Search Results
Return to Search Parameters
Displaying 1 to 20 of 74 Records
Next →
Submitted By  Meeting Date:Type   _Title___________________________________________  _Department________________  _Submitted For________________
Casey Liebler 11/17/2020:BOS  20-21 Flood Maintenance Assistance Program Funding Agreement for County Service Area 6  County Administrator
  Approve Flood Maintenance Assistance Program funding agreement, in the amount of $121,000, with the California Department of Water Resources for County Service Area 6 levee maintenance activities; adopt associated Funding Acceptance and Local Maintaining Agency Authorizing resolutions; adopt budget resolution to increase the 2020-21 County Service Area 6 budget by $60,500; and authorize the County Administrator, or his/her designee, to sign all grant program related documents. (No general fund impact) (4/5 vote required) (Blacklock/Liebler)
 
  1. Approve the Flood Maintenance Assistance Program funding agreement, in the amount of $121,000, with the California Department of Water Resources for County Service Area 6 levee maintenance activities (Attachment A);
     
  2. Adopt associated Funding Acceptance (Attachment B) and Local Maintaining Agency Authorizing resolutions (Attachment C);
     
  3. Adopt budget resolution to increase the 2020-21 County Service Area 6 budget by $65,000 (Attachment D); and
     
  4. Authorize the County Administrator, or his/her designee, to sign all grant program related documents.
 
Safe Communities
Sustainable Environment
  The Knights Landing Unit 2 - Yolo Bypass - County Service Area 6 (CSA 6) levee system is a portion of the Sacramento River Flood Control Project, a large-scale levee project authorized by Congress.  This system reduces the risk of flooding for Yolo and Sutter counties, and adjacent agricultural lands from flood waters in the Sacramento River, Knights Landing Ridge Cut, and Colusa Basin Drain.  A non-urban population and a small number of structures are present within the leveed area.  The Central Valley Flood Protection Board is a non-federal sponsor and has delegated authority to Yolo County CSA 6 for operation and maintenance of the levee system.

Over the last few years, the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) has implemented the Flood Maintenance Assistance Program (FMAP), which provides State funds for eligible maintenance activities to Local Maintaining Agencies and Maintenance Areas.  The program's purpose is to ensure that State Plan of Flood Control Facilities are properly maintained and have sufficient resources (i.e. funding) to meet applicable federal regulations and operation and maintenance manual requirements.  An important component of this program is that local matching funds are not required to obtain the State funding.

Yolo County CSA 6 was a successful recipient of $121,000 in FMAP funding for the 2021 calendar year.  Funds to be received will be used for continued implementation of levee maintenance activities that have been funded by the FMAP program since 2019.  These activities include, but are not limited to, vegetation control (weed spraying, tree limbing, and grazing), the removal of critical pipe crossings, and rodent control.  The work plan, schedule, and budget for this round of funding is included as Attachment E.

Staff is recommending that the Board of Supervisors approve the funding agreement (Attachment A) and adopt the associated resolutions (Attachment B - Resolution Accepting Funds; Attachment C - Local Maintaining Agency Authorization Resolution; and Attachment D - Budget Resolution), as well as authorize the County Administrator, or his/her designee, to sign all grant program related documents.

Lastly, Staff would like to note that there is a recital in Attachment C (Local Maintaining Agency Authorizing Resolution) that states:

"The County of Yolo acknowledges that it must submit a new operations, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, and replacement agreement with the Central Valley Flood Protection Board prior to the receipt of Flood Maintenance Assistance Program funds."

The Board of Supervisors approved the above-referenced agreement during their meeting on May 21, 2019 (Resolution No. 19-70 and Agreement No. 19-93).  The agreement was fully executed by the Central Valley Flood Protection Board on June 10, 2019, and has been attached to this staff report as Attachment F.  No additional agreements with the Central Valley Flood Protection Board are required to receive the 2021 FMAP funding.
  Staff has collaborated wih the California Department of Water Resources and the Office of County Counsel on this item.
  The competitive bid process is not applicable to this action.
Mubeen Qader 11/17/2020:BOS  2019-20 Year-End Appropriation Adjustments  Financial Services
  Receive report on 2019-20 year-end budget variances and adopt budget resolution to adjust final year-end appropriations for overdrawn budget units. (No general fund impact) (4/5 vote required) (Rinde/Qader)
  Receive report on 2019-20 year-end budget variances and adopt budget resolution approving year-end appropriation adjustments for overdrawn budget units.
  In Support of All Goals
  State law, Government Code Section 29009, requires that the County end the year with a balanced budget, whereby funding sources are equal to financing uses.  On a countywide basis, 2019-20 operating expenditures (excluding Capital Improvement Projects) ended the year $70.4 million less than budgeted amounts (a positive variance), while operating revenues ended the year $1 million less than budgeted amounts (a negative variance).  Altogether, combined year-end operating expenditures and revenues reflect a net positive variance of $69.5 million relative to budgeted amounts, as reflected in Attachment A. 
 
While the overall County budget ended fiscal year 2019-20 in balance, budgetary control is established at the budget unit level, and year-end expenditures for several budget units exceed current appropriations.  As a result, year-end appropriation adjustments are required to bring these budget units into balance.  These appropriation adjustments are reflected in Exhibit 1 to Attachment B. 
 
While Board action is required only for those budget units that have overdrawn current appropriations, this year-end variance analysis report examines all department variances whether positive or negative.  Reviewing all year-end budget variances can be helpful in identifying budgetary trends or operational impacts that may need to be monitored.  It also provides the opportunity to review and consider budgetary practices that may be out of line with actual results.
 
The sections below provide narrative descriptions of the most significant department year-end variances.  Emphasis is on explaining departments’ net variance, or the combined result of how actual revenues and expenditures compare to budgeted amounts.
 
Agriculture – $668,566 Positive Net Variance
Agriculture ended the fiscal year with a net positive variance of approximately $669,000, primarily due to an unbudgeted operating transfer of $394,000 to the Building Replacement fund. This transfer is done annually in order to meet the Agriculture Maintenance of Effort pursuant to State of California Food and Agriculture Code Section 224.5. Additionally, in the Building Replacement fund, the $200,000 in budgeted expenditures were not spent since the construction of the modular building was placed on hold while other options were researched. Within the Equipment Replacement fund, there is a $41,000 surplus due to a delayed vehicle purchase and receipt of unbudgeted revenue.
 
Assessor/Clerk-Recorder/Elections - $1,111,083 Positive Net Variance
Assessor/Clerk-Recorder/Elections ended the fiscal year with a positive net variance of approximately $1.1 million primarily due to vacancy savings, lower than budgeted costs for professional services, and $540,000 in excess revenues in both the Election and Clerk-Recorder divisions.
 
Although the department experienced a positive net variance, the Administration budget unit realized a deficit of approximately $795,000; this was due to salary and benefit and services costs that were charged to the Administration budget unit but not allocated to the other divisions at year-end. This deficit is offset by the surpluses in the Assessor, Elections, and Clerk-Recorder budget units as the Administration salary expenses should have been allocated to each division.
 
Capital Improvement Program - $4,906,006 Negative Net Variance
The Capital Improvement Program (CIP) ended the fiscal year with a net negative variance of $4.9 million. The Historic Courthouse Renovation Project ended with expenditures $1.4 million less than what was budgeted with offsetting revenue budgeted to be bond proceeds. However, available fund balance was used due to bond proceeds already being in fund balance from a 2017 bond issuance. The first year of the election system replacement was completed within budget appropriations, though revenue related to this project will not be received until after substantive completion at the end of the second project year.
 
It should be noted that many of the County’s capital improvement projects are multi-year in nature. As such, it is not expected that the entire project budget will be expended in a given fiscal year.
 
Child Support Services - $30,977 Net Negative Variance
Child Support Services ended the fiscal year with a net negative variance of approximately $31,000 primarily due to the purchase of an unbudgeted vehicle. Fleet recommended replacing one of the department’s current vehicles during the fiscal year since the mechanical issues were excessive.
 
Community Services- $24,565,842 Positive Net Variance
The Department of Community Services ended the fiscal year with a positive net variance of approximately $25 million as a result of both lower than anticipated expenditures and increased revenues. The major variance was in Integrated Waste Management, ($17.1 million), mainly due to delayed and canceled projects including the Waste Management Unit (WMU) G pond upgrade, postponed procurement of budgeted equipment, considerable budgetary savings on the closure of WMU 4&5 due to the project extending into FY2020-21 ($1 million), and less than expected expenses to external vendors.
 
Integrated Waste Management’s Debt Service Fund was never budgeted since this fund was not established until after the 2019-20 Adopted Budget with the issuance of the 2019 Solid Waste Revenue Bonds. Additionally, at the beginning of the budget year, Use of Fund Balance was budgeted under Waste Management Unit (WMU) 6&7, however, it should have been budgeted under WMU 4&5
 
Finally, the Road Fund experienced a $6.3 million surplus due to the construction phase of the 2020 rehabilitation and CR 95 bridge projects being postponed until 2020-21.
 .
 
County Administrator’s Office - $2,010,848 Positive Net Variance
The County Administrator’s Office ended the year with net positive variance of about $1.5 million, mainly due to lower than budget expenditures by $2.3 million. Part of the positive variance is off-set by the negative variance in revenue by $813K.
 
The major negative variance in revenues $729K is due to less than budgeted Water Resources grant revenue as the balance of the budgeted grants is rolled over to the next fiscal year. Other below budget revenues are: Water Delta grant in the Office of Emergency by $342K; and Housing and Community Development grants revenue being over budget by $371K as the grants were closed out in 18-19. Other below budget revenue is due to the Federal Aviation grant ($300K) at the Yolo Airport; the completion of the Grant was pushed back to the next fiscal year. Negative variance in revenues was offset by positive variances in many areas. Some of the major positive variances are, Risk Management ($365K), higher than expected interest income in Cache Creek Plan and Rumsey Tribal Mitigation fund respectively by $110K and $120K . Another major above budget revenue is in Dental Self Insurance ($185K).
 
The department’s total expenditures positive variance is mainly due to lower than budgeted grant expenditures in Water Resource and Rural Community Initiative Program grants ($1.2 million). Other major below budget expenditures are due to Area Restoration grants ($841K) and the Office of Emergency Grant ($500K) that are rolled over to the next fiscal year. Part of the positive variance is offset by the negative variance in Yolo Electric by $1.4 million. A major part of the Yolo Electric’s variance is due to the posting of the Depreciation ($846K), non-cash expense. Remainder is due to PG&E rate increase and an unbudgeted transfer to General Fund allocating Grassland Solar Production profit from last year. The negative variance in Yolo electric will be recovered through departmental charges in the coming years.
 
County Counsel - $71,560 Positive Net Variance
County Counsel ended the fiscal year with a positive net variance of approximately $72,000, with Indigent Defense accounting for approximately $104,000 of the surplus while County Counsel ends the year with $38,000 deficit. Indigent Defense reduced the number of contracted attorneys during the fiscal year, resulting in $67,000 of savings, and had a reduced number of claims presented for expense reimbursement. County Counsel has a $111,000 deficit in Salary and Benefits primarily related to two promotions and a retirement buyout, which was partially offset by $73,000 in unbudgeted CARES Grant reimbursements.
 
County Service Areas - $901,774 Positive Net Variance
County Service Areas ended the fiscal year with a positive net variance of approximately $902,000, with Wild Wings (WW) Sewer accounting for approximately $416,000 and Wild Wings (WW) Water nearly $437,000.  In the last two fiscal years, there have been significant expenses in repairing the WW Sewer Treatment Plant. There were further repairs needed in 2019-20, however, the costs were not as extensive as originally budgeted. WW Water budgeted an antenna project, a water rerouting project and arsenic projects that were not completed in 2019-20, and instead have been delayed until 2020-21. Wild Wings Golf Course had an expenditure deficit of $53,000 due to the purchase of a John Deere Mower that was not originally budgeted and COVID-19 closures for part of the year that impacted course revenues.
 
The North Davis Meadows’ water connection project litigation is still ongoing resulting in a large expenditure and revenue variance of approximately $4.5 million. 
 
El Macero Water also had an expenditure deficit of $141,000 due to a City of Davis utility bill that was not accrued in the prior year.
 
Countywide - $11,036,510 Positive Net Variance
The Countywide department ended the fiscal year with a positive net variance of $11.0 million, due primarily to lower General Fund transfers to other funds ($3.4 million), and unbudgeted development impact fee revenues ($4.3 million).  In addition, the County collected approximately $2.1 million in Measure K cannabis tax revenue, which was not budgeted. These revenues are not budgeted by design and only appropriated after receipt of funds.
 
Board Controlled Penalties ended the fiscal year with a net deficit of $29,000 due to a deficit in expenditures.   The deficit is due to an unbudgeted transfer to the general fund.   Excess revenues from penalty assessments and existing fund balance will be used to balance this appropriation.  
 
While the Court MOU ended the fiscal year with a net positive variance of $696,000, expenditures were in a deficit by $32,000 due to the payment made to the State for their portion of court related revenues.  Record and index fees collected exceeded budget by $72,000.  The excess revenue collected adjusts the calculation to the State (which receives 50% of fees and fines above a minimum threshold) and increases the payment to government agencies causing the deficit in expenditures.   The surplus revenues will be used to balance this appropriation. 
 
Debt Service - $12,404,448 Positive Net Variance
The Debt Service department ended the fiscal year with a positive net variance of $12,404,448.  The function experienced a $4 million expenditure deficit due to delays in the acquisition and closing of the Child Support Building and had savings in the current budget year due to not expending the full amount of the Trane project proceeds as this project will continue into fiscal year 2020-21 ($9.1 million).   This deficit is offset by receipt of unbudgeted revenues for bond proceeds related to the financing of the Gonzales and Child Support Services buildings ($16 million).
 
District Attorney - $530,523 Positive Net Variance
The District Attorney’s Office ended the fiscal year with positive net variance of approximately $530,000. A net expenditure surplus of $3 million was due mainly to numerous vacancies, and grant work not materializing as budgeted.  This expenditure surplus was offset by a net revenue deficit of $2.5 million due to a reduction of realignment and other state and federal funding and a reduction in grant funding from what was originally anticipated. 
 
Within the public safety fund, the Criminal Prosecution division had numerous vacancies and retirements during the year.  Some of the positions were under filled for a portion of the year, and provided some salary savings.  Also contributing to the surplus was not filling all budgeted extra help positions with the exception of the Real Estate segment of Criminal Prosecution where an extra help position was filled in lieu of a regular full time employee.   Other divisions within the public safety fund, including Neighborhood Court and Special Investigations, also had vacant positions.  Within Special Investigations, the Auto Insurance Fraud and Workers Compensation grants were awarded less than anticipated, causing a reduction in expenditures and also a reduction in reimbursement revenue. 
 
Special revenue funds including the DA COPS and Consumer Fraud Environmental Protection were also unable to fill vacant positions, contributing to the expenditure surplus.  In addition, Consumer Fraud Environmental Protection and the Multi-Disciplinary Intervention Center (MDIC) had surpluses in professional services due to less interviews related to cases and other contracted services.  Consumer Fraud had also budgeted to purchase a vehicle, but it was determined it was not needed at this time.  
 
The DNA ID special revenue fund ended the fiscal year with a net deficit of $29,861 due to unanticipated overtime while working on a cold case.   The investigation hours resulted in an arrest. 
 
Financial Services - $630,504 Positive Net Variance
The Department of Financial Services ended the fiscal year with positive net variance of approximately $630,500, primarily due to salary savings from vacant positions ($448,000).  A portion of the savings was offset by lower than anticipated expense transfer reimbursement however, additional revenues ($148,000) and reimbursement related to the CARES Act ($87,000) increased the positive net variance.    
 
General Services - $1,299,802 Positive Net Variance
General Services ended the fiscal year with a positive net variance of $1.3 million, due to surpluses in various divisions.   Of the total net surplus, Facilities and Parks contributed $940,000.  The Tuli Mem Park and Pool has been added to the General Services department and was the only budget unit to end the fiscal year with a material deficit, $65,000.
  
The Facilities division ended the year with a positive net variance of $495,000 with an expenditure surplus variance of $1.4 million.  Due to COVID, there has been a reduction in work orders.  This has positively affected extra help, overtime and the salary allocation charged out to projects.   But this has negatively affected the revenue reimbursements for work charged to the departments.  In addition to lower salary expenses, Facilities has been able to identify expenses that should be charged to the departments (janitorial and landscaping expenses) instead of being absorbed within their budget.  This improvement is reflected as an expenditure reduction.  Also contributing to the positive net variance were delays with multiple roof replacements and the Administration Building key card system projects.
 
Parks ended the year with a positive net variance of $445,000 with an expenditure surplus variance of $1.6 million.    The Knights Landing Boat Launch project was budgeted in FY19-20 but more than $1.4 million in work was not completed, and has been budgeted to be completed in FY20-21.  The expenditure surplus is offset by the corresponding reduction of reimbursement.  The Grasslands Park project re-budgeted approximately $56,000 to FY20-21 for completion of the project.   
 
Information Technology (which was budgeted as part of General Services in the 2019-20 budget but separated January 1, 2020) ended the year with a positive net variance of $211,000.  Expenditures for the department reflect a deficit of $338,000 while revenues had a surplus of $548,000.  Vacant positions, unused retirement payout, training savings, and programming projects not needed, contributed to a reduction of expenses.  In addition, network switches were not purchased and a portion of the project has been rolled into FY20-21.  These expenditure savings were offset by the purchase of the countywide OKTA security program and other security software in response to COVID changing the work environments for county employees.  The largest expenditure reduction was the decrease in Expense Transfer Reimbursement for IT services of $2.0 million.

The revenue surplus of $548,000 is due mainly to CARES Act reimbursement, unanticipated Department Systems revenue of $610,000 from Probation, HHSA, Sheriff, and DA for additional dedicated staffing and project work, and a shift in accounting practices between an expense reimbursement and revenue.  A portion of the surplus was offset by less ERP revenue due to vacancies and $35,000 in uncollectible charges. In future years, it will be shown separately and distinctly from General Services.
 
Telecom ended the fiscal year with a positive net variance of $205,000.  This is due mostly to the delay in completing the countywide telephone project which will complete now in fiscal year 2020-21.  Also, contributing to the surplus was the unused portion of on-call services with Quest and VOX and other purchased services for the departments.  These expenditure surpluses were partially offset with lower communication services revenue due to a change in billing processes. 
 
Health & Human Services Agency - $7,929,517 Positive Net Variance
HHSA-Administration ended the year with lower than budgeted expenditures by $508K due to the long term space planning project not materializing as a result of Covid-19. Respective revenue, a transfer in from IGT is lower than budget as well by $535K.  The division overall had a net negative variance of $27K.
 
HHSA-IGT total expenditures are below budget by $40K which is insignificant compared to the total annual budget of $4.1 million. Total revenues exceed the budget by $5.4 million, mainly due to the current year’s receipts not being budgeted.  
 
HHSA-Behavioral Health division ended the year with net positive variance of $4.7 million, mainly due to lower than budgeted expenditures in the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA)–Community Services and support program ($8 million). The lower expenditures are primarily attributable to the MHSA three year spending plan. The plan requires community stakeholder engagement which was prolonged due to COVID. The Board has approved a new three year spending plan (2021-2023), and the balance of the funds has rolled forward to the newer plan. Other major drivers behind the variance are vacancy savings of $1.8 million, and lower than budgeted contract expenditures ($3.9 million) in Adult and Child services, transfers to MHSA inter-programs ($2 million).  Other major positive variance is in Alcohol and Drug Program ($1.8 million), mainly due to lower salary and benefits ($980K) due to vacancy saving and under-utilized contracts ($953K). Some of the positive variance is offset by above budget expenditures ($1.7 million) in Mental Health Services, Prevention and Early Intervention ($427K), and in Innovation ($290K).
 
HHSA-Public Guardian- The division ended the year with lower than budgeted expenditures by $135K, mainly due to lower than budgeted salary and benefits expense allocations from the Administration division. The revenues were lower than budget due to lower than anticipated Public Guardian fee revenue by $54K and a pushed back transfer in from IGT by $52K due to delayed purchase of a vehicle. Overall the division ended the year with a net positive variance of $35K.
 
HHSA-Public Health- The division ended the year with net positive variance of $2.8 million, mainly due to lower than budgeted expenditures ($5 million). Major part of the lower than budgeted expenditures is due to unused IGT transfers out budget ($2.5 million), the activity was moved to a new fund and the budget was supposed to have moved as well. Public Health Realignment Trust fund has lower than budget expenditure due to unused transfer out budget to the operating fund. Other major positive variance ($527K) is due to unused medical emergencies budget. Some of the total positive variance is offset by the negative variance in the Jail Medical Services contract by about $95K due to CPI increase. The positive variance is offset by below budget revenue ($2.3 million). Major drivers behind the revenue variance is lower revenue in Public Health Administration ($2 million), mainly due to lower than budgeted transfer in from Public Health Realignment Trust fund by $1.1 million, since the operating fund had fund balance to be used.
 
HHSA-Social Services division ended the year with negative variance of $4.9 million.  Total expenditures were lower than budget by $3 million, but revenues were lower than budget by $7.8 million.  The major revenue variance is in Public Assistance Administration ($2.3 million) because of the declined Federal revenue, and unused transfer budget from Realignment funds. The lower than budget revenue ($3.6 million) in the Public Assistance Aid is mainly due to CalWORKs’ declined revenue from the Social Services Realignment funds. A major part of the lower than budget expenditures is attributable to $2.4 million  in unused transfer out from the Social Services Realignment fund to the Social Welfare program. Other major positive variance in  expenditures is in Public Assistance Aid ($2.3 million) due to over budget in Foster care. Public Assistance Admin division’s total expenditures are lower than budget ($1.8 million) mainly due to actual operating expenditure including salary and benefits coming in lower than the budget. Part of the lower than budget expenditures were offset by the above budget expenditures in realignment funded social welfare entitlement programs ($5.1 million), mainly due to larger than expected caseload growth as a result of the Covid-19 economic downturn.
 
Library - $1,470,595 Positive Net Variance
The Library ended the fiscal year with a positive net variance of approximately $1.5 million, with Library Operations accounting for approximately $1 million and Library Services Measure A fund, nearly $422,000. Library Operations realized $493,000 in vacancy savings among various positions at the Davis branch and Central Services branch including unused Extra Help hours related to the COVID-19 closures. Services and Supplies was also reduced because of the branch closures including utilities, office supplies, security, and maintenance. Measure A is used to pay debt service costs and subsidize costs for the Davis Branch. The significant surplus in Library Operations resulted in a reduction of the transfer out of the Measure A fund into the Operating division.
 
Gibson House ended the fiscal year with a $2,580 deficit due to higher than expected Salary and Benefits. This deficit will be offset by additional Use of Fund Balance.
 
Probation -  $2,637,272 Positive Net Variance
Probation ended the year with a positive net variance of $2.6 million, due to $5.2 million expenditures savings. Major areas of savings in expenditures are: $2.4 million in lower expenditures related to reductions in services provided to clients in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, reductions in IT services, and termination of the Office of Refugee and Resettlement (ORR) program. Additionally, the department experienced $1.8 million in savings from vacant positions in all divisions. The expenditure savings are offset by $2.6 million in less than budgeted revenues, including State and Federal program revenues and special revenue fund transfers into various programs such as Youth and Juvenile Placement, Juvenile Detention, and Probation Service Units.
 
Public Defender - $59,591 Positive Net Variance
Public Defender ended the year with a positive net variance of $59,000 due to the Public Defender departmental budget surplus of $99,000.  The departmental budget received $30,000 in CARES Act reimbursement and had budget surpluses of $152,000 for Professional Services and DA Discovery Fees and $32,000 in Extra Help.  These savings were partially offset by deficits of $43,000 related to IT development and testing of the Public Defender Record Management System (RMS) and $60,800 in costs for building and facility repairs.   The surplus in the departmental budget offset the reduction of realignment revenues in Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) and the Revocation funds, each with a deficit of $14,000 and $26,000 respectively.  
 
Sheriff - $2,679,409 Positive Net Variance
The Sheriff’s Office ended the year with a positive net variance of almost $2.6 million with approximately $1.9 million from special revenue funds. Vacancies in Patrol, Detention, Public Administrator and Management division contributed to much of the positive variance. The COVID pandemic reduced expenses in the Animal Services division, travel and training expenses in the Training department and expenses in Detention, like food costs, due to a lower inmate count.  
 
With court closures and reduced services, COVID also effected services performed by the Civil division, like court orders, reducing revenue.  Despite a lower inmate count and salary savings due to vacancies, Detention exceeded budget in overtime by $239,000 as a result of maintaining mandatory staffing levels. 
 
Court Security continued to exceed budget in salary and benefits by $363,000.  The budgetary deficit of salary and benefits was partially offset by a lower workers compensation expense of $160,000. 
 
The Sheriff’s Community Corrections Partnership division ended the fiscal year with a deficit due to the reductions of realignment revenues as a result of COVID-19.  
 
Due to COVID, the Records Management/Jail Management (RMS/JMS) replacement project, funded by the Small and Rural fund, is behind schedule.  A surplus of $1.4 million has been budgeted for continuation of the project in FY 2020-21.  
  The Department of Financial Services worked with other county departments to review and analyze variance explanations provided by departments for budget units that had a significant year-end appropriation variance.
  N/A
Alexander Tengolics 11/16/2020:JPA  2021 Board Calendar 
  Approve 2021 Board meeting calendar, establish Executive Committee, and increase Executive Director's expenditure authority limit from $5,000 to $25,000
Julie Dachtler 11/03/2020:BOS  AB 1234  County Administrator
  Conferences, meetings and events the Board of Supervisors attended.
  Where reimbursement is otherwise authorized by statute, members of a legislative body may be reimbursed for actual and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of official duties, provided that (1) the local agency has adopted a written reimbursement policy specifying the types of expenses that may be incurred, (2) expense reports and receipts are submitted, and (3) the members give a brief report on meetings attended at public expense at the next regular meeting of the local agency. (Gov. Code, §§ 53232 et seq.)

The following lists meetings attended by members of the Board of Supervisors since the posting of the last Board of Supervisors meeting agenda:

District 1, Oscar Villegas
None attended.

District 2, Don Saylor
None attended.

District 3, Gary Sandy
None attended.

District 4, Jim Provenza
None attended.

District 5, Duane Chamberlain
None attended.
Julie Dachtler 11/17/2020:BOS  AB 1234  County Administrator
  Conferences, meetings and events the Board of Supervisors attended.
  Where reimbursement is otherwise authorized by statute, members of a legislative body may be reimbursed for actual and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of official duties, provided that (1) the local agency has adopted a written reimbursement policy specifying the types of expenses that may be incurred, (2) expense reports and receipts are submitted, and (3) the members give a brief report on meetings attended at public expense at the next regular meeting of the local agency. (Gov. Code, §§ 53232 et seq.)

The following lists meetings attended by members of the Board of Supervisors since the posting of the last Board of Supervisors meeting agenda:

District 1, Oscar Villegas
CSAC 126th Annual Meeting.
November 12-19, 2020.

District 2, Don Saylor
CSAC 126th Annual Meeting.
November 12-19, 2020.

District 3, Gary Sandy
None attended.

District 4, Jim Provenza
CSAC 126th Annual Meeting.
November 12-19, 2020.

District 5, Duane Chamberlain
None attended.
Chad Rinde 11/03/2020:BOS  AB1869 Criminal Justice Fees  Financial Services
  Receive update on impacts of Assembly Bill 1869 Legislation; authorize Probation, Public Defender, Sheriff, and Financial Services to cease charging and collection of repealed fees; and authorize Financial Services to discharge outstanding debts related to these specified Criminal Justice Fees. (General fund impact $381,199) (Rinde/Burnham)
 
  1. Receive and accept presentation on AB1869 legislation;
     
  2. Authorize Financial Services, Probation, Public Defender, and Sheriff to cease charging and collection of fees contained in AB1869 effective November 3, 2020;
     
  3. Direct Financial Services to repeal fees formally as part of the December, 2020 Master fee update process; and
     
  4. Direct Financial Services to discharge accountability for fees repealed by AB1869 starting November 3, 2020 and return to the Board with a report of total completed discharges. 
 
Thriving Residents
Safe Communities
  AB1869 Background
On September 18, 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill (AB) 1869 into law. This bill repeals the authority of Counties through 23 different code provisions which allow for the charging and collection of a variety of Criminal Justice fees in the Probation, Public Defender and Sheriff offices. This is part of a broader trend in the state of California of legislative efforts to reduce or eliminate criminal justice fees which rely on academic studies demonstrating that these fees can be counter-productive and disproportionately affect lower-income households. 

This repeal in AB1869 was set in law to become effective on July 1, 2021 and will also at that time require the County to discharge uncollected fees associated with these same fee provisions. AB1869 does not  impact Victim Restitution that is owed by defendants and ordered by the Court. 

A list of fees that will be repealed (and are currently charged by Yolo County) are listed below:
 
Department Fee Name Code Sections Old Fee Amount New Fee 
Public Defender Adult Registration Fee PC987.5 $50 $0
Public Defender Legal Defense - Adult Specialty Court PC987.8 $125 $0
Public Defender Legal Services, Adult, Post Judgment PC987.8 $125 $0
Public Defender Legal Services, Adult Felony, settle after Preliminary Hearing PC987.8 $350 $0
Public Defender Legal Services, Adult Felony, settle before Preliminary Hearing PC987.8 $175 $0
Public Defender Legal Services, Adult Misdemeanor, settle after Trial Conference PC987.8 $275 $0
Public Defender Legal Services, Adult Misdemeanor, settle before Trial Conference PC987.8 $150 $0
Probation Adult Probation Supervision Fee PC1203.1b $30 per month $0
Probation Global Positioning System Fee PC1203.016 $18 per day $0
Probation Intercounty Compact Transfers PC1203.1b $243 each $0
Probation Interstate Compact Transfers PC1203.1b $243 each $0
Probation Pre-Sentence Investigation Reports PC1203.1b $794 per report $0
Probation Work program participation fee PC4024.3, PC1208.2 $340 $0
Sheriff Electronic Surveillance program (15 days or less to serve) PC1208.2 $175 $0
Sheriff Electronic Surveillance program (16 days or more) PC1208.2 $18 per day $0
Sheriff Electronic Surveillance Program Application PC1208.2 $70 per application $0
Sheriff Jail Booking Fee GC29550 $154.48 per arrestee $0
Sheriff Sheriff Working Inmate Program (SWIP) Application PC1208.2 $45 per application $0

Based on the legislation, the County could continue to charge these fees to defendants, probationers, or arrestees until June 30, 2021 but then at that time would no longer have the authority to collect and be required to discharge past obligations from these fees. However, based on discussion with the Sheriff, Probation Chief, Public Defender, and Chief Financial Officer, an accelerated implementation may be prudent for a variety of reasons as explained below. 
  • Low collection rate - Currently, depending on the fee, collection rates are ordinarily in the 10-20% range and could be lower than usual as this law will require any uncollected amounts to be discharged on July 1, 2021. 
  • Staff transition - The time between now and July 1, 2021 could be spent with continuing to assess and attempt to collect fees or in an effort to facilitate change to systems and staff duties who formerly worked on fee collection to more value added activities. It seems more sensible to take the later approach and begin this transition earlier. 
  • Public benefit - There would likely be a benefit to citizens in the County being proactive in implementing the legislation and relieving them of the burden of these criminal justice fees in line with the spirit of AB1869.  
Fiscal Analysis
Though there are benefits to early implementation of this bill, there is also a financial cost associated with it. In AB1869, it provided for beginning in fiscal year 2021-22, a backfill statewide of $65 million of revenue impacts to Counties which may mitigate the ongoing impact. However, there is currently not a prescribed method for the apportionment of that backfill. An early implementation in fiscal year 2020-21 would mean approximately 8 months of lower fee collection for the County. Based on prior year collections, this impact is estimated to be approximately: 
 
Department FY2020-21 Impact
Financial Services $104,333
Probation $220,200
Public Defender $6,666
Sheriff $50,000
Total $381,199

The fiscal impact of this reduction would be requested to be managed in each departments’ respective budget. Recognizing that departments have already made reductions associated with the impacts of COVID-19, should a department not be able to manage the revenue reduction within their budget, County Financial Services staff would look at 3rd or 4th quarter budget monitoring to recommend appropriating a portion of the Public Safety Contingency to support any shortfall that materializes directly related to this item. 

Discharge of Accountability
County staff have not yet had an opportunity to perform or assemble a full analysis of delinquent accounts that may be eligible for discharge. However, based on summary reporting information available currently, this amount is expected to be in the range of $6-8 million. 

Recommendation
County staff are thus recommending that the Board take the following actions should they be supportive of an early implementation of AB1869. Should the Board not accept staff’s recommendation, the implementation would occur still by July 1, 2021 as required by law.
 
1) Authorize Financial Services, Probation, Public Defender, and Sheriff to cease charging and collection of fees contained in AB1869 effective November 3, 2020.
2) Direct Financial Services to formally repeal fees as part of the December, 2020 Master fee update process.
3) Direct Financial Services to discharge accountability for fees repealed by AB1869 starting November 3, 2020 and return to the Board with a summary report of completed discharges. 
  The Department of Financial Services collaborated with the Probation, Public Defender, Sheriff and County Administrator's Office on this item. 
  Not applicable. 
Lilia Razo 11/03/2020:BOS  Accept project as complete  Community Services
  Accept as complete the construction work on the Striping Project performed under Agreement 555-2019-3011-CHRISP By Chrisp Company. (No general fund impact) (Echiburú/Razo)
 
  1. Accept as complete the construction work on the Striping Project performed by Chrisp Company under Agreement 5555-2019-3011-CHRISP; and
     
  2. Authorize the Director of Public Works to sign and record the Notice of Completion.
 
Safe Communities
  Chrisp Company substantially completed construction of this project on September 9, 2020 in accordance with the contract plans and specifications.  The Board of Supervisors’ acceptance of the work, and authorization for the Director of Public Works to record the Notice of Completion, will allow final payment to the contractor and close out the project.
 
Background
The Board of Supervisors approved the plans and specifications for the Striping Project April 24, 2018 and authorized the Department to advertise for bids and award a contract to the lowest responsive bidder.
 
Work began October of 2018 and progressed for about a month until weather conditions impeded the contractors’ ability to continue work.  Work resumed intermittently during the winter when weather permitted into 2019 and 2020 construction seasons when weather conditions met contract specifications. This contract was used to supplement County rehabilitation projects that were constructed in 2017, 2018, and 2019.  Rather than use Senate Bill 1 funds for striping, staff was able to use this contract to reduce the costs from SB1 and the Road Fund for these projects.
 
The project striped approximately 230 centerline miles of road from the County road network and replaced retroreflective pavement markers.  The focus roads of this project included arterials, collectors and local roads.  The roads selected were based on public use, accident rates, and conformance to the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).  The project is expected to systemically improve safety during day, night and wet conditions by providing uniform visual cues.  
 
In 2015 Public Works Division staff applied for federal Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funds administered by Caltrans to perform a striping audit and to determine California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) compliance under daytime and nighttime conditions.  The grant also provides for installation of upgraded centerline and right edge lines using thermoplastic striping with reflective beads and elements, and replacement of existing retro-reflective pavement markers to improve night and wet weather visibility. The Division’s accident database was used to demonstrate the “benefit to cost” ratio for the proposed improvements, as required to receive the HSIP funds, which are awarded statewide on a competitive basis.
  None
Todd Riddiough 11/17/2020:BOS  Adopt CEQA Document  Community Services
  Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the County Road 40 over Cache Creek Bridge Replacement Project as the appropriate level of environmental review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, and direct County staff to file the Notice of Determination with the County Clerk-Recorder. (No general fund impact) (Echiburú/Riddiough)
 
  1. Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the County Road 40 over Cache Creek Bridge Replacement Project (Project) as the appropriate level of environmental review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
     
  2. Direct County staff to file the Notice of Determination with the County Clerk-Recorder.
 
Safe Communities
  Based on the environmental evaluation in the Initial Study for the County Road 40 Over Cache Creek Bridge Replacement Project, with the implementation of prescribed mitigation and other measures to reduce environmental impacts, the Project was determined not to have a significant effect on the environment. Adoption of this Mitigated Negative Declaration will allow the Project to move forward through the environmental permitting process for bridge construction.
 
BACKGROUND
 
The County Road 40 Bridge (also known as the Low Water Bridge) over Cache Creek was constructed in 1930.  The existing bridge (Bridge No. 22C-0091) consists of a 115-foot long, 22-foot wide, six-cell, reinforced concrete box culvert with three open cells.  Three of the six cells were plugged with concrete sometime between 1930 and 1979 when Caltrans began biannual inspections of the structure.  The north side of the bridge is accessed via CR 40, a single lane gravel road that connects to State Route 16.  In its 2008 bridge inspection report, Caltrans rated the bridge’s safe load capacity at zero tons, deeming the bridge as unsafe and inoperable to vehicular traffic. The structurally deficient bridge was closed to vehicular traffic that year.
 
When it is not inundated, the bridge still provides pedestrian access to public lands, such as recreational trails and park lands. The bridge may be inundated during the winter due to storm events, and in spring and summer due to water releases from the Cache Creek Dam, upstream of the bridge near Clear Lake.
 
Identifying that this bridge is a key access point to fire fighting in a very remote area of northwest Yolo County, in 2018 the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) entered into an agreement with Yolo County to provide funding to complete the engineering design for a replacement bridge.
 
PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Yolo County proposes to replace the existing CR 40 bridge over Cache Creek with a new three-span, cast-in-place, reinforced concrete slab superstructure, supported on two column pile extension bents and seat type abutments founded on 30-inch cast-in-drilled-hole concrete piles.  The maximum depth of excavation for the bridge piles is approximately 30 feet. The replacement bridge will be constructed on an improved alignment at essentially the same location as the existing bridge.  The bridge will provide a minimum clear width of 20 feet, the same as the existing structure. The structure will be constructed with a horizontal curve radius of 132 feet, to accommodate CAL FIRE’s 72-foot long tractor and trailer vehicle used to transport their fire-fighting equipment across Cache Creek.
 
Yolo County ceased maintenance on CR 40 in 2009 from State Route (SR) 16 to the Lake County line per Resolution 09-31.  CR 40 is no longer maintained by the County and its “county highway” designations have been removed, as most the road extending from Lake County to State Route 16 is not under Yolo County jurisdiction.  Since the remainder of the CR 40 roadway is not maintained by the County, as a matter of public safety, the County believes that the gate near its intersection with SR 16 should remain normally closed/locked.  Even when the CR 40 gate at SR 16 is closed, the bridge will be accessible to pedestrian, ATV, and equestrian traffic.
 
Due to the limited traffic use of the bridge, a bridge that satisfies the standard design hydraulic clearances is not proposed. The 50-year and 100-year storm events are expected to overtop the bridge by approximately 8 and 13-feet respectively. The County will request a design exception from Caltrans for hydraulic clearances. Due to bridge inundation during high design flows, the County is proposing to use the new California State Type ST-75 bridge rail with tubular bicycle railing. The Type ST-75 bridge rail will allow inundation flows to pass through the rail members.  The heavy-duty steel tube rails are expected to undergo little to no damage when subjected to drift impacts.
 
Pedestrians and bicyclists, as well as ATV users and equestrians will use the proposed replacement bridge to access recreational trails, parks, and the southeast bank of Cache Creek. The proposed bridge will provide a minimum freeboard clearance of 8-feet for recreational rafters during summer irrigation flows in Cache Creek. During construction, portage signage for recreational rafters will direct them out of Cache Creek upstream of the construction zone and around the bridge construction site to a creek entrance location downstream of the existing bridge.
 
To build the bridge in essentially the same alignment as the existing low water bridge and provide the needed vertical clearance for irrigation flows and rafters (i.e., will no longer be a low water crossing), the approach roadway construction requires imported fill material. Two retaining walls will be constructed to contain the approach fill at the west end of the new bridge.  Rock slope protection is required around the new abutments and these retaining walls to protect the bridge during inundation flows.
 
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
 
A Natural Environmental Study was prepared for the Project area which supports the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (Attachment A).  The Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration was submitted to the State Clearinghouse, and subsequently circulated for public review and comment on September 9, 2020.  Comments were received during the review period through October 9, 2020, and responses to those comments are included in the attached memorandum (Attachment B).
 
County staff has applied with the Yolo Habitat Conservancy for coverage of this proposed Project under the Yolo Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan (Yolo HCP/NCCP).
 
The County also initiated an early consultation request with interested Tribes under the provisions of Assembly Bill (AB) 52, and subsequently met with Cultural Resources staff of the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation (Yocha Dehe/Tribe), who indicated a cultural interest and authority in the project area. A site visit was conducted at the project site with Yocha Dehe’s Cultural Resources Director, Caltrans and County staff, and the County’s consultant team, including an archaeologist.  Initially the original design alignment landed the bridge in the middle of a known cultural resource area along the creek bank.  Yocha Dehe’s team collaboratively worked with County staff and its consultant team to provide an improved location to avoid the sensitive area.  Details of the consultation process are outlined in the Initial Study provided in Attachment A.
 
The County is working to receive a Categorical Exclusion from Caltrans as part of their National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) determination.  All studies required for NEPA have been approved by Caltrans with the exception of the cultural resources suite of studies:  Historic Property Survey Report, Archaeological Survey Report, Environmentally Sensitive Area Monitoring and Discovery Plan, and the Finding of No Adverse Effect.  Caltrans required this documentation despite the fact that the project was sited to avoid impacts to the satisfaction of Yocha Dehe, and the Tribe did not desire any additional studies or archaeological testing.  The initial reports to meet this requirement were sent to Caltrans on 1/3/2020.  After several iterations the final package that has met all the requirements of Caltrans staff was submitted on 10/27/2020.  Once District 3 signs these documents, they will be transmitted to Caltrans headquarters for their approval and transmittal to the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO).  Our understanding is that SHPO has 30 days to review this package.  We hope to receive these final environmental approvals in December 2020, so we can proceed with finalizing the bridge design for construction.  The County will be responsible for implementing the conservation and mitigation measures outlined in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) (Attachment B), as referenced in the attached Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.
 
CAL FIRE, with the timely assistance of Assemblymember Cecilia M. Aguiar-Curry, has also encumbered $2 million in construction funding to be allocated toward the CR 40 bridge replacement construction.  Bridge construction is estimated to cost approximately $4 million.  The balance of construction funds is planned to be reimbursed by the federal Highway Bridge Program once funding is programmed by Caltrans.
 
Staff anticipates finalizing design and receiving the required local, State, and federal construction permits in early 2021, going out to bid in Spring 2021, with construction following through Fall of 2021.
  California State Assembly, District 4
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CAL FIRE
County Administrator’s Office
Caltrans
Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation
Yolo Habitat Conservancy
Lilia Razo 11/17/2020:BOS  Adopt Road Safety Plan  Community Services
  Accept and adopt the Yolo County Local Road Safety Plan. (No general fund impact) (Echiburú/Dinozo)
 
  1. Accept and adopt the Yolo County Local Road Safety Plan; and
     
  2. Direct staff to implement the plan and the Director of Public Works to approve an annual update.
 
Safe Communities
  Yolo County was selected by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to participate in a pilot program for local agencies to develop a Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP), as a supplement to Caltrans’ Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) which provides Federal funding of safety improvements for road projects for local agencies. The purpose of the plan is to look at the safety of our roads and possible safety improvements in a comprehensive manner including Education, Enforcement, and Engineering. The ultimate goal of the effort is zero deaths on our roads.  For HSIP Cycle 11 in May 2022, local agencies will be required to prepare a LRSP to be eligible to apply for federal funding through the HSIP
 
Through safety stakeholder meetings with the various agencies listed in “Collaborations” below, the existing safety efforts and current safety needs on Yolo County roads were discussed and documented. The CHP supplied traffic collisions data so that stakeholders could identify areas of emphasis and establish goals and strategies to improve safety.
 
As a “Living Document” the Public Works Division will annually update the Yolo County Local Road Safety Plan to adjust to current traffic safety needs based on trends of traffic collision data and input from safety stakeholders and the public.
 
  • Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
  • Yolo County Board of Supervisors
  • Yolo County Health & Human Services Agency
  • Yolo County Sheriff’s Office
  • Woodland California Highway Patrol (CHP)
  • West Plainfield Fire Protection District
  • Yolo County Office of Education
  • California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS)
Karen Wood 11/17/2020:BOS  Agreement with CommuniCare Health Centers for Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT) services, Peer Navigator   Health & Human Services
  Delegate authority to the Yolo County Procurement Manager to approve agreements with: CommuniCare Health Centers, Inc. in the amount of $45,121 for the period of August 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021 to fund a Medication Assisted Treatment Peer Navigator position; and WellPath, Inc. in the amount of $31,150 for the period of August 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021 to support and expand Medication Assisted Treatment services provided in the County jail to individuals in need. (No general fund impact) (Larsen)
 
  1. Delegate authority to the Yolo County Procurement Manager to approve an agreement with CommuniCare Health Centers, Inc. ("CCHC") in the amount of $45,121 for the period of August 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021 to fund a Medication Assisted Treatment ("MAT") Peer Navigator position; 
     
  2. Delegate authority to the Yolo County Procurement Manager to approve an agreement with WellPath, Inc. ("WellPath") in the amount of $31,150 for the period of August 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021 to support and expand MAT services provided in the County jail to individuals in need; and
     
  3. Delegate authority to the Yolo County Procurement Manager to execute any amendments to the resulting agreements with CCHC and WellPath, including financial amendments not to exceed $100,000 per agreement.
 
Thriving Residents
  The County of Yolo, via its Health and Human Services Agency ("HHSA"), received funding from Health Management Associates under the State Targeted Response to the Opioid Crisis Grant (“STR Opioid Grant”) for the Medication Assisted Treatment Expansion Project 2.0 (“STR Opioid Grant MAT Expansion Project”). The main focus of the STR Opioid Grant MAT Expansion Project is to expand the availability of MAT treatment for in-custody clients that are in need of referrals, counseling, education tools, and discharge planning. It is crucial that individuals receive education regarding proper medication, assistance while in-custody, and linkage to behavioral health treatment when discharged.
 
The County will allocate $45,121 of the grant funds received to CCHC for the period of August 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021 to fund a 1.0 FTE MAT Peer Navigator position (“Peer Navigator”).  The Peer Navigator shall have personal experience and identify as a mental health services consumer or the family member of a mental health services consumer, or have previous involvement in substance use and/or involvement in the criminal justice system.  The Peer Navigator will collaborate with the CCHC MAT and Transitions of Care Team to receive referrals and provide coordination via referrals from WellPath (or the current contracted behavioral health service and physical health care providers for Yolo County inmates) and other staff to provide assistance in successfully navigating clients leaving incarceration to ongoing substance use treatment, prioritizing individuals who need ongoing MAT treatment as part of their exit plan. Among other tasks, the Peer Navigator will use their personal and professional life experience to provide peer support/case management to MAT clients and assist them with navigating physical heath, behavioral health, and social service systems to obtain the services that are necessary for stability and wellness. Performance measures will be included in the resulting agreement. 
 
The County will allocate $31,150 of the grant funds received to WellPath for the period of August 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021 to support and expand MAT services provided by WellPath as the current contracted behavioral health service and physical health care providers for Yolo County inmates in the County jail to individuals in need.  This will allow for all patients to be screened during their routine 7-day Health Appraisal.  All appropriate patients will be referred to the MAT Coordinator for additional follow-up and assessment for OUD/SUD.  WellPath will also provide education and appropriate counseling services to patients in the facility regarding MAT treatment, including motivational interviewing, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Dialectical Behavioral Therapy, etc.  Performance measures will be included in the resulting agreement.
 
The services under both of these agreements will assist with reduction in both recidivism and overdose rates for this population. Granting authority to the Procurement Manager will reduce administrative process time and allow for the resulting agreements to be fully executed as soon as possible. There is a small window in which to utilize these funds (by March 31, 2021). 
  County Counsel will approve the resulting agreements as to form.
Yolo County Procurement Manager provided guidance on the underlying procurement and agreement language for federal subawards.
  This agreement is being sought by a Sole Source approved by the Procurement Manager.
Kimberly Villa 11/03/2020:BOS  Approve Amendment to Power Line Easement  Community Services
  Approve agreement with Harlan Family Revocable Trust and Christine Harlan for up to $32,800 for an amendment to an Electrical Power Line Easement Agreement on County Road 28H. (No general fund impact) (Echiburu/Villa)
 
  1. Approve and authorize the Chair of the Board to sign the agreements with Harlan Revocable Trust and Christine Harlan for $32,800 for acquisition of an electrical utility easement on County Road 28H; and
     
  2. Authorize the Director of Integrated Waste Management to approve payments, accept the easement, and record the deed once the signed deed has been received.
 
Sustainable Environment
 

A temporary power line utility easement exists on these properties along County Road 29.  The power line on the easement conveys power from the County's methane power plant located at the Yolo County Central Landfill to the main power grid on County Road 102. This temporary easement has expired and an extension of its term is required to continue the delivery of power to the main grid. Pattison and Associates, Inc. a property acquisition consultant, provided appraisals and an accompanying independent review appraisal to determine the value of the property.  County staff have negotiated with both property owners and have reached agreement to amend the original agreement for an additional 6 years, with an expiration of December 31, 2026.

Background
On March 20, 1989, Yolo Gas Recovery Corporation (the prior owner of the methane facility) entered into an agreement with Bernell Harlan and John Henry Beckman for a Power line Utility Easement.  In 2017 the Division of Integrated Waste Management purchased the Yolo County Central Landfill Methane Power Plant and the rights to the utility poles from NEO Yolo, LLC to continue transmitting electricity generated at the Yolo County Central Landfill. In 2012, Christine Harlan purchased the Beckman property, and the easement went with the property.  The original power line easement expired 31 years after the agreements were fully executed.

In accordance with federal requirements for property easement acquisition, just compensation was established by the County based on the approved appraisal and an offer was presented to the owners on June 6, 2020.  Since that time, staff have worked with the property owners and offered an amount that was substantially higher than the appraised value in order to reach an acceptable agreement as shown in the attached Amendments to the Agreement. The limited term of this amended easement will allow the County to continue to use the land to transmit power from the County's methane plant while staff negotiates a longer term or permanent easement on this corridor.
  County Council approved the Agreement as to form
  Contract negotiated with property owner for easement agreement.
Competitive Bid Process not needed.
Alberto Lara 11/03/2020:BOS  Approve Department Holiday Closures  County Administrator
  Approve 2020-2021 department holiday closures. (No general fund impact) (Lara)
  Approve 2020-2021 department holiday closures.
  Operational Excellence
  None.
  Staff is recommending Board approval for select department closures during holiday periods when service demands are reduced.  Employees who choose to be off work during the office closure must use available leave balances to cover their time off.

The following departments are requesting office closures:

Agriculture - December 28, 2020 through January 1, 2021

Assessor - December 25, 2020 through January 1, 2021

Clerk-Recorder - closed on scheduled holidays only and will close at noon on December 24, 2020

Elections - December 25, 2020 through January 1, 2021

Community Services (except the Landfill) - December 24, 2020 through January 1, 2021

County Administrator (including Clerk of the Board) - December 25, 2020 through January 1, 2021

County Counsel - December 25, 2020 through January 1, 2021. Coverage of any court hearings will be arranged and pressing matters addressed.

Financial Services - December 25, 2020 through January 1, 2021

Health and Human Services Agency - All branches are requesting to be closed on December 24, 2020 and December 31, 2020, which are in addition to the regular County holidays (December 25, 2020 and January 1, 2021).  There will be a 24-hour response on these dates for child and adult protective services, eligibility program applications, and temporary assistance to the homeless.

Human Resources - December 24, 2020 through January 1, 2021

Library - All library branches to be closed on Friday, November 27, 2020, the day after Thanksgiving.  All branches will be closed on December 25, 2020 and January 1, 2021. All branches will close at 6 p.m. on December 24, 2020. All branches will close at 6 p.m. on December 31, 2020.

Probation - No closures except for the regular holidays.
Public Defender - No closures except for the regular holidays.
Child Support - No closures except for the regular holidays.
General Services - No closures except for the regular holidays.
  All County departments
Selena Hobbs 11/03/2020:BOS  Approve Extension of Off Highway Vehicle Education and Safety and Law Enforcement Grants  Sheriff-Coroner
  Approve first amendment to Agreement Nos. 20-31 and 20-32, Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Education and Safety, and Law Enforcement Grant agreements between the Sheriff’s Office and the California State Department of Parks and Recreation extending the project performance periods through December 31, 2020. (No general fund impact) (Lopez/Johnson)
  Approve first amendment to Agreement Nos. 20-31 and 20-32, Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Education and Safety, and Law Enforcement Grant agreements between the Sheriff’s Office and the California State Department of Parks and Recreation extending the project performance periods through December 31, 2020.
 
Safe Communities
  Since fiscal year 2009-10, the Sheriff’s Office has received Off Highway Vehicle Grant funding from the State to increase patrol on public and private lands around Cache Creek and regions of habitat restoration due to the ongoing trespassing issues between OHV riders and Yolo County land owners.  The Sheriff’s Office has continued to receive State grant funding through the subsequent fiscal years, which has allowed the Sheriff’s Office to augment overtime, purchase equipment and other resources, and attend specific trainings to help establish an OHV enforcement team. The Sheriff’s Office OHV team also provides public outreach and educational opportunities to the citizens of Yolo County who wish to learn more about OHV programs and recreation.
 
On March 10, 2020, the Board of Supervisors approved the fiscal year 2019-20 OHV Education and Safety Grant Agreement (Agreement No. 20-31). The Sheriff’s Office received $30,466 in OHV Education and Safety grant funds to purchase two ATVs, rescue litters, and trailers to be used for extrications during search and rescue missions.  A 35% match of $10,704 was required, which was met with the annual OHV contribution from the Natural Resources Division and in-kind funds already in the Sheriff’s Office Patrol budget.
 
On March 10, 2020, the Board of Supervisors also approved the fiscal year 2019-20 OHV Law Enforcement Grant Agreement (Agreement No. 20-32). The Sheriff’s Office received $120,358 in OHV Law Enforcement grant funds to purchase a vehicle, safety gear, helmets and fund patrol operations. A 25% match of $40,119 was required, which was met with $28,102 of In-Lieu Gas Tax Funds. The remaining $12,017 was met with in-kind match of already budgeted administrative staff time.
 
These grants had performance periods extending from December 1, 2019 through November 30, 2020.  While OHV recreation sites remained open during COVID-19 quarantine restrictions, social distancing requirements impacted the OHV team members’ ability to patrol. In addition, COVID-19 has impacted the Sheriff’s Office ability to purchase and receive all of the grant deliverables by the November 30, 2020 deadline.  On October 1, 2020, the Sheriff’s Office requested to amend the grants by extending the performance period to December 31, 2020 in order to fully expend the grant funds.  Board of Supervisor approval is now requested for the Amendments.
  County Counsel has approved the attached grant amendments.  Purchasing has assisted with the acquisition of fixed assets.
  The competitive bid process does not apply to this Agenda item.
Kim Eldredge 11/17/2020:BOS  Approve Internal Audit Policies  Financial Services
  Approve Internal Audit Follow-up Policy and Audits Conducted By External Entities and Fiscal Monitoring Review Policy. (No general fund impact) (Rinde/Eldredge)
 
  1. Approve the Audit Follow-up Policy; and
     
  2. Approve the Audits Conducted By External Entities and Fiscal Monitoring Review Policy.
 
In Support of All Goals
  The County Internal Audit division is required to establish and maintain a system to monitor the disposition of audit results communicated to management, as in accordance with the Institute of Internal Auditors, International Professional Practices Framework (IPPF) Standard 2500. 
 
The proposed Audit Follow-up  policy formalizes the divisions current practice requiring County departments and other government entities to respond to audits, including audits of services provided by contract vendors, resulting in recommendations for improvement, disallowance, or questioned costs within specific timeframes. It further distinguishes specific roles and responsibilities, and provides a priority ranking to recommendations (for audits conducted by the Internal Audit division only) to highlight the relative importance of some recommendations over others based on the likelihood of adverse impacts if a corrective action is not taken and the seriousness of the adverse impact that may result. 

Additionally, the proposed Audits Conducted By External Entities and Fiscal Monitoring Review Policy, formalizes the process which requires County departments and other agencies to submit semi-annual notifications to the County Internal Audit division of audits and fiscal monitoring reviews and notify the Internal Audit division at the inception and completion of audits. The County Internal Audit division requests copies of audit reports from County departments and other governmental agencies as part of their role of performing risk assessment as well as to prepare a report for the Yolo County Audit Committee to support the Board's oversight responsibilities.  This policy formalizes the divisions current practices and requires a semi-annual notification to the Internal Audit division within 60 calendar days from the end of each reporting period.
  Internal Audit staff collaborated and requested feedback from the Chief Financial Officer, County Administrator, County Counsel, County Department Directors, Financial Oversight Committee, and Audit Committee. 
 
The Audit Committee approved the audit policies to proceed to full board approval at their regular meeting on September 17, 2020.
Alexander Tengolics 11/16/2020:JPA  Approve revised Advisory Committee composition 
  Approve revised Advisory Committee composition
Julie Dachtler 11/17/2020:BOS  Board Reports  County Administrator
  Action items and reports from members of the Board of Supervisors, including announcements, questions to be referred to staff and reports on various 2x2s and meetings with other agencies. (Board of Supervisors)
  Action items and reports from members of the Board of Supervisors, including announcements, questions to be referred to staff and reports on various 2x2s and meetings with other agencies.
Julie Dachtler 11/03/2020:BOS  Board Reports  County Administrator
  Action items and reports from members of the Board of Supervisors, including announcements, questions to be referred to staff and reports on various 2x2s and meetings with other agencies. (Board of Supervisors)
 
  1. Committee on Capital Investments update. (Supervisors Saylor and Sandy)
  Action items and reports from members of the Board of Supervisors, including announcements, questions to be referred to staff and reports on various 2x2s and meetings with other agencies.
Karen Wood 11/17/2020:BOS  CalWORKs Single Allocation  Health & Human Services
  Adopt a budget resolution adding California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids Program single allocation funds in the amount of $5,292,326 to the Health and Human Services Agency budget for 2020-21. (No general fund impact) (4/5 vote required) (Larsen)
  Adopt a Budget Resolution adding California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids Program (“CalWORKs”) single allocation funds in the amount of $5,292,326 to the Health and Human Services Agency budget for fiscal year 2020-21.
 
Thriving Residents
  The fiscal year 2020-21 budget submitted for HHSA included an estimated allocation of $9,874,590 for the social services program known as the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids Program ("CalWORKs"), which is funded by the California Department of Social Services ("CDSS").
 
On or about September 14, 2020, the CDSS published County Fiscal Letter (“CFL”) No. 20/21-23.  This CFL notified Yolo County of a CalWORKs allocation in the amount of $15,166,916 for the programs described below.  This notification was received after the deadline for HHSA to revise the amount for the FY20-21 adopted budget for the September 29, 2020 Board of Supervisors meeting.  As such, the attached Budget Resolution is being submitted to add the $5,292,326 in excess of the estimated funding to the HHSA fiscal year 2020-21 budget.

This CalWORKs Single Allocation includes support for the following CalWORKs programs:
  1. Employment Services: The CalWORKs Employment Services funding reflects the cost of providing services to individuals in the CalWORKs Welfare-to-Work (“WTW”) Program.
  2. Employment Services Diaper Assistance: The CalWORKs Diaper Assistance funding provides supportive services for participation in the WTW program. The CalWORKs recipients who participate in a WTW plan are eligible for $30 per month to assist with diaper costs for each child under 36 months of age.
  3. Employment Services Home Visiting Program (“HVP”):  The purpose of this funding includes:
    1. Supporting positive health, development, and well-being outcomes for pregnant and parenting women, families, and infants born into poverty;
    2. Expanding participants’ future educational, economic, and financial capability opportunities;
    3. Improving the likelihood that participants will exit poverty.
  4. Program Eligibility Administration:  This includes additional funding for additional time spent on homeless assistance cases due to the removal of the consecutive day rule and work verification which may be used for either hiring and/or retraining staff.
  5. Child Care:  This funding reflects the cost for Stage One Child Care services and administration for CalWORKs families with children under 13 years of age. The CalWORKs Child Care funding also includes funding to extend child care eligibility to families for 12-months following the signing of the WTW Plan.
  6. Cal-Learn Intensive Care Management:  This funding reflects the funding to provide intensive case management, supportive services, and financial incentives to CalWORKs teen recipients who are pregnant or parenting.
  County Counsel has approved this Budget Resolution as to form.
  Not applicable.
11/12/2020:PC  Cannabis Land Use Ordinance  Community Services
  Public hearing to consider a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors regarding adoption of the Cannabis Land Use Ordinance (CLUO), certification of CLUO Final EIR, general plan text amendments, and various amendments to other sections of County Code.  (Staff:  S. Strachan, H. Tschudin) 
 
 
FILE:  GPA #2020-01 and ZC #2020-03: Yolo County Cannabis Land Use Ordinance (CLUO)
APPLICANT:
Yolo County Dept. of Community Services		 OWNER:
Yolo County
LOCATION: Countywide Unincorporated area

GENERAL PLAN: Various

ZONING: Various

SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT: All		 SOILS: Various

FLOOD ZONE: All

FIRE SEVERITY ZONE: All
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
  Staff recommends that the County Planning Commission receive a staff report, conduct a public hearing, and make the following recommendations to the Board of Supervisors:
  1. Adopt a Resolution Certifying the CLUO Final EIR, which will include the CEQA Findings of Fact (see Attachment A)
  2. Adopt a Resolution Amending the General Plan and Adopting the CLUO EIR Mitigation and Monitoring Report (MMRP) (see Attachment B)
  3. Approve an Ordinance Adopting the CLUO (see Attachment C)
  4. Approve an Ordinance Amending the Subdivision Regulations (see Attachment D)
  5. Approve an Ordinance Amending the Zoning Regulations (see Attachment E)
  Yolo County (County) is proposing to adopt a Cannabis Land Use Ordinance (CLUO) and take other related actions described above.  The proposed ordinance would add a discretionary conditional use permit requirement for allowable cannabis activities.  The proposed CLUO adds requirements for zoning compliance, site design, and various performance standards related to development and operation. 
 
The recommended actions would accomplish the following: 
  • Certification of the program EIR for the CLUO as complete under and adequate under CEQA, allowing for adoption of the CLUO and potential future CEQA streamlining by cannabis use permit applicants.  
  • Amendment of the General Plan (first of four allowed annually under state law) resulting in revisions to the text of Policy LU-1.1 and Table LU-4, modification of Policies LU-2.3 and AG-1.3, and inclusion of new Policies LU 1.4 and AG-3.21. 
  • Amendment of the County Code to add the CLUO to the Zoning Regulations by adding Article 14 (Cannabis Land Use Ordinance) to Chapter 2 (Zoning Regulations) of Title 8 of the Yolo County Code 
  • Amendment of the County Subdivision Regulations, Section 8-1.802 (Streets) to comport to CLUO Section 8-2.1408(K) (Driveway Access) to include standards related to access for new private driveways and encroachments. 
  • Adoption of two additional amendments to the County Zoning Regulations to comport to the CLUO by eliminating Section 8-2.116 which prohibits medical marijuana dispensaries and by amending Section 8-2.217 (Use Permits) to clarify and expand the process for revocation or modification of a use permit. 
The Planning Commission held a workshop September 10, 2020 to review the ordinance, receive public comments, ask questions of staff, and discuss the proposed ordinance.  A summary of the workshop is provided below.
 
The purpose of the subject hearing is for the Planning Commission to take a final action, in the form of recommendations to the Board of Supervisors, regarding certification of the EIR and adoption of the CLUO and related actions. A second hearing has been scheduled for December 10, 2020, if needed.  Should the second meeting be needed, staff recommends the Commission close the public hearing at the end of the first hearing, and continue the item to the December date for final action.

REVIEW OF STAFF-PROPOSED CLUO
As presented to the Planning Commission during the September workshop the staff is proposing adoption the proposed CLUO with the following key features:
  1. Base EIR Alternative – The proposed CLUO recommended by staff is most similar to EIR Alternative 2,“All License Types with Moderate Limits”. 
  2. Range of Cannabis Uses – The proposed CLUO would allow the following new cannabis land uses in addition to cultivation (Section 8-2.1405): manufacturing, testing, processing, nursery, distribution, retail, and microbusiness.  This same range of uses was assumed in EIR Alternative 2.
  3. Allowed Location -- The proposed CLUO allows the same types of cannabis uses in the same zoning districts as Alternative 2, including prohibitions on commercial cannabis uses in all residential zones (Section 8-2.1407).
  4. Use Permit Cap – The proposed CLUO would limit the number of cannabis use permits to 132 total (Section 8-2.1406(G)). This same cap on uses was comprehensively analyzed for environmental impacts in Alternative 2.
  5. License Type Cap -- The proposed CLUO would establish generally lower caps on specified cannabis activities by land use/cannabis license type (Section 8-2.1406(G)) than the range of allowed uses analyzed in the CLUO Final EIR between Alternatives 2 through 5.  The  proposed CLUO is most similar to Alternative 2.  The differences between the proposed CLUO and Alternative 2 reflect market and policy decisions and would have no material effect on, or arguably reduce, the impact conclusions of the EIR because they fall within the magnitude and range of impact analyzed in the equal weight analysis of the five alternatives:
 
Cannabis Use Type Alternative 2 Caps by Cannabis Use Type CLUO Caps by Cannabis Use Type Differences (CLUO v Alt 2)
Personal Unlimited Unlimited None
Cultivation 80 95 +15
Nurseries 5 5 None
Processing 5 7* +2
Manufacturing 20 6* -14
Testing 5 2* -3
Distribution 10 7* -3
Retail Storefront 2 5 +3
Retail Non-Storefront Not Specified Unlimited N/A
Microbusiness 5 5 None
*Prohibited in Guinda/Rumsey
 
6. Buffers -- With the exception of buffers for tribal trust lands, the proposed CLUO establishes smaller buffers than Alternative 2 for the same list of identified sensitive land uses (Section 8-2.1408(E)).  Alternative 2 assumed 1,000-foot buffers for all identified sensitive land uses.  The proposed CLUO establishes buffers ranging from 200 feet to 1,000 feet depending on the specific identified sensitive land use.  The Alternatives examined in the CLUO Final EIR analyze a range of buffer distances from 75 feet to 1,000 feet.  The buffers included in the proposed CLUO fall within that range. 

Proposed CLUO Buffers
CLUO Sensitive Use Buffer5 Measure Buffer From
Off-site individual legal residences located on AG zoned parcels under separate ownership >20 ac (“farm dwelling”) = 200 ft
 
<20 ac (“home on small AG parcel”) = 600 ft		 Building1
 
 
Parcel2
Residentially zoned land 600 ft Zone boundary3
Public parks 600 ft Parcel4
Licensed day cares 600 ft Building1
 
 
Recognized places of worship
Public or licensed private schools
Licensed treatment facilities for drugs or alcohol
Licensed youth centers
Federal lands held in trust by the federal govt or the subject of a trust application for a federally recognized Tribal government 1,000 ft Parcel4
Cannabis Land Use Buffer Measure Buffer From
Personal cultivation (indoor and outdoor) None N/A
Commercial indoor cultivation on AG, IND, or COMM parcel (with approved odor control system, if needed) None4 N/A
Commercial outdoor cultivation As identified above for various sensitive uses (200/600/1000) The closest point of any structure or outdoor area containing any cannabis 3
 
1/ Buffers applied to farm dwellings on agriculturally zoned parcels of 20 acres or more, day cares, places of worship, schools, treatment facilities, and youth centers shall be measured from the closest surface of the building in which the use is operated to the closest point of any structure or outdoor area containing cannabis.
 
2/ Buffers applied to residences on agriculturally zoned parcels less than 20 acres would be measured from the closest point of the parcel boundary to the closest point of any structure or outdoor area containing cannabis.
 
3/ Buffers applied to residentially zoned land would be measured from the closest point of the residential zone boundary to the closest point of any structure or outdoor area containing cannabis.
 
4/ Buffers applied to public parks and Tribal trust land would be measured from the closest point of the parcel boundary to the closest point of any structure or outdoor area containing cannabis.
 
5/Variations of up to ten percent may be approved by the County.


In making this recommendation regarding buffers the staff balanced the following considerations:
  • The buffers from off-site residences would be much larger than what is currently allowed under the licensing program.  The licensing program requires 75-foot buffers between outdoor cannabis uses and occupied off-site residences, as compared to 200-foot or 1,000-foot buffers under the proposed CLUO.   
  • Odor analysis modeling conducted by Trinity Consultants indicates that the difference between no buffer and 500 feet is substantial in terms of odor control.  It also indicates that increasing the buffer from 500 to 1,000 feet gets about half again the gains; and from 1,000 to 1,500 feet, the gains are dramatically diminished.  This suggests that the optimum distance for buffers is somewhere between 500 and 1,000 feet.  
  • Of the 17 counties that allow outdoor cannabis activities, 11 set the maximum buffer at 1,000 feet with all but three allowing lower buffers under specified circumstances.  Four set the maximum buffer at 600 feet, with two allowing lower buffers under specified circumstances.  
  • The default buffer established by the state is 600 feet.  
  • Preliminary GIS modeling, looking solely at buffers and based on gross assumptions regarding site boundaries, indicates that of the currently operating cultivation licensees:  
    • Approximately 40 percent could potentially fail or have to relocate on-site under a 500-foot buffer requirement.  
    • Approximately 60 percent could potentially fail or have to relocate on-site under a 1,000-foot buffer requirement.  
    • Approximately 50 percent could potentially fail or have to relocate on-site under the staff proposed buffers.
7. Eliminate buffers for personal use -- The proposed CLUO creates an exception from buffers for personal use but all other performance standards including odor control apply, thus ensuring the ability to control and enforce for nuisance behavior related to personal use.  Alternative 2 assumes buffers apply to personal use, with the exception of within residentially designated areas because that would have the unintended effect of prohibiting personal use entirely within those zone districts.   
 
8. Over-Concentration Threshold – The proposed CLUO would establish the threshold for over-concentration as more than ten cannabis operations in any 6-mile diameter area throughout the unincorporated County (Section 8-2.1406(H)).  Alternative 2 assumes control on over-concentration will be established but does not identify specific thresholds. The threshold included in the proposed CLUO is consistent with the CLUO Final EIR analysis and incorporates Mitigation Measure OVC-1(a-c).  

SUMMARY OF PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP
The staff report for the workshop included a summary of the proposed CLUO, additional explanation supporting the staff recommendation, a summary of the EIR including the Master Responses contained in the Final EIR volume, a review of the comments and recommendations of the Citizen’s Advisory Committees (CACs), and a review of key features of the staff recommendation for the proposed CLUO.  That information is not repeated in this staff report but can be accessed here.
 
All volumes of the EIR are available here.
 
Between 40 and 50 members of the public attended the workshop which was conducted virtually due to public health requirements.  Seven participants made comments.  The list below identifies the key issues raised during the workshop, either by the public or by Commissioners, with brief staff responses to each item:
 
Over-Concentration and Co-Located Sites – A concern was expressed over the way co-located sites were proposed to be counted for purposes of over-concentration.  The staff concurs and has proposed a modification to Section 8-2.1406(H) so that each owner/entity at a co-located site would be counted individually.
 
Proposed Caps by Cannabis License Type – Comments were received advocating a variety of changes, both higher and lower, to the proposed caps by license type. The staff is comfortable with the caps as recommended and proposes no changes.  In making this recommendation the staff balanced the following considerations:
  • Allow opportunities for new operators to cultivate.
  • Start slowly with a reasonable number in each category.  The County may modify the CLUO, including the identified caps, at any time in the future. 
  • Allow for market growth overall. 
  • Expand beyond the current restriction solely to cultivation and allow for reasonable numbers of new cannabis activities.  
  • Remain generally at or below the mid-point analyzed in the EIR. 
  • Reflect generally the permit caps suggested by the CACs.
 
“Grandfathering” of Existing Cannabis Licensees – Comments were received in favor of granting exemptions to existing operating cannabis licensees, presumably without requiring compliance with certain requirements of the CLUO, such as buffers for example.   The staff does not recommend this approach.  All licensees were notified prior to securing building permit approvals for capital improvements to their existing operations that compliance with future regulations would be required.  They were all required to sign a waiver acknowledging this disclosure. 
 
The proposed CLUO already includes several sections that are relevant to this discussion:  
  1. Priority Processing For Existing Cultivators (Section 8-2.1404(B)) -- This gives priority to existing licensees in applying for cannabis use permits and all license types. 
  2. Minor Administrative Relief for Buffers (Section 8-2-1408(E)) – This allows for variation from the buffers of up to ten percent of the required distance, at the discretion of the County, based on consideration of project-specific conditions.  It should be noted as well, that the proposed buffers are graduated to recognize the reasonableness of providing greater protections for residences on smaller agricultural properties that are less likely to be involved in intensive agricultural activity.
  3. Functionally Equivalent Standards (Section 8-2.1408(S)) -- This allows for one or more requirements or standards in the ordinance to be addressed by alternative means that have an equally effective or better outcome.  This provides for flexibility on a case-by-case basis, at the discretion of the County, yet imposes the overall regulatory standard of equal or better. 
  4. Odor Easement (Section 8-2.1408(DD)(3)) – This allows neighbors to agree to accept odorous conditions on their property by agreeing to an easement to allow this to occur.  The easement would be an alternative to compliance with the identified odor threshold.
If “grandfathering” were nevertheless determined by the Planning Commission or Board of Supervisors to be desirable, staff recommends it be limited and specific.  It should identify those specific regulations of the CLUO for which waivers or exemptions would be provided for existing licensees, and require full compliance with all other aspects of the CLUO.  Licenses should be in good standing and operators afforded this opportunity should be those that have operated in good faith and full compliance with all applicable laws over the course of their licensure.  The discussion of a “buffer easement” below addresses this issue from a different perspective – regulatory relief for one specific requirement and in situations where neighbors are in agreement.
 
Buffer Easement Concept – Comments were received in favor of allowing smaller buffers provided an easement agreement is reached between an operator and affected neighbors.  The staff does not recommend this approach, particularly in light of the flexibility already proposed as a part of the CLUO (described above).   Nevertheless, were this concept to move forward, recommended considerations include: use of a standardized agreement template for equity and fairness; definition of the externalities intended to be covered by (and excluded from) the easement such as odor, noise, light, etc.; clarity regarding enforcement within buffer easement areas; clarity regarding determinations of nuisance within the easement; requirements that the easement be recorded against all affected properties; and protections against coercion. 
 
Over-Concentration Threshold – A concern was expressed that the proposed over-concentration threshold may not be consistent with the EIR.  The staff has confirmed that the proposed approach is in full compliance with the analysis in the EIR and Mitigation Measure OVC-1.  The EIR analysis identifies that five or fewer sites within a six-mile diameter should not be considered over-concentrated and that 23 or more sites within a six-mile diameter should be considered over-concentrated.  The analysis points out (page 4-37, Draft EIR volume) that between six and 22 sites within a six-mile diameter area should be considered potentially over-concentrated and acknowledges that the precise threshold for over-concentration, within this range, is a matter of policy.  Mitigation Measure OVC-1a(II) directs the County to identify the appropriate threshold within the range and incorporate it in the CLUO.  In Section 8-2.1406(H) the proposed over-concentration threshold is:
 
>10 use permits/operations within 6-mile area = over-concentration
<10 use permits/operations within 6-mile area = acceptable concentration
 
CEQA Baseline for Impact Analysis – A comment was expressed in disagreement with the assumed operation of 78 existing and eligible licensees as the CEQA “baseline” for analyzing impacts in the EIR.  The staff understands this perspective but notes that this is a matter of law that has been confirmed consistently by the courts.  Master Response 2 in the Final EIR volume (page 3-4) is helpful in better understanding this issue.
 
Volatile Manufacturing – A concern was mentioned regarding volatile manufacturing.  The proposed CLUO would allow all types of manufacturing, with appropriate project-specific and site-specific considerations, which the cannabis use permit process will ensure. Compliance with all relevant local, state, and federal requirements for hazards and hazardous material will be required.  The staff supports all manufacturing types and proposes no change to the CLUO in this regard.  The EIR (Chapter 3.9) confirms that potential impacts associated with manufacturing are fully mitigated.
 
Cannabis-infused products (such as edibles, tinctures, and oils) are important components of the cannabis industry and growing in popularity.  A key ingredient of these products is cannabis extract.  To create these products chemical solvents are used to extract the active ingredients from whole marijuana flowers. The solvents are often flammable pressurized chemicals which, if used improperly during the extraction process, could be dangerous.  The most common chemicals/gases used for cannabis extraction are butane, ethanol (alcohol), propane, and carbon dioxide. 
 
To limit potential dangers, California split the activity of cannabis manufacturing into two different categories, volatile and non-volatile, distinguished by whether or not they use volatile solvents, and placed differing restrictions on the two categories, with additional precautions required for manufacturing operations that used volatile solvents.  There are different license types for each manufacturing type. Based on California Department of Public Health regulations, butane and propane are considered volatile solvents and ethanol and carbon dioxide are considered non-volatile solvents.
 
It is helpful for context to note that many common products and daily activities involve the use of hazardous chemicals including swimming pool maintenance, agricultural applications, house cleaning, painting, and furniture refinishing, among many others.  Butane is used in cigarette lighters and camping stoves.  Ethanol is used in gasoline, varnishes, and perfumes.  Propane is used to fuel BBQs and in many rural homes.  Carbon dioxide is used in fire extinguishers, sodas, and beer.  With proper controls and oversight, these chemicals and gases are used effectively and safely every day.
 
Agricultural Use on Parcel Remainder – There was discussion regarding additional creative mechanisms to support agricultural use of portions of cannabis parcels not being used for cannabis activities.   The staff noted during the workshop that farmers receiving any type of federal assistance are prohibited by the terms of their agreements from any agricultural endeavors on parcels associated with cannabis activities.  Until federal policy and regulations change regarding cannabis this creates challenges for cannabis licensees seeking to collaborate with non-cannabis farmers.  The staff does not propose changes to the CLUO in this regard.  Section 8-2.1408(B) requires agricultural use or proper maintenance of cannabis remainder areas.  Nevertheless there is nothing prohibiting voluntary programs and incentives to support farmers not otherwise prohibited due to their federal commitments.  This could be pursued as a possible cannabis incentive program outside of the CLUO regulations.

ADDITIONAL STAFF-PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE CLUO
Since the Planning Commission workshop, the staff has identified several additional proposed edits to the CLUO.  These are identified in Attachment C in yellow highlight and include: 
  • General -- A number of non-substantive clarifications and corrections.  Included in these is the removal of the words “regional-serving” from the description of nurseries and processing in Section 8-2.1406(G).  These words were intended to be descriptive but caused unintentional confusion.
  • Section 8-2.1406(H) – Modification to require that each owner/entity at a co-located site be counted individually for purposes of evaluating over-concentration.
  • Section 8-2.1411(A) – Modifications to sub-sections 1 and 4 because this information is already required under state law.
LETTERS RECEIVED SINCE THE CLOSE OF THE DRAFT EIR COMMENT PERIOD
Since the close of the Draft EIR comment period, the County has received the following 12 comment letters on the CLUO (see Attachment F).  These comments have been considered in developing the staff recommendation.
 
Date Received -- Commenter
December 22, 2019 -- Brian Boyce and Linda Deering
January 6, 2020 -- Carol Owens
February 6, 2020 -- Meg Hehner
March 1, 2020 -- David Hills
March 3, 2020 -- Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation
March 5, 2020 -- South Davis CAC
September 2, 2020 -- PG&E
September 9, 2020 -- Caltrans District 3
September 10, 2020 -- Susan Pelican
September 11, 2020 -- Capay Valley CAC Minutes from December 4, 2019
September 14, 2020 – Loren Hamilton
September 28, 2020 -- Brian and Gretchen Paddock
   
NEXT STEPS
If the Planning Commission requires a second meeting to take action on the CLUO, staff will return to the Commission on December 10, 2020 for this purpose.  If a second meeting is not needed, the next step will be to move this item forward to the Board of Supervisors:
 
  • January 19, 2021  Board of Supervisors Workshop
  • February 23, 2021  Board of Supervisors Hearing
  • March 9, 2021  (tentative) Board of Supervisors Meeting (if needed)
The staff will report back to the Planning Commission at a later date regarding implementation of the CLUO including considerations for accepting and processing applications following adoption of the ordinance.
 
 

 







 
  County Administrators Office, County Counsel, Department of Community Services, Cannabis Task Force
  Any person who is dissatisfied with the decisions of this Planning Commission may appeal to the Board of Supervisors by filing with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors within fifteen (15) days from the date of the action. A written notice of appeal specifying the grounds for appeal and an appeal fee immediately payable to the Clerk of the Board must be submitted at the time of filing. The Board of Supervisors may sustain, modify, or overrule this decision.
Julie Dachtler 11/17/2020:BOS  CAO Report  County Administrator
  Action items and reports from the County Administrator. (Blacklock)
  Action items and reports from the County Admnistrator.
Next →