Docstoc

AGENDA

Document Sample
AGENDA Powered By Docstoc
					                                                 AGENDA
                        BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF MONO
                                 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
          Regular Meetings: The First,                                               County Courthouse,
          Second, And Third Tuesday of                                              Bridgeport, CA 93517
          each month                           Regular Meeting

                                            September 15, 2009


NOTE: In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (760) 932-5534. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will
enable the County to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (See 42 USCS 12132,
28CFR 35.130).

Full agenda packets are available for the public to review in the Office of the Clerk of the Board (Annex I - 74 North
School Street, Bridgeport, CA 93517), and in the County Offices located in Minaret Mall, 2nd Floor (437 Old
Mammoth Road, Mammoth Lakes CA 93546). Any writing distributed less than 72 hours prior to the meeting will be
available for public inspection in the Office of the Clerk of the Board (Annex I - 74 North School Street, Bridgeport,
CA 93517). ON THE WEB: You can view the upcoming agenda at www.monocounty.ca.gov. If you would like to
receive an automatic copy of this agenda by email, please send your request to Lynda Roberts, Clerk of the Board :
lroberts@mono.ca.gov.

9:00 AM           Call meeting to Order

                  Pledge of Allegiance

                  OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE BOARD on items of public interest that
                  are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Board. (Speakers may be limited in speaking time
                  dependent upon the press of business and number of persons wishing to address the Board.)

                  BOARD MEMBER REPORTS

                  The Board may, if time permits, take Board Reports at any time during the meeting and not at a
                  specific time.

                  UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED BY TIME, ITEMS SCHEDULED FOR EITHER THE
                  MORNING OR AFTERNOON SESSIONS WILL BE HEARD ACCORDING TO AVAILABLE
                  TIME AND PRESENCE OF INTERESTED PERSONS. PUBLIC MAY COMMENT ON AGENDA
                  ITEMS AT THE TIME THE ITEM IS HEARD.
Approximately 10 COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE
Minutes

1)                CAO Report regarding Board Assignments (David Wilbrecht)
                  RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive brief oral report by County AdministrativeOfficer (CAO)
                  regarding his activities.

2)                APPROVAL OF MINUTES

                  A. Approve minutes of the Regular Meeting held September 1, 2009.
                   B. Approve minutes of the Special Meetings held August 24, 25, 26, 2009.
 Approximately     CLOSED SESSION
 thru 10:00 a.m.

                   COUNTY COUNSEL

3a)                Closed Session - CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION.
                   Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Government Code section 54956.9. Number of
                   potential cases: one.

                   COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE

4a)                Human Resources - CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS. Government Code Section
                   54957.6. Agency designated representative(s): Dave Wilbrecht, Marshall Rudolph, Mary Booher,
                   and Rita Sherman. Unrepresented employee(s): Finance Director.

4b)                Human Resources - CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS. Government Code Section
                   54957.6. Agency designated representative(s): Dave Wilbrecht, Marshall Rudolph, Brian Muir,
                   Mary Booher, and Rita Sherman. Unrepresented employee(s): Social Services Director.

4c)                Human Resources - CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS. Government Code Section
                   54957.6. Agency designated representative(s): Dave Wilbrecht, Marshall Rudolph, Brian Muir,
                   Mary Booher, and Rita Sherman. Unrepresented employee(s): Assistant Finance Director
                   (Treasurer-Tax Collector's Office).

4d)                Human Resources - CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS. Government Code Section
                   54957.6. Agency designated representative(s): Dave Wilbrecht, Marshall Rudolph, Brian Muir,
                   Mary Booher, and Rita Sherman. Unrepresented employee(s): Public Health Director.

4e)                Risk Management - CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION.
                   Subdivision (a) of Government Code section 54956.9. Name of case: Worker’s compensation
                   claim of John Aronson.

10:00 a.m.         DEPARTMENT REPORTS/EMERGING ISSUES
Approximately 15 (PLEASE LIMIT COMMENTS TO FIVE MINUTES EACH)
minutes

Approximately 5                                           CONSENT AGENDA
minutes for
Consent Items
                                     (All matters on the consent agenda are to be approved on one motion
                                      unless a board member requests separate action on a specific item.)

                   COUNTY COUNSEL

                   Additional Departments: Public Works
5a)                Grading Ordinance Amendment - Adopt proposed ordinance amending certain sections of
                   Chapter 13.08 of the Mono County Code pertaining to land clearing, earthwork, and drainage
                   facilities.

                   Recommended Action: Adopt proposed ordinance.

                   Fiscal Impact: None.

                                                          REGULAR AGENDA
                   CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED
                   (INFORMATIONAL)
                   All items listed are available for review and are located in the Office of the Clerk of the Board

                   CLERK-RECORDER

6a)                Courthouse Cannon - Email letter addressed to the Board of Supervisors regarding the historic
                   Mono County Courthouse cannon.
             **********************************

             FINANCE

             Additional Departments: County Counsel
7a)          Ordinance Amending Board of Supervisors’ Compensation (Brian Muir) - Consider and
             potentially introduce, read title, and waive further reading of ordinance amending sections
5 minutes    2.04.030 and 2.04.070 of the Mono County Code pertaining to compensation of the Board of
             Supervisors. Provide any desired direction to staff.

             Recommended Action: Introduce, read title, and waive further reading of proposed ordinance.
             Direct Clerk to schedule ordinance for adoption at the Board's next regular meeting.

             Fiscal Impact: FY 09/10 $11,270

             COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE

             Additional Departments: Public Health
8a)          Human Resources (Mary Booher and Rita Sherman) - Consider and potentially adopt proposed
             resolution rescinding the recent elimination of one position in the Public Health Department and
5 minutes    rescinding the layoff of one employee who currently fills that position. Receive staff report.
             Provide any desired direction to staff.

             Recommended Action: Adopt proposed resolution.

             Fiscal Impact: The additional Emergency Preparedness funds of $106,000 will cover the cost of
             this position, which is approximately $85,000.

8b)          Human Resources-vacancy review (Mary Booher, Rita Sherman) - Receive presentation by
             Mary Booher and Rita Sherman regarding current position vacancies. Provide any desired
15 minutes   direction to staff.

             Recommended Action: Provide any desired direction to staff.

             Fiscal Impact: These vacancies represent a savings of approximately $284,000 in fiscal year
             2009/10 to-date. Of this amount, approximately $68,000 is non-general fund.

             BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

9a)          Williamson Act Subventions (Board of Supervisors) - Proposed letter addressed to Governor
             Schwarzenegger supporting the Williamson Act subventions.
10 minutes

             Recommended Action: Approve proposed letter to Governor Schwarzenegger requesting the
             restoration of Open Space Subvention funding in the 2010-11 State Budget.

             Fiscal Impact: None.

9b)          State Budget (Board Members) - The Board of Supervisors may discuss issues pertaining to the
             California State budget.
10 minutes

             Recommended Action: Discuss issues if necessary; provide staff direction if so desired.

             Fiscal Impact: None.

9c)          Carbon Cap and Trade Program (Supervisor Bauer) - The Board will discuss and consider
             adopting R09-__ "A resolution of the Board of Supervisors of Mono County opposing new taxes
10 minutes   on state or local governments, employers or households through federal climate revenues
             collection". Supervisor Bauer asked to have this item agendized.

             Recommended Action: Potentially adopt proposed resolution.

             Fiscal Impact: None.
             PUBLIC WORKS

             Additional Departments: Community Development
10a)         PUBLIC HEARING--Bryant Field Airport Use Permit (Kelly Garcia, Assistant Public Works
             Director; Allen Berrey, Assistant County Counsel) - Consideration of application of Aerohaus
11:00 AM     LLC for an Airport Use Permit allowing it direct access to Bryant Field from nine aircraft hangars
30 minutes   that Aerohaus proposes to install on its private property adjacent to Bryant Field (commonly
             referred to as a "through-the-fence" arrangment). Provide any desired direction to staff.

             Recommended Action: It is recommended that the Board: 1) Receive staff report regarding:
             a) Aerohaus LLC's application for an Airport Use Permit (AUP) allowing it to access Bryant Field
             Airport directly from its property adjacent to the Airport; b) the associated Community
             Development Director's (CDD) Review 09-01 authorizing Aerohaus to construct nine aircraft
             hangars on its property adjacent to Bryant Field; and c) the Environmental Analysis concerning
             the AUP prepared by Community Development. 2) Designate the Land Development Technical
             Advisory Committee (LDTAC) as the Bryant Field Airport Advisory Board for purposes of this
             Airport Use Permit application; 3) Conduct a public hearing on LDTAC's recommendation that the
             Board find its consideration of the AUP is exempt from further CEQA review under Section 15183
             of the CEQA Guidelines; 4) Based on the recommendations of staff and the LDTAC, acting as
             the Bryant Field Airport Advisory Board, either: a) approve, with such conditions as the Board
             deems appropriate, Aerohaus's application for an Airport Use Permit, and establish an Airport
             Access Fee to be paid by Aerohaus in connection with that Permit; or b) deny that application. 5)
             If the Board approves the application, make findings as to whether the Board's decision to issue
             the Airport Use Permit, is exempt from further CEQA review under CEQA Guideline 15183
             (projects consistent with development density of General Plan for which an EIR was certified if
             feasible mitigation measures are undertaken); 6) If the Board approves the Application,
             establishes an Airport Access Fee, and makes a CEQA finding, etc., adopt a resolution
             memorializing those actions and directing County Counsel to draft an AUP for final consideration
             by the Board at a later meeting; 7) Provide any desired direction to staff.

             Fiscal Impact: Potential annual revenue from Airport Access Fees of $1200-$2700, depending
             on the rate at which the hangars are built and leased; these fees would go to the Airport
             Enterprise Fund.

             COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - BUILDING DIVISION

             Additional Departments: County Counsel
11a)         Construction Board of Appeals - Members Appointments (Rick McManis) - Receive presentation
             by County Building Official Rick McManis regarding appointment of Mono County Construction
20 minutes   Appeals Board. Consider the submitted list of Mono County residents in the staff report and
             provide any desired direction to staff.

             Recommended Action: Choose Construction Board of Appeals appointees from a list of
             qualified Mono County residents in the attached staff report.

             Fiscal Impact: Future consideration of reimbursements to the appointed Construction Board of
             Appeals members will be presented to the Board of Supervisors for any additional
             recommendations.

             ********
             LUNCH
             ********

             OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE BOARD on items of public interest that
             are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Board. (Speakers may be limited in speaking time
             dependent upon the press of business and number of persons wishing to address the Board.)

             PUBLIC WORKS

12a)         Bid Award for Roof Replacement at the Sheriff's Office and Jail Facility (Kelly Garcia) - Receive
             staff report concerning bids received in response to solicitation for bids, bid protests received (if
10 minutes   any), and responsibility of the apparent low bidder for the Roof Replacement at the Sheriff’s
             Office and Jail Facility. Consider and potentially authorize the Public Works Director to enter into
             and administer an agreement for the work. Provide any desired direction to staff.

             Recommended Action: Based on staff report concerning bids received in response to
             solicitation for bids, bid protests received (if any), and responsibility of the apparent low bidder: 1)
             identify __ as responsible bidder submitting the lowest bid; 2) award contract to __for Roof
             Replacement at the Sheriff’s Office and Jail Facility, in an amount not to exceed $__; 3)
             authorize the Public Works Director, in consultation with County Counsel, to administer that
             contract, including making minor amendments to said contract from time to time as the Public
             Works Director may deem necessary, and authority to approve and issue change orders to the
             contract in accordance with Public Contract Code §20142, in a cumulative amount not to exceed
             $__, provided such amendments do not substantially alter the scope of work and are approved
             as to form and legality by County Counsel.

             Fiscal Impact: Estimated $471,000 from allocated Capital Improvement funding.

12b)         Contract Award for the Swall Meadows Streets Rehabilitation Project (Garrett Higerd) - Receive
             staff report concerning bids received in response to solicitation for bids, bid protests received (if
10 minutes   any), and responsibility of the apparent low bidder for the Rehabilitation of Swall Meadows
             Streets. Consider and potentially authorize the Public Works Director to enter into and administer
             an agreement for the work. Provide any desired direction to staff.

             Recommended Action: Based on staff report concerning bids received in response to
             solicitation for bids, bid protests received (if any), and responsibility of the apparent low bidder: 1)
             identify __ as responsible bidder submitting the lowest bid; 2) award contract to __ for
             Rehabilitation of the Swall Meadows Streets, in an amount not to exceed $__; 3) authorize the
             Public Works Director, in consultation with County Counsel, to administer that contract, including
             making minor amendments to said contract from time to time as the Public Works Director may
             deem necessary, and authority to approve and issue change orders to the contract in accordance
             with Public Contract Code §20142, in a cumulative amount not to exceed $__, provided such
             amendments do not substantially alter the scope of work and are approved as to form and
             legality by County Counsel.

             Fiscal Impact: $1.28 million of Proposition 1B funds.

             HEALTH DEPARTMENT

             Additional Departments: County Counsel
13a)         Ratification of Local Health Emergency (Dr. Richard Johnson, County Health Officer) -
              Proposed Resolution Ratifying a Declaration of Local Health Emergency and Continuing State of
5 minutes    Local Health Emergency.

             Recommended Action: Consider and potentially adopt proposed resolution.

             Fiscal Impact: None.

             FINANCE

14a)         PUBLIC HEARING: County Budget Fiscal Year 2009-2010 (Brian Muir) - Receive staff report.
             Conduct public hearing regarding fiscal year 2009-2010 County budget. Consider resolution
1:30 pm      adopting final Mono County budget for fiscal year 2009-2010. The 2009-2010 Proposed Final
20 minutes   Budget is available on the Auditor-Controller's website at:
             http://www.monocounty.ca.gov/departments/auditor/auditor.html

             Recommended Action: Adopt proposed resolution.

             Fiscal Impact: $73.7 million before contingency appropriations.

             ADJOURNMENT

                                                             §§§§§
        OFFICE OF THE CLERK
        OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                        REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                          Print




MEETING DATE         September 15, 2009                    DEPARTMENT             Clerk of the Board
ADDITIONAL
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED                                              PERSONS
                                                           APPEARING
SUBJECT              Minutes of Regular Board Meeting      BEFORE THE
                                                           BOARD


                                         AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
               (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

                        A. Approve minutes of the Regular Meeting held September 1, 2009.


RECOMMENDED ACTION:

FISCAL IMPACT:

CONTACT NAME: Linda Romero
PHONE/EMAIL: 760-932-5534 / lromero@mono.ca.gov

     SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                     SEND COPIES TO:
        ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
          THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
       PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
   32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
g YES g NO
f
e
d
b
c     d
      c
      f
      e


ATTACHMENTS:
Click to download
    Sept 1 2009 Draft Minutes



 History
 Time                                   Who                                      Approval
9/9/2009 12:56 PM   County Administrative Office   Yes

9/10/2009 9:09 AM   County Counsel                 Yes

9/3/2009 9:19 AM    Finance                        Yes
Draft Minutes

September 1, 2009

Page 1 of 6




                                            DRAFT MINUTES
                            BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF MONO
                                         STATE OF CALIFORNIA
                Regular Meetings: The                         County Courthouse,
                First, Second, And Third     Regular Meeting Bridgeport, CA 93517
                Tuesday of each month
                                           September 1, 2009


                                 Flash Drive               File #1008

                                Minute Orders      M09-201 through M09-204

                                 Resolutions        R09-56 through R09-57

                                  Ordinance           Ord09-03 Not Used

 9:00 AM             Meeting Called to Order by Chairman Bill Reid.
                     Pledge of Allegiance led by Supervisor Byng Hunt.
                     OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE BOARD
                     No One Spoke.
                     BOARD MEMBER REPORTS
                     Supervisor Bauer:
                                                     th
                        1) 8/21 Attended YARTS’ 10 Anniversary meeting.
                        2) Attended Lee Vining Trails Committee meeting.
                        3) The Ball Field has been showing some activity.
                        4) Congressman Buck McKeon was vacationing in Mammoth and I was able to spend
                            some time with him.
                     Supervisor Hazard:
                        1) 8/22 Had dinner with Bob Hauter, from McKeon’s office.
                        2) 8/24-26 County Budget hearings.
                        3) 8/27 Drove to June Lake for the Fisheries Commission meeting but the meeting had
                            been rescheduled.
                        4) 8/27 met with CalTrans representatives regarding windbreaks on old Highway 395.
                        5) Had a phone call with the Governors’ Office regarding EDD services. They will be
                            sending an employee to set up office hours.
                        6) 8/31 Phone conversation with County Counsel, Building, Planning, and property
                            owners from Swall Meadows regarding easement language for the access road.
                     Supervisor Farnetti:
                                                      Note

      These draft meeting minutes have not yet been approved by the Mono County Board of
                                         Supervisors
Draft Minutes

September 1, 2009

Page 2 of 6


                        1) 8/20 Attended the Town County Liaison meeting. Bruce Kenny from Fish and Game
                             Commission gave updates.
                        2) 8/26 Solid Waste Task Force meeting. Discussed gate fees, BP Landfill Closure and
                             cuts in the recycling fund.
                        3) CSAC states assessed property valuation has dropped first time since 1973.
                                                                                  th
                        4) Market Watch publication lists Mono County as the 15 most desirable place.
                        5) State owned classroom modules are for sale from $4,000-$12,000.
                     Supervisor Hunt:
                        1) Attended ESTA board meeting. Topic of discussion was the mission of ESTA.
                        2) Along with representatives of Sierra Nevada Conservancy, we visited fuel reduction
                            project in Mammoth;
                     Supervisor Reid:
                        1) Met with the Bridgeport Indian Reservation representatives. They would like to
                            acquire 40 acres along the highway adjacent to the Reservation. Also looking at other
                            land for the potential of reopening Center in Walker.
                        2) 8/23 Spent the day with the Mammoth Search & Rescue Team.
                        3) 8/27 Spent the morning at the Senior Center in Walker, which happened to be the
                            birthday day celebration of the month.
                        4) 8/27 Visited with Terry Ross in Mammoth regarding Senior Center.
                        5) 8/31 Meeting regarding the Walker River Basin EIS.
                        6) Updated the Board on Cougar Gold’s projects.


                     COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE
                     Dave Wilbrecht:
                        1) Bob Garret, Human Resources, is no longer employed by Mono County. Rita
                           Sherman will be acting HR Director. We are currently reviewing the restructure of HR.
                        2) Any bargaining issue will be handled by Rita.
                        3) Congratulations to the Board on last weeks budget workshops.
                        4) I have received calls from various nonprofit organizations stating they need to relocate
                           their items that are presently stored in the Water District’s property. We are looking
                           into this and pursuing other properties that would work.
                        5) In regards to the Sierra Center Mall, the County has no interest in moving forward at
                           this time. We are moving forward with a sub lease.


 2)                  APPROVAL OF MINUTES
                     Approve minutes from the Regular Meeting held August 11, 2009.
M09-201             Action: Approve Minutes from the Regular Meeting held August 11, 2009.
                    Hazard/Hunt     Farnetti/abstain 4-0

                    Closed Session: 9:02 a.m. through 9:27 a.m.
                    Break: 9:27 a.m.
                    Reconvened: 9:30 a.m.
                    Break: 9:59 a.m.
                    Reconvened: 10:07 a.m.
                    Public Hearing: 11:02 a.m.
                    Adjourned: 11:32 a.m.


                    CLOSED SESSION
                                                        Note

      These draft meeting minutes have not yet been approved by the Mono County Board of
                                         Supervisors
Draft Minutes

September 1, 2009

Page 3 of 6


                    COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE
3a)                 Human Resources - CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS.
                    Government Code Section 54957.6. Agency designated representative(s): Dave
                    Wilbrecht, Marshall Rudolph, Brian Muir, Mary Booher, Jody Henning.
                    Unrepresented employee(s): Appraisal Operations Manager.
                    HUMAN RESOURCES
4a)                 Labor Negotiations - CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS.
                    Government Code Section 54957.6. Agency designated representative(s):
                    David Wilbrecht, Marshall Rudolph, Brian Muir, Ann Gimpel, and Robert Garret.
                    Unrepresented employee(s): Psychiatrist.

                    No report from Closed Session.

                    DEPARTMENT REPORTS/EMERGING ISSUES
                    Kelly Garcia, Assistant Public Works Director:
                        1) Sheriff’s Roof Project has been approved.
                        2) Lee Vining Airport project has potential for being delayed. We did finally get approval
                           from FAA. Granite Construction requests a delay due to the removal of dirt and the
                           possibility of weather coming early.
                    Lynda Roberts, Clerk/Recorder:
                        1) Regular Board Meeting scheduled for 9/8 is very full. Housing Authority is to follow.
                           Board decision was to have the Housing Authority Meeting scheduled for 3:00 p.m.
                           instead of 1:00 p.m.
                        2) Special Board Meeting on 9/15, scheduled for Mammoth Lakes, has no agenda items.
                    Marshall Rudolph, County Counsel:
                        1) Inyo County terminated the Inyo-Mono Fish and Game Advisory Commission. There is
                           not necessarily an impact on Mono County nor any need for Mono County to do
                           something as a result. The Board of Supervisors had already designated the Mono
                           County Fisheries Commission as its fish and wildlife commission for purposes of
                           making recommendations regarding expenditures of money in the fish-and-game fine
                           fund. That resolution remains in effect. And each county’s fine monies are now, and
                           always have been kept by each county, not commingled.
                        2) Litigation involving the grading permit issued to Crowley Mutual Water Company for its
                           water tank was successfully handled by my office. The ruling was against Mr. Payne.
                    Stacey Simon, Assistant County Counsel:
                        1) Updated the Board on Walker River Basin’s impending issues: 2002 federal monies for
                            this Walker River Basin Acquisition Project was $200 million. In 2006, $70 million was
                            directed to the University of Nevada to acquire water in Nevada for Walker Lake. Ken
                            Spooner, Walker River Irrigation District, contacted Supervisor Reid and said that $25
                            million is proposed to be allocated for a pilot program to lease water rights in the
                            Walker River Basin. The legislation appropriating funds for that pilot program also
                            would revise the 2006 appropriation to authorize the use of that $70 million to acquire
                            water and land in California. I am expecting a call from Senator Harry Reid’s office
                            today to discuss the issue. Mono County and the State of California have become
                            aware of these changes only in the last 10 days.
                    Dan Lyster, Economic Development:
                        1) Attended the Scenic Byways conference in Denver. This is a two year organizational
                           project. Federal highway funds have not been released to the State as of yet. U.S.
                           Forest Service paid for my trip and expressed their appreciation on my attendance.

                                                        Note

      These draft meeting minutes have not yet been approved by the Mono County Board of
                                         Supervisors
Draft Minutes

September 1, 2009

Page 4 of 6


                       2) Met with CalTrans regarding the Conway Ranch grant. I feel it was a favorable reaction.
                       3) Cougar Gold has contributed $5000 to hire staff for the Bridgeport Visitors Center. Next
                           year it will be possible to have a four day a week staffing.
                    Lynda Salcido, Public Health Director:
                       1) The WIC program currently is combined with Inyo County. Mono County can contract
                            with WIC independently from Inyo County to obtain more funds.

                                                      CONSENT AGENDA
                    CLERK OF THE BOARD
5a)                 Childhood Cancer Awareness Week - Proclamation recognizing the week of
                    September 6-13, 2009, as Childhood Cancer Awareness Week in Mono
                    County.
M09-202             Action: Adopt Proclamation recognizing the week of September 6-13, 2009, as
                    Childhood Cancer Awareness Week in Mono County.
                    Hazard/Hunt 5-0
                    ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
6a)                 Motor Touring Guide Grant Application - Resolution approving an application for
                    grant funds from the State Recreational Trails Program for the re-printing and
                    distribution of the guide "Motor Touring in the Eastern Sierra, Mono County,
                    CA".
R09-56              Action: Adopt Resolution R09-56 approving the application for grant funds
                    from the State Recreational Trails Program for the re-printing and distribution of
                    the guide “Motor Touring in the Eastern Sierra, Mono County, CA”.
                    Hazard/Hunt 5-0
                                                      REGULAR AGENDA
                    CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED
                    CLERK-RECORDER
7a)                 US Department of the Interior - Response to July 7, 2009, letter related to F.I.M.
                    Corporation's domestic sheep grazing permits.
7b)                 Mammoth Lakes Swim Team - Letter from Greg Bissonette, Treasurer, thanking
                    the County for a $3,000 donation.
                    Supervisor Reid: Reminder notice for new request was sent to wrong address, so the
                    Swim Team will have an opportunity at the mid-year budget to make a request.

7c)                 Lee Vining Community Projects - Email letter from Tim Hansen thanking the
                    Board of Supervisors for their continuing efforts in completing the projects at the
                    Lee Vining Community Center, Mono Lake Park, and Mono Lake Cemetery.
7d)                 Mono County Little League - Letter from Antonette Ciccarelli, Treasurer,
                    thanking the Board of Supervisors for a $3,600 donation.

                                                       Note

      These draft meeting minutes have not yet been approved by the Mono County Board of
                                         Supervisors
Draft Minutes

September 1, 2009

Page 5 of 6


                    Supervisor Farnetti: New request will be considered at mid year.

7e)                 Reds Meadow Valley Recreation Fees - Letter from Jim Upchurch, Inyo
                    National Forest Supervisor, regarding proposed changes in the recreation fees
                    charged to visitors at Reds Meadow Valley starting in 2010.
                    Supervisor Bauer: Will follow up on deadline for public comment.

                    PUBLIC WORKS
8a)                 Chalfant Landfill Off-Site Diversion Channel Right-of-Way (Matt Carter) -
                    Receive staff report regarding Public Works’ application to BLM for permission
                    to maintain a well and construct and maintain an off-site diversion channel on
                    federal lands adjacent to the Chalfant Landfill. Consider and potentially
                    authorize the Public Works Director’s signature on a right-of-way grant from
                    BLM for said use. Provide any desired direction to staff.
M09-203             Action: Approve and authorize the Public Works Director’s signature on a
                    right-of-way grant from BLM to allow construction, operation, and maintenance
                    of County facilities on federal lands adjacent to the Chalfant Landfill.
                    Hazard/Farnetti 5-0
                    BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
9a)                 Regional Council of Rural Counties (RCRC) (Supervisor Reid) - Discuss
                    attendance at the upcoming RCRC meeting.
                    Supervisors Hazard and Hunt plan to attend the upcoming meeting of the Regional
                    Council of Rural Counties.

9b)                 State Budget (Board Members) - The Board of Supervisors may discuss issues
                    pertaining to the California State budget.
                    No Action Taken.

9c)                 County Service Area No. 1 (Marianne O'Connor, Secretary, or a Member of
                    the Board of Directors) - Request for authorization to expend $23,250 for a
                    digital upgrade on one low power TV translator.
                    Supervisor Hazard:
                       1) CSA#1 has the most current system. I believe they would like to take one channel and
                           convert it to experiment instead of converting all channels ( 6 or 7). This will also give
                           helpful information to other CSA districts.

M09-204             Action: Authorize the Board of Directors of County Service Area #1, in
                    consultation with County Counsel, to contract with Norm Powell (Valley T.V. and
                    Communication) in an amount not to exceed $23,250 for a digital upgrade on
                    one low power TV translator.
                    Hazard/Farnetti 5-0
                    HEALTH DEPARTMENT

                                                         Note

      These draft meeting minutes have not yet been approved by the Mono County Board of
                                         Supervisors
Draft Minutes

September 1, 2009

Page 6 of 6


10a)                PUBLIC HEARING--Fee Resolution Pursuant to the State Mandated Medical
                    Marijuana Program (Lynda Salcido, Public Health Director) - Consider and
                    potentially adopt proposed Resolution R09-57 adopting fees to administer the
                    approval, issuance and annual review of identification cards pursuant to the
                    state mandated Medical Marijuana Program. Receive staff report. Provide any
                    desired direction to staff.
                    Lynda Salcido, Public Health Director:
                       1) Resident will fill out an application; health department will check license of Physician,
                           applicant picture will be sent to the State.
                       2) The State mandated fee is $66. Each card is estimated to take my staff 2 ½ hours to
                           process. I project that it will cost us $225 per card. This card will be renewed yearly.
                           MediCal cost for the card will be cut in half. I am expecting 10-15 card applications.
                           The marijuana will be purchased at a designated dispensary. There is a possibility that
                           a dispensary would then be located in Mono County. Mono County is the last county to
                           approve. Indicator for receiving a card would be any condition that a physician
                           recommended the use of medical marijuana.
                    Mark Magit, Assistant County Counsel:
                       1) Cal Courts has said there is not a conflict, this is a state law.
                    Tim Kendall, Assistant District Attorney:
                       1) Law enforcement officials are to recognize the card. It is a law enforcement aid.

                    Public Hearing Opened & Closed at 11:19 a.m.
                    No public comments.


R09-57              Action: Adopt Resolution R09-57 adopting a fee of $225 to administer the
                    approval, issuance and annual review of identification cards pursuant to the
                    state mandated Medical Marijuana Program.
                    Hunt/Farnetti 5-0
                    Meeting adjourned at 11:32 a.m.
                                                                §§§§§




                                                        Note

       These draft meeting minutes have not yet been approved by the Mono County Board of
                                          Supervisors
      OFFICE OF THE CLERK
      OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                       REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                         Print




MEETING DATE        September 15, 2009                    DEPARTMENT             Clerk of the Board
ADDITIONAL
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED                                         PERSONS
                                                      APPEARING
SUBJECT             Minutes of Special Board Meetings BEFORE THE
                                                      BOARD


                                        AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
              (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

                    B. Approve minutes of the Special Meetings held August 24, 25, 26, 2009.


RECOMMENDED ACTION:

FISCAL IMPACT:

CONTACT NAME: Lynda Roberts
PHONE/EMAIL: 932-5538 / lroberts@mono.ca.gov

     SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                    SEND COPIES TO:
        ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
          THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
       PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
   32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
g YES g NO
f
e
d
b
c     d
      c
      f
      e


ATTACHMENTS:
Click to download
   Draft Minutes of August 24, 2009
   Draft Minutes of August 25, 2009
   Draft Minutes of August 26, 2009
History
Time                Who                            Approval
9/9/2009 12:57 PM   County Administrative Office   Yes

9/2/2009 2:54 PM    County Counsel                 Yes

8/31/2009 5:50 PM   Finance                        Yes
DRAFT MEETING MINUTES
Special Meeting
August 24, 2009
Page 1 of 2




                               DRAFT MEETING MINUTES
                        BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF MONO
                                 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
                                            SPECIAL MEETING
                                       AUGUST 24, 2009
                               Mono County Courthouse, Bridgeport

                                  Meeting Not Recorded


  9:05 a.m.       Meeting Called to Order by Chairman Reid

                  Pledge of Allegiance

                  OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE BOARD
                  No one spoke.

                  FINANCE DEPARTMENT

  1a)             Fiscal Year 2009-2010 Budget Workshop (Brian Muir)
                  Brian Muir: Presented the proposed budget and answered the Board’s questions.
                                                                                          th
                      ≠ Mammoth Mountain Ski Area has been enrolled. As of June 30 , there were fewer Prop 8
                         reductions than expected; there are 2,000 single family residences left to review. Will be
                         conservative in forecasting revenue.
                      ≠ The Board can allocate general reserve money during the regular budget process or during
                         the year by a 4/5ths vote.
                      ≠ The General Fund revenue chart, by source, does include the State taking of $1.4 million;
                         the current secured amount of -6.6% reflects Prop 8 reductions.
                      ≠ Courts determine the amount of traffic fines. Muir will follow-up on Supervisor Hazard’s
                         request to have the court consider reducing fees and fines.
                      ≠ There is a change in the cemetery funding because some of the money is from previous
                         allocations and the remainder is a reconciliation of funds.
                      ≠ Previous funds for Conway Ranch are now disclosed.
                      ≠ Muir will follow-up on the decrease in Jail/POST funding.
                      ≠ All funds including internal and external sources are included in the $4.2 million A-87 cost
                         plan.
                      ≠ The General Fund balance includes a $600,000 contingency; future use will be determined
                         by the Board.
                      ≠ Provided an explanation about various fund balance strategies.
                                                      Note
        These draft meeting minutes have not yet been approved by the Mono County Board of Supervisors
AGENDA
August 25, 2008
Page 2 of 2




                  David Wilbrecht: Provided an explanation about the motor pool, and advanced planning using
                  internal fees.

                  Department Heads
                  The following department heads came before the Board to answer questions about their budgets:
                     ≠ Ed Zylman, Social Services
                     ≠ Lynda Salcido, Public Health
                     ≠ Evan Nikirk, Public Works and Facilities (Road, Solid Waste, Enterprise Funds, Motor Pool
                           Fund, Capital Improvement Plan)
                     ≠ Clay Neely, Information Technology
                     ≠ Jody Henning, Assessor

                                                       ~Lunch Recess~
                  Break: 12:00-1:00 p.m.

                  OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE BOARD
                  No one spoke.

  1b)             Budget Workshop Continued
                  Public Input and Funding Requests
                     ≠ Kathy Williams: Requested $1,000 for Ombudsman Advocacy Services.
                     ≠ David Carl: Requested $5,000 for Mono Basin Historical Society.
                     ≠ Tony Barrett: Gave a report about the GEO project.

                  Department Heads
                  The following department heads came before the Board to answer questions about their budgets:
                     ≠ Rick Scholl, Sheriff & Coroner
                     ≠ Mark Mikulicich, Emergency Medical Services
                     ≠ Beverlee Bryant, Probation
                     ≠ Nancy Boardman, Animal Control

                  ADJOURN: 3:00 p.m.
                                                      §§§§§
DRAFT MEETING MINUTES
Special Meeting
August 25, 2009
Page 1 of 2




                               DRAFT MEETING MINUTES
                        BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF MONO
                                 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
                                           SPECIAL MEETING

                                             AUGUST 25, 2009
                                       Mammoth Lakes, Sierra Center Mall
                                           452 Old Mammoth Road
                                                             rd
                               Sierra CAO Conference Room, 3 Floor, South End

                                              Meeting Not Recorded


  9:00 a.m.       Meeting Called to Order by Chairman Reid

                  Pledge of Allegiance

                  OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE BOARD
                  No one spoke.

                  FINANCE DEPARTMENT

  1a)             Continue the Fiscal Year 2009-2010 Budget Workshop
                  Department Heads
                  The following department heads came before the Board to answer questions about their budgets:
                     ≠ Ann Gimpel, Mental Health
                     ≠ Rick McManis, Community Development—Building
                     ≠ Scott Burns, Community Development—Planning & Transportation
                     ≠ Sarah McCahill, Economic Development (Conway Ranch, Fish Enhancement, Tourism)
                     ≠ Marshall Rudolph, County Counsel
                     ≠ George Milovich, Agricultural Commissioner

                                                       ~Lunch Recess~
                  Break: 12:00-1:00 p.m.

                  OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE BOARD
                  No one spoke.

  1b)             Budget Workshop Continued
                  Public Input and Funding Requests
                     ≠ Tony Barrett: Requested funding for the GEO project.

                                                      Note
        These draft meeting minutes have not yet been approved by the Mono County Board of Supervisors
AGENDA
August 26, 2008
Page 2 of 2


                     ≠   Ken and Flossy Coulter: Requested funding for Jazz Jubilee
                     ≠   Ms. Ray: Requested funding for Chamber Music Unbound.
                     ≠   Gaye Mueller: Requested funding for Mono Council for the Arts.

                  Department Heads
                  The following department heads came before the Board to answer questions about their budgets:
                     ≠ Julie Tiede, Child Support Services
                     ≠ Brian Muir, Finance and Other Budgets
                     ≠ Lynda Roberts, Clerk-Recorder

                  ADJOURN: 3:00 p.m.
                                                      §§§§§
DRAFT MEETING MINUTES
Special Meeting
August 26, 2009
Page 1 of 5




                               DRAFT MEETING MINUTES
                        BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF MONO
                                 STATE OF CALIFORNIA

                                             SPECIAL MEETING
                                       AUGUST 26, 2009
                               Mono County Courthouse, Bridgeport

                                    Flash Drive                File #1006


  9:00 a.m.       Meeting Called to Order by Chairman Reid

                  Pledge of Allegiance led by Supervisor Farnetti

                  OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE BOARD
                  David Wilbrecht, CAO: When people in the north end of the county dial 911 on a Nextel phone, the
                  call goes to Douglas County, Nevada. Staff will communicate this information to the community, and
                  will follow-up with the Sheriff’s Office to ensure the dispatchers are communicating necessary
                  information about calls coming from Mono County.

                  Sheriff Scholl: Yesterday an incident of firearm discharge occurred in a prohibited area in Crowley
                  Lake. Scholl distributed a map showing the area and distributed a copy of the County ordinance
                  pertaining to discharge of firearms. Supervisor Hazard: The boundary area maps in the County
                  code for both firearms and leash laws need to be updated and improved.

                  Mary Booher: Lynda Salcido confirmed that H1N1 funds can be used for personnel costs, so the
                  health department will not proceed with an employee layoff.

                  FINANCE DEPARTMENT

  1a)             Continue the Fiscal Year 2009-2010 Budget Workshop
                  Department Heads
                  The following department heads came before the Board to answer questions about their budgets:
                     ≠ George Booth, District Attorney
                     ≠ Mary Booher, County Administrative Officer
                     ≠ Lynda Roberts, Board of Supervisors

                  Break: 9:22 a.m.
                  Reconvened: 9:31 a.m.
                  Break: 11:00 a.m.
                  Reconvened: 11:12 a.m.
                                                      Note
        These draft meeting minutes have not yet been approved by the Mono County Board of Supervisors
DRAFT MEETING MINUTES
Special Meeting
August 26, 2009
Page 2 of 5


                 Lunch: 12:16 p.m.
                 Reconvened: 1:17 p.m.
                 Adjourned: 3:14 p.m.

                 Final Policy Item Review & Prioritization
                 David Wilbrecht:
                     ≠ Recommended the Board set a cap for spending before making decisions about policy
                         items.
                     ≠ Regarding Sierra Center Mall improvements, currently working to get the funding that was
                         promised by the owner.
                     ≠ At this time it is prudent to keep the Health and Planning Departments in the Minaret Mall
                         rather than purchase the Sierra Center Mall for County offices. The Board agreed.

                 Supervisors agreed about being conservative with the reserve and suggested using only $1.5 million
                 to $2 million, noting there are projects that must be funded.

                 Supervisor Hazard: Would like to discuss a $50,000 allocation for the EMS program in Tri Valley.
                 The funding would be used for the design and engineer work, and to help identify the final program.

                 Brian Muir: The general reserve currently has $5.7 million.

                 The Board considered policy items individually and funded them as follows:
                 Board of Supervisors
                    ≠ General Fund Contingency: $550,000

                 Operating Transfers
                    ≠ Land Purchase from Town: Defer
                    ≠ Chamber Music Unbound: $10,000
                    ≠ Eastern Sierra Avalanche Center: $7500 directly to the Forest Service
                    ≠ Eastern Sierra Stewardship Corp (Friends of the Inyo): $10,000
                    ≠ Geothermal Education & Outreach (GEO): The Board wants to see a budget and sources of
                        outside funding prior to committing public funds; GEO can make another request at mid-year
                    ≠ Interagency Visitors Center: $5,000
                    ≠ Jazz Jubilee Festival: $15,000
                    ≠ Mammoth AYSO: No request
                    ≠ Mammoth Lakes Swim Team: No request
                    ≠ Mammoth Lakes Trails and Public Access: No allocation; sufficient progress has not been
                        made on a County-funded project, plus MLTPA has dedicated funding from Measure R
                    ≠ Mammoth Lakes Sierra Summer Festival: $10,000
                    ≠ Mono Basin Historical Society: $5,000
                    ≠ Mono Council for the Arts: $20,000
                    ≠ Mono County Little League: No request
                    ≠ Ombudsman Advocacy Services: $2,000
                    ≠ Southern Mono Historical Society: $5,000

                 Capital Improvement Plan
                    ≠ Walker Campus Master Plan: $35,000 CDBG grant
                    ≠ Bridgeport Facilities Conceptual Plan: Defer to next budget year

                                                    Note
      These draft meeting minutes have not yet been approved by the Mono County Board of Supervisors
DRAFT MEETING MINUTES
Special Meeting
August 26, 2009
Page 3 of 5


                        ≠   Parks Masterplan Study: Defer to next budget year
                        ≠   June Lake Facilities Exterior Rehab: $30,000 (roof); $10,000 (paint)
                        ≠   Tri-Valley EMS Building Design & Planning: $50,000 ($24,712 in CIP)
                        ≠   Walker Wellness Center Drive, Parking, Furnace: $25,000 MHSA funds
                        ≠   Davidson House Rehab: $500,000 MHSA funds
                        ≠   Hilton Creek Park Playground Equipment: $25,000
                        ≠   Crowley Lake Community Center Parking Lot, Stairs: Defer to mid-year
                        ≠   Bridgeport Hospital Temporary Power: Defer to mid-year
                        ≠   Road Shop District #1 Reroof (Crowley Lake): $50,000
                        ≠   Road Shop District #3 Fence Upgrade (Lee Vining): Defer to mid-year
                        ≠   Rehab & Construction 7 Tennis Courts: Defer to next budget year
                        ≠   Proximity Locks (IT): Defer

                  Community Development
                     ≠ Update Development Impact Fees: Defer to mid-year

                  County Administrative Officer
                     ≠ Housing Authority—Homebuyers’ Assistance: Defer to Housing Authority
                     ≠ Housing Authority—Additional Meter, Benton: $5,000 from housing mitigation fees
                     ≠ Housing Authority—Contract Septic Tank Location, Benton: Defer to Housing Authority
                     ≠ Housing Authority—Xeriscaping, Benton: Defer to Housing Authority
                     ≠ Housing Authority—Workforce Housing, Lee Vining: Deferred

                  County Administrative Officer—HR
                     ≠ Board of Supervisors Salary Adjustment: $12,675 (requires an ordinance)
                     ≠ Health—Reclassify FTS II to FTS IV: $3,473 public health funds
                     ≠ Sheriff—Deputy Sheriff Position: $141,824 rural law enforcement funds
                     ≠ Sheriff—Safety Officer Position: $94,044 rural law enforcement funds
                     ≠ Sheriff—Public Safety Officer: $80,363 rural law enforcement funds


                                                       ~Lunch Recess~

                  OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE BOARD
                  No one spoke.

  1b)             Budget Workshop Continued
                  Public Input and Funding Request
                     ≠ Paul McFarland, Executive Director, Friends of the Inyo: This past year Friends of the Inyo
                          worked on trail maintenance, invasive species, and watershed; the program went very well.
                          McFarland asked the Board for the same amount of funding ($10,000). Last year Friends of
                          the Inyo doubled the money provided by Mono County through National Forest Foundation
                          grants. In 2009-10 they would like to focus on creating a vacations volunteer program, and
                          will partner with businesses along the Eastern Sierra.




                                                      Note
        These draft meeting minutes have not yet been approved by the Mono County Board of Supervisors
DRAFT MEETING MINUTES
Special Meeting
August 26, 2009
Page 4 of 5




                 Final Policy Item Review & Prioritization (continued)
                 Economic Development
                     ≠ Fish Enhancement—Increase Trophy Trout: No allocation
                     ≠ Fish Enhancement—Discretionary Fisheries Commission Budget: $25,000; in the future
                         include this as a line item in the Economic Development budget
                     ≠ Tourism—Brand Study: Defer to mid-year

                 Finance
                     ≠ Integrated Finance System Software: $122,180

                 Public Health
                    ≠ General Fund Contribution: Defer to mid-year

                 Information Technology
                     ≠ Additional T-1 Line: $9,600

                 Paramedics
                    ≠ Power Gurney: $26,000 (50% general fund/50% risk management fund); in the future
                       include this as a line item in the Paramedics budget
                    ≠ Cardiac Monitor: $18,000, TOT trust

                 Public Works/Road/Solid Waste
                    ≠ Motor Pool—Public Works, 3 Ford F-250 Pickups: $110,000, motor pool fund
                    ≠ Motor Pool—Assessor, 2 Subaru Foresters: No allocation
                    ≠ Motor Pool—Probation, Van: $35,000, motor pool (YOBG)
                    ≠ Motor Pool—Social Services, Mid-Size SUV: $30,000, motor pool
                    ≠ Motor Pool—Sheriff Replacement Patrol Vehicles, 7 Ford Expeditions: $317,985, motor
                        pool/rural law enforcement funds
                    ≠ Public Works—Additional Funds for Maintenance: $275,000
                    ≠ Public Works—2 Commercial Lawnmowers: Defer to mid-year
                    ≠ Public Works—Backhoe: Defer to mid-year
                    ≠ Public Works—Development Standards Manual: Defer to mid-year
                    ≠ Road—Additional General Fund Contribution #1: $425,900
                    ≠ Road—Additional General Fund Contribution #2: $174,200
                    ≠ Road—Vehicles, 2 each 4x4 Dump Trucks and Trackless MT Snowblower: Defer to next
                        budget year
                    ≠ Road—Fuel Dispensing System: $80,000

                 Sheriff-Coroner/Jail
                    ≠ Lockable Vaults for Unmarked Vehicles-Five: $18,000, rural law enforcement funds
                    ≠ Control Munitions: $12,450, rural law enforcement funds
                    ≠ Jail Lethal Force Equipment: $4,527, rural law enforcement funds
                    ≠ Jail Pepper Ball Guns and 40MM Launcher: $5,100, rural law enforcement funds
                    ≠ Casa Diablo Radio Tower: $6,500, rural law enforcement funds
                    ≠ Mammoth Tower Extensions and Dipole Antenna: $4,500, rural law enforcement funds
                    ≠ Mammoth and Potato Peak Wind Generators: $4,000, rural law enforcement funds

                                                    Note
      These draft meeting minutes have not yet been approved by the Mono County Board of Supervisors
DRAFT MEETING MINUTES
Special Meeting
August 26, 2009
Page 5 of 5


                        ≠   Conway Radio Tower: $3,500, rural law enforcement funds
                        ≠   Conway Repeater Equipment Shelter: $7,500, rural law enforcement funds

                 Amount remaining in general reserve: $4.4 million, which will earn interest during the year.

                 ADJOURN: 3:14 p.m.
                                                       §§§§§




                                                    Note
      These draft meeting minutes have not yet been approved by the Mono County Board of Supervisors
       OFFICE OF THE CLERK
       OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                       REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                         Print




MEETING DATE        September 15, 2009                    DEPARTMENT             County Counsel
ADDITIONAL
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED                                             PERSONS
                                                          APPEARING
SUBJECT             Closed Session                        BEFORE THE
                                                          BOARD


                                        AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
              (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION. Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision
               (c) of Government Code section 54956.9. Number of potential cases: one.


RECOMMENDED ACTION:

FISCAL IMPACT:

CONTACT NAME:
PHONE/EMAIL: /

     SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                    SEND COPIES TO:
        ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
          THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
       PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
   32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
g YES g NO
e
d
c
f     e
      d
      b
      c
      f


ATTACHMENTS:
Click to download

No Attachments Available



 History
Time                 Who                            Approval
9/10/2009 9:15 AM    County Administrative Office   Yes

9/10/2009 8:51 AM    County Counsel                 Yes

9/10/2009 10:09 AM   Finance                        Yes
       OFFICE OF THE CLERK
       OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                       REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                         Print




MEETING DATE        September 15, 2009                    DEPARTMENT             County Administrative Office
ADDITIONAL
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED                                             PERSONS
                                                          APPEARING
SUBJECT             Human Resources                       BEFORE THE
                                                          BOARD


                                        AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
              (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

     CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS. Government Code Section 54957.6. Agency designated
representative(s): Dave Wilbrecht, Marshall Rudolph, Mary Booher, and Rita Sherman. Unrepresented employee(s):
                                                Finance Director.


RECOMMENDED ACTION:

FISCAL IMPACT:

CONTACT NAME: Mary Booher
PHONE/EMAIL: 760-932-5583 / mbooher@mono.ca.gov

     SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                    SEND COPIES TO:
        ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
          THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
       PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
   32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
f
e
d
c
g YES g NO
      e
      d
      c
      b
      f


ATTACHMENTS:
Click to download

No Attachments Available



 History
Time                Who                            Approval
8/31/2009 1:35 PM   County Administrative Office   Yes

9/2/2009 2:45 PM    County Counsel                 Yes

8/31/2009 2:15 PM   Finance                        Yes
       OFFICE OF THE CLERK
       OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                       REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                         Print




MEETING DATE        September 15, 2009                    DEPARTMENT             County Administrative Office
ADDITIONAL
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED                                             PERSONS
                                                          APPEARING
SUBJECT             Human Resources                       BEFORE THE
                                                          BOARD


                                        AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
              (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

     CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS. Government Code Section 54957.6. Agency designated
 representative(s): Dave Wilbrecht, Marshall Rudolph, Brian Muir, Mary Booher, and Rita Sherman. Unrepresented
                                      employee(s): Social Services Director.


RECOMMENDED ACTION:

FISCAL IMPACT:

CONTACT NAME: Mary Booher
PHONE/EMAIL: 760-932-5583 / mbooher@mono.ca.gov

     SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                    SEND COPIES TO:
        ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
          THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
       PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
   32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
f
e
d
c
g YES g NO
      e
      d
      c
      b
      f


ATTACHMENTS:
Click to download

No Attachments Available



 History
Time                Who                            Approval
8/31/2009 1:36 PM   County Administrative Office   Yes

9/2/2009 2:45 PM    County Counsel                 Yes

8/31/2009 2:16 PM   Finance                        Yes
       OFFICE OF THE CLERK
       OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                       REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                         Print




MEETING DATE        September 15, 2009                    DEPARTMENT             County Administrative Office
ADDITIONAL
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED                                             PERSONS
                                                          APPEARING
SUBJECT             Human Resources                       BEFORE THE
                                                          BOARD


                                        AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
              (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

     CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS. Government Code Section 54957.6. Agency designated
 representative(s): Dave Wilbrecht, Marshall Rudolph, Brian Muir, Mary Booher, and Rita Sherman. Unrepresented
                     employee(s): Assistant Finance Director (Treasurer-Tax Collector's Office).


RECOMMENDED ACTION:

FISCAL IMPACT:

CONTACT NAME: Mary Booher
PHONE/EMAIL: 760-932-5583 / mbooher@mono.ca.gov

     SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                    SEND COPIES TO:
        ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
          THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
       PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
   32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
f
e
d
c
g YES g NO
      e
      d
      c
      b
      f


ATTACHMENTS:
Click to download

No Attachments Available



 History
Time                Who                            Approval
8/31/2009 1:36 PM   County Administrative Office   Yes

9/2/2009 2:48 PM    County Counsel                 Yes

8/31/2009 2:16 PM   Finance                        Yes
       OFFICE OF THE CLERK
       OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                       REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                         Print




MEETING DATE        September 15, 2009                    DEPARTMENT             County Administrative Office
ADDITIONAL
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED                                             PERSONS
                                                          APPEARING
SUBJECT             Human Resources                       BEFORE THE
                                                          BOARD


                                        AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
              (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

     CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS. Government Code Section 54957.6. Agency designated
 representative(s): Dave Wilbrecht, Marshall Rudolph, Brian Muir, Mary Booher, and Rita Sherman. Unrepresented
                                       employee(s): Public Health Director.


RECOMMENDED ACTION:

FISCAL IMPACT:

CONTACT NAME: Mary Booher
PHONE/EMAIL: 760-932-5583 / mbooher@mono.ca.gov

     SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                    SEND COPIES TO:
        ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
          THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
       PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
   32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
f
e
d
c
g YES g NO
      e
      d
      c
      b
      f


ATTACHMENTS:
Click to download

No Attachments Available



 History
Time                Who                            Approval
8/31/2009 1:37 PM   County Administrative Office   Yes

9/2/2009 2:48 PM    County Counsel                 Yes

8/31/2009 2:17 PM   Finance                        Yes
       OFFICE OF THE CLERK
       OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                       REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                         Print




MEETING DATE        September 15, 2009                    DEPARTMENT             County Administrative Office
ADDITIONAL
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED                                             PERSONS
                                                          APPEARING
SUBJECT             Risk Management                       BEFORE THE
                                                          BOARD


                                        AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
              (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION. Subdivision (a) of Government Code section
               54956.9. Name of case: Worker’s compensation claim of John Aronson.


RECOMMENDED ACTION:

FISCAL IMPACT:

CONTACT NAME:
PHONE/EMAIL: 932-5415 /

     SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                    SEND COPIES TO:
        ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
          THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
       PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
   32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
g YES g NO
e
d
c
f     e
      d
      b
      c
      f


ATTACHMENTS:
Click to download

No Attachments Available



 History
Time                Who                            Approval
9/9/2009 12:57 PM   County Administrative Office   Yes

9/8/2009 10:40 AM   County Counsel                 Yes

9/3/2009 11:22 AM   Finance                        Yes
        OFFICE OF THE CLERK
        OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                        REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                          Print




MEETING DATE         September 15, 2009                    DEPARTMENT             County Counsel
ADDITIONAL           Public Works
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED                                              PERSONS
                                                           APPEARING
SUBJECT              Grading Ordinance Amendment           BEFORE THE
                                                           BOARD


                                         AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
               (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

 Adopt proposed ordinance amending certain sections of Chapter 13.08 of the Mono County Code pertaining to land
                                 clearing, earthwork, and drainage facilities.


RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt proposed ordinance.


FISCAL IMPACT:
None.


CONTACT NAME: Garrett Higerd, Stacey Simon
PHONE/EMAIL: 932-5457, 924-1704 / ghigerd@mono.ca.gov, ssimon@mono.ca.gov

     SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                     SEND COPIES TO:
        ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
          THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
       PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
   32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
b
c
d
e
f
g YES g NO
      d
      e
      f
      c


ATTACHMENTS:
 Click to download
    Staff Report
   Proposed Ordinance


History
Time                    Who                            Approval
9/10/2009 9:15 AM       County Administrative Office   Yes

9/10/2009 8:54 AM       County Counsel                 Yes

9/10/2009 10:28 AM      Finance                        Yes
County Counsel                          OFFICE OF THE                                 Telephone
Marshall Rudolph                                                                    760-924-1700
                                  COUNTY COUNSEL
Assistants                                Mono County                                  Facsimile
Mark Magit                          South County Offices                            760-924-1701
Stacey Simon                           P.O. BOX 2415
Allen Berrey                  MAMMOTH LAKES, CALIFORNIA 93546




      To:          Board of Supervisors

      From:        Stacey Simon

      Date:        September 15, 2009

      Re:          Grading Ordinance Amendment

      Recommendation

      Adopt proposed ordinance amending certain sections of chapter 13.08 of the
      Mono County Code pertaining to land clearing, earthwork, and drainage
      facilities.

      Fiscal Impact

      None

      Discussion

      At its September 8, 2009, meeting the Board introduced the proposed ordinance
      amending certain sections of chapter 13.08 of the Mono County Code pertaining
      to land clearing, earthwork, and drainage facilities. The ordinance is now before
      the Board for adoption. Background provided on September 8th is provided
      below.

      Chapter 13.08 of the Mono County Code regulates land clearing, earthwork, and
      drainage facilities in the County (the “Grading Ordinance”). The Grading
      Ordinance requires that a grading permit be obtained prior to performing any
      land clearing, grading, or drainage interference or alterations, with certain
      exceptions which are not relevant to this item.

      Section 13.08.030 of the Grading Ordinance states that grading permits shall only
      be issued to the “owner” of the property upon which the work is to be carried
      out, but fails to provide any definition of the word “owner.” Given the complex
and varied forms of land ownership and rights respecting land, the Public Works
Department (which issues grading permits and administers the Grading
Ordinance) has of necessity interpreted the word “owner” in a manner that
encompasses a variety of types of interests in land beyond fee ownership --
rather than impose unnecessary burdens upon those who otherwise have the
legal right to perform work subject to the Grading Ordinance on a particular
property.

In order to provide guidance to Public Works, and make explicit the current
interpretation of the Grading Ordinance, it is recommended that the Board add a
definition of the word “owner” to section 13.08.020 of the Mono County Code
which would specify to whom such permits may be issued. Specifically, the
definition of “owner” would include fee owners, easement and license holders,
and any person claiming an ownership interest in the property, in any instance
where the permit applicant represents that the interest claimed encompasses and
allows the type of work that is the subject of the permit.

Defining “owner” in the above-proposed manner would also clarify that it is the
permittee (rather than the County) who is responsible for determining
“ownership.” Accordingly, a minor modification to the hold harmless provision
of the ordinance is also proposed which would make explicit what is otherwise
included in the more general existing language: that the permittee must defend,
indemnify, and hold the County harmless against claims arising from the
issuance of the grading permit as well as against claims arising from the work
performed pursuant to the permit. Finally, language is proposed to be added to
the bonding provisions of the Grading Ordinance authorizing the Public Works
Director to require an additional bond to guarantee the permittee’s obligation to
defend, indemnify, and hold the County harmless.

If you have any questions regarding this item prior to your meeting, please call
me at 924-1704 or call Garrett Higerd at 932-5457.
 1
 2
 3
 4                               ORDINANCE NO. ORD09- ___
 5                    AN ORDINANCE OF THE MONO COUNTY
                       BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AMENDING
 6                     CERTAIN SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 13.08
                   OF THE MONO COUNTY CODE PERTAINING TO
 7            LAND CLEARING, EARTHWORK AND DRAINAGE FACILITIES
 8         WHEREAS, Chapter 13.08 of the Mono County Code regulates land clearing,
     earthwork, and drainage facilities in Mono County; and
 9
             WHEREAS, with certain exceptions not here relevant, Chapter 13.08 requires
10   that a “grading permit” be obtained prior to performing any land clearing, grading, or
     drainage interference or alterations; and
11
            WHEREAS, section 13.08.030 states that such grading permits shall only be
12   issued to the owner of the property on which the work is planned but fails to provide
     any definition of the term owner; and
13
           WHEREAS, in order to memorialize the County’s current practice in
14   determining who is eligible to receive a grading permit, and to make other related
     changes, the Board of Supervisors wishes to add a definition of the term owner to
15   Chapter 13.08 which is consistent with that current practice; and
16          WHEREAS, the changes made to sections 13.08.020 and 13.08.160 of the Mono
     County Code by this ordinance are intended to be declarative of existing law and
17   practice.
18      NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF
     MONO ORDAINS that:
19
           SECTION ONE: The following language shall be added to section 13.08.020 of
20   the Mono County Code (“Definitions”), and all subparagraphs of that section
     (beginning with the existing subparagraph I.) shall be re-lettered accordingly:
21
           “I. “Owner” means the fee simple owner, any easement holder, licensee, or
22   person claiming a property interest in the property on which work subject to this
     chapter is planned, where the applicant represents that the property interest
23   encompasses and allows the type of work sought to be performed pursuant to the
     permit.”
24
            SECTION TWO: The following language shall be added to section 13.08.120,
25   following the existing paragraph:
26          “The director may additionally require the applicant to furnish a corporate
     surety bond in a form satisfactory to and approved by the County Counsel in an
27   amount sufficient to insure the performance of the obligations set forth in section
     13.08.160 of this Chapter to defend, indemnify, and hold the County harmless as
28   provided therein.

                                               -1-
 1         SECTION THREE: Section 13.08.160 shall be revised to read as follows (with
     new language shown in underline):
 2
            “Approval of grading permits will be made subject to the appropriate conditions
 3   or reservations required to assure construction and to protect public health, safety and
     general welfare.
 4          The owner shall execute a hold harmless clause on the permit which shall read as
     follows: “The Permittee for himself, his contractors and employees agrees to save,
 5   indemnify, and hold harmless the County or its representatives from all liabilities and
     claims for damage to property from any cause whatsoever while in, upon or in any way
 6   connected with the work covered by this grading permit, and does further agree to
     defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County in any claim arising out of, or as a
 7   result of the work done under this permit or the issuance of this permit.”
            Applications and plans found inadequate or not in compliance with this chapter
 8   will not be approved until revised to conform to the conditions and regulations
     prescribed under this chapter. Rejection of the application or plans based on
 9   insufficient or inadeqate plans shall not preclude the applicant from submitting revised
     plans in connection with the pending application. Applications shall be considered
10   pending until a grading permit is issued, application denied or withdrawn. The
     application shall expire one year from the date of its filing.”
11
             SECTION FOUR: This ordinance shall become effective 30 days from the date
12   of its adoption and final passage, which appears immediately below. The Clerk of the
     Board of Supervisors shall post this ordinance and also publish the ordinance in the
13   manner prescribed by Government Code section 25124 no later than 15 days after the
     date of its adoption and final passage. If the Clerk fails to publish this ordinance within
14   said 15 day-period, then the ordinance shall not take effect until 30 days after the date of
     publication.
15
             PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this ______ day of __________, 2009, by
16   the following vote, to wit:
17          AYES:
            NOES:
18          ABSENT:
            ABSTAIN:
19                                                     ________________________________
                                                       BILL REID, Chair
20                                                     Mono County Board of Supervisors
21
            ATTEST:                                    APPROVED AS TO FORM:
22
            ______________________                     _____________________________
23          Clerk of the Board                         County Counsel
24
25
26
27
28

                                                 -2-
       OFFICE OF THE CLERK
       OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                        REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                           Print




MEETING DATE        September 15, 2009                     DEPARTMENT            Clerk-Recorder
ADDITIONAL
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED                                              PERSONS
                                                           APPEARING
SUBJECT             Courthouse Cannon                      BEFORE THE
                                                           BOARD


                                        AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
              (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

    Email letter addressed to the Board of Supervisors regarding the historic Mono County Courthouse cannon.

                                           **********************************


RECOMMENDED ACTION:

FISCAL IMPACT:

CONTACT NAME: Lynda Roberts
PHONE/EMAIL: 932-5538 / lroberts@mono.ca.gov

     SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                     SEND COPIES TO:
        ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
          THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
       PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
   32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
g YES g NO
e
d
c
f     e
      d
      b
      c
      f


ATTACHMENTS:
Click to download
    Courthouse Cannon


 History
Time                Who                            Approval
9/9/2009 1:46 PM    County Administrative Office   Yes

9/10/2009 8:53 AM   County Counsel                 Yes

9/9/2009 1:14 PM    Finance                        Yes
From:                    Allan Fishbein
To:                      Lynda Roberts;
Subject:                 Fw: Historic Mono County Courthouse Cannon
Date:                    Wednesday, September 02, 2009 10:36:49 AM



MEETING MINUTES

September 9, 2008

Page 4 of 4


6b) Email Letter from Allan Fishbein - Email letter from Allan Fishbein addressed
to the Mono County Board of Supervisors regarding historic Mono County
Courthouse cannon.

Supervisor Reid requests discussion re old cannon on Courthouse lawn. Request that Public
Works take a look at the cannon and try to preserve and repair any damage.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Dear Board of Supervisors.

As you can see from the above Board Meeting Minutes of 9 September, 2008,
the Board punted to the Public Works Department the unbelievably simple job of
slapping some wood preservative (prob $10 per can plus $3 for a paint brush) on
the hand built cannon sitting outside of the very building where the Board meets.
That cannon is one of the few things in Bridgeport which has true historic value, if
one doesn't count the Cain House and also the Jolly Cone. It was J.Cain's gift to
the town of Bridgeport and was created in Bodie by one of Cain's skilled metal
workers, a Mr. Renault. The metal working skills to build such a gift no longer
exist in Mono County or in most other counties for that matter. Men like Mr.
Renault are long gone, but his gift to Bridgeport sits rotting in front of its
Courthouse.

Anyway, just step outside the Courthouse and take a look at what Bridgeport
neglect has done to the wood comprising the caisson and wheels. Then, go back
into session and fire the head of the Public Works Dept for not reporting back to
you after he was asked a year ago to put down his doughnuts and coffee and get
over to the Courthouse and actually do something abt preserving what's left of
the wood components weathering to pieces out there.

The cheapest and most effective solution might be to move the whole shebang to
a new site in front of the high school or the Cain House. The kids at the school
will take care of it, and so will the folks at the Cain House. Whatever you decide
to do, don't put in front of the Dept of Public Works unless the cannon is aimed
directly at the office of the Dept Head. Messrs Cain and Renault would like that,
you can be sure. The Board and the Public Works Dept have done 0.00% for
Cain's gift since 1914 when it was set up in front of the Courthouse. They had
their 95 year chance and blew it. Time to give somebody else with more of a
sense of historic responsibility a chance. As a fall-back plan in case nobody in
Bridgeport feels comfortable with a paintbrush and a can of wood preservative,
give me the cannon. My son and I will gladly show up with his truck and take it off
your hands. I'll even supply a plaque -- maintenance-free, of course -- which can
be set up at the cannon site to let the good folks of Mono County know where it
went. I'll even list the names of the Supervisors and the head of Public Works on
the plaque, so historic fame will devolve to all the players.

Allan Fishbein, Santa Rosa, CA.




============================================================
----- Original Message -----
From: Allan Fishbein
To: lroberts@mono.ca.gov
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 7:33 PM
Subject: Historic Mono County Courthouse Cannon

Dear Sup's;
   I visit Bridgeport very often, and, for the past several years I have seen the
historic wood caisson supporting the cannon in front of the Courthouse
deteriorate from lack of routine maintenance. The wood needs to be stained and/
or watersealed to prevent its eventual collapse. The cannon balls are rusting
and need primer and paint. It would take only a couple of hours to do the job,
and it's your job to make sure it gets done. Many visitors like me look at the
neglect and think, "Why don't the people in this town take better care of such
irreplaceable community assets?" It makes a poor impression. Please see what
you can do. Anything you do will be better than the previous Bds of Sups who
apparently did squanto for the cannon and its balls. If I lived in Bridgeport I'd do
the job myself. It's a great town, and I'm sure there are lots of students or
interested citizens who would do the job with care, and they'd do it in a flash for
sure. If the guys who made the cannon were alive to see how it has been
neglected they'd probably swing it around and blast the courthouse to
smithereens, right?
Thanks,
Allan Fishbein

P.S. I'll check that cannon from now on -- every time I pass through.
        OFFICE OF THE CLERK
        OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                         REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                           Print




MEETING DATE          September 15, 2009                    DEPARTMENT             Finance
ADDITIONAL            County Counsel
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED         5 minutes                             PERSONS                Brian Muir
                                                            APPEARING
SUBJECT               Ordinance Amending Board of           BEFORE THE
                      Supervisors’ Compensation             BOARD


                                          AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
                (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

Consider and potentially introduce, read title, and waive further reading of ordinance amending sections 2.04.030 and
  2.04.070 of the Mono County Code pertaining to compensation of the Board of Supervisors. Provide any desired
                                                     direction to staff.


RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Introduce, read title, and waive further reading of proposed ordinance. Direct Clerk to schedule ordinance for adoption
at the Board's next regular meeting.


FISCAL IMPACT:
FY 09/10 $11,270


CONTACT NAME: Brian Muir
PHONE/EMAIL: (760) 932-5494 / bmuir@mono.ca.gov

      SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                     SEND COPIES TO:
         ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
           THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
        PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
    32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
e
f
g YES g NO
c
d     b
      c
      d
      e
      f


ATTACHMENTS:
 Click to download
   Staff Report
   Ordinance Board Compensation



History
Time                              Who                            Approval
8/31/2009 1:42 PM                 County Administrative Office   Yes

9/2/2009 2:42 PM                  County Counsel                 Yes

8/29/2009 2:48 PM                 Finance                        Yes
 1
 2                              ORDINANCE NO. ORD09-___
 3                AN ORDINANCE OF THE MONO COUNTY BOARD OF
                    SUPERVISORS AMENDING SECTIONS 2.04.030 AND
 4               2.04.070 OF THE MONO COUNTY CODE PERTAINING TO
                    COMPENSATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
 5
            WHEREAS, when the Board sets and adjusts the salaries of management-level
 6   officers and employees, including members of the Board of Supervisors, it has generally
     followed the principles set forth in the County’s management compensation policy, as
 7   the same may be amended from time to time (see Resolution R06-59); and
 8          WHEREAS, pursuant to that policy, the Board provided most management-level
     officers and employees with a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) of 4.3% effective
 9   January 1, 2009, but chose not to provide members of the Board with any COLA at that
     time; and
10
           WHEREAS, having reviewed current fiscal data through its budget workshops,
11   the Board now finds that such a COLA can and should be provided (prospectively) to
     Board members; and
12
           WHEREAS, it is also necessary and appropriate at this time to update the
13   County Code to reflect the current amount of the automobile allowance provided to
     Board members;
14
        NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF
15   MONO ORDAINS as follows:
16          SECTION ONE: Section 2.04.030 of the Mono County Code shall be amended to
     read as follows:
17
           “2.04.030 Compensation.
18                The salary of members of the board of supervisors is set at four
           thousand one hundred and nine dollars ($4,109) per month, with the
19         exception of the chair of the board whose salary is set at four thousand
           four hundred and sixty-two dollars ($4,462) per month. In addition, the
20         members of the board and their dependents shall be entitled to the same
           medical care, dental care, and vision care coverage provided to all county
21         employees, and to the same term life insurance provided to all county
           department heads (elected and appointed). Members of the board shall
22         also continue to have the option of being members of the California Public
           Employees Retirement System (CalPERS), with the employee’s share of
23         any CalPERS contributions being paid by said board members (as it is by
           other county officers and employees).”
24
25          SECTION TWO: Section 2.04.070 of the Mono County Code shall be amended
     to read as follows:
26
           “2.04.070     Automobile allowance.
27
                   As additional compensation, each member of the board of supervisors
28         shall receive a monthly automobile allowance in the amount of seven hundred

                                           Page 1 of 2
 1         and ninety dollars ($790), in recognition of the considerable amount of driving
           necessary for board members to attend public meetings and other functions in
 2         their official capacities within the territorial boundaries of Mono County and the
           contiguous northern territory of Inyo County bounded to the south by (and
 3         encompassing) the Bishop region. In addition, members of the board may be
           reimbursed for actual miles driven on county business to and from destinations
 4         outside of the aforementioned territory on the same terms and conditions that
           reimbursement is provided to other management-level officers and employees of
 5         the county.”
 6           SECTION THREE: This ordinance shall become effective 60 days from the date
     of its adoption and final passage, which appears immediately below. The Clerk of the
 7   Board of Supervisors shall post this ordinance and also publish the ordinance of a
     summary thereof in the manner prescribed by Government Code section 25124 no later
 8   than 15 days after the date of this ordinance’s adoption and final passage. If the Clerk
     fails to so publish this ordinance or a summary thereof within said 15 day-period, then
 9   the ordinance shall not take effect until 60 days after the date of publication.
10          PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this___day of_________, 2009, by the
     following vote, to wit:
11
                  AYES:
12                NOES:
                  ABSENT:
13                ABSTAIN:
14
                                              _______________________________
15                                            BILL REID, Chair
                                              Mono County Board of Supervisors
16
17
     ATTEST:                                  APPROVED AS TO FORM:
18
19   ________________________________         _______________________________
     Clerk of the Board                       COUNTY COUNSEL
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

                                            Page 2 of 2
        OFFICE OF THE CLERK
        OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                         REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                           Print




MEETING DATE          September 15, 2009                    DEPARTMENT             County Administrative Office
ADDITIONAL            Public Health
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED         5 minutes                             PERSONS                Mary Booher and Rita Sherman
                                                            APPEARING
SUBJECT               Human Resources                       BEFORE THE
                                                            BOARD


                                          AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
                (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

  Consider and potentially adopt proposed resolution rescinding the recent elimination of one position in the Public
  Health Department and rescinding the layoff of one employee who currently fills that position. Receive staff report.
                                       Provide any desired direction to staff.


RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt proposed resolution.


FISCAL IMPACT:
The additional Emergency Preparedness funds of $106,000 will cover the cost of this position, which is approximately
$85,000.


CONTACT NAME: Mary Booher
PHONE/EMAIL: 760-932-5583 / mbooher@mono.ca.gov

     SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                      SEND COPIES TO:
        ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
          THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
       PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
   32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
c
d
e
f
g YES g NO
b     d
      e
      f
      c


ATTACHMENTS:
 Click to download
   Public Health Rescinding layoff
   Public Health Rescinding layoff Resolution



History
Time                                     Who                            Approval
8/31/2009 1:41 PM                        County Administrative Office   Yes

9/8/2009 1:47 PM                         County Counsel                 Yes

8/31/2009 2:19 PM                        Finance                        Yes
              COUNTY OF MONO
                                             P.O. BOX 696, BRIDGEPORT, CALIFORNIA 93517
                                                        (760) 932-5413 ≠ FAX (760) 932-5411
                                                                   Email: mbooher@mono.ca.gov

     David Wilbrecht                    Mary Booher                      Rita Sherman
County Administrative Officer         Financial Analyst        Deputy County Administrative Officer



September 15, 2009

TO:             Honorable Chair and Members of the Board of Supervisors

FROM:           Mary Booher, CAO Financial Analyst

Subject:        Rescind Layoff of one Public Health Employee

Recommended Action:
     Consider and potentially adopt proposed resolution rescinding the recent
     elimination of one position in the Public Health Department and rescinding the
     layoff of one employee who currently fills that position. Receive staff report.
     Provide any desired direction to staff.

Discussion:
      On July 14, 2009 the Board approved Resolution 09-46 authorizing the
      elimination of 5 positions in Public Health and Mental Health, and authorizing the
      layoffs of the two employees who had not been placed into other positions.
      Subsequent to that time, Public Health Staff has received an additional allocation
      of Public Health Emergency Preparedness funds of at least $106,000. The state
      has indicated that these funds can be used to cover personnel costs in carrying
      out the Scope of Work. Therefore, staff is requesting the Board to approve a
      new resolution rescinding the previous layoff authorization.

        At this time, the funds will cover the position for the 2009/10 fiscal year.

Fiscal Impact:
       The additional Emergency Preparedness funds of $106,000 will cover the cost of
       this position, which are approximately $85,000.


If there are any questions regarding this item, please contact Mary Booher at 932-5583.

Thank you,

Submitted by:______________________________________ Date:_8/27/09____
            Mary Booher, County Administrative Office Financial Analyst
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
                                              RESOLUTION NO. R09-
 6
               A RESOLUTION OF THE MONO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
 7          RESCINDING THE REMOVAL OF ONE COMMUNITY HEALTH SPECIALIST
        POSITION FROM THE LIST OF ALLOCATED POSITIONS WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT
 8        OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND RESCINDING THE CORRESPONDING LAYOFF OF ONE
                EMPLOYEE AS PREVIOUSLY ORDERED BY RESOLUTION R09-46
 9
10          WHEREAS, Mono County Code Section 2.68.311 authorizes the Mono County Board of
     Supervisors to lay off employees when specific conditions exist, including situations when, in the
11   opinion of the majority of the Board of Supervisors, there is a determination that there should be a
     reduction in services offered by a department, there is a lack of funds, or for any other reason; and
12
             WHEREAS, on July 14, 2009, the Board of Supervisors approved Resolution R09-46, which,
13   effective October 1, 2009, will eliminate several positions, including three Community Health
     Outreach Specialist positions in the Department of Public Health, and lay off two employees, due to a
14   reduction in funding from the State of California; and

15           WHEREAS, the Department of Public Health has received additional and sufficient state and
     federal funding that may be used to fund one of the Community Health Outreach Specialist positions
16   that was ordered to be eliminated pursuant to Resolution 09-46.

17           NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Mono County Board of Supervisors
     hereby finds that elimination of one of the three Community Health Outreach Specialist positions
18   ordered pursuant to Resolution R09-46, and the layoff of the employee currently filling that position
     also ordered by that resolution, are no longer necessary. Accordingly, these previous orders are hereby
19   rescinded. All other orders of Resolution R09-46 shall remain in full force and effect.

20           PASSED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of September 2009, by the following

21   Vote:

22   AYES           :
     NOES           :
23   ABSTAIN        :
     ABSENT         :
24
25
     ATTEST: ______________                        __________________________
26           Clerk of the Board                          BILL REID, Chair
                                                         Board of Supervisors
27
28


                                                      Page 1
 1   APPROVED AS TO FORM:

 2
     _____________________________
 3   COUNTY COUNSEL

 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28


                                     Page 2
         OFFICE OF THE CLERK
         OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                             REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                               Print




MEETING DATE              September 15, 2009                    DEPARTMENT             County Administrative Office
ADDITIONAL
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED             15 minutes                     PERSONS                       Mary Booher, Rita Sherman
                                                         APPEARING
SUBJECT                   Human Resources-vacancy review BEFORE THE
                                                         BOARD


                                              AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
                    (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

 Receive presentation by Mary Booher and Rita Sherman regarding current position vacancies. Provide any desired
                                               direction to staff.


RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Provide any desired direction to staff.


FISCAL IMPACT:
These vacancies represent a savings of approximately $284,000 in fiscal year 2009/10 to-date. Of this amount,
approximately $68,000 is non-general fund.


CONTACT NAME: Mary Booher
PHONE/EMAIL: 760-932-5583 / mbooher@mono.ca.gov

      SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                         SEND COPIES TO:
         ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
           THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
        PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
    32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
d
e
f
c
g YES g NO
      c
      d
      e
      f
      b


ATTACHMENTS:
 Click to download
     staff report
   vacancy spreadsheet



History
Time                     Who                            Approval
8/31/2009 1:41 PM        County Administrative Office   Yes

9/2/2009 2:53 PM         County Counsel                 Yes

8/31/2009 2:22 PM        Finance                        Yes
              COUNTY OF MONO
                                            P.O. BOX 696, BRIDGEPORT, CALIFORNIA 93517
                                                       (760) 932-5413 ≠ FAX (760) 932-5411
                                                                  Email: mbooher@mono.ca.gov

     David Wilbrecht                   Mary Booher                      Rita Sherman
County Administrative Officer        Financial Analyst        Deputy County Administrative Officer



September 15, 2009

TO:             Honorable Chair and Members of the Board of Supervisors

FROM:           Mary Booher, CAO Financial Analyst

Subject:        Monthly review of vacant positions

Recommended Action:
     Receive staff report on current county vacancies and give any desired direction
     to staff.

Discussion:
      This is an update of the current vacant positions in the county and the status of
      said recruitments. We have included the three new positions that will be
      approved in the 2009/10 budget, but have deleted the positions that have been
      filled based on previous Board direction.

        All of these positions are included in the 2009/10 budget as the full-year cost.
        The salary savings shown are to-date since July 1.

Fiscal Impact:
       These vacancies represent a savings of approximately $284,000 in fiscal year
       2009/10 to-date. Of this amount, approximately $68,000 is non-general fund.


If there are any questions regarding this item, please contact Mary Booher at 932-5583.

Thank you,

Submitted by:______________________________________ Date:_8/27/09____
            Mary Booher, County Administrative Office Financial Analyst
              Vacant Position                Reason for vacancy         Date of Vacancy   Monthly Cost    FY 09/10 Savings                  Status                               Board Direction


                                                                                                                             Initial offer declined, 2nd offer
                                                                                                                             declined, 3rd candidate probationary
                                         New Position approved 08/09                                                         termination after 2 weeks, staff has
Road MW II/III-Crowley                   budget                              9/17/2008 $         5,030    $       12,575 selected candidate-no offer made yet Hold until budget
                                                                                                                             in psych check, still needs Madeira
                                                                                                                             b/g, first candidate failed
                                                                                                                             background, 2nd candidate failed, 3rd
Deputy Probation Officer                 Probationary Term                   1/22/2009 $         6,342    $       15,856 started 8/11/09                             Continue Recruitment-report back
                                                                                                                             local background done, needs
                                                                                                                             Madeira background-8/18 no contact
                                         New Position approved 08/09                                                         from candidate, extended open
Animal Control Officer                   budget                              9/17/2008 $         5,354    $       13,386 recruitment                                 Continue Recruitment
Animal Control Officer                   Probationary resignation             4/6/2009 $         5,354    $       13,386     Recruitment closes 7/17                 continue recruitment-hold on filling
                                         New Position approved 08/09
MH Fiscal Officer                        midyear                        Jan, 2009         $      8,944    $       22,360     Interviews scheduled for 8/28           Continue Recruitment-report back
                                                                                                                             Recruitment closed 7/1/09,
                                         New Position approved 08/09                                                         interviews scheduled for 7/27
Appraisal Operations Manager             midyear                        Jan, 2009         $      12,156   $       30,389 candidate scheduled to start 9/15           Continue Recruitment
Soc Serv Eligibility and Training Worker resignation                    May, 2009         $      5,030    $       12,575     Recruitment closes 7/24                 Continue Recruitment-report back
                                         New Position approved 08/09
                                         budget-extended discussion
Loss Prevention and Special Events       on placement                        9/17/2008 $         4,559    $        11,397    recruitment pending Union M/C


                                                                                                                             in-county closed 8/17, will go to
PW Inventory and Purchasing Technician Promotion of Brett McCurry             5/8/2009 $         5,554    $       13,884 open; open recruitment closes 9/4/09 open recruitment
                                                                                                                             on-going recruitment-requires
Sheriff Public Safety Officer            Probationary resignation             6/7/2009 $         6,697    $       16,742 overtime to fill staffing needs             continue recruitment
                                         End of state LPHSS
Public Health Nurse                      Contract                       June, 2008        $      7,035    $       17,588     in-county                               open recruitment-report back
FTS I/II/III-County Cousel-part time     split of Co Counsel Position   June, 2008        $       3,191   $        7,978                                             continue with temporary
                                         Transfer of Jennifer Hanson
Transportation Analyst                   to Sheriff's dept                   6/29/2009 $         5,892    $       14,730     Dept Head reviewing position            continue with temporary
Cook/Driver                              New Position                         7/5/2009 $         2,782    $        6,956 In-county through 8/24                      open recruitment
Senior Services Site Coordinator         resignation                         7/29/2009 $         3,388    $        8,470     reviewing job desc with DH              open recruitment
Public Safety Officer                    New Position                        9/15/2009 $         6,697    $       16,742     pending final approval of budget
Deputy Sheriff                           New position                        9/15/2009 $         11,819   $       29,547     pending final approval of budget
Sheriff Safety Officer                   new position                        9/15/2009 $         7,837    $       19,593     pending final approval of budget
Deputy CAO/HR                            resignation                           9/1/2009 $        13,839                      Dept head reviewing position
                                                                                                          $       284,151
        OFFICE OF THE CLERK
        OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                        REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                          Print




MEETING DATE         September 15, 2009                    DEPARTMENT             Board of Supervisors
ADDITIONAL
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED        10 minutes                            PERSONS                Board of Supervisors
                                                           APPEARING
SUBJECT              Williamson Act Subventions            BEFORE THE
                                                           BOARD


                                         AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
               (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

        Proposed letter addressed to Governor Schwarzenegger supporting the Williamson Act subventions.


RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve proposed letter to Governor Schwarzenegger requesting the restoration of Open Space Subvention funding
in the 2010-11 State Budget.


FISCAL IMPACT:
None.


CONTACT NAME: Lynda Roberts
PHONE/EMAIL: 932-5538 / lroberts@mono.ca.gov

     SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                     SEND COPIES TO:
        ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
          THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
       PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
   32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
b
c
d
e
f
g YES g NO
      d
      e
      f
      c


ATTACHMENTS:
 Click to download
    Williamson Act Subventions
   Proposed Letter


History
Time                 Who                            Approval
9/9/2009 12:57 PM    County Administrative Office   Yes

9/8/2009 10:38 AM    County Counsel                 Yes

9/3/2009 11:22 AM    Finance                        Yes
                   BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
                   COUNTY OF MONO
                                         P.O. BOX 715, BRIDGEPORT, CALIFORNIA 93517
                                                     (760) 932-5538 ≠ FAX (760) 932-5531
            Lynda Roberts                                                  Linda Romero
          Clerk of the Board                                        Assistant Clerk of the Board
        lroberts@mono.ca.gov                                           lromero@mono.ca.gov




To:       Honorable Board of Supervisors

From:     Lynda Roberts, Clerk of the Board

Date:     September 15, 2009


Subject
Open Space Subvention Funding (Williamson Act)

Recommendation
Approve proposed letter to Governor Schwarzenegger requesting the restoration of Open
Space Subvention funding in the 2010-11 State Budget.

Discussion
The Board of Supervisors requested that the proposed letter supporting Williamson Act
subventions be agendized for discussion and possible approval.

Fiscal Impact
None




      _________________________________________________________________________________________
                     Tom Farnetti ~ District One      Duane ‘Hap’ Hazard ~ District Two
             Vikki Bauer ~ District Three   Bill Reid ~ District Four Byng Hunt ~ District Five
                 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
                 COUNTY OF MONO
                                        P.O. BOX 715, BRIDGEPORT, CALIFORNIA 93517
                                                    (760) 932-5538 ≠ FAX (760) 932-5531
          Lynda Roberts                                                   Linda Romero
        Clerk of the Board                                         Assistant Clerk of the Board
      lroberts@mono.ca.gov                                            lromero@mono.ca.gov




September 15, 2009

The Honorable Arnold Schwarzenegger
Governor, State of California
State Capitol
Sacramento, CA 95814

Re: Open Space Subvention Funding (Section 9100-101-0001)

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger:

On behalf of Mono County, I am writing to urge you to restore the Open Space
Subvention funding (Section 9100-101-0001) in your proposed 2010-11 State Budget.
This modest appropriation will allow counties to continue to participate in the California
Land Conservation Act, also referred to as the Williamson Act.

For cities and counties, the financial support provided by the Williamson Act
subventions has provided a tangible incentive for local governments to stay in the
program and initiate more contracts. This year’s suspension of the subvention funding
may be the last straw for some counties struggling to provide essential public services.
Many counties are seriously considering exiting the program if the subventions are not
funded next year.

In addition to the fiscal implications for counties, we fear that eliminating the subvention
payments is the first step toward a total unraveling of the broadest based agricultural
conservation program in the State. California is losing its working landscapes at an
alarming rate while simultaneously faced with tremendous population pressure that
further jeopardizes the economic viability of thousands of farming and ranching
enterprises.

As you know, California committed to reducing its carbon emissions and addressing
global warming in a comprehensive manner upon your signing of AB 32 and SB 375.
Please recognize that the Williamson Act is the ultimate compliment to these
measurers. The Act strives to protect farmland and open space, land which in itself
reduces greenhouse gas emissions through the carbon sequestration process.

 _________________________________________________________________________________________
                Tom Farnetti ~ District One      Duane ‘Hap’ Hazard ~ District Two
        Vikki Bauer ~ District Three   Bill Reid ~ District Four Byng Hunt ~ District Five
The Honorable Arnold Schwarzenegger
September 15, 2009
Page 2




The preservation of agriculture and open space is not just a local priority; it is—and
must remain—a State priority. We urge you to support restoration of the Williamson
Act subventions in 2010.

Sincerely,


Bill Reid, Chairman
Mono County Board of Supervisors

Cc: Howard P. “Buck” McKeon
    Tom Berryhill
    Dave Cox




 _________________________________________________________________________________________
                Tom Farnetti ~ District One      Duane ‘Hap’ Hazard ~ District Two
        Vikki Bauer ~ District Three   Bill Reid ~ District Four Byng Hunt ~ District Five
        OFFICE OF THE CLERK
        OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                         REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                             Print




MEETING DATE          September 15, 2009                     DEPARTMENT            Board of Supervisors
ADDITIONAL
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED         10 minutes                             PERSONS               Board Members
                                                             APPEARING
SUBJECT               State Budget                           BEFORE THE
                                                             BOARD


                                           AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
                (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

                The Board of Supervisors may discuss issues pertaining to the California State budget.


RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Discuss issues if necessary; provide staff direction if so desired.


FISCAL IMPACT:
None.


CONTACT NAME: Lynda Roberts
PHONE/EMAIL: 932-5538 / lroberts@mono.ca.gov

      SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                      SEND COPIES TO:
         ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
           THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
        PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
    32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
b
c
d
e
f
g YES g NO
      d
      e
      f
      c


ATTACHMENTS:
 Click to download

 No Attachments Available
History
Time               Who                            Approval
7/8/2009 3:54 PM   County Administrative Office   Yes

7/6/2009 4:54 PM   County Counsel                 Yes

7/6/2009 6:56 AM   Finance                        Yes
        OFFICE OF THE CLERK
        OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                        REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                          Print




MEETING DATE         September 15, 2009                    DEPARTMENT             Board of Supervisors
ADDITIONAL
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED        10 minutes                            PERSONS                Supervisor Bauer
                                                           APPEARING
SUBJECT              Carbon Cap and Trade Program          BEFORE THE
                                                           BOARD


                                         AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
               (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

     The Board will discuss and consider adopting R09-__ "A resolution of the Board of Supervisors of Mono
    County opposing new taxes on state or local governments, employers or households through federal climate
                    revenues collection". Supervisor Bauer asked to have this item agendized.


RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Potentially adopt proposed resolution.


FISCAL IMPACT:
None.


CONTACT NAME: Lynda Roberts
PHONE/EMAIL: 932-5538 / lroberts@mono.ca.gov

      SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                    SEND COPIES TO:
         ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
           THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
        PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
    32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
b
c
d
e
f
g YES g NO
      d
      e
      f
      c


ATTACHMENTS:
 Click to download
    Cap and Trade
History
Time                Who                            Approval
9/9/2009 12:56 PM   County Administrative Office   Yes

9/10/2009 8:49 AM   County Counsel                 Yes

9/9/2009 1:11 PM    Finance                        Yes
                                      RESOLUTION NO. R09-___

      A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF MONO COUNTY
    OPPOSING NEW TAXES ON STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, EMPLOYERS
    OR HOUSEHOLDS THROUGH FEDERAL CLIMATE REVENUES COLLECTION

        WHEREAS, in July 2008, the National Association of Counties (“NACo”) passed a
resolution calling for further studies before Congress passes a law on carbon cap and trade,
which states as follows: “NACo supports in-depth study and evaluation of financial and
environmental impact of carbon cap and trade program or the lack thereof and its impact on local
land use regulatory authority . . .”; and

       WHEREAS, on July 26, 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 2454, The
American Clean Energy and Security Act for 2009, that is currently on the United States Senate
calendar, which will create a cap and trade program for greenhouse gasses; and

       WHEREAS, carbon tax is being proposed by some because of the theory that man-
caused greenhouse gas affects global warming; and

         WHEREAS, The Congressional Budget Office (“CBO”) estimates that this bill will cost
ten billion dollars ($10 billion), broken out as eight hundred and ninety dollars ($890) per
household in 20201; and

      WHEREAS, as fees from the bill increase, estimates put the cost to the average U.S.
household close to seven thousand dollars ($7,000) per year by 20302; and

       WHEREAS, NASA temperature statistics show that temperatures have been decreasing
since 20023; and

          WHEREAS, some weather scientists are predicting global cooling is beginning; and




1
    CBO report Waxman-Markey, page 4
2
  Science Applications International Corporation, which is a contractor with the U.S. Energy Information
Administration (“EIA”), reports that EIA’s economic models show carbon dioxide restrictions such as those
required by Waxman-Markey are likely to cost the average U.S. household close to $7,000 each year by the year
2030.
3
    Dr Roy Spencer PhD. Climatologist, Former NASA scientist
       WHEREAS, record cooler spring and summer temperatures occurred in wide areas of
the country in 2009.

    NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF MONO COUNTY
RESOLVES as follows:

        In this time of severe economic recession and rising unemployment, the Board of
Supervisors of Mono County opposes any federal legislation, including cap and trade
legalization, if it imposes any new tax, energy cost, or other financial burden on state and local
governments, employers and households. The Board of Supervisors of Mono County calls
upon Congress to follow the 2008 NACo resolution and further study the issue in light of the
NASA temperature statistics.

     PASSED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of September, 2009, by the following vote:

AYES    :
NOES    :
ABSTAIN :
ABSENT :

ATTEST: ______________________                        ______________________
        Clerk of the Board                            Bill Reid, Chair
                                                      Board of Supervisors

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

______________________
COUNTY COUNSEL
        OFFICE OF THE CLERK
        OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                        REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                          Print




MEETING DATE         September 15, 2009                    DEPARTMENT             Public Works
ADDITIONAL           Community Development
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED        30 minutes                            PERSONS                Kelly Garcia, Assistant Public Works
                                                           APPEARING              Director; Allen Berrey, Assistant
SUBJECT              PUBLIC HEARING--Bryant Field          BEFORE THE             County Counsel
                     Airport Use Permit                    BOARD


                                         AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
               (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

 Consideration of application of Aerohaus LLC for an Airport Use Permit allowing it direct access to Bryant Field from
  nine aircraft hangars that Aerohaus proposes to install on its private property adjacent to Bryant Field (commonly
                referred to as a "through-the-fence" arrangment). Provide any desired direction to staff.


RECOMMENDED ACTION:
It is recommended that the Board: 1) Receive staff report regarding: a) Aerohaus LLC's application for an Airport Use
Permit (AUP) allowing it to access Bryant Field Airport directly from its property adjacent to the Airport; b) the
associated Community Development Director's (CDD) Review 09-01 authorizing Aerohaus to construct nine aircraft
hangars on its property adjacent to Bryant Field; and c) the Environmental Analysis concerning the AUP prepared by
Community Development. 2) Designate the Land Development Technical Advisory Committee (LDTAC) as the Bryant
Field Airport Advisory Board for purposes of this Airport Use Permit application; 3) Conduct a public hearing on
LDTAC's recommendation that the Board find its consideration of the AUP is exempt from further CEQA review under
Section 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines; 4) Based on the recommendations of staff and the LDTAC, acting as the
Bryant Field Airport Advisory Board, either: a) approve, with such conditions as the Board deems
appropriate, Aerohaus's application for an Airport Use Permit, and establish an Airport Access Fee to be paid by
Aerohaus in connection with that Permit; or b) deny that application. 5) If the Board approves the
application, make findings as to whether the Board's decision to issue the Airport Use Permit, is exempt from further
CEQA review under CEQA Guideline 15183 (projects consistent with development density of General Plan for which
an EIR was certified if feasible mitigation measures are undertaken); 6) If the Board approves the Application,
establishes an Airport Access Fee, and makes a CEQA finding, etc., adopt a resolution memorializing those actions
and directing County Counsel to draft an AUP for final consideration by the Board at a later meeting; 7) Provide any
desired direction to staff.


FISCAL IMPACT:
Potential annual revenue from Airport Access Fees of $1200-$2700, depending on the rate at which the hangars are
built and leased; these fees would go to the Airport Enterprise Fund.


CONTACT NAME: Allen Berrey
PHONE/EMAIL: 760-924-1712 / aberrey@mono.ca.gov
    SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH           SEND COPIES TO:
       ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
         THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
      PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
  32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
b
c
d
e
f
g YES g NO
      d
      e
      f
      c


ATTACHMENTS:
Click to download
   staff report
   Board resolution 06-111
   LDTAC minutes 8 31 09
   Bryant Field Review
   Bryant Field Analysis
   Resolution approving AUP


History
Time                          Who                            Approval
9/9/2009 12:57 PM             County Administrative Office   Yes

9/9/2009 11:49 AM             County Counsel                 Yes

9/9/2009 1:17 PM              Finance                        Yes
County Counsel                                     OFFICE OF THE                          Telephone
Marshall Rudolph                                                                        760-924-1700
                                         COUNTY COUNSEL                                    Facsimile
Assistants                                          Mono County                         760-924-1701
Mark Magit                                  South County Offices
Stacey Simon                                   P.O. BOX 2415
Allen Berrey                          MAMMOTH LAKES, CALIFORNIA 93546




      TO:                        The Board of Supervisors

      FROM:                      Allen Berrey, Assistant County Counsel

      MEETING DATE:              September 15, 2009

      RE:               Application for Airport Use Permit for Access to Bryant Field
      ________________________________________________________________________

      The following is respectfully submitted with regard to the referenced Agenda
      item:

      BACKGROUND

      In November, 2006, the Board adopted Resolution No. 06-111,1 which established
      rules and procedures by which the County could consider, and grant or deny,
      requests by those wishing to access Bryant Field Airport from private property
      adjoining the Airport. If granted, such “through-the-fence” access would be
      memorialized in a County-issued “Airport Use Permit” (AUP).

      Aerohaus LLC owns property adjacent to Bryant Field upon which it proposes to
      construct nine aircraft hangars, and has asked the County to issue it an AUP
      allowing it to have “through-the-fence” access to Bryant Field from its hangars
      and vice versa. It is that request that is before the Board today.

      Under Resolution 06-111, anyone wishing to obtain an AUP must first submit an
      application, which is reviewed by the Bryant Field Airport Advisory Board “or
      such other entity as the Board may designate.” Based on the application and
      certain criteria set forth in the Resolution, the Advisory Board or other entity is to
      make a recommendation to the Board as to whether the Board should “grant,
      grant with conditions or deny the applicant’s request for access.”




      1   A copy of that Resolution is attached.


                                                        1
The Board of Supervisors then reviews the application, the findings of the
Airport Advisory Board, and such other factors as the Board chooses, and either
grants the request made in the application, with or without conditions, or denies
the application; certain of the conditions the Board can impose are set forth in the
Resolution. Further, if the Board approves the application, it must establish, via
resolution, an “Airport Access Fee” to be paid by the recipient of the AUP.

Aerohaus has not submitted a formal application for the AUP. It did, however,
submit an application to the Community Development Department for approval
of the hangars that Aerohaus wishes to build adjacent to Bryant Field, and both
Community Development and the Public Works Department have deemed that
application as including a request for issuance of the AUP.

Nor has Aerohaus’s application been presented to the Bryant Field Airport
Advisory Board, mainly because that Board has not been constituted. Instead,
the application was submitted for review on August 31 to the County’s Land
Development Technical Advisory Committee (LDTAC). The LDTAC, acting in
place of the Bryant Field Advisory Board, addressed the following matters, as
contemplated by Section 3 of Resolution No. 06-111, and made the corresponding
findings:

      1) Will issuance of the AUP “enhance the usefulness of the airport to the
      local community”?

      The LDTAC found that issuance of the AUP would indeed enhance the
      usefulness of the Bryant Field property, because it would facilitate the
      construction and use of new aircraft storage facilities (i.e., hangars) at
      Bryant Field.

      2) Will issuance of the AUP provide important tax base and/or jobs for
      the community?

      The LDTAC found this criterion was met because issuance of the AUP,
      together with construction of the hangars, will increase the value of
      Aerohaus’s property at Bryant Field.

      3) Will issuance of the AUP enhance and improve the physical
      and/or financial operations of the airport?

      The LDTAC found the issuance of the AUP, together with construction of
      the hangars, would provide aviation storage facilities that currently do
      not exist at Bryant Field, thereby enhancing the physical operations of the
      airport.




                                         2
The LDTAC also recommended that the Board of Supervisors approve
Aerohaus’s application for the AUP, subject to the conditions that: 1) are set forth
in Resolution No. 06-111; and 2) were imposed in Director Review 09-01, by
which the County authorized construction of the hangars adjacent to Bryant
Field, to the extent those conditions apply to the AUP.

Finally, the LDTAC recommended that the Board conduct a public hearing and
make the requisite findings to allow this application to be approved in
accordance with § 21083.3 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
and CEQA Guideline § 15183.         Copies of the Director’s Review 09-01, the
Environmental Analysis concerning Director’s review 09-01, and the LDTAC’s
minutes of its August 31, 2009 action on the AUP are attached to this staff report.

As mentioned, if, upon receipt of the Airport Advisory Board’s (i.e., LDTAC’s)
recommendation, the Board approves the AUP application, it must also, by
resolution, establish an “airport access fee” to be paid by the permittee. The
amount of that fee was the subject of a closed session with the Board on
September 8. Pursuant to the direction given in that closed session, staff
negotiated with the applicant and will advise the Board of the results of that
negotiation and propose a fee amount when the Board considers this matter on
September 15.

FISCAL IMPACT

If the Board approves the AUP application, the County will receive annual
permit-fee revenue. Depending on the amount of the fee established by the
Board and the rate at which the hangars are built and leased, and assuming
AUPs are subsequently issued to the lessees of those hangars, this revenue
would likely be in the range of $1200-$2700 per year, which will go to the Airport
Enterprise Fund. Also, the assessed value of the property upon which Aerohaus
wishes to build hangars might be enhanced were the tenants of those hangars
able to access Bryant Field directly from their hangars.

RECOMMENDATION

It is therefore recommended that the Board:

1. Receive staff report on:

a) Aerohaus LLC’s application for an Airport Use Permit (AUP); and

b) The associated Director’s Review # 09-01 which authorized construction of
nine aircraft hangars adjacent to Bryant Field; and




                                         3
c) The “Environmental Analysis for Bryant Field Hangars” dated Match 2008
concerning Director Review 09-01 and the Airport Use Permit application
prepared by the Community Development Department.

2. Designate the Land Development Technical Advisory Committee (LDTAC) as
the entity with authority under Section 3 of Resolution No. 06-111 to make a
recommendation to the Board with respect to Aerohaus’s application and, via
staff, receive LDTAC’s recommendation on the application.

3. Open and conduct a public hearing on that application and the LDTAC’s
recommendation that the Board find that its consideration of the AUP permit is
exempt from further review under § 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines.

4. Approve or deny the application.

5. If the Board approves the application, it must then:

      a) Establish an Airport Access Fee to be paid by Aerohaus LLC; and

      b) Impose such conditions on the application as the Board sees fit, except
      that the Board is required to impose the mandatory conditions set forth in
      Section 4 of Resolution No. 06-111; in imposing the conditions, the Board
      should consider the recommendation of the LDTAC.

6. If the Board approves the application, it should also take the following actions
with respect to CEQA:

      a) Find that the issuance of the AUP is consistent with the Mono County
      General Plan;

      b) Find that the Mono County General Plan Environmental Impact Report
      (EIR) and the General Plan Land Use Element Update EIR analyzed the
      potential impacts of development provided for in the Airport Land Use
      Compatibility Plan for Bryant Field, including the development proposed
      for the subject parcel (i.e., the use of nine aircraft hangars with direct
      “through-the-fence” access to Bryant Field);

      c) Find that the “Environmental Analysis for Bryant Field Hangars”
      concerning the Airport Use Permit application need only examine those
      environmental effects that are peculiar to the project and that were not
      addressed as significant effects in the Mono County General Plan    EIRs,
      unless substantial new information shows that those effects will be more
      significant than described in those EIRs;




                                         4
      d) Find that uniformly-applied development standards (e.g., General
      Plan/Airport Land Use Compatibility Plans or other development
      standards) have been applied to the project, and that those policies or
      standards will substantially mitigate potential environmental effects that
      were not addressed as significant effects in the prior EIRs to a less-than-
      significant level;

      e) Adopt the “Environmental Analysis for Bryant Field Hangars”
      concerning Director Review 09-01 and Airport Use Permit which were
      prepared in accordance with Public Resources Code § 21083.3 and § 15183
      of the CEQA Guidelines; and

      f) Find that the feasible mitigation measures identified in the Mono
      County General Plan will be applied to this project.

7.    Adopt a resolution by which the Board:

      a) Approves the Airport Use Permit application;

      b) Establishes an Airport Access Fee to be paid by the applicant,
      Aerohaus LLC; and

      c) Directs the County Counsel’s Office, with the assistance of the Public
      Works and Community Development Departments, to prepare an
      Airport Use Permit to be issued to Aerohaus LLC setting forth all of the
      terms and conditions of said approval and present that permit to the
      Board for its final review and approval at a later Board meeting.

8.    Provide such direction to staff as the Board wishes.


Please do not hesitate to contact me at 924-1712 or aberrey@mono.ca.gov should
you have any questions. Thanks you.




                                        5
                   MONO COUNTY
   LAND DEVELOPMENT TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
             Public Works, Community Development, Environmental Health
                        (Other departments may attend as needed)


                               LDTAC MEETING NOTES
                        August 31, 2009 – 1:30 P.M.
      CAO Conference Room, Annex I ~ Bridgeport, CA, or video conference at
     Town/County Conference Room, Minaret Village Mall, Mammoth Lakes, CA
1. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment.

2. PREAPPLICATIONS: No items.

3. APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE: No items.

4. ACTION ITEM:
   AIRPORT USE PERMIT & DIRECTOR REVIEW/Aerohaus LLC (~1:30 p.m.): The proposed
   project is to construct nine aircraft hangars in two phases on APN 008-070-042 in
   Bridgeport adjacent to the Bryant Field airport and operate under a through-the-fence
   arrangement with Mono County for direct access to Bryant Field. Hangars will provide
   general aviation storage. Review amendment of DR 09-01 that would include a freestanding
   sign next to the airport; review Airport Use Permit conditions for through-the-fence
   requirements; and consider supporting environmental assessment. Provide
   recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. Staff: Courtney Weiche

   Attendance:
   Weiche, deBethizy, Plummer, Burns, Johnston, McManis, Shoffner, Carkeet, Berrey,
   Higerd, Lehman, Dublino.

   Discussion:
   Ms. Weiche presented the project. Tony noted the applicant is only requesting a temporary
   sign. Tony noted that the sign would be mounted on the building, and he felt the applicant
   would be willing to put a freestanding 4 x 8 foot sign at 8 feet high. Rick noted that the
   applicant will have to submit wind-loading calculations and a foundation plan for the sign.
   The sign shall be in substantial compliance with the exhibit shown at the LANDTAC
   meeting. Pubic Works may require safety signs in accordance with Chapter 7. The
   conditions could reflect this request.
   Allen Berrey noted that in 2006 the Board of Supervisors adopted resolution R06-111 which
   spells out rules and regulations regarding access to Bryant Field as specific procedures
   allow access to Bryant Field. Berrey noted there is no Bryant Field Advisory Board or such
   other entity. LANDTAC could qualify as another entity. The BOS will retroactively authorize
   the LANDTAC to operate as the advisory board.

   Action:
   1. Ms. Plummer motioned that the LANDTAC act as the Bryant Field Airport Advisory Board
   subject to ratification by the Board of Supervisors as authorized in Resolution R06-111. Mr.
   Higerd seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved.

   2. Ms. Plummer motioned that the Bryant Field Airport Advisory Board i.e. LANDTAC make
   the findings as authorized in BOS Resolution R06-111 that the project: a) will enhance the
   usefulness of the airport to the local community; b) will provide important tax base and/or
   jobs for the community; and c) will enhance and improve the physical and/or financial
   operations of the airport. As evidence to support the motion LANDTAC found that the
   project will: a) facilitate the construction and use of hangars at Bryant Field, making it
   more useful to the community; b) will, in conjunction with the hangars, increase the value
   of Aerohaus’s property adjacent to Bryant Field;
   c) together with the construction of the hangars, enhance physical operations by, providing
   aviation storage facilities that currently do not exist; and further that d) the “Through the
   Fence” arrangement provided in Resolution R06-111will provide additional financial
   resources because the resolution requires an “airport access fee” which supports the finding
   that there will be financial resources. Mr. Higerd seconded the motion. The motion was
   unanimously approved.

   3. Mr. Higerd motioned that the Bryant Field Airport Advisory Board i.e. LANDTAC
   recommend the Board of Supervisors approve the application with conditions as specified in
   resolution R06-111 and included in the conditions of Director Review 09-01. It is also
   recommend that the Board of Supervisors make a finding after the public hearing that the
   mitigation measures contained in Director Review 09-01 have been identified in the General
   Plan and will be applied to this project. Ms. deBethizy seconded the motion. The motion
   was unanimously approved.

5. WORKSHOP: No items.

6. ADJOURN

For questions on the above projects, call Community Development at (760) 924-1800.

*NOTE: Start times are only tentative. Although the LDTAC generally strives to follow the agenda
as scheduled, it reserves the right to take any agenda item, in any order, and at any time after its
meeting starts. The only way to ensure that you are present for a particular agenda item is to
attend the meeting from the time it starts until that agenda item is actually taken up.


                                   AGENDA GUIDELINES
         Rules of order: Project staff introduces item; applicant comments;
         each department comments; public comments; general discussion;
         LDTAC action (if applicable); project staff summarizes action/review;
         project staff records notes and transmits to applicant and file.


        ABOUT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE…
The Mono County Land Development Technical Advisory Committee consists of representatives
from Public Works, Community Development (Building, Planning and Compliance) and
Environmental Health. The LDTAC provides technical review and recommendations on land
development projects. Its purposes include facilitating coordination among County
departments, promoting efficient and timely permit processing, and providing applicants an
inexpensive forum to learn of County requirements early in the development review process.
                                         Mono County
                               Community Development Department
       P.O. Box 347                              Planning Division                                             P.O. Box 8
 Mammoth Lakes, CA 93546                                                                                  Bridgeport, CA 93517
(760) 924-1800, fax 924-1801                                                                          (760) 932-5420, fax 932-5431
  commdev@mono.ca.gov                                                                                   www.monocounty.ca.gov



NOTICE OF DECISION
DIRECTOR REVIEW 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars

DIRECTOR REVIEW:                       09-01
APPLICANT:                             Aerohaus, LLC
SUBJECT PROPERTY:                      APN 08-070-42
PROPOSAL FOR:                          Construction of nine aircraft hangars in two phases

Pursuant to Mono County General Plan, Land Use Element, Chapter 31 (Director Review
Processing), and based upon the following findings, you are hereby notified that Director Review
09-01 has been:
           Granted as requested.
  XX       Granted subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
           Denied.

BACKGROUND
This Director Review permit (DR 09-01) is for the construction of nine aircraft hangars
developed in two phases, initially four, followed by the remaining five and a monument
sign. The hangars are 55x61 square feet and range in height from 18’ to 24’. Exterior
construction materials will be similar to the existing hangar to the North. There will be 4
motion censored Dark Sky compliant lights that will minimize light pollution.

The monument sign shall be placed at the aircraft entrance and shall be no more
than 8’ X 4’ with a height of no more than 8’ at any given point. Hangars will support
general aviation transportation as storage for aircraft. No employees will occupy these
facilities; they are for storage use only. Buildings will be vacant except for when aircraft
is arriving or departing, therefore there is no requirement for an on-site bathroom. Patrons
using hangars will be able to access the existing restroom servicing the Bryant Airport,
via the “Through the Fence Agreement” approved by the Mono County Board of
Supervisors. Electricity will be provided via existing overhead lines and power pole.

The parcel to the north and east is the Bryant Field Airport designated Public Facility
(PF). The parcel to the west is designated Open Space (OS) and is owned by Walker
River Irrigation District. The parcels to the south are undeveloped land designated Estate
Residential/Specific Plan (ER/SP).

An environmental analysis was prepared in 2006 for the Bryant Field Airport Master Plan
20/20 and for the update of the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. The Bryant Field
Master Plan anticipated the development of airport supporting facilities, such as hangars,
on the proposed projects site. A “Request for Comments” notice was sent to applicable
agencies and surrounding property owners. One comment letter was received in favor of
the proposed project.

                      Planning / Building / Code Compliance / Environmental / Collaborative Planning Team (CPT)
Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) / Local Transportation Commission (LTC) / Regional Planning Advisory Committees (RPACs
Proposed Project
   Location




                   2
SITE PLAN




            3
    Elevations




Enlarged Section




                   4
Site Photo




             View looking North West
                    from here




                                   5
DIRECTOR REVIEW FINDINGS

Chapter 31, Processing-Director Review, Section 31.010, the Director may issue a Director
Review permit after making certain findings; the Director has made the following findings
concerning DR 09-01:

 1. All applicable provisions of the Mono County General Plan are complied with, and the site
    of the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use and to
    accommodate all yards, walls and fences, parking, loading, landscaping and other required
    features because:

     a) The parcel is 2.5 acres in area and can accommodate all required yard setbacks.

 2. The site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways adequate in width and type to
    carry the quantity and kind of traffic generated by the proposed use, because:

     a) The parcel is located north of Highway 395 and east of Highway 182 in Bridgeport on
         Stock Drive. The existing road is capable of accommodating the traffic generated by
         the use.

 3. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or
    improvements in the area in which the property is located, because:

     a) The site is adequate in size to accommodate the proposed uses.

     b) The project site is adjacent to similar airport uses.

 4. The proposed use is consistent with the map and text of the existing General Plan because:

     a) The General Plan designation for the parcel is Service Commercial which is “intended
     to provide for a wide variety of wholesale, retail and service uses…”

 5. The project is exempt from CEQA, because:
       The project qualifies pursuant to Section 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines as a
       Categorical Exemption "Projects consistent with a Community Plan or Zoning".
       Potential effects peculiar to this project are limited since the project is being developed
       in a community area, adjacent to developed parcels. Most (if not all) of the effects of
       the project were identified in the EIRs certified by the County in conjunction with the
       adoption and update of the Mono County General Plan and are not unique or peculiar to
       the proposed project.




                                                                                                  6
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
This Director Review permit (DR 09-01) is for the construction of nine aircraft hangars that will
provide general aviation transportation as storage for aircraft.

1.     All new on-site utilities shall be installed underground.
2.     Prior to Building Permit issuance, the applicant shall prepare a landscape plan approved
       by Community Development Department and Public Works Department.

3.     The site shall be kept in a neat and orderly fashion at all times. All improvements
       shall be maintained in a condition of good repair and appearance. Vehicles,
       equipment and materials inappropriate to the site and its use shall not be stored on the
       site. No outside storage is permitted.

4.     Color of buildings and architectural design shall be approved by the Community
       Development Department, prior to building permit, to blend in with existing and
       surrounding facilities.

5.     For hangar patrons, provide either a restroom centrally located or provide
       evidence of approved access to off-site restroom. The Health Department shall
       approve the sanitation methods for the use if applicable

6.     The buildings shall comply with the requirements for Type I construction
       occupancy group S-2. Fire suppression shall be approved by the Mono County
       Building Official, Bridgeport Fire Protection District, and Cal Fire. No flammable
       materials shall be stored on-site.

7.     The applicant shall provide a letter from the Bridgeport Fire Protection
       District indicating the FPD will provide service to the project.

8.     Future outdoor lighting or night lighting shall be low-level, side shielded, and
       directed downward to reduce glare onto adjacent property and roads in compliance with
       Chapter 23, Dark Sky Ordinance, of the Mono County General Plan.

9.     A “Through the Fence Agreement” shall be approved by the Mono County Board of
       Supervisors and all conditions thereto shall be complied with.

10.    Applicant shall install perimeter fencing of the property boundaries and comply
       with other security requirements of a “Through the Fence Agreement” approved
       by the Board of Supervisors.

11.    In accordance with Section 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines a lead agency must make
       a finding at a public hearing as to whether the feasible mitigation measures will be
       undertaken. Therefore, a noticed public hearing will be held for the “Through the
       Fence Agreement” by the Mono County Board of Supervisors, at which time the
       application of these Director Review conditions shall be considered and approved.




                                                                                                  7
12.    The hangars are to be used as aviation storage use only; no service or repair work shall be
       conducted on-site. There shall be no on-site employees.

14.    The applicant shall comply with all building permit requirements.

15.    a.) All signs shall be in conformance with Chapter 07 of the Mono County General
       Plan.

       b.) Monument sign shall not exceed 8 feet in height and shall show substantial
       compliance with dimensions, color, and design as shown in Exhibit A.

       c.) Any lighting shall be indirect and in compliance with Mono County Dark Sky
       Regulations Chapter 23.

16.    Applicant shall comply with any additional signs as may be required by Public
       Works and allowed outright.

17.    Sign shall be in substantial compliance with the exhibits shown at the
       LDTAC (Land Technical Advisory Committee) meeting.

18.    Applicant shall submit a foundation plan in addition to wind-loading
       calculations for the sign in compliance with the Mono County Building
       Divisions requirements.

18.    All requirements of the Mono County General Plan shall be adhered to at all times.

19.    All applicable avigation easements shall be dedicated to the airports as required by
       the airport manager.

20.    The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit for Stock Dr. from the Public
       Works Department.

21.    If any of these conditions are violated, this permit and all rights hereunder may be
       revoked in accordance with Section 32.080 of the Mono County General Plan, Land
       Development Regulations.


EFFECTIVE DATE
This Director Review permit shall become effective fifteen (15) days following the issuance of
the Director's decision. This decision may be appealed within fifteen (15) days by filing a
written notice of appeal with the Secretary of the Planning Commission. If an appeal is filed, the
permit will not be issued until the appeal is considered and a decision is rendered by the Planning
Commission.

The following General Plan policies shall apply in cases of termination, extensions, and
revocation:



                                                                                                 8
Termination.
A Director Review shall terminate and all rights granted therein shall lapse, and the property
affected thereby shall be subject to all the provisions and regulations applicable to the land use
designation in which such property is classified at the time of such abandonment, when any of
the following occur:

   A. There is a failure to commence the exercise of such rights, as determined by the Director,
      within one (1) year from the date of approval thereof. Exercise of rights shall mean
      substantial construction or physical alteration of property in reliance with the terms of the
      Director Review.
   B. There is discontinuance for a continuous period of one (1) year, as determined by the
      Director, of the exercise of the rights granted.
   C. No extension is granted as provided in Section 32.070.

Extensions
If there is a failure to exercise the rights of the Director Review within one (1) year of the date of
approval, the applicant may apply for an extension for an additional one (1) year. Only one
extension may be granted. Any request for extension shall be filed at least sixty (60) days prior
to the date of expiration and shall be accompanied by the appropriate fee. Upon receipt of the
request for extension, the Department shall review the application to determine the extent of
review necessary and schedule it for public hearing. Conditions of approval for the Director
Review may be modified or expanded, including revision of the proposal, if deemed necessary.

Revocation
The Commission may revoke the rights granted by a Director Review and the property affected
thereby shall be subject to all of the provisions and regulations of the Land Use Designations and
Land Development Regulations applicable as of the effective date of revocation. Such
revocation shall include the failure to comply with any condition contained in the Director
Review or the violation by the owner or tenant of any provision pertaining to the premises for
which such Director Review was granted. Before the Commission shall consider revocation of
any permit, the Commission shall hold a public hearing thereon after giving written notice
thereof to the permittee at least ten days in advance of such hearing. The decision of the
Commission may be appealed to the Board of Supervisors in accordance with Chapter 47,
Appeals, and shall be accompanied by an appropriate filing fee.

PREPARED BY:           Courtney Weiche, Assistant Planner


DATE OF DECISION: ____________                        SIGNED
                                                           Scott Burns, Planning Director




                                                                                                    9
     ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
                        for



          Bryant Field Hangars
                    Bridgeport
                    March 2008




             Director Review 09-01 and
Airport Use Permit (Through-the-Fence Requirements)




                  PREPARED BY:

    Mono County Community Development Department
   Planning Division
     P.O. Box 347
Mammoth Lakes, CA 93546
                        Director Review/Bryant Field Hangars
                         ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS




MONO COUNTY PLANNING STAFF
Contact Persons
Courtney Weiche, Assistant Planner

Mono County Community Development
Planning Division
P.O. Box 347
Mammoth Lakes, CA 93546
(760) 924-1800
                                                                                                                                   IMPACT ANALYSIS




                                                TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I--ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS, CEQA SECTION 15182 AND 15183 ...................................................2
I.   INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................................................2
II. PROJECT INFORMATION ................................................................................................................................2
III. PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 15183 ..........................................................................................3
IV. IMPACT ANALYSIS ..........................................................................................................................................9
V. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ................................ 14
VI. DETERMINATION........................................................................................................................................... 25
PART II    REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 26



                                                            LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1 – LOCATION MAP ....................................................................................................................................5
FIGURE 2 – LAND USE DESIGNATION MAP .........................................................................................................6
FIGURE 3 – SITE PLAN AND DETAIL .....................................................................................................................7
FIGURE 3 – AIRPORT PLANNING BOUNDARY ....................................................................................................8




                                                                                 i
                                                   Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                                 March 16, 2009
                                                                                                           IMPACT ANALYSIS



PART I: ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
CEQA Section 15183

I.       INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires public agencies to consider the effects that development projects
will have on the environment. California Public Resources Section 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines mandate that projects that
are consistent with the development density of existing zoning, community plan or general plan policies for which an EIR
was certified shall not require additional environmental review, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are
project-specific significant effects that are peculiar to the project or site.

Mono County has existing zoning, community plan and general plan policies for which an EIR was certified; i.e.

Mono County General Plan, EIR certified in 1993 (SCH # 91032012) − general plan policies for all required general plan
elements.

Mono County Land Use Element Update, EIR certified in 2000 (SCH # 98122016) − zoning, land use policies, community
plan policies.

The Mono County Planning Division has prepared an Initial Study checklist to determine whether there are project-specific
significant effects that are peculiar to the project or to the site. As mandated by the CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, this
checklist identifies whether environmental effects of the project:

1.       Are peculiar to the project or the parcel on which the project would be located;
2.       Were not analyzed as significant effects in a prior EIR on the zoning action, general plan, or community plan, with
         which the project is consistent;
3.       If environmental effects are identified as peculiar to the project and were not analyzed in a prior EIR, are there
         uniformly applied development policies or standards that would mitigate the environmental effects;
4.       Are potentially significant off-site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the prior EIR
         prepared for the General Plan, community plan, or zoning action; or
5.       Are previously that identified significant effects which, as a result of substantial new information that was not
         known at the time the EIR was certified, are determined to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the
         prior EIR.

Further examination of environmental effects related to the project is limited to those items identified in the checklist as
meeting one of the above criteria.

II.      PROJECT INFORMATION

1.       Project Title: Bryant Field Hangars Director Review 09-01/Through the Fence Agreement

2.       Lead Agency Name and Address:
         Mono County Community Development Department
         Planning Division
         P.O. Box 347
         Mammoth Lakes, CA 93546

3.       Contact Persons and Phone Numbers: Courtney Weiche at (760) 924-1803.

4.       Project Location: The project is located on Stock Dr. in Bridgeport, California. The Assessor’s Parcel Number
         (APN) is 08-070-42.

5.       Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
         Aerohaus, LLC
         8250 SW Hunziker Rd.


                                                                2
                                          Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                        March 16, 2009
                                                                                                           IMPACT ANALYSIS



        Tigard, OR 97223
        Jim Severson

        Property Owners
        Aerohaus, LLC
        8250 SW Huntzinger SW
        Portland, OR 97223

6.      General Plan Land Use Designation:
        Service Commercial

7.      Description of Project: The proposed project would construct nine aircraft hangars developed in two
        phases, initially four, followed by the remaining five. Hangars would support general aviation
        transportation as storage for aircraft. No employees will occupy these facilities; they are for storage use
        only.

8.      Surrounding Land Uses
        The surrounding land uses include:

        West: Undeveloped Walker River Irrigation District land use designated Open Space (OS).
        North, East:      Bryant Field Airport land use designation Public Facility (PF). There is currently one hangar
        already located on this site.
        South: Undeveloped land designated Specific Plan/Estate Residential.

        Physical Characteristics of the Property

        The property is 1.5 acres and is currently undeveloped. It is adjacent to the Bryant Field airport. The site is
        characterized by sage brush and native plant species.

        Access
        Access to the parcel is from the east side of Stock Drive. Access will also be used via the existing Bryant Field
        Airport ramp.

        Utilities
        Existing utilities have sufficient capacity to serve the proposed use. All new utility extensions will be installed
        underground. The applicant will obtain a "will serve" letter from the Bridgeport Fire Protection District.
        Utilities will be provided as follows:
        Water Supply:       N/A
        Sewage Disposal: N/A
        Fire Protection: Bridgeport Fire Protection District
        Electricity:        Southern California Edison (underground)
        Telephone:          N/A
        School:             Eastern Sierra Unified School District

III.     PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 15183

Compliance with General Plan, Area Plan, and Land Use Designation (Zoning)
The project site is designated Service Commercial (SC). The SC designation is intended to provide for a wide variety of
wholesale, retail and service uses that are not normally compatible with uses permitted in other commercial districts.

Potential effects peculiar to this project will be limited since the “project” is the adoption of master plans and Airport Land
Use Compatibility Plans for existing airports. The ALUPs are included in the Mono County General Plan Land Use Element
and the impacts of the airport land use policies were analyzed along with the impacts of other land use policies in the General
Plan EIR in 2000.



                                                                3
                                          Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                        March 16, 2009
                                                                                                     IMPACT ANALYSIS



The proposed development is consistent with county wide policies contained in the Mono County General Plan Land Use
Element. The following summarizes applicable sections from the Mono County General Plan:

Bryant Field Airport Goal
Provide for the orderly growth of Bridgeport communities in a manner that retains the small town character, coincides with
infrastructure expansion, facilitates economic and community development, and protects the area's scenic, recreational, and
natural resources.

COUNTYWIDE LAND USE POLICIES
Maintain and enhance the environmental and economic integrity of Mono County while providing for the land use needs of
residents and visitors.

Determination
The project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation for the parcel; EIRs were certified by Mono County for
the adoption of the Mono County General Plan in 1993 and the General Plan Update in 2000. The project meets the
conditions set forth in Public Resources Code Section 21083.3 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15183. The proposed project
is consistent with a community plan and zoning; therefore, the use of an environmental analysis in conformance with CEQA
Guidelines Section 15183 is appropriate.




                                                             4
                                        Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                      March 16, 2009
                                                                      IMPACT ANALYSIS




                                                                      U.S. 395




Figure 1: Location Map

                           Bryant Field Airport
                                Hangars




                                             5
                         Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                       March 16, 2009
                                                IMPACT ANALYSIS




Figure 2: Land Use Designation Map




                       6
   Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                 March 16, 2009
                                             IMPACT ANALYSIS



          Figure 3 Site Plan




                    7
Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
              March 16, 2009
                                             IMPACT ANALYSIS




                    8
Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
              March 16, 2009
                                                                                                                             IMPACT ANALYSIS



     IV. IMPACT ANALYSIS

     The following environmental analysis is based on CEQA Guideline 15183. The checklist assesses potential
     environmental impacts to determine whether they meet requirements for assessment under Section 15183; i.e.

     1.   Are potential impacts peculiar to the project or parcel?
     2.   Were the impacts addressed in a previously certified EIR?
     3.   If an impact is peculiar to the project and was not addressed in a prior EIR, are there uniformly applied development
          policies or standards that would mitigate the impact?
     4.   Are there potentially significant cumulative or offsite impacts that were not discussed in the prior EIR?
     5.   Is there substantial new information to show that a potential impact would be more significant than previously
          described?

                                                                                                     If peculiar and
                                                                                                     not addressed,    Potentially     Substantial
                                                                    Impact        Was the impact     are there         significant     new
                                                                    potentially   addressed in the   uniformly         cumulative or   information
            Issues & Supporting Information Sources
                                                                    peculiar to   prior EIR?         applied           off-site        showing
                                                                    the project                      development       impacts not     impact more
                                                                    or parcel?                       policies or       discussed in    significant
                                                                                                     standard that     the prior       than
                                                                                                     would mitigate?   EIR?            previously
                                                                                                                                       described?


I. LAND USE AND PLANNING.
      a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?          No            Yes                N/A               No              No
      b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or            No            Yes                N/A               No              No
          policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the
          project?
      c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?    No            Yes                N/A               No              No
      d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g.,         No            Yes                N/A               No              No
          impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from
          incompatible land uses)?
      e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an           No            Yes                N/A               No              No
          established community (including a low-income or
          minority community)?

II. POPULATION AND HOUSING.
      a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local No                        Yes                N/A               No              No
          population projections?
      b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or No               Yes                N/A               No              No
          indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped
          area or extension of major infrastructure)?
      c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable No                      Yes                N/A               No              No
          housing?




                                                                    9
                                            Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                          March 16, 2009
                                                                                                                             IMPACT ANALYSIS


                                                                                                     If peculiar and
                                                                                                     not addressed,    Potentially     Substantial
                                                                    Impact        Was the impact     are there         significant     new
                                                                    potentially   addressed in the   uniformly         cumulative or   information
            Issues & Supporting Information Sources
                                                                    peculiar to   EIR?               applied           off-site        shows impact
                                                                    the project                      development       impacts not     more
                                                                    or parcel?                       policies or       discussed in    significant
                                                                                                     standard that     the prior       than
                                                                                                     would mitigate?   EIR?            previously
                                                                                                                                       described?


III. GEOLOGY AND SOILS.
       a) Fault rupture?                                  No                      Yes                N/A               No              No
       b) Seismic ground shaking?                         No                      Yes                N/A               No              No
       c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? No                      Yes                N/A               No              No
       d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard?            No                      Yes                N/A               No              No
       e) Landslides or mudflows?                         No                      Yes                N/A               No              No
       f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil No                      Yes                N/A               No              No
          conditions from excavation, grading, or fill?
       g) Subsidence of the land?                         No                      Yes                N/A               No              No
       h) Expansive soils?                                No                      Yes                N/A               No              No
       i) Unique geologic or physical features?           No                      Yes                N/A               No              No

IV. WATER RESOURCES.
     a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the      No            Yes                N/A               No              No
         rate and amount of surface runoff?
     b) Exposure of people or property to water related             No            Yes                N/A               No              No
         hazards such as flooding?
     c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of        No            Yes                N/A               No              No
         surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved
         oxygen or turbidity)?
     d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water         No            Yes                N/A               No              No
         body?
     e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water    No            Yes                N/A               No              No
         movements?
     f)  Change in the quantity of groundwater, either through      No            Yes                N/A               No              No
         direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception
         of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through
         substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability?
     g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?           No            Yes                N/A               No              No
     h) Impacts to groundwater quality?                             No            Yes                N/A               No              No
     i)  Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater         No            Yes                N/A               No              No
         otherwise available for public water supplies?




                                                                    10
                                            Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                          March 16, 2009
                                                                                                                              IMPACT ANALYSIS




                                                                                                      If peculiar and
                                                                                                      not addressed,    Potentially      Substantial
                                                                     Impact        Was the impact     are there         significant      new
                                                                     potentially   addressed in the   uniformly         cumulative or    information
            Issues & Supporting Information Sources                  peculiar to   EIR?               applied           off-site         shows impact
                                                                     the project                      development       impacts not      more
                                                                     or parcel?                       policies or       discussed in     significant
                                                                                                      standard that     the prior EIR?   than
                                                                                                      would                              previously
                                                                                                      mitigate?                          described?


V. AIR QUALITY.
      a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an        No            Yes                N/A               No               No
          existing or projected air quality violation?
      b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?                   No            Yes                N/A               No               No
      c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause      No            Yes                N/A               No               No
          any change in climate?
      d) Create objectionable odors?                                 No            Yes                N/A               No               No

VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
      a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?              No            Yes                N/A               No               No
      b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp         No            Yes                N/A               No               No
          curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
          uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
      c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?       No            Yes                N/A               No               No
      d) Insufficient parking capacity on site or off site?          No            Yes                N/A               No               No
      e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?          No            Yes                N/A               No               No
      f)  Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative     No            Yes                N/A               No               No
          transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
      g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?                    No            Yes                N/A               No               No

VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
       a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats   No            Yes                N/A               No               No
          (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,
          animals, and birds)?
       b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees)?         No            Yes                N/A               No               No
       c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., oak          No            Yes                N/A               No               No
          forest, coastal habitat, etc.)?
       d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian and vernal          No            Yes                N/A               No               No
          pool)?
       e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?                 No            Yes                N/A               No               No




                                                                     11
                                             Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                           March 16, 2009
                                                                                                                           IMPACT ANALYSIS




                                                                                                   If peculiar and
                                                                                                   not addressed,    Potentially      Substantial
                                                                  Impact        Was the impact     are there         significant      new
                                                                  potentially   addressed in the   uniformly         cumulative or    information
            Issues & Supporting Information Sources
                                                                  peculiar to   EIR?               applied           off-site         shows impact
                                                                  the project                      development       impacts not      more
                                                                  or parcel?                       policies or       discussed in     significant
                                                                                                   standard that     the prior EIR?   than
                                                                                                   would                              previously
                                                                                                   mitigate?                          described?


VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES.
       a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?      No              Yes                N/A               No               No
       b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and No                      Yes                N/A               No               No
          inefficient manner?
       c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral No              Yes                N/A               No               No
          resource that would be of future value to the region
          and the residents of the state?

IX. HAZARDS.
      a) A risk or accidental explosion or release of hazardous   No            Yes                N/A               No               No
         substances (including, but not limited to: oil,
         pesticides, chemicals or radiation)?
      b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan    No            Yes                N/A               No               No
         or emergency evacuation plan?
      c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health    No            Yes                N/A               No               No
         hazard?
      d) Exposure of people to existing sources for potential     No            Yes                N/A               No               No
         health hazards?
      e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,     No            Yes                N/A               No               No
         grass or trees?

X. NOISE.
      a)    Increases in existing noise levels?                   No            Yes                N/A               No               No
      b)    Exposure of people to severe noise levels?            No            Yes                N/A               No               No

XI. PUBLIC SERVICES.
      a) Fire protection?                                         No            Yes                N/A               No               No
      b) Police protection?                                       No            Yes                N/A               No               No
      c) Schools?                                                 No            Yes                N/A               No               No
      d) Parks or recreational facilities?                        No            Yes                N/A               No               No
      e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?       No            Yes                N/A               No               No
      f)  Other governmental services?                            No            Yes                N/A               No               No




                                                                  12
                                             Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                           March 16, 2009
                                                                                                                        IMPACT ANALYSIS




                                                                                                If peculiar and
                                                                                                not addressed,    Potentially      Substantial
                                                               Impact        Was the impact     are there         significant      new
                                                               potentially   addressed in the   uniformly         cumulative or    information
            Issues & Supporting Information Sources
                                                               peculiar to   EIR?               applied           off-site         shows impact
                                                               the project                      development       impacts not      more
                                                               or parcel?                       policies or       discussed in     significant
                                                                                                standard that     the prior EIR?   than
                                                                                                would                              previously
                                                                                                mitigate?                          described?


XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
      a) Power or natural gas?                             No                Yes                N/A               No               No
      b) Communications systems?                           No                Yes                N/A               No               No
      c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution No                Yes                N/A               No               No
           facilities?
      d) Sewer or septic tanks?                            No                Yes                N/A               No               No
      e) Storm water drainage?                             No                Yes                N/A               No               No
      f)   Solid waste disposal?                           No                Yes                N/A               No               No
      g) Local or regional water supplies?                 No                Yes                N/A               No               No

XIII. AESTHETICS.
       a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?               No          Yes                N/A               No               No
       b) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or No          Yes                N/A               No               No
          quality of the site and its surroundings?
       c) Create light or glare?                                 No          Yes                N/A               No               No

XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES.
      a) Disturb paleontological, archaeological or historical No            Yes                Yes               No               No
         resources?
      b) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the No            Yes                N/A               No               No
         potential impact area?

XV. RECREATION.
     a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional No                  Yes                N/A               No               No
         parks or other recreational facilities?
     b) Affect existing recreational opportunities?      No                  Yes                N/A               No               No




                                                               13
                                          Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                        March 16, 2009
                                                                                                            IMPACT ANALYSIS



V. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

 INTRODUCTION
 CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 mandate that when a parcel has been zoned to accommodate a particular density of
 development and an environmental impact report was certified for that zoning or planning action, subsequent environmental
 review of a project consistent with that prior action shall be limited to those effects from the project that are peculiar to the
 parcel or the site unless substantial new information indicates that the effect will be more significant than previously
 described or there are potentially significant off-site or cumulative impacts not discussed in the prior EIR.

 In determining whether an effect is peculiar to the project or the parcel, the CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 state that an
 effect shall not be considered peculiar to the project if it can be substantially mitigated by uniformly applied development
 policies or standards that have previously been adopted by the County with a finding that the policies or standards will
 substantially mitigate that environmental effect when applied to future projects (unless substantial new information shows
 that the policies or standards will not substantially mitigate the environmental effect).

 Potential effects peculiar to this project will be limited since the project is being developed adjacent to the Bryant Field
 Airport and was anticipated to be developed with airport supporting facilities. The Airport Land Use Plan are included in the
 Mono County General Plan Land Use Element and the impacts of the airport land use policies were analyzed along with the
 impacts of other land use policies in the General Plan EIR in 2000.

 The Bryant Field Airport Master Plans focus on development of the airport sites in a manner consistent with the land use
 policies in the ALUPs. The proposed development is an extension of existing uses at the airport and will occur adjacent to
 existing development at the airport. In addition, the Master Plan for the airport states that the airport should continue to be
 developed as basic utility general aviation airports serving primarily single engine and small twin-engine planes, with
 occasional transient turboprops. Since the type of airplane activity is not anticipated to change, the intensity of impacts is not
 anticipated to change over the timeframe of the Master Plans and ALUPs.

 Most (if not all) of the effects of the project were identified in the EIRs certified by the County in conjunction with the
 adoption and update of the Mono County General Plan and are not unique or peculiar to the proposed project.

 The area is suitable for development, and utilities with sufficient capacity for the project are in place or can be extended. The
 potential environmental effects of the project are in conformance with the requirements of the CEQA Guidelines Section
 15183.

 1) LAND USE AND PLANNING
    The land use designation for the proposed project is Service Commercial. The project is consistent with the General
    Plan land use designation for the parcel. Sufficient standards are contained in the Airport Land Use Plan and will be
    supplemented with a “Through the Fence” agreement with Mono County to permit processing through the Director
    Review process.

     The Bryant Field Airport Master Plan 20/20 anticipated development of the proposed property to provide for FBO
     supporting facilities (i.e. fuel tank, automated weather system, apron and hangars).

 Mono County General Plan, Conservation/Open Space Element, Visual Resource Policies

 Objective A       Maintain and enhance visual resources in the County.
 Policy 5:         Restore visually degraded areas when possible.
 Action 5.2:       Work with existing uses to mitigate the adverse visual impacts of those uses, e.g. by painting, landscaping
                   or otherwise screening the use.
 Action 5.3:       Encourage private restoration of disturbed sites.
 Action 5.4:       Consider visual impacts during the Grading Permit process.
 Action 5.5:       Require the restoration of disturbed sites following construction, but prior to issuance of a Certificate of
                   Occupancy.




                                                                 14
                                            Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                          March 16, 2009
                                                                                                         IMPACT ANALYSIS



Objective C      Ensure that development is visually compatible with the surrounding community, adjacent cultural
                 resources and/or natural environment.
Policy 2:        Future development shall be sited and designed to be in scale and compatible with the surrounding
                 community and/or natural environment,
Action 2.1:      Develop design guidelines for residential, commercial, and industrial development projects. At a minimum,
                 the following development standards shall apply:

        a.       Projects should not dominate the natural environment, and should complement existing community
                 character; the scale, design, and siting of a project should be appropriate for the setting;
        b.       Building mass should be varied and should be appropriate for the surrounding community or area. Facades
                 in commercial districts should be varied.;
        c.       Project siting and structural design should be sensitive to the climate, topography, and lighting of the
                 surrounding environment;
        d.       The design, color, and building materials for structures, fences, and signs shall be compatible with the
                 natural environment and/or surrounding community;
        e.       Visually offensive land uses shall be adequately screened through the use of landscaping, fencing, contour
                 grading, or other appropriate measures;
        f.       The visual impacts of parking areas shall be minimized through the use of landscaping, covered parking,
                 siting which screens the parking from view, or other appropriate measures.
        g.       Signs shall comply with the County's Sign Ordinance;
        h.       Standardized commercial structures, design, and materials shall not be allowed (e.g. a "McDonalds" shall
                 be designed with materials and finishes that harmonize with the surrounding area);
        i.       Industrial areas shall be as compact as possible.
        j.       Exterior lighting shall be shielded and indirect and shall be minimized to that necessary for security and
                 safety;
        k.       All new utilities shall be installed underground, in conformance with applicable provisions of the MCZDC;
        l.       Existing roads shall be utilized whenever possible. Construction of new roads should be avoided except
                 where essential for health and safety;
        m.       Earthwork, grading, and vegetative removals shall be minimized;
        n.       All site disturbances shall be revegetated with a mix of indigenous species native to the site (based upon a
                 pre-project species survey). A landscaping plan shall be submitted and approved for all projects.
Action 2.2:      County staff may require project modifications as necessary to implement Policy 2 and Action 2.1 above.

DETERMINATION
•   The land use and planning impacts of the proposed density of development were analyzed in the prior EIRs certified in
    conjunction with the adoption and amendment of the Mono County General Plan.
•   This parcel is no different than other parcels in the surrounding area; there is nothing unusual about the proposed project
    that would change or in any way affect the severity of these impacts. The impacts are not peculiar to the parcel or the
    project.
•   There is no new substantial information indicating that the land use and planning impacts of the project will be more
    severe than described in the prior EIRs.
•   There are no cumulative or off-site land use and planning impacts from the proposed project that were not addressed in
    the prior EIRs.

 2) POPULATION AND HOUSING
The project does not include housing and is not anticipated to induce population growth. Construction-related jobs, or other
jobs engendered by development at the airports, are anticipated to be taken by existing residents of the area and are not
anticipated to induce population growth

DETERMINATION
•   The population and housing impacts of the proposed density of development were analyzed in the prior EIRs certified in
    conjunction with the adoption and amendment of the Mono County General Plan.



                                                              15
                                         Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                       March 16, 2009
                                                                                                           IMPACT ANALYSIS



•   This parcel is no different than other parcels in the surrounding area; there is nothing unusual about the proposed project
    that would change or in any way affect the severity of these impacts. The impacts are not peculiar to the parcel or the
    project.
•   There is no new substantial information indicating that the population and housing impacts of the project will be more
    severe than described in the prior EIRs.
•   There are no cumulative or off-site population and housing impacts from the proposed project that were not addressed in
    the prior EIRs.

3) GEOLOGY
   The airport site is not within an Alquist-Priolo Fault Hazard Zone or an area at high risk for ground failure (MEA Figure
   34). The project site is not in a High Risk Ground Failure Area (MEA Figure 34b, Seismic Hazards), nor in a Rockfall
   Risk Area (MEA Figure 35). There are no unique geologic figures on the site. Bryant Field is in an area subject to ash
   accumulations of 8 inches or more from an eruption in the Long Valley Caldera (MEA Figure 22).

     The Safety Element of The Mono County General Plan, Chapter VI contains goals, policies and implementation
     measures designed to reduce the risk from locally significant natural hazards to an acceptable level. All of Mono County
     has been designated as a Seismic Zone 4, the zone of greatest hazard defined in the Uniform Building Code,
     consequently new construction in the County must comply with stringent engineering and construction requirements
     (Government Code §8875).

     MEA Figure 18C, Soil Erosion, shows the project site is not in an area subject to stream sheet rill erosion, sheet rill or
     urban road construction erosion. However, the Mono County General Plan and the Mono County Grading Ordinance
     (Mono County Code, Chapter 13.08) contains uniformly applied erosion control policies and standards designed to
     prevent erosion and sedimentation impacts from construction activities. The Conditions of Approval for Director
     Review 09-01 will incorporate measures to avoid potential erosion and sedimentation impacts, as required by Mono
     County General Plan policies.

DETERMINATION
•   The geologic impacts of the proposed density of development were analyzed in the prior EIRs certified in conjunction
    with the adoption and amendment of the Mono County General Plan.
•   This parcel is no different than other parcels in the surrounding area; there is nothing unusual about the proposed project
    that would change or in any way affect the severity of these impacts. The impacts are not peculiar to the parcel or the
    project.
•   There is no new substantial information indicating that geologic impacts of the project will be more severe than
    described in the prior EIRs.
•   There are no cumulative or off-site geologic impacts from the proposed project that were not addressed in the prior EIRs.

4) WATER RESOURCES

The East Walker River flows into Bridgeport Reservoir to the west of the airport and flows within approximately 200 feet of
the southwest corner of the parcel. There are no existing storm drainage improvements; drainage is sheet flow to the
surrounding areas. For the most part the ground slopes away from the airport towards the East Walker River and Bridgeport
Reservoir.

The California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) implements the Clean Water Act in California and is
responsible for issuing waste discharge and storm water discharge permits and establishing water quality standards. The
Bryant Field Airport and proposed project site is under the jurisdiction of the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control
Board (LRWQCB). The Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (Basin Plan), revised in 1995, contains
policies and regulations to protect water resources in the region. The overall goal of that plan is to maintain water resources
at existing levels of quality unless potential beneficial uses are unreasonably affected.




                                                               16
                                          Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                        March 16, 2009
                                                                                                         IMPACT ANALYSIS



The additional paved surfaces needed for the proposed new hangars will create additional impervious surfaces, increasing the
volume of storm water runoff which may affect drainage patterns and water quality. Runoff from impervious aeronautical
surfaces may include oil, grease, and other complex hydrocarbon compounds.

Disturbance of more than one acre of soil requires a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and a
Storm water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), administered by the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board.
NPDES permits and Storm water Pollution Prevention Plans contain conditions that regulate storm water runoff and mitigate
potential significant impacts to water quality. Master Plan improvements at Bryant Field do not appear to exceed one acre of
disturbance and will not require a NPDES permit.

The project site is not within a flood zone as designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Figure
38D, Flood Hazards). The Mono County General Plan, Chapter 21, Development Standards – Flood Plain regulations
contain goals, policies and implementation measures intended to establish special requirements and regulations to be applied
to those areas of the County subject to inundation in order to prevent loss of life and property damage.

The project will not create a reduction in the amount of ground water quality or the direction or rate of flow of groundwater,
The Mono County General Plan contains policies to mitigate water resources in the Conservation/Open Space Element –
Water Resources and Water Quality Mitigation Measures.

Conservation/Open Space Element—Goal II, Water Quality

GOAL II: Protect the quality of surface and groundwater resources to meet existing and future domestic, agricultural,
recreational, and natural resource needs in Mono County.

Policy 1:        Future development projects shall avoid potential significant impacts to water quality in Mono County, or
                 mitigate impacts to a level of non-significance unless a statement of overriding considerations is made
                 through the EIR process.
Action 1.1:      Future development projects with the potential to significantly impact water quality shall assess the
                 potential impact(s) prior to project approval. Examples of potential significant impacts include:
                 1) substantially degrading water quality; and/or
                 2) contaminating a public water supply; and/or
                 3) causing substantial flooding, erosion or siltation.

                 In areas determined by the County to be of special significance, such an analysis and associated mitigation
                 measures may be required even if the proposed project conforms to water quality standards established by
                 the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board for the project area.

                 Mitigation measures and associated monitoring programs shall be included in the project plans and
                 specifications and shall be made a condition of approval for the project.

Policy 2:        Control erosion at construction projects.
Action 2.1:      Ensure that Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulations for erosion control are
                 met as a condition for County permit approvals.

DETERMINATION
•   The water resources impacts of the proposed density of development were analyzed in the prior EIRs certified in
    conjunction with the adoption and amendment of the Mono County General Plan.
•   This parcel is no different than other parcels in the surrounding area; there is nothing unusual about the proposed project
    that would change or in any way affect the severity of these impacts. The impacts are not peculiar to the parcel or the
    project.
•   There is no new substantial information indicating that the impacts of the project on water resources will be more severe
    than described in the prior EIRs.




                                                              17
                                          Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                        March 16, 2009
                                                                                                            IMPACT ANALYSIS



•   There are no cumulative or off-site water resources impacts from the proposed project that were not addressed in the
    prior EIRs.
•   Any additional development within the flood zone will comply with Chapter 21, Land Development Regulations of the
    Mono County General Plan Land Use Element.

5) AIR QUALITY
Mono County is a state-designated non-attainment area for ozone and PM10 (State Air Resources Control Board,
www.arb.ca.gov). This project is not expected to increase or impact air quality resulting from auto emissions. In addition, the
amount of traffic generated by the project will not be significant; therefore, potential emissions impacts from that traffic will
not be significant.

The Airport Master Plan states that the airport should continue to be developed as basic utility general aviation airports
serving primarily single engine and small twin-engine planes, with occasional transient turboprops. Since the type of
airplane activity is not anticipated to change as a result of the project, the intensity of air quality impacts related to aircraft
activity is not anticipated to increase significantly over the timeframe of the Master Plan and ALUPs.

The proposed use is not expected to expose sensitive receptors to pollutants or to create any objectionable odors. Policies in
the Mono County General Plan contain air quality mitigation measures in the Conservation/Open Space Element – Public
Health and Safety Section.

DETERMINATION
•   The air quality impacts of the proposed density of development were analyzed in the prior EIRs certified in conjunction
    with the adoption and amendment of the Mono County General Plan.
•   This parcel is no different than other parcels in the surrounding area; there is nothing unusual about the proposed project
    that would change or in any way affect the severity of these impacts. The impacts are not peculiar to the parcel or the
    project.
•   There is no new substantial information indicating that the impacts of the project on air quality will be more severe than
    described in the prior EIRs.
•   There are no cumulative or off-site impacts on air quality from the proposed project that were not addressed in the prior
    EIRs.

6) TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
Access to the parcel is off Stock Dr. in Bridgeport. Because the airport hangars will not have employees, there will be no
regular hours of operation and there will be minimal impact to the existing local traffic patterns. The number of trips
generated will not significantly impact the capacity of Stock Drive, pursuant to the guidance provided in the manual Trip
Generation, 5th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1991.

Trips generated by the proposed project will not substantially increase vehicle trips on local roads or cause traffic congestion.
The Master Plan for Bryant Field estimates that the peak number of flights per hour on an average day in the peak month will
remain at three flights per hour through 2020. The number of flights on an average day in the peak month at Bryant Field is
estimated to increase from 17 in 2000 to 23 in 2020. Access to Bryant Field is on local roads, SR 182, and Hwy. 395.
Assuming that each airplane flight generates two vehicle trips (one from the airport and one returning to the airport) the access
roads to Bryant Field have the capacity to handle the minimal increase in traffic.

The lot is of adequate size to accommodate all required parking on the parcel. The project will neither create barriers for
pedestrians or bicyclists nor will it conflict with policies supporting alternative transportation.

The Mono County General Plan Circulation Element, Land Development Regulations and the Mono County Regional
Transportation Plan contain policies and standards concerning transportation and circulation that have been applied to this
project.




                                                                18
                                           Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                         March 16, 2009
                                                                                                            IMPACT ANALYSIS



DETERMINATION
•   The traffic and circulation impacts of the proposed density of development were analyzed in the prior EIRs certified in
    conjunction with the adoption and amendment of the Mono County General Plan.
•   This parcel is no different than other parcels in the surrounding area; there is nothing unusual about the proposed project
    that would change or in any way affect the severity of these impacts. The impacts are not peculiar to the parcel or the
    project.
•   There is no new substantial information indicating that the traffic and circulation impacts of the project will be more
    severe than described in the prior EIRs.
•   There are no cumulative or off-site traffic and circulation impacts from the proposed project that were not addressed in
    the prior EIRs.

7) BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
VEGETATION
The proposed project is located within the community of Bridgeport and is surrounded by developed commercial and
residential uses and by Bridgeport Reservoir. Land to the west of the developed portion is currently undeveloped, covered
with a mix of sagebrush scrub and pasture land. The sagebrush scrub covers nearly all of the area and is composed primarily
of rabbit brush with some bitter brush and sagebrush. The pasture land is primarily grass and is used for grazing. Figure 28
in the MEA indicates that are no special status wildlife species or habitats within the general vicinity of Bryant Field. This
area does not provide significant habitat for any wildlife species and the sagebrush scrub habitat is common regionally.

WILDLIFE
The Mono County Master Environmental Assessment (MEA) indicates that there are no special status wildlife species or
habitats within the general vicinity of Bryant Field. The nearest locations of special status wildlife species indicated in the
MEA are at Log Cabin Creek, west of Bridgeport Valley (lahontan cutthroat trout), at Twin Lakes (northern goshawk), and
in the hills southeast of Bridgeport (travertine band-thigh diving beetle and farther south sage grouse leks). The MEA also
indicates that the general vicinity is not a wildlife use area for any species, including mule deer. In the past, birds were
attracted to trash at the Bridgeport Landfill, located approximately one half mile east of the northern end of the airport, which
created a potential hazard at the airport. The landfill has been converted to a solid waste transfer station with covered
containers and no longer attracts birds.

Bryant Field is primarily developed with paved runways and airport facilities. Undeveloped land immediately adjacent to the
airport is predominantly sagebrush scrub, much of which has been previously disturbed by construction, use and maintenance
of the airport facilities, access roads, and adjacent highways.

The airport land use planning boundaries for Bryant Field extend well beyond the area occupied by the airport facilities,
primarily to address potential safety and noise impacts from aircraft during approach and takeoff. The Airport Land Use Plan
(ALUPs) focus on development within the airport land use planning boundaries. The airport master plans for the airport
focus on future development, expansion and renovation of existing airport facilities. Analysis of the potential environmental
impacts resulting from the adopting of the Master Plans and Comprehensive Land Use Plans focused on potential impacts
within the general vicinity of the airport, i.e. within the area of existing and proposed airport facilities such as the hangars.

No special status species were identified within the general vicinity of the airport; there are no potential impacts identified for
these resources. Northern Goshawks may occasionally fly over the site. The minor loss of sage brush scrub does not
represent a significant loss of foraging habitat for the Goshawk based on the regional abundance of the habitat.

Bryant Field is in the middle of a developed area and is not identified as a deer use area, and does not provide deer habitat.
Deer proof security fencing would force deer to avoid airport supporting facilities.

The Mono County General Plan Countywide Land Use Policies, Wildlife Mitigation Measures Conservation/Open Space
Element, Biological Resources Section and Land Development Regulations and the Mono County Regional Transportation
Plan contain policies and standards concerning biological resources that have been applied to this project.



                                                                19
                                           Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                         March 16, 2009
                                                                                                           IMPACT ANALYSIS



DETERMINATION
•   The biological resources impacts of the proposed density of development were analyzed in the prior EIRs certified in
    conjunction with the adoption and amendment of the Mono County General Plan.
•   This parcel is no different than other parcels in the surrounding area; there is nothing unusual about the proposed project
    that would change or in any way affect the severity of these impacts. The impacts are not peculiar to the parcel or the
    project.
•   There is no new substantial information indicating that the biological impacts of the project will be more severe than
    described in the prior EIRs.
•   There are no cumulative or off-site biological impacts from the proposed project that were not addressed in the prior
    EIRs.

8) ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES
All future construction will be required to meet the requirements of Title 24, Part 2, Chapter 2-53 Energy Efficiency
Standards according to Mono County Code 15.04.111. While an incremental demand upon existing energy service or
resources is expected, it is not expected to be significant.

MEA figure 17D indicates that the site is located in an area designated MRA-3 indicating areas with mineral deposits, the
significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data.

DETERMINATION
•   The energy and mineral resource impacts of the proposed density of development were analyzed in the prior EIRs
    certified in conjunction with the adoption and amendment of the Mono County General Plan.
•   This parcel is no different than other parcels in the surrounding area; there is nothing unusual about the proposed project
    that would change or in any way affect the severity of these impacts. The impacts are not peculiar to the parcel or the
    project.
•   There is no new substantial information indicating that the energy and mineral resource impacts of the project will be
    more severe than described in the prior EIRs.
•   There are no cumulative or off-site energy and mineral resource impacts from the proposed project that were not
    addressed in the prior EIRs.

9) HAZARDS
All future development will be required to comply with the Mono County Fire Safe Regulations (Mono County Land
Development Regulations, Chapter 22). The proposed project will provide adequate access for emergency vehicles. The
development of the hangars is not expected to create health hazards. There are no known health hazards in the project area to
which owners could be exposed.

There are no plans for additional fuel storage facilities. The existing fuel tank at the neighboring Bryant Field Airport,
utilizes modern safety and spill prevention systems, in accordance with State and Federal permitting requirements. No
significant environmental impacts are anticipated from hazardous materials or wastes at the site.

DETERMINATION
•   The hazards impacts of the proposed density of development were analyzed in the prior EIRs certified in conjunction
    with the adoption and amendment of the Mono County General Plan.
•   This parcel is no different than other parcels in the surrounding area; there is nothing unusual about the proposed project
    that would change or in any way affect the severity of these impacts. The impacts are not peculiar to the parcel or the
    project.
•   There is no new substantial information indicating that the hazards impacts of the project will be more severe than
    described in the prior EIRs.
•   There are no cumulative or off-site hazards impacts from the proposed project that were not addressed in the prior EIRs.




                                                                20
                                          Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                        March 16, 2009
                                                                                                            IMPACT ANALYSIS



 10) NOISE
  Noise readings taken at Bryant Field Airport indicate that noise does not extend much beyond the boundaries of the airport
  property. Noise levels may increase as a result of increased aircraft operations and associated vehicular traffic. The 55dB
  CNEL contour projects partially into the residential area to the east of the airport. The airport noise impact to this area is
  infrequent and intermittent, and therefore is not considered to be significant. This same area experiences greater and more
  frequent noise impacts from the adjacent highway traffic on State Route 182. Since airport activity is not projected to
  increase significantly over the 20-year timeframe of the Master Plans and Airport Land Use Plans, noise impacts are not
  considered to become significant over that timeframe.

  The overall purpose of the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUPs) for the Bryant Field airport is to allow for the
  orderly development of airport supporting facilities in a manner that minimizes the public’s exposure to excessive exterior
  noise levels for noise sensitive receptors within the airport land use planning boundaries. These noise levels comply with
  Federal regulations for noise control at airports.

      Bryant Field Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan Noise Policies:

      NOISE GOAL
      Protect future development within the Bryant Field Airport/Lee Vining Airport planning boundaries from objectionable
      airport-related noise by minimizing the number of people exposed to frequent and/or high levels of airport noise.

      POLICY 3           Prohibit noise-sensitive land uses (e.g. residential uses, schools, hospitals) within the 55 dBA CNEL
                         noise contours for Bryant Field Airport/Lee Vining Airport.

      POLICY 4           Require noise and avigation easements1, as necessary, before approving any land trade or major
                         development project within the Bryant Field Airport/Lee Vining Airport land use planning boundaries.


  Construction-related noise impacts may cause some temporary disturbance. The hangars will have no onsite employees;
  therefore there will be no regular hours of operation and limited impact from noise-generating sources. No significant long-
  term noise impacts are anticipated from the proposed use. Ordinance requirements direct that noise levels during construction
  be kept to a minimum by equipping all on-site equipment with noise attenuation devices and by compliance with all
  requirements of the County's Noise Ordinance (Mono County Code, Chapter 10.16).


  DETERMINATION
  •   The noise impacts of the proposed density of development were analyzed in the prior EIRs certified in conjunction with
      the adoption and amendment of the Mono County General Plan.
  •   This parcel is no different than other parcels in the surrounding area; there is nothing unusual about the proposed project
      that would change or in any way affect the severity of these impacts. The impacts are not peculiar to the parcel or the
      project.
  •   There is no new substantial information indicating that noise impacts of the project will be more severe than described in
      the prior EIRs.
  •   There are no cumulative or off-site noise impacts from the proposed project that were not addressed in the prior EIRs.

11) PUBLIC SERVICES
  The project is located within the Bridgeport Fire Protection District (FPD) and will be required to comply with FPD
  regulations, building regulations and the county's Fire Safe Regulations (Mono County Land Development Regulations,
  Chapter 22). Emergency services are not expected to be impacted by the project. Police protection is provided by the Mono
  County Sheriff's Department. The proposed project is not anticipated to impact law enforcement services.




                                                                 21
                                            Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                          March 16, 2009
                                                                                                           IMPACT ANALYSIS



  The Eastern Sierra Unified School District collects impact fees at the time of building permit issuance to mitigate future
  impacts.

  Future development is not expected to impact existing park facilities.

  DETERMINATION
  •   The public service impacts of the proposed density of development were analyzed in the prior EIRs certified in
      conjunction with the adoption and amendment of the Mono County General Plan.
  •   This parcel is no different than other parcels in the surrounding area; there is nothing unusual about the proposed project
      that would change or in any way affect the severity of these impacts. The impacts are not peculiar to the parcel or the
      project.
  •   There is no new substantial information indicating that the public service impacts of the project will be more severe than
      described in the prior EIRs.
  •   There are no cumulative or off-site public service impacts from the proposed project that were not addressed in the prior
      EIRs.

12)   UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
      Future service extensions for electrical services must be installed underground in compliance with Mono County
      General Plan policies. Water will not be provided nor sewage disposal as they are not applicable to this proposal and
      therefore, will not have an impact to water or sewage services. Mono County landfill facilities are not expected to be
      impacted by the proposed project.

  DETERMINATION
  •   The utilities and service systems impacts of the proposed density of development were analyzed in the prior EIRs
      certified in conjunction with the adoption and amendment of the Mono County General Plan.
  •   This parcel is no different than other parcels in the surrounding area; there is nothing unusual about the proposed project
      that would change or in any way affect the severity of these impacts. The impacts are not peculiar to the parcel or the
      project.
  •   There is no new substantial information indicating that the utilities and service systems impacts of the project will be
      more severe than described in the prior EIRs.
  •   There are no cumulative or off-site utilities and service systems impacts from the proposed project that were not
      addressed in the prior EIRs.

 13) AESTHETICS
     The proposed location is ideal for the hangars since it is directly adjacent to the Bryant Airport. The immediate
     surrounding environment of the proposed location consists of sage brush, and similar vegetation. The project is not
     within the boundaries of a state or county designated scenic highway corridor.


      The visual effect of the proposed hangars will be minimal since it is consistent with the surrounding land uses which are
      not considered visually offensive nor do they have a significant visual impact on the visual resources in the general
      vicinity of the airport. Expansion of the existing uses will not degrade visual resources in the area.

  The Mono County General Plan and Land Development Regulations contain policies and standards concerning visual
  resources/aesthetics that have been applied to this project; i.e.

  VISUAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURES CONSERVATION/OPEN SPACE ELEMENT
  VISUAL RESOURCES

  OBJECTIVE A: Maintain and enhance visual resources in the County.
  Policy 5:    Restore visually degraded areas when possible.



                                                                 22
                                            Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                          March 16, 2009
                                                                                                         IMPACT ANALYSIS



Action 5.2:      Work with existing uses to mitigate the adverse visual impacts of those uses, e.g. by painting,
                 landscaping, or otherwise screening the use.
Action 5.3:      Encourage private restoration of disturbed sites.
Action 5.4:      Consider visual impacts during the Grading Permit Process.
Action 5.5:      Require the restoration of disturbed sites following construction, but prior to issuance of a
                 Certificate of Occupancy.

Policy 2:        Future development shall be sited and designed to be in scale and compatible with the surrounding
                 community and/or natural environment,
Action 2.1:      Develop design guidelines for residential, commercial, and industrial development projects. At a
                 minimum, the following development standards shall apply:
                 a. Projects should not dominate the natural environment, and should complement existing
                      community character; the scale, design, and siting of a project should be appropriate for the
                      setting;
                 b. Building mass should be varied and should be appropriate for the surrounding community or
                      area. Facades in commercial districts should be varied.;
                 c. Project siting and structural design should be sensitive to the climate, topography, and
                      lighting of the surrounding environment;
                 d. The design, color, and building materials for structures, fences, and signs shall be compatible
                      with the natural environment and/or surrounding community;
                 e. Visually offensive land uses shall be adequately screened through the use of landscaping,
                      fencing, contour grading, or other appropriate measures;
                 f. The visual impacts of parking areas shall be minimized through the use of landscaping,
                      covered parking, siting which screens the parking from view, or other appropriate measures.
                 g. Signs shall comply with the County's Sign Ordinance;
                 h. Standardized commercial structures, design, and materials shall not be allowed (e.g. a
                      "McDonalds" shall be designed with materials and finishes that harmonize with the
                      surrounding area);
                 i. Industrial areas shall be as compact as possible.
                 j. Exterior lighting shall be shielded and indirect and shall be minimized to that necessary for
                      security and safety;
                 k. All new utilities shall be installed underground, in conformance with applicable provisions of
                      the MCZDC;
                 l. Existing roads shall be utilized whenever possible. Construction of new roads should be
                      avoided except where essential for health and safety;
                 m. Earthwork, grading, and vegetative removals shall be minimized;
                 n. All site disturbances shall be revegetated with a mix of indigenous species native to the site
                      (based upon a pre-project species survey). A landscaping plan shall be submitted and
                      approved for all projects.
Action 2.2:      County staff may require project modifications as necessary to implement Policy 2 and Action 2.1
                 above.

Policy 3:        Proposed transmission and distribution lines shall be designed and sited to minimize impacts to
                 natural and visual resources.
Action 3.1:       Install utilities underground in conformance with the Mono County Code.


DETERMINATION
•   The aesthetic impacts of the proposed density of development were analyzed in the prior EIRs certified in conjunction
    with the adoption and amendment of the Mono County General Plan.
•   This parcel is no different than other parcels in the surrounding area; there is nothing unusual about the proposed project
    that would change or in any way affect the severity of these impacts. The impacts are not peculiar to the parcel or the
    project.


                                                              23
                                         Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                       March 16, 2009
                                                                                                           IMPACT ANALYSIS



  •   There is no new substantial information indicating that the aesthetic impacts of the project will be more severe than
      described in the prior EIRs.
  •   There are no cumulative or off-site aesthetic impacts from the proposed project that were not addressed in the prior
      EIRs.

14)   CULTURAL RESOURCES
      No known paleontological, archaeological or historical resources exist on the project site. (Mono County MEA Table
      32) There are no existing religious or sacred uses within the project vicinity. Conditions of Approval for Director
      Review 09-01 require developers to stop work and notify appropriate agencies if archaeological evidence is encountered
      during earthwork activities. No disturbance of an archaeological site is permitted until the applicant hires a qualified
      consultant and an appropriate report that identifies acceptable site mitigation measures is filed with the county Planning
      Division.

  DETERMINATION
  •   The cultural resource impacts of the proposed density of development were analyzed in the prior EIRs certified in
      conjunction with the adoption and amendment of the Mono County General Plan.
  •   This parcel is no different than other parcels in the surrounding area; there is nothing unusual about the proposed project
      that would change or in any way affect the severity of these impacts. The impacts are not peculiar to the parcel or the
      project.
  •   There is no new substantial information indicating that the impacts of the project on cultural resources will be more
      severe than described in the prior EIRs.
  •   There are no cumulative or off-site impacts from the proposed project on cultural resources that were not addressed in
      the prior EIRs.

15)   RECREATION
      The addition of the hangars will not increase the demand for local and regional park facilities. The project will not affect
      existing recreational opportunities since there are no recreational facilities within the airport planning boundaries and
      most of the recreational opportunities in Mono County occur on public land.

  DETERMINATION
  •   The recreation impacts of the proposed density of development were analyzed in the prior EIRs certified in conjunction
      with the adoption and amendment of the Mono County General Plan.
  •   This parcel is no different than other parcels in the surrounding area; there is nothing unusual about the proposed project
      that would change or in any way affect the severity of these impacts. The impacts are not peculiar to the parcel or the
      project.
  •   There is no new substantial information indicating that the impacts of the project on recreation will be more severe than
      described in the prior EIRs.
  •   There are no cumulative or off-site impacts from the proposed project on recreation that were not addressed in the prior
      EIRs.




                                                                24
                                           Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                         March 16, 2009
                                                                                                      IMPACT ANALYSIS



VI. DETERMINATION

On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an
attached sheet have been added to the project and/or revisions in the project have been made by
or agreed to by the project proponent.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.

I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment,
and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environmental, but at
least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as
described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or “potentially
significant unless mitigated.” An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated
pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is
required.
                                                                                                           X

                                                                Date


Printed Name                                                    Signature




                                                              25
                                           Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                         March 16, 2009
                                                                                   IMPACT ANALYSIS



PART II: REFERENCES

REFERENCES CONSULTED

California Air Resources Control Board
    www.arb.ca.gov -- non-attainment area information

California Regional Water Quality Control Board
     Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (Basin Plan). 1995.

Mono County Code.
   Chapter 13.03. Land Clearing, Earthwork and Drainage Facilities
   Chapter 10.16, Noise Ordinance.
   Mono County Land Development Regulations (Revised Land Use Element). 2001.

Mono County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC)
   Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan: Bryant Field Airport. 2002.
   Airport Land Use Plan, Bryant Field Airport 1994., updated 2006

Mono County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO)
   Sphere of Influence Report for Bridgeport PUD

Mono County Local Transportation Commission (LTC)
   Mono County Regional Transportation Plan. 2001.
   Mono County Transit Plan. Revised 2002.

Mono County Planning Division
   Mono County General Plan, 1993. Revised Land Use Element. 2001.
   Mono County General Plan EIR. 1993.
   Mono County General Plan Land Use Amendments EIR. 2001.
   Mono County Master Environmental Assessment. 2000.
   Mono County Environmental Analysis for Bryant Field Airport Master Plan & ALUP. 2006

U.S. Forest Service, Inyo National Forest
    Inyo National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. 1990.
    Mono Basin National Forest Scenic Area Comprehensive Management Plan. 1990.
    Toiyabe National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. 1986.

Wadell Engineering Corporation.
   Bryant Field Airport Master Plan/2020. 2002.

ORGANIZATIONS & PERSONS CONSULTED
Mono County Public Works Department
   Kelly Garcia, Assistant Director




                                                        26
                                    Director Review 09-01/Bryant Field Hangars
                                                  March 16, 2009
 1

 2

 3

 4
                                 RESOLUTION NO. 09-___
 5

 6
        A RESOLUTION OF THE MONO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
 7     APPROVING AEROHAUS LLC’S APPLICATION FOR AN AIRPORT USE
     PERMIT ALLOWING “THROUGH-THE-FENCE” ACCESS TO BRYANT FIELD
 8
       FROM AEROHAUS’S PROPERTY ADJACENT TO BRYANT FIELD AND
 9            TAKING ACTIONS RELATED TO THAT APPROVAL

10
     WHEREAS, via Resolution 06-111 this Board adopted a procedure whereby it could
11   allow “through-the-fence” access onto Bryant Field from property adjacent thereto
     by the issuance of an Airport Use Permit (AUP); and
12

13   WHEREAS, Aerohaus LLC, in conjunction with its request for permission to build
     nine aircraft hangars adjacent to Bryant Field, has applied for an AUP; and
14

15
     WHEREAS, on August 31, 2009, the Land Development Technical Advisory
     Committee (LDTAC) reviewed, and made recommendations to this Board with
16   respect to, Aerohaus’s AUP application; and
17
     WHEREAS, the Community Development Department, in connection with its
18   review of Aerohaus’s request to build the hangars, conducted an environmental
     analysis of Aerohaus’s application for an AUP and has made recommendations to
19
     this Board with respect to that application; and
20
     WHEREAS, in accordance with Resolution 06-111 and the California
21
     Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) this Board conducted a public hearing to
22   consider Aerohaus’s application for an AUP and the various staff and LDTAC
     recommendations made with respect thereto; and
23

24   WHEREAS, based on all of the information received this Board finds that
     Aerohaus’s AUP application substantially complies with the requirements of
25
     Resolution 06-111 and that it is appropriate for this Board to take the various
26   actions recommended by staff and LDTAC with respect to that application.

27
     /
28   /




                                              1
 1
     NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this Board hereby designates the
 2   LDTAC as the entity with authority under Section 3 of Resolution 06-111 to make a
     recommendation to this Board with respect to Aerohaus LLC’s application for an
 3   AUP, and hereby adopts the LDTAC’s recommendations concerning that
 4   application.

 5   BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the environmental review undertaken by the
 6
     Community Development Department with respect to Aerohaus LLC’s AUP
     application, set forth in the “Environmental Analysis for Bryant Field Hangars
 7   Bridgeport March 2008” (Environmental Analysis), demonstrates that further
 8
     review of the application under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
     is unwarranted as the application was appropriately reviewed under CEQA
 9   Guideline § 15183; in making that determination, the Board adopts the findings and
     recommendations made in the Environmental Analysis and the staff report.
10

11   BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, based on the information received during its
     consideration of this matter, including the recommendations of the staff and the
12
     LDTAC, this Board hereby approves the issuance of an AUP to Aerohaus LLC,
13   subject to the applicable terms and conditions in Resolution 06-111, Director
     Review 09-01, and the Environmental Analysis.
14

15   BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, as a condition of its AUP, Aerohaus LLC shall
     pay to the County an Airport Access Fee in accordance with Section 4 of Resolution
16
     06-111 in the amount of $_________; which amount shall be adjusted every five
17   years by the cumulative Western States -All Items Consumer Price Index (CPI).

18
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County Counsel’s office, with the assistance
19   of the Public Works and Community Development Departments, is directed to
     prepare an AUP containing all the applicable terms and conditions imposed herein
20   and Resolution 06-111, and to present that permit to this Board for its final review
21   and possible approval at a later Board meeting.

22   Passed and adopted this _____ day of _________, 2009, by the following vote of the
23   Mono County Board of Supervisors:
24   /
25   /
26   /
27   /
28   /



                                               2
 1   AYES:
 2   NOES:
 3   ABSTAIN:
 4   ABSENT:
 5                                       __________________________________
 6
                                         Bill Reid, Chair
 7                                       Mono County Board of Supervisors

 8   ATTEST:
 9

10   _____________________________
11   Lynda Roberts, Clerk of the Board
12

13   APPROVED AS TO FORM:
14

15   ________________________________
16   Marshall Rudolph, County Counsel
17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28




                                          3
           OFFICE OF THE CLERK
           OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                        REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                          Print




MEETING DATE         September 15, 2009                    DEPARTMENT             Community Development - Building
                                                                                  Division
ADDITIONAL           County Counsel
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED        20 minutes                            PERSONS                Rick McManis
                                                           APPEARING
SUBJECT              Construction Board of Appeals -       BEFORE THE
                     Members Appointments                  BOARD


                                         AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
               (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

Receive presentation by County Building Official Rick McManis regarding appointment of Mono County Construction
  Appeals Board. Consider the submitted list of Mono County residents in the staff report and provide any desired
                                                  direction to staff.


RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Choose Construction Board of Appeals appointees from a list of qualified Mono County residents in the attached staff
report.


FISCAL IMPACT:
Future consideration of reimbursements to the appointed Construction Board of Appeals members will be presented
to the Board of Supervisors for any additional recommendations.

********
LUNCH
********

OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE BOARD on items of public interest that are within the subject
matter jurisdiction of the Board. (Speakers may be limited in speaking time dependent upon the press of business and
number of persons wishing to address the Board.)


CONTACT NAME: Rick McManis
PHONE/EMAIL: 760.932.5434 / rmcmanis@mono.ca.gov

      SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                    SEND COPIES TO:
         ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
           THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
        PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
  32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
b
c
d
e
f
g YES g NO
      d
      e
      f
      c


ATTACHMENTS:
Click to download
   Construction Board of Appeals



History
Time                               Who                            Approval
8/31/2009 1:31 PM                  County Administrative Office   Yes

9/4/2009 1:26 PM                   County Counsel                 Yes

8/31/2009 2:11 PM                  Finance                        Yes
                                        Mono County
                               Community Development Department
       P.O. Box 347                                                                                            P.O. Box 8
 Mammoth Lakes, CA 93546
                                                  BUILDING DIVISION                                       Bridgeport, CA 93517
                                                        www.monocounty.ca.gov
(760) 924-1800, fax 924-1801                                                                          (760) 932-5432, fax 932-5431


September 15, 2009

TO:                 Honorable Chair and Members of the Mono County Board of Supervisors
FROM:               Rick McManis - Building Official
RE:                 Construction Board of Appeals – Members Selection/Appointment

RECOMMENDATION:
Consider the provided list of Mono County qualified residents and select three members to serve on the Construction
Board of Appeals per the requirements of Mono County Code section 15.04.120 – (A) that details the specific terms and
qualifications for those serving on this board.
SUMMARY:
Mono County Code section 15.04.120 details the minimum requirements, for those chosen by the Board of Supervisors, to
serve on the Construction Board of Appeals per the following:
15.04.120 Board of Appeals -The construction Board of Appeals shall hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions or
determinations made by the Building Official relative to the application and interpretation of Mono County Title 15 and
provide reasonable determinations of decisions rendered by the officials charged with the responsibility of enforcing the
Building Codes adopted by Mono County, as amended from time to time including, but not limited to the following:
A. Qualifications. The Construction Board of Appeals shall consist of three (3) members, all of whom should be
     residents of Mono County.
     1. The three (3) members shall consist of persons with experience in the field of construction and deemed qualified
          to understand issues relating to this field.
     2. All members shall be appointed by the Board of Supervisors.
     3. No County officer or employee shall serve on the Construction Board of Appeals.
     4. The three (3) appointees shall serve for four (4) years.
In determining persons with experience in the field of construction and deemed qualified to sit on the construction appeals
board, persons with a current professional license in good standing, actively engaged in the construction field, and with a
history of building in Mono County were determined to be qualified. In some jurisdictions with five-person boards,
owner-builders are often appointed to construction appeal’s boards. If the Board determines that an owner-builder should
be appointed, now or in the future, a list of persons who have successfully built their own home will be included for the
Board’s consideration.
The following list of qualified Mono County residents were contacted and stated that they were willing and able to accept
appointment to the Mono County Construction Board of Appeals:
DESIGN PROFESSIONALS (Architects and Engineers)
Tim Rudolph – Pinyon Engineering, 760. 387-2800
Tom Platz – Triad/Holmes Associates, 760. 924-5095
Kathy Cage – 760. 934-4688
Joe Adler – Sierra Geotechnical Services Inc, 760. 934-3992
Bruce Woodward – Woodward Architecture, 760. 934-1860
CA CONTRACTORS
Troy Rowan – Paul’s Electric Inc, 760. 934-2607
Greg Jennison – Neubauer-Jennison Inc, 760. 934-2511
Stan Zielinski – Zee’s Water Works, 760. 914-1719

FISCAL IMPACT:
Future consideration of reimbursement to the appointed members of the Construction Board of Appeals and establishment
of a filing fee will be presented to the Board of Supervisors for recommendations.
Please call Rick McManis at 932-5434 if you have additional questions.
ATTACHMENT
None


                      Planning / Building / Code Compliance / Environmental / Collaborative Planning Team (CPT)
Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) / Local Transportation Commission (LTC) / Regional Planning Advisory Committees (RPACs)
        OFFICE OF THE CLERK
        OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                         REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                            Print




MEETING DATE          September 15, 2009                    DEPARTMENT              Public Works
ADDITIONAL
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED         10 minutes                            PERSONS                 Kelly Garcia
                                                            APPEARING
SUBJECT               Bid Award for Roof Replacement        BEFORE THE
                      at the Sheriff's Office and Jail      BOARD
                      Facility


                                          AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
                (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

  Receive staff report concerning bids received in response to solicitation for bids, bid protests received (if any), and
 responsibility of the apparent low bidder for the Roof Replacement at the Sheriff’s Office and Jail Facility. Consider
 and potentially authorize the Public Works Director to enter into and administer an agreement for the work. Provide
                                              any desired direction to staff.


RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Based on staff report concerning bids received in response to solicitation for bids, bid protests received (if any), and
responsibility of the apparent low bidder: 1) identify __ as responsible bidder submitting the lowest bid; 2) award
contract to __for Roof Replacement at the Sheriff’s Office and Jail Facility, in an amount not to exceed $__; 3)
authorize the Public Works Director, in consultation with County Counsel, to administer that contract, including making
minor amendments to said contract from time to time as the Public Works Director may deem necessary, and
authority to approve and issue change orders to the contract in accordance with Public Contract Code §20142, in a
cumulative amount not to exceed $__, provided such amendments do not substantially alter the scope of work and
are approved as to form and legality by County Counsel.


FISCAL IMPACT:
Estimated $471,000 from allocated Capital Improvement funding.


CONTACT NAME: Kelly Garcia
PHONE/EMAIL: 760.932.5446 / kgarcia@mono.ca.gov

      SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                     SEND COPIES TO:
         ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
           THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
        PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
    32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING
MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
c
d
e
f
g YES g NO
b     d
      e
      f
      c


ATTACHMENTS:
Click to download
   Staff Report
   Exhibit 1 - Building Elevation Figure


History
Time                                       Who                            Approval
8/31/2009 1:27 PM                          County Administrative Office   Yes

9/2/2009 3:08 PM                           County Counsel                 Yes

8/31/2009 2:07 PM                          Finance                        Yes
                    MONO COUNTY
                    DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
                                    Post Office Box 457 • 74 North School Street • Bridgeport, California 93517
                                                (760) 932-5440 • Fax (760) 932-5441 • monopw@mono.ca.gov

 Evan Nikirk, PE                                                                                 Kelly Garcia, PE
    Director                                                                                    Assistant Director

Date:    September 15, 2009
To:      Honorable Chair and Members of the Board of Supervisors
From: Kelly Garcia, Assistant Director of Public Works
Re:      Contract Award for Roof Replacement at the Sheriff’s Office and Jail Facility

Recommended Action:
Based on staff report concerning bids received in response to solicitation for bids, bid
protests received (if any), and responsibility of the apparent low bidder: 1) identify ________
___________ as responsible bidder submitting the lowest bid; 2) award contract to ______
____________for Roof Replacement at the Sheriff’s Office and Jail Facility, in an amount not
to exceed $__________. 3) authorize the Public Works Director, in consultation with County
Counsel, to administer that contract, including making minor amendments to said contract
from time to time as the Public Works Director may deem necessary and authority to approve
and issue change orders to the contract in accordance with Public Contract Code §20142, in
a cumulative amount not to exceed $_________, provided such amendments do not
substantially alter the scope of work and are approved as to form and legality by County
Counsel.

Fiscal Impact:
Construction costs for roof and HVAC replacement at the Mono County Sheriff’s Office and
Jail Facility, including a 10% contingency, are estimated at $471,000. Funding for the project
has been previously allocated to the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) fund.

Background:
The plans and project manual for this project were approved at the Board meeting of August
11, 2009. The project was subsequently put out to bid and a voluntary pre-bid meeting was
held at the Sheriff’s Office on August 27, 2009. A total of 20 contractors and vendors
attended the meeting, representing 16 firms. The plans were approved by the Office of the
State Fire Marshall on August 28. Their approval included the addition of a parapet wall on
the roof, as reflected on the attached elevations (Exhibit 1).

Award of the contract today will allow construction to start prior to the end of September.
November 1 has been specified as the deadline to have the building weather tight.

Respectfully submitted,


Kelly Garcia
Assistant Director of Public Works
                                                                 Attachment: Exhibit 1 – Building elevation figure
                   Road Operations • Parks • Community Centers • Land Development • Solid Waste
                   Fleet Maintenance • Building Maintenance • Campgrounds • Airports • Cemeteries
'                                          '




&                                          &



    5(&5($7,21 6758&785( 127
    6+2:1 )25 522) &/$5,7<

                                               0212 &2817<
                                               6+(5,)) 67$7,21
                                               522) 5(3$,5
                                                   %5<$17 675((7
                                               %5,'*(3257 &$

                                               0212 &2817< 38%/,& :25.6
                                                  1RUWK 6FKRRO 6WUHHW
                                               3RVW 2IILFH %R[
                               6&$/(
                                               %ULGJHSRUW &DOLIRUQLD




                                                                 5(9 %,' 6(7 ,,

                                                                   26)0 5(9 ,
%                                          %



                                                                                3-0




                                                      +>6 °
                                                      45 °)     




$                                          $        (;7(5,25
                                                    (/(9$7,216


                                                       0&6              GZJ




                                                               $




                                       EXHIBIT 1
        OFFICE OF THE CLERK
        OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                         REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                            Print




MEETING DATE          September 15, 2009                     DEPARTMENT              Public Works
ADDITIONAL
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED         10 minutes                             PERSONS                 Garrett Higerd
                                                             APPEARING
SUBJECT               Contract Award for the Swall           BEFORE THE
                      Meadows Streets Rehabilitation         BOARD
                      Project


                                          AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
                (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

  Receive staff report concerning bids received in response to solicitation for bids, bid protests received (if any), and
  responsibility of the apparent low bidder for the Rehabilitation of Swall Meadows Streets. Consider and potentially
   authorize the Public Works Director to enter into and administer an agreement for the work. Provide any desired
                                                     direction to staff.


RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Based on staff report concerning bids received in response to solicitation for bids, bid protests received (if any), and
responsibility of the apparent low bidder: 1) identify __ as responsible bidder submitting the lowest bid; 2) award
contract to __ for Rehabilitation of the Swall Meadows Streets, in an amount not to exceed $__; 3) authorize the
Public Works Director, in consultation with County Counsel, to administer that contract, including making minor
amendments to said contract from time to time as the Public Works Director may deem necessary, and authority to
approve and issue change orders to the contract in accordance with Public Contract Code §20142, in a cumulative
amount not to exceed $__, provided such amendments do not substantially alter the scope of work and are approved
as to form and legality by County Counsel.


FISCAL IMPACT:
$1.28 million of Proposition 1B funds.


CONTACT NAME: Garrett Higerd
PHONE/EMAIL: 760.932.5457 / ghigerd@mono.ca.gov

      SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                      SEND COPIES TO:
         ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
           THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
        PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
    32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING
MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
b
c
d
e
f
g YES g NO
      d
      e
      f
      c


ATTACHMENTS:
Click to download
   Staff Report



History
Time                 Who                            Approval
8/31/2009 1:32 PM    County Administrative Office   Yes

9/2/2009 3:10 PM     County Counsel                 Yes

9/1/2009 1:32 PM     Finance                        Yes
                    MONO COUNTY
                    DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
                                    Post Office Box 457 • 74 North School Street • Bridgeport, California 93517
                                                (760) 932-5440 • Fax (760) 932-5441 • monopw@mono.ca.gov

 Evan Nikirk, PE                                                                                 Kelly Garcia, PE
    Director                                                                                    Assistant Director

Date:    September 15, 2009
To:      Honorable Chair and Members of the Board of Supervisors
From: Garrett Higerd, Associate Engineer III
Re:      Contract Award for the Swall Meadows Streets Rehabilitation Project

Recommended Action:
Based on staff report concerning bids received in response to solicitation for bids, bid
protests received (if any), and responsibility of the apparent low bidder: 1) identify ________
___________ as responsible bidder submitting the lowest bid; 2) award contract to ______
____________for Rehabilitation of the Swall Meadows Streets, in an amount not to exceed
$__________; 3) authorize the Public Works Director, in consultation with County Counsel,
to administer that contract, including making minor amendments to said contract from time to
time as the Public Works Director may deem necessary, and authority to approve and issue
change orders to the contract in accordance with Public Contract Code §20142, in a
cumulative amount not to exceed $_________, provided such amendments do not
substantially alter the scope of work and are approved as to form and legality by County
Counsel.

Fiscal Impact:
This project is funded by the FY07-08 allocations of the Proposition 1B Local Streets &
Roads Program. The engineer’s estimate is $1.28 million for the base bid and four
alternates. There will be no General Fund impact.

Background:
This project consists of a hot mix asphalt overlay of many of the local streets in Swall
Meadows. The project plans and manual were approved at the Board meeting of July 27,
2009. A voluntary pre-bid meeting was held in Bridgeport on Monday, August 24. In addition
to Public Works staff and the consulting engineer, two contractors were represented by three
attendees to the meeting. Barring any significant weather days, the Project Manual stipulates
completion of the project by October 29, 2009.

Respectfully submitted,


Garrett Higerd
Associate Engineer III




                   Road Operations • Parks • Community Centers • Land Development • Solid Waste
                   Fleet Maintenance • Building Maintenance • Campgrounds • Airports • Cemeteries
        OFFICE OF THE CLERK
        OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                         REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                          Print




MEETING DATE          September 15, 2009                   DEPARTMENT             Health Department
ADDITIONAL            County Counsel
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED         5 minutes                            PERSONS                Dr. Richard Johnson, County Health
                                                           APPEARING              Officer
SUBJECT               Ratification of Local Health         BEFORE THE
                      Emergency                            BOARD


                                            AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
               (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

    Proposed Resolution Ratifying a Declaration of Local Health Emergency and Continuing State of Local Health
                                                    Emergency.


RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Consider and potentially adopt proposed resolution.


FISCAL IMPACT:
None.


CONTACT NAME: Richard Johnson
PHONE/EMAIL: (760) 924-1828 / drrickjohn@gmail.com

     SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                     SEND COPIES TO:
        ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
          THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
       PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
   32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
b
c
d
e
f
g YES g NO
      d
      e
      f
      c


ATTACHMENTS:
 Click to download
    staff report re emergency declaration
   Emergency Declaration
   Resolution ratifying Declaration of Emergency



History
Time                                     Who                            Approval
9/10/2009 9:15 AM                        County Administrative Office   Yes

9/10/2009 8:46 AM                        County Counsel                 Yes

9/10/2009 7:08 AM                        Finance                        Yes
County Counsel                            OFFICE OF THE                          Telephone
Marshall Rudolph                                                               760-924-1700
                                   COUNTY COUNSEL                                 Facsimile
Assistants                                  Mono County                        760-924-1701
Mark Magit                               South County Offices                 ____________
Stacey Simon                                P.O. BOX 2415
Allen Berrey                    M AM M OTH LAKES, CALIFORNIA 93546



TO:                Board of Supervisors

FROM:              Marshall Rudolph

DATE:              September 15, 2009

RE:                Proposed Resolution Ratifying Declaration of Local Health Emergency
                   and Continuing State of Local Health Emergency

Recommendation:

Consider and potentially adopt proposed resolution.

Fiscal/Mandates Impact:

None.

Discussion:

At the Board of Supervisors’ meeting on September 8, 2009, Dr. Richard Johnson, the
County’s Health Officer, announced that he had issued an declaration of local health
emergency as a result of the H1N1 influenza pandemic and provided the Board with a
copy of that declaration (see enclosed). Under applicable state law, such a declaration
cannot remain in effect more than seven days unless the Board ratifies it. The proposed
resolution would effectuate such ratification.

Incidentally, applicable state law also requires the Board to thereafter review the
continuing need for such an emergency declaration at least every fourteen days. And
the Board’s next regular meeting would be more than fourteen days later. My initial
research has not revealed any exceptions to this requirement. Accordingly, it appears
that the Board may need to hold a special meeting for the purpose of reviewing the
continuing need for an emergency declaration no later than September 29th.

If you have any questions about this item, you may contact me at (760) 924-1707 or Dr.
Johnson at (760) 924-1828.

Encl.
 1
 2
 3                                  RESOLUTION NO. R09- ___
 4                  BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF MONO
             RATIFYING A DECLARATION OF LOCAL HEALTH EMERGENCY
 5            AND CONTINUED STATE OF LOCAL HEALTH EMERGENCY
 6
            WHEREAS, the County Health Officer on September 8, 2009, issued a
 7   declaration of local health emergency as a result of the H1N1 influenza pandemic; and
 8          WHEREAS, the Board thereafter duly reviewed the need for declaring the local
     health emergency in accordance with legal requirements; and
 9
             WHEREAS, the situation resulting from said conditions of extreme peril is still
10   beyond the control of the normal protective services, personnel, equipment, and
     facilities of and within said County of Mono;
11
            NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of the
12   County of Mono, State of California, does hereby ratify the aforementioned declaration
     of local health emergency and continued state of local health emergency in said County.
13
            PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 15th day of September, 2009, by the
14   following vote, to wit:
15                AYES          :
                  NOES          :
16                ABSENT        :
                  ABSTAIN       :
17
18                                            ___________________________
                                              BILL REID, Chair
19                                            Mono County Board of Supervisors
20
21   ATTEST:                                  APPROVED AS TO FORM:
22
     ______________________________           ______________________________
23   COUNTY CLERK                             COUNTY COUNSEL
24
25
26
27
28
        OFFICE OF THE CLERK
        OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

                        REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
                                                          Print




MEETING DATE         September 15, 2009                    DEPARTMENT             Finance
ADDITIONAL
DEPARTMENTS
TIME REQUIRED        20 minutes                    PERSONS                        Brian Muir
                                                   APPEARING
SUBJECT              PUBLIC HEARING: County Budget BEFORE THE
                     Fiscal Year 2009-2010         BOARD


                                         AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
               (A brief general description of what the Board will hear, discuss, consider, or act upon)

 Receive staff report. Conduct public hearing regarding fiscal year 2009-2010 County budget. Consider resolution
adopting final Mono County budget for fiscal year 2009-2010. The 2009-2010 Proposed Final Budget is available on
        the Auditor-Controller's website at: http://www.monocounty.ca.gov/departments/auditor/auditor.html


RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt proposed resolution.


FISCAL IMPACT:
$73.7 million before contingency appropriations.


CONTACT NAME: Brian Muir
PHONE/EMAIL: (760) 932-5494 / bmuir@mono.ca.gov

      SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WITH                    SEND COPIES TO:
         ATTACHMENTS TO THE OFFICE OF
           THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
        PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE FRIDAY
    32 DAYS PRECEDING THE BOARD MEETING


MINUTE ORDER REQUESTED:
b
c
d
e
f
g YES g NO
      d
      e
      f
      c


ATTACHMENTS:
 Click to download
    Staff Report
   FY 2009-2010 Final Budget Resolution



History
Time                                  Who                            Approval
8/31/2009 1:43 PM                     County Administrative Office   Yes

9/2/2009 2:33 PM                      County Counsel                 Yes

8/29/2009 12:40 PM                    Finance                        Yes

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:3
posted:10/4/2011
language:English
pages:148