⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 5 findings
F1
There is opportunity for Alpine County to provide a greater benefit to its citizens by improving its partnership with STPUD. The current consolidated agreement was passed by Alpine County Board of Supervisors (BOS) on November 5, 2002 in an unprecedented manner. Don Jardine and Herman Zellmer were the only Supervisors to vote on the agreement which is a direct violation of California Government Code 25005 concerning quorums. The vote passed 2-0 due to one member absent, one seat vacant and one member abstaining from the vote.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
Given that the consolidated agreement from November 5, 2002 was only approved by two board members, a re-vote is recommended as a remedy to comply with California Government Code 25005. At the same time, it is advised the BOS seek legal counsel and make a request to reopen and reconsider the Agreement with STPUD and hold public hearings accordingly as needed for the re-vote.
F2
Under the 1983 STPUD agreement, Alpine County receives $100,000 annual compensation for accepting STPUD wastewater. This figure is not adjusted for inflation; however, it has been adjusted for new hookups and is currently at $113,900. In 2017 dollars, the agreement is only worth about 46% of its original value, or approximately $45,800. By 2050 the agreement will be worth approximately 10% of its original value when adjusted for inflation, or a little more than $10,000. Originally set up as a mitigation fund, monies became general use revenue when STPUD agreed to accept all liability for wastewater pumped into Alpine County after Alpine County voters, by a vote of 217 to 207, approved the 1983 Sewage Quality Initiative. There is no restriction on how these funds are spent. In 2010 Alpine County BOS approved using these funds to finance rebuilding its county offices.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
It is recommended the BOS request to have annual adjustments for inflation added to the agreement. Alpine County would be receiving about $248,000 annually if the 1983 figure was adjusted for inflation. The 1995 Alpine County Grand Jury made this exact same recommendation which was never acted upon. If the 1995 recommendation was acted upon Alpine County would be receiving about $158,000 annually if the annual adjustment for inflation took effect in January of 1996. Compounded annually since 1996 this equals net $500,000 in revenue to the county.
F3
As required by the 1983 Sewage Quality Initiative, Alpine County received $15,000 annually to do independent testing of groundwater in the dispersal area. Alpine County stopped independent groundwater testing sometime in 2009 and once the maximum balance of $60,000 was reached the county no longer receives groundwater testing funds from STPUD. The action to stop testing is in direct violation of the 1983 Initiative. There is currently a balance of $50,411 in the county budget reserved for testing. The last payment received from the District was dated 8/23/2010. The funds on balance are being used to pay for a separate groundwater monitoring program which is not related to STPUD discharges. Annually Alpine County is paying approximately $1,000 to $2,000 for this separate program.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Alpine County is legally required to do independent wastewater testing by voter mandate in the Sewage Quality Initiative of 1983. It is recommended that the county resume this testing immediately as required. Because past tests returned similar results as STPUD tests, it is recommended the county take a proactive approach and start testing for additional pollutants in wastewater which are not currently being tested for by STPUD. Examples include hormones such as 17a-Ethynsylestradiol, 17b-Estradiol, Estrone, Progesterone and Testosterone as well as pharmaceutical and personal care products (PPCP) such as Bisphenol A, Diclofenac, Gemfibrozil, Ibuprofen, Iopromide, Naproxen, Salicylic acid, Triclosan, Acetaminophen, Amoxicllin, Azithromycin, Caffeine, Carbamazepine, DEET, Diazepam, Fluoxetine, Meprobamate, Methodone, Phenytoin, Primidone, Sufamethoxazole, TCEP, TCPP, TDCPP and Trimethoprim.
F4
Alpine County receives 15,000 pounds of fish planted annually to be paid entirely by STPUD.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
It is recommended that the BOS keep the fish requirement in the agreement or convert to the cash value of the fish adjusted for inflation.
F5
STPUD has limited options for pumping wastewater out of the Lake Tahoe Basin other than sending it to Alpine County. It could create a system going over Echo Summit and keep the wastewater in El Dorado County, however this is an unlikely scenario due to the expense and required approval from El Dorado County. Due to current federal regulation STPUD is not permitted to send wastewater across state lines. STPUD has invested significantly in its Diamond Valley facility and has indicated a desire for a long-term partnership in Alpine County.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
It is recommended that Alpine County continue to take a path of partnership with STPUD while it negotiates to improve the Agreement. Looking outward at similar arrangements in other communities would also be a benefit to the county, especially if we are able to negotiate a model similar to North Lake Tahoe where wastewater is sent to an actual treatment plant and processed to tertiary quality levels prior to being released into the open environment. Response requested: Terry Woodrow, Chair Alpine County Board of Supervisors INVESTIGATIVE REPORT Citizen Complaints The Brown Act THE BROWN ACT OPEN MEETINGS FOR LOCAL LEGISLATIVE BODIES Brown Act Violations Alpine County School Board Citizen Complaint Background: The Grand Jury received a citizen complaint of a Brown Act violation by the Alpine County Unified School District Board of Trustees at the meeting held on December 13, 2016. It is alleged proper notice and support documents were not made available 72 hours prior to the meeting on item #8.A.6, the approval of the Superintendent's contract.
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.