In a special meeting held at 4 p.m. at City Hall, the council authorized a resolution to allow Mayor Roy Parmentier to sign the escrow documents to sell the center, according to City Attorney Steve Brookes.

The center, located on Lakeport Boulevard near the highway, is being sold to Matt Riveras, 43, of Windsor,

Riveras, the son-in-law of Councilman Buzz Bruns, is purchasing the shopping center land for $1,001,000.

As part of the purchase Riveras will be able to collect rent on the shopping center's lease, which Meridian Investments of Oakland is scheduled to hold for another 21 years. At Wednesday's meeting the council approved assignment of the lease to Riveras and Donica LLC, Brookes said.

With Parmentier given the OK to sign the escrow documents, Brookes said he expects escrow to close Thursday afternoon, a day ahead of the council's Oct. 26 deadline.

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 5-0 vote took place after a brief discussion among board members and no community input.

The board initially adopted the ordinance in the wake of concerns raised by Upper Lake resident Cheryl Little Deer and other community members about a US Cellular tower to be erected near Upper Lake along Highway 20.

Little Deer filed an appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of the US Cellular tower. The Board of Supervisors denied the appeal at its July 25 meeting but responded by imposing the temporary moratorium on the same day.

On Sept. 11 the board extended the ordinance to Oct. 26.

The ordinance calls for extending the temporary moratorium from Oct. 26 until March 26, 2008. During that time, no applications to construct, modify or place wireless communications facilities will be approved unless those applications were deemed complete by Sept. 11 or are necessary for public safety or homeland security purposes, and are installed and operated by authorized federal, state or local public safety agencies.

County Counsel Anita Grant told Lake County News Tuesday afternoon that the moratorium extension will allow the Community Development Department extra time to get a draft of an zoning ordinance to the board.

Grant added that moratoriums should never exist longer than is necessary.

That updated zoning ordinance is to be amended to address citizens' concerns about the impacts of wireless communications facilities, according to the moratorium's language.

Some of the issues the board wants added to the zoning ordinance include determining if adequate coverage exists in an area before approving a new facility; the level of analysis of feasible and environmentally superior project alternatives; methods to ensure compliance with federal radio frequency and emissions standards; setback requirements; sufficiency of design plans; and proposed projects' aesthetic impacts.

Grant said Community Development may have identified other considerations that the updated zoning ordinance should include.

Grant said the revised zoning ordinance is expected to go to the board on Nov. 20, at which time they are expected to pass a resolution of intent.

That will set in motion a hearing before the Lake County Planning Commission, after which the zoning ordinance will return to the board in final ordinance form, where community members will again have the opportunity to address it.

Those applications for cell towers and other wireless facilities already in the pipeline will be honored according to the temporary moratorium, Grant pointed out.

As she researched the moratorium, Grant said she noticed other model telecommunications ordinances are cropping up in other communities around the country.

However, those ordinances are limited in what they can consider, said Grant.

“Issues that go to the radio emissions are preempted by federal law,” she explained. “We can take steps to ensure compliance, we can't change those standards.”

A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit Court took a hard look at a telecommunications ordinance established in San Diego County, said Grant.

The Ninth Circuit, which Grant said is “generally very friendly toward these types of ordinances,” ruled that the San Diego ordinance was too general, and included general aesthetic standards which weren't specific enough.

The court opinion stated that the state and local regulations can't “have the effect of prohibiting the ability of any entity to provide any interstate or intrastate telecommunications service.”

The decision, which may be appealed to the Supreme Court, was a major victory for cell phone companies from a court not known for many pro-business decisions, said Grant.

“This is a real lesson for what's going to pass muster,” Grant 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}

In August, the City Council began negotiations for the sale of the center, located on Lakeport Boulevard near Highway 29, with Matt Riveras, 43, a Windsor developer who is the son-in-law of City Councilman Buzz Bruns.

The sale is for the land underneath the center. Meridian Investments of Oakland holds the lease on the center's buildings.

In a closed session following its Sept. 18 meeting, the council decided to sell the shopping center to Riveras, who offered the city $1,001,000 for the property.

The special meeting scheduled for Wednesday afternoon is to adopt Resolution No. 2307 (2007), authorizing the shopping center sale and authorizing Mayor Roy Parmentier to execute escrow documents.

As part of the meeting, the council also will approve assignment of Vista Point ground lease to Riveras and Donica LLC.

The meeting will take place at 4 p.m. in the council chambers conference room at Lakeport City Hall, Lakeport City Hall, 225 Park St.

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

{mos_sb_discuss:3}

Farrington, 37, was injured Sept. 23 when his dirt bike collided with a pickup at the Cow Mountain off-highway recreation area, as Lake County News previously reported.

On Tuesday, Farrington – who usually dresses in suit and tie for the meetings – was without jacket and tie, instead sporting a sling on his right arm and a cast on his left wrist and arm.

Besides looking a bit thinner and more pale, Farrington appeared to be on the mend.

He thanked everyone for helping speed his recovery through their support, which included e-mails and other get well messages.

“It was actually overwhelming,” he said. “My heart was touched.”

He added, “It definitely helped me in terms of wanting to get back into the swing of things.”

Farrington's first meeting back lasted into early afternoon, and was shorter by far than recent meetings held during his absence.

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

{mos_sb_discuss:3}

LEAD AGENCY: City of Lakeport

                  Community Development Department

                  225 Park Street, Lakeport, CA  95453  

PROJECT TITLE: CARL FRED BLOWER 

PROJECT LOCATION:    601 N. Forbes St, Lakeport  APN:  25-234-02 

PROJECT DESCRIPTION:  A Zone Change of a portion of the property from R-3 High Density Residential to PO Professional Office, Architectural and Design Review, and an Environmental Review of the project. 

The project is not listed on the Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List as set forth in Government Code Section 65962.5. 

FINDINGS / DETERMINATION:  The City has reviewed and considered the proposed project and has determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, with substantial supporting evidence provided in the Initial Study.  The City hereby prepares and proposes to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project. 

PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD:  A 20-day public review period for the Mitigated Negative Declaration will commence on October 19, 2007, and end on November 7, 2007, for interested and concerned individuals and public agencies to submit written comments on the document.  Any written comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration must be received within the public review period.  Copies of the Mitigated Negative Declaration are available for review at City Hall, 225 Park Street, Lakeport.   

PUBLIC HEARING / MEETING:  The Planning Commission of the City of Lakeport will hold a public hearing to consider these applications, the Initial Study, and the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact on Wednesday, November 14, 2007, at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers of City Hall, located at 225 Park Street, at which time and place all interested persons may appear and be heard.  If you have questions or comments, please call the Lakeport Community Development Department at 707-263-5613.  A copy of the Initial Study is available for review at Lakeport City Hall. 

Assemblymember Patty Berg, who represents Lake County in the Assembly, called the hearing, and informed Board Chair Jeff Smith on Oct. 9 that it was scheduled for Tuesday, as Lake County News previously reported.

With a full agenda, and with Supervisor Anthony Farrington still recovering at home from a motorcycle accident that took place late last month, the Board of Supervisors voted Tuesday morning to send Social Services Director Carol Huchingson Sacramento to testify on the board's behalf.

Supervisor Rob Brown was the lone dissenter in the 3-1 vote, saying that he felt the entire board should attend.

Brown contended that the timing of the hearing was not an accident. He said of Berg, “If she was serious about our involvement and input it would have been scheduled for another day.”

Supervisor Denise Rushing said she had spoken with Berg about the hearing, and that the timing was based on the calendars of legislative staff, not Berg's.

She also reported that Berg had told her, “You've opened a can of worms” with the two-tier proposal, which would pay IHSS providers an extra $1 per hour over their current minimum wage if they underwent drug testing, background checks and first aid training.

Rushing said she felt it was a mistake for the board or at least one member not to go to the hearing. “I would hate to not have all sides heard by the choice of this board.”

Brown said the board had agreed two weeks ago to go as a body, and that they should all go together or not go at all.

The board considered sending one of its members but couldn't agree on which one.

“If we want to be passionate and confrontational, we send Supervisor Brown,” said Rushing. If they wanted to reach out, they should send Robey, she added.

Brown said that, with no disrespect intended, that Rushing shouldn't go because “she does not share the same passion at this time as we do on this particular issue.”

Eventually, they settled on sending Huchingson, who carried a five-page position statement signed by all four board members at Tuesday's meeting, along with exhibits and attachments, to the hearing.

County Counsel Anita Grant advised Huchingson to simply read the position statement into the record and avoid making policy statements that are the board's responsibility.

With Huchingson, the board also sent the request that Berg's Health and Human Services Subcommittee No. 1 expand the hearing to allow the board – with a recovered Farrington – to appear at a later time to give its testimony.

“This is a big, big issue, and to restrict it to just the folks they've invited to this hearing is not going to give them adequate knowledge of the scope and breadth of this issue, if that's what they really want,” said Robey.

HEARING FEATURES VARIETY OF STAKEHOLDERS

Berg introduced the 1:30 p.m. hearing by saying, “I believe that good policy warrants and requires public discussion and airing.”

The hearing included four panels, beginning with state and legislative staffers, and Carol Zabin, Ph.D., a UC Berkeley labor economist.

Zabin said that many important health care areas – such as caring for the children, the elderly and the disabled – feature low paid workers. She discussed the importance of controlling turnover for through higher wages and benefits, which translates into better care, a larger employee pool and job satisfaction.

Eva Lopez, deputy director of Adult Programs for the California Department of Social Services, confirmed to the Assembly subcommittee that Lake County did request clearance to pursue the two-tier system.

In order to carry out the proposal, Lopez said the county would need to go through a “labor intensive process” to make sure the drug testing, training and background checks requirements were met.

Los Angeles County, she said, is the only county so far with a two-tier IHSS pay system, but it's different in that it applies to backup providers in emergency situations.

She said the state Department of Social Service determined the county could require drug testing, although the state agency doesn't require it. The issue of drug testing is a county by county issue that depends on each county's specific labor negotiations, she added.

Four other counties – Inyo, Riverside, Sacramento and Yolo – require drug and alcohol screening before workers can be included in a registry, but they don't offer different wages, said Lopez.

Lopez said the state Department of Social Services has asked Lake County to submit additional information on its proposal in order to complete a full review.

During her 15 minutes of testimony, Huchingson told the subcommittee, “Our board feels very strongly about our proposal,” and urged them to continue the process so all board members can be heard and more stakeholders could comment on the proposal.

Sticking carefully to the position statement, Huchingson emphasized four points: that the hearing was premature pending the outcome of the state's approval process; that the issue merited more input and consideration that just one hearing could provide; the hearing could interfere with ongoing negotiations between the Lake County Public Authority and the IHSS union, California United Homecare Workers; and that the proposal was meant to give IHSS recipients the chance to make informed choices and ensure a pool of reliable, capable providers.

Huchingson declined to answer many of the questions subcommittee members asked her, saying she deferred to the county's supervisors.

When Berg asked about the status of negotiations, Huchingson would only say that they were “ongoing.”

Berg said she thought it would have been necessary to submit the two-tier system to collective bargaining with the union before taking it to the state. “I'm confused,” said Berg.

Huchingson reported that, for August 2007, there were 1,611 paid IHSS providers and 1,561 authorized recipients. She said the county's current IHSS registry has 307 workers listed, of which 146 are active and 161 are on hold because they are not seeking more work.

PROPOSAL DRAWS HARSH CRITICISM

On the third panel, Deborah Doctor, policy advocate for Protection and Advocacy Inc., said the two-tier proposal offers no evidence of increased safety for clients, it diminishes statutory rights and punishes consumers for their choices. She suggested it came down to the county attempting to save money.

Doctor said her sister, who lives in another state, provides IHSS-type care for their mother. If her sister lived in Lake County, she said, “she would have to pee in a cup for the privilege” of caring for her mother, which Doctor said was “appalling.”

Sitting on the same panel as Doctor, Janie Whiteford, president of the California IHSS Consumer Alliance and Santa Clara County Advisory Board member, called the proposal “inherently wrong” and demeaning to consumers.

Also speaking was Lake County resident Nancy Krook, an IHSS recipient who employs her daughter, Laurel Elliot.

“My daughter put her life on hold two years ago and came to help me out,” said Krook, adding that she often needs 24-hour care.

“The county should not be making judgments where they are not welcome or needed,” she said. “I can't help but feel that the caregivers are being discriminated against.”

IHSS allows Krook to stay in her dream home, but she fears that's in jeopardy because her daughter may have to move on in order to make a living and have a life.

The final panel featured Tyrone Freeman, president of California United Homecare Workers.

He said there is no agreement between the union and the county to prevent discussion of what is going on in negotiations, contradicting Huchingson's earlier statement.

Freeman said he was there to address the dangerous precedent – especially for consumers – that the two-tier system represented. He added, however that protections should exist, which is why the union supported AB 868, which requires that IHSS providers undergo criminal background checks.

He said Lake County's “misguided” proposal offers no additional protections for consumers.

Freeman, who is black, said the two-tier system created a second-class citizenship situation like the Jim Crow laws that his grandparents fought during the Civil Rights Era.

Doug Moore, vice chair of the California Home Care Council, echoed Freeman's concerns, saying Lake County is attempting to undermine a fundamental consumer right.

Moore suggested Lake County's proposal was meant to avoid paying reasonable wages; he added that the legislature should make the county increase wages to its IHSS workers.

Lake County resident Laurel Elliot, who provides IHSS care to her other, said she believes the proposal is the county's effort to control the system.

“They're not looking at what's best for the provider,” she said. “They're not looking at what's best for the consumer.”

Minimum wage is not a livable wage, she said, and a livable wage is in everyone's best interests.

The subcommittee also welcomed public comment from residents from around the state. Overwhelmingly, those who spoke opposed the proposal.

Assemblyman Jim Beall (D-San Jose), a subcommittee member, said at the end of the hearing that he wanted to hear from the Lake County Board of Supervisors on the issue.

He pointed to increasing administrative costs for IHSS and concerns about insurance. “Ultimately we want to see everyone have health care and some kind of benefits.”

The hearing adjourned shortly before 4 p.m., about five minutes before the Board of Supervisors' open session ended for the day.

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

{mos_sb_discuss:2}