County of Inyo

Board of Supervisors

Public Comment

The Chairperson announced the public comment period and there was no one wishing to address the Board.

The County Administrator, Mr. Ron Juliff, took the opportunity to officially welcome Mr. Marvin Moskowitz, the new Environmental Health Director.

Planning/Housing Task Force Appt.

Moved by Supervisor Bilyeu and seconded by Supervisor Cash to appoint Ms. Lynne Almeida to the Inyo County Valley Housing Task Force.  Motion carried unanimously.

Transit/Display Case P. O.

Moved by Supervisor Bilyeu and seconded by Supervisor Cash to declare Design Dimensions of Austin, Texas, as a sole-source provider of transit schedule display cases and authorize the purchase of 75 display cases from Design Dimensions, in an amount not to exceed $5,923 plus tax.  Motion carried unanimously.

HHS-Behavioral Hlth./AODS Office of Ed Contract

Moved by Supervisor Bilyeu and seconded by Supervisor Cash to approve the Contract between the County of Inyo and the Inyo County Office of Education for the provision of after school activities sustaining alcohol and drug prevention efforts, for the period of March 1, 2005, through October 31, 2005, in an amount not to exceed $49,000, contingent upon the Board’s adoption of a FY 2005-06 County Budget; and authorize the Chairperson to sign.   Motion carried unanimously.

Closed Session

The Chairperson recessed open session at 8:10 a.m., to convene in closed session to discuss Agenda Items No. 17.  CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6) - Instructions to Negotiators re: wages, salaries and benefits – Employee Organization – ICEA – Negotiators – County Administrator and Personnel Analyst; No. 18.  CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6) - Instructions to Negotiators re: wages, salaries and benefits – Employee Organization – Deputy Sheriff’s Association (DSA) – Negotiators – County Administrator and Personnel Analyst; No. 19.   CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6) - Instructions to Negotiators re: wages, salaries and benefits – Employee Organization – Law Enforcement Administrators’ Association (LEAA) - Negotiators – County Administrator and Personnel Analyst;; and No. 20.  CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6) - Instructions to Negotiators re: wages, salaries and benefits – Employee Organization – Elected Officials Assistant Association (EOAA) – Negotiators – County Administrator and Personnel Analyst.  The Chairperson recessed closed session at 9:45 a.m., to reconvene in open session, with all Board Members present.

With regard to the Board’s further consideration to authorize the equity adjustment for the position of Correctional Officer in the Sheriff’s Department from ranges 52, 56, and 59 to Range 64 ($2,846 - $3,460) to be funded through AB443 grant funds a recruitment incentive of $1,500 for new Correction Officers who successfully complete existing probation requirements, the Chairperson announced that the Board had directed that negotiations with the union be re-opened on the current MOU to address the issue of equity adjustment for the Correction Officers.  The Sheriff updated the Board on the situation at the jail, explaining that he is currently seeking volunteers from the deputies to cover the shifts at the jail and if that is unsuccessful, he will be forced to make the assignments.  He also notified the Board that he is proceeding with arrangements to house female detainees in Kern County, in order to secure that option should it become necessary.  The Sheriff went on to provide detailed information on staffing levels and changes in operations.  The Board thanked the Sheriff for the update.

Moved by Supervisor Bilyeu and seconded by Supervisor Cash to approve the Annual Overall Goal Information for Federal Fiscal Year 2004-05 for the Inyo County Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program.  Motion carried unanimously.

Moved by Supervisor Cash and seconded by Supervisor Bilyeu to A) amend the 2004-05 County Budget as follows: (a) authorize the transfer of $4,800 from the Transit Program Insurance Deductible Trust Account #612501 to the Transit Program Budget Unit 153101; and (b) increase estimated revenue in Transit Program Budget Unit 153101, Miscellaneous Revenue (Revenue Code #4959) by $4,800 and increase appropriations in Maintenance of Equipment (Object Code #5171) by $4,800; and B) ratify the emergency repair of one transit bus and approve a purchase order to Inyo Mono Body Shop for the repair of the bus in an amount not to exceed $4,800.  Motion carried unanimously.

Supervisor Cervantes reviewed his request to have a review of the Long Term Water Agreement to determine any impacts that Boards of Supervisors or City of Los Angeles’ actions may have had on the environment, economy and the people of Inyo County, to be conducted by an independent law firm to be retained by the County that is well versed in the Government Code and CEQA law.  He clarified that now he was not requesting an independent review by a law firm because of the potential cost of such a review.  He went on to suggest that the Board sanction the formation of a group of community members similar to the recent task forces which have been formed to address housing and the Southern Inyo Hospital to perform an independent review of the actions.  The Board and Staff discussed the ability of any group to take on such a review as well as the level of Staff involvement in such a review.  Mr. Paul Lamos and Ken Lloyd of the Inyo County Water Commission addressed the Board to express concern with the amount of staff time, which would be dedicated to this review, as well as the staff costs.  Mr. Gale Holbrook, Bishop Resident, asked that if a task force is formed for this review that it be representative of all areas of the County and not just a special interest group.  The Board expressed concerns with an open-ended review, expressing their desire to identify the scope of such a review.  The Board and Staff discussed the ability of the public to form committees, as well as the level at which the County should be involved in a review.  At the conclusion of the discussion, the Board took no action on this request. 

Supervisor Arcularius asked that the word “direction” in the fourth paragraph on the second page be changed to “direct”.  Moved by Supervisor Arcularius and seconded by Supervisor Cash to approve the minutes of the February 15, 2005, Board of Supervisors Meeting as corrected.  Motion carried unanimously.

Recess/

Reconvene

The Chairperson recessed open session at 12:10 p.m., to reconvene at 1:30 p.m., in a workshop with all Board Members present.

HHS/Workshop Hlth Revenues

The Board met in a workshop with Health and Human Services Staff on health revenues.  The Chairperson recessed the workshop at 2:05 p.m., to reconvene at 2:10 p.m., in closed session, with all Board Members present. 

Closed Session

The Board reconvened in closed session to continue discussions on the following: Agenda Items No. 21. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION [Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(a)] - Sierra Club v. City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and County of Inyo, Inyo County Superior Court Case No. SICVCV01-29768; and No. 22. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION [Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(a)] – Inyo Citizens for Better Planning v. Inyo County; Inyo County Board of Supervisors et al., Inyo County Superior Court Case No. SICVPT05-38164. The Chairperson recessed closed session and the regular meeting at 4:08 p.m., reconvening at 5:30 p.m., with all Board Members present. 

Public Comment/ Water Director

The Chairperson called for public input on the Water Director traits, qualifications, etc.  Ms. Ellen Hardebeck, President of the League of Women Voters, indicated that the qualified candidate must have strong administration skills, can get the job done, and have the necessary science and maybe engineering background.  Ms. Hardebeck also suggested that the Water Commission be made a part of the hiring process.  Ms. Kenny Scruggs, a lawyer and Independence Resident, said that she felt the Director did not need to be a lawyer and the candidate needs to be a good administrator in combination with having the necessary science knowledge.  She also expressed her opinion that more public information and input is required regarding water issues.  She went on to suggest that the County establish a “war fund” that would be committed to defending the County’s water position, as well as additional County funds being committed to the Water Department to protect the agreement and the County.  Mr. John Klusmire, Inyo Register Reporter and Bishop Resident, asked for clarification if the Job Description, which was approved by the Board, was the one being used by the “Head Hunter?”  Mr. Mike Prather, Lone Pine Resident, said it was in the best interest of both the DWP and the County to make the Water Agreement work.  He said that the Director needed to be able to summarize Staff information for planning purposes and had to have strong administration skills.  He went on to suggest a two-pronged approach, with one being long-term strategy and working with the City Mayor and DWP.  Mr. Scott Kemp, Independence Resident and a representative of the Inyo Mono Ranchers Association, recommended the Director have strong administration skills, with the ability to work cooperatively with others.  He went on to express his concern with the Water Department Staff, explaining that it was his opinion that Staff appears to be working against DWP.  He said that he felt staff should be working on monitoring and not creating habitat.  The Board thanked those from the public attending the meeting and for their input.  The Chairperson recessed the regular meeting at 6:30 p.m., to reconvene at 7:00 p.m., in a workshop.  Supervisor Arcularius explained that she felt the Water Director Job Description, which is currently being used, addresses the concerns identified in this discussion.  

P.W./Town Water System-Indy CSD Workshop

The Board met with the Independence Community Services District Board to discuss the transfer of the Independence Town Water System.  The Chairperson recessed the workshop at 7:55 p.m., to reconvene in open session, to receive a report on closed session. 

Report on Closed Session

County Counsel reported that with regarding to Agenda Item No. 22. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION [Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(a)] – Inyo Citizens for Better Planning v. Inyo County; Inyo County Board of Supervisors et al., Inyo County Superior Court Case No. SICVPT05-38164, which is an action by an unincorporated association called the inyo Citizens for Better Planning against the County of Inyo, Inyo County Planning Commission and the Inyo County Planning Department seeking declaratory and injunctive relief and a writ of mandate relating to the Board of Supervisors’ denial of appeal of the approvals of lot splits TMP 357 (Core and TMP 358 (Shane) and the Board of Supervisors’ approval of a general plan amendment on February 1, 2005, clarifying the definition of “net acreage, the Board by a unanimous vote, with Supervisors Arcularius, Cervantes, Bilyeu, Williams and Cash voting yes, directed the Office of County Counsel to defend the County, the Board of Supervisors, the Planning Commission and the Planning Department in this litigation.

Adjournment

The Chairperson adjourned the regular meeting at 8:00 p.m., to 9:00 a.m., March 8, 2005, in the Board of Supervisors Room, at the County Administrative Center, in Independence.