Alpine County Grand Jury • 2016-2017 • Agency Response

County of Alpine Board of Supervisors Fi Ied

Published: October 18, 2017 13 pages
Ver PDF original

Note: Missing finding numbers detected: F6, F9

Findings and Recommendations 8 findings

F1 Page 4
Agree The Board of supervisors is very sensitive to the requirements of the Brown Act and all aspects of open government. The Board only acts in closed session when absolutely necessaryto the welfare of the county. TheBoardwill continue to be open in all of it,s deliberations.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
Page 2
Supervisors will take the Grand Jury's recommendations under consideration and confer with legal counsel. The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors seek to increase the compensation received from SouthTahoe Public Utility District to account for annual inflation rates. Thiswill be covered underthe Board,s actions
F2 Page 2
Agree in part lnflationary factors would enhance the contract compensation, unable to verify amounts.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
Page 2
relative to recommendation #1. See res onse R2 from 2011 res onse to Grand Ju The Grand Jury is recommending that the County undertake independent wastewater testing in accordance with the Sewage Quality lnitiative of 1983. The Board's decision to eliminate independent monitoring was based on
F3 Page 7
Partially disagree Thefund nam tsSTPUD Mitigation Fund. Thefundtota isted n th rep rt s AS ofFebruary /-u10 n the past, funds have been used to estab ish the Counh/ rese rve an d have Leen used to provide initi fundinb ofor arge projects/grants SUch s Hawkins PeakandAIp ne Vi a gelEm bra ntTrail. Th fund has also contributed tnthe purchase offire trucks and waterta nk.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Page 2
the Board's finding that the additional testing was yielding results not different from those established by sTUpD. The GrandJu recommends ke p n the fi sh Iequ rement n the agreemen t orconVErtto a ca5h a Ue ad Usted
F4 Page 2
Agree Agree The Grand Jury recommends reopening the agreement with the South Tahoe public utility District, based upon the failure ofthe Board to appropriately approve the 2002 amendments. The Gra nd Jury correctly points out that a vote of less than a majority of the Board of Supervisors is not a legitimate action ofthe Board. However, the time allotted for challenging the action has long passed and both parties have been acting in reliance on the agreement. The Board of
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
Page 2
fof nfla t on Th s be part fthe d scuss on as pro ded n re5ponse t o recommenda t on #1 The Grand Jury recommends continuing in partnership with South Tahoe Public Utilities District, while improving the agreement. The Board of Supervisors intends on continuing the partnership while performing due diligence in reviewing possible changes and updates to the agreement. The County worked with STUPD to reach the consolidated
F5 Page 7
F6 Partially disagree Th Districthas submitted newwater monitorInd planto the Lahontan RWQcB '1Lahontan") Lahontan staffhas eenWOrkinb owith th DistrictdndWI d ntify requiremen'ts and commendationsforthe monitonng p an, ncluding location ofmonitorIng wel no tothe lan bet acce and lemented.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
Page 2
agreement of 2002 and the C-line agreement of 2004. See response from 2011 response to Grand Jury. ALPINE COUNry CIVIL GRAND JURY 20T6.2017 BOARD OF SUPERVISOR RESPONSE October t7,2Ot7 2' The Brown Act-Alpine county school Board-open Meetings for Local Legislative Bodies
F7 Page 7
Partially disagree SCE responsFto F4 re$ard n ts the COnso d ated agreement, Sect on 1s(e) containsthe enti re language regardingthe mitigation payment. There is n provlston fo decreastngthE paymen' t ifflows orhook Ups decrease. Payment can only ncrease based on ncreased connectioil> to the District's n the recedin Thts effective establishes a benchmarkto sustatn 4 OZ Page l5 ,2071 the m on to the
Related Recommendations (1)
R7
Page 10
Witl not be implemented The Board of Supervisors has no regulatory or contractual authority to impose this requirement. The Lahontan RWQCB has the authority to enforce regulations and permit requirements related to disposal of rerycled water.
F8 Page 8
F9 Partially disagree n2009, the District completed the Recycled Water Facilities Master PI n and EI R. This document addresses the Iong term eeds for rerycled waterfacilities in Alpine County Potential growth to 2028and the associated projected recycled watervolume of5.6 MGD are addressed tn thisdocument. The prlan envisions dditional capacity fordisposa ofrecycl.ed water bei rovtded n the District's Diamond Va
Related Recommendations (1)
R8
Page 10
Requi res further a nalysis The Consolidated Agreqment Section 15(e) indicates that 7 65 Page l8 OO9.2O1O FINAL REPORT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RESPONSE MARCH 1-,2011" the annual compen payment is increased annually equal to the percentage increase in sewer connections to the District s system during the preceding year. The agreement does not directly address whether payments can be reduced. See R2 regarding amending the current
F10 Page 8
F1.L A8885 ts not ln effect. The regulationsto I mplement A8885 re sti in draftstage Ittsvery unl that res r dents WOuld,have no wastewater available. 5 63 Page l5 OO9.2O1O FINAL REPORT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RESPONSE IVIARCH L,2OI1.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10
Page 11
uires further ana is See res to R2.