During the hearing, which ran about a half hour, the board once more heard input both from those who favored a ban and those who oppose it, but the focus of the discussion was on the committee and how it could be formed to ensure that the different sides hear each other.

On Oct. 21, the board voted 3-2 to initially approve a ban of GE crops in Lake County. However, on Nov. 4, they delayed approving the ordinance on a second hearing due to concerns about conflicts with the state's right to farm ordinance, among other things.

For the Tuesday meeting, three versions of the ordinance – including that which had originally been approved – were offered.

However, before the board could consider them, Board Chair Ed Robey, who brought the ordinance to the board, began the discussion by withdrawing the ordinance altogether.

Instead, he asked the board to go ahead and consider forming the advisory committee.

“I think it would be much better at this point if we just gave a committee a chance to try to come up with a – some sort of an ordinance that addresses this issue that we could all live with,” he said.

He quoted a letter sent to the board from Toni Scully, whose family owns the pear packing house Scully Packing. Scully told the board it would be wrong to pass the ordinance before giving the working group a chance to work.

Robey said the issue was a bit of deja vu for him. Five years ago, when the GE issue manifested locally, the board asked a committee to look at it and come up with a solution.

“I believe that the committee basically reached a compromise except for one word, basically – they were that close,” he said.

Supervisor Anthony Farrington said that, like Robey, he agreed with the thrust of Scully's letter. However, he had issues with some of Scully's sentiments, which suggested the board was “placating” certain groups by initially accepting the ordinance.

Farrington said placation doesn't come into it. “For me, from day one, it's about bringing these two sides together for a dialog that has been nonexistent.”

And dialog has resulted from the ban's proposal, with the opportunity for continued discussion, he said.

Farrington said there also is still the option that either pro- or anti-GE forces could put the matter on the ballot.

Scully's letter also had stated, “It's insulting that you discredit governmental protection agencies.”

Farrington said it's the board's responsibility to question superior powers; if they don't, they're not doing their job.

The letter also had said Scully was dismayed by the board's seemingly enthusiastic support of stances approved by “anti-establishment” groups like the Center for Food Safety.”

To that, Farrington responded he was required to look at both sides – not just one.

Supervisor Denise Rushing said she also had concerns about the letter, although she agreed with its general thrust.

“I wonder if common ground can be found if either side can't hear the underlying concerns,” she said.

She said she believed the board had heard from both sides during the process of discussing the ban that local regulation was appropriate if the crops weren't regulated by the state and federal governments.

“I, for one, would like to not see these genetically engineered organisms in our county unless they have been fully tested,” she said.

In the Bay Area, a local foods movement is forming with people who want to buy food produced within 100 miles. “We happen to be within that 100-mile radius,” she said, asking how the county can capture that opportunity.

Sierra Club Lake Group Chair Victoria Brandon said she came to the meeting charged by her executive committee to make a request that the board withdraw the ban options until they could be considered more closely.

In the mean time, Brandon suggested the advisory committee should include members from all segments of the community. Brandon proposed that Debra Sommerfield, the deputy administrator for the county's Economic Development Department, should be included in the process, since it could have “immense” implications for marketing the county.

“I think we've got an opportunity here to exchange views and discover what peoples' concerns really are,” Brandon said.

The issue, she added, isn't going to go away just because a ban isn't being actively considered.

She also suggested formal facilitation to avoid confrontation, with a neutral person leading the initial sessions.

“Like a monk?” joked Farrington.

Supervisor Rob Brown suggested Sommerfield could fulfill that facilitation role.

“I'd really like to do it myself,” joked county Chief Administrative Office Kelly Cox.

“That's as close to a monk as we could get,” Brown quipped.

Sarah Ryan, a founding member of the Coalition for Responsible Agriculture, questioned if the various sides have equal access to the board.

“I'm impressed we can send letters and they get addressed and looked at,” she said, referring to Scully's missive.

Ryan, on the other hand, said she had called and e-mailed the supervisor for the area she lives, Jeff Smith, but received no response. “I don't know if we all have equal access.”

She asked if the board would consider directing the agricultural commissioner to track plantings of GE crops from this point forward.

Ryan also asked if the board would create a time frame for the advisory committee to accomplish its work.

Farrington suggested Rushing and Brown – who have been on the pro- and anti- sides of the ban, respectively – also serve on the advisory committee, a suggestion which gained two thumbs up from Robey. “I think that it's a balance,” Farrington said.

He agreed that a first task should be establishing a time line.

Responding to Ryan's criticism about his not returning calls, Smith said he doesn't reply to inquiries in the middle of public discussions, because once a matter goes to the board he believes all conversations should be public. “That's why I don't respond when we have something hot on the table.”

“He's been like this for years,” said Robey.

Brown suggested he and Rushing meet this week with Sommerfield on the criteria for committee membership and structure, and then bring it back next Tuesday.

Robey suggested the board ask the committee to give a progress report within a month of its formation.

Smith suggested the Sierra Club, Farm Bureau, the chambers and the Lake County Winegrape Commission be among those with representatives on the committee.

JoAnn Saccato of the Lake County Community Co-op, citing concerns about cross-contamination from GE crops, asked if a nonbinding “gentleman's” agreement to prevent GE crops from being planted for six to 12 months could be arrived at to protect farmers who don't want their crops impacted.

“Once it comes in, your window of opportunity is closed to have a GE-free county,” said Saccato.

Robey questioned how such an agreement could be made to work.

Michelle Scully, who throughout the public debate has been one to point to the need for middle ground and compromise in exchange for division, said she's a big believer in “win-win” solutions.

Scully suggested the board would have a difficult task in choosing members for the committee. However, she added, “There's polarized sides, but I believe here's a great big center.”

The polarization over the GE ban “has been a painful thing to watch, and I don't think it's serving any of us well at this point,” she said, adding that the board was like Solomon cutting the baby in half – and they needed to be careful how they cut the baby.

She said property rights and the public's general impression of farming were big concerns for her. Agriculture is “a gift to this county – how can we lift that up and facilitate it?”

Robey said he believed the property rights issue is a red herring. “I think it's more that people, especially farmers, just don't like being regulated, and I'll give you an example.”

He referred to the use of DDT, which once was legal but now is banned. “Is that taking away a property right?”

“Ed, are you teasing me?” Scully responded.

Robey replied that he wasn't, and he compared DDT as a tool with GE crops, a tool local farmers have said would be taken away if the ban was put in effect.

“You're not going to be on the committee, right?” Scully replied.

She said DDT always is thrown out by GE opponents, and she said she could respond that people also used to not be vaccinated for polio, so she said Robey's argument also was a red herring.

Finley farmer Phil Murphy said an advisory board working in Monterey County on GE-related issues is now in its third year, and hasn't been able to work out an agreement with their Farm Bureau.

“Because they didn't have a time line for it, it's just dragging on endlessly,” he said.

Murphy said he would like to see the advisory committee's work completed by mid-April, before the next planting season.

He said he had gone to the Lake County Farm Bureau with the GE ban proposal earlier this year, before approaching the Board of Supervisors. “I asked them if they wanted to sit down with us and look at it and see if there was things they wanted to change or improve or talk about,” but he was “turned down flat” due to a Farm Bureau policy not to negotiate the issue.

Murphy suggested that before the Lake County Farm Bureau is included on the committee, they need to rescind their policy.

“I've heard it said many, many times here that this is a divisive issue in the local farming community, and honestly, I've never seen it that way,” said Murphy, noting he's seen the same divisions since he got into farming 15 years ago.

While some people believe strongly what comes from the corporate community and the University of California system, other people – himself included – tend to question information, said Murphy.

“I think the batting average of the skeptics is better than the people that just put blind faith in 100 percent of what they're told.”

More specifics about the advisory board will be presented at the board meeting next week.

E-mail Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

{mos_sb_discuss:2}

NOTICE

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Lakeport will hold public workshops on the 3rd and 4th of December, 2008, from 4:00 p.m. to 6 p.m., in the Council Chambers of City Hall, located at 225 Park Street, to accept comments from any interested persons on the Draft General Plan as well as the Draft EIR. No formal action will be taken at these workshops. If you have questions or comments, please call the Lakeport Community Development Department at 707-263-5613 ext. 25.

The objective of the proposed project is to update the General Plan for the City of Lakeport, and will include the following: (1) Changes to current General Plan designations, (2) proposed expansion of the City of Lakeport’s Sphere of Influence to include a Specific Plan area in the south of the city, and (3) changes to and the reorganization of the General Plan Elements.

The City is proposing amendments to the existing General Plan that would expand the City’s Sphere of Influence. In addition, the land-use designation for certain areas within the city limits would be amended to allow a broader mix of uses than currently allowed. With the implementation of the proposed General Plan, buildout of the Specific Plan area would result in a variety of potential uses including: increased residential development, commercial development, and open space.

The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) identifies the following potentially significant environmental effects: aesthetic/visual; agricultural resources; air quality; biological resources; cultural resources; geology soils; hazards and hazardous materials; hydrology and water quality; land use and planning; noise; population and housing; public services and utility systems; recreation; and transportation and traffic. In addition to these workshops, written comments will be accepted on the Draft EIR until the close of the public review period on December 18, 2008.

Dated this 18th day of November, 2008.

_______________________________

MARK BRANNIGAN

Community Development Director

{mos_sb_discuss:2}

Jim Burns, representing the Cristallago development team, made the presentation to the council on behalf of developers Mark Mitchell and Matt Boeger.

The matter was the council's last item of discussion, and placed on the agenda under City Council communications rather than public presentations, which Councilman Jim Irwin questioned. Mayor Buzz Bruns said he had it agendized that way.

“Was there anything in our packets about this one?” Irwin asked.

There wasn't, said Bruns. It was, he said, an opportunity for the council to hear more about the project.

“If we think it's good for our city we can give 'em the go-ahead – the blessing, let's put it that way,” said Bruns, who will leave the council next month when his successor, Suzanne Lyons, is sworn in.

“Lake County is just changing dramatically,” said Burns, pointing to developments like that being done by Jim Fetzer on the Northshore, along with the proposals for Cristallago and an 18-hole golf course and subdivision the city of Lakeport envisions on its municipal sewer district land.

Burns said the county – which has had unsavory associations such as trailer trash and methamphetamine pinned to it – will be transformed by those projects.

The collective redevelopment programs of the cities and the county are drawing developers and giving them the confidence to invest in Lake County, said Burns. Over the next 25 years, he said half a billion dollars will be invested in the county's blighted areas.

Burns offered a PowerPoint presentation in which he explained that Cristallago, slated to be located on Hill Road at Highway 29, had originally included 1,000 residences and 200 resort units on 862 acres, which includes 576 acres of open space.

However, at the behest of the Board of Supervisors, Burns said the project was adjusted to have more of an emphasis on the resort side, reducing the residential units to 650 and raising the resort units 63 percent to number 325.

Burns said sewer service is immediately adjacent to the development area, which also is near a fire station, Sutter Lakeside Hospital and a water source – Clear Lake, which will supply the subdivision's drinking water. Groundwater won't be used, he said.

There also will be a link between Cristallago and the Marina at Lyons Creek, another Boeger Land Development project, which is located on the lakeshore. According to Boeger's Web site, the marina will have “up to 440 residences (many located with a boating connection to the lake), a restaurant, and a senior home.” It's also supposed to have a high-tech water treatment plant on site.

“We think there will be a lot of synergism between those two projects,” he said.

Cristallago will include an 18-hole Jack Nicklaus signature golf course on nearly 190 acres. Burns said the course alone will cost about $2 million to design and will raise each residential lot's value by an additional $77,000.

He said the development and resort will provide activities for people of all ages and income levels.

Burns presented figures of potential annual spending of $21.6 million from the residential side and $33.7 million from Cristallago's resort. Annual service costs for the residential development is estimated at more than $906,000 and more than $166,000 for the resort.

In addition, Burns said Cristallago has numerous “green” programs, from a prohibition on wood-burning fireplaces to a tertiary-treated water system, which will supply the golf course. The subdivision also will use smart-growth principles.

Burns said the subdivision will create 670 new jobs, and by itself can reduce the county's unemployment from 10 percent to 6 percent. Of those jobs, 110 will be construction and 560 will be permanent.

He estimated the project will attract 40,000 visitors annually, resulting in $195 million in direct economic impact and $370 million in total economic impact. Burns said Cristallago will generate $48 million in local spending annually. A $20 million marketing effort will promote the plan.

A marketing plan completed for the county several years ago pointed to the need for a destination resort in the north county, which is where the business partners began looking to build, said Burns. They combined the former Black Rock and Las Fuentes project sites, which had been approved in the 1990s and 1980s, respectively, and both of which had golf courses included.

“We thought this would be a natural place to build this,” he said.

Addressing what he said were the main misconceptions about Cristallago, Burns said it's not the largest project in the county ever – the Clear Lake Riviera and Hidden Valley Lake are larger. It will create 560 permanent jobs and won't be just for the rich, with some units available for around $300,000.

He said the project also won't cause area wells to dry up because it will use lake water and traffic also won't be out of control, he said.

Burns said the subdivision will be built over a 15- to 20-year timeframe, with the golf course to be built first.

Lakeport may get all of the impacts – as well as all of the positives, such as increased sales tax, said Burns.

The development team is planning to meet with Sutter Lakeside Hospital and the Lakeport Regional Chamber of Commerce. The project will be before the Planning Commission in December.

Councilman Bob Rumfelt asked about traffic issues, and if the development would help provide for updating area roads. Burns said they're happy to pay their fair share, and pointed to the county's work on a traffic impact fee to address development and traffic.

Rumfelt pointed out that the city's traffic impact fees are proposed to go as high as $20,000 per home. “I'm not really sure how to respond to that,” said Burns, who admitted that such high fees might cause the developers to take another look at the project and retool it accordingly.

John Lee, who owns 20 acres on Hill Road adjacent to the heart of the Cristallago area, spoke to the council and warned them against giving their support to the project.

Lee, who earlier this year had successfully appealed to the Board of Supervisors Mitchell's Eachus View Estates – a reworked version of which the board accepted last month – said Cristallago was another example of developers' big money and big talk, but very little action.

“If you listen carefully to the presentation it's flawed beyond belief,” he said.

Lee said it's “nonsense” that the developers have taken care of all planing concerns.

Cristallago, he said, promotes leapfrog development, and he dismissed the economic impacts Burns presented as just numbers and “nothing more.”

“If you lay money on those numbers then I have some land down in Louisiana I'd like to talk to you about too because I think your investment will be just as good,” Lee said.

The northern area of Cristallago, on the Las Fuentes site, has high degrees of asbestos in the soil, which Lee said would require the area's 450 acres to be covered by 2 to 3 feet of soil to build.

“The project really makes no sense,” Lee said.

He added, “Are you going to control development or is development going to control you?”

While Lee imagined local business will support the project, he wondered how long it would be before major chain stores started trying to come in, which Lee suggested would wipe out smaller merchants.

He also said it was “balderdash” that it won't have traffic impacts on the city.

Lee ended by invoking the “lipstick on a pig” reference heard often during the recent presidential election.

“This is still a pig,” he said of Cristallago. “It's not a good plan.”

Businesswoman and Sierra Club member Cheri Holden told the council that the project's environmental impact report is available now, and she urged them to examine it in order to understand the project's realities.

Suzanne Lyons, who will take her council seat next month after receiving the most votes in this month's City Council election, said she had several questions about Cristallago. She said she thought the sewer system Burns said was in close proximity to it was under a cease and desist order. She also said she hasn't seen how the project will pay its own way.

In addition. Lyons questioned who will build the tertiary treatment plant, and asked if the construction jobs would be for local residents or out-of-county union members.

She said she didn't know what Realtors Burns was talking to, but said her understanding is that lakes, not golf courses, are big draw for visitors.

Bruns asked his fellow council members if they wanted to take any action. Councilman Ron Bertsch said he didn't know enough about the project to offer an opinion. Other council members for the most part were silent.

Lyons suggested the council should take more time before doing anything.

Councilman Roy Parmentier, spotting Lakeport Fire Chief Ken Wells in the room, asked if he had any input on the project.

Wells said he's toured the project area with one of the developers and sat in on a few meetings about it, but hasn't yet reviewed the environmental impact report.

“Personally I think the tax dollars are there and it could be good for all,” Wells said.

In other council news Tuesday night, the council didn't approve a $5,000 request from the Lakeport Regional Chamber of Commerce to help fund the Dickens Christmas Market, instead opting to reconsider it later during the midyear budget review, citing budget concerns.

The council also didn't approve the chamber request for $500 to pay the volunteers association for the Lakeport Fire Department to put up Christmas decorations, also citing cost. City Public Works Director Doug Grider and Wells offered to work together to find volunteers to do the work for free.

In a brief public hearing, the council approved an amendment to the city's contract with CalPERS to add a “golden handshake” early retirement option. It also approved a contract change order for adding six memorial plaques to the Third Street Improvement Project; approved a resolution prohibiting utility companies from opening, cutting or excavating in the newly paved sections of Third Street from the east side of Main Street to the east side of Park Street for a period of five years; approved the Lakewood Knolls tentative subdivision map; and received a long-awaited draft of new city personnel rules crafted by City Attorney Steve Brookes.

E-mail Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

{mos_sb_discuss:3}

The funding, to be distributed by the California Housing and Community Development Department (HCD), is part of a $3.9 billion allocation by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which was announced in September as part of the newly formed Neighborhood Stabilization Program.

Congress authorized the funds in the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, passed in July.

California has received $529 million from HUD to renovate and rehabilitate foreclosed homes, eliminate blight and help stabilize neighborhoods impacted by the rising tide of foreclosures. The funds will be distributed over the next year and a half.

Clearlake City Administrator Dale Neiman told the Clearlake City Council at its meeting Nov. 13 that the city could be receiving some of that money as part of a noncompetitive application process.

Neiman said the city would be able to sell the properties to qualified buyers, with the money ultimately being returned to the state. He added that the funds would help cover city staff time to work on the program.

Lakeport Redevelopment Manager Richard Knoll told Lake County News that the city is waiting to see if it will be eligible for the program. If it is, they'll then need to evaluate if they should apply.

“It could be beneficial to the community,” he said.

Counties also are available for the funding, according to HCD.

HCD spokesperson Jennifer Sweeney said that numerous communities – among them major metropolitan areas hit hard by foreclosures – received direct allocations from HUD.

On Friday, HCD finalized its action plan for how the money will be spent.

“The process is pretty rigid,” said Sweeney.

HCD will administer $145 million to local jurisdictions who do not get money directly from HUD. The state on Friday issued breakdowns of which communities are available for joint or cumulative allocations totaling of $77.8 million or direct allocations of $28 million.

That totals just over $105 million, with another $40 million yet undetermined for local jurisdictions such as Clearlake, Lakeport or even the county.

Eligibility for the funding will be based on the greatest percentage of home foreclosures, the greatest percentage of homes financed by a subprime mortgage-related loan, and the likelihood of facing a a significant rise in the rate of home foreclosure, according to HCD.

With Lake County currently ranked No. 12 among California's 58 counties for foreclosure activity – it also recorded a 3,500-percent increase in foreclosures from September 2007 to September 2008 – it's likely local jurisdictions will receive consideration.

Of all areas in the county, the city of Clearlake appears to lead in foreclosure activity currently.

Foreclosure Listings Nationwide, an online service, currently lists 47 properties in Clearlake going through some kind of foreclosure activity, with another 50 in preforeclosure status.

In Lakeport, the numbers are lower – with 18 homes in active foreclosure status and 25 in preforeclosure.

In the Hidden Valley Lake community, 32 homes are in foreclosure with 49 in preforeclosure, while in Kelseyville, there are 32 homes in foreclosure and 25 in preforeclosure, according to Foreclosure Listings Nationwide.

Sweeney said there will be a 15-day public comment period on the state's action plan, which must then be submitted to HUD by Dec. 1.

At that point, HCD will release its notice of available funding with an application. It will be well into December before local jurisdictions will know how much money they're eligible for, Sweeney added.

E-mail Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

{mos_sb_discuss:2}

The meeting will be held beginning at 9 a.m. Tuesday at the board chambers in the Lake County Courthouse, 255 N. Forbes St. TV 8, the PEG Channel, will broadcast the meeting live.

The GE ban discussion is scheduled for 1:30 p.m.

The board approved a version of the ban in a 3-2 vote on Oct. 21. However, when the ordinance came up for a second reading on Nov. 4, issues were raised by the Lake County Farm Bureau with a perceived conflict between the ban's wording and the state right to farm ordinance.

On Tuesday, the board will look at three proposed options crafted by County Counsel Anita Grant.

The first option will be the version of the ordinance accepted Oct. 21. In the second option, any pre-existing agricultural operation that has been growing a GE crop for one year or more will be exempted, but the crop cannot be expanded or altered, and the grower must apply to the county agricultural commissioner within 30 days of the ordinance's effective date.

The third option includes the same language as option two, but adds a limited exemption for a GE crop already being grown, allowing it to continue being produced for a period of time that has not yet been specified. Continued operation beyond that cessation date will be considered a violation of the ordinance, and could be subject to fines, abatement and other enforcement.

During the morning session, at 10:30 a.m., the board will hear an appeal by Milton and Ellen Heath of the Planning Commission's approval of Kurt Steil and Gary Johnson's Bonavita Estates, which includes an 11-acre ski lake at 16756 and 17350 Butts Canyon Road, Middletown.

The plan proposes merging and resubdividing two parcels totaling 534 acres into five parcels, a deviation to construct a dead-end road longer than 1,000 feet and use permit for construction of an 11-acre ski lake and hosting special events, and adopting a mitigated negative declaration based on

initial study.

A letter from the Heaths appealing the Planning Commission's Sept. 11 decision said their appeal is “entirely based” on inaccuracies in hydrologist Matt O'Connor's report, which included data that is “insufficient and is half a century old.”

The Heaths also assert in their letter that the Planning Commission's decision “completely ignores” more than one potentially significant impact – “from gas emissions, and contaminants from the ski boats that could potentially percolate down into the aquifer and consequently impact drinking water for thousands of residents.”

They also cite concerns about the Colloyomi Fault, which they say could cause a disaster if it was disturbed by stresses from the ski lake; concern about groundwater and dry wells in the area; and vector control.

Other items on the Tuesday agenda include the following.

Timed items:

9:15 a.m. ‒ Request for update on status of request for proposals for the implementation of quagga/zebra mussel inspection sites at key entry points to Lake County and other efforts to prevent

the quagga/zebra mussel from invading Lake County waters.

10 a.m. ‒ Presentation by Lakeside Wellness Foundation on the Mobile Foundation Health Services Unit Project and consideration of board direction relative to pursuit of potential funding sources to

support project.

Untimed items:

‒ Consideration of proposed agreement between the county of Lake and the Lakeport Regional Chamber of Commerce for marketing, economic development and visitor information services.

‒ Proposed resolution accepting and confirming ballot tabulation for the establishment of Zone “P” (Clear Lake Keys) of County Service Area No. 23, approving formation of Zone “P” and

assessments for Zone “P” road maintenance.

Following the public portion of the meeting, the board will go into closed session to discuss labor negotiations with employee unions representing county employees and In-Home Supportive Services workers; a performance evaluation of County Counsel Anita Grant; and conference with legal counsel regarding existing litigation, Woll v. County of Lake.

E-mail Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

{mos_sb_discuss:3}

The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. at Lakeport City Hall, 225 Park St.

Under City Council communications, the council will receive information on the proposed Cristallago subdivision, and may take possible action on it.

Although the reports with this week's agenda don't specify what that action may be, it could include offering comments on the subdivision's draft environmental impact report, which is now in its 45-day public comment period, which ends Dec. 29.

The project proposes a mixed-use community consisting of 650 single family residential units, 325 resort units, 18-hole “Jack Nicklaus Signature” golf course, 25,000-square-foot clubhouse, community activity center, vista spa, restaurant, conference facility, and nature preserve. It also would include maintaining 576 acres of open space, of which 366 acres is proposed to be dedicated in perpetuity as a nature preserve.

Cristallago would not be within the Lakeport city limits; the site is located two and a half miles north of the city.

The Lake County Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Cristallago's draft environmental impact report on Dec. 11 at 11 a.m.

Also on Tuesday, the council will hold a public hearing on Ordinance No. 877, which would authorize an amendment to the contract between the city and the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System.

The amendment will add the provision to offer a “golden handshake” early retirement incentive of two years additional service credit to a retiring member because of an impending mandatory transfer, demotion or layoff, according to a report from Financial Director Janet Tavernier.

Convening jointly as the council and the Lakeport Redevelopment Agency, they will consider two contract change orders, and approve the notice of completion for the Third Street Improvement Project and authorize the mayor to sign it and the City Clerk to record it.

Under council business, City Engineer Scott Harter will take to the council a resolution providing for the paving of Third Street from the east side of Main Street to the east side of Park Street and the paving of the alley between Second and Third Streets adjacent to 225 Park St.; and prohibiting opening, cuts or excavations in these paved sections of street for a period of five years.

Planning Services Manager Andrew Britton will present the council with the Lakewood Knolls Subdivision map, which the council will consider approving. Kevin Carinalli of Santa Rosa-based CarCo is proposing to create 28 lots out of two parcels totaling approximately 6.41 acres at 1296 and 1320 Craig Ave.

The council also will considering adopting personnel rules presented by City Attorney Steve Brookes.

Other items on the council's Tuesday agenda will include:

‒ A proclamation commemorating the Redwood Empire Foster Grandparent Program on their 35th anniversary.

‒ Application for Victory Man Racing for a triathlon on Sept. 18, 19, and 20, 2009.

‒ No Name Car Club's application for its annual car show on June 5 and 6, 2009.

‒ Lakeport Regional Chamber of Commerce's request for the Dickens Christmas Market in the amount of $5,000.

‒ Consider request for funding from the Lakeport Regional Chamber of Commerce for putting up and removing the City Christmas decorations in the amount of $500.

The council also will hold a closed session to discuss negotiations with the Lakeport Employees Association and Lakeport Police Officers Association.

E-mail Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

{mos_sb_discuss:3}