The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20100292.tiff RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS MINUTES BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO FEBRUARY 8, 2010 The Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, met in regular session in full conformity with the laws of the State of Colorado at the regular place of meeting in the Weld County Centennial Center, Greeley, Colorado, February 8, 2010, at the hour of 9:00 a.m. ROLL CALL: The meeting was called to order by the Chair and on roll call the following members were present, constituting a quorum of the members thereof: Commissioner Douglas Rademacher, Chair Commissioner Barbara Kirkmeyer, Pro-Tem - EXCUSED Commissioner Sean P. Conway Commissioner William F. Garcia Commissioner David E. Long Also present: County Attorney, Bruce T. Barker Acting Clerk to the Board, Esther E. Gesick Director of Finance and Administration, Monica Mika MINUTES: Commissioner Conway moved to approve the minutes of the Board of County Commissioners meeting of February 3, 2010, as printed. Commissioner Long seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA: There were no amendments to the agenda. PUBLIC INPUT: Doug Meyer, County resident, submitted copies of a letter and an e-mail message from the Board of Supervisors and the County Attorney for Inyo County, California, marked Exhibits A and B, respectively. He stated eleven counties in the States of Oregon and Washington signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for Cooperating Agency status in preparation of forest management plans. He stated, according to the terms of the MOU, the counties waived their right of appeal for any issue that arises in the planning process. As a result, the Forest Service is trying to replace all concepts of "coordination" with "Cooperative Agency" status. Mr. Meyer requested the Board review the documentation and consider discussing the issue further at a later date. Commissioner Conway commended Mr. Meyer for his efforts in working with the County Attorney regarding Coordination, as it relates to the Pawnee National Grassland, and for keeping the Board informed of the relevant issues. CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Conway moved to approve the Consent Agenda as printed. Commissioner Long seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. NEW BUSINESS: CONSIDER TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF CR 13 BETWEEN CR 56 AND U.S. HIGHWAY 34: Janet Carter, Department of Public Works, stated staff recommends approval of a temporary closure on County Road 13, between County Road 56 and U.S. Highway 34, from February 10, to March 5, 2010, Minutes, February 8, 2010 2010-0292 Page 1 BC0016 for a culvert replacement and drainage work to prepare for a capital improvement project in the coming year. Ms. Carter stated, in 2008, the average daily traffic count for County Road 13 was approximately 150 vehicles, water will be sprayed to provide dust control on the gravel portion of the detour route, and road signs and barricades will be used for traffic control. Commissioner Garcia moved to approve said temporary closure. Seconded by Commissioner Conway, the motion carried unanimously. CONSIDER THREE PURCHASE OF SERVICES AGREEMENTS FOR OPERATIONAL EXPENSES FOR VARIOUS RURAL SENIOR CENTERS AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN: Judy Griego, Director, Department of Human Services, stated these agreements were reviewed by the Board in a work session on February 6, 2010. She stated under these agreements the Hill N Park, Lochbuie, and Pierce Senior Centers will each receive $500.00 to be used for operational expenses such as heating, electricity, telephone, office supplies, etcetera. Ms. Griego stated these funds are being awarded on a one-time basis, and terms of the agreement are valid through June 30, 2010. Commissioner Garcia moved to approve said agreements and authorize the Chair to sign. Seconded by Commissioner Long, the motion carried unanimously. CONSIDER SEVEN PURCHASE OF SERVICES AGREEMENTS FOR OUTREACH ACTIVITIES WITH VARIOUS PROVIDERS AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN: Ms. Griego stated these agreements were presented to the Board at a work session on February 6, 2010. She stated the seven service providers will each receive a one-time award, in the amount of $500.00, which will be funded through the Older Coloradoan Fund to provide a variety of programs and activities that are designed for low-income, isolated and lonely seniors in their communities. In response to Commissioner Rademacher, Ms. Griego stated Eva Jewel, Department of Human Services, has reviewed different options for ways to approach funding of the Tri-Town Senior Center, which is actually serving three communities; however, staff believes the larger centers typically have more resources compared to the smaller centers. Responding to Commissioner Conway, Ms. Griego reiterated these grants are intended to help off-set some of the expenses related to outreach activities, and staff believes the larger centers have access to more resources and that the funds tend to have a larger impact in the smaller communities. In response to Commissioner Garcia, Ms. Griego stated the Older Coloradoan Fund has a limited amount of funds, and the Area Agency on Aging determined that $500.00 was an appropriate amount for the awards. Responding to Chair Rademacher, Ms. Griego stated the centers are required to complete an application, which indicates what programs they intend to provide; however, a specific number of clients is not reported. Ms. Griego indicated she will research the average number of individuals who are being served by the senior centers and provide that information to the Board. Commissioner Long moved to approve said agreements and authorize the Chair to sign. Seconded by Commissioner Garcia, the motion carried unanimously. CONSIDER 2010-2011 COMMUNITY SERVICES BLOCK GRANT (CSBG) APPLICATION AND PLAN AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN: Ms. Griego stated this matter was reviewed by the Board at a work session on February 3, 2010. She explained with these funds Weld County will provide services to low-income residents, including direction and training for operation of the nutrition program, pre- and post-employment services, door-to-door transportation, and emergency assistance. She stated the term of this grant will commence March 1, 2010, and end February 28, 2011, and the Human Services Committee recommends approval, in the amount of $279,267.00. Commissioner Long moved to approve said application and plan and authorize the Chair to sign. Seconded by Commissioner Garcia, the motion carried unanimously. CONSIDER AGREEMENT FOR EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN - LIVE WELL SOLUTIONS, LLC: Monica Mika, Director, Department of Finance and Administration, stated this item was reviewed with the Board in a work session, and staff recommends switching from APS Healthcare Northwest, Inc., to Live Well Solutions, LLC, in an attempt to resolve some issues with service delivery. In response to Commissioner Conway, Ms. Mika explained there Minutes, February 8, 2010 2010-0292 Page 2 BC0016 was not a consolidation of the provider; however, the original vendor is now part of Well Solutions as a case manager. She further stated staff is confident this transition will provide expanded services, including assistance in Spanish. Commissioner Conway moved to approve said agreement and authorize the Chair to sign. Seconded by Commissioner Conway, the motion carried unanimously. HEALTH: CONSIDER AUTHORIZATION FOR THE WELD COUNTY ATTORNEY TO PROCEED WITH LEGAL ACTION FOR VIOLATION OF THE COLORADO RETAIL FOOD ESTABLISHMENT RULES AND REGULATIONS - ALBERTO'S: Dan Joseph, Department of Public Health and Environment, stated the Alberto's establishment, located at 2605 West 11th Street Road, Greeley, Colorado, has failed to maintain compliance with the Colorado Retail Food Establishment Rules and Regulations, and he referenced the History of Violations spanning from 2005, through January 13, 2010. Mr. Joseph stated, despite efforts of staff, the facility continues to receive citations related to food borne illnesses, therefore, he recommends the Board suspend or revoke the license and assess the civil penalty of $750.00. (Clerk's Note: Rebecca Morales and Bryant Morales, owners/operators, now present) For the benefit of the facility owners/operators, Mr. Joseph reviewed his presentation, and stated staff has conducted the inspections in compliance with the Colorado Retail Food Establishment Rules and Regulations and Section 25-4-1609, C.R.S., which indicates the Board of Commissioners has the ability to suspend or revoke a license. Mr. Joseph referred to a PowerPoint presentation, which was included as part of the Board's documentation, and stated, since 2005, staff has conducted 30 inspections and issued 174 violations. He noted that facilities which are in compliance undergo an average of ten inspections, and in this instance, the number of violations continues to increase, rather than decrease. He stated inspectors have destroyed food that did not meet heating and cooling requirements, and in 2006, there was an outbreak of food-borne illnesses, and also a follow-up procedure, staff also contacted patrons who paid with a credit card to ensure there weren't more cases that simply weren't reported. Mr. Joseph displayed a slide showing an inspection report and explained how inspectors determine critical food temperatures. He noted that although proper equipment has been installed, the facility continues to receive citations for not using the equipment properly to ensure the appropriate temperature of the food for cold holding. He reviewed the citation dates for improper cooling, unwholesome food, improper cold holding, toxic levels of chemicals, and other critical violations, and stated the problem stems from a breakdown of multiple issues which all typically result in food-borne illness. Mr. Joseph stated staff scheduled an informal hearing on January 6, 2010; however, the establishment owner missed the hearing due to confusion regarding the date of a separate hearing that was to be held with the City of Greeley concerning the liquor license. Rather than reschedule, staff conducted a follow-up inspection on January 13, 2010 and cited the facility for eight additional violations, with seven being repeat citations. He explained the procedure used by staff to notify establishments concerning repeat violations and non-compliance, and stated the facility has also been cited multiple times for violations of the top five risk factors listed by the Center for Disease Control. In summary, Mr. Joseph stated the Department of Public Health and Environment feels that the management is not in control over food-borne illness risk factors, and is asking for suspension or revocation of the facility's license due to the health risk posed to the public. He explained the facility has been assessed a civil penalty of $500.00, and the next inspection will incur an additional $250.00, for a total of$750.00 in civil penalties. In response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Joseph stated the facility has been assessed more than $2,000.00 in prior fines, which have been paid. Responding to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Joseph stated the blast chiller can only hold a certain quantity, and the facility has been storing the extra food in the walk in cooler. Responding further to Commissioner Conway, he stated the Department has provided formal training, as well as some in-house training regarding food borne illness; however, despite the training, the violations continue. Responding to Commissioner Garcia, Mr. Joseph Minutes, February 8, 2010 2010-0292 Page 3 BC0016 confirmed the informal hearings are typically an opportunity for staff and the facility operator to meet and coordinate ideas for solutions to the known problems; however, staff did not request a formal plan because they had not witnessed measurable improvement in the past. He stated the Department opted to conduct a follow-up inspection, since the informal hearing was missed, and acknowledged that a formal plan has not been presented by the owner. In response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Joseph stated the rules and regulations do allow for immediate action by staff, if warranted; however, following the previous illness incident, staff did not receive evidence of illness reports before, or after, the known date, and it was determined that the incident was likely a result of one individual's improper actions. Sara Evans, Department of Public Health and Environment, explained the informal hearing is a courtesy process in an attempt to avoid bringing suspension/revocation requests before the Board. She stated it appears the primary issue at this establishment is that no one is in charge of actively monitoring the food handling. Responding to Commissioner Conway, Ms. Evans stated the problems will only be resolved if the owners take responsibility. Mr. Morales stated he was not familiar with the hearing process and he would like the opportunity to review the evidence that was presented by staff. In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Morales stated he is disputing some of staffs evidence and would request this hearing be continued to allow him the opportunity to retain an attorney to help represent him in this matter. Mr. Joseph stated a notice explaining the hearing date and process, as well as the Summary and History of Violations, were sent to the facility and signed for on January 29, 2010, indicating staffs intent to request suspension or revocation of the license. In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Morales requested a one-week continuance. In response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Barker stated the Board may grant a continuance; however, staff brought this matter forward with a request to suspend and revoke today due to the serious conditions found at the facility. Mr. Joseph confirmed all of the information presented to the Board was delivered to the facility, and he called last Wednesday to ensure they were aware of the hearing date and time. He stated at that time they had not reviewed the delivered documents, so he urged them to locate the letter, review it, and call if there were any questions. Mr. Barker stated contrary to previous statements, staff has verified that the information was made available; however, the establishment failed to review it. In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Joseph stated he, personally, spoke with Ms. Morales on February 3, 2010, who indicated her daughter Robin had signed for the letter and that she had not reviewed it. He called later in the day to follow-up and found that they had still not read the letter, so he reiterated the date and time and requested the content be reviewed prior to this hearing. Commissioner Garcia thanked the owners for attending, and questioned what would be changed to ensure the protection of the public during a one-week continuance. Mr. Morales stated he is one of the managers; however, due to serious health issues he has not been present at the facility to help ensure food control. He acknowledged that his absence has been a large factor in some of the problems, and he has reviewed the Health Department's concerns with the staff; however, they have experienced a lot of transition in staffing and it is sometimes difficult to keep the current staff trained. Ms. Morales stated it would be very helpful to have the classes offered in Spanish for the kitchen staff, and Mr. Morales stated most of the training was done with the front wait staff. Mr. Joseph indicated the Department did provide on-site training in Spanish; however, Mr. Morales countered that it was an informal training, and no formal training has been provided in Spanish. Mr. Joseph stated he is aware of at least three employees who manage the kitchen, cut the meat, and wash the dishes, that have been present at a majority of the inspections that have been conducted during the past three years. In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Morales stated he will be having surgery in a couple of weeks; however, during the next week he will work diligently to retain legal counsel who can represent him at the next hearing. Commissioner Conway stated he did not hear a direct answer to Minutes, February 8, 2010 2010-0292 Page 4 BC0016 Commissioner Garcia's previous question regarding what measures would be taken to ensure the health and safety of the public during a continuance; however, a lot of excuses have been presented and he wants to be sure the public health is ensured during a continuance. Mr. Morales stated he will personally work to train the staff and demonstrate proper technique when using the flash cooler. He further stated Alberto's has been in business for 21 years and has maintained a good working relationship with both the City of Greeley and Weld County. Commissioner Conway questioned whether a temporary plan could be drafted and signed by the owner to establish procedure during the interim. Commissioner Long stated he does not support a continuance because he believes the owner has had more than adequate time to retain an attorney and review the evidence. He stated he is not willing to put the public in jeopardy. Commissioner Garcia stated he is largely in agreement with Commissioner Long; however, he feels a continuance would provide the owners with a good opportunity to present any arguments and evidence they may have. He stated he still needs to hear an answer to his initial question of what steps will be taken during a continuance, and noted that he is very concerned that, during his four years of serving as a Commissioner, this is the longest list of health citations he has seen. He stated he supports a one-week continuance, with the issuance of a suspension during that time. In response to Commissioner Rademacher, Mr. Joseph stated an additional option for the facility would be to contract with an outside safety inspector who would on-site and oversee the operations to ensure the safety standards are maintained, as well as provide additional staff training. Ms. Evans stated this is not something that can simply be cleaned or repaired, rather, the problems will only be resolved when the owner changes how the facility operates and functions, and it would also be helpful if the owners would attend a managerial control course. Chair Rademacher stated he does not support allowing the facility to remain open for another week, and it is still unclear whether one week will be long enough to address the problems. Commissioner Long commented those questions will need to be answered at the next hearing, which may result in continued suspension or revocation of the license. Mr. Barker expressed concern with the Board issuing a suspension because it will be difficult to make a finding of fact when the facility owners' only defense presented today was the need for an attorney. He suggested the matter be continued until Wednesday, which will allow the owners to retain an attorney, at which time the citations may be addressed and defended, with or without an attorney, or they present evidence of a Stipulation Agreement with the Health Department, which may include a voluntary suspension for a set amount of time. In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Barker stated the Board does have the option to request a voluntary suspension. Responding to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Morales stated he believes a voluntary suspension would be admitting guilt, and closing the facility for two days will have a negative impact on the welfare of the 30 individuals they employ, as well as hinder their ability to generate revenue that will be needed to pay the assessed fines. In response to Commissioner Long, Mr. Barker stated the obligations of due process were met when the notification was sent by staff. He stated before the Board makes any findings, the respondents need to be advised that today is their opportunity to address the concerns identified in the staff report, or state for the record that they are not willing to do so. Commissioner Long stated he is not willing to allow the facility to remain open for two days while the owners hire an attorney. Chair Rademacher stated this has been going on for almost five years, and he expressed concern that the matter was not brought before the Board in 2006 when there were confirmed cases of illness. He also agreed with Commissioner Long that he is not willing to allow the facility to operate during a continuance. Commissioner Garcia stated although he would like to give the respondents the opportunity to retain an attorney, he is also concerned with the option of allowing the facility to continue Minutes, February 8, 2010 2010-0292 Page 5 BC0016 to operate in light of the facts presented by the Health staff, and he is disappointed the owner did not offer to enter into a voluntary suspension. Based on the Board's discussion, Mr. Barker advised the facility owners/operators that the Board is ready to issue a two-day suspension; however, they are requesting a defense. He stated they are not willing to grant a continuance based on the request to retain an attorney, since adequate notice was provided and legal counsel should have been retained prior to this date. Mr. Morales stated he is not legally trained to dispute any of the evidence. Mr. Barker stated the Health Department presented its findings and he questioned whether the owners had any response to the information provided. Mr. Morales indicated he will present a response with an attorney present. Mr. Barker stated it appears the respondents are refusing to present a defense today, therefore, he advised the Board to proceed accordingly. Chair Rademacher suggested closing the facility for two days and set a hearing for Wednesday to evaluate whether the suspension should be extended or if the license should be revoked. Mr. Morales stated he believes that is passing judgment. Mr. Barker agreed; however, he chose not to respond when provided with the opportunity. In response to Mr. Morales, Mr. Barker stated double jeopardy issues will not apply in this case. Commissioner Long moved to issue a two-day suspension, and set a hearing for Wednesday, February 10, 2010, at 9:00 a.m., to allow the owners/operators adequate time to retain a lawyer to represent in this matter. He stated the Board will hear testimony, review facts, and then make further determination of whether to dismiss, extend the suspension, or revoke the permit. Mr. Barker clarified the Board is issuing a two-day suspension based on the testimony provided today, and on Wednesday the Board will make further determination of whether to revoke or suspend from that point forward. Commissioner Garcia seconded the motion, based on the evidence presented by the Department of Public Health and Environment, and the lack of evidence to dispute staff's findings. Commissioner Conway stated he will support the motion, and expressed his disappointment that the owners did not enter into a voluntarily suspension as a sign of good faith. He stated the evidence clearly shows that this action is warranted, and he has not been convinced of a commitment on the part of management to take corrective measures. There being no further discussion, the motion carried unanimously. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES: The resolutions were presented and signed as listed on the Consent Agenda. No Ordinances were approved. Let the minutes reflect that the above and foregoing actions were attested to and respectfully submitted by the Acting Clerk to the Board. Minutes, February 8, 2010 2010-0292 Page 6 BC0016 There being no further business, this meeting was adjourned at 10:10 a.m. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS -43 E La` WELD COUNTY, COLORADO ATTEST: +i • n c�r4l . , t I SI 14 '.:itiv glas ademache , Chair Weld County Clerk to the Board 1 ? -.(7)A EXCUSED BY: hl0 ' :„`ck' Barbara Kirkmeyer, Pro-Tern n .' Dept Clerk t the Board Sean P. Cones WilI• m ' . Garcia David E. ` 1 Long Minutes, February 8, 2010 2010-0292 Page 7 BC0016 I MEMBERS OF TILE BOARD LINDA ARCULSUSAN ASH S 0 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SUSAN CASH BEVERLY BROWN MARTY FORTNEY COUNTY OF INYO RICHARD CER VANTES Q P.O.BOX N .INDEPENDENCE,CALIFORNIA 93526 KEVIN D.CARUNCHIO of the Bo ard the Board IL/P010‘13/4lTELErxoxE(760)878-0373 . FAX (760)878-2241 e-mail:pgansolley®inyocounly.us PATRICIA GUNSOLLEY Assistant Clerk of the Board January 26, 2010 Forest Service Planning NOI C/O Bear West Company 172 E 500 S. Bountiful, UT 84010 RE: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the National Forest System Land Management Planning Rule To Whom It May Concern: Inyo County appreciates the opportunity to participate in developing the new Planning Rule to guide planning efforts for national forest land. On behalf of the Board of Supervisors, please consider the comments in this correspondence in crafting the new Rule, alternatives for analysis in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), and the environmental analysis in the EIS. Planning efforts for federal land have tremendous impacts on the communities that are surrounded by these lands. A county such as ours, which is 95% federal land, is a prime example. When so much of the environment in which a community exists is controlled by federal land use planning, the culture, way-of-life, and very existence of the community relies on the use allowed of those lands. It can serve no national purpose to plan for the use of federal lands in such a way that symbiotic communities lose their identity as a result. Inyo County is therefore pleased to observe that an important principle of the new planning rule is "the sustainable use of public lands to support vibrant communities." There can be no better means to achieve this goal than to provide a strong role for local communities in the development of national forest plans. Congress recognized and protected a strong role for local communities when it created mandates for federal officers to coordinate with local governments in the creation of forest plans. 14O1 for the National Forest System Land Management Planning Rule Inyo County Board of Supervisors Correspondence Dated January 26,2010 Page 2 Coordination with county government is particularly important. County government is the one level of government that represents the citizens who are directly affected by federal land use plans. It is county government that is the spokesperson for local populations and which, ideally, can create a consensus around the balanced use of federal lands. A coordinated planning process can strengthen forest plans and the communities that are so dependent on those lands for their economic, social and cultural health. Recent planning rules, in our estimation, have not sufficiently protected the obligation to coordinate planning efforts with local land use plans. To an important extent, this has led to the disenfranchisement of local governments and the communities they represent in the federal planning process. lnyo County supports collaboration. But, while collaboration is a valuable exercise in public participation, it seldom involves more than a series of bargains struck between various interest groups, none of which represent more than a segment of the population, and the most successful of which are the best organized or best funded rather than best representative of the citizenry. Collaboration is not governing, and must not replace or overshadow the viewpoints of a local government that represents the variety of groups and points-of-view which comprise an organic and living community. Local governments are not "stakeholders" in a collaborative planning process, they are the voice of the community. Only a governmental entity, elected by the people and responsive to it, is able to incorporate and legitimize the compromises necessary to the common good and only a governmental entity can truly represent its constituents. And only the most local of governments, counties, can speak for the communities that live adjacent to the forest. lnyo County recognizes that there are interests in federal lands beyond those of its population, but believes Congress has correctly determined that citizens should have extraordinary input into forest plans that directly affect them. It is a matter of providing communities the right of self-determination and the ability to influence, if not control, their destinies. lnyo County therefore petitions the Department of Agriculture and the National Forest Service to strengthen the coordination mandate in the new Planning Rule, with the objective of providing local populations an effective voice in planning for the national forests. We propose the following principles for effective coordination: 1. Forest plans should be consistent with local land use plans to the maximum extent possible, consistent with federal law. 2. Coordination with local government should commence at the earliest possible time. Ideally, local land use plans will be consulted prior to developing a proposed forest plan, and the local government consulted prior to the proposed plan being released to the public and prior to the issuance of a Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS or other procedure required by the National Environmental Policy Act, 3. The Forest should recognize that local government is the expert on the meaning and application of its local plans. The Forest should solicit the views of local government to determine if the proposed forest plan is consistent with local plans, as interpreted 3 NoI for the National Forest System Land Management Planning Rule Inyo County Board of Supervisors Correspondence Dated January 26,2010 Page 3 by the local government. Local governments should be given sufficient time to review proposed plans and comment in writing to the Forest official. 4. Where inconsistencies exist, forest officers should meet with local government officers to achieve consistency. The forest should create a joint task force with the local government or governments to work toward consistency in their plans. 5. The EIS for an individual forest plan should reflect consideration of the objectives of local government plans and policies, an assessment of the interrelated impacts of these plans and policies, a determination of how each forest plan should deal with the impacts identified, and consideration of alternatives to resolve conflicts among the plans. 6. Where a forest plan may not be made consistent with the local plan, the EIS prepared for the plan should justify why its plan is not consistent with local plans, as determined by local authorities, and explain why its plan cannot be made consistent with local plans. If these principles for coordination are not incorporated into the Planning Rule, then the EIS for the Planning Rule should include alternatives that do. Furthermore, the EIS should evaluate the potential social, economic, and environmental justice implications of any alternatives that do not provide effective coordination with local government. The proposed principles do not sufficiently address two important characteristics of the forests, and should be expanded. First, founding purposes of the forests are for grazing, timber, mining, and other economic factors. Management of the forests' resources to promote sustained yields should be paramount in the principles. However, these topics are glossed over, despite their relevance, especially to working landscapes in rural communities. It is therefore recommended that a new principle and associated questions be added in regards to managing natural resources to serve the American people and local economies in a sustainable manner. Secondly, the forests provide opportunities for recreation that are of utmost importance to visitors and local economies alike. Indeed, most forest visitors' purpose is recreation, and the local communities in the vicinity of the forests depend on these visitors for their livelihood. The principles proposed seem to delegate this reality to secondary consideration. Therefore, it is recommended that another new principle and associated questions be crafted to promote diverse recreational opportunities, including but not limited to hiking, camping, off-road vehicle use, and dispersed recreation. In addition to coordination issues, the following concepts should be included in the guiding principles when crafting the new Rule: • Founding purposes of the forests are for grazing, timber, mining, and other economic factors. These topics should be taken into account to a greater degree, and are integral components to creating vibrant, working, rural communities. • Permitting processes should be streamlined. • The financial and economic burden of Forest Service bureaucracy should be reduced. NOI for the National Forest System Land Management Planning Rule Inyo County Board of Supervisors Correspondence Dated January 26,2010 Page 4 • Restoration and conservation do not necessarily enhance the resilience of ecosystems. • Flexibility should be allowed for land managers to address actual observed impacts, rather than speculative issues such as climate change, if not applicable. • Water supply issues should be more focused on forest lands. • Alternative and hydroelectric energy siting and transmission should be specifically evaluated and included in the analysis. Thank you. If you have any questions regarding these matters, please contact the County's Planning Department staff at(760) 878-0263. Sincerely, Richard Cervantes, Chairperson Inyo County Board of Supervisors cc: Board of Supervisors Kevin Carunchio, CAO Randy Keller, County Counsel Doug Wilson, Willdan Regional Council of Rural Counties California State Association of Counties National Association of Counties FAT: Coordination Rule Making- USFS - Inbox - Yahoo! Mail EXHIBIT I-it �Hi, Ed Sign Out All-New Mai! Help Yahoo± YAI- QV1e, MAIL I Search Web Search Classic `E;-• -y, £ • .. " Click Here! Mail Contacts Calendar Notepad What's New? Mobile Mail Options Check Mail i [New l f Mail Search Try the new Yahoo? Mail I Netflix Previous I Next I Back to Messacie5 Mark as Unread I Print 04 Try for Free! , . Delete Reply Forward Spam ' Move... Folders [Add] Fw: Coordination Rule Making -USFS Friday, February 5,2010 12:09 PM I Inbox From: "Mick Mizner" <mcmiz@wildblue.net> Drafts To: "Dad" <lazyvo@yahoo.com> Sent i 1 File(89KB) Spam [Empty] Pau 3 i L Trash [Empty] rY� «I My Photos My Attachments February is the due date so there is not much time to add statements, amendments or Chat&Mobile Text [Hide] additions. I am Available ----Original Message -) k . r I � ,— r+ Itls V From: FRED KELLY GRANT 0 Online Contacts [Add] To:jake tibbetts ; sean curtis ; Kevin Carunchio ; Dohn Henion ; sylvia milligan ; tomtiffany(a,newnorth.net ; Teri Murrison ; steve and jennifer curtis ; Ron Olfert; Rhoda No contacts online right now. Start a New Chat Cargill ; Eric&Tanya Storer; Rachel Thomas ; Mick Mizner; Fred Warner ; margaretaC�americanstewards.us ; dbliberty@aol.com 0 Mobile Contacts [Add] Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 10:59 AM Subject: FW: Coordination Rule Making-USFS You don't have any Mobile Text contacts yet. I am forwarding a message prepared by Randy Keller of Inyo Start a Text Message County, California. I would like you all to look at and read carefully settino what Randy says in the message, and then consider getting comments in from your various jurisdictions, singly, but with a common message. This is just a heads up with the message to asia you to begin thinking of how you can not only put together comments for your jurisdiction, but how you can help put together a format that can be used by all. More later, and I will have a response to a message that someone in forest service land is sending out that says that the planning hf+.,•//,.n mnl�21 moil �+nl,�� .,..m/..../...ol .,...07 ....-1 9. t...-11AC1O41 co 9, 7/G/711 Fw: Coordination Rule Making - USFS - Inbox - Yahoo! Mail Page 2 of ADVERTISEMENT rules later than 1982 do not include coordination, and that is simple its WEIGHT not so. WATCHERS AND IT'S ... fred COMPLETELY ONLINE. �!i�iP +1fA I FYE'�' m saner L.,04„,„0„ Fred Kelly Grant A power has risen up in the government greater than the people themselves, consisting of many and various and powerful interests, combined into one mass, and held together by the cohesive power of the vast surplus in the banks. John C. Calhoun Subject: Coordination Rule Making - USFS Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 16:40:58 -0800 From: rkeller@invocountv.us To: rkeller@inyocounty.us Hello: I am the County Counsel for Inyo County. I am sending this to you because of your interest in the federal coordination mandate. I want to alert you all that the U.S. Forest Service is undergoing a rulemaking that will have an extraordinarily important effect on its obligation to coordinate with local government. While federal statutes create a generalized obligation to coordinate with local government, it is through rule-making that a federal agency spells out how that coordination will occur(and may limit how it will occur). For the USFS, the operative rule is the national forest land planning management rule. This is the rule that in its 1982 form set defined procedures and obligations for coordination that have been progressively watered down since. The Forest Service is re-writing its national planning rule. This rulemaking is a prime opportunity to press the USFS to expand its obligation to coordinate with local government, and may be our best opportunity for many years to bring about positive change in this arena. The comments are to inform the USFS of concerns to be addressed in drafting the new rule. It would be very helpful if they received numerous comments from local governments urging that a strong coordination mandate be included in the new regulations. The comments are due by Feb. 16, 2010. The next chance to comment will likely be after the USFS issues a draft of the rule. I urge you all to submit comments and to forward this notice to any other entity that is interested in coordination. I cannot over-emphasize the importance of commenting early in this process. From my perspective, central principles for coordination should include: • Forest plans should be consistent with local land use plans to the maximum extent possible, consistent with Federal law. • Coordination with local government should commence at the earliest possible time. Ideally, local land use plans will be consulted prior to developing a proposed forest plan, and the local government consulted prior to the proposed plan being released to the public and prior to the issuance of a notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement or other procedure required by NEPA. Fw: Coordination Rule Making - USFS - Inbox - Yahoo! Mail Page 3 of • The Forest should recognize that local government is the expert on the meaning and application of its local plans. The Forest should solicit the views of local government to determine if the proposed forest plan is consistent with local plans, as interpreted by the loca. government. Local governments should be given sufficient time to review proposed plans and comment in writing to the forest official. • Where inconsistencies exist, Forest officers should meet with local government officers to achieve consistency. The Forest should create a joint task force with the local government or governments to work toward consistency in their plans. • The environmental impact statement should reflect consideration of the objectives of local government plans and policies, an assessment of the interrelated impacts of these plans and policies, a determination of how each forest plan should deal with the impacts indentified, and consideration of alternatives to resolve conflicts among the plans. • Where the Forest plan may not be made consistent with the local plan, the environmental impact statement should explain how and why its plan is not consistent with local plans, as determined by local authorities, and explain why its plan cannot be made consistent with local plans. If you are interested in the Coordination principle, and have a National Forest presence, there will be no better opportunity to influence the issue for years to come. Respectfully, Randy Keller County Counsel County of Inyo California Delete ! Reply Forward Spam Move... I Previous I Next I Back to Messages Select Message Encoding ,.c- I Full Header Check Mail New ; I Mail Search Copyright©1994-2010 Yahoo!Inc.All rights reserved.Terms of Service-CopyrightfI P Policy-Guidelines NOTICE:We collect personal information on this site. To learn more about how we use your information,see our Privacy Policy-About Our Ads. Hello