October 24, 2000 BOS Meeting notes by the Board Watcher Chairman Mike Reilly has returned from vacation. He called the meeting to order at 8:30 AM. All the supervisors were present: Cale, Kerns, Reilly, Smith and Kelley. Chair: Special District Consent Calendar, Items 1 through 4, Supervisor Kelley? Supervisor Kelley: On No. 4: I noticed there was a list of people being appointed from both sides. How do people get determined to be appointed to that committee? Chair: Anyone from the Water Agency present? Randy Poole, General Manager of the Water Agency: We worked very hard for a year on the process that caused this project to at least come to this stage. Some of this was enacted by you previously with some of the members from the governmental agencies. Some of the meetings were held at Pat Wiggins' office. Supervisor Kelley asked if team recommendations come back to the board. Mr. Poole said yes. Mr. Kelley: I appreciate the assemblymember's work.. Mr. Poole: The bigger question, how do we deal with the CEQA process? And the contractors' stuff. I hope we don't have a lot of small contracts which make it very difficult to process. Chair: Any other questions on this? Record a 5-0. [BW Comment: Remember the March election? From the Notes:"The Costa-Machado Water Act of 2000 (Prop 13) included $1 million for the County of Sonoma to help protect, restore, and enhance the environmental and economic value of the Russian River Watershed within the County's boundaries." Prop 13 was a state measure along with 12. How come Pat Wiggins and BOS/WA get to pass out the money? Answer: Lobbyists?] The TEAM: Bob Anderson, (United Wine Growers); Fred Euphrat, (environmental issues); Rue Furch, (Planning Commission Chairman); Bev Wasson, (member WQCB for ag); Lawrence Jaffe, (aide, Pat Wiggins' office); Bob Klamt, (WQCB staff); Bob Coey, (F&G); Bill Cox - (F&G) alt; Miles Croom (NMFS); Shawn White, fisheries biologist, (SCWA). SPECIAL DISTRICTS CONSENT CALENDAR SONOMA VALLEY COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT (3-member board) 5. Reservoir R1 Emergency Repair Change Order No.6:($52,744.68 increase) 6. Extension of Local Emergency for R1 and R2 7. Extension of Local Emergency due to sewer trunk lines deterioration at Broadway north and south of Leveroni Road Chair: Mayor Barnett here? [Results inaudible] That brings us to Board's Consent Calendar. That includes addendum item 34A, the emergency shelter agreement. Any questions or comments on the consent calendar? Supervisor Kelley: Record a no on 20 (emergency extension, needle exchange) and 27 (resolution proclaiming October 24, 2000 as United Nations Day). Supervisor Kerns: Mr. Chairman, Item No.14 (Carpet replacement in office leased space for Human Services): I just wanted to express my displeasure with the landlord of those offices. I'm wondering in the amended agreement or the additional agreement if there's going to be something in there about carpet replacement. It mentions that now our agreements are now signed... they have language in there by which a landlord will be required to replace carpets in approximately 5 years - get that in there.... Mike Wagner, Real Estate Manager: This is an old lease more than 10 years old. This landlord has been unwilling to cooperate with the county. Potentially it's a safety hazard. We have an option coming up in about a year. If the county wants to elect to exercise this option, we might be able to use that opportunity to negotiate for it - for carpet replacement. Supervisor Kerns: That was my thinking. I mean replace half of the carpet but not all of it. Mr. Wagner: Exactly. Supervisor Kerns: Doesn't make sense. Supervisor Kelley: ...extension now with that landlord. He'd probably be willing to do it. Supervisor Kerns: Well, that was my thought. If we're going to pick up ___?_. Maybe that's the opportunity to put that language in there. Supervisor Kelley: Maybe this could be one of those departments that's going to be moving out of there to a future building. Chair: Any other comments? Seeing none. With a No vote on Number 20 and 27, it's 5-0... Supervisor Kelley: Somebody wants to speak. Bill Pisenti, Redwood Empire TRIM Committee: I see you have the UN flag flying under our good American flag...which is a disgrace. Anybody that would think of something like that should be living in Beijing, China or Moscow. For 75 years I've been studying and reading about the UN. Don't laugh. This is a serious matter for our country. I love my country. If you don't love it, get the hell out of here!They said this was going to stop wars and conflicts. They're the biggest cause of wars and conflicts in this world.They should be out of this country. They should be destroyed. I want that flag out of here! And it you don't take it down, I'M GOING TO BURN IT! I'll take it down! You suit yourself. It's un-American. This is an un-American activity and I don't like it! Chair Reilly: We did adopt 2 resolutions. The first has to do with court adoptions, Item 10. Supervisor Kerns: This is a resolution proclaiming November as Court Adoption and Permanency Month. There are approximately 200 children here in Sonoma County in need of adoptive families. I would encourage good families out there to get the information. Chair: We adopted Item 27 on a 4-1 vote. (UN Day) Bob Brown of Santa Rosa was present to accept the resolution. He and Chairman Reilly had a photograph taken together. Mr. Brown said the cities of Healdsburg, Cotati, Petaluma, Rohnert Park, Santa Rosa, Sebastopol, Sonoma and Windsor have all adopted a similar resolution. He accepted the resolution on behalf of the United Nations Chapter of Sonoma County and thanked the board. Chair: There are three items that we are continuing to November 7th: 36) Monte Rio sanitation; 37) ad policy, and Item 38. Williams Communications Encroachment Permit: [fiber optic cable from the coast to Sacramento]. NOTE: THERE WILL BE NO BOS MEETING ON OCTOBER 31, 2000. REGULAR CALENDAR HUMAN SERVICES 35. In-home supportive services (IHSS) advisory committee appointments Resolution appointing members Supervisor Kerns said he was very impressed with the quality of the 55 applicants. It was very difficult to narrow it down to these 10 and alternates. Chair: Record 5-0. Good work. 39 Securitization (Limited Sale) of Tobacco Settlement Revenues Ron Piorik, County Administrator's Office and Rod Dole, County Office of the Controller: County's share from participating in a tobacco lawsuit resulted in a share of $57,000,000. These funds are to be treated as a one-time resource. The revenue stream is unpredictable due to possible bankruptcy of the tobacco companies or their taking their operations overseas. The county will make a true sale of its rights to the tobacco fund __?__ for up to 40 years in return for an upfront lump-sum cash payment of $57,000,000. The purchaser would be a nonprofit corporation and a joint powers agency. The county would not be obligated to repay the bondholders.The proceeds from the $57 million can be used for capital expenditures or placed in an endowment fund. Annually this would provide between $3 and $3.5 million dollars. In summary this securitization plan will provide the county with about about $57 million cash in hand with $3 to $3.5 million annually as income. The joint powers agency will consist of Stanislaus, Merced and Kern Counties in forming a new joint powers agency. The following actions/resolutions are necessary for approval: 1) approval of formation of the securitization agency, JPA; 2) execution of installment sale, self insurance and risk transfer agreement and other related transactions 3) authorize county counsel to execute legal services agreements with Brown & Wood (bond counsel) and Orrick, Herrington and Sutcliff (disclosure counsel) 4) authorize county treasurer/tax collector to execute agreement with Leifer Capital for financial advisor services subject to review by counsel as to form 5) authorize CAO or his deputy, auditor-controller, treasurer/tax collector and county counsel to execute related documents and agreements and to travel out of state. There was discussion among the supervisors and staff. Money from interest earnings can be used in discretionary spending. Another commented that this will see the county through lean times. Chair: If there are no other questions, record a 5-0. We're very impressed with staff research. 40. Fee waiver of $251 for the use of the Veterans Memorial Building, Guerneville, for West County Community Services for October 14th for the Harvest Moon Dance fundraiser. Chair: No objections? Record 5-0. The board has agreed to adjourn in the memory of Bill Clat who worked with emergency services on the coast for a number of years. We will adjourn to closed session. Adjourned at 9:05 AM. Afternoon Session Steven Woodside: Report from closed session: There was only one item discussed: Zemarzly v. County of Sonoma. Instructions were given to counsel and authorized us to enter into a settlement agreement. We will reduce this to a written form for approval. Personal Appearances: Michael Allen, Local 707: I want to talk about the county's problem of recruiting and retaining good employees. There's been discussion of dumbing down the workforce. We've been told the pay philosophy of the county is you want to look at other counties, get the average and then use 95% of the average. That means below average. You're not going to be competitive with the other employers.Your human resources department is woefully understaffed. We've got reclassifications that are now 3 years old. The county doesn't have the resources to do reclassification studies in house. They have to contract out. They take so long they have to be redone. Your human resources staff is smaller than the city of Santa Rosa's. They have a workforce of a 1000. You have 3000. So I don't think you have the resources to get the work done. The other thing is we're in a very tight labor market. 2.7% unemployed. The real estate prices have been going up about 20% per year, about 16% a year for rentals. You're hiring contract workers who are getting 50 to 60% more than in-house workers. We're being told there's no money to revisit the compensation for in-house workers. I don't know why you're paying substantially more for contracts, even when you factor in benefits. There's no comparison. I'm here today because the workforce is getting increasingly restive. They're voting with their feet. Today, they're picketing outside because they're showing their dissatisfaction. The turnover rate is increasing. We're being told by management: Let's wait a couple of years and see how many people we've lost and maybe we can do something about the problem. You increased your own compensation. They're saying, how about us? Concerning part time workers, this retirement issue is incredibly important for women over 40 who are in that category. These things are all related in terms of your capacity to hold on to your workforce. The cornerstone of your services are the people you retain as employees. You're falling behind. I'm Sherry Smith. I'm here to talk about the salary issue. Marin County social workers make 19% more than what we make here. Diane Hendrick: I have been employed here in Sonoma County as a psychiatric nurse for 22 years. I have a petition here signed by 336 employees in support of being admitted into the retirement system effective January 2001. This is an issue of fairness. [She read the petition.] Two employees have major illnesses and fear reoccurrence. If any one of these 104 workers has a serious illness and can't return to work, they are not eligible for retirement and even more important health insurance benefits. Paul Carroll, SEIU 707: I've been called quite a bit lately about a dire situation in inpatient services. We have people working back to back, 15-hour shifts because they're so understaffed. They cannot recruit the part-time staff that they've relied on in the past because people don't want to work those positions. They have no job rights. The pay is not that good. They are part-time extra help recruited to fill in for a staff shortage. There's a shortage of registry nurses now. Most are being sucked up by hospitals who also have a nursing shortage. If you really have an interest in mental health, you may want to allocate full-time positions. These people are putting their licenses at risk. Another thing we're wondering: has the Department of Mental Health responded to the Grand Jury Reports? We haven't seen anything to date. Bill Rebotka: I'm a field representative for Engineers and Scientists of California. We represent Sonoma County employees. I have a letter for the board also. We are very concerned. In 1998, we raised the topic of part-time retirement benefits. We were told rather than just resolve it with 260-odd people, the county preferred to broaden the discussion. In June we had an overwhelming vote of "Yes, we want to participate in the retirement system." We learned that you had put it off for at least another year. The response I got from my membership was overwhelmingly negative and frustrated and upset and disappointed and angry. They don't understand why after waiting so long, they had to wait longer. The information is there. The actuarial reports have been submitted to the board for quite some time. All the information that could be developed has been developed. They just don't understand why there can't be some decisions and action taken on this. They're very impatient and they're hoping that the board will see that this is something they can do that's very positive, will help with the motivation of these employees, and I encourage you to take note of this and please take action. Lisa Merton and small daughter Amanda: We live in the city of Sonoma on Olive Avenue. The neighbors are very very upset. There were speed bumps installed one block west of our street. This rerouted most of the traffic down our street. Orange Avenue and Olive are the only streets that connect Arnold Drive with __?_ Street. There are at least 24 safety features on Orange Avenue. We have none of that on our street. There have been two accidents already. Dave Knight told me there was no way to make changes unless the issue comes before the board. We have a petition signed by all the residents on the two blocks of ____ Avenue requesting that something be done. We're now getting traffic going in both directions, passing each other on our street. It scares me to death. It frightens me. I'd appreciate your consideration of this. Thank you. Chairman Reilly: Just a comment on what we've heard today. These are appropriate comments for the board to hear at personal appearance time. The board can't take action at this time. Looking at the acts and determinations of the planning bodies, are there any board comments? Seeing none, record a 5-0. [BW Comment: the certificate of compliance granting two parcels on Peaks Pike Road didn't come up. The last day to appeal is October 27th.] The uncontested hearing on the lease renewal for the Human Services Department passed 5-0. Regular Calendar Public Hearing at 2:15: James Hummer's appeal of a Planning Commission decision to deny a Design Review approval for a 5,200 square foot office/metal shop for Lorenzo Designs. Mr. Hummer was both the owner and the appellant. You may remember that Mr. Hummer represented the neighbors in their approximately eight year abatement effort against Rabbit Ridge Winery. The background notes always seem to contain the anticipated action of the board in the form of a resolution or an ordinance. This one said: WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors makes the following findings: 1. The existing 22 foot wide access road to the site is inadequate to accommodate the delivery truck traffic that would occur as a result of the proposed development. 2. There is not sufficient on site turn around area to accommodate the loading and unloading of materials or supplies that would occur as a result of this development. 3. After testimony from 3 noise consultants, it was unclear if the project would create an adverse noise impact on the adjacent trailer park. 4.Given the proximity of the site to the adjacent trailer park, construction of the 7,056 square foot building could jeopardize continuance of the trailer park which provides needed affordable housing. 5. Given the shape of the parcel and its proximity to the trailer park, the proposed 7,056 square foot industrial building will result in an overdevelopment of the site. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors denies the appeal by James Hummer, thereby upholding the Planning Commission decision and denying the request to construct a 7,056 square foot industrial building. Briefly, Project Planner Angus Latta presented the facts of the matter. Mr. Hummer gave a history of the parcel and argued for the project. Jean Kapolchek represented the trailer park. Supervisor Smith said he had gone out to the site during lunch and come up with a recommendation. Since this project is in Supervisor Smith's district, the board will listen to his opinions. He came up with his own findings. Supervisor Smith: It seems to me that the parcel has a legitimate urban industrial use. This has gone through several generations of design review. This is what I would recommend: The noise consultant said the noise was negligible when the doors were closed. I'm going to condition any approval on having the doors shut when work is taking place at that facility. I'm going to put a condition of a 25' height on any building to be approved there. I think an 8' masonry sound wall would be appropriate. I would restrict the truck traffic to the size of a UPS type truck. Other than that, the hours of operation are covered. How about sound insulation? [Mr. Latta said he would check the truck designation and the sound insulation.] Mr. Chairman, for the purposes of a straw vote that would be my recommendation. And that we go ahead and uphold the appeal. Build this building on the footprint provided and with the 25' height limit and the other conditions that I mentioned. Bring it back for final approval November 7th. Chairman Reilly clarified the recommendations. The 8' masonry sound wall is on the north and east boundaries? Supervisor Smith: Yes, absolutely. Chair: And was it your intention to incorporate the remainder of the conditions of approval that were on pp. 25-29? Supervisor Smith: Yes. Supervisor Cale: I'm very impressed with your capabilities today. Chair: Record a 5-0. That will come back on November 7 on consent with the modifications. Meeting adjourned at 3:30 PM.