County of Inyo

Board of Supervisors

Public Comment

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

County Dept. Reports

The Chairperson announced the County Department report period and there were no reports forthcoming.

Treasurer/Invest- ment policy

The Treasurer-Tax Collector, Ms. Alisha McMurtrie, informed the Board that there were no changes to the Policy. Moved by Supervisor Cash and seconded by Supervisor Cervantes to approve the Inyo County Treasury Investment Policy as presented. Motion carried unanimously, with Supervisor Arcularius absent.

Resol. #2008-01/ Delegating Invest- ment Authority

On a motion by Supervisor Cervantes and a second by Supervisor Bilyeu, Resolution No. 2008-01 entitled “A Resolution of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Inyo Delegating to the Inyo County Treasurer Its Investment Authority Pursuant to Section 53607 of the Government Code,” was approved: motion unanimously passed and adopted, with Supervisor Arcularius absent.

BofS/Committee Assignments

Moved by Supervisor Bilyeu and seconded by Supervisor Cervantes to approve the 2008 Board of Supervisors committee assignments as recommended by the Chairperson Supervisor Linda Arcularius. Motion carried unanimously, with Supervisor Arcularius absent.

Resol. #2008-02/ Forest Service Rt. Designation Coordination

The County Administrator noted that the resolution concerning coordination with the Forest Service on their Route Designation process, sets parameters for moving forward on the coordination process. Mr. Carunchio informed the Board that Staff would be meeting with the Forest Service this afternoon and he would report back on the results of that meeting next week. Supervisor Cash asked if archeological resources should be added, with the CAO responding that the language in the resolution mirrors the County’s General Plan, which he was recommending not be changed. Supervisor Cash concurred with the recommendation and withdrew her request. On a motion by Supervisor Bilyeu and a second by Supervisor Cash, Resolution No. 2008-02 entitled “A Resolution Regarding County of Inyo/United States Forest Service Coordination Concerning the Inyo National Forest Motorized Travel Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement,” was approved: motion unanimously passed and adopted, with Supervisor Arcularius absent.

Resol. #2008-03/ Calif. Energy Technical Ass. Application

The County Administrator explained that the Resolution to the California Energy Commission was an application requesting an energy audit of Inyo County facilities, which should result in recommendations for energy conservation measures. On a motion by Supervisor Bilyeu and a second by Supervisor Cervantes, Resolution No. 2008-03 entitled “A Resolution of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Inyo, State of California, Authorizing the Submittal of the California Energy Commission Technical Assistance Application,” was approved: motion unanimously passed and adopted, with Supervisor Arcularius absent.

BofS/Minute Approval

The Assistant Clerk asked that on the third page, 7 th paragraph (Board Members and Staff Reports) the word “ quite” be corrected to “quiet.” Additionally Staff noted that NWC is an anagranim for “Naval Weapons Center.” Moved by Supervisor Cash and seconded by Supervisor Cervantes to approve of the minutes of the January 8, 2008 Board of Supervisors Meeting. Motion carried unanimously, with Supervisor Arcularius absent.

Board Members and Staff Reports

The Board Members reported on their activities during the preceding week, including a Children’s Services Council Meeting, an Inyo First Five Meeting, a City of Bishop City Council Meeting, information regarding rain damage at Statham Hall, an announcement that Supervisor Cervantes has been awarded the Boy Scouts of America’s Silver Beaver Award, various constituents meetings, and an announcement by today’s presiding Chairperson, Supervisor Brown, that today’s meeting would be adjourned in memory of Andi Rossi. The County Administrator, briefly noted that Staff was monitoring the State Budget situation and the Board could expect an update in the coming weeks. Mr. Carunchio also informed the Board that he would be traveling to Sacramento this evening to attend the County Administrator’s Association (CAOAC) meeting, returning by Thursday afternoon for a meeting with the new Coso Operators.

Closed Session

The Chairperson recessed open session at 9:30 a.m., to convene in closed session, with all Board Members present, except Supervisor Arcularius, to discuss and take action as required on Agenda Items No. 13. REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS (Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8) – Property – 230 West Line Street, Bishop, CA; Negotiating Parties – Jerry Core, County Administrator and Director of Public Works; Negotiations – Terms and conditions of Potential Lease; No. 14. REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS (Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8) – Property –2957 Birch Street, Bishop, CA; Negotiating Parties –Southern Mono Healthcare District, County Administrator and Director of Public Works; Negotiations – Terms and Conditions of Potential Lease; No. 15. REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS (Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8) – Property –174 South Main Street, Bishop, CA; Negotiating Parties –RJG Investments, LLC/Vons Company’s Inc., #2402, County Administrator and Director of Public Works; Negotiations – Terms and Conditions of Potential Lease; No. 16. REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS (Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8) – Property –1180 North Main Street, Bishop, CA; Negotiating Parties – Escondido Trust, County Administrator and Director of Public Works; Negotiations – Terms and Conditions of Potential Lease; No. 17. REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS (Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8) – Property –908 and 910 North Main Street, Bishop, CA; Negotiating Parties – RA2 Bishop LLC, Lessor, County Administrator and Director of Public Works; Negotiations – Terms and Conditions of Potential Lease; No. 18. REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS (Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8) – Property – 301 West Line Street, Bishop, CA; Negotiating Parties – City of Bishop, County Administrator and Director of Public Works; Negotiations – Terms and Conditions of Potential Lease; No. 19. REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS (Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8) – Property – 568 West Line Street, Bishop, CA; Negotiating Parties – Tim & Allison Fillmore, County Administrator and Director of Public Works; Negotiations – Terms and Conditions of Potential Lease; No. 20. REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS (Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8) – Property – 787 North Main Street, Bishop, CA; Negotiating Parties – Maudsley Enterprises, County Administrator and Director of Public Works; Negotiations – Terms and Conditions of Potential Lease; No. 21. REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS (Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8) – Property – 163 May Street, Bishop, CA; Negotiating Parties – Harry & Brenda Wilson, County Administrator and Director of Public Works; Negotiations – Terms and Conditions of Potential Lease; No. 22. REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS (Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8) – Property – 162 East Line Street, Bishop, CA; Negotiating Parties – KPL Ventures LLC, County Administrator and Director of Public Works; Negotiations – Terms and Conditions of Potential Lease; No. 23. REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS (Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8) – Property – APN 10490-08-00 and APN 10490-08-2 – Negotiating Parties – Joseph Enterprises, County Administrator and Director of Public Works – Negotiations – Terms and Conditions of Potential Lease; No. 24. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION [Pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(c)] – Decision whether to initiate litigation (one case); No. 25. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR [Pursuant to Government Code §54957.6] - Instructions to Negotiators re: wages, salaries and benefits - Employee Organization: ICEA - Negotiators: County Administrator Kevin Carunchio and Labor Relations Administrator Sue Dishion; and No. 26. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR [Pursuant to Government Code §54957.6] - Instructions to Negotiators re: wages, salaries and benefits - Employee Organization: DSA - Negotiators: County Administrator Kevin Carunchio and Labor Relations Administrator Sue Dishion.

Recess/ Reconvene

The Chairperson recessed closed session at 9:55 a.m., to reconvene in open session at 10:05 a.m., with all Board Members present, except Supervisor Arcularius.

CAO-Advertising County Resources/ Tourism Marketing Services RFP Award

The County Administrator briefly reviewed the actions required for the Board regarding the award of the contract for Tourism and Marketing Services. He informed the Board that two proposals had been received. Members of the audience who addressed the Board to respond to the question of why other local Chambers of Commerce had not responded to the RFP were Mr. Rich White of the Independence Chamber, who explained that the Independence Chamber was a small office without the resources or staff to provide the services; and Ms. Kathleen New, Executive Director of the Lone Pine Chamber of Commerce, who told the Board that the Lone Pine Chamber would have had to hire a professional to provide the services required in the RFP.

The County Administrator went on to explain that the two proposals had been evaluated and analyzed by a review panel whose members had independently rated the proposals on a point system based on five criteria, and had sealed their scores in signed envelopes which were delivered to and kept secure by the Auditor-Controller. Representatives of the two responders, Ms. Tawni Thompson of the Bishop Chamber of Commerce, and Ms. Becky Bell of SMG, addressed the Board to briefly comment on their proposals and the process.

Mr. Carunchio described how the double blind evaluation process works. He discussed the Board assigning weights to each of the criteria before the Auditor-Controller applies those weighted percentages to each of the review panel’s scores. He reviewed the two processes available to the Board to determine the weighted averages, which were to (1) reach consensus on each of the criteria, or (2) average the individual Board Members’ percentage for each of the categories. Each Board Member listed their criteria priorities. Supervisor Cash expressed her concern with the Board reaching consensus on the percentages and supported the averaging process. The Chairperson noted that while three Board Members were relatively close in the prioritization of the criteria, there were sufficient differences in the percentages being discussed to be assigned those priorities to warrant using the averaging process. The County Administrator provided the Board Members with an individual score sheet and collected the signed documents once completed. Mr. Carunchio took a few moments to calculate the averages and announced the results as follows:

(1) capabilities and qualifications – 33.75%;

(2) scope of work – 30%;

(3) Cost – 17.5%;

(4) completeness of the proposal – 10%; and

(5) ability to enter into contract – 8.75%.

He then requested a short recess to provide the Auditor-Controller the opportunity to apply the weighted averages to the review panel’s score sheets and calculate the scores of the two proposals.

The Chairperson recessed the regular meeting at 10:40 a.m., to reconvene at 10:55 a.m., with all Board Members present, except Supervisor Arcularius. The County Administrator announced the results of the Auditor’s calculations as follows: Bishop Chamber of Commerce 103.42 points and SMG 118.5 points. The Board Members briefly addressed their thoughts on the process with Supervisor Cash supporting the results, noting that the double blind process was successful, that the politics of the process had been removed, leaving objective and fairly obtained results and that she was anticipating the results and next year’s evaluation of this contract. Supervisor Cervantes noted that he felt the process was flawed for several reasons; i.e., that he did not believe they were comparing apples to apples because its not fair to think a small local Chamber of Commerce could compete with a professional marketing corporation; that more responders were required; and that more County resources had been used in awarding this contract than the contract amount justified. Supervisor Bilyeu noted that he was impressed with both proposals and the evaluation process and echoed Supervisor Cash’s remarks regarding the fairness of the process and its ability to obtain objective results. Supervisor Brown also supported the double blind process and its ability to obtain objective results. She noted her strong support of the Bishop Chamber of Commerce’s ability to compete, explaining that The Chamber has always provided professional marketing services to the County.

The County Administrator offered his thanks to the members of the Board and the Review Panel and informed the Board that he would be seeking comments from the Coalition of Chambers regarding the scope of work.

The Chairperson directed Staff to A) commence contract negotiations, including finalizing the scope of work and associated fee schedule, with SMG the respondent that received the highest total score when the average scores assigned by the review panel for each evaluation criteria were weighted in accordance with the weight factor the Board assigned to each criteria, B) return next week with an agenda item to provide the Board the opportunity, if they choose, to provide comments on the scope of work to be negotiated, and C) direct staff to return, no later than February 19, 2008, a proposed contract with SMG for tourism marketing services for consideration by the Board.

Resol. #2008-04/ SNC LORP Recreational Plan Grant Application

The County Administrator provided additional information and further explanation on the request for approval of a Sierra Nevada Conservancy Grant for the LORP Recreational Plan. He explained that in the Long Term Water Agreement any recreational opportunities developed for the LORP are the responsibility of the County, contingent upon DWP approval. He noted that there are no funds currently or anticipated to be budgeted for implementation of a recreational plan for the LORP. He went on to explain that this Grant will give the County the ability to develop a recreational plan, which is the first step in any process to expand recreational opportunities for the LORP. The Board and Staff discussed the scope of the application, including the local public outreach and support aspects of the proposal, as well as the need for coordination of the extensive numbers of Court orders; and legal and environmental documents which pertain to the LORP and which will have impact on any recommendations which are developed for the LORP. Mr. Carunchio also explained that in order to have this grant evaluated in the next round of the SNC Grant selection process, it had been preliminarily submitted prior to the deadline and tentatively accepted contingent on the Board’s approval. He noted that there is a $5,000 County match associated with advertising the public meetings identified in the application. County Counsel, Mr. Paul Bruce, clarified the relevance of the CEQA and NEPA processes on projects, which might be developed through this Plan.

On a motion by Supervisor Bilyeu and a second by Supervisor Cervantes, Resolution No. 2008-04, was approved authorizing the submittal of a Sierra Nevada Conservancy Proposition 84 Grant Program Application for funds to prepare a Recreational Use Plan for the Lower Owens River Project; motion unanimously passed and adopted, with Supervisor Arcularius absent.

Resol. #2008-05/ Land Tenure SNC Grant Application Support

The Planning Director, Mr. Pat Cecil, introduced Mr. Bill Dunkleberger, BLM Field Manager, who reviewed the Land Tenure Planning Project and the grant application being submitted to the Sierra Nevada Conservancy. He explained that this a joint jurisdiction project, to develop maps that inventory lands that may be available for exchange. He explained how this project will benefit the various governmental entities in our area and support local land use and community development planning activities. Mr. Dunkleberger explained the process that Mono County has agreed to administer this grant, that Inyo County’s matching funds are only $2,000, which Mr. Cecil advised is available in the Planning Department Budget. Mr. Dunkleberger also informed the Board that in conversations with the local SNC representative it does not appear that this grant will compete with any of Inyo County’s other applications because the Conservancy has over $800,000 in grant funds still available for this round of applications.

On a motion by Supervisor Cervantes and a second by Supervisor Bilyeu, Resolution No. 2008-05 entitled “A Resolution of the Inyo County Board of Supervisors Supporting the Application for Grant Funds From the Sierra Nevada Conservancy Strategic Opportunity Grant Program Under the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply Flood Control, River and Coast Protection Bond Act of November 7, 2006 for a Regional Land Tenure Planning Project,” was approved: motion unanimously passed and adopted, with Supervisor Arcularius absent.

BLM/Power Corridor

Mr. Bill Dunkleberger and Mr. Larry Primosch of the BLM, updated the Board on the BLM Power Corridor Project, which is a project to identify federal lands for the National Utility Corridor to provide increased energy generation. They provided the address where more information on this project, including the PEIS, is available on the internet.

Closed Session

The Chairperson recessed open session at 1:20 p.m., to reconvene in closed session with all Board Members present, except Supervisor Arcularius, to continue discussions on previously noted closed session items.

Report on Closed Session

The Chairperson recessed closed session at 1:40 p.m. to reconvene in open session to receive a report on closed session. County Counsel reported there were no items discussed in closed session, which were required by law to be reported on in open session.

Public Comment

The Chairperson announced the second public comment period on this agenda. The County Administrator advised the Board of an upcoming Support the Troops employee bash, being sponsored for the employees by the Department Heads, and invited the Board to attend.

Adjournment

The Chairperson adjourned the regular meeting in memory of Ms. Andrita Rossi, a beloved member of our local ranching community who unexpectedly passed away last week. The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 1:45 p.m., to 9:00 a.m., Tuesday, February 5, 2008.