The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 11021993 - 1.62 1.59 through 1.70 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on November 2, 1993, by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors ' Powers, Smith, Bishop, McPeak and Torlakson NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------ SUBJECT: Correspondence Item No. 1.59 LETTER dated October 15, 1993 , from J. Corgiat, 2001 Oakmont Way #7, Walnut Creek 94595, commenting on the cutbacks in the Walnut Creek Library. ***REFERRED TO COUNTY LIBRARIAN AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 1. 60 LETTER dated October 12, 1993 , from Art Agnos, Regional Administrator-Regional Housing Commissioner, U.S. Department of Housing and UrbanDevelopment, San Francisco Regional Office, Region IX, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco 94102-3448, regarding HOME funds for affordable housing projects. ***REFERRED TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR 1. 61 LETTER dated October 7, 1993 , from William R. Locke, Chief, Risk Studies Division, ' Federal Insurance Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C. 20472 , transmitting a revised Flood Insurance Rate Map and commenting on minimum floodplain management criteria established in accordance with provisions of the National Flood Insurance Program. ***REFERRED TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR AND PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR 1. 62 LETTER dated October 15, 1993 , from Paul E. Payne, Supervisor, Inyo County Board of Supervisors, P.O. Box N, Independence 93526, requesting the Board to oppose the "California Desert Protection Act" introduced by Senator Dianne Feinstein. ***REFERRED TO COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR -0- C. C. BRENT WALLACErtY O�f (619)878-0373 Clerk to the Board 4 �� PATRICIA GUNSOLLEY C Deputy Clerk of the Board 7EE E®COUNTY OF INYO BOARD OFSUPERVISORS P.O. Box N INDEPENDENCE, CALIFORNIA 93526 CLERK BRVISORSC000. October 15, 1993 Board of Supervisors County of Contra Costa 651 Pine St. , 11th Floor Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Board Members: The Inyo County Board of Supervisors is in a battle to save the economy of the southern portion of Inyo County. Senator Dianne Feinstein has introduced legislation known as the "California Desert Protection Act" , S.21, which would drastically effect the land use of almost all of the California desert Counties. Passage of this legislation will be extremely costly, and the total economic impact of this legislation will be detrimental to the entire desert area. The Inyo County Board of Supervisors request that you adopt a similar resolution to the one enclosed, opposing the "California Desert Protection Act" as introduced by Senator Feinstein. Your support of Inyo County's position on this legislation is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Paul E. Payne, Supervisor Inyo County �rd of Supervisors PEP;pg Enclosure RESOLUTION NO. 93-65 RESOLUTION OF INYO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IN OPPOSITION TO "CALIFORNIA DESERT PROTECTION ACT" WHEREAS, Senator Diane Feinstein has introduced bill entitled "California Desert Protection Act; and WHEREAS, S.21 designates 74 of . Bureau of Land Management wilderness areas and one wilderness study area in the California desert comprising nearly four million acres; and WHEREAS, the bill adds 1.3 million acres to the Death Valley National Monument, 234,000 acres to Joshua Tree National Monument, and WHEREAS, both national monuments will be redesignated as national parks; and WHEREAS, S.21 has been changed from previous versions of the California Desert Protection Act by removing two (2) wilderness areas surrounding Ft. Irwin and a 31 acre mining claim from the boundaries of the proposed East Mojave National Park; and WHEREAS, the Bill proposes that of the 12.1 million acres currently managed for the public by BLM, only 4.6 million acres remain available for multiple use such as hunting, mining, grazing and motorized recreation, and 7.5 million placed in wilderness or national parks; and WHEREAS, the Bill proposes that the current Death Valley National Monument, almost entirely within the boundaries of Inyo County, already over 2 million acres, would be designated a National Park and expanded to 3 . 4 million acres of which 1 . 3 million acres would come from BLM public lands. The wilderness portion of the Death Valley Park will consist of 3.2 million acres; and WHEREAS, the Bili proposes one entirely new national park, Mojave National Park of 1.5 million acres which would come from BLM public lands; redesignate Joshua Tree National Monument expanding it to 805,000 acres; and designate 3.9 million acres of national park wilderness in these three parks of which 1.6 million acres would come from BLM public lands; and WHEREAS, the Bill, in proposing to establish three national parks within the already designated California Desert Conservation } l Area, will withdraw many of those lands from many other .important uses under the public land laws and the mining laws, such as for mining leases and from Geothermal Steam Act leasing; and WHEREAS, the Bill will require that every unpatented mining claim located within the boundaries of the proposed parks must have a validity test completed the estimated cost of purchasing any existing patented mining claims must also be provided Congress prior to approval of any plan of operation; and WHEREAS, the Bill discusses protection of grazing rights which may be located within the proposed national parks; but says that, "all grazing of such livestock on such lands shall. cease on July 1, 20161„; and WHEREAS, the Bill provides as national parks, the three proposed sites in the California Desert - Mojave National Park, Joshua Tree National Park and Death Valley National Park - - which will follow the tradition of other national parks by charging entry fees. Also, new public funds will have to be appropriated in the Federal budget to construct extensive public facilities, such as a visitors' center in the Mojave National Park and to provide for additional staffs. The proposed Bill says, "There are hereby authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act,"; and WHEREAS, the passage of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 included a congressional mandates to BLM to begin planning for protecting and 'managing the resources of the California Desert Conservation Area under a multiple use concept, i.e. , using the .lands for mining, wilderness, recreation grazing, as well as for the scenic . beauty and cultural resources of the area; and WHEREAS, in 1980, the California Desert Plan was completed on time through a great amount of public participation, including that of the affected counties, in developing a draft plan and draft EIS, and a final EIS and final plan. Environmental, cultural, mining, recreation and ranching organizations, among others, all participated; and WHEREAS, over 18,000 copies of the draft Desert Plan were distributed for public review and comment in 1979. Twelve hearings and workshops were attended by over 900 people. Nearly 9,000 written responses, containing over 40,000 individual comments were received. The public Desert Advisory Council, the .BLM and the public developed the final plan over a five year period; and WHEREAS, the Desert Plan stressed the multiple use concept and called for setting aside certain special areas for particular protection such as 700,000 acres for areas of —critical environmental concern (ACEC) and 5.5 million acres of wilderness study areas of which approximately 2 million have been preliminarily recommended as suitable. The wilderness designation i process .—iS . confinuing as part of .the planning process whereby Congress, with ample opportunity for public input, will decide on the proper mix of wilderness;- and WHEREAS, the -Desert Plan was approved by then Secretary of Interior, Cecil Andrus, and reaffirmed later by the Secretary of Interior under the Bush administration, putting the Desert Plan in the unique position of having been endorsed by two Secretaries of Interior under two administrations, one Democratic and one Republican. The BLM conducts an annual amendment process which includes an annual EIS; and WHEREAS, the Desert Plan contained the proposed establishment of the 1.5 million acre East Mojave National Scenic Area with the management philosophy that, ". . . the East Mojave National Scenic Area was so designated because of its unique blend of human use (past and present) and genuinely unique features . . . .Designation . . was adopted . . to ensure continuation of the 'uses and occupation which gives the region its character, and yet gives special emphasis to retain the area's natural scenic qualities . . ." In other words, the uses of the area are important, but BLM will manage them to assure the scenic values of the area will remain; and WHEREAS, Senator Feinstein or staff has not consulted with any representative of Inyo County or any of its staff before introducing the Bill; and WHEREAS, the Inyo County Board of Supervisors is informed that no local governments, nor their staffs in California, were consulted by Senator Feinstein, or staff before introducing the Bill; and WHEREAS, Inyo County's economy is based mainly on tourism, mining, and cattle ranching; and WHEREAS, the Bill', as written, would drastically limit multiple use of the desert by tourists, miners and for grazing in Inyo County; and WHEREAS, the Bill,as written, would drastically affect the land use of almost all of the California desert counties; and WHEREAS, the Federal government, through the BLM, has already spent a great deal of money, time and energy in developing the California Desert Plan with the participation of all desert users, including the environmental groups, local governments and others. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Inyo County Board of Supervisors opposes S.21 (California Desert Protection Act) in its present form, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Inyo County Board of Supervisors and its citizens request they be involved in drafting • ' r fir- 4 �. L f(( C any .. future:;.bills-.concerningt'the ,'California_Desert 'Protection Act within.-Inyo .County, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Inyo County Board of Supervisors is disappointed that hearings were not held in various communities that are within the general boundaries of, and are affected by, the ucalifornia Desert Protection Act", and request that such hearings be jointly conducted by Senator's Feinstein, and Boxer, .and the Bureau of Land Management, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Inyo County Board of Supervisors supports the efforts of the BLM in the development of California Desert Plan in the California Desert Conservation Area and the multiple use concepts therein, and BE , IT FURTHER RESOLVED. .that copies of this Resolution be forward to both U. S. Senators from California, the Congressional Delegation from California, appropriate State representative, County Supervisors Association of California, Regional Council of Rural Counties, and other organizations as designated by the Board of Supervisors. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Inyo, State of California, this 12th day of October 1993 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Arcularius, Bear, Dean, Gracey and Payne NOES: -0- ABSENT: -0- SAM DEAN, CHAIRMAN INYO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ATTEST: C. Brent -Wallace' Clerk of the Board Y Patricia Gunsolley, Deputy desertres