INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE

INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE

March 11, 20139:00 A.M.

651 Pine Street, Room 101, Martinez

Supervisor Candace Andersen, Chair Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, Vice Chair

Agenda Items: Items may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference of the Committee

1. Introductions 2. Public comment on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this agenda

(speakers may be limited to three minutes). 3. Approve the Record of Action from February 11, 2013 meeting. (Page 3)

4. CONSIDER approving nominations for appointment to the following appointive bodies:

a. Workforce Development Board – Michael De Poortere (Page 4)

5. CONSIDER reviewing 2012 Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund grants and forward to the Board of Supervisors for approval, as recommended by the Fish and Wildlife Committee. (John Kopchik, Conservation and Development Department) (0)

6. CONSIDER reviewing proposed language modifying Section 3 of the MAC Policy

Recommendations, as adopted by the Board of Supervisors and authorize the County Administrator to request feedback on the proposed language from various stakeholders. (Timothy Ewell, Senior Deputy County Administrator) (Page 25)

7. Adjourn

The Internal Operations Committee will provide reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities planning to attend Internal Operations Committee meetings. Contact the staff person listed below at least 72 hours before the meeting.

Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and distributed by the County to a majority of members of the Internal Operations Committee less than 96 hours prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at 651 Pine Street, 10th floor, during normal business hours.

Public comment may be submitted via electronic mail on agenda items at least one full work day prior to the published meeting time.

For Additional Information Contact: Timothy Ewell, Committee Staff Phone (925) 335-1036, Fax (925) 646-1353

[email protected]

Acronyms, Abbreviations, and other Terms (in alphabetical order): Contra Costa County has a policy of making limited use of acronyms, abbreviations, and industry-specific language in its Board of Supervisors meetings and written materials. Following is a list of commonly used language that may appear in oral presentations and written materials associated with Board meetings:

AB Assembly Bill ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments ACA Assembly Constitutional Amendment ADA Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 AFSCME American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees AICP American Institute of Certified Planners AIDS Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome ALUC Airport Land Use Commission AOD Alcohol and Other Drugs BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District BART Bay Area Rapid Transit District BCDC Bay Conservation & Development Commission BGO Better Government Ordinance BOS Board of Supervisors CALTRANS California Department of Transportation CalWIN California Works Information Network CalWORKS California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids CAER Community Awareness Emergency Response CAO County Administrative Officer or Office CCHP Contra Costa Health Plan CCTA Contra Costa Transportation Authority CDBG Community Development Block Grant CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CIO Chief Information Officer COLA Cost of living adjustment ConFire Contra Costa Consolidated Fire District CPA Certified Public Accountant CPI Consumer Price Index CSA County Service Area CSAC California State Association of Counties CTC California Transportation Commission dba doing business as EBMUD East Bay Municipal Utility District EIR Environmental Impact Report EIS Environmental Impact Statement EMCC Emergency Medical Care Committee EMS Emergency Medical Services EPSDT State Early Periodic Screening, Diagnosis and treatment Program (Mental Health) et al. et ali (and others) FAA Federal Aviation Administration FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency F&HS Family and Human Services Committee First 5 First Five Children and Families Commission (Proposition 10) FTE Full Time Equivalent FY Fiscal Year GHAD Geologic Hazard Abatement District GIS Geographic Information System

HCD (State Dept of) Housing & Community Development HHS Department of Health and Human Services HIPAA Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act HIV Human Immunodeficiency Syndrome HOV High Occupancy Vehicle HR Human Resources HUD United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Inc. Incorporated IOC Internal Operations Committee ISO Industrial Safety Ordinance JPA Joint (exercise of) Powers Authority or Agreement Lamorinda Lafayette-Moraga-Orinda Area LAFCo Local Agency Formation Commission LLC Limited Liability Company LLP Limited Liability Partnership Local 1 Public Employees Union Local 1 LVN Licensed Vocational Nurse MAC Municipal Advisory Council MBE Minority Business Enterprise M.D. Medical Doctor M.F.T. Marriage and Family Therapist MIS Management Information System MOE Maintenance of Effort MOU Memorandum of Understanding MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission NACo National Association of Counties OB-GYN Obstetrics and Gynecology O.D. Doctor of Optometry OES-EOC Office of Emergency Services-Emergency Operations Center OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration Psy.D. Doctor of Psychology RDA Redevelopment Agency RFI Request For Information RFP Request For Proposal RFQ Request For Qualifications RN Registered Nurse SB Senate Bill SBE Small Business Enterprise SWAT Southwest Area Transportation Committee TRANSPAC Transportation Partnership & Cooperation (Central) TRANSPLAN Transportation Planning Committee (East County) TRE or TTE Trustee TWIC Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee VA Department of Veterans Affairs vs. versus (against) WAN Wide Area Network WBE Women Business Enterprise WCCTAC West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

IOC Packet 3/11/2013 Item 3

INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, Chair

Supervisor Candace Andersen, Vice Chair

Record of Actions

February 11, 2013

651 Pine Street – Room 101 Martinez, CA 94553

1. Introductions/ Call to Order – 9:02am

The meeting was called to order by Chair Mitchoff. Vice Chair Andersen was in attendance. 2. Public Comment on Items Not on the Agenda:

None.

3. Approval of Record of Action from the February 11, 2013 meeting:

Approved as presented. (AYES: 2 | NOES: 0 | ABSTAIN: 0 | RECUSE: 0 | ABSENT: 0)

4. CONSIDER approving nominations for appointment to the following appointive bodies:

a. Contra Costa County Public Law Library Board of Trustees – David Del Simone

Approved as presented.

(AYES: 2 | NOES: 0 | ABSTAIN: 0 | RECUSE: 0 | ABSENT: 0) 5. CONSIDER accepting the 2013 Audit Schedule and 2012 Annual Report on the Financial Audit Program from

the Auditor-Controller’s Office. Approved as presented.

(AYES: 2 | NOES: 0 | ABSTAIN: 0 | RECUSE: 0 | ABSENT: 0)

6. CONSIDER adopting a process for the recruitment, nomination, and appointment of the Member No. 4 seat on the Contra Costa County Employee’s Retirement Association (CCCERA) Board of Trustees. Approved as presented. (AYES: 2 | NOES: 0 | ABSTAIN: 0 | RECUSE: 0 | ABSENT: 0)

7. Adjourned – 9:41am

of 41

IOC Packet 3/11/2013 Item 4a

2013 INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE

NOMINATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE

WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD

The Workforce Development Board (WDB) was created pursuant to the federal Workforce Investment Act of 1998 and has responsibility for overall workforce investment policy, a newly mandated workforce investment plan and oversight of the new One-Stop Career Center system. The composition of the WDB is 38 seats: Business members (19), Education members (2), Labor members (5), Community-Based members (3), Economic Development members (2), and One-Stop Mandated Partners (7). The Internal Operations Committee reviews nominations for all seats except the One-Stop Mandated Partner seats. Seat terms are four years, except that One-Stop Mandated Partner seats have no specific seat terms. Appointments are made by the Board of Supervisors upon the recommendation of the Internal Operations Committee. March 11, 2013 Attached is a letter from the Workforce Development Board transmitting a recommendation to fill one vacant seat, the nominee application, and membership roster for the Board. Action Nominee Seat Term Expiration

APPOINT Michael De Poortere Business No. 9 June 30, 2017 Attachments: 1. Transmittal Letter from the Workforce Development Board 2. Application – Michael De Poortere 3. Workforce Development Board Membership Roster



REVIEW OF RECOMMENDED FISCAL YEAR 2013/14 FISH AND WILDLIFE

PROPAGATION FUND GRANT ALLOCATIONS BY THE FISH AND WILDLIFE COMMITTEE

The Fish & Wildlife Committee was established by the Board in December 1994 to advise the Board on fish and wildlife issues, make recommendations for the expenditure of funds from the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund, and to address issues surrounding the enforcement of fish and game laws and regulations of the County. The Committee comprises ten members: one nominated by each County Supervisor, four At Large seats, and one At Large Alternate seat. On November 22, 2010, the IOC received a status report from Department of Conservation and Development regarding the allocation of propagation funds by the Fish and Wildlife Committee. The IOC accepted the report and the recommended modifications to improve the grant process in the future. The modifications included (1) Update the Fish and Wildlife Committee’s Conflict of Interest Code, and; (2) Recommendation that the Fish and Wildlife Committee provide grant recommendations to the Internal Operations Committee, for an additional round of review, prior to forwarding to the Board of Supervisors for final consideration and approval. March 11, 2013 The Fish and Wildlife Committee (FWC) has completed a review of grant applications for fiscal year 2013/14 Fish and Wildlife Propagation funds and is requesting that the IOC review the recommendations and forward to the Board of Supervisors for approval.

of 41

of 4

FWC Grant Program The Board has charged the FWC with coordinating a process by which fine money could be appropriately “expended for the protection, conservation, propagation, and preservation of fish and wildlife” [Fish and Game Code 13100]. Since 1996, the Fish and Wildlife Committee (FWC) has implemented a structured process for reviewing funding requests. The intent of this structured review process was to replace case-by-case decision-making with a grant process that enables comparative and efficient review of applications. The FWC developed a grant application packet (attached), which included a cover letter to explain the grant process and funding priorities, an application to solicit relevant information about the project, and a copy of the expenditure criteria established by California law for the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund. As a new, additional focus for 2013, the Fish and Wildlife Committee expanded their outreach to schools with the intent to fund high value, low-cost public education projects related to the scientific principles of fish and wildlife conservation. In November 2012, the application packet was sent to the Fish and Wildlife Committee mailing list, the Contra Costa Watershed Forum mailing list, the Contra Costa County Office of Education, Contra Costa College, Diablo Valley College, Los Medanos College and the California Regional Environmental Education Community (CREEC) for distribution to interested teachers and programs that would benefit from the grant program. Joan Morris wrote a short article in the Contra Costa Times regarding the availability of the grant application packet. It was also made available on the Committee’s website and to anyone who requested a copy. FWC Grant Review Process in 2013 A total of 15 applications requesting a total of $102,707.12 were received during the application period, which ended January 4, 2013 (chart attached). The Fish and Wildlife Committee discussed the funding applications at its January and February 2013 meetings. Some applicants came to FWC meetings to talk about their applications during public comment opportunities. The FWC acknowledged the hard work that went into all of the applications received and appreciates the commitment to improving the resources of the County demonstrated by these applications. II. Recommendation of Funding on Grants for 2013 At the February 20, 2013 meeting, the FWC recommended funding eleven (11) proposed projects. Five (5) of the recommendations would directly benefit public education. There were four (4) proposed projects that were not recommended for funding (see attached chart for more detailed information on all of the applications, including the four applications not recommended for funding). The specific FWC recommendations and the vote of the FWC on these recommendations are listed below. Members in attendance and voting on these items were: Susan Heckly (District II), Kevin McIlvenna (District III), Brett Morris (District IV), Daniel Pellegrini (District V), Jim Hale (At-large), Kathleen Jennings (At-large), Webb Johnson (At-large) and Jeff Skinner (At-large). Martha Berthelesen (District I) was absent from the January meeting and recused herself from all deliberations at the February meeting, citing a connection to one of the applications.

of 41

of 4

All recommendations are for full funding of the project as proposed unless noted otherwise. FWC Recommendations:

1) As in previous years, require recipients of the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Funds to adhere to three general commitments outlined in their application packets and reiterated in a letter accompanying the award check: a) return funds if the project is not performed; b) provide documentation and/or accounting to show that funds were spent for the purpose described in applications; and c) provide a brief summary report on the progress or results of the project by one year from the date grant awards are distributed. [8 ayes/0 noes]

2) Appropriate $160.00 to SPAWNERS for installation of two bee boxes at their Wilke Creek site to monitor native bees with high school students. (partial funding) [8 ayes/0 noes]

3) Appropriate $7,927.82 to East Bay Regional Park District for an upgrade to the backup

aquarium system that houses the Mobile Fish Exhibit fish when they are not on display. [8 ayes/0 noes]

4) Appropriate $2,996.00 to the City of Lafayette Creeks Committee to develop two interpretive panels and install them on a well-used creekside walkway leading to the Lafayette Reservoir to educate pedestrians on riparian habitat for wildlife and water quality protection through low impact development practices. [8 ayes/0 noes]

5) Appropriate $19,140.00 to Mountain View Sanitary District to fund studies to better

understand the toxic algae bloom that occurred in McNabney Marsh between mid-August 2012 and December 2012, hoping to avoid and/or control future blooms that may negatively impact fish and wildlife. This recommendation is contingent upon the results of the study being made public. [8 ayes/0 noes]

6) Appropriate $6,000.00 to Save Mount Diablo to fence Kirker Creek on Save Mount Diablo’s Thomas Property in order to protect the sensitive riparian habitat and creek from cattle, purchase two camera traps to document wildlife movement along the creek corridor, purchase materials for oak tree protection and purchase educational materials to be used during creek clean-up days and campouts. [8 ayes/0 noes]

7) Appropriate $10,000.00 to the City of Walnut Creek for the purchase and installation of a Leviathan floating island with biohaven technology as a means to enhance fish and wildlife habitat and improve water quality at Heather Farm Park. This floating island will also become a natural educational classroom resource. [8 ayes/0 noes]

8) Appropriate $1,712.52 to the Contra Costa Resource Conservation District as fiscal sponsor for the Alhambra Watershed Council for equipment and supplies to continue an ongoing Alhambra Creek water quality monitoring program to determine salmonid habitat suitability and involve Martinez High School students supervised by a trained adult volunteer. The goal is to determine whether water conditions could sustain trout and/or steelhead especially over summer months when crucial water quality may deteriorate. [8 ayes/0 noes]

of 41

of 4

9) Appropriate $8,200.00 to The Watershed Project for the installation of hanging native oyster gardens at a slip in a marina along the Richmond shoreline to provide wildlife conservation and educational benefits. The Committee encourages The Watershed Project to find a reduction in slip rental costs and use cost savings for additional non-labor project expenses. [8 ayes/0 noes]

10) Appropriate $10,000.00 to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (Antioch Dunes National Wildlife Refuge) for propagation of 1,000 host plants for the endangered Lange’s metalmark butterfly and for interns to improve habitat and install butterfly host plants at Antioch Dunes National Wildlife Refuge. [8 ayes/0 noes]

11) Appropriate $10,000.00 to the Regional Parks Foundation to provide 600 low-income Contra

Costa County third grade students with a hands-on educational experience related to fish and wildlife conservation during the 2013-2014 academic year. [8 ayes/0 noes]

12) In addition, purchase for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, two thermal imaging

cameras for the estimated price of $4045.38, to aide in locating mountain lions, as well as locating suspects and evidence. [8 ayes/0 noes]

Please contact Maureen Parkes at 925-674-7831 or John Kopchik at 925-674-7819 with any questions. Attachments:

Grant application packet for Fish and Wildlife Propagation Funds Chart summarizing recommended and not recommended applications

of 41

Contra Costa County

October 26, 2012 Dear Fish and Wildlife Committee Propagation Fund Applicants: The Contra Costa County Fish and Wildlife Committee is pleased to announce that completed funding applications are now being accepted for consideration for the Contra Costa County Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund (Fund). All application materials and guidelines are attached. Proposals must be received by 5:00 p.m. on Friday, January 4, 2013 (a postmark of January 4, 2013, does NOT satisfy the submission deadline). Proposals may be emailed or mailed. Any applications that are received after the due date or without a signature will be automatically rejected. The recommendations of the Fish and Wildlife Committee will be forwarded to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, which maintains final decision-making authority for expenditures from the Fund. The Contra Costa County Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund is entirely supported by fine revenues resulting from violations of the Fish and Game Code and Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations in Contra Costa County (County). Projects awarded from the Fund must benefit the fish and wildlife resources of the County and must meet the requirements of Section 13103 of the Fish and Game Code (attached). All applications that satisfy the requirements listed in the funding application directions will be considered. The Fish and Wildlife Committee strongly encourages applications related to:

• improving habitat, • scientific research, and

In addition, as a new, additional focus for 2013, the Fish and Wildlife Committee wishes to fund high value, low-cost public education projects related to the scientific principles of fish and wildlife conservation. The Committee is interested in funding one or more small projects that will benefit the largest possible number of students (e.g. curriculum kits or other tools that have a high likelihood of making a significant impact on a broad audience.)

The Fish and Wildlife Committee generally does not recommend funding for operating costs and overhead, such as benefits or utilities. If an hourly rate is listed, costs need to be itemized separately (see grant guidelines for more details). The Committee expects to recommend awards to several applicants. However, it is possible that a particularly excellent proposal will be recommended to receive a large portion of the total available funds. During the 2012 grant cycle a total of $50,645 was awarded to 10 projects. The awards ranged from $1,060 to $10,000. Successful applicants may anticipate receiving funding awards by the late spring or summer of 2013. Recipients must submit a mid-term budget and report six months after receiving funds and must have expended all funds and submitted a final project report within a year of receiving funds from the Committee (i.e. spring or summer of 2014). Details will be outlined in the grant packet to all successful applicants.

Catherine Kutsuris Director Aruna Bhat Deputy Director Community Development Division Jason Crapo Deputy Director Building Inspection Division Steven Goetz Deputy Director Redevelopment, Conservation and Transportation Programs

Department of Conservation & Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553-4601 Phone: 1-855-323-2626

of 41

2

The Committee appreciates your interest in this opportunity to improve the fish and wildlife resources in Contra Costa County. Should you have any questions about the Fish and Wildlife Committee or this funding program, please contact me at 925-674-7831 or [email protected]. Sincerely,

Maureen Parkes Fish and Wildlife Committee Staff

of 41

INSTRUCTIONS What Must Be Included in Your Proposal (not to exceed 3 pages): 1) Signed Application Cover Page (see attached) 2) Description of the project for which funding is requested. Please include an explanation of:

• how this project will benefit the fish and wildlife of Contra Costa County • how this project meets the requirements of Section 13103 of the Fish & Game Code (attached) which defines the

eligibility requirements for projects requesting funding from the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund. Indicate which letter(s) of the Section 13103 is/are satisfied. • If your proposal is eligible under Section 13103 (d), (h), (i), or (m), send a copy of your draft proposal by

December 4, 2012 to the CA Department of Fish and Game, 7329 Silverado Trail, Napa, CA 94558 to request a letter of support. (This letter does not count toward your page limit).

3) Project schedule - Funds need to be expended a year from the date you receive the funding (by Spring/Summer 2014). 4) Project budget (itemized). The Fish and Wildlife Committee generally does not recommend funding for operating costs

and overhead. Examples for these may include benefits such as health insurance, and operation costs such as electricity to run an office. If an hourly rate is listed, overhead costs needs to be itemized separately. The Committee generally gives preferences to funding material expenses (e.g. purchase of equipment).

5) Annual budget for the applying organization (NOT itemized). 6) Statement describing the applying organization, listing the Board of Directors and officers of the organization, and listing

all affiliated organizations. 7) Statement describing the qualifications of the sponsoring organization and participating individuals for completing the

project. 8) List of individuals responsible for performing project and of individuals responsible for overseeing project. 9) Statement describing the status of permit approvals necessary to perform project (if applicable).

Format: • Your proposal packet, including cover sheet and any attachments must not exceed four single-sided pages or two

double-sided pages, 8.5 by 11 inches in size. Do not use less than 11 point font. Do not have less than ½ inch margins on your pages. If you are including a letter from the CA Department of Fish and Game to demonstrate eligibility under Section 13103 (d), (h), (i) or (m) of the Fish and Game Code, this will not be counted as part of your page limit. Otherwise, if you submit more than 3 pages plus required cover sheet, your proposal may be rejected without review.

• Do not attach an additional cover letter, brochures, posters, publications, CDs, DVDs or large maps. • Do not use yellow-sticky paper (e.g. Post-ItTM) to express extra comments. • Your complete application packet including signature must arrive by 5:00 p.m. on Friday, January 4, 2013

(Pacific Standard Time) to be considered for funding. (Please note: A postmark of January 4, 2013 does not satisfy the submission deadline. If submitted after the deadline, your proposal will be rejected).

• Faxed applications will not be accepted. • Your complete application should be:

Emailed to: [email protected] OR Mailed to: Contra Costa County Fish & Wildlife Committee

c/o Contra Costa County Dept. of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553-4601 Attn: Maureen Parkes

• Contact Maureen by email or at 925-674-7831 if you wish to hand deliver. Final Checklist Before You Submit Your Proposal: Please note that your proposal will be automatically rejected if you provide more materials than required below:

• Signed Cover page (your proposal will be automatically rejected if you type your name in the signature space, submit an electronic signature, or do not provide your signature).

• 3 pages or less on your project description (any extra attachments such as a map and an organization budget will be counted as one of the three page limit.)

• Letter from the CA Department of Fish and Game only if your project is under section Section 13103 (d), (h), (i), or (m) of the Fish and Game Code. (This is NOT a part of the page limit listed above).

If you have questions regarding the Contra Costa County Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund grant process, please contact Maureen Parkes: [email protected] / (925) 674-7831. of 41

13103. Expenditures from the fish and wildlife propagation fund of any county may be made only for the following purposes:

(a) Public education relating to the scientific principles of fish and wildlife

conservation, consisting of supervised formal instruction carried out pursuant to a planned curriculum and aids to education such as literature, audio and video recordings, training models, and nature study facilities.

(b) Temporary emergency treatment and care of injured or orphaned wildlife. (c) Temporary treatment and care of wildlife confiscated by the department as evidence. (d) Breeding, raising, purchasing, or releasing fish or wildlife which are to be released

upon approval of the department pursuant to Sections 6400 and 6401 onto land or into waters of local, state, or federal agencies or onto land or into waters open to the public.

(e) Improvement of fish and wildlife habitat, including, but not limited to, construction of fish screens, weirs, and ladders; drainage or other watershed improvements; gravel and rock removal or placement; construction of irrigation and water distribution systems; earthwork and grading; fencing; planting trees and other vegetation management; and removal of barriers to the migration of fish and wildlife.

(f) Construction, maintenance, and operation of public hatchery facilities. (g) Purchase and maintain materials, supplies, or equipment for either the department's

ownership and use or the department's use in the normal performance of the department's responsibilities.

(h) Predator control actions for the benefit of fish or wildlife following certification in writing by the department that the proposed actions will significantly benefit a particular wildlife species.

(i) Scientific fish and wildlife research conducted by institutions of higher learning, qualified researchers, or governmental agencies, if approved by the department.

(j) Reasonable administrative costs, excluding the costs of audits required by Section 13104, for secretarial service, travel, and postage by the county fish and wildlife commission when authorized by the county board of supervisors. For purposes of this subdivision, "reasonable cost" means an amount which does not exceed 3 percent of the average amount received by the fund during the previous three-year period, or three thousand dollars ($3,000) annually, whichever is greater, excluding any funds carried over from a previous fiscal year.

(k) Contributions to a secret witness program for the purpose of facilitating enforcement of this code and regulations adopted pursuant to this code.

(l) Costs incurred by the district attorney or city attorney in investigating and prosecuting civil and criminal actions for violations of this code, as approved by the department.

(m) Other expenditures, approved by the department, for the purpose of protecting, conserving, propagating, and preserving fish and wildlife.

of 41

Contra Costa County Office Use Only: 2013 Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund

Application Cover Page

Project title:

Organization/Individual applying:

(Organization type: please check one – government, non-profit, for-profit, other (explain)

Address:

Telephone: Fax:

E-mail:

Name and title of contact person:

One sentence summary of proposal:

Requested grant:

Proposal prepared by (name & title):

Signature (Typing your name does not count as a signature. If this section is empty, your proposal will not be considered):

________________________________________________ Signed on _______________

of 41

Grant Applications and Fish and Wildlife Committee Recommendations 2013

Organization Type of Org Project Title Type of project Location of the Project Requested Funding Amount

Recommended Funding Amount

Staff Summary of the Request

FWC Rationale for Recommendation e

A SPAWNERS non-profit Bee Boxes and Shed Security Project

(a) education(e) habitat improvement

West County $960.00 $160.00 Installation of two bee boxes at their Wilkie Creek site to monitor native bees with high school students, and upgrade the security on their tool shed at the El Sobrante Library.

The shed portion of the grant request did not demonstrate as much benefit to fish and wildlife as other projects. For the remainder, the project meets requirements of Section 13103 and will provide substantial benefit to fish and wildlife resources of the County.

B EBRPD government Mobile Fish Exhibit Improvements

(a) education Countywide $7,927.82 $7,927.82 Upgrade back-up aquarium system that houses Mobile Fish Exhibit when they are not on display. The upgrade would automate a number of regular tasks including water changes, water quality analysis and chemical treatment of the water. The upgrade would save approximately 600 gallons of water per week due to better filtration.

The project meets requirements of Section 13103 and will provide substantial benefit to fish and wildlife resources of the County.

C CA Dpt of Fish and Wildlife government Thermal Imaging (g) purchase materials(m) other expenditures

East County (1)West County (1)

$4,045.38 $4,045.38 A request for two thermal imaging cameras to aide in locating mountain lions, as well as locating suspects and evidence.


Page 1 of 5 03-01-13 of 41






D City of Lafayette Creeks Committee

government Interpretive Panels for Lafayette Creek Trail

(a) education Central County $2,996.00 $2,996.00 Develop two interpretive panels that include website QR codes (an icon that can be scanned by a mobile phone to access web page information), and install these panels on a well-used creekside walkway leading to the Lafayette Reservoir to educate pedestrians on 1) riparian habitat for wildlife and 2) water quality protection through low impact development practices.


E Friends of Pleasant Hill Creeks

non-profit Tools for Restoration Work on Ellinwood Creek


Central County $1,577.40 $0.00 Seeks funds to purchase tools to remove invasive riparian plants from Ellinwood Creek and replant with native species, and involve the community, school groups and scout troops to educate them about riparian ecosystems and the habitat needs of local wildlife in this restoration effort.

Compared to other projects the cost for supplies is high. The FWC determined that compared to other applications, benefits were not as large.

F Mountain View Sanitary District (MVSD)

government McNabney Marsh Toxic Algae Bloom Research Project

(i) scientific fish and wildlife research

Central County $19,140.00 $19,140.00 Through proposed studies, MVSD seeks funds to better understand the toxic algae bloom that occurred in McNabney Marsh between mid-August 2012 and December 2012, hoping to avoid and/or control future blooms that may negatively impact fish and wildlife.

The project meets requirements of Section 13103 and will provide substantial benefit to fish and wildlife resources of the County. Recommend approval as long as the results of the study are made public.

Page 2 of 5 03-01-13 of 41






G EarthTeam non-profit Eco-Stewards at Helms Middle School


West County $7,328.00 $0.00 An after-school service-learning project improving San Pablo Creek with Helms Middle School students.

Too much labor cost in proposal, internal inconsistencies in the proposal regarding the budget. The FWC determined that compared to other applications, benefits were not as large.

H Save Mount Diablo non-profit Kirker Creek Fencing and Restoration Project

(e) habitat improvement East County $6,000.00 $6,000.00 Funds would be used to fence Kirker Creek on Save Mount Diablo's Thomas Property in order to protect the sensitive riparian habitat and creek from cattle. In addition, a portion of the grant would provide funds for two camera traps to document wildlife movement along the creek corridor, materials for oak tree protection and educational materials to be used during creek clean-up days and campouts.


I The Regents of University of California

non-profit Farming for Native Bees: Educating Farmers about Native Bees' Role in Agriculture

(a) education(e) habitat improvement (i) scientific research

East County; with abroad educational component at state and regional levels

$9,320.00 $0.00 Expand previously funded Farming for Native Bees project, expanding bee habitat and combining targeted outreach and education, conservation and scientific research on the role of native bees in agriculture.

Some duplication with grant approved in 2011. The FWC determined that compared to other applications, connection to fish and wildlife was not as strong as other grant requests.

Page 3 of 5 03-01-13 of 41






J City of Walnut Creek government Floating Island Technologies and Education at Heather Farm Park

(a) education(e) habitat improvement (i) scientific research

Central County $10,000.00 $10,000.00 Purchase and installation of a Leviathan floating island with Biohaven technology as a means to enhance fish and wildlife habitat and improve water quality at Heather Farm Park. This floating island will also become a natural educational classroom resource.


K CCRCD government Water Quality Testing for Salmonid Survival in Alhambra Creek Watershed


Central County $1,712.52 $1,712.52 Equipment and supplies to continue an ongoing Alhambra Creek water quality monitoring program to determine salmonid habitat suitability and involve Martinez High School students supervised by a trained adult volunteer. The goal is to determine whether water conditions could sustain trout and/or steelhead especially over summer months when crucial water quality may deteriorate.


L The Watershed Project non-profit Wild! Oysters Gardening & Education


West County $8,200.00 $8,200.00 Installation of hanging native oyster gardens at a slip in a marina along the Richmond shoreline to provide wildlife conservation and educational benefits.

The project meets requirements of Section 13103 and will provide substantial benefit to fish and wildlife resources of the County. Encouraged to find a reduction in slip rental costs and use cost savings for additional non-labor project expenses.

Page 4 of 5 03-01-13 of 41






M United States Fish & Wildlife Service (Antioch Dunes National Wildlife Refuge)

government Lange's Metalmark Butterfly Habitat Improvement at Antioch Dunes National Wildlife Refuge

(e) habitat improvement East County $10,000.00 $10,000.00 Propagation of 1,000 host plants for endangered Lange's metalmark butterfly and for interns to improve habitat and install host plants at Antioch Dunes National Wildlife Refuge.


N Regional Parks Foundation non-profit Kids Healthy Outdoor Challenge - Field Trips

(a) education Countywide $10,000.00 $10,000.00 The funds would be used to provide 600 low-income CCC third grade students with a hands-on educational experience related to fish and wildlife conservation during the 2013-2014 academic year.


O Steven M. LeVine MD individual homeowner

Habitat and Stream Bank Restoration Along Moraga Creek

(e) habitat improvement Central County $3,500.00 $0.00 The request is to fund a survey and design a residential habitat restoration and primary school education project for a 300-foot section of Moraga Creek.

The project is on private property, limited public benefit. The FWC determined that compared to other applications, benefits were not as large.

$102,707.12 $80,181.72$109,933.14

Grants Requested & Recommended by Region

Subtotals by Region Requested Funding Amount

Percentage of Total Amount Requested


Percentage of Total Amount Recommended

for Approval

East $27,342.69 27% $18,022.69 22.5%West $18,510.69 18% $10,382.69 12.9%

Central $38,925.92 38% $33,848.52 42.2%Countywide $17,927.82 17% $17,927.82 22.4%

Total $102,707.12 $80,181.72

Grand TotalTotal Available Funds (as of 2/12/2013)

Page 5 of 5 03-01-13 of 41



REVIEW OF DRAFT LANGUAGE MODIFYING MAC POLICY GUIDELINES

REGARDING ALTERNATE SEATS

On October 16, 2012, the Board of Supervisors referred to the IOC a recommendation from Supervisor Andersen to add two seats and extending term expiration dates for existing seats on the Alamo Municipal Advisory Committee. On December 10, 2012, the IOC approved the recommendation and forwarded to the full Board for approval. On December 11, 2012, the Board of Supervisors directed the County Administrator’s Office to draft language authorizing the use of alternates certain MACs and eventually circulate that proposal to various stakeholders prior to returning to the Board. March 11, 2013 Attached is a redline copy of the proposed language expanding the discretion of District Supervisors to establish alternate seats on various MACs. Staff requests that the Committee review the proposed language, determine that the language is sufficient and/or provide additional revisions and authorize the County Administrator’s Office to circulate the proposed language for comment prior to returning to the full Board of Supervisors with a final recommendation. Attachments:

1. Proposed Revisions to Section 3 of the MAC Policy 2. MAC Policy Recommendations, as adopted by the Board of Supervisors on

December 16, 2008

of 41

PROPOSED REVISIONS TO EXISTING MAC POLICY GOVERNING THE USE OF ALTERNATE POSITIONS

3. MAC Alternate Positions Alternate positions have been established for 7 of the existing MACs. Alternates can serve a useful purpose by assisting with the achievement of a quorum. However, a policy of automatic appointment of the alternate in the event of a vacancy may discourage other interested individuals from applying for appointment. Moreover, appointments should not be made automatically, in respect of District Supervisor responsibility for member nominations. Recommendations

1. Alternate positions do not automatically assume a member position when a vacancy arises. Alternates, however, may be nominated to fill a member vacancy to the Board of Supervisors by the District Supervisor.

2. The establishment of an alternate position (or positions) in the case of a 5 member MAC is at the discretion of the District Supervisor. However, a MAC should not exceed 7 members in total, except as recommended by the District Supervisor responding to specific community needs.

of 41

MAC POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

From the Ad Hoc MAC Committee

Supervisor Mary N. Piepho Supervisor Federal D. Glover

Dec. 16, 2008

of 41

Table of Contents

Introduction........................................................................................................................ 3

MAC Member Appointments .......................................................................................... 3

MAC Member Termination............................................................................................. 4

MAC Alternate Positions ................................................................................................. 5

MAC Membership Size .................................................................................................... 5

MAC Committees.............................................................................................................. 6

MAC Meeting Location, Frequency, and Length .......................................................... 7

MAC Training Requirements .......................................................................................... 8

Administrative Staff Support of MACs .......................................................................... 8

MAC Funding.................................................................................................................... 9

MAC Operating Procedures--Creating Agendas, Posting Agendas, Records of

Action, and File Storage ................................................................................................. 10

MAC External Communications and Representations ............................................... 11

MAC Annual Reports, Including Work Plans ............................................................. 12

MAC Boundaries ............................................................................................................ 12

Community Service District Board Members as MAC Members.............................. 13

12/10/2008 2 Contra Costa County

of 41

Introduction The following policy recommendations are made for the purpose of improving consistency among the County’s Municipal Advisory Councils (MACs). Currently, there is little consistency in the membership composition, method of member selection, staff support, activities conducted, methods of community outreach, and fiscal resources among the MACs. While some of these variances may appropriately reflect the inherent differences in the communities served, a policy framework for the operating rules and procedures of the MACs will ensure that the MACs are effectively serving their advisory purpose and, in that regard, are accurately representing the concerns and recommendations of the community. Staff should be directed to review the Maddy Book, MAC establishing resolutions, MAC Bylaws and other relevant resolutions to make amendments consistent with all Board approved policies. 1. MAC Member Appointments Resolution 2002/377 (“Board Advisory Body Procedures”) states: “Except for committees comprising County staff members, all advisory body members that are appointed by the Board shall have specific terms of appointment as prescribed by statute or as fixed by the Board. Unless otherwise specified, appointees shall serve four-year terms.” MAC members are appointed by the Board of Supervisors, upon nomination by the District Supervisor. Often, after the expiration of a member term, the member continues to serve in the seat until re-appointment or dismissal. Although the continuation of service may seem efficient from the perspective of having a seat filled, it can create the impression that re-appointment is an automatic process. Recommendations

1. There should be no automatic re-appointment of MAC members. 2. At the expiration of the term, the MAC member appointment should be

terminated, and the MAC member should not hold over.

3. The District Supervisor may choose whether to re-nominate an incumbent member or nominate a new member. Any re-nomination or nomination must be approved by the Board of Supervisors.

4. Effective January 2009, MAC member terms shall be coterminous to the term of office of the District Supervisor nominating the member. Appointments should be made within 60 days of the beginning of the District Supervisor’s term.


of 41

5. In the case of newly-elected Supervisors, MAC members can carry over their positions for a period not to exceed 90 days, to allow time for a Supervisor to recruit and make position selections and nominations to the Board of Supervisors.

2. MAC Member Termination Each appointed member of the MAC serves at the pleasure of the Board of Supervisors and may be removed, at will, by a majority vote of the Board. The rescission of an appointment by the Board is rare. However, policies should be in place in the event that a MAC member acts inappropriately toward other MAC members, staff, or the public; acts outside the authority of the MAC; or has persistent problems with attendance. Recommendations

1. MAC members may be removed from their appointments at will upon recommendation by the District Supervisor to the Board of Supervisors.

2. MAC members should express concerns about any inappropriate behavior by a

member to the District Supervisor. 3. If an issue arises, a District Supervisor may meet with or send a letter to the MAC

member, advising the member of the concern and indicating that a failure to correct the inappropriate behavior may lead to removal.

4. The MAC member should receive written notice of a recommendation for

removal, of the date and time of the meeting at which the Board will consider the matter, and of the opportunity for public comment to the Board before action on the matter.

5. If a MAC member or alternate has been absent from two consecutive meetings,

the secretary or administrative support staff should advise the member or alternate that absence from three consecutive regular meetings of the MAC may result in a recommendation of termination to the Board of Supervisors.

6. Where it appears that there will be sufficient members to hold a meeting but at the

actual time of the meeting a quorum cannot be reached and the meeting is canceled, those members or alternates who are absent will have an absence counted against them.


of 41


3. MAC Alternate Positions Alternate positions have been established for 7 of the existing MACs. Alternates can serve a useful purpose by assisting with the achievement of a quorum. However, a policy of automatic appointment of the alternate in the event of a vacancy may discourage other interested individuals from applying for appointment. Moreover, appointments should not be made automatically, in respect of District Supervisor responsibility for member nominations. Recommendations

1. Alternate positions do not automatically assume a member position when a vacancy arises. Alternates, however, may be nominated to fill a member vacancy to the Board of Supervisors by the District Supervisor.

2. The establishment of an alternate position (or positions) in the case of a 5 member

MAC is at the discretion of the District Supervisor. However, a MAC should not exceed 7 members in total.

4. MAC Membership Size The size and composition of the MACs in Contra Costa County vary widely. MACs are currently comprised of either 5 or 7 members with one, two, or no alternates. The population of the unincorporated communities range from 861 to 21,534 with no correlation between the size of the MAC and the size of the community. In general, the larger the membership size, the greater the cost and administrative support required by District staff to serve the members. Furthermore, recruiting members to serve is sometimes a challenge for the MACs, which creates problems for achieving a quorum, particularly for the 7 member MACs. The current size of the MACs and the 2000 Census population estimates for their respective communities are as follows:

MAC District Current Size Population Bay Point V 7 21,534 Bethel Island V 5 & 1 alternate 2,312 Byron III 7 & 1 alternate 916 Contra Costa Centre IV 7 5,133 Diablo∗ III 5 988 El Sobrante I 7 & 2 alternates 12,260 Kensington I 5 & 2 alternates 4,936 Knightsen III 5 & 2 alternates 861

∗ The members of this MAC are Community Service District (CSD) board members.

of 41

North Richmond I 7 4,076 Pacheco IV 7 & 1 alternate 3,562 Rodeo II 7 & 1 alternate 8,717

Recommendations To better align the size of the MAC with the size of the community, to provide greater consistency among the MACs, and to equalize administrative support requirements, the size of the MAC should be 5 members for small communities and 7 members for large communities.

1. MACs that represent unincorporated communities whose population is less than 4,000 should have a membership of no more than 5 members.

2. The term of current members should not be renewed and appointments should not

be made for vacant seats, as necessary, to achieve the recommended MAC size.

MAC District Current Size Proposed Size Bay Point V 7 7 Bethel Island V 5 & 1 alternate 5 Byron III 7 & 1 alternate 5 Contra Costa Centre IV 7 7 Diablo III 5 5 El Sobrante I 7 & 2 alternates 7 Kensington I 5 & 2 alternates 5 & 2 alts.* Knightsen III 5 & 2 alternates 5 North Richmond I 7 7 Pacheco IV 5 & 1 alternate 5 & 1 alt.* Rodeo II 7 & 1 alternate 7

*As recommended by the District Supervisor.

5. MAC Committees Some MACs have established committees (or subcommittees) to address particular subject areas considered by the MAC. However, contrary to requirements, the committees do not always operate in accordance with MAC operating procedures, the Brown Act, and the County’s Better Government Ordinance. Unless these policies and procedures are followed, the MAC, the public and the Board of Supervisors may not be well served by the committees.


of 41

Recommendations

1. MACs may establish a single-purpose committees (or subcommittee) when needed. The committee (or subcommittee) shall be composed solely of less than a quorum of the MAC and chaired by one of its members. Members of the public who are not MAC members may not serve on a committee or subcommittee.

2. A specific charge or outline of responsibilities shall be established for the

committee (or subcommittee) by the MAC in its Board-approved annual work plan. A target date shall be established for report back to the MAC. The maximum life of the committee (or subcommitee) shall be one year, with annual review, and possible extension by the MAC.

3. The committee (or subcommittee) shall operate in accordance with MAC

operating procedures, the Brown Act, and the County’s Better Government Ordinance.

4. Meeting agendas for committees (or subcommittees) shall be posted and records

of action should be maintained and posted as well.

6. MAC Meeting Frequency, Location, Length, Operations Current policy in the MAC establishing resolutions indicates that MACs “shall hold regular meetings at least monthly at an established time and place.” (Italics added.) Many MACs meet twice a month, with additional committee meetings. The frequency and length of meetings increase the cost and requirements of administrative support for the MACs. However, MACs should meet as needed to ensure timely and effective input on land use matters. Recommendations

1. MACs shall establish a standard meeting schedule for the year as part of its Board of Supervisors-approved annual work plan, making changes in consultation with the District Supervisor’s office.

2. MAC meetings should be held at a time and place convenient and accessible to

MAC members, the community, and administrative support staff.

3. Generally, MAC meetings should not exceed three (3) hours in length.

4. MACs shall fully comply with the Board of Supervisors’ policy concerning conflict of interest and open meetings (Resolution No. 2002/376).


of 41

5. The MACs shall agendize and respond to items that are referred to them in a timely manner (i.e., within 30 days of referral) such that their review does not delay the County consideration of the matter.

6. Time limits may be imposed in the course of the meeting by the Chair. In general,

speakers should be prepared to make their points known within three minutes.

7. The MAC Chair should remind the public at the start of each meeting that the MAC is an advisory body to the Board of Supervisors.

7. MAC Training Requirements The staffs of the County Administrator’s Office (CAO), Auditor-Controller and County Counsel annually train advisory body and MAC members on operating procedures, fiscal procedures, the Brown Act, the County’s Better Government Ordinance, and County government in general. Training provides MAC members with resources and knowledge to operate efficiently and effectively. Recommendations

1. MAC members must attend a training offered by the CAO staff at least once during the first two years of his/her term, preferably in the first year, and must view the video training “The Brown Act and Better Government Act—What You Need to Know” before attendance of their first meeting.

2. MAC members are encouraged to attend the annual advisory body training and

should receive an orientation on MAC member duties and responsibilities by District and/or CAO staff before their first meeting. CAO staff will develop and distribute a MAC Handbook to members, as well as a guide to the Brown Act.

3. Within three months of appointment, each MAC member shall complete the

prescribed training on compliance with conflict of interest and open meeting laws and shall certify that he or she has completed such training. Training certificates should be maintained by the District administrative support staff.

4. MAC chairs and/or treasurers must receive fiscal training offered by the Auditor-

Controller’s Office and CAO staff before assuming their position. 8. Administrative Staff Support of MACs Currently, administrative support resources vary widely among MACs. Some MACs handle their own administrative matters; others are supported by District staff or a contractor. To ensure effectiveness, all MACs need some level of administrative support services provided by either District staff or through an independent contractor.


of 41

Recommendations

1. Each District Supervisor should determine if their MACs will receive administrative support services from District staff or an independent contractor retained by the District.

2. In all cases, District staff should be responsible for fiscal oversight of the MACs.

3. Administrative support services to the MACs could include some or all of the

following:

a) MAC agenda preparation, posting, and distribution. b) Attendance at MAC meetings and arranging for County staff attendance, as

needed. c) Preparing responses to inquiries made during public comment. d) Preparing responses of requests from MAC members. e) Records of action posting and distribution. f) Filing and maintaining training certifications. g) Fiscal oversight of the MAC budget and establishment of Petty Cash fund.

9. MAC Funding The current MAC establishing resolutions state that no funding will be provided by the Board for MAC operations: “The Board shall provide no ongoing professional or clerical staff support to the Council or provide funds to pay for any of the Council’s operating costs. However, County staff will provide the Council with information and reports on matters of interest to the Council.” The few MACs that have budgets are funded with special revenues or donations. Funding MACs would be a change in County policy. However, financial support would provide a baseline budget for such things as postage, post office box fees, telephone charges, printing and postage costs, and clerical support. Non-General Fund support for MAC operations should be identified until the County budget situation allows for General Fund support. Recommendations

1. Each District Office should be provided $3,000 annually per MAC for support of MAC operations.

2. Funding will be restricted to the following uses: clerical support, telephone

expenses, post office box expenses, postage, print and mailing services, and community meeting expenses. Funding may not be expended on other items not directly related to the functions and activities specified in the Board-approved annual work plan.


of 41

3. MACs are encouraged to seek and apply for funding from other non-County

sources to supplement their budget.

10. MAC Operating Procedures--Creating Agendas, Posting Agendas, Records of Action, and File Storage Not every MAC consistently operates in adherence with a set of operating rules, the Brown Act, the County’s Better Government Ordinance, the Board of Supervisors’ policy concerning conflict of interest and open meetings (Resolution No. 2002/376), and the Board’s policy governing appointments to boards, committees, and commissions (Resolution 2002/377). Without adherence to policies and rules, public participation and the provision of public information is hampered. In addition, the District Supervisor and Board of Supervisors may not be well served by a lack of timely and accurate information. Recommendations

1. The agenda for a MAC meeting should be created by the MAC Chair in

consultation with the administrative support staff. The County Administrator’s Office will provide an agenda template. (See Attachment A.)

2. The agenda for a MAC meeting shall be posted in accordance with the Brown Act

and the County’s Better Government Ordinance.

3. District staff is encouraged to post the agenda and record of actions on the District webpage.

4. Materials distributed for the meeting must be available for viewing at a specified

location that is a public place, accessible during normal business hours, at least 96 hours before a scheduled meeting. In addition, a sufficient number of copies of meeting materials (a minimum of 10) should be available at the meeting for MAC members and the public.

5. The MAC should keep a record of its actions in a form prescribed by the County’s

Better Government Ordinance: “Each County body must keep a record of its meeting. Though the record need not be verbatim, i.e., a tape-recording, it must accurately reflect the agenda and the decisions made in the meeting.” (Ord. § 25-2.205).

6. The Record of Actions should be approved by the MAC and submitted to the

District Supervisor office no later than one month after their approval. The County Administrator’s Office will provide a template for Records of Actions. (See Attachment B.)


of 41

7. Storage space for MAC files should be provided at District Supervisor offices where feasible. For transition purposes, District Supervisors should have access to at least two years of records. If there is insufficient space in the District offices, the County Administrator’s Office can assist with the provision of storage space at a centralized location.

11. MAC External Communications and Representations

MACs advise the Board of Supervisors on land use and planning matters affecting their communities of interest and may represent their communities before the Board of Supervisors, the Planning Commission and the Zoning Administrator on such issues as land use, planning, and zoning. MACs may also represent the community before the Local Agency Formation Commission on proposed boundary changes affecting the community.

MACs may advise the Board of Supervisors on services which are or may be provided to the community by Contra Costa County or other local government agencies. Such services include, but are not limited to, public health, safety, welfare, public works, and planning. MACs may also provide input and reports to the Board, County staff or any County hearing body on issues of concern to the community. However, it is understood that the Board of Supervisors is the final decision making authority with respect to issues concerning the community and that the Council shall serve solely in an advisory capacity.

Recommendations

1. Except as specified, the MAC and its individual members acting on behalf of the

MAC, may not represent the community to any federal, state, other county, city, special district or school district, agency or commission, or any other organization on any matter concerning the community.

2. Individual MAC members cannot represent the MAC’s positions unless such

representation has been expressly authorized by a vote of the MAC. When an individual member is authorized to represent the MAC’s position to the Board of Supervisors, Planning Commission, Zoning Administrator, or LAFCO, that member should speak only to those topics which have been expressly authorized by the MAC and only with respect to the issues MACs are authorized to address.

3. The MAC may not, as a body, take positions on candidates for any public office

or take positions on any legislative matter.

4. On any business cards, letterhead, or printed material from the MAC, the MAC should be identified as an advisory body to the Board of Supervisors, and the contact information for the District Supervisor should be included.


of 41

12. MAC Annual Reports, Including Work Plans With respect to “Responsibilities related to Advisory Bodies,” Board Resolution 2002/377 states: “Each advisory body shall keep necessary records and submit an annual report, in accordance with the report format and time schedule set forth in Section IV of this resolution.” Section IV of the resolution specifies that the report must contain information on activities, accomplishments, membership attendance, required training, and proposed work plan or objectives for the following year. Work Plans have not been regularly submitted by the MACs; however, they are a good planning tool and would help focus the MAC’s time and attention. Recommendations

1. Each MAC shall annually report to the Board of Supervisors, in writing, on its prior year activities, accomplishments, membership attendance, and required training, as well as its proposed work plan or objectives for the year, by the second Tuesday of each February. Each MAC should be reminded of its annual reporting responsibilities by administrative staff support.

2. MAC annual reports, including work plans, should be reviewed by the District

Supervisor who will recommend appropriate action by the Board of Supervisors.

3. Each MAC should consult with District staff when developing its annual work plan.

4. Failure to submit the required annual report and work plan may result in

consideration of MAC dissolution.

13. MAC Boundaries The current MAC boundaries do not necessarily reflect the “community of interest” for every MAC. A few MACs are surrounded by a combination of established boundaries (city or special district boundaries) or natural boundaries. However, others are partially surrounded by cities but may include industrial or agricultural land outside the Urban Limit Line. Others include lesser inhabited rural areas or government-owned areas (such as an airport, special district lands, transitional military bases, etc.). In addition, there does not seem to be a common or consistent rationale for the current boundaries. There are unique characteristics of each area; however, the boundaries should reflect the true "community of interest” for each MAC. Therefore, criteria should be developed to redraw the MAC boundaries, as necessary, to achieve this objective.


of 41


Recommendations The area for which the MACs will serve and discharge their duties and powers is the unincorporated area described on the attached maps which reflect the following criteria:

1. Use of Borders: The unincorporated community of interest may be bounded by established borders such as county and city limit lines, special district boundaries (including, but not limited to, park and water districts), census tracts, geographic features such as highways or waterways, and/or the adopted Urban Limit Line. Borders are followed to the extent practicable and to the extent that they reflect the generally recognized “community of interest.”

2. Population Density and Community Affiliation: Population density and

recognized population centers should be considered in determining boundaries (where established borders do not exist). The unincorporated community of interest should also include the neighborhoods or residential areas commonly or traditionally affiliated with the name of the community. Uninhabited or sparsely populated rural or agricultural areas should generally be excluded unless there are known or anticipated matters of public health, safety, welfare, public works, and/or planning.

3. Areas of special interest: When an unincorporated community of interest is

adjacent to industrial areas or facilities (e.g., refineries, power plants, gas fields), these areas should be included if there are known or anticipated matters of public health, safety, welfare, public works, and/or planning. When an unincorporated community of interest is adjacent to government-owned lands (e.g., airports, special district lands, transitional military bases, etc.), these areas should be included only if there are known or anticipated matters of public health, safety, welfare, public works, and/or planning.

14. Community Service District (CSD) Board Members as MAC Members The MAC and the CSD are separate bodies and cannot be combined into a single public entity1. However, the Board of Supervisors can create a MAC and specify that the members of the MAC shall be those persons serving as Directors of the CSD. (This was accomplished in April 2007 for the Diablo MAC.)

1 At its March 12, 1997 meeting, the Contra Costa Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) passed Resolution 96-19 that addressed termination of the Discovery Bay Municipal Advisory Council and stated that its advisory functions would be assumed by the Discovery Bay CSD Board of Directors. Subsequent to that action, the Board of Supervisors passed Resolution 97-295 terminating the Discovery Bay Municipal Advisory Council effective December 1, 2008 and acknowledging that DBCSD would assume the advisory functions previously performed by the MAC: “In order to create a smooth transition of ‘in- progress’ advisory functions to the newly created DBCSD, the Discovery Bay Municipal Advisory Council shall be terminated on December 1, 1998, and its advisory responsibilities shall be assumed by the DBCSD Board of Directors.”

of 41


Unless or until there is an amendment to the County’s Better Government Ordinance with respect to a MAC with the same membership composition as a CSD Board, such MACs would operate as other County advisory bodies do, subject to the County’s policies for advisory bodies and to the Better Government Ordinance2. The MAC could hold its meetings on the same night and in the same location where the CSD Board of Directors meets. When the Board of Supervisors designates that a MAC shall have the same membership composition as a CSD Board, the CSD Board can then submit an application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) to activate its latent power to finance the operation of a MAC. After receiving LAFCO’s approval, the Board of Directors may, by ordinance, order the exercise of that power. (Gov. Code §§ 61100 (ad); 61106). Recommendations

1. The “Membership” provision of the MAC’s establishing resolution would be amended to specify that the Council would consist of five members who shall be current elected members of the CSD, appointed by the Board of Supervisors, upon nomination by the District Supervisor.

2. The “Term of Office” provision of the MAC’s establishing resolution would be

amended to specify that a MAC member’s term shall be the same as his or her term of office on the CSD Board of Directors. Also, vacancies would not be filled through the Board of Supervisors appointment process. Rather, they would be filled based upon the result of CSD elections.

3. The “Removal from Office” provision of the MAC’s establishing resolution would be deleted, as it would not be consistent with representation by elected CSD Board members serving ex officio as members of the MAC.

4. The “Quorum and Vote Necessary for Action” provision of the MAC’s

establishing resolution would be deleted, as it is more efficient for the MAC members to operate pursuant to the quorum and vote requirements of the CSD.

5. The MAC’s “Territorial Area,” or boundaries, would be modified to be

coterminous with that of the CSD unless there are compelling reasons for separate boundaries owing to the CSD’s service requirements or the identification of the MAC’s “community of interest.”

6. Notwithstanding the above amendments, the MAC would continue to operate as a

County advisory body, subject to the County’s operating procedures and policies

2 The Ad Hoc MAC Committee has requested that the Internal Operations Committee of the Board consider an amendment to the County’s Better Government Ordinance with respect to the definition of "policy body" under the BGO such that it would exclude any MAC whose members are the directors of a CSD serving ex officio as members of a MAC.

of 41


for MACs and other advisory bodies, including the County’s Better Government Ordinance.

of 41

INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE

Documents

Transcript of INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE