live at the residence where the marijuana is grown.
Luiz moved to approve the ordinance’s first reading, which was approved 5-0.
The council will hold its second and final reading of the ordinance at its June 13 meeting.
Email Elizabeth Larson at
- Details
- Written by: Elizabeth Larson
Judge’s proposed decision finds for county in suit over Rattlesnake Island environmental studies
LAKE COUNTY, Calif. – A judge has issued a proposed ruling in a lawsuit filed by a group that sued the county over a building project on Rattlesnake Island, finding there was not sufficient evidence to support allegations that the county didn’t require sufficient environmental studies before allowing the project to move forward.
Judge Michael Lunas issued the proposed statement of decision on Tuesday in the Friends of Rattlesnake Island’s suit against the county of Lake and the Lake County Board of Supervisors.
Emeryville resident John Nady, who has owned the 57-acre island off of Clearlake Oaks since 2003, was named as a real party of interest in the suit, which was filed in late 2011, as Lake County News has reported.
Friends of Rattlesnake Island, which formed shortly before filing the suit, sought a writ of mandate in its suit against the county as well as a requirement that an environmental impact report be completed before Nady could go forward with building a 2,930-square-foot residence, 1,258-square-foot caretaker's cabin, standalone bathroom and utility trenching on the island.
Lunas found the claims in the lawsuit alleging that the county failed to carry out enough environmental study to lack sufficient evidence, and said that zoning ordinances allowed Nady to use the island for residential purposes, with the island having been used for similar purposes for years.
Friends of Rattlesnake Island’s attorney, Rachel Mansfield-Howlett, did not respond to messages seeking comment, and Lake County News was unable to make contact with Nady’s attorney, Frederic Schrag.
County Counsel Anita Grant said Wednesday that, because the decision is still not final, she can’t offer much in the way of comment at this point.
Lunas said the parties have 15 days to serve and file objections to his statement of decision. He will consider those filings in a final statement of decision.
Sarah Ryan, one of the members of the Friends of Rattlesnake Island, said the group needs to confer and determine a way forward, since Judge Lunas’ proposed ruling is allowing them to submit additional briefs. “We will definitely take advantage of that.”
Ryan said the proposed decision does not take into account certain facts, and she expects Mansfield-Howlett will submit that information on behalf of the group.
The suit was filed in response to the Board of Supervisors’ 3-2 decision in September 2011 to grant Nady’s appeal of a May 2010 Lake County Planning Commission vote requiring him to complete a focused environmental impact report on the island’s cultural archaeological resources.
One of the group’s key concerns is the island’s status as a cultural, religious and political center for the Elem Pomo, who call it “Elem-Modun.”
The island is the location of many prehistoric and historic sites, and was placed on the California Register of Historical Resources in 2008.
Elem tribal members say the island was illegally taken from them in 1877.
Lunas, the newest judge on the Lake County Superior Court bench, heard arguments in the case on Feb. 21.
“The County conducted environmental review of the impacts to aesthetics and adopted mitigations designed to reduce those impacts to a less than significant level,” Lunas wrote in his 39-page proposed decision. “There is no substantial evidence to demonstrate that potential impacts were not identified or that the mitigation does not reduce the potential impacts to a less than significant level.”
Judge Lunas found that there was no substantial evidence to show that there were potential project impacts that the county didn’t consider or that the project would cause “a substantial adverse change in the significance of the Island, or any part thereof, as a historical resource.”
He also stated that the evidence presented didn’t prove that the project would prevent the island from being included in the National Register of Historic Places and the State Register of Historic Resources.
A brief history of the island’s planning issues
Rattlesnake Island has been the source of numerous public planning hearings, county actions as well as legal wrangling for nearly a decade.
According to county and court documents, Nady first proposed to build a caretake dwelling and standalone field bathroom on the island in 2004, applying for and obtaining septic permits for the buildings.
In January 2005, the Board of Supervisors sought – and received – a court order to stop Nady’s building project until mitigation and artifact studies were completed after it was determined that the county incorrectly issued him the septic system permits.
Later that month, the Lake County Planning Commission ordered Nady to carry out further study before beginning his project.
In April 2005 Nady applied for the permits to complete his proposed project, revising his plans in October 2007 to include the main residence.
In 2008, the county contracted with archaeologist Thomas Gates to evaluate the sites archaeological resources, with Gates performing an investigation the following spring.
“In sum, Gates found that the discovered archeological materials did not present much further information potential and, in his opinion, with a high degree of certainty, there were not present any unique archeological resources at the site of the Project,” according to Lunas’ proposed decision.
Based on an evaluation of Gates’ work, the Community Development Department prepared an initial study that identified potential impacts to historical and archaeological resources and aesthetics, proposed mitigation and mitigation monitoring measures to reduce impacts. County staff recommended approval of the project based on a mitigated negative declaration.
In May 2010, the Lake County Planning Commission voted to require that Nady complete a focused environmental impact report to look specifically at Rattlesnake Island’s cultural and archaeological resources.
The Board of Supervisors agreed to hear Nady’s appeal of that decision, with Nady arguing that a mitigated negative declaration be sufficient instead.
The appeal was heard over two meetings in August and September 2011, before the board voted 3-2 – with Supervisors Anthony Farrington and Denise Rushing dissenting – to allow Nady to move forward without completing the focused environmental impact report.
Friends of Rattlesnake Island would later apply unsuccessfully three different times to get a restraining order to stop further work on the project.
The group filed its lawsuit against the county in November 2011.
Judge’s take on the evidence
Lunas’ proposed statement of decision went through a list of items he said lacked substantial evidence.
Among them, he questioned the claims in the suit that the project has altered or substantially changed the archaeological resources, that unique archaeological resources existed at the project site or that such resources may be substantially adversely changed.
An Elem Pomo was not used as the project’s American Indian monitor, but Lunas didn’t find evidence that the absence of an Elem monitor impacted the environmental review’s validity or integrity.
“The values and feelings that the Elem Pomo have for the Island as a historical and spiritual place are definite and certain,” Lunas wrote. “However, this Project is not the barrier to the physical contact, access and use of the Island – Nady’s ownership controls those claims.”
The inquiry that the Friends of Rattlesnake Island group is seeking under the California Environmental Quality Act relates to whether the project “will affect the environment of persons in general and not whether a project will otherwise affect particular persons in a specific manner,” Lunas said.
Lunas said that, based on zoning ordinance, Nady has the right to construct two residences and use the island for residential purposes.
“For years, the Island has been substantially exposed to the type of use and activities occasioned by residential occupancy, involving farming, ranching and recreational activities,” Lunas wrote. “These activities are not subject to CEQA review and have been lawful use of the island by the owner. There is no substantial evidence to suggest that the residential use of the Island intended by the Project will cause any real change in that environment or the utilization of the lands by Nady.”
Lunas ordered Nady’s counsel to prepare and present a form of judgment in preparation for a final decision.
Email Elizabeth Larson at
052213 Friends of Rattlesnake Island Proposed Statement of Decision
- Details
- Written by: Elizabeth Larson
