HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 12131994 - IO.8 ' I .O.-8
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra
INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE "r
FROM: j !� Costa
November 14, 1994 & December 12, 1994 County
'`�'
DATE: rJ�T+2`dJn�1 c
SUBJECT: REPORT ON WHETHER TO RECONSIDER THE BOARD'S DECISION TO ABOLISH THE
FISH AND WILDLIFE COMMITTEE
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1 . AGREE to form a new Fish and Wildlife Committee to replace the
one abolished by the Board of Supervisors on July 12, 1994 .
2 . SPECIFY that the Fish and Wildlife Committee will have nine
members, one nominated by each member of the Board of
Supervisors and four nominated by the Internal Operations
Committee.
3 . SPECIFY that the term of office for all members shall be two
years, beginning March 1, 1995 . Of the initial appointments,
those from the Supervisors of Districts I and IV, plus two of
the at-large seats, shall expire February 28, 1997 and every
two years thereafter. The appointments from the Supervisors
of District II, III, and V plus the other two at-large seats,
shall expire February 28, 1996 and every two years thereafter.
4 . DETERMINE that the interim role of the Fish and Wildlife
Committee shall be to:
✓ Advise the Board of Supervisors on fish and wildlife
issues .
✓ Make recommendations to the Board of Supervisors for the
expenditure of funds from the Fish and Wildlife
Propagation Fund pursuant to Fish and Game Code S 13103.
✓ Address issues surrounding the enforcement of fish and
game laws and regulations in the Delta and estuary.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY D INISTR R RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE HE
SIGNATURE(S): MARK DeSAULNIER
ACTION OF BOARD ON ember 13 , 1994 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER X
The Board APPROVED the above recommendations, and added a sunset date of two
years for the commitee.
Supervisor Bishop requested that the prior members of the Fish & Wildlife Committee
be contacted to ascertain if they wish to be considered for membership on the reconstituted
committee.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
X UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
ATTESTED December 13, 1994
Contact: County Administrator PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
cc: Director, GMEDA SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Community Development Director
Roberta Goulart, CDD
Sheriff-Coroner BY DEPUTY
I .O.-8
✓ Consider other issues which may from time to time be
referred to the Committee by the Board of Supervisors .
5 . LIMIT funding for the Fish and Wildlife Committee at this time
to the $3,000 annually which can be drawn from the Fish and
Wildlife Propagation Fund pursuant to Fish and Game Code S
13103 (j ) .
6 . DIRECT the County Administrator' s Office to determine from the
Sheriff whether the Sheriff would be willing to staff the Fish
and Wildlife Committee and report his reaction to the 1995
Internal Operations Committee.
7 . DIRECT the County Administrator' s Office to advertize for
applications for the Fish and Wildlife Committee and forward
appropriate applications to each member of the Board of
Supervisors and to the 1995 Internal Operations Committee and
for this purpose REFER this subject to the 1995 Internal
Operations Committee.
8 . AUTHORIZE the 1995 Internal Operations Committee to undertake
whatever screening and interviewing the Committee wishes to
undertake and make recommendations for the four at-large seats
when -this process has been completed.
9 . AUTHORIZE the 1995 Internal Operations Committee to work with
the newly appointed members of the Fish and Wildlife Committee
on any refining, clarification or revisions to the role of the
Committee as set forth in Recommendation # 4 above and make
appropriate recommendations to the Board of Supervisors as
necessary. This authority should include asking the Fish and
Wildlife Committee to prepare a proposed Work Plan for 1995
which would outline goals and objectives for the Committee and
result in the Committee's reporting its progress to the
Internal Operations Committee for subsequent sharing with the
Board of Supervisors .
10 . REMOVE this subject as a referral to the 1994 Internal
Operations Committee.
BACKGROUND:
On July 12, 1994, the Board of Supervisors abolished the Fish and
Wildlife Study Committee. On August 16, 1994 , at the request of
Supervisor Bishop, the Board of Supervisors agreed to refer the
matter to our Committee for further consideration and a
recommendation back to the Board of Supervisors regarding whether
to modify or reverse the Board' s action of July 12, 1994 .
On October 4, 1994, the Board of Supervisors approved a report from
our Committee which requested that certain additional information
be obtained from other counties and reported back to our Committee
on October 31, 1994 . This item had to be continued to November 28,
1994 because of a special Board meeting on October 31, 1994 . Our
Committee met again on December 12, 1994 to finalize the nature of
our recommendations to the Board of Supervisors .
Our Committee has met with staff and members of the former Fish and
Wildlife Committee on several occasions since August and has
requested a considerable amount of data from staff. A copy of that
information is attached for the Board's review.
From the testimony which has been provided to our Committee, it
seems clear to us that an ongoing Committee on Fish and Wildlife
issues is necessary and appropriate. We differ somewhat in terms
of the scope of the Committee' s charge. Supervisor Smith would
prefer to have a more broadly based "Environmental Committee" which
would have fish and wildlife issues as one of its charges, but
which would also have responsibility to provide advice to the Board
2
I .O.-8
of Supervisors on a range of environmental issues . Supervisor
DeSaulnier prefers to address the specific issue of fish and
wildlife issues initially and then study what additional subjects
may need advisory committee input and how that input can best be
provided to the Board of Supervisors .
Our Committee agrees on all of the other components of the new Fish
and Wildlife Committee and are recommending that the 1995 Internal
Operations Committee work with the members of the Committee to
define the scope and range of responsibilities for the Committee,
based on the above role, suggesting changes to this role as
necessary.
3
Contra Costa County
Community Development Department
Date: October 19, 1994
To: Claude L. Van Marter, Assistant County Administrator
From: Roberta Goulart, Community Development Department
by Edy Zwierzycki
Re: Follow-up to Internal Operations Committee Report on
Request for Additional Data on the Fish and Wildlife
Study Committee
--------------------- ------------------------------------ ---------
The Counties Surveyed
Per your request, a telephone survey was conducted to
determine whether a Fish and Wildlife Committee/ Commission, or a
committee with a similar title and/or function, existed in other
counties in northern and central California. Between September 28,
1994 and October 13, 1994, 21 out of the 48 counties in northern
and central California, were surveyed.
Contact persons in 7 out of 21 counties surveyed, or 1/3 of
these 21 counties, claimed that no committee of this nature existed
in their county. These jurisdictions included Alameda, Marin,
Merced, San Joaquin, Solano, Stanislaus, and Yolo Counties. As
illustrated on the attached map of California (figure 1) , the
majority of these counties border Contra Costa County. Sacramento
County is the only jurisdiction adjacent. to Contra Costa that
claimed to have such a committee. However, this committee is
currently not functioning, because their sole purpose is .�o advise
the board on the allocation of Fish and Game grant funds, but these
1
OREGON
Del
Norte Siskiyoq Modoc Survey of
Fish and Wildlife Committees
Shasta Lassen Conducted In 21 Out Of 48 Counties
Trinity In Northern California
Tehama :< Plumas
Glenn <: Sierra'
: i Colusa
NEVADA
•»�•�::��:�.•'' Yx':, �;; •j Has Fish&WildIife
fil'Ylj`'' Committee
Marin No Fish&Wildlife
Committee
Contra `�r`Y•a•:'':;f;'{.iY >' 4a�{��S'GYr'•'.•;:.
Costa
San T- :%a.•�'•:s;.•>,:
Francisco :.�f'r i'i1'} }}�•�y?:;{ •�:ti'>.jt•:{f:x::}{ti•..:-ttiis.
San j >{{'. lafa tl1 h ;v f. r>•:: ,
Mateo t?'.x•xx:�fs;r 3;•::{;•Y:{:r i
Fresno:=;r:x: . .: :: �.r
Santa Cruz 7
�: '?•{�Y' '(� ..;''nifi`;r..S: Tulare '•.'r.:;:<.• ;: ``a? •Y,.z cf ;,:
n ,
San
Luis Kern
Obispo
Santa San Bernadino
Barbara
Ventura
Los Angeles
Q
rage° Riverside
San Diego. Imperial
Conducted by the Community Development Department
of Contra Costa County.-October 1994
Figure 1
funds have recently been withheld from the County planning
departments. Contact persons at the remainder of the 14 counties
surveyed claimed 'that they did have a committee that focused on
fish and wildlife issues. These jurisdictions included Butte, El
Dorado, Inyo, Lake, Kings, Mono, Monterey, Napa, Sacramento,' San
Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Sonoma, and Tuolumne counties .
Basis for County Selection
Selection of the referenced 21 counties for this
telephone survey study was limited to northern and central
California. Also, all the referenced counties were selected based
on the likelihood that some open space and/or fish and wildlife
habitat existed in the county. In addition, these counties were
selected based on ,their proximity to Contra Costa County, and/or
the similarity of the county's population size (according to
Department of Finance statistics for July 1, 1993) with Contra
Costa County's estimated population size of 861,200 people.
Survey Results
Responses to the referenced survey questions were recorded for
each of the 14 counties. Refer to Appendix A for a more complete
description of the questions and responses. The responses to
Question #s 1, 2, 4, 6, 8., 9, and 10 are also summarized for each
of these counties, in the attached table.
Attachment
cc: Harvey E. Bragdon, Community Development Director
2
ro a a n n w ....
a rt o t� i•• o a
�' as a
0
0 0 o r w w cn
H H H H H H H H H y �
m m m m m m m
orroY a 0aas o
r•0 w st+ C R+ ft► R^+ C R� fn
fh
ON
a
r•0 Ym
m
3
3 r• •
�
42 r•
Y•
r•m
E r-
4S G�
r•
G�
N nY• m mo :; m rt mo m m
N M
m
C m
K
m
rt m
n
N
m
I @
Y-
r-
ra
w
r•
w
0 o O o @ 0 0
0
a a
a
H
K
`i? f1J
rt z rc
+t m
z K
m o
� K
x
x
m
0
@ @
rt
w
0
@ @
0
m
m
m
a
N N
Sstjd
M
0
rt K rn o n
ID
ro
ro
iiVlii>::
:
rt
rt
v�>
M
E
M•
rt
r
N
H
* w aaw r wwtlj
wr * N
aaw r
a Nr a rta a An 0a rta a a a €
rt a t Y @ @ {�
{3 :: ::;'
fC •q m nr m bcOm nr
w7o0 rt 0 � rt 20 rt 0 � 1-1 ft ct
a m a @ n a @ a
n rt n rt a rt n Ka {' H
Ell
v r in
Ln o w w t
rt
n
a
C —• M C C -•^ rt ctro rt h]
a r@ r• O 0 to a K Rs 0 O
r uc r•0 w w .a P. ?C O w
ro � m
� rt@ 0 � owr•
r
0rt
0 Hrrm a 0 0 t (D@M
a
rt '-^ @ tQ K K F'• rt rt > �::<:it7;::::>:TA:::::
m
o
rt @ @ m
n n
o►e @ @
0
n n n m
P) n a
n
1 k ' 0•
rr
a
f"LL '
;' fn
a m f+ 0 is EH..:::,, N
>z=
w
rt a rct a r A rt w ft— r o m 0@ f3 N o o C a ro hS� rt
ar @ as 0.0`� @Mn0 0rtn0C o@ :::sr
?t{`
N K ro C n @ w N L? A M
� w@A �kcn @nr•a
M
C t••w ft n
En P) N o r• @ cint @Aa
r-
„r
rt@ 0 k•a 0 m rr A n rt rt@ a m m r•0 m@ rt
o00rom mon a a m OtomOrtm D}
n r•a@ r M -- o • '3 n r 0r rt 0 0@ r• zi:t::!*w:i %<:s
fD0@K Ort I M (D •C 0
r•aK @O "C
a A
mac a � rt �n
a
rr • -- @ � . 0 @
N N
o '
z o 0
a�
K n to @ :r 0 n t
• N
(D M :3.'b mo
PV m
rt
m '. @
@
r rto @ �+ 0 9 it m
0 (Da 0'Om@ x ka Owaaa x kaKY•mRrt
0 C @ NA roC C OrmrtC 'OC roC artft@w
M P)
c� r• rt P- ro r
uor• -rortao
M iD M m cn !n @ m ?:�< 0 rt r @ m O m m tltq
@ a
M
a m @ @ @
fr rD @ @ � '� K a @
� a : a k a w
a
�
A
r•m r•a @ r• : r• r-
ft r• rt.
m • rt
@ hi r•
H rt ??�: ct t:T a Cr tr' rt t7
a tr n a >T a r•m m oro @
MNK @ (D a 0K 0K Oma' K OK an 0 :r ttcOK
0 a ft to w n a i:`:i:; n a @ Y•W a K a n a @ O
0 t0
m
�,.
rr
H.@ ro
::: @ aro @
n ar a a
c�o n
00 nm00 ma '>: m0 aMto • O ma NO W
Ma
a 14 O rt
0 0
as
A
nam aA
c oar ro-
a rt
�
�
aM
.mrt.
mrt
ao
a� sn K @ a ft as
@ P.a wrt@ r+
nr a0 roM@a m0
a @ 0 m �
a
R rt 4 k
@ k R (ti
w a s K a r-
r• � cf tt,ft r A
(D @AM a 0 K '•W 0 0
a00 0 0
N
arts a a a @ @ m
a
a r r•
Pi m
a >r o
art m
r
. m
Ka
rt
• 0 �C t� Ct! Opt 09 t7! � �:�>:�:fi;{•``�`'';:;''
o rt o a
OW
* m w o w a w o
ct
@ w d
j Z a 0 cr
9
?S
to $-A � .wa w ~ 0% cn ►. <>"' w>»
00 N
t0 w N tb N to
z ►� x 1c x K K «e x ►e
° ° m ° mm @ ° (D
o
ro
P) ::::::.tri ro
� 0 :ro ro
O rtn
ro
Cl
h7 �:
N
r !r
> a ¢ Oil a
a
W
tr c
a
m � �•: m
z
W
mY• M
@ m
@ fi 1
0 ta. r•m
Gs r•
4a
W
rt m o
W n to >w:»%
n
o m
rt
rt
«� m
c n
n
m 0 w rt
rt
@ r�r•k ro
n c 1 C •
0 n d'
@0
0
@
m
a @
a
tj M ..
0
Y�
k N m
K
pa K
x
cs
@ @ o rtra @
a1,4
@
m
m
dw a
m
m
@ moM
d n
rA
r-
ro
f
d
rt
d�
rt
0
w
r'S !✓ N 7 �
r�
m (D
tJ'
CT
m
f1PCf
i Ir t7
0 b
ronaWo ....�..,
n
k
tt g m
L1' w W
r• W
@om
^a
rt ro rtm
I— o
r•
rt m
m
m
m �
w a 910
�i
m
K
rt rt
rt rt
rt
@ W to
P. w r•
rt
O n K m
as
d d
I 3C
m '
0 rt
SEf .
M
m
d @
ia.
•J
N N In N
en
N
O
O
A
(r�
C "4' ro @ 27• @ to
C C LT
M
3 a4 @
0
:>>?;: C
a o o arocr
k rt :.
N r };r.
N m
0 0
0
o a
o ta. Rs
K0
r~
a @ rt w PO (D
M rt\
@ Ir
rt : fit rr
w M w rt
PC ma t� rt rt
@ K @ @
@
@ @
@ O m 'ix�r��� m 44@
n n
d
O
CL \
•>z.:
.:r
a N r o N
a
x o baro z toa
•>: M
w r o (D P)
@ w
m
d n O O dp 'C a n a
@
rt
Q n
sW W
O @ @
wn
Pr a
'<{ to I-0n faP. n ro m rt C m rt
m
00
€ ;?'
ro
o tx 0
o rt
0
ft FA
' w @
W
r't n n
M
fa
!'•tA W�` W
W (] m
m rtm
m rr
a a @ rt cr
..
W ttaO
@ n n
a
O Rl
0
W n @
a @
x a
ta. @
�o
a rt o rt (D
@
0
ty d
n
N
rt m rt mrt\
r
n
@@
ro
atTro 0 � r•rt
:..:.
,< W i�f d
H
r n. @ m
w n
aaa+
c :>`: rt c c c c
o c @ o
� c
ut rt }::z:{<{
ro cr n
;x x @ 0
:3 :3
@ W
= r :.:•>
►�•• m o m @ K m r m m ..to
dP m
:r5v r5
� srL E n fi
tl t
a: :•: '• @
r
� a @ rr
0
m ar o :r o tr
@ W
� aro
� tr
m �
:.
0
� '.
rtWK Mn '=JK a ti O ro
Ar
rrraW•Nx@ a
�
tt
s
ro
d
a
0 rt W
WW
�0Mrt
iaK
c n Ka oo
@ a rorod
0 roI ro s o� o dttp
c a 3 ro d oa 0 (Ds
to
� a
nM rt
m a R► n!�+ M In N n w a mm
fa•
W m
rtv
W E
•
@m@ W � A• Ga
0
,..
w @ rt w @
:r
ro M @O on @@ and w d
ort a n
>:> om
nk tam @ o11
W b :..: m r
ct rt m
wo wn ro
W 0 0 @ a+ m m
n
a �
a
r• w o @ m m
� a+ rn @
M
� o cr @
W rt
>� o W
a M
ro
rt H•
M
ro n o
0
ia• a d a
K r
m
a
a
0
9d 4
{r>'
a ro
m
APPENDIX A
Survey Questions
Contact persons at the counties with Fish & Wildlife
Committees, Commissions, or committees with similar titles and/or
functions were asked the following questions:
(1) What is the Title of your Committee/ Commission?
(2) Do the Committee members report directly to the board of
Supervisors? Yes/No. If not, to whom?
(3) How are members selected? Does selection require the submittal
of applications, or appointment by the Board of Supervisors,
or both?
(4) Do you base selection of committee members on a prescribed #
for each supervisorial district or other criteria?
(5) Are members required to have a biological or other technical
background requirement?
(6) What are the committee's duties/function?
(7) How is the committee funded?
(8) - How is the committee staffed (inotherwords,, is there a
particular county department that staffs this committee) ?
(9) What is the number of staff persons on this committee?
( 10) How many hours does staff spend on activities related to this
committee?
(11) Is the Committee referred items from the Board of Supervisors?
Can the public or other agencies suggest what goes on the
committee's agenda?
3
Survey Responses
Summary of Responses to Question #2
Do the members report directly to the board?
9 stated that the Committee members directly reported to, or
communicated with the Board of Supervisors; and
5 stated that Committee members reported to County staff who would
in turn run the Committees recommendations by the Board.
Summary of Responses to Question #3
Are members selected based on application, appointed by the Board
of Supervisors, or both?
13 stated that the Board of Supervisors appointed members from
applications submitted to the County; and
1 stated that the Parks and Recreation Commissioners (who are board
appointed) appointed members from applications submitted.
Summary of Responses to Question #4
Member Selection Criteria?
5 stated that 1 member was selected from each supervisorial
district in their county. (In Tuolumne County at least 1 of the
members must also be a member of the Sportsman Club) ; and
2 stated that 3 members were selected from each supervisorial
district; and
The remainder of responses ranged from 1 member selected from each
supervisorial district in addition to 2 more members selected at
large; to 4 chosen at-large in addition to 1 youth representative,
1 sportsman-angler representative, and 1 planning commissioner.
Summary of Responses to Question #5
Are committee members required to have a biological or other
technical background?
All 14 stated no biological or other technical background was
required, except for an interest in fish and wildlife matters.
4
Summary of Responses to Question #6
What are the committee members duties/functions?
8 stated that the committee only served an advisory role with
respect to the allocation of Fish and Game fine monies; and
6 stated that the main function of their committee was to advise
the board on how Fish and Game fine monies should be spent.
However, each county also engaged in one of the following: ( 1)
recommend action on Fish and Game legislation; (2) advise board on
fish and wildlife matters (ie. voted against a Bass fishing contest
taking place in the County, voted for educating high school
students about salmon and trout) ; or (3) involved in the
establishment of a Mitigation Banking Program.
Summary of Responses to Question #7
How is the Committee funded?
10 stated that the Committee's were voluntary; and
2 did not answer this question; and
2 used a portion of Fish and Game funds (and property taxes etc. )
to pay for Committee-related clerical services.
Summary of Responses to Question #8
Is there a County Department that staff the Committee?
6 stated that no. County Department staffed the committee?
3 stated that their County Parks or County Parks & Recreation
Department staffed the committee.
2 stated that the Agricultural Commission office staffed the
committee.
I stated that the Flood and Water Conservation District staffed the
committee.
1 stated that the Community Development Department staffed the
committee.
5
Summary of. Responses to Question #9
What is the number of staff persons (and Title) on this committee?
6 stated that either that no one staffed the committee or the Clerk
of the Board staffed it.
The majority of the remaining responses included one staff member,
such as a Park Ranger, Parks and Recreation Director, Agricultural
Commissioner, Conservation Development and Planning Director.
Summary of Responses to Question #10
How many hours does staff spend on Committee-related activities?
The hours varied from 0 to 10 hours per month. The average number
of hours of staff-time of Committee-related activities fell between
8-10 hours per month.
Summary of Responses to Question #10
What are the Committee's duties/functions. (See Table)
Summary of Responses to Question #11
Is the Committee referred items from the Board of Supervisors?
Can the public or other agencies suggest what goes on the
committee's agenda?
The Committee members are to follow the rules set out in their
charter, however in some cases the public and other agencies (ie.
State Department of Fish and Game) can recommend items for
discussion as long as they fit within the parameters of the Fish
and Game Code and Committee Charter.
6
CountyAdmitagir-atorContra �' Board of Supervisors
Tom Powers
County Administration Building
1st District
651 Pine Street,11th Floor Costa Jeff Smith
Martinez,California 94553-1229 2nd District
(510)646-4080 County
FAX: (510)646-4098 Gayle Bishop
3rd District
Phil Batchelor Mark DeSaulnier
County Administrator - 4th District
of i� S Tom Torfakson
5th District
September 28, 1994 ..��~
court
INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS
CONCERNED WITH THE FUTURE OF THE
FISH AND WILDLIFE STUDY COMMITTEE
Enclosed is a copy of the report the Internal Operations Committee (Supervisor Jeff
Smith and Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier) will make to the Board of Supervisors on
October 4, 1994, resulting from their meeting September 26, 1994 with many of you.
As the report indicates, we would appreciate receiving any comments or
recommendations you have on what you believe the role, size, composition, manner
of selection and reporting relationship of the Fish and Wildlife Committee should be.
Your comments can be forwarded to the undersigned, as follows:
Claude L. Van Marter
Assistant County Administrator
County Administration Building
651 Pine Street - 11th Floor
Martinez, CA 94553
Your comments will. be included in the report we make to the Internal Operations
Committee on October 31, 1994.. At Mr. •Studley's request, we will forward all
materials we receive from other counties to you on a flow basis as they are received
in this office. We will also furnish you in advance of October 31, 1994 with a copy
of the report we will make to the Committee on that date.
We have scheduled time for the Internal Operations Committee to consider the report
this office and the Community Development Department will jointly make, as follows:
Monday, October 31, 1994
9:00 A.M. - 9:30 A.M.
The Training Institute, Bay Room
George Gordon Education Center
500 Court Street, Martinez
You are welcome to attend this meeting and address the Internal Operations
Committee on this subject. We anticipate that the Committee will make a report back
to the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday, November 8, 1994.
-2-
If you have any questions about the Committee meeting, you can call me at 646-2602.
Very truly yours,
Y
Claude L. Van Marter
Assistant County Administrator
CLVM:amb
vang-91-94
Enclosure
cc: Supervisor Tom Powers
Supervisor Jeff Smith
Supervisor Gayle Bishop
Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier
Supervisor Tom Torlakson
Val Alexeeff, Director
Growth Management & Economic Development Agency
Harvey Bragdon, Community Development Director
Roberta Goulart, Planner, CDD
TO: BOARD % _�PERVISORS 1-0.-4
Contra
FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
Costa
DATE: September 26, 1994 , County
)UBJECT:3 FISH AND WILDLIFE COMMITTEE
;PECIFIC REQUEST($)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS:
I. REQUEST the County Administrator and Community Development
Director to obtain information on the following:
0 If the Fish and Wildlife Committee were restored, what
should the precise role, responsibility and jurisdiction
of the Committee be?
0 What is the actual cost of staffing the Fish and Wildlife
Committee?
• What options would the Board of Supervisors have for
funding the Fish and Wildlife Committee from other than
County general funds?
0 What is an appropriate reporting "chain of command" for
the Fish 'and Wildlife Committee which makes it clear to
whom the Committee is responsible?
0- What, if any, changes should be made to the composition
of the Fish and Wildlife Committee?
2 . REQUEST the County Administrator and Community Development
Director to obtain the following information from other
counties in the Bay Area, including at least the counties of
Sacramento, Solano, San Joaquin and Sonoma:
0 Does the county have a Fish and Wildlife Committee?
.1 1-
• If so, what is its size, composition and manner of
appointment?
iTiNUED ON ATTACHMENT: -YES SIGNATURE:
-RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR.-RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
-APPROVE -OTHER
IATURE(S): JEFF IqMTTH MARK ntmSATTINTER
ON OF BOARD ON. Oct ober 4., 1994 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
ATTESTED
tact: PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
County Administrator SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Community Development Director
Members, Fish and Wildlife Committee (Via CAO)
BY DEPUTY
1.0.-4 �k
• What is the identified role and responsibility of the
Committee?
0 What level of staff Support is provided to the Committee
and from which County Department?
0 What is the cost of providing staff support to the
Committee, including staff time, materials, mailing and
other costs?
• What is the source of funding for the costs of staffing
the Committee?
3. REQUEST the County Administrator to write to the members of
the Fish and Wildlife Committee and encourage them to provide
the County Administrator with their suggestions for the role,
size, composition, manner of selection and reporting
relationship for the Committee if it were to be reconstituted.
REQUEST the County Administrator to provide the Internal
Operations Committee with a report on this subject to cover
the points in recommendations # 1, # 2, and # 3 above on
October 31, 1994 .
BACKGROUND:
On July 12, 1994, the Board of Supervisors abolished the Fish and
Wildlife Committee. On August 16, 1994, at the request of
Supervisor Bishop,. the Board of Supervisors agreed to refer the
matter to our Committee for further consideration and a
recommendation back to the Board of Supervisors regarding whether
to modify or reverse the Board's action of July 12, 1994.
On September 26, 1994, our Committee met with staff from the
Community Development Department, several members of the Fish and
Wildlife Committee and other interested citizens. Harvey Bragdon,
Community Development Director, reviewed the attached report with
our Committee.
Skip Bateman, a "iftbmber of the Fish and Wildlife Committee,
recounted some of the history Of the Committee and some of the
actions which were. taken which led some of the members of the
Committee to believe that the Community Development Department
staff was trying to get rid of the Committee by narrowing its
responsibilities and eventually concluding that there was nothing
further that the Committee needed to address. He noted that the
Committee was supposed to protect the fish and wildlife in the
County and report to the Board of Supervisors. He emphasized the
importance of reporting to the full Board of Supervisors and not
just through the Water Committee. Mr. Bateman suggested that there
are a number of current and emerging issues which require the
attention of the Committee.
Tom Studley, also a member of the Committee, urged our Committee to
recommend three actions to the Board of Supervisors:
• That the Committee be restored.
• That the Committee be made responsible to report directly to
the Board of Supervisors.
0 That the fish and game fine revenue received by the County be
used to' provide staff support to the Committee.
Mr. Studley indicated that the Committee could help to protect the
interests of Contra Costa County from outside groups which might
approach the Board of Supervisors asking for money from the, fish
and game revenue for purposes which might be spent outside this
County. He also suggested that the Committee needed only a few
hours a month of staff support, contrary, to the staff report, which
suggested the need for 15 to 50 hours a month of staff support. He
also suggested that there. are always wetlands issues and
development issues which ought to be of concern to the Committee.
2
I.O.-4 --Z
Andy Surges suggested that the Board of Supervisors needs a
Committee to look at some of these issues and advocate for their
perspective. He noted that in, the past there had been a perceived
need for a grading ordinance which was brought to the Board's
attention by the Committee in order to prevent developers from
filling in the wetlands .
Jim Marieiro spoke to the issue of financing by pointing out that
the State law permits 10% of the Fish and Game fines, not to exceed
$3,000 a year to be used to support a Fish and Wildlife Committee.
In the past, Mr. Marieiro noted that the Board of Supervisors had
been using the Fish and Game fine revenue for the Sheriff's Marine
Patrol in violation of the State law. This situation was brought
to the Board's attention by the Committee.
Capt. Ed Nagel of the State Department of Fish and Game supported
the need for the Committee, indicated that the other three counties
for which he is responsible and, he thought, the other 14 counties
for which his regional supervisor was responsible all had Fish and
Wildlife Committees. Mr. Nagel also suggested that the. Committee
could be supported from a portion of civil settlements of hazardous
materials spills prosecuted by the District Attorney.
John Winther suggested that the Committee performs an important
watchdog. role and provides a great deal of valuable work to the
County for free.
Al McNabney suggested that without the Committee no one in the
County is charged with watching out for the interests of fish and
wildlife. He disagreed with the report from the Community
Development Department. He noted that the Committee has had some
ups and-downs over the past years - mostly "downs" in the past few
years and that everyone associated with the Committee, including
staff and members of the Committee, are frustrated. He indicated
that the Committee should have an opportunity to make its comments
on issues from its perspective to the Board of Supervisors. The
need for staff assistance should be minimal,, in Mr. McNabney's
view.
Supervisor DeSaulrifdr asked whether committees in other counties in
the Bay Area report to the Board of Supervisors and how they are
staffed. Capt. Nagel indicated that in his counties the Committees
reported to the Board of Supervisors, although he was unsure how
they were staffed.
Supervisor Smith read the entry from the "Maddy Book" which
outlines the role of the Fish and Wildlife Committee and noted that
much of what the Committee members had been discussing was beyond
the role outlined by the Board of Supervisors. He suggested that
there is bound to be a conflict when the Committee is trying to do
other than what they were established to do and staff then tries to
bring them back to their official role. He also suggested that it
is somewhat naive to suggest that the Committee does not require
considerable dedication of staff resources to do research, write
reports, do mailings, etc. He also suggested that there are two
issues which are causing a problem:
✓ The mission of the Committee
✓ The financial situation
Supervisor Smith also suggested that it does a disservice to the
Board of. Supervisors to suggest that the Committee does not care
about an issue simply because it abolishes a Committee with
jurisdiction in a given area. He noted the importance about being
clear about the charge to the Committee.
3
1.0.-4
Based on the discussion we had with the members of the Fish and
Wildlife Committee, we have asked that the above information be
gathered and reported to our Committee by the end of October.
Following the receipt of that information and an opportunity to
discuss it with the members of the Committee and staff, we will be
prepared to make further recommendations to the Board of
Supervisors.
F
4
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
TO: 1 .0'. Committee
Supervisor Jeff Smith
Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier
eSau nier
FROM: Harvey E. Bragdon, Di;recto
DATE: September 21, 1994
TSH WILDL FE COMMITTEE
SUBJECT: FUTURE OF COUNTY FISH AND W
BACKGROUND
The Fish and Wildlife Committee (the Committee) was,, on the
recommendation
n of the Water Committee (Supervisors Torlakson and
McPeak) allowed to .continue on an "ad-hoc basis" by the Board of
Supervisors on February 2, 1993. This action was to allow the
Committee to review and comment on a proposed draft wetlands
ordinance. The. Board did not approve the ordinance since a
consensus could not be reached, on June 13, 1993. As part of the
recommendation to continue with an ad-hoc Committee on a project
specific basis, vacancies were not filled, and members' terms were
allowed to expire. There have been no new referrals from the Board
to.,the Committee, and as a result, the Committee has not met for
some time.
Some Committee members who remain interested in Committee
continuance, have in the past asked the Water Committee for use of
Game -Protection Funds to pay for greater levels of staff support.
No action has been taken. If such action were to be considered, a
determination by County Counsel may be appropriate as to the
legality of using these funds to cover administrative costs, rather
than activities which directly benefit wildlife.
THE GAME PROTECTION FUND
County Game Protection Fund monies consist of a very small
percentage of State Department of Fish and Game citation fines
which ,go to the County 'of origin to help mitigate damage done to
the environment. There is about $20,000 of reserve funds in this
account at this time, and we receive about $2,000 -$4,000 Per year.
The Committee and the Sheriff-Coroner may advise the Board on how
these funds should be used.
The Game Protection Fund, even if deemed appropriate for
administrative use, may not be adequate to pay for staff associated
with Committee activities, once reserve funds have been exhausted.
Recent State cuts in the Department of Fish and Game, coupled with
cuts in County Sheriff Marine Patrol activities, have resulted in
significantly less manpower on the Delta, resulting in less
citations and less funding back to the counties. Staff has
reported that this Committee is quite staff-intensive, having
required anywhere from 15 to 50 hours per month in the past.
RECOMMENDATION
Due to budgetary constraints, coupled with resultant staff and
program restrictions, we do not recommend continuation of this
Committee at this time. The concept of a Committee is a good one,
given adequate funding for staff and the�..necessary wetland/wildlife
programs where Committee involvement would indeed be helpful . This
is a consideration for the future, when budgetary issues have been
resolved and proactive environmental programs are once again
underway. County programs related to wetlands have been deferred
indefinitely due 'to lack of funding. Should the Board elect to
continue Committee involvement, there would be a need to define the
funding, function and duties of the Committee.