Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting

And we are unmuted.

Okay. Good morning, El Dorado County. Today is April 21, and it is Tuesday. This is our regularly scheduled board of supervisors meeting. And we are so glad to see so many of you here, especially the young our young people.

I mean, we're happy to see the parents too, but, you know, I mean, the young people really is why we're here this morning. So we're gonna do a little bit of business before, we move into the map contest. So if you'll just, give us a few minutes to do some business, we'll get on with the with the with the sage. So may we please have an invocation from pastor Daniel Frank of Cold Springs Community Church. Welcome, sir.

Thank you, chair and board for the opportunity to lead us in this way. Dear heavenly father, thank you for this wonderful place that we live, the beauty all around us and the trees and the flowers. Thank you for the rain, that we continue to need. And, Lord, I know you are shown to me through creation, and I thank you for that. I thank you for this wonderful place of El Dorado County that we call home. Would you bless this place? Would you bless the state and our country? I lift up to you the leaders in this room and the leaders that are joining us online as well. Would you be with them in the critical decisions that they face for our future? Would you bring wisdom in these decisions that affect our health, jobs, and housing?

In all of the frustrations and challenges that come with our times, would you bring peace? Lord, would you provide opportunities for these leaders to see the difference that they are making in our communities, and would you bless them as they seek to make wise decisions? Lord, I lift up our nation to you, all of the turmoil and division that takes a toll on our country and on this room, no doubt. Would you bring peace and joy? Lord, we also know the beauty of this country and all that it stands for.

Thank you for this place that we get to call home. Give us all the wisdom to operate in such a way that brings unity and joy back to our country in a new in a new and exciting way. I lift up to you our armed forces in this moment that we are in. Our armed forces, weigh heavy on the hearts of parents all over this country. Would you hold them and protect them?

Would you give wisdom to those leaders, to lead well in a tense time? I lift up our esteemed members of law enforcement. Would you protect them and be with them as they protect and serve us? And I thank you for this room of families reminding us of the joy and life that we have here in this county, in this country. Lord, help us to see all of the goodness around us and all of the goodness that you provide and that you bring. Lord, I pray all of these things in your name.

Amen. Amen. Amen.

Thank you, pastor Frank. Supervisor Vercamp, will you lead us in the pledge, please?

Please stand. Thank you very much.

Madam CAO, are there any changes to the agenda that was posted on April 15?

No. Thank you, Madam Chair. Okay.

All right. Let's move on to approval of the consent calendar. I'm going to ask my colleagues if they have any items they wish to pull or if they have any questions on consent. We'll start with, Supervisor Turnboo.

No changes.

Okay. Supervisor Verkamp.

No changes, madam chair.

Alright. I have one item that I would like to pull, and that's item number 12. And because we are gonna be taking public comment even on items pulled, I'll let the public know the reason why I'm pulling that item. A contract that gives PG and E a lot of discretion over removal of vegetation. It happens to be in Four Bay Park. And so I'm just concerned about the amount of leniency that we're giving them. So I'm going to pull that, and that'll be discussed later, probably in the afternoon. Let's see. District 1, Supervisor Yes.

Chair, I would if you would, be so, provide me the opportunity to, make a comment on and read some expert excerpts from the proclamation, item number 24.

Please.

Okay.

Thank you.

Good morning. This proclamation recognizes this week as crime rights crime victims rights weeks. Americans are the victims of more than 20,000,000 crimes each year, whereas Eldorado County recognizes the importance of a justice oriented community that holds those who commit crimes against others accountable while rigorously seeking justice on behalf of the victims of their crimes. And whereas Eldorado County understands that prioritizing crime victims, crime victim support, and prevention is essential for fostering a safe, healthy, and thriving community, whereas Eldorado County is a community that rejects crime in all forms. Whereas Eldorado County is dedicated to supporting crime victims and survivors in the aftermath of crime, building trust among our citizens, collaborating with service providers, and engaging our community in response efforts.

So now therefore be it proclaimed that the board of supervisors of El Dorado County does hereby proclaim the week of April 19 to the twenty fifth twenty twenty six as Eldorado County Crime Victims' Rights weeks. Thank you.

And thank you, vice chair Ferrero, for bringing that proclamation forward. I did notice that our Eldorado County district attorney, Vern Pearson, is in the room, and I bet you would like to comment on this as well.

Yes. I wanna keep it very short and just say thank you to the board, and thank you for everybody that's here. It's, we didn't we haven't done this in a few years during the proclamation like this, and it did seem like it coincided with the MAP awards in the past, which is, in a way, being careful in terms of what we we mentioned in terms of talking about it in terms of in addition to the proclamation. But it is a a probably as epic, a a a a reminder of why it is so important, from the invocation recognizing law enforcement and the work that, frontline law enforcement does on behalf of all of us and behalf of all these kids that are here and all of us, raising kids and some of us grandkids, here in this county and the sense of appreciation that we have for the hard work done by, by law enforcement, by the all the victim witness people that are here and, the very difficult work, that that goes into, ensuring that this is, in fact, as it is, this one of the safest, if not the safest county within the state of California under difficult times that, that we all face.

With so with that, I thank you, supervisor Ferraro and board, board Brook Lane, the chair, and the rest of the board members for this recognition today.

Thank you, Vern.

Thank you for being with us today, and thank you for all the work you do as well. Thank you.

Thank you, Vern.

We will now take public comment on all matters on the consent calendar, including items that have been pulled. We will also take public comment on closed session items. So to be specific, we will now hear public comment on closed session items number one through three and consent items numbers four through 45. Please identify which item number or numbers you will be addressing to the board. Madam Clerk?

Each speaker will have three minutes to address the board. The time will alert you when thirty seconds remain and again when your time has ended. We'll begin with comments from individuals present in the boardroom followed by those participating via Zoom. If you're joining via Zoom, please ensure you unmute yourself when called upon. If you're joining the meeting by phone, press 9 to raise your hand. If you're on Zoom, use the raise hand feature to indicate your interest in speaking. We ask that you voluntarily state your name for the record before beginning your comments.

Mister Kaling.

Good morning. John Kaling with DOT. Item 39 on the consent agenda today proposes to establish a couple of, or a advisory committee for a couple drainage zones of benefit in El Dorado Hills. We're asking the board to approve resolution zero seven seven two zero two six. That resolution contains a typo. My fault. It lists Bob Slater as one of the drainage committee appointees that needs to be replaced with Diane Slater, please. So I asked the board to board clerk to make that adjustment.

Excellent. Thank you. We will make that correction. Thank you. Are there other members of the public in the room that would like to address the board on any items on consent or closed session? Okay. May we go online, please?

Now taking public comment from online participants. There is no public comment.

Okay. Thank you. And I will note for the record that there was a public comment submitted

on

item number 15. Okay. Miss Dawson, do you want to read this item into the record?

Approve the consent calendar with the following changes. Poll item 12 for discussion, and the proclamation comments read into the record by supervisor Ferrero will be included in the minutes.

And do we have to make the correction on item

Excuse me. Yes. The correction for the Department of Transportation item will be changed from Bob Slater replaced by Diane Slater.

Thank you. Is there a motion or any further discussion?

I'll move approval. Second.

Okay. There's a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed?

Thank you. Motion passes four-zero with Supervisor Parlin being absent.

We will now take public comment on the rest of the agenda items, excluding public hearings. We have two public hearings scheduled for this morning, so we will not be taking public comment on items number 52 or 53, but we would like to take public comment at this time on items 46 through fifty one and fifty four. Ms. Dawson?

Each speaker will have three minutes to address the board. A timer will alert you when thirty seconds remain and again when your time has ended. We will begin with comments from individuals present in the boardroom followed by those participating via Zoom. If you're joining via Zoom, please ensure you unmute yourself when called upon. If you're joining by phone, press 9 to raise your hand. If you're on Zoom, use the raise hand feature to indicate your interest in speaking. We ask that you voluntarily state your name for the record before beginning your comments.

Welcome, miss Posey.

Good morning, board. I'm Gina Posey, candidate for supervisor here in District 4. My comments for agenda item 26 dash zero five three eight. It's an important item for my district. I'm here in strong support of allocating the remaining mosquito fire settlement funds to the Volcanoville area, the community that bore the brunt of this devastating fire.

It is hard to believe it has been four years since the fire burned more than 77,000 acres, destroyed more than 70 homes, and took over a month to be contained. When the Mosquito Fire came over the ridge, it wasn't policy that saved lives. It was people. It was met with significant coordinated efforts from the Office of Emergency Services to the brave men and women from CAL FIRE, our forest service and local fire districts from Georgetown, El Dorado, etcetera, who risked everything to protect our homes and our community. At its peak, there were literally thousands of firefighters.

That level of commitment showed what's possible when we prioritize safety. Now it's our responsibility to follow through with the investments these communities still need. The Mosquito Fire was not just an event, it was a life altering disaster for the residents of Volcanoville. Families lost homes, infrastructure was severely damaged, and even today, the landscape still reflects the trauma and vulnerability that this community continues to live with. While we are grateful for the work that has been done so far, the reality is this.

Volcanoville is still at risk. As outlined by the Bear Estate Property Owners Association letter, critical needs remain unmet. The roads are still degraded, drainage systems are still clogged, and perhaps most concerning, this community continues to rely on a single access route, a dangerous situation that has already failed in the past when storm damage washed it out. Today, we have an opportunity right now to make meaningful, lasting improvements. These are not wish list items.

These are essential safety measures. If we fail to invest these remaining funds where the impact was greatest, we are missing the very purpose of this settlement. Volcanoville residents are not asking for extras. They are asking for basic safety, resilience, and the ability to protect their lives and property moving forward. To prioritize, this is the moment, the community that is most effective and to ensure we are not back here again after the next disaster wishing we had done more. I respectfully urge you to allocate the remaining mosquito fire sentiment funds to Volcanoville. Thank you. Thank you.

Are there other members of the public in the room that would like to address the Board at this time? Seeing none, may we go online, please?

Now taking public comment from online participants. Now taking public comment from Linda Campbell.

Morning, everyone. Linda Campbell, Eldorado Hills. My comment is on item 46. I had sent in a written comment, primarily in that one. Hopefully, you all looked at it.

I'm a little confused as to the cost basis that was used for calculating cost per mile across projects with seemingly the same definitions of what's gonna happen. What I forgot to include in that was the actual totals. So the totals that were provided for the projects is about 14,500,000. The amount of funds that were identified in there are about 10,100,000. So, primarily, I guess, I'm a little concerned with where the additional $4,000,000 is coming from.

Any information on that to try to tie that out would be awesome. And then just finally, I just wanna say, please bring back the regular comments per regular agenda items so we can speak per activity. Thank you.

Thank you.

There's no additional public comment.

Okay. Thank you. We'll go ahead and close public comment. And we will move on to the item that we are all here for and excited about. And that's the presentation of awards to the winners of the student map drawing contest. Ms. Dawson.

Item 51 comes from the Board of Supervisors presenting awards to the winners of the thirty first Annual Student Map Drawing Contest hosted by the county and sponsored by the local organization of professional surveyors, architects, geologists, and engineers, SAGE.

Great. I'd like to welcome Brian Fraser, who is our surveyor for El Dorado County. Welcome, sir.

Good morning, board. Thank you for hosting the thirty second annual map contest. We appreciate it, and it's always a fun time. So with that, I'll hand it over to president of Sage, Andrew Schaefer.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Good morning, madam chair, members of the board. My name is Andrew Schaefer, and I'm the current president of Sage, a local professional organization of the surveyors, architects, geologists, and engineers of Eldorado County. The purpose and objective of SAGE is to provide and share the technical expertise of our members with the community. In addition, we work with public agencies and community leaders regarding public interest as it relates to land surveying, architecture, geology, and engineering. Additionally, Sage provides a service to the youth of our community by sponsoring and hosting the annual student map contest.

Over the past thirty two years of the map contest, Sage has donated over a $100,000 in awards and prizes to the stop top student artists who participate in the countywide annual contest. Sage would also like to thank the county surveyor's office, El Dorado County RCD, the board of supervisors, and volunteers for the continued support of this community event. This year's contest had hundreds of map entries by students ranging from kindergarten to twelfth grade. Judging was based on criteria specific to each grade level and completed by volunteers. Today, we're here once again to acknowledge the efforts put forth, and please join Sage and the County of Eldorado in celebrating this year's MAP contest winners. Thank you.

Thank you. Alright. I would like to ask our vice chair, supervisor Ferrero, if you would kick us off. And I think you'll be introducing the kindergarten through fourth grades.

Yes. Good morning, everybody. Yeah. I have the honor of issuing awards from kindergarten through fourth fourth grade. We'll start with kindergarten. And what I'm gonna do, I'm gonna start with the third place winner and call each winner up individually. We'll have time for a photo. And then once all of the grades are announced, we are going to break the room, and then you can come up and get pictures of parents and students with with their maps when we're done with the award ceremony. First, I just wanna recognize and and say all of these maps are quite incredible, whether you're in high school or or kindergarten. And put a lot of effort into them, and you should all be very proud.

So I will start with the kindergarten. For third third place, I'd like to bring up Jack Lerza from Latrobe School.

Hi, Jack. Hi. Congratulations.

Congratulations on third place. Stay here. Okay?

Here we go.

Look at the camera.

Alright. Stay here. For second place, I would like to bring up Emory Randle from Camino Polytechnic. And our first place winner for kindergarten is David Lopez from La Trobe School. Congratulations, David.

Good handshake. I like that. Here's your ribbon. You want to get a group photo? We're giving photos? One more here? All right. Alright. Congratulations, guys. You can go back to your seats now.

Alright. Moving on to first grade. The third place winner is Violet Lizambi American River Charter. Congratulations. Alright.

Stay here. Second place winner is Victoria Mavy from American River Charter. Congratulations, Victoria. And first place for first grade is Opal Grano from Camino Polytechnic.

Want take a picture?

All right. Great job, guys. You can go back to the seats. Thank you. Oh, you need one more? Okay. Come on, ma'am. One more photo.

Oops. One

more here. Alright. Everybody face forward. Opal. Alright. Thank you. Good job. Alright. For second grade, third place winner is Wesley Aston from La Trobe Elementary. He's not here today. Okay.

All

right. Thank you, Wesley.

Wesley's not here. And for the first time ever, my understanding, we have two second place winners, a tie. What first is gonna be Addison Peace from Camino Elementary. And Fox Newman from Camino Polytechnic. And for first place for second grade is Riley Randall from Camino Polytechnic.

Congratulations, Ivan.

Let's take some photos. Let me get a look to your right.

I think we need to take over here. Here we go. Here we go. Alright.

Thank you. Congratulations. Alright. Moving on to third grade. For third place from Sutter's Mill Elementary, Naomi Dillman.

Congratulations. And

in second place from Sutter Mill Sutter's Mill Elementary, Wyatt Bala.

And

in first play first place, excuse me, from Sutter Mill Elementary, a clean sweep from Sutter Mill, Cornelia Dillman, first place. I look to your

right. Alright,

congratulations. Alright, now moving on to fourth grade. Third place from Camino Polytechnic is Makayla Powell. And in second place from Northside Elementary, Whitney Stanhope. And first place from Northside Elementary, Emilia Romanovsky.

Congratulations. Alright. Look wanna look to right. Get another photo. Alright. Thank you. Supervisor Beercamp.

Thank you, Greg. Good morning, everybody. It's nice to see some familiar faces that been around this county for a long time and have educated our kids as well, and we appreciate that. This is, like, my ninth map contest awards, so this is just great, and these maps are unbelievable. Every year, they just get better and better.

So I'm gonna kick this off with the fifth grade, and we'll do, continue on with the third place for fifth grade, Evelyn Wagner, Millers Hill School. Evelyn? And second place is Jocelyn Brown, Miller's Hill School. Jocelyn? And it gives me great pleasure to present to Gold Trail School, which George and I both went to school at. Lasers. Just just the other day. Right, George?

Yeah. Yeah.

Just the other day.

The other day.

Alright. Mila Gomez. Mila Gomez, first place.

Very good. Congratulations.

Moving on to sixth grade, another Gold Trail school, Grant Secondon, third place. Grant? Second place, Desi Pace, Mountain Creek Middle School. Desi? And first place, Gold Trail School, Jasper Johnson.

Congratulations, you guys. Okay. Seventh grade, third place, Chloe Osobi Ani. Probably butchered that. Camarado Middle? Not here. Doesn't look like it. Alright. Second place, Madison Ritchie, Millers Hill School. Madison.

Thank you. Congratulations.

And first place, Vibha Vibha Sinew Sanu. You want a picture on this side? Yes. Overwhelming everybody, I think. All right. Thank you. Congratulations, girls.

Okay.

And eighth grade, third place, Isaac Abbott, Goldtrell School. In second place, Jacob Neal, Gold Trail School.

And

first place, Alice Teenan Tien Mildersil. Alice? Cool blazers. Right?

Yeah. Mhmm. Alright.

Congratulations. Supervisor of Turnboo, I believe it's your turn. Better be some more Gold Trail students on your list.

What? I'll do a little something at the end. Oh, you are? Oh,

Gotta excuse me a little bit. I got a bad knee. So anyway, good morning, everyone. I'm glad everybody showed up today. That's great. And these maps, like Brian was talking about, they're unbelievable. And you guys, you put a lot of work into these things. They're absolutely beautiful. They really are. So I'm gonna be doing ninth grade to open category. Alright. Ninth grade, first place, Joseph Eisenby, American River Charter. Congratulations. There you go. Hold that.

Come right here. First Okay. Carla, go ahead. Congratulations.

Alright.

Tenth grade?

She's not here. Not here.

Not here? Second place is not here.

Okay. Second place is not?

No.

Okay. Alyssa.

Place. First place.

There you go. Congratulations. Come on

over here. Stand right here.

She wants you to show up. Oh, okay. Okay. Turn this way. This way.

Yeah. Congratulations.

Second is here.

Oh, second place is here. Okay. Sammy Oh, good. There you go. Alright. One more time. You wanna hold yourself. I'll turn this mic. Perfect. That's okay.

Congratulations. Alright. Anyway, eleventh grade, Pyra Abbott, El Dorado High School. Congratulations. Okay. Second place?

Second place.

Second Oh,

yeah. Second place, Eveline Lisenby, American River Charter. All right. Congratulations. All right. Now turn this way. Sorry if I'm giving you guys directions. Sorry about that. All right. Congratulations.

Okay. Twelfth grade, first place, Jolene Verde Bernaday.

It's okay.

Got it, Carla? Congratulations. Open category.

See that our open categories are here, but if they snuck in, find out.

Are they here?

I'm I'm I'm seeing that in my

Oh, they're not here?

Delilah and Esther.

Is Delilah and Esther here? I don't see them.

K. K.

Okay.

That's it.

That's it? Yeah. Alright, Brooke.

Alright. Thank you, supervisor Turnbull.

You're welcome. Thank you. It's good seeing you.

You too.

Thank you. Good job. Alright.

Gonna kinda

skate you a little bit on that.

Do you need do you need your cane, or are you okay getting back up there? Yeah. Can't help you. Okay. I can't believe that the the building that these two gentlemen went to school in is still standing. Has it has it been renovated and worked on a little bit?

We we get beat up all the time. Right?

Alright. I have some special awards that I would like to give out at this time. One in particular, a superstar award. We inadvertently left this person off the list last year, So we want to make that correction, this year. And I'd like to invite Kylie Steigle to come forward. She is a superstar award winner, meaning she's placed for at least four years in her career. Oh, there it is. I didn't see her do that. She's sneaky.

Oh my god. Yeah.

Congratulations. Sorry about that.

Can you guys move over just a little bit? Thank you. Good job. Now still in that same category, we have four superstar award winners for 2026. Again, these are all students who have placed at least four times in this competition. Would you like me to bring them all forward at once? Yeah. If you would like to. Okay. Alright.

May I please have Grant Seckington come forward? Isaac Abbott. Jacob Neal. And Jolene Berindi.

Congratulations.

Are superstars. Alright. We have congratulations. We have two more awards to give out. One is the Outstanding achievement award, is given to the school with the most winners.

Drumroll, please. Camino Polytechnic. Okay. Great. Thank you. Tell her we said congratulations. And finally, the School Spirit Award, which is the school with the most map entries. Drumroll, please. Northside School. A 105 entries.

Wow. Good job.

Thank you. Congratulations. All right. And that concludes our twenty twenty six Sage Awards. Please feel free to stick around, take photos with your kids with their maps if you wish. We will reconvene at in ten minutes. So 09:50.

It's right here?

Yes. Let's do a a big group photo first. All all the winners come forward, please.

Alright. You're doing great. Alright. Alright.

We all want you. One two three winners. Winners. Whoo. Yes.

One

more time. Go. Yeah.

Got it.

Perfect. You guys. Congratulations. Alright. Welcome back to the Board of Supervisors' regularly scheduled meeting.

We just finished with the SAGE map.

I'm sorry. Could we could we ask that the members that are on the dais currently, if they could maybe exit the dais? Or Thank you. Sorry about that.

That's okay. Alright, we have a few minutes before our 10:00 time certain. So on department matters, I would like to start with item number 48, which is the Fair Ad Hoc Committee. Madam Clerk?

Item number 48 comes from the chief administrative office recommending the board establish and appoint two members to a Fair Ad Hoc Committee.

And our CAO, miss Phillips?

Sure. We've had appointed fair ad hoc committees, on and off in the past for specific issues. And there was a discussion, recently about perhaps trying to purchase some of the property down near the Fairgrounds on the Armory property from the state. And so we thought it might be a good idea to, point a fair ad hoc committee to have discussions with the fair as we go through that process.

Alright. I'll bring it to my colleagues. Is there interest in, being on an ad hoc committee for the fairs?

I would like to be on that committee because, you know, there's a lot of history between our two families, actually, Brian and myself. So I think I think we'd be really good on that committee.

I'd I'd be fine with that being in District 3 and the prior, familiarity with it as well.

I would nominate supervisor Turnboo and supervisor Verkamp to the ad hoc.

Okay, there's a motion.

Second.

And a second. Is there any further discussion on the motion? Okay, seeing none, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right. Motion passes four-zero with Supervisor Parlin being absent.

Thank you. Let's see if we can squeeze in item number 50, which is the Chief Administrative Office Jurisdictional Reorganization. Madam Clerk.

Item number 50 comes from the chief administrative office and the jurisdictional reorganization ad hoc committee recommending the board, one, authorize staff to enter into negotiations with Garden Valley Fire Protection District in support of a potential regional shared services model on the Georgetown Divide. And two, conceptually approve the use of funding from the county settlement with Pacific Gas and Electric Company over the Mosquito Fire for the first two years of the shared services agreement.

All right. And I'll turn this back over to our chief administrative officer, Ms. Phillips.

Thank you. So as we've expressed over the years, there are continued funding problems with rural fire districts in our county. And so we look for any opportunity that there might be to achieve efficiencies and more collaboration. In this case, there are three districts that serve the divide, Mosquito, Garden Valley, and Georgetown. Georgetown fires chief retired last summer.

Mosquito fires chief is retiring this August. And so Georgetown and Garden Valley have already entered into a shared services agreement. They're working together collaboratively quite well on things such as training, administration, and purchasing. And so we'd like to see if that model might work to extend to mosquito. We've been having discussions with some of the mosquito board members and some of the community members out there.

And they are open to just exploring that discussion with Garden Valley. However, as that chief is currently basically the chief of two departments because he's serving Garden Valley as well as the shared services through Georgetown, he's beginning to be spread a little bit thin. So, the county and the jurisdictional ad hoc committee of supervisors Parlin and Ferrero met and talked about potentially providing some of this funding to Garden Valley to bolster their resources to serve all three districts. And this funding would be sort of contingent upon those shared services agreements remaining in place, and it's just a support to see how this collaboration might work and potentially extend into something maybe longer term. The mosquito fire settlement funding, as I think, you know, we've we've seen in the public comment today, was for related to, a settlement with PG and E for the mosquito fire and the impacts to that area.

We will be having a larger discussion with the board next week on the twenty eighth about the balance of that funding, that $8,500,000. But we are here today recommending that a portion of that up to $400,000 be used in that divide area to enhance fire services, for potentially two years of that shared services agreement.

Alright. Are there questions of my colleagues?

I would imagine that AdHoc is recommending.

The AdHoc, yes, we met last week, and we are recommending this. We feel that a small price to pay to bolster, fire service upon the divide, including Volcanoville. This money is is settlement money, not coming out of our general fund, and, we are in hopes of, you know, creating more, consistency through our through our salt smaller departments of the bill. So, yeah, we do we do recommend it.

I would concur. I think there's a nexus, and, it it's a great investment to try to shore up that area that was always had a little bit of short.

Yeah. Especially when we've had a

lot of the problems with

the fire departments up there. So I think this is a great thing. Thank you for that, Greg. You and Lori both.

So my only question is, you know, utilizing one time money like this for personnel, especially if it's ongoing, like, how do you sustain that?

We do have a plan, a longer term plan. It's gonna take a little bit of time to work out. But if if this is successful, then we do have a longer term funding plan that we haven't quite discussed publicly yet.

Okay. And miss Posey, who spoke under public comment on this particular item, She mentioned something that I've I see a lot in District 5, especially, in the Pollock Pines area, and that is these one way accesses, single way in, single way out. Is that something that that will be addressed in that that longer term solution?

Oh, with the balance of the settlement funds? So, yes, there will be a recommendation from the ad hoc committee next week on the twenty eighth, and we will also have the DOT director here to discuss some of the investigation that he's already done to improvements to Volcanoville Road. And he has looked into a second way out, and he can report out on his findings there.

Okay. It's a little it's a little

a lot more complicated than it would seem, but he can fill you in next week on that. Okay. Great.

Yeah. I just wanna to that.

A comment on that, Brooke. Yes. A whopper's already looking in. These roads are only one way in, one way out. So they're doing a good job in researching all that and putting it all together, especially when when it comes to evacuation.

Yeah. Excellent. Okay. Good to hear. Are there any further questions or comments?

No, ma'am.

I would entertain a motion.

I'll make a

Oh, go ahead.

Oh, wait. I'm sorry. Where we headed? Yeah. Go ahead, George. Public comment.

Well, let you go ahead. You're on

the I will move to approve item 50 to, dedicate, one time settlement fees to the fire departments. Okay. I'll second that.

Okay. There's a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed?

Motion passes four-zero with Supervisor Parlin being absent.

All right. Thank you. Let's go to our first public hearing. Do I have to wait twenty seconds? Yes, I do.

Okay. The longest twenty seconds of my life right now. All right. It is now 10AM. We'll go ahead and move toward our first public hearing, which is item number 52.

Madam Clerk, will you read this item into the record?

Item 52 is a hearing from the Chief Administrative Office recommending the Board, one, conduct a public hearing consistent with the Mitigation Fee Act requirement to consider an adjustment of 3% to the Eldorado Hills Community Service District Park impact fee schedule, Cameron Park Community Service District fire impact fee schedule, and the Cameron Park Community Service District Park impact fee schedule based on the 2025 consumer price index. Two, find that the revised Eldorado Hills Community Service District Park impact fee schedule and Cameron Park Community Service District Fire impact fee schedule and the Cameron Park Community Service District Park impact fee schedule is consistent with the mitigation fee act. Three, adopt and authorize the chair to sign a resolution for the revised Eldorado Hills Community Service District Park impact fee schedule. Four, adopt and authorize the chair to sign a resolution for the Cameron Park Community Service District Fire impact fee schedule. And five, adopt and authorize the chair to sign a resolution for the revised Cameron Park Community Service District Park impact fee schedule.

Thank you. I'd like to go ahead and open the public hearing and welcome Ms. Stout, who's our principal management analyst out of the CAO's office.

You. Welcome. Good morning board. Today's hearings are to address three different requests as Ken has read those off for Eldorado Hills Community Service District and Cameron Park, both for their park and their fire impact fees. Under the mitigation fee act, these fees are established to offset the impacts of new development on public facilities and the Board of Supervisors are the ones that have to adopt these fees based on the nexus studies and fee reports that are conducted by the special districts.

According to the Mitigation Fee Act, any adjustment in fees must be approved through a resolution at a public hearing today. Today's request is based on the 2025 consumer price index, which was 3%. This is the first time that Cameron Park CSD for both fire and park impact fees that they have adjusted these since they had their nexus studies approved in 2028 for fire and 2029 for park. And Eldorado Hills CSD did their adjustments last year for '23 and '24. So if the board adopts these today, the fees will take effect in sixty days. That's the end of my presentation. We do have representatives from both districts here if you have any questions.

Okay, great. Any clarifying questions by my colleagues?

No, thank you.

Not yet.

Okay. All right. Not at this time. So we'll go ahead and open the public comment. Ms. Dawson.

We are now taking public comments specifically on item 52. Each Each speaker will have three minutes to address the board. A timer will alert you when thirty seconds remain and again when your time has ended. We will begin with comments from individuals present in the boardroom followed by those participating via Zoom. If you're joining via Zoom, please ensure you unmute yourself and called upon. If you're joining by phone, press 9 to raise your hand. If you're on Zoom, use the raise hand feature to indicate your interest in speaking. We ask that you voluntarily state your name for the record before beginning your comments.

Are there any members of the public here in the room that would like to address the board on this particular item? Okay, seeing none, may we go on Zoom please?

Now taking public comment from online participants. There is no public comment.

All right. I'll go ahead and close the public hearing and, bring this back to the board for further deliberation or action. It's your pleasure.

Yep. Madam chair, I'll move the item for approval.

I think we need to take each, individual one Okay. One at a time. So it's number three, number four, and number five.

Dave, will you take them that way or you want three, four, and five together?

So since it's been drafted with separate, excuse me, separate resolutions, I I think it would be okay to do a single motion, but, they are all embodied in separate resolutions given that there are different fees for different districts. Mhmm.

Okay. So I I would move that we approve item three, which is for Elroy Hills Community Services District, and item four, which is Cameron Park Community Services District fire. And item five, adopt a chair or adopt and authorize the chair to sign resolution for the revised Cameron Park Community Services District park impact fee schedule.

Okay. Second. A motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Okay. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed?

Motion passes four-zero with Supervisor Parlin being absent.

All

right. Let's move on to item number 53, which is also a public hearing on the Highway 50, Kiber's speed zones. I'll go ahead and open the public hearing. Ms. Dawson.

Item 53 is a hearing from the Department of Transportation recommending the Board receive public comment regarding State of California Department of Transportation proposed update to speed zones on State Route 50 from Kiber's Maintenance Station to 0.2 miles east of 33 Milestone. Written public comments received by 4PM on the day prior to today's meeting were distributed to all board members and included with this agenda item.

Thank you. I would like to welcome Mr. Honey Honeycutt from traffic superintendent for the Department of Transportation. Would you like to present this item or will mister Martinez?

Good morning, madam chair. Rafael Martinez, director of transportation for El Dorado County. Mister Honeycutt is not here, but I just wanted to let you know that, this is a public hearing for, the change of speed on US 50. It is a Caltrans facility, but we have opened it up, for the public hearing portion of it so that Caltrans can, get that information out. And if there are any comments regarding that aspect, they'd be more than welcome to to answer them.

This is very similar to the speed surveys that the county performs, in our own jurisdiction, county road, county maintained roads, and where traffic survey has to be performed in order for the, speeds to be enforceable by law. And so this is just a perfunctory, item that Caltrans, similar to us, need to actually go through the motions to make sure it is enforceable, through the CHP. So with that said, I will hand it over for any public comment.

Okay. Let's see. Do we have any clarifying questions by the board first?

Are we approving anything today? Or we just it's a receiving file? What what's We'll just take the public

That's a good question. So, mister Martinez? So the question is, are we actually approving anything? Do we have any authority No.

We do not. In this matter? No. The the, board of supervisors, County Of Eldorado does not have any jurisdiction over this. This is something that is through the state of California, on their state system. And the representative from Caltrans is here, and she can give you a little bit more information on that if you'd like.

Okay. That would be great. Would the representative from Caltrans like to come forward?

Oh, you over there? Sorry.

We'll find one somewhere. Sorry.

Good morning. Good morning. Yes. My name is Mary Bolkova. I'm the office chief of safety programs. I'm here on behalf of Caltrans district three, and we're here to hear the public comments. Wanted to let all of you know that the ones that will be commenting today, your comments will be taken into consideration before the final decision

is

made. However, we still have to go through the process and wait to receive other comments from those that may not be here today. So, thank you again, and, I'll open it up for comments.

Glad to hear. And, miss Bokova, I have a question for you. You know, obviously, I drive this this road a lot. And my concerns are for many of the commune the small communities that are along Highway 50 and are bifurcated by the Highway. Strawberry would also be a a community that I'm very concerned about.

Witnessed car accidents there myself. Kiber's definitely similar concerns. My question is, when you drive Highway 50 from here to to Tahoe, there are many, many curves that have a yellow sign that tells you a speed limit that's other than the speed limit. For example, a lot of them are 35 miles an hour. So I was kinda testing myself today coming down.

I was even coming down in rain, rain and snow. But, you know, I could easily take those corners at 50 miles an hour. It doesn't there's no jerking of the car. I don't feel like I'm out of control. But the posted speed limit is 35 miles an hour. What is the difference between a turn like that and the posted speed limits that you're looking at posting that are going through communities?

The yellow signs that you see mostly around curved areas and then other locations are what's called curve warning signs. So they have the speeds that are recommended for the driver, that's recommended speed at which it is safe to go through the curve. Many drivers can go faster. However, it was determined through some calculation that this is considered the safe speed. Enforceable speed limit that's posted on the white side is different because that is the speed limit that can be enforced by local law enforcement if somebody is exceeding that. The signs on the yellow signs are not enforceable. They're just recommendations.

Those recommendations, the yellow signs, are they based on any kind of traffic analysis of what the average person takes that those curves at?

Yeah. They're calculated through a design process. Curves are designed for certain speeds that are considered safe to traverse. But as I mentioned, some drivers could probably drive faster. This is just what's recommended for most vehicles.

Okay. Thank you for explaining the difference between those two. I appreciate it. And it's good to see you here today.

Thank you. You.

Thank you. All right. Any questions of my colleagues, Mr. Chernbu?

I got a question. Can you come back up? Sorry. You know you know, I travel that road quite a bit too myself, and and the biggest concern that I have is people getting out of where they live because there's a lot of cabins on that particular area when you're going up High 5th Highway 50 around Khyber's and stuff. And it's bad enough to to be able to pull out, especially when the speed limit, would be 55.

And my personal did you do a study on that? I'm sure you did. Right? I mean but the biggest part I have is and and it's hard to pull out on some of them areas to get back on the on the freeway, especially when you're pulling that out from these cabins or these people that live around in that area. So I I'm just a little bit concerned about it myself, especially with the it's gonna be increased. And that's gonna be pulling out. You understand that it's gonna close very, very fast, especially so I just I just worry about we have enough accidents as it is on Highway 50 in that particular area. So this could probably increase more accidents. Am I correct or not?

No. Because it's up to the driver be aware of their surroundings. So when they're entering an area where there's houses, drivers, they have to be aware and watch for people pulling out of the drivers. It's in the law. It's in the California vehicle code, 22350.

I I totally understand that. But to get going, especially on some of these areas where you're pulling out from, especially when you're you're you're coming around corners and stuff, I I don't know. I'm just a little bit concerned about it myself because I think the response time, yeah, it can end up creating more accidents, my personal opinion. So

Yeah. I think we fully understand the speed survey and the whole thing behind that, but in these areas where there's, homes, vacation rentals, and so forth. And, unfortunately, supervisor Ferrero knows this firsthand. The drivers don't pay attention. They really don't care who's on the road trying to get out. Mhmm. They wanna get home or they wanna get to. So it's just something really to, I think, to take into consideration as you re review this. Unfortunately, Highway 50 is a two lane wagon road made into a almost an interstate, and it's very, very dangerous. And Kairos has a lot of head ons right there too. And it may not be the residents pulling out, but it's the drivers that don't pay attention or don't care.

Other comments by my colleagues, mister Ferrer?

We we you kinda have competing interest in this scenario. If if you followed a speed survey and increased the speed limit, which the speed limit says or the survey says it's justified to 55, We all know people see the speed limit sign and have got 28 of experience with the CHP prior to this. See, speed limit that says 55 miles an hour, you think you're justified to go 65. So the speeds will Increase. Will increase as they go through. If we leave it at 45, we're not gonna be able to force the

the Yes.

The law.

That's correct.

The private facial law of 45 miles an hour because it's right? Because the speed survey

That's why

I justifies 55. So, I mean, we're not making this decision. The state's gonna have to make this decision. But if we leave it at 45, it's gonna be unenforceable with pacing, lidar, and anything. So but that is an area where there are buildings, you know, within a few feet of the road. And, I mean, personally, if it was up to me, I'd probably probably leave it at forty five. Yeah.

Thank you, mister Ferrero. Thank you, Ms. Bocoa.

Any other questions

for Caltrans? Okay.

We're gonna open it up.

We'll go ahead and we'll go ahead and open this up, for public comment. I I think our clerk of the board did note also that we received three written public comments that I hope all of you received. Ms. Dawson.

We are now taking public comments specifically on item 53. Each speaker will have three minutes to address the board. A timer will alert you when thirty seconds remain and again when your time has ended. We'll begin with comments from individuals present in the boardroom followed by those participating via Zoom. If you're joining via Zoom, please ensure you unmute yourself when called upon. If you're joining the meeting by phone, press 9 to raise your hand. If you're on Zoom, use the raise hand feature to indicate your interest in speaking. We ask that you voluntarily state your name for the record before beginning your comments.

Welcome.

Hi. My name is Beth Simons. I actually live in Myers. And I've been coming down at least once a week for the last nine months to visit Placerville. So here are my complaints. We never lower the speed limits. We keep raising the speed limits. No matter what speed limit you put there, someone's going to go faster. That's a very busy road, very fast, many curves. And I think by raising the speed limit, you're going to create more problems. You have small, vehicles pulling trailers. You have unsure drivers up there. You have weather on a regular basis. Today we had white rain. It was 35 degrees and snowing.

And so you have a number of people. If you put down a different speed limit, I think we should have 45 miles an hour from Ice House all the way into Myers. By changing the speed limit going up and down, have vehicles that speed up and pass and create bottlenecks as they go through the passing lane, cutting off other drivers and thereby creating accidents. You have a limited number of emergency personnel between basically Pollock Pines and Myers, and your emergency personnel are having to drive many miles on two lane roads blocking the road to handle any of these emergencies going forward. I think you should maintain 45 all the way from Ice House, all the way to Myers.

Myers at one time was 35. Because of your speed limit changes, we went to 40. I can't cross the street in Myers except at the roundabouts where even that's a problem. And I also think when we keep raising our speed limit, I think from Highway 15, from 15th Avenue all the way up to Tahoe City, it shouldn't be more than 35 miles. You guys keep raising the speed limit, making it harder for people who live in the area to get in and out and increasing the chances of accidents.

We have wildlife through there. Two weeks ago, I was attacked by a deer, which, I have a little bit of front end damage on my car. And you have a number of issues there by raising it to 55, you've create created much more problems. And then if you wanna look at the energy conservation, if you increase your speed and then constantly decrease your speed around all those curves, we're, negating all the things that go with energy conservation even with the hybrid cars. And so I think you should take another look without increasing the speed limit and maybe lowering the speed limit and enforcing the laws that are already out there. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Saunders. Good morning, Ms. Stanton.

Good morning. Good morning. My name is Allison Stanton, and I would like to strongly oppose this speed limit increase in three different capacities. And I feel like I need to talk to the people behind me and not the people in front of me. Mhmm. I am a twenty year resident of Silver Fork. I am also a trustee of the Silver Fork School, which is less than a half in a mile from this segment and the current board president. And I'm also the secretary treasurer of our water association. And there are three water associations, and everyone I've spoken to strongly opposes this. The traffic study that was done is absolutely indefensible in increasing the speed limit.

In the easternmost segment, of this the segment in question, there was no speed study due to a curve restricting speed. To the rest of us, that's called a blind corner. And, there were six accidents in that area due to improper turn and traveling too fast for conditions. The collision rate in that section is higher than the statewide average. After this, was proposed, which I believe was proposed in December, in November 2025, there was fatality in that section where a husband and wife were killed and their two children were trapped in the car for hours after that.

Earlier in earlier in the other two sections, there is the highest concentration of intersections anywhere on Highway 50. There are eight intersections right there. There have been six accidents, including a fatality in that section. And this data all cuts off on January 2024, it doesn't include anything of 2025. There was another very, very terrible multicar accident there in October of last year, which shut the highway down for hours.

The the collision rate is not higher than the statewide average. But, again, this is the this whole section of highway, there are many people that live there. There are many intersections more than anywhere else in along Highway 50. And the other aspect about enforceability is that there is no enforcement in Kivers. There are never cops there.

Never. I've never seen a cop sitting there ever, and they don't pull anyone over anywhere in the section. The last place that cops sit is at the at the Salt Station down, past Fresh Pond and then again up near Sierra At Tahoe. Cops don't stop anybody hardly anywhere, occasionally at Wrights Lake Road, but nowhere below Wrights Lake Road in Kuybers or along it because it's too dangerous for them to sit there most of the time. So there are not cops.

So the enforcement angle is is not defensible, and it doesn't happen. So please do not increase the speed limit. And thank you very much for giving us the the opportunity to comment because the same was not afforded to Strawberry when the street speed limit up there was increased, and they didn't get the opportunity to make public comment. So thank you very much for taking our comments.

Thank you.

And thank you, Brooke, for

bringing Of it course. Are there other members of the public that would like to address the board at this time on this particular item?

Think she wants to.

Someone on Zoom, but they just can't figure out how to unmute themselves. Oh, okay. We'll take we'll help them. We'll go

to that

in a minute. Did you wanna speak?

I'm related to him. So he's Oh, okay. Okay. Madam Clark, would you please go to our online participants?

Not taking public comment from online participants. Not taking public comment from Arash Palsad.

Good morning, everybody. Am I unmuted?

Yes. You are.

Thank you for thank you for having us, and thanks for affording us the opportunity to speak today. I do appreciate it. My name is Arash Paksad. I just wanted to touch on something real quick before I got into what I wrote down about the enforceability. I believe to put I believe that the that is a correct statement that it's not enforceable right now at 45 miles per hour, but we don't have enough 45 mile an speed signs to help enforce the law. They're very rare. They're few and far between, and we need more. And I believe you'll see an immediate safety uptick. There are not enough speed signs. Again, on the survey, I was present for the survey.

I'm a property owner, business owner, and a and a resident of. The survey is one day for two hours. I was hanging out with Caltrans while they're doing it, and that's how that's the extent of the survey. My public comment statement today. Good morning. Again, my name is Raj Paxhout, and I'm a resident and business owner in. I'm here today to strongly oppose any proposal to increase the speed limit on Highway 50 through our community. I've submitted a petition by email this morning with over 150 signatures from residents and regular visitors who share this concern and do not support a speed limit increase. I am prepared and can easily obtain more signatures from valid residents and visitors to the community. That's no problem for me.

The stretch of Highway 50 is not just a roadway. It's where people live, work, and raise their families. Within this corridor, we have homes, an elementary school and junior high school, local businesses, restaurants, cafes, a hotel, and a post office, all directly impacted by traffic speed. We already deal with dangerous driving conditions. There have been multiple serious and fatal accidents along this corridor, and speed is consistently a contributing factor.

Increasing the speed limit will not make this road safer. It will increase the severity of crashes and put more lives at risk. It will also put Caltrans workers, residents, and pedestrians and commuters in a more dangerous position. With this area's needs with this area needs is better enforcement and safer speeds, not faster traffic. I respectfully urge you to reject any proposal. I urge Caltrans to hear us out on this before they're before it's too late. Any increase in the speed limit through KYBRS needs to prioritize safety before speed. This is a community, not a shortcut. Please treat it like one. Thank you.

Thank you.

Now taking public comment from 05:25.

Hi. This is Nayal Bennett, Coshone Polak Pines. If I understand this correctly, this doesn't end with the board taking action, because it's a hearing to take comment. I'm sure county council could hopefully give you a way of a unified voice that shows that you have listened to all the written comments, all the oral comments, and the surveys and myself, no. Don't raise the speed limit.

You know, it's gonna be up to Caltrans, but I hope you make it very clear from what you're hearing. I have lived next to these rural roads in other counties, And the bottom line is safety has been shared, and it's not going to be safety through enforcement for both resources and the way the road winds and turns. In both of those other areas when these nexuses came up, the signs went up, so did the death rate. And sadly, one of them was on a rural highway that fed a high school and way too many funerals on an annual basis. But to me, this is looking at how can you maintain a safe highway by a different criteria, which is the behavior of people.

I mean, sometimes that's a 25 mile hours, though, when it's backed up. But number one for me is safety and especially for people crossing the streets. This is Caltrans. They're gonna focus mostly on vehicle traffic. That's their space.

I think you need to take the space from all the voices of the community and the lived experience. It needs to stay where it is now because at least that increases public safety. There is no increase in public safety when you have a rural highway, limited resources, the speed curves, everything that's been shared. So please make it clear that you're going to support your community voice in whatever way you can. Thank you for taking my comment.

Thank you.

Now taking public comment from Linda Campbell.

Hey, everyone. Linda Campbell, Eldorado Hills. I just wanna lend my voice in support of everybody who's written in and spoken already. I was actually really shocked to see that there was a recommendation to increase the speeds through these areas. So when as noted, if we increase the speed limit, supervisor knows it for sure, people will go faster.

So so this wouldn't just be saying, like, hey. 55 is the speed limit. Basically, it'd be saying what people assume. No, that means 65 is the speed limit. It's all unsafe, and I think that the first of all, it was unfortunate that the survey was not on the agenda item, so it'd be easier access to review the details for it, but I would think that the survey should include heavier weighting on the hazards of the area and the roadways to protect the residents and the travelers, things like the fact that it's a smaller roadway, frequent turns, wildlife was mentioned today.

So I this is just not a good idea at all, and I recommend a reevaluation. I like Leo's suggestion that it would be nice for the supervisors to provide a combined voice back to the state for consideration, of modifying the survey, and making sure that this increase doesn't occur. Thank you.

Thank you.

Now taking public comment from t Walker.

Hello? Hello. Can you hear me?

Sounds like a Tim's can.

You have an echo. Do you have another device on?

Let me chat. Chat. Chat.

Is that any better?

That better? Does it hurt? No.

There's still an echo. Okay.

I'm sorry, but I don't know how to fix that fix that. I did I did I did email email supervisor supervisor Blaine this morning with my comments. We'll have to leave it at that.

Thank you. There's no additional public comment.

Okay. Thank you. We'll go ahead and close the public hearing. I'll bring it back to the Board. Do you have any further comments or questions at this time?

Well, I

I I just wanna say that Greg and I and Brian are on the transportation commission, and that's an issue that we can bring up, you know, because we, have Caltrans is there, you know, in some of the projects that they're doing. So this is something we can actually work on and make sure they're they could address this. I mean

Best we can. Yeah. Yeah. Not as simple as it sounds, but, again, given the area and the complexity and those I I think the accident major accidents in that area Yeah. This is this is just not an area to increase speeds as well as enforcement's a difficult situation up there. So the lower the speed limit, the better. Although if they move it as supervisor Farrell alluded to, then there'd be no way to enforce it. But I think we urge that they do not increase the speed based on testimony today and and the accident rate and so forth.

I agree. Regarding enforcement, there there's there's always ways to enforce. You can't they can't if they if the if the speed limit remains at 50 45 and the speed survey justifies 55, the officers can't enforce the posted speed limit. They still can enforce an unsafe speed for conditions. It's section 20, going back in my memory, twenty two three fifty, which gives officers a lot of discretion in enforcing speed for unsafe speed for conditions. I mean, it takes more thought on the officer. It takes more testimony. It's not as simple as saying, you know, they exceeded the posted 55 mile an hour speed limit, but it can be enforced.

These are all good comments. With regards to the Transportation Commission, I mean, think we're in the same spot. It is a Caltrans decision. It's their road. It's their responsibility.

And so yes, to have the Transportation Commission chime in as well and maybe make a similar recommendation that Caltrans reconsider this might be helpful, at least from that regard. And then Supervisor Ferrero, your experience and everything is is helpful in your comments. But I I agree with what was already said, is there is CHP doesn't do anything in this particular area. I'm gonna say ever. I know where their spots are.

You know? Mhmm. There's sometimes a motorcycle, at the Salt Place, and and there's always a CHP at the pullout after Sierra Tahoe, and they they make a lot of money up there. So that's where they kind of enforce. This is not an area that is being enforced. So I'm not worried about it being unenforced because it is already unenforced. Yeah. So I have grave concerns. I've shared this with Caltrans. Caltrans, thank you for being here today.

And especially miss Bokova, we've worked with her on many other different things, and she's done a great job educating me on all of this stuff. And and this vehicle code 22350 basically says, you know, you should be traveling the speed that's safe. So if you rear end somebody going five miles an hour, you could be cited for unsafe driving because you were driving too fast because you couldn't stop when you were going five miles an hour. So the logic around all of this, it it is logical. But the actual implementation of it is where I side with the community that it's it's just going to ask people to drive even faster.

And I've seen people walk across the highway to get to different places. We definitely talked about vehicles coming onto the road. It's hard to do. You have to pretty much floor it. This is this is a a problem throughout El Dorado County.

We've even seen, speed limits go up in the Camp Rich area, which is very transit populated, and there's lots of wildlife. And yet we feel like we just don't have a a say or control. And so I also join miss Stanton in thanking Caltrans for being here and for listening. And I would like to maybe informally just come together as a board to say that we would strongly like Caltrans to reconsider their position on this given the testimony that you've heard today and the concerns. So if we if I don't know, mister Livingston, if is that about all we can do?

Yeah. And I think you have about expressed that. I mean, the item wasn't agendized for any board action. Rather, it was just to receive the comment, which is consistent with what the statute requires. So, I mean, I I think the message is clear, and I think each board member has expressed similar sentiment. So I don't believe any thing further would be required to convey the board's feelings about this particular action.

Write a letter to Caltrans from the chair Sure.

We could do

with our recommendation?

I I so I would think the letter might be going too far if it is intended to be a formal action of the board, though there is nothing to prevent any of you individually from communicating with Caltrans. And so if if there is a desire to have something memorialized, might I suggest you do it in an individual capacity rather than as a as a body, again, just because the item wasn't agendized to authorize that type of action.

That's fair.

Alright. Makes sense.

That works.

Okay. All right. Then that will conclude item number 53. Thank you for everybody for joining us. We have a little bit of time before we'd kind of like to go into closed session at 11:00. We could take, since the Department of Transportation is here with us in the room now, Department of Transportation, would you be prepared to speak on item number 46? Okay. Let's go ahead and move on to item number 46. Madam Clerk.

Item number 46 comes from the Department of Transportation recommending the Board, one, receive and file a presentation on transportation road maintenance projects, and two, adopt and authorize a chair to sign a resolution adopting a list of projects funded in the fiscal year 2627 by senate bill one. Written public comments received by 4PM on the day prior to today's meeting were distributed to all board members and included with this agenda item.

Welcome back, mister Martinez.

My pleasure. Good morning, madam chair, board of supervisors. Rafael Martinez, director of transportation for El Dorado County with you once again. As many of you know, in twenty seventeen, twenty eighteen, the state of California initiated the Road Repair and Accountability Act. It was a, an additional gas tax that was implemented to, collect to, collect additional funding for much needed roadway repairs in the state of California.

This is collected through gas tax. It was an additional gas tax that was imposed on, motorists for the state of California in 2017. This funding is collected by the state, distributed to Caltrans, and then the remainder of that goes to, local counties and municipalities. As part of that SB one act, it is required that municipalities present to, their governing bodies a, the transparency behind it. So how are those funds being utilized, and where is it going to best serve the public, the motoring public.

So as part of that, about once a year, the Department of Transportation has been presenting to the board what our future projects are going to be in utilizing those funds, for roadway repair and, rehabilitation. But as a request by the public as well as the, grand jury, the Department of Transportation has decided, and we come up here now twice a year. Once in the beginning of construction season and then one at the end of construction season just to provide that additional layer of, information, knowledge, transparency as to how these funds are being utilized and where they're going. With that said, I am here with, transportation staff, to give you a presentation. I do want to take the honor of introducing, the newest member of our executive team, Nathan Haines.

He will be giving you a presentation today. He will be our up and coming, deputy of maintenance and operations, director. He will be replacing, the soon to be retired Brian Mullins, who will be leaving us here in June. Nathan comes to us twenty years of experience in the county, that, the latest being within the fleet main management portion of the county. So we're very excited to have him on board and to hear his presentation. So with that said, I'll hand it over to Nathan.

Welcome, mister Haynes. No pressure.

Yeah. Welcome, Nathan.

I appreciate that. Good morning Madam Chair, members of the board. My name is Nathan Haynes. I will be assuming the role of Deputy Director of Maintenance and Operations come July 1 when Mr. Mullins officially retires.

It is my pleasure to be here today to present to you our proposal for the upcoming road maintenance projects, to provide you an overview with the processes that we use to maintain and improve our roadways and offer you a brief look into the inner workings of the units within maintenance and operations. Next slide please. Here you can see a tiered chart showing the five groups that make up maintenance and operations. I'd like to take a moment to highlight the Fleet Services unit as it won't appear in detail in any later slides. Fleet Services is based here on the West Slope and is responsible for service maintenance and repair of all County owned vehicles.

They currently support nearly 600 vehicles, including cars, trucks and SUVs across virtually every department, including the Sheriff's Office, DOT, HHSA, engineering and facilities. Their team performs almost all work in house from routine services to advanced diagnostics and repair. The work they do ensures every other department across the county can meet its operational needs by providing reliable vehicles and responsive support. The remaining four units shown here will be discussed in greater detail on the next slide. Our bridge crew is responsible for the inspection, maintenance and repair of 85 bridges throughout the County, along with handling curb, gutter and sidewalk repair.

They also manage the maintenance and replacement of many miles of guardrail. Our traffic and signal crew manages the installation and maintenance of thousands of roadway signs throughout the County, along with 68 traffic signals and the coordinated signal timing and multiple additional lighting systems such as rapid flashing beacons on some of the newer crosswalks. They also perform road striping and pavement marker maintenance. Our heavy equipment shops located on both the West Slope and East Slope maintain and repair all 147 pieces of equipment used by our field crews. This includes everything from chainsaws to dump trucks, off road and snow removal equipment.

Their support keeps every other maintenance and operation unit equipped and ready to work. Our road crews, also based on both slopes, make up the largest portion of our staff and are responsible for maintaining the county's roadway infrastructure of ten eighty six centerline lane miles. Their work includes repairing roadways, ditches, culverts and performing brushing and herbicide application within our right of way. During the winter months, they are also responsible for all the snow removal operations. The integration of these five units across both the West and East slopes combined with a strong communication and skilled workforce defines the very meaning of teamwork and ensures we provide the residents of El Dorado County with the highest level of service possible.

Next slide, please. On this slide, you can see our staff performing some crack sealing applications. This is our primary line of defense to perform an economical way to extend pavement life by preventing water intrusion through the open cracks and into the base, which compromises the foundation and leads to more expensive repairs later on. The next option we have is overlays. This is when we put a new layer of asphalt over the existing layer.

Sometimes we can utilize grinding methods to reintroduce crown back into the center of the roadway. By doing so, the standing water is shed into the ditch line, preventing water intrusion and lessening vehicle hydroplaning. When extensive base or subgrade repairs are needed, we can grind beyond the asphalt layer into the base and subgrade, reinforce the base with GeoGrid, backfill and compact, and then lay new asphalt down to alleviate reoccurring failure points. Next slide. This slide details our surface treatment process we've been using to expand the longevity of the roads that are already in good condition.

Micro milling is a process that skims the top of the roadway, taking off the high points, restoring proper grade and improving rideability. Following that, there are micro surface treatments. This is a thin layer of modified emulsion that encapsulates aggregate of varying sizes depending on our needs. Another product option is the Rubberized Cape Seal. This is a multilayer process that typically uses both the rubberized chip followed by a microsurface treatment.

Next slide. Getting into the project selection process, there are several factors that we take into consideration when determining what roads we're going to be performing work on. The funding sources on these projects include SB1, Tribe, General Fund and Measure S. We look at the potential roads we've noted throughout the five districts, analyze the data, including PCI and ADT and the estimated life and return and factor in the economies of scale, which is where we try to tie in projects within the known work order work area to reduce costs since equipment is already mobilized within that area. Our strategy of prioritizing the roads that are already in fair to good PCI category, allocating 80% of the available funds towards maintaining those roads combined and improving the roads and 20% towards rehabilitating the roads that are in poor condition, combined with the newer surface treatment technologies discussed in the previous slide, has led to a significant improvement in the County's overall PCI.

In the last seven years, the PCI has increased from 64 to 70, which is the benchmark that most other counties aim to achieve. Next slide, please. Here's a list of projects that we've completed in 2025. If you look in the lower right corner, this is an example of a deeper dig out that was performed where GeoGrid was placed in on, Larson. It strengthens the subgrade prior to repaving to alleviate future asphalt failures from a compromised base.

All of these projects were completed with SB one funding with the exception of the cable road, which was funded by an AQMD grant for dust mitigation. We are always looking to explore any avenues of funding to repair any of the roads available to us. Next slide, please. Here are our proposed projects for the upcoming summer funded by SB one. The Larson and Barkley Phase two project is an example where we coordinated with other agencies, in this case, PG and E, knowing that they were gonna be performing underground utility work.

So we waited until their work was completed before starting ours. This prevented unnecessary dig up of the new repairs and allows us to have a much more concise final product. It's also one of the projects that we're utilizing the overlay and wedge cut grinding method to reintroduce Crown back into the roadway, improving watershed and the overall safety of the road. The Sly Park Phase two project is an example of using the economy of scale method as mentioned before. We're tying in roads like Park Creek and Mormon immigrant tethered into the Sly Park project since the equipment is already gonna be staged there, thus reducing the overall cost to repair these roads versus if they were done independently at a later time.

We also have additional grind and pave areas selected within multiple zones of the Tahoe Basin to be funded by a Measure S and the Road Fund. These repairs are scheduled to start at the beginning of June. Next slide please. Here's a list of the future road maintenance project areas. As discussed, we have identified areas of concern in all five districts.

The North Canyon Phase 2 is for District 3, Cambridge Road is District 2, Elorado Hills Boulevard from Harvard to Highway 50 in District 1, Green Valley Road, Lotus Road to city limits is District 4 and Christmas Valley Lower Paradise is District 5. We're also moving forward with replacing any culverts that we can along the way. The locations within Zone 8 for South Lake Tahoe will be determined once recommended budget is finalized and we know what dollar amount we have to work with. Next slide, please. Before concluding this presentation, I would like to take a moment to thank the board for their annual allocation of the $650,000 from Tribe.

This additional funding has allowed us to expand, sorry, this additional funding from Tribe has significantly enhanced our roadside vegetation management program. The additional funding has allowed us to expand our contracted services and accomplish several additional roads this year. Since July, we've completed multiple areas in Gold Ridge, Cambridge and South Shingle, along with the county wide tree cleanup from thousands of trees from the last storm. In conjunction with our contracted companies for brush removal, we utilize other resources such as Growlersburg, Ponderosa Fire Camp, and Tribal Fire Department to clear areas such as Davidson And Green Valley Road. Once those locations are completed, we will continue to identify and clear additional areas until all of the funds are depleted.

When our department is completing SB-one projects, brush removal is primarily completed by the maintenance staff internally. We continue to partner with OWOPR and local fire safe councils to coordinate our vegetation management program, aligning with our efforts and other supporting agencies and municipalities. These joint initiatives help to improve the ingress and egress in areas with limited access, including one way in and one way out communities. For example, in May, we will begin a brushing project on Oak Hill Road, which serves the sole access route for all residents in that area. With that, I appreciate the time you've given me today. And are there any questions I can answer regarding this presentation?

Okay. Thank you, mister Haynes. Are there any questions or clarifications from my colleagues?

I just want to say thank you, Brian and and and John and Rafael and David back there. I see you. Anyway, thank you for all your hard work and stuff, especially when it comes in my district and stuff. E 16 is like it's beautiful. It really is. And it's all the way from Holiday Market all the way to Pioneer. So you guys done a great job. You really have. And I appreciate that very much. And especially Sandridge, taking the funds in there and doing Sandridge because now we have an escape route just in case we do have a horrific buyer. And it's not when. It's when. You know what I mean? We it could happen anytime. So I appreciate that, and I appreciate everything you guys have done.

You've really done a great job, and thanks for all the ride alongs and stuff too. So appreciate that.

Thank you, supervisor Turnboo, supervisor of your account.

Yeah. I'd just like to echo the thanks. You know, given limited budget and resources, definitely stretch it. Yep. And, that but that's how we get things done. And I and I I believe Rafael and all of you are magicians in, sometimes moving money here and moving money there and getting the grant. So it's all a process, unfortunately, in a in a game, but, y'all do a good job. And, the the workers also down to the shovel in hand, are to be commended for the work that they do. So really appreciate it, and, please pass that on to them all.

Thank you, supervisor, supervisor, forever.

Yeah. Thank you also. And looking at the the cost, it looks, you know, really equitable between all five districts. I appreciate that. Do have one question on item one for District 1, the Eluard Hills Boulevard rehab project, where it talks about the brushing, and I guess that's trimming of the trees along the perimeter. Will will it will you be including the trees along that bike path, class the one bike path on El Dorado Hills Boulevard?

On the golf course?

The old golf course?

Yeah. The the Jason's the old golf course from, you know, basically, like, Raley's or from Serrano Boulevard to Station 85 on Wilson?

Brian Mullins, deputy director.

Turn the turn the

air off.

There you go.

Now it's on.

Okay. Red red means go.

Yeah. Okay. It's hot.

Brian Mullins, deputy director of maintenance operations. Yes. While we're in the area doing the actual roadside, we will encompass the bike trails in that area also, everything in the right of way.

Okay. Awesome. Thank you very much. Yes.

Other questions? No? Seeing none. I never try to pass up an opportunity to talk about kind of the disparity between the districts when it comes to, road maintenance. And what I mean by that is I I think mister Martinez dreads sending me or dreads sending me the PCI report every year, but I go through it, you know, with a fine tooth comb.

And the the way that I mean I mean, I know that PCI is determined by a number of factors, but you give it a a score. And for District 5, between a completely failed road, to 47 or 49, which is a failing road. District 5 has 40 where did I write that down? 46% of our roads are in that category. And I mentioned that because I looked at the other districts as well.

District 1 in that same exact count from zero to 47%, 11% of your roads fall into that compared to District 5, which is 46%. And District 2, comes in at 13% and District 3 at 15%. And then, miss Parlin's district comes in also at 13%. So there's a huge disparity between the roads that we deal with up in the basin, not to mention the amount of tourists that we have that just add to that that use. And yet, I agree when you look at the SB one funding, you go, oh, well, that's, you know, pretty well divided up between all the districts.

That seems fair. But my question is, it doesn't probably have a good answer, but the question is, how do you catch us up when you continue to have this philosophy that, you know, we try to spread it out amongst all five districts. So I understand that everybody has road repair issues, but the disparity between what we deal with up in the basin and what we have down here is very different. We're also we're not making new roads. A lot of the systems down here are, in fact, new roads as new subdivisions and stuff go in.

We just don't have that up in the basin. So how does that how does that philosophically settle in your mind?

Do you

Brian Mullins, deputy director. We do we do have a lot of challenges in the basin. We have the climate up there where we can be very hot and very cold in the morning, very cool, very hot in the afternoon. The thermal, expansion and contraction up there is severe. We're also like some of the other supervisory districts, unlike, supervisor Ferrero's, where they were built to a very high standard, in recent years, you know, with within the last couple decades where Tahoe dates back to the early nineteen hundreds, and a lot of the roads are just were paved right over the top of the granite material up there in the that you have there in the basin.

And, yeah, we are hyper focused on making improvements up there, but we didn't get there overnight and we're not going to reverse it overnight. But I think the long term strategy that the maintenance division has, you'll you'll see those improvements increase over over the next years to come. So we're always we're always looking for opportunity. Obviously, additional funding with with the, measure s and s b one. We're we're making strides in forward and not backwards, but, we're just long as we stick with our plan that we're currently, using.

Think over the next ten years, you're going to see, vast improvement in the road conditions overall in the basin. Thank you.

I appreciate that. And I hate to always harp on it, but, you know, it is it is something that's very visible to our residents and always comes up. So I've I felt compelled to have the discussion again. But I do appreciate everything that you are doing, and will make headway. Yeah. It's not fast enough.

Wanna add, you know, Brooke. I mean, District 2, there's a lot of projects that are unfunded. For the little amount of money that they have and what they stretch out, I think they're doing a great job. There's you gotta understand, especially especially with with all all the the housing and build that's going on right now in District 2 on the road area, it's gonna impact a lot of our roads and stuff. But I appreciate everything you guys have done for the little amount of money that you have. So thank you for that.

Alright. Any further comments? Okay. Then I'll bring this item back to the board for action or deliberation.

Yeah. Madam chair, I would move that we receive, obviously, the the, presentation, which was great, by the way. Congratulations. And adopt and authorize the chair to sign resolution o seven six twenty twenty six, adopting a list of projects funded fiscal year 2627 by senate bill one. I'll second it.

Okay. There's a motion and a second. And under, discussion, I was remiss in not bringing forward, public comment on this particular item where they were saying the money just didn't add up. Did staff wanna make a comment on that?

Absolutely. Ashley Johnson, Department of Transportation. There was a couple items that were noted on the cost per lane mile. While the resolution is under a very specific template that is drafted by the state of California, so we add in the phases, they are not apples to apples projects. El Dorado Hills Boulevard is you know, we produce it by lane mile. That's how we write it. But, however, it is going to require night work. There are four lanes compared to Sly Park that only has two. Brushing on Sly Park might be a bit more, so we don't break it down by phase. This is all original estimates.

We factor in inflation, what we're anticipating next year. And then when we do look at those numbers, we carry over projects. So as you'll see at the bottom of the resolution, we're carrying over those projects we're completing this summer. So, even though the total dollar amount of the estimated projects exceeds what we're saying we're going to get in 2627, that is because a portion of the projects being carried over has already been completed in '25 and '26.

Great. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. Absolutely. Okay. Any further discussion on the motion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay.

Motion passes four-zero with Supervisor Parlin being absent.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Supervisor Lane, we have presenters here for item number 47, and I wasn't sure if you wanted to try to fit them in before you went into closed session.

The

problem is we have some people that are supposed to be joining us in closed session for an item that's scheduled to take an hour, and we really can't push it to the afternoon. And this being an item that we think will take a half an hour

We could probably do it fifteen past that.

If you could do it in fifteen minutes, that'll push us a little bit into our lunch hour, we'd be okay with that.

That works, yeah.

All right. We'll give up a little of our lunch and we have item number 47 we will hear right now. Madam Clerk.

Item number 47 comes from Environmental Management Department recommending the board receive and file a presentation from the Eldorado Solid Waste Advisory Committee regarding the twenty twenty through twenty twenty five solid waste management plan five year review and provide direction if necessary.

Good morning. Good morning. Welcome.

Thank you. So do we have the presentation coming Okay. Up right So I'd like to start by introducing Doug Venable. Doug is our new chair for the solid waste advisory committee, and Tim Engel, who is with environmental management, who provides a tremendous amount of support to us so that we can do our work. So just I will I'm just reading all this at home, so I'm ready.

Okay. So the purpose of today's presentation is that we have a solid waste management plan. And every five years, we're to report to you on it. So this is your five year for 2020 to 2025. So we're to identify progress towards the solid waste management plan's 75% solid waste diversion goal. This is a aspirational state goal. The state has said that this is where they're going. The actual target right now is 50%, just so you know that. Then explain some state measurement changes. Basically, the goalpost was moved.

We'll give you some detail on that. And then identify some key factors affecting diversion, describe the current focus and strategies, and then provide recommendations for the next five years. K? That makes sense. Mhmm. Let's move on. Okay. So this this all waste management plan was adopted in 2012 and with the target of the 75% decrease by 2030. So it had 32 strategies, programs, infrastructure. 16 of those strategies assumed that we would be, have diversion estimates.

So the idea was we're gonna get 7% more diversion by doing all of these steps in these plan in this plan. So then the EDSWAC was required to report every five years. So we're here, and we would have one last time of reporting to you on this. So in terms of implementation strategies, I think that a lot of credit goes to the county and to the haulers that all 32 strategies were implemented, ongoing, or they were deemed to be infeasible. There are two strategies which we thought we didn't really have the ability to make the decision on, and so we will, note those to you.

Some of them we thought were infeasible. One was a West Coast JPA. Nobody wanted to participate. We asked twice, so we took that off. The nether was an eco park, which would be a regional center for recycling, and this was very expensive. And, basically, there was never a plan where we would have that kind of money to do that. We, looked into rural transfer stations where we would have out in various areas of the county. We would have small areas. People could bring their recyclable materials, etcetera. And, basically, we got a NIMBY approach on all of those.

Nobody wanted to have those near where they lived. So we said, okay. You know, we tried. Everything was in good faith. And then possibly yard waste burning elimination. So that may or may not be feasible given all of the fire issues that we have in the county and requirements for, having defensible space around houses. So at this point, basically, the, everything's been implemented. It's feasible. And so it's really a reference document more than anything else. Okay.

The, two strategies that would need board of supervisors decisions. The first would be expanding mandatory residential collection. There'd be certainly logistical issues, public acceptance. One of the issues that's a problem with not having the mandatory collection is that there are materials that don't go to Eldorado disposal in particular that would go if it was mandatory. So in terms of counting our numbers and where we really are, we don't get as good a picture because some of this and some of the heavier materials are going out of county.

The other was evaluating the yard waste burning restrictions. So I think you'd real this would have to be carefully crafted looking at, fire safety, insurance requirements, feasibility for large parcels or steep parcels. I think there'd be a lot of places where this could be difficult to implement. So, we felt that that was something that the board of supervisors would need to determine, not us. K.

So for the 75% diversion that, basically, good idea, and and we wanna work towards it, but it's base fewer implementing it, the 75% diversion level. One is it's expensive. If you threw enough money at it, you could you could get there, but it's that would be borne by rate payers. And so you really need to sort of look at the feasibility. So for example, this plan had an eco park at a cost in 2020, think was, like, $20.12 dollars of 24 to $39,000,000.

I we didn't think that that was gonna fly here. There wasn't a plan for that. It would need to be regional, etcetera, for that to go. There are changes in recycling markets. We used to have materials that were dirty, we found out, and, they won't be accepted. And, so there are there are changes in the markets, changes in what can be recycled. There's limited infrastructure. You need space to manage the materials and the people and the equipment, and we are limited in that in our two MRFs. There's, we have nonmandatory service. And so as I mentioned, we aren't capturing all of the materials.

We've had changes to, recycling collection systems. In South Lake Tahoe, they are required by the state to do a three cart system. It used to be that people would bring their materials in, and they had people who know what went where, and they would sort for them.

Mhmm.

At this point, we've got the carts, and people don't know as well as somebody who was paid to sort. And so that has been an issue there. And then we also have, organics and green waste collection now that we're doing. So on home construction renovation, the, we have times with big economic activity and times with low, and that really impacts the numbers that we have. So moving on.

So in terms of this chart, this kinda gives you a sense of what we are monitoring, and it's kind of it moves quite a bit. So we're looking at when there are changes, what is going on with this. I think it's not fair to do a direct comparison between STR and Eldorado disposal because they have differences in who is using their MRFs. So, for example, in for STR, 50% are still self haul. So there are people who you know, they know what goes where when they bring it in.

For Eldorado disposal, that's 13%. So you have an STR 25%, our residential loads coming in, and Eldorado disposal is 49%. So I just I think to caution because it's easy to look and go, oh, well, they're doing better than they are, but it really is not apples to apples. Okay. I'll move on then.

Okay. So then is the shift to the I'm trying to follow along in my packet. Okay. So the shift, what has been significant is we had our solid waste management plan say we wanna get a 75% diversion. Well, the state has changed how they measure what we do.

So now they're doing it to pounds per person per day. So, essentially, diversion was looking at the waste diverted versus the waste generated. So you got credit for everything that came in and what you diverted and what was left. Now the state is saying it's the let's look at what's left, what's going into the landfill, and per person per day, which the state is calculating, and that's what we want you to decrease. And we're gonna do it based on weight.

So before we could, you know, have a whole lot of recyclable materials, takes up a huge volume, but it doesn't have much weight. I mean, you have aluminum cans. They're not very heavy. So, really, to get the waste diverted for weight, we need to look at heavier materials. So construction, demolition, and organics, and that's where the weight is.

So we're focusing on the, actual disposal quantities. For the PPD, there is a 50 rate that you are to achieve, and we have met that in the county. And going forward to meet the PPD, we're gonna look at what's heavy. So if we to be successful in that, you need to look at what's heaviest and focus your efforts there. Okay.

This one I'm gonna go over quickly. And that, basically, we have a 50% diversion that we are allowed we're required to do. We have met that. And so in the county, we're doing some conversions so we can say, here, our old measure was, you know, a percentage. Our new is PPD. So kinda can we translate that to see where we are? So what this is showing is that, basically, we are all above the 50%. We are making progress, but it would take a while to get into much detail on that one. Okay. So the next, we have a pounds per person per day chart.

So, basically, if you're going up the scale, you're getting worse. And if you're going down the scale, you're getting better. There's a number of factors. I think one of these for South Lake Tahoe was the mandated carts that that has impacted because we're still educating people about what goes where. So I'll keep you moving. Okay. So factors implementing diversion, COVID nineteen pandemic, different types of materials going in the waste stream, economic growth in home construction. There's huge variation in that. Tahoe has a lot of that. It's very seasonal as far as what's going on there.

So that's going to impact all these numbers. We had the fires, recycling markets, what will be accepted, and also requirements to have it be clean or they won't take it. So, it's much more stringent. And then just the time to build updated West Coast MRF that took couple years longer than was projected, and then requirements for a three cart system, which was implemented in Lake Tahoe in October 24. Okay.

So in terms of some accomplishments, we had the, the Eldorado MRF modernization. We, expanded the, so it's expanded transfer building. It's a safer facility in terms of people getting in, getting out. There are more opportunities if you have some recycled materials to go and take those in, and that's free. There's more gatehouses.

There's more capacity for organics and, c and d, materials. So but, essentially, for people, I I think the key one of the keynotes on this is if I'm home and I'm making a choice which cart do I put a material in, it's gonna stay in that stream. So if I make the wrong choice, that it goes all the way through. There's nobody there to pull it out. And if we have too many people making the wrong choices, then we have contamination problems. Okay. So let me go here. Okay. And moving along. Okay.

So, what we have spent a significant amount of time on with new legislation is s b thirteen eighty three. And this is so not only do we have the PPD, which is if we do more things that are heavier, we'll do better. So that being the C and D and the organics. So this is legislation related to organics. So as you're aware at home, you have now put your food waste in with your green waste.

There's also procurement programs, and we have seen it really focused on this. There's been a 24% increase in the organics collected in, East Slope between 2021 and '24. West Slope, they gave numbers for 2024, was 24,000, tons. So that is going well, making progress, and has been a huge impact. Okay.

So in summary, all of the feasible solid waste management plan strategies have been implemented. So I think that, is important to note. We had this plan. It was detailed, and we you've got in your appendices all the detail on what we did and the status, etcetera. So I think that was, successful.

The 75% diversion was not met by any jurisdiction. We're not saying we're not gonna work towards it, but we need to be smart about how to do it, especially with the PPD requirements. There were, as you saw from the charts, diversion increases and decreases in a changing environment. And so that's one of the things that we're looking at what's happening as we get those numbers. There have been disruptions.

And one thing that was most sort of interesting to me looking at all of this data is that when we did the solid waste management plan, the assumption was we were at 65% diversion. So that's this plan was we're already at this high level, and we just need to get another 10%. Well, after that came the whole China sword where we used to ship our recycling abroad, and then we were told, no. We're not accepting it. There's too much garbage in it.

So we then started shipping locally, and we got feedback that there was a 27% of garbage in the recycling. So we were never actually, I think, at the 65%. So sort of if you look at that, so we probably have done better. We've made improvements because we have an overinflated starting point because it wasn't as clean, and it wasn't all recyclable as we were thinking at the time. Okay.

So, so our diversion system's reliant on residents being informed, and I think that's going to be our big issue is having people know where to put materials, getting more information out to them, and having that approach versus paying for something really expensive, which would have to be passed on to rate payers. So, recommendations for increasing diversion, one is focused on organics recycling. It's required, and it's heavy. Expand expand public education because, essentially, now we have a transfer station. So what whatever goes in the cart, it just goes through the transfer station and goes on.

So unless somebody is recycling it or sorting it themselves, it's not pulled out. To, conduct waste character characterization studies, The idea being is we need to know what's in the garbage so that we can plan how to get it out and then use technology like truck cameras for monitoring, and this is already being implemented so that if they're seeing somebody who's doing something incorrectly, they'll, send them a little fix it tiffot. I must admit I got one at home even though I have done this forever, and, it was helpful. It was, like, something that I didn't know. And, so I think that that it's done in with a a good tone on that.

And then focus on areas with the greatest opportunities for diversion and develop some real time data monitoring. We don't need another plan by a consultant. I think that we just need to focus on how to meet our PPD targets. And I think that EDSWAC could be doing that. And so that's where we are. If you have questions, happy to answer.

Alright. You did well. That was Okay. Like, seventeen minutes.

Okay. Good job.

Thank you. You. Are there any clarifying questions by my colleagues? Supervisor Trimble?

I started this Yes. This solid waste plan back in 2012. I don't know. I think Sue probably remembers being that she's been here a long time. But, anyway, the diversion rate, we got it up to 65%, but then it went to pounds per person, and then it dropped. Is that correct?

Well yes. So we probably were never actually at 65% because there was a lot of garbage, so it wasn't clean. Uh-huh. Once we had to clean it up, I think that we were actually lower.

Okay.

So but now we have shifted how we measure to the pounds per person per day. So it's basically what goes in the garbage and then how how much does it weigh, and then you divide that by the number of people that are calculated.

Yeah. I I know we were talking about all kinds of different things way back when I visited an area, you know, Kenosha Mhmm. That actually they burn all their garbage and all green waste, and it powers that city, is what it does, off of that. And I know we have looked at different things here, especially on vessel composting, all kinds of different things. And I know that, I know waste management has facilities. Is Waste Connections ever thinking about maybe doing some kind of a cogeneration plant? Because especially when the garbage eventually is not gonna be able to be hauled out of our county, we gotta do something here. So I'm I'm just asking, is is a possibility they're looking into any of that? Not yet at

this time. Uh-huh. Yeah. And and, actually, for, Eldorado disposal, it's a lot the materials are going to Davis or to, Ukiah as far as the organics.

Yeah.

Because they have facilities there that can handle it.

Yeah. Okay. Alright. Well, anyway, thank you for the presentation. It's been a long time since I've seen

you. So Other Yeah.

I just have some

thank the committee. I know it's a thankless job.

It is.

And it's a it's very involved, but I would agree with the the recommendations. Again, there's no reason to go out and reinvent, and keeping up with the state mandates is hard enough as it is. So Yeah. Great job. Appreciate it.

Thank you. Thanks.

Thank you

no questions just thank you very much all

right this is a receiving file so we will go ahead and move now into closed session Mister Livingston?

Yes. Thank you, madam chair. The board will recess into closed session to hear items, one through three, if time permitting. Public comment has already been received.

Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Alright. Great.

Welcome back, El Dorado County, to the Board of Supervisors' regularly scheduled meeting. We will go ahead and pick up where we left off, which is our 01:00 open forum. So we will now take open forum comments. Madam Clerk.

We are now taking public comment on open forum. Each speaker will have three minutes to address the board. A timer will alert you when thirty seconds remain and again when your time has ended. We will begin with comments from individuals present in the boardroom followed by those participating via Zoom. If you're joining via Zoom, please ensure you unmute yourself when called upon. If you're joining by phone, press 9 to raise your hand. If you're on Zoom, use a raise hand feature to indicate your interest in speaking. We ask that you voluntarily state your name for the record before beginning your comments.

Would you like to comment to the board? No? You're just hanging out.

No one's here.

Okay. Well, there's no one in the boardroom. So is there anybody on Zoom?

Now taking public comment from online participants. Now taking pub public comment from 525.

Hi. This is Leo Benik Koshan. I'd like to urge you to bring back the item about the traffic safety on Highway 50. Public comments, including yours, have a deadline of May 7. So you have two meetings.

I think it would add value if you actually had it ascendized and you could express the board opinion in a formal way. You would also be able to provide the traffic citation, sorry, the survey. And then perhaps you could check with legal counsel because there are some options when I look at the law where even if it's passed, you can bring it down to five, where you can add your own engineering survey or public input because I do feel that if the public comment was accurate about a two hour watching the speed limit did not include the pedestrians and everything else. And you have some rights under the law and where you could express your opinion and take a bit of action. Every mile you drop, I think, is safe for for all of us.

So thank you for taking my comment. And you can respond under the Brown Act and give direction to staff. Take care.

Thank you.

Now taking public comment from three ninety.

Well, good afternoon, Board. This is Ken Greenwood live from the Triple Junction, not from Tahoe. We prayed for snow and we got it. And it was a good end of the season this last weekend and, kinda wish there were some more, but you gotta make the transition at some point. And it's hard to keep a ski resort open when it's only pass holders.

I wish people understood that. Anyway, as always, I'm gonna comment about noticing. As I noticed that the notice is always minimally done, and hopefully, we can get towards site posting, which may be part of the the new way of things, but I hope so. Actually, I'd like an answer on that one. And as the previous speaker pointed out, yes, you can comment on these things.

Anyway, but also that the, Town and Country project, is definitely a no. It it it's it's the wrong thing for the right right place or the right place for the wrong thing or it's no. It's both wrong. It's the wrong place and the wrong, project. Anyway and what else do we got here?

Yeah. Sounds good. And we'll be watching you for the summertime or spring and summer, and hopefully, we'll have time to get out and burn. Oh, that's another thing. If we can encourage for next year, what's their name, CDF or CalFire to look at elevational differences for burn permits, say, 2,500 feet or Highway 49 East and West.

And so that we appear in the higher elevations can get our job done to do our fire safe. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

There is no additional public comment.

Okay, great. We'll go ahead and move on then. We do have a 02:00 time certain today, but, I'd like to go back to department matters. And I think, we will call up item number 49. This is planning and building reorganization. Ms. Miss Dawson. Dawson.

Item number 49 comes from planning and building department and human resources department recommending the board adopt and authorize a chair to sign a resolution. One, amending the authorized personnel allocation schedule to adddelete the following allocations. A, add one full time equivalent chief deputy director of planning and building. B, add one full time equivalent FTE program manager. Three, add one FTE administrative analyst allocation for housing programs.

D, add one FTE administrative analyst allocation for the economic development program. And e, delete one FTE deputy director of planning and two authorizing the director of human resources to make technical and conforming corrections as needed to implement the board's action.

Great, thank you. I'd like to welcome our director of planning building, Ms. Garner.

Thank you. Good afternoon, honorable board members. So this request is indeed to add positions in support of economic development and housing programs within our department. As you know, both of those programs have undergone some significant changes in the past year with new direction from the board. So this structure really helps to serve both current and future projected needs.

So as some examples, these positions will support our strategic economic enhancement development committee and affordable housing task force, and there are activities, that come out of those committees. So oftentimes, there's research and materials and putting together agendas. So these positions would be in support of those committees. They'd also have oversight of programs such as our film liaison, affordable housing monitoring, first time homebuyers program, and developing and implementing programs such as the local preference program for affordable housing that this board just spoke about a couple of weeks ago. Currently, there is no staffing solely dedicated to housing, but rather we have other positions that are taking some of their time for housing functions and responsibilities.

We also do have a contract with a consultant, a housing firm, to assist with some of those tasks. And I would anticipate we can, certainly reduce, if not eliminate, that contract in the future once we get staffing on board and up to speed. In economic development, currently, we have one filled position that's solely dedicated to economic development. That's our liaison position. And same with housing.

We have other staff that are sort of filling in and and doing different tasks, and which is not ideal to run those programs in that way. And to be clear, you know, there's positions that we have had in the past. You know, people are well, what happened to those? So either they're vacant, currently vacant. We've had some that have been frozen because of budget constraints, one that was a reduction in force that was eliminated.

So kind of because of those reasons, we're we're down to what we're at right now. But rather than just refilling those vacant positions, I really took the opportunity to look at the board direction on future programs for economic development and housing, what our needs are, and rather than just simply refill these vacant positions, took opportunity to restructure and really get the positions in there that I think will do, the best job for our current needs. So, I won't go over again the positions that Kim read off, but we're, you know, adding a few positions and then deleting one of the vacant positions, the deputy director of planning. It should be pointed out that about half of the costs associated with the housing positions will be grant funded. These are grants that we get on a pretty regular basis.

And most of it well, pretty much all grants that we receive through CDBG or other sources have a portion that can be used for administrative costs. So we do charge what we can, for administrative costs. And those are things like our first time home buyer program, our owner occupied rehab program. So with these positions, we can more effectively manage and implement our economic development and housing programs. With that, I'm happy to answer any questions that you might have. Thank you.

Oh, thank you. Questions of my colleagues?

Yeah. I just got one. Aaron. When you're talking about affordable housing, will this help especially relieve a body of your staff working on, like, long time, five twenty five together? So having one person dedicated to that will help that follow-up and see that process.

Certainly would, do that. And in fact, I would anticipate these positions, when we get them filled, would be able to help monitor that program and get people through the process quicker to get those homes rebuilt if we can get them onboard. I don't have that number.

Alright. Okay. Go ahead. Probably nobody listen anyway. So

Yeah. I No.

I'm just just curious. We don't we don't have it fixed.

You know, off the top of my head, I believe it is probably around 100,000 a year. I don't quote me on that, but something close to that.

Yeah. Alright. Thank you.

Other questions, mister Ferrero?

Yeah. So good afternoon. Two of the positions are dedicated towards or almost entirely to economic development. How do you go about what are you looking for in those positions? I mean, it's one thing to have a title, but it's more importantly to have the right person.

Correct. So, you know, certainly, and it's not unusual for other jurisdictions of our size to have people that do kind of a combination of both economic development and housing. So that would be ideal. But we are definitely looking for someone who knows housing very well and for one of the analyst positions. I'd like someone that is seasoned, that really understands CDBG funding and reporting requirements and and all of that.

Our our plan is to, for the manager position, have someone that knows a little bit of both, but is probably a little more heavier towards the economic development side has experience in that. With the analyst, really hoping to get an analyst too on the housing side that also has that experience and knowledge. And then I think if we have the other analyst position could perhaps come in as a one for economic development that maybe has a little bit of experience but can learn on the job as well. But, yeah, we'll definitely be working with HR to on these recruitments to particularly because they are the the, you know, official title is, analyst, administrative analyst. That really doesn't tell you what exactly the job is.