How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
News
LAKE COUNTY, Calif. – The Lake County Theatre Co.’s fifth annual Shakespeare at the Lake takes place this week, with the Bard’s famed love story, “Romeo and Juliet,” to be presented virtually.
Live performances are set for 7 to 9 p.m. Friday, July 24, and Saturday, July 25.
The performances will be held via Zoom. To register, visit the Lake County Theatre Co. website.
KPFZ 88.1 FM, Lake County Community Radio, also will live-stream the Saturday performance on the air and its website.
In April, following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and the local and state shelter in place orders, Shakespeare at the Lake’s producers announced they were taking the entire production – from auditions and rehearsals to performances – online.
It was the latest measure that Shakespeare at the Lake has had to take to adjust to extraordinary conditions over the last several years.
In July 2018, performances had to be canceled after the entire city of Lakeport was evacuated due to the Mendocino Complex fires. The show did go on, with that year’s presentation of “As You Like It” moved to September.
With the fight against COVID-19 involving masking and social distancing – difficult to achieve in theater settings, whether it be for performers or audiences – the producers announced the change to the online format.
Organizers have reported that the Mendocino College classes in acting and production which provide the actors and technical staff have been conducted online and in small groups.
While the performances won’t take place in the scenic settings of Library Park in Lakeport or Austin Park in Clearlake, the cast and crew will use photos they’ve taken of Lake County – in combination with an original soundtrack – to create a new setting as they come into people’s homes.
While the performances are free to the community, the Mendocino College Foundation is seeking donations to help cover the expenses of bringing Shakespeare to the community, including supporting scholarships for the students enrolled in the summer session theatre classes and other technical aspects of the production.
Donations can be made online through the Mendocino College Foundation website by checking “other” and designating Shakespeare 2020 for a payment through PayPal.
For more information, visit the Lake County Theatre Co. website.
Email Elizabeth Larson atThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. . Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, or Lake County News, @LakeCoNews.
Live performances are set for 7 to 9 p.m. Friday, July 24, and Saturday, July 25.
The performances will be held via Zoom. To register, visit the Lake County Theatre Co. website.
KPFZ 88.1 FM, Lake County Community Radio, also will live-stream the Saturday performance on the air and its website.
In April, following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and the local and state shelter in place orders, Shakespeare at the Lake’s producers announced they were taking the entire production – from auditions and rehearsals to performances – online.
It was the latest measure that Shakespeare at the Lake has had to take to adjust to extraordinary conditions over the last several years.
In July 2018, performances had to be canceled after the entire city of Lakeport was evacuated due to the Mendocino Complex fires. The show did go on, with that year’s presentation of “As You Like It” moved to September.
With the fight against COVID-19 involving masking and social distancing – difficult to achieve in theater settings, whether it be for performers or audiences – the producers announced the change to the online format.
Organizers have reported that the Mendocino College classes in acting and production which provide the actors and technical staff have been conducted online and in small groups.
While the performances won’t take place in the scenic settings of Library Park in Lakeport or Austin Park in Clearlake, the cast and crew will use photos they’ve taken of Lake County – in combination with an original soundtrack – to create a new setting as they come into people’s homes.
While the performances are free to the community, the Mendocino College Foundation is seeking donations to help cover the expenses of bringing Shakespeare to the community, including supporting scholarships for the students enrolled in the summer session theatre classes and other technical aspects of the production.
Donations can be made online through the Mendocino College Foundation website by checking “other” and designating Shakespeare 2020 for a payment through PayPal.
For more information, visit the Lake County Theatre Co. website.
Email Elizabeth Larson at
CLEARLAKE, Calif. – The Clearlake City Council has approved a lengthy and detailed response to the Lake County Civil Grand Jury’s report on issues the city has raised with the Treasurer-Tax Collector’s Office and its handling of tax-defaulted property sales.
In its June 29 report, the grand jury leveled criticisms at the city that included alleging that the city was using incorrect information as the basis of its complaint that thousands of properties totaling millions in unpaid taxes hadn’t been put up for tax sale.
The grand jury also faulted the city for what it claimed were “inappropriate” criticisms of Treasurer-Tax Collector Barbara Ringen’s job performance.
At the council’s July 16 meeting, staff and council members discussed the nine-page response letter being sent to the grand jury. The response letter is just one page shorter than the grand jury’s report.
City Manager Alan Flora said the information the city used in addressing the tax-defaulted property matter came from the county, specifically, the Treasurer-Tax Collector’s Office.
“At this time we have no reason to doubt any of that data,” he said.
In order to let members of the public judge the matter for themselves, Flora said city staff had posted the information the city received from the county on its website. The data can be found on a new page, “Tax Defaulted Properties Information.”
A 2019 map on the site shows thousands of tax-defaulted properties, highlighted in pink, throughout the city.
Mayor Russell Cremer and Vice Mayor Dirk Slooten assisted staff with writing the response letter.
“I felt that we had no choice but to give this long, very detailed responses to the grand jury,” Cremer said, adding that the grand jury report’s many inaccuracies required a strong response.
Slooten said the report was wrong and the information the city used came directly from the county. “There’s no doubt in my mind that our data is correct.”
With regard to the data, the letter explains its source and how it was used. The city pointed out that the grand jury used “inaccurate assumptions to artificially reduce the real numbers” of tax-defaulted properties, including not considering properties without proper road access or utilities.
The response letter added that neither the grand nor the tax collector have the authority to allow certain property owners to be removed from the tax default list based on physical attributes of properties, and doing so is contrary to state law and the charge of the Tax Collector’s Office.
Regarding the grand jury’s criticisms about the city’s statements about Ringen’s job performance, the letter stated, “While it gives the City no pleasure in saying it, the assertion by the Grand Jury that allegations of negligence were inappropriate or that we have no real understanding of the on-going management of the Tax Collector’s Office we believe these claims are accurate and further it is even documented by the Board of Supervisors. The Board has established an ad hoc committee to provide additional support and oversight of the Treasurer Tax Collector’s Office due to a lack of performance. Additionally, the 2019 letter only came after attempts by the ad hoc and City representatives to discuss these issues with the Tax Collector.”
The letter said a meeting between ad hoc committee members Supervisor Bruno Sabatier, Supervisor Moke Simon, County Administrative Officer Carol Hutchinson, Ringen and Flora was scheduled on Oct. 25, 2019. Ringen chose not to attend.
“The Tax Collector’s refusal to engage with the City, or even the Board’s ad hoc committee, necessitated a different approach to resolution of the problem,” the letter stated.
The letter went on to list, in detail, responses to the grand jury’s recommendations and findings.
Councilwoman Joyce Overton agreed with the letter and said it was important that people understand where the information came from.
Slooten moved to approve the response, which was seconded by Councilman Russ Perdock. The council voted 4-0 to pass the motion, with Councilman Phil Harris absent.
The city’s full response letter is published below.
Email Elizabeth Larson atThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. . Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, or Lake County News, @LakeCoNews.
July 16, 2020
Lake County Civil Grand Jury
PO Box 1078
Kelseyville, CA 95451
Dear Grand Jurors:
RE: RESPONSE TO THE 2019-2020 LAKE COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY REPORT “TAX DEFAULT AUCTIONS”
The Lake County Civil Grand Jury released a report on Tax Default Auctions as part of its 2019-2020 report. This Grand Jury’s recommendations “required” the Clearlake City Council respond to recommendation #4 (R4), However, it should be noted that the City of Clearlake believes much of the report is flawed as it is clearly based on inaccurate assumptions and parsing of the information available, and therefore the City will respond in entirety to the discussion and analysis as well as all findings and recommendations.
The Grand Jury separated its discussion and analysis of the issue into four sections, so we will organize our responses likewise.
1). The default property situation – The Grand Jury states that the information provided by the City in its 2019 letter are not accurate, and further that the data is obtained by a singular secondary source. The City of Clearlake obtained information on the City’s tax delinquent and defaulted properties from the Assistant Treasurer/Tax Collector for the County of Lake. This source was listed in the 2019 letter. Information about tax delinquent and tax defaulted properties in the entire County was received later through the County Administrator’s Office. The information was provided from the central county system and there is no known reason to question the data or to be concerned for its veracity that the City is aware of. If the Grand Jury is aware of some deficiencies in the County’s tax database, they should provide some basis for this claim and share the “correct” raw data they refer to. The City has placed the original files
obtained from the County on its website so that anyone can review and verify the data for themselves. The City is very open about the source of its data. We welcome the County Tax Collector providing corrected data if necessary.
a). The report notes that the numbers are moving targets; we agree that the numbers are updated as often as daily based on property owner payments. The City never asserted that the numbers specified in the 2019 letter were indefinitely accurate, only that these were the numbers accurate at the time of the drafting of the letter. These numbers are a true reflection of the scope of the problem. This section of the report is one example of language that is lazy and confusing. The Grand Jury mentions “understanding some assumptions” and achieving a “broad based understanding,” but there is not enough description to understand what this means. The report does state that the quantities and dollar values have been “corroborated from multiple independent sources.” Frankly, such independent sources do not exist. However, if you refer to the sources of data the Grand Jury reviewed, they are both from the Tax Collector’s Office. While we agree this should be the ideal source of the date, it is neither multiple nor an independent source. This is the beginning of the overarching theme of the report which appears that the Grand Jury made a decision on the issue and drafted a report that supported this argument without spending the time and effort necessary to base this decision on facts.
b). This section alleges that the number of 12,500 tax default properties referenced in the 2019 letter is not accurate. The City acknowledges that the language used in the initial letter could be misleading. The City’s intent in referencing this number is to emphasize the scope of the tax delinquent properties. The City is interpreting tax delinquent properties to be those with any type of late property tax payments. A property is currently considered “in default” if it has remained delinquent for five years or more. It is important to note that the five-year timeline is not a hard line and many properties with the County should really be considered in default if they have been delinquent for three years or more. The state law governing tax default property sales sets the five-year timeline for residential properties while non-residential properties are authorized for sale after being delinquent for three years. Additionally, properties with abatement liens or other residential properties can be sold after three years of delinquency at the request of a taxing agency, such as the City. The number of tax delinquent properties in Lake County at the time the data was received was 12,500 properties. With the notice of an auction in May (although the Tax Collector decided to delay this auction indefinitely) additional payoffs were received and a more current delinquency number is 11,651. While this number is slightly less than what was reported initially based on information provided at that time, it still supports City’s assertion of the serious scope of this problem.
Perhaps most troubling is the discussion which follows in that the Grand Jury describes “there are two ways to look at the actual number.” The Grand Jury goes on to describe one method is to only consider properties in default which “do not have specific addresses, or accessibility, or existing services such as water hookups.” This method is used to create a smaller number of defaulted properties which is then used as a more “accurate” number throughout the remainder of the report. While we acknowledge that many of these properties without proper road access or utilities will be hard to sell and are difficult to develop, they are nonetheless still in tax default. These property owners are not absolved of responsibility to pay their taxes, nor is the Tax Collector absolved of responsibility to sell them. Not only is it inaccurate, it is irresponsible and contradictory to the Grand Jury’s mission to present this as an argument to artificially reduce the number of defaulted parcels and by extension, the scope of the problem. Further, while many properties do not currently have access to utilities, the scope of the problem is so large that many properties could be grouped together and sold to be developed into housing. Both Clearlake and Lake County desperately need additional quality housing and it’s a primary goal of the state to develop. Even the Grand Jury has recommended that tax defaulted properties be explored to develop housing in this year’s report entitled, “Assessing the Homelessness in Lake County”. Why wouldn’t we take advantage of this opportunity to turn a
longstanding problem into a benefit for the entire community?
c). We agree that when you artificially and arbitrarily reduce the number of defaulted properties based on their physical attributes rather than the requirements of state law (which is based on whether the property taxes are paid) the “amount owed” would be reduced. We know from reviewing actual data from the Tax Collector that this number is over $18 million. It is also misleading to remove “costs, penalties and interest” from this total, as it is an actual debt on the tax bill and the only motivation in removing this from the total number can be to artificially reduce the scale of the problem.
d). Again, the Grand Jury uses inaccurate assumptions to artificially reduce the real numbers. Neither the Grand Jury nor the Tax Collector have the authority to allow certain property owners to be removed from the tax default list based on physical attributes of their property. And, to do so is contrary to state law and the charge of the Tax Collector’s office.
e). We believe the recent trend in more property owners not paying taxes is due to the lack of regular tax sales and a history of inaction and negligence from the Tax Collectors Office. This has created an uptick in new default properties each year. If there is no threat of a tax sale, there is little motivation of a delinquent property owner to pay his/her property taxes.
2). The job performance of the Treasurer/Tax Collector – While it gives the City no pleasure in saying it, the assertion by the Grand Jury that allegations of negligence were inappropriate or that we have no real understanding of the on-going management of the Tax Collector’s Office we believe these claims are accurate and further it is even documented by the Board of Supervisors. The Board has established an ad hoc committee to provide additional support and oversight of the Treasurer Tax Collector’s Office due to a lack of performance. Additionally, the 2019 letter only came after attempts by the ad hoc and City representatives to discuss these issues with the Tax Collector. In fact, a meeting between ad hoc committee members Supervisor Sabatier, Supervisor Simon, CAO Hutchinson, Tax Collector Ringen and City Manager Flora was scheduled on October 25, 2019. Attendees of the meeting were Supervisor Sabatier, CAO
Hutchinson and City Manager Flora. While this face to face meeting was scheduled at the City’s request, the Tax Collector chose to abscond from the meeting. The Tax Collector’s refusal to engage with the City, or even the Board’s ad hoc committee, necessitated a different approach to resolution of the problem.
a). We agree that the Tax Collector holds multiple responsibilities, many of which are critical to supporting revenues for local governments and special districts.
b). The City believes tax sales are fundamental to the responsibility of the County and the Tax Collector. It is one responsibility that has limited options for deferring or delegating authority to perform and is the basis for the entire collection of property taxes and the bundle of property rights in the United States. For the Grand Jury to assert that it is not a “primary or critical function” of the Tax Collector’s responsibilities is not based on facts and is irresponsible. Additionally, the Tax Collector has clearly defined responsibilities in state law which are not negotiable by the person holding the office or the Grand Jury, one of which is the mandate to hold auctions of tax defaulted properties. Further, the Tax Collector is the only official with the
authority to conduct said auctions.
c). While we agree that staffing levels could always be higher, it is our responsibility as local government agencies to provide certain services regardless of the level of staffing. Just because an agency may have less than ideal resources does not give that agency the ability or the option to not fulfill any of its core functions. To be effective in leadership of a critical office, one must be able to identify solutions to meet the obligation to the public and statutory responsibility of the office, regardless of the resources provided.
d). We are supportive of any additional staff being dedicated to addressing the historical and persistent backlog of tax delinquent and defaulted properties.
e). While we believe the argument here is based on conjecture and anecdote, an important point is made that even engaging in the process of noticing and preparing for a tax auction instigates a significant number of property owners into paying their back taxes and curing the default. If this was a regular effort of the Tax Collector, the number of delinquencies and defaulted properties would likely be greatly reduced.
3). The Teeter Plan – While we have no quarrel with the history of the Teeter Plan provided herein, we have no understanding of the basis for the following statement, “It is critical to note that these actions were on delinquent tax amounts and not on default tax amounts. Default properties/taxes were not intended to be part of the plan.” It is unclear what the Grand Jury is trying to say here, unless the “default” properties are not intended to be part of the Plan as it is expected they will be sold at tax auction. In Lake County both delinquent and defaulted properties are part of the Teeter Plan due to the historical lack of adequate tax sales. The Teeter Fund pays taxing entities all portions of the 1% ad valorem taxes owed if there is a delinquency. There is no bearing whether the property is considered “defaulted” or not. The Teeter Fund
makes up the difference of unpaid property taxes (from the 1% only, not bond measures or special taxes) whether a property is delinquent for 1 year or 50+ years.
a). We believe the Grand Jury’s assertion that 32% to 40% of property tax contributions to cities and special districts is coming from the Teeter Fund (a fund that pays the cities and special districts their total owed delinquent amount, even if all property owners do not pay the County) is a reflection of the dire situation that has been created by the actions, or inaction, of the Tax Collector’s Office. With regular tax sales the amount “owed” by the Teeter Fund would be reduced, freeing up funds to be distributed to the County General Fund. These discretionary dollars could be used to hire more deputies, build parks, pave roads or even hire more people in the Tax Collector’s Office to conduct regular tax auctions.
b). We agree with the Grand Jury’s statement of who manages the Teeter Fund, which is why in the 2019 letter to the Board of Supervisors the City requested the Board schedule a presentation on the Teeter Fund by the Auditor-Controller. In future years, the Grand Jury may consider interviewing the Auditor regarding the Teeter Fund in order to get a more accurate picture of how the fund operates.
c). The assertion of the Grand Jury that only cities and special districts benefit from the Teeter Fund is not based in fact. While the cities and special districts are beneficiaries of the Plan, the County also benefits. When the fees and penalties are collected due to payoffs or the tax sale process, the County gets to keep the fees, penalties and interest. Additionally, the 1% tax has already been paid by Teeter to the cities and special districts, so this funding is available for use by the County (as long as they meet the minimum funding requirement of the Teeter Fund). The excess proceeds are discretionary dollars that can be used for any lawful purpose as mentioned above (law enforcement personnel, building parks, paving roads, or hiring additional staff to serve the community). There is no wonder that some County departments may have been
“making noises” as many will benefit directly from additional revenue from tax sales via the Teeter Fund.
4. With regard to the floated concept of a lawsuit to try to attain certain specific goals – the discussion raised by the City’s focus on this issue has elevated the profile of the need for more tax sales. Unfortunately, up to this point the public discussion has had little impact on the Board of Supervisors or the Tax Collector resulting in action. The Grand Jury’s stated resignation that the goal of 1,000 properties being sold is impossible, sounds eerily similar to the excuses of the Tax Collector and some members of the Board of Supervisors. If as much effort was put into solving the problem and buckling down and doing the work required rather than dreaming up excuses and reasons why it can’t be done, the County would be making significant progress toward achieving the goal.
a). Based on the assumptions created by the Grand Jury, and our own understanding of the facts, the City concurs it is necessary to hire additional staff or consultant resources to adequately address the severe scope of the tax default problem.
b). This section of the report shows a lack of understanding of the process involved with sale of properties and sharing of proceeds. The only proceeds sent to special districts as the result of a tax auction are bond measures and special assessments levied. The proceeds from a sale which are from the 1% ad valorem are not distributed to the cities or special districts as the Teeter Fund has been paying the delinquency each year. The proceeds of the 1% (as well as fees, penalties and interest) go to the County. Property tax is a local tax and a portion is not sent to the state.
Conclusion of Discussion and Analysis
The City Council of Clearlake believes we are well informed on this issue and for the reasons outlined above we have confidence in the numbers provided us by the County. If the numbers provided are incorrect, we expect the County to provide updates. While we do not understand the underlying basis for comments such as “exaggerated effects of certain programs and possibilities created a belief in financial possibilities that could not, with proper vetting and understanding, be supported,” the scope of this problem is staggering and the impacts on our community are immense and far reaching. The City Council clearly understands the following:
The City has continued to receive its property tax revenue, via the Teeter Plan, for the thousands of delinquent and defaulted properties within the City, even though some of which have never paid taxes in the entire existence of the City (since 1980) and have never been offered at a tax auction. The City’s revenue loss is due to stagnation of these defaulted properties and the drain of existing resources for code enforcement, crime, persistent fires and the resulting lack of additional development due to properties often sitting in defaulted status for decades. Moreover, the excess blight impedes investors and developers from coming into the City, further compounding our revenue dilemma.
The direct revenue loss as a result of the many defaulted properties is a more serious problem for the County itself, and the many special districts and schools. The Teeter Fund only makes whole the revenue loss from the 1% ad valorem tax and not special assessments, bond measures, etc. Special taxes, which most local fire districts have in place, are not paid if an owner is delinquent (or in default). Similar owner payments towards school bond payments are not made whole by Teeter and are not received by the school district until a redemption of back taxes is made voluntarily or through a tax auction. Information on the scope of this problem has been requested of the County but has not yet been provided. However, from the numbers that
we do have access to, we know that approximately $8 million of total debt is owed to special districts, including our fire districts and schools.
Ironically, the County itself has the largest financial incentive to regular tax sales and eliminating the longterm backlog of delinquent and defaulted properties. As mentioned above, the Teeter Fund is maintained at a minimum level and any excess proceeds received from redemptions, through an auction or otherwise, benefits the County General Fund and can be used for any discretionary purpose. Based on the report on the Teeter Plan, which was presented to the Board of Supervisors by the County Auditor- Controller, even a small tax sale results in a large financial benefit to the County.
It is also important to note that the County General Fund is the only “taxing entity” that is NOT necessarily made whole by the Teeter Fund. The General Fund relies on the fees, penalties and interest from redemptions that exceed the Teeter Fund’s minimum level to make itself whole. Due to the higher level of delinquencies (and presumably defaults) in 2019 the total Teeter “debt” rose from $8.3 million in 2018, to $9.2 million. The County General Fund has to absorb this gap of $890,107. Additionally, over the past ten-years the General Fund has received an average of $2.1 million in transfers from Teeter (excess proceeds from redeemed properties not needed to meet the minimum Teeter reserve threshold), however in 2019 a transfer of only $889,594 was possible. Essentially this funding was lost due, at least in part, to a lack of a tax
auction in 2019. This can all be verified based on the information from the Auditor-Controller’s presentation on February 25, 2020 (also made available on the City’s webpage along with the other County provided data). Needless to say, it is confusing why the County does not believe there is a significant financial benefit to solving this problem, in addition to their statutory mandate to do so.
While we appreciate the Grand Jury’s stated goals of “accurately defining this situation” and not to “look to point blame”, unfortunately not enough effort was dedicated to this commitment in order to accurately define the situation and to achieve an accurate understanding of the facts. In spite of this, we are in agreement with many of the “findings” and “recommendations” of the Grand Jury.
Findings
• F1: There has been a sizable ‘backlog’ of property tax default parcels for a number of years. The City Council agrees with this finding.
• F2: The size of the above referenced backlog was stable at -4200 for most of that time but is now growing by -325 parcels/year. Based on information provided above we believe it is clear the backlog is substantially greater than 4,200, although we do agree the backlog is growing significantly due to the lack of recent tax sales, which adds to the immediate need to systematically address the problem.
• F3: The processing of default properties into the condition for auction has - by virtue of staffing limitations – been relegated to a ‘delay’ status in favor of completion of higher priority and greater fiscal impact items by the Treasurer/Tax Collector.
Regardless of staffing limitations the Tax Collector and Board of Supervisors need to make sure this mandate is addressed by the County. Additionally, we believe that there is no excuse for anyone labeling this issue as lower priority than other items or areas of responsibility. The information provided above clearly indicates the fiscal impact of the inaction on various agencies.
• F4: It would take two completely dedicated (meaning non-transferrable to other priorities at any time) and well-trained staff in the Treasurer’s/Tax Collector’s office to handle year-to-year growth of the number of default parcels and reduce the backlog. Cost to the county to accomplish this would be offset by the revenues from a -500/year tax auction with expected ‘withdrawals’ and final sales.
Regardless of the assumptions made by the Grand Jury in making this finding, the Council agrees that two additional staff focusing on this mandated task is important and critical in addressing the problem. We further encourage the County to utilize any other resources available to bring this backlog under control, including additional contracted work like other counties do.
• F5: Data was transferred from a staff position inside of the County Administration Office to a staff position inside of the City of Clearlake that was not properly vetted for accuracy, applicability to the over-riding issue, and not passed by the appropriate elected official ultimately responsible for that data.
As described previously, the Clearlake data was provided directly to the City Manager from the Assistant Tax Collector, with the entire County level information coming from the County Administrative Office. Whether the information is provided directly by the “elected official” (Treasurer/Tax Collector), one of her staff or another County employee, the information comes from the same County system. We are perplexed on how we can “vet for accuracy” this data. Additionally, we are unaware of any mandate or regulation that restricts the “elected official” from putting additional limits on access to public records to one position. Unless the Grand Jury or County provides some type of specifics about the veracity of the data they previously provided to the City, we believe the data provided was accurate and was provided by a legitimate and official source. We do not believe that the Tax Collector has the ability to make the determination she will be the only person or official to provide public information under her responsibility or purview.
• F6: The Teeter Plan has been utilized and managed by the Controller/Auditor and is making the expected contributions to the cities and special districts.
The Council agrees the Teeter Plan has been making the expected contributions to the cities and special districts, as managed by the Auditor-Controller, however minimum expected payments to the County General Fund have not been made in each year due, at least in part, to the lack of tax auctions by the Tax Collector.
• F7: A group of elected city officials issued written ‘claims’ against a county-wide elected official and distributed these claims to multiple governmental groups (both inside of Lake County and in Sacramento.) It occurred that there was a ‘leakage’ of these claims to the local process and social media without performing a reasonable set of fact checking nor any sourcing of second- and third party independent corroboration of the data and the assumptions upon which those claims were based.
The City Council of Clearlake sent various agencies some information and a request for investigation into the lack of actions of the Tax Collector. The information in the letters was based on information directly provided from the County, not a second or third hand source that should require verification. Additionally, there was not a ‘leakage’ of the 2019 letters to the press. These are all public documents and should not be only accessible at the whims of the Tax Collector.
• F8: Communications between elected city officials and elected county officials are sometimes strained and occasionally non-existent.
The Council agrees communications are sometimes strained between groups of local officials as we all have different positions and interests in some topics. We can only speak to communication between the City of Clearlake officials and County officials. Communication between the Council members and our staff, with the Board of Supervisors, County Administrative Office and most departments is extremely high and very regular. The only real communication problem we have experienced over the past year has been with the Tax Collector’s Office. The Tax Collector has not made herself available for meetings and has been hesitant to respond to requests for information without influence from either the County Administrator or members of the Board of Supervisors. As the Council and our City Manager have shared on multiple occasions that we are ready to meet and discuss the issue and provide resources available to us to support the successful implementation of a strategy to solve this backlog of defaulted properties. We remain committed to doing so, regardless of our disagreement on certain aspects of the situation. Unfortunately, at this point not enough attention or resources has been granted to this issue by the Board of Supervisors or the Tax Collector and the City is committed to ensuring the County’s mandated responsibility to conduct regular tax sales is adhered to.
Recommendations:
• R1: County Administrative Office review and enact enhanced controls over data dissemination to departments not normally utilizing such data and to any non-county public or private entities.
The Council understands that the implementation of this recommendation will be the decision of the County Administrator and the Board of Supervisors, however it is troubling that the Grand Jury as a group tasked with oversight of local government agencies, would recommend the enactment of thresholds on release of public records that appear to be contrary to state law. We recommend review of the California Public Records Act.
( https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?division=7.&chapter=3.5.&lawCode=GOV&title=1.&article=1 . )
• R2: Two dedicated and trained staff members should be added to the Treasurer/Tax Collector office to focus exclusively on the tax default auction process. This will stop expansion of those default quantities and – over time- reduce the backlog. This is in full recognition of current ‘open’ positions in the department but is in addition to those positions.
The City Councils is supportive of any additional resources provided to address the backlog and expansion of defaulted properties within the City and larger County. Our only concern with this recommendation is we do not believe the history of inaction by the Tax Collector is solely based on a lack of staffing in the office, but a negligence in addressing the issue. The Board of Supervisors may consider placing additional staff under the leadership of a different department head, such as the County Administrator, in order to ensure they are focused entirely on the tax auctions.
• R3: All elected city officials and elected county officials should exercise extreme prudence in making disparaging claims (be they in public or to other governmental agencies) against the performance or motivation of any other elected official. If such claims are to be made, multiple/independent verification of information/data supporting such claims should be fully explored.
As elected officials the City Council is certainly sensitive to this issue. However, we believe in accountability. We are all accustomed to criticism of decisions we make, and the Council does not take lightly the decision to focus attention on the Board of Supervisors’ and Tax Collector’s attention to this issue. We believe that there has been a negligence of duty related to this issue and unfortunately the normal methods of collaboration have not worked to resolve this long-standing issue. This is the reason the issue was raised in a more public way. It should be noted however that neither the Tax Collector or the Board of Supervisors have been “disparaged” by our actions or correspondence. All of the City’s actions and commentary are rooted in facts. We do believe it is critical to hold elected officials responsible for their track record and in the case of regular tax auctions the County has fallen very short and deserves criticism and attention paid to this issue. In the case of the information used, as has been mentioned multiple times above, the information all came directly from the County and we have no reason to believe the data is inaccurate.
• R4: A regular and scheduled meeting of representative of the Clearlake (elected) city council, representatives of the (elected) Lakeport city council, and representatives of the (elected) Lake County Board of Supervisors should be instituted. The purpose of this meeting will be to bring matters of mutual concern to light and explore proactive and cooperative means of addressing these concerns.
The three elected bodies have conducted an annual joint meeting the previous two years. The intent of this meeting has been focused on economic development discussion, but the Clearlake City Council is certainly willing to discuss a wider range of topics of “mutual concern”.
In conclusion, the Council would also like to point out that the current year’s report appears to conflict significantly with the Grand Jury’s report from 2016-17, “Has Anybody Seen a Tax Lien Sale Recently?”. In the earlier report the Grand Jury was critical of the lack of regular tax auctions and stressed the following key points:
• Municipalities depend on local tax monies to finance the operation of their government.
• When a local municipality has adequate funds to operate, they can create an atmosphere that make people desire to live in their city.
• When improvements are made to either private residences or commercial buildings, the property tax revenues will increase.
• When property owners stop paying taxes due on their property or vacate their properties without paying taxes, the municipality will lose valuable tax monies. The loss of those types of tax monies will affect the municipality’s ability to fund their operations.
• When a tax lien property sells, it is hoped that the new owners of said property will invest in them, increasing their value and generating more tax revenue.
• A property is eligible for a tax sale when property taxes have been delinquent for five consecutive years. Vacant houses or lots can deteriorate to such an extent that the values of surrounding properties are negatively affected.
It is difficult to understand how the perspective of the Grand Jury can change so much from what is directly quoted above, to the 2019-2020 report where tax sales are not to be considered a high priority of the Tax Collector’s Office. The blight within Lake County and Clearlake is a result, in part, of the County’s failure to have regular tax auctions. The City Council wants positive investment in our City, and we need the County’s help in taking this matter seriously and allocating resources to cure the massive backlog.
The 2016-17 Grand Jury’s ultimate recommendation was that the County conduct annual tax sales. In this years’ report the Grand Jury recommends two additional staff be hired to conduct tax auctions. We agree.
Sincerely,
Russell Cremer, Mayor
Phil Harris, Councilmember
Dirk Slooten, Vice Mayor
Russell Perdock, Councilmember
Joyce Overton, Councilmember
CC: Honorable Michael S. Lunas, Presiding Judge of the Lake County Superior Court - 255 N. Forbes Street,
Lakeport, CA 95453
Lake County Treasurer/Tax Collector – 255 N. Forbes Street, Lakeport, CA 95453
Lake County Board of Supervisors – 255 N. Forbes Street, Lakeport, CA 95453
In its June 29 report, the grand jury leveled criticisms at the city that included alleging that the city was using incorrect information as the basis of its complaint that thousands of properties totaling millions in unpaid taxes hadn’t been put up for tax sale.
The grand jury also faulted the city for what it claimed were “inappropriate” criticisms of Treasurer-Tax Collector Barbara Ringen’s job performance.
At the council’s July 16 meeting, staff and council members discussed the nine-page response letter being sent to the grand jury. The response letter is just one page shorter than the grand jury’s report.
City Manager Alan Flora said the information the city used in addressing the tax-defaulted property matter came from the county, specifically, the Treasurer-Tax Collector’s Office.
“At this time we have no reason to doubt any of that data,” he said.
In order to let members of the public judge the matter for themselves, Flora said city staff had posted the information the city received from the county on its website. The data can be found on a new page, “Tax Defaulted Properties Information.”
A 2019 map on the site shows thousands of tax-defaulted properties, highlighted in pink, throughout the city.
Mayor Russell Cremer and Vice Mayor Dirk Slooten assisted staff with writing the response letter.
“I felt that we had no choice but to give this long, very detailed responses to the grand jury,” Cremer said, adding that the grand jury report’s many inaccuracies required a strong response.
Slooten said the report was wrong and the information the city used came directly from the county. “There’s no doubt in my mind that our data is correct.”
With regard to the data, the letter explains its source and how it was used. The city pointed out that the grand jury used “inaccurate assumptions to artificially reduce the real numbers” of tax-defaulted properties, including not considering properties without proper road access or utilities.
The response letter added that neither the grand nor the tax collector have the authority to allow certain property owners to be removed from the tax default list based on physical attributes of properties, and doing so is contrary to state law and the charge of the Tax Collector’s Office.
Regarding the grand jury’s criticisms about the city’s statements about Ringen’s job performance, the letter stated, “While it gives the City no pleasure in saying it, the assertion by the Grand Jury that allegations of negligence were inappropriate or that we have no real understanding of the on-going management of the Tax Collector’s Office we believe these claims are accurate and further it is even documented by the Board of Supervisors. The Board has established an ad hoc committee to provide additional support and oversight of the Treasurer Tax Collector’s Office due to a lack of performance. Additionally, the 2019 letter only came after attempts by the ad hoc and City representatives to discuss these issues with the Tax Collector.”
The letter said a meeting between ad hoc committee members Supervisor Bruno Sabatier, Supervisor Moke Simon, County Administrative Officer Carol Hutchinson, Ringen and Flora was scheduled on Oct. 25, 2019. Ringen chose not to attend.
“The Tax Collector’s refusal to engage with the City, or even the Board’s ad hoc committee, necessitated a different approach to resolution of the problem,” the letter stated.
The letter went on to list, in detail, responses to the grand jury’s recommendations and findings.
Councilwoman Joyce Overton agreed with the letter and said it was important that people understand where the information came from.
Slooten moved to approve the response, which was seconded by Councilman Russ Perdock. The council voted 4-0 to pass the motion, with Councilman Phil Harris absent.
The city’s full response letter is published below.
Email Elizabeth Larson at
July 16, 2020
Lake County Civil Grand Jury
PO Box 1078
Kelseyville, CA 95451
Dear Grand Jurors:
RE: RESPONSE TO THE 2019-2020 LAKE COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY REPORT “TAX DEFAULT AUCTIONS”
The Lake County Civil Grand Jury released a report on Tax Default Auctions as part of its 2019-2020 report. This Grand Jury’s recommendations “required” the Clearlake City Council respond to recommendation #4 (R4), However, it should be noted that the City of Clearlake believes much of the report is flawed as it is clearly based on inaccurate assumptions and parsing of the information available, and therefore the City will respond in entirety to the discussion and analysis as well as all findings and recommendations.
The Grand Jury separated its discussion and analysis of the issue into four sections, so we will organize our responses likewise.
1). The default property situation – The Grand Jury states that the information provided by the City in its 2019 letter are not accurate, and further that the data is obtained by a singular secondary source. The City of Clearlake obtained information on the City’s tax delinquent and defaulted properties from the Assistant Treasurer/Tax Collector for the County of Lake. This source was listed in the 2019 letter. Information about tax delinquent and tax defaulted properties in the entire County was received later through the County Administrator’s Office. The information was provided from the central county system and there is no known reason to question the data or to be concerned for its veracity that the City is aware of. If the Grand Jury is aware of some deficiencies in the County’s tax database, they should provide some basis for this claim and share the “correct” raw data they refer to. The City has placed the original files
obtained from the County on its website so that anyone can review and verify the data for themselves. The City is very open about the source of its data. We welcome the County Tax Collector providing corrected data if necessary.
a). The report notes that the numbers are moving targets; we agree that the numbers are updated as often as daily based on property owner payments. The City never asserted that the numbers specified in the 2019 letter were indefinitely accurate, only that these were the numbers accurate at the time of the drafting of the letter. These numbers are a true reflection of the scope of the problem. This section of the report is one example of language that is lazy and confusing. The Grand Jury mentions “understanding some assumptions” and achieving a “broad based understanding,” but there is not enough description to understand what this means. The report does state that the quantities and dollar values have been “corroborated from multiple independent sources.” Frankly, such independent sources do not exist. However, if you refer to the sources of data the Grand Jury reviewed, they are both from the Tax Collector’s Office. While we agree this should be the ideal source of the date, it is neither multiple nor an independent source. This is the beginning of the overarching theme of the report which appears that the Grand Jury made a decision on the issue and drafted a report that supported this argument without spending the time and effort necessary to base this decision on facts.
b). This section alleges that the number of 12,500 tax default properties referenced in the 2019 letter is not accurate. The City acknowledges that the language used in the initial letter could be misleading. The City’s intent in referencing this number is to emphasize the scope of the tax delinquent properties. The City is interpreting tax delinquent properties to be those with any type of late property tax payments. A property is currently considered “in default” if it has remained delinquent for five years or more. It is important to note that the five-year timeline is not a hard line and many properties with the County should really be considered in default if they have been delinquent for three years or more. The state law governing tax default property sales sets the five-year timeline for residential properties while non-residential properties are authorized for sale after being delinquent for three years. Additionally, properties with abatement liens or other residential properties can be sold after three years of delinquency at the request of a taxing agency, such as the City. The number of tax delinquent properties in Lake County at the time the data was received was 12,500 properties. With the notice of an auction in May (although the Tax Collector decided to delay this auction indefinitely) additional payoffs were received and a more current delinquency number is 11,651. While this number is slightly less than what was reported initially based on information provided at that time, it still supports City’s assertion of the serious scope of this problem.
Perhaps most troubling is the discussion which follows in that the Grand Jury describes “there are two ways to look at the actual number.” The Grand Jury goes on to describe one method is to only consider properties in default which “do not have specific addresses, or accessibility, or existing services such as water hookups.” This method is used to create a smaller number of defaulted properties which is then used as a more “accurate” number throughout the remainder of the report. While we acknowledge that many of these properties without proper road access or utilities will be hard to sell and are difficult to develop, they are nonetheless still in tax default. These property owners are not absolved of responsibility to pay their taxes, nor is the Tax Collector absolved of responsibility to sell them. Not only is it inaccurate, it is irresponsible and contradictory to the Grand Jury’s mission to present this as an argument to artificially reduce the number of defaulted parcels and by extension, the scope of the problem. Further, while many properties do not currently have access to utilities, the scope of the problem is so large that many properties could be grouped together and sold to be developed into housing. Both Clearlake and Lake County desperately need additional quality housing and it’s a primary goal of the state to develop. Even the Grand Jury has recommended that tax defaulted properties be explored to develop housing in this year’s report entitled, “Assessing the Homelessness in Lake County”. Why wouldn’t we take advantage of this opportunity to turn a
longstanding problem into a benefit for the entire community?
c). We agree that when you artificially and arbitrarily reduce the number of defaulted properties based on their physical attributes rather than the requirements of state law (which is based on whether the property taxes are paid) the “amount owed” would be reduced. We know from reviewing actual data from the Tax Collector that this number is over $18 million. It is also misleading to remove “costs, penalties and interest” from this total, as it is an actual debt on the tax bill and the only motivation in removing this from the total number can be to artificially reduce the scale of the problem.
d). Again, the Grand Jury uses inaccurate assumptions to artificially reduce the real numbers. Neither the Grand Jury nor the Tax Collector have the authority to allow certain property owners to be removed from the tax default list based on physical attributes of their property. And, to do so is contrary to state law and the charge of the Tax Collector’s office.
e). We believe the recent trend in more property owners not paying taxes is due to the lack of regular tax sales and a history of inaction and negligence from the Tax Collectors Office. This has created an uptick in new default properties each year. If there is no threat of a tax sale, there is little motivation of a delinquent property owner to pay his/her property taxes.
2). The job performance of the Treasurer/Tax Collector – While it gives the City no pleasure in saying it, the assertion by the Grand Jury that allegations of negligence were inappropriate or that we have no real understanding of the on-going management of the Tax Collector’s Office we believe these claims are accurate and further it is even documented by the Board of Supervisors. The Board has established an ad hoc committee to provide additional support and oversight of the Treasurer Tax Collector’s Office due to a lack of performance. Additionally, the 2019 letter only came after attempts by the ad hoc and City representatives to discuss these issues with the Tax Collector. In fact, a meeting between ad hoc committee members Supervisor Sabatier, Supervisor Simon, CAO Hutchinson, Tax Collector Ringen and City Manager Flora was scheduled on October 25, 2019. Attendees of the meeting were Supervisor Sabatier, CAO
Hutchinson and City Manager Flora. While this face to face meeting was scheduled at the City’s request, the Tax Collector chose to abscond from the meeting. The Tax Collector’s refusal to engage with the City, or even the Board’s ad hoc committee, necessitated a different approach to resolution of the problem.
a). We agree that the Tax Collector holds multiple responsibilities, many of which are critical to supporting revenues for local governments and special districts.
b). The City believes tax sales are fundamental to the responsibility of the County and the Tax Collector. It is one responsibility that has limited options for deferring or delegating authority to perform and is the basis for the entire collection of property taxes and the bundle of property rights in the United States. For the Grand Jury to assert that it is not a “primary or critical function” of the Tax Collector’s responsibilities is not based on facts and is irresponsible. Additionally, the Tax Collector has clearly defined responsibilities in state law which are not negotiable by the person holding the office or the Grand Jury, one of which is the mandate to hold auctions of tax defaulted properties. Further, the Tax Collector is the only official with the
authority to conduct said auctions.
c). While we agree that staffing levels could always be higher, it is our responsibility as local government agencies to provide certain services regardless of the level of staffing. Just because an agency may have less than ideal resources does not give that agency the ability or the option to not fulfill any of its core functions. To be effective in leadership of a critical office, one must be able to identify solutions to meet the obligation to the public and statutory responsibility of the office, regardless of the resources provided.
d). We are supportive of any additional staff being dedicated to addressing the historical and persistent backlog of tax delinquent and defaulted properties.
e). While we believe the argument here is based on conjecture and anecdote, an important point is made that even engaging in the process of noticing and preparing for a tax auction instigates a significant number of property owners into paying their back taxes and curing the default. If this was a regular effort of the Tax Collector, the number of delinquencies and defaulted properties would likely be greatly reduced.
3). The Teeter Plan – While we have no quarrel with the history of the Teeter Plan provided herein, we have no understanding of the basis for the following statement, “It is critical to note that these actions were on delinquent tax amounts and not on default tax amounts. Default properties/taxes were not intended to be part of the plan.” It is unclear what the Grand Jury is trying to say here, unless the “default” properties are not intended to be part of the Plan as it is expected they will be sold at tax auction. In Lake County both delinquent and defaulted properties are part of the Teeter Plan due to the historical lack of adequate tax sales. The Teeter Fund pays taxing entities all portions of the 1% ad valorem taxes owed if there is a delinquency. There is no bearing whether the property is considered “defaulted” or not. The Teeter Fund
makes up the difference of unpaid property taxes (from the 1% only, not bond measures or special taxes) whether a property is delinquent for 1 year or 50+ years.
a). We believe the Grand Jury’s assertion that 32% to 40% of property tax contributions to cities and special districts is coming from the Teeter Fund (a fund that pays the cities and special districts their total owed delinquent amount, even if all property owners do not pay the County) is a reflection of the dire situation that has been created by the actions, or inaction, of the Tax Collector’s Office. With regular tax sales the amount “owed” by the Teeter Fund would be reduced, freeing up funds to be distributed to the County General Fund. These discretionary dollars could be used to hire more deputies, build parks, pave roads or even hire more people in the Tax Collector’s Office to conduct regular tax auctions.
b). We agree with the Grand Jury’s statement of who manages the Teeter Fund, which is why in the 2019 letter to the Board of Supervisors the City requested the Board schedule a presentation on the Teeter Fund by the Auditor-Controller. In future years, the Grand Jury may consider interviewing the Auditor regarding the Teeter Fund in order to get a more accurate picture of how the fund operates.
c). The assertion of the Grand Jury that only cities and special districts benefit from the Teeter Fund is not based in fact. While the cities and special districts are beneficiaries of the Plan, the County also benefits. When the fees and penalties are collected due to payoffs or the tax sale process, the County gets to keep the fees, penalties and interest. Additionally, the 1% tax has already been paid by Teeter to the cities and special districts, so this funding is available for use by the County (as long as they meet the minimum funding requirement of the Teeter Fund). The excess proceeds are discretionary dollars that can be used for any lawful purpose as mentioned above (law enforcement personnel, building parks, paving roads, or hiring additional staff to serve the community). There is no wonder that some County departments may have been
“making noises” as many will benefit directly from additional revenue from tax sales via the Teeter Fund.
4. With regard to the floated concept of a lawsuit to try to attain certain specific goals – the discussion raised by the City’s focus on this issue has elevated the profile of the need for more tax sales. Unfortunately, up to this point the public discussion has had little impact on the Board of Supervisors or the Tax Collector resulting in action. The Grand Jury’s stated resignation that the goal of 1,000 properties being sold is impossible, sounds eerily similar to the excuses of the Tax Collector and some members of the Board of Supervisors. If as much effort was put into solving the problem and buckling down and doing the work required rather than dreaming up excuses and reasons why it can’t be done, the County would be making significant progress toward achieving the goal.
a). Based on the assumptions created by the Grand Jury, and our own understanding of the facts, the City concurs it is necessary to hire additional staff or consultant resources to adequately address the severe scope of the tax default problem.
b). This section of the report shows a lack of understanding of the process involved with sale of properties and sharing of proceeds. The only proceeds sent to special districts as the result of a tax auction are bond measures and special assessments levied. The proceeds from a sale which are from the 1% ad valorem are not distributed to the cities or special districts as the Teeter Fund has been paying the delinquency each year. The proceeds of the 1% (as well as fees, penalties and interest) go to the County. Property tax is a local tax and a portion is not sent to the state.
Conclusion of Discussion and Analysis
The City Council of Clearlake believes we are well informed on this issue and for the reasons outlined above we have confidence in the numbers provided us by the County. If the numbers provided are incorrect, we expect the County to provide updates. While we do not understand the underlying basis for comments such as “exaggerated effects of certain programs and possibilities created a belief in financial possibilities that could not, with proper vetting and understanding, be supported,” the scope of this problem is staggering and the impacts on our community are immense and far reaching. The City Council clearly understands the following:
The City has continued to receive its property tax revenue, via the Teeter Plan, for the thousands of delinquent and defaulted properties within the City, even though some of which have never paid taxes in the entire existence of the City (since 1980) and have never been offered at a tax auction. The City’s revenue loss is due to stagnation of these defaulted properties and the drain of existing resources for code enforcement, crime, persistent fires and the resulting lack of additional development due to properties often sitting in defaulted status for decades. Moreover, the excess blight impedes investors and developers from coming into the City, further compounding our revenue dilemma.
The direct revenue loss as a result of the many defaulted properties is a more serious problem for the County itself, and the many special districts and schools. The Teeter Fund only makes whole the revenue loss from the 1% ad valorem tax and not special assessments, bond measures, etc. Special taxes, which most local fire districts have in place, are not paid if an owner is delinquent (or in default). Similar owner payments towards school bond payments are not made whole by Teeter and are not received by the school district until a redemption of back taxes is made voluntarily or through a tax auction. Information on the scope of this problem has been requested of the County but has not yet been provided. However, from the numbers that
we do have access to, we know that approximately $8 million of total debt is owed to special districts, including our fire districts and schools.
Ironically, the County itself has the largest financial incentive to regular tax sales and eliminating the longterm backlog of delinquent and defaulted properties. As mentioned above, the Teeter Fund is maintained at a minimum level and any excess proceeds received from redemptions, through an auction or otherwise, benefits the County General Fund and can be used for any discretionary purpose. Based on the report on the Teeter Plan, which was presented to the Board of Supervisors by the County Auditor- Controller, even a small tax sale results in a large financial benefit to the County.
It is also important to note that the County General Fund is the only “taxing entity” that is NOT necessarily made whole by the Teeter Fund. The General Fund relies on the fees, penalties and interest from redemptions that exceed the Teeter Fund’s minimum level to make itself whole. Due to the higher level of delinquencies (and presumably defaults) in 2019 the total Teeter “debt” rose from $8.3 million in 2018, to $9.2 million. The County General Fund has to absorb this gap of $890,107. Additionally, over the past ten-years the General Fund has received an average of $2.1 million in transfers from Teeter (excess proceeds from redeemed properties not needed to meet the minimum Teeter reserve threshold), however in 2019 a transfer of only $889,594 was possible. Essentially this funding was lost due, at least in part, to a lack of a tax
auction in 2019. This can all be verified based on the information from the Auditor-Controller’s presentation on February 25, 2020 (also made available on the City’s webpage along with the other County provided data). Needless to say, it is confusing why the County does not believe there is a significant financial benefit to solving this problem, in addition to their statutory mandate to do so.
While we appreciate the Grand Jury’s stated goals of “accurately defining this situation” and not to “look to point blame”, unfortunately not enough effort was dedicated to this commitment in order to accurately define the situation and to achieve an accurate understanding of the facts. In spite of this, we are in agreement with many of the “findings” and “recommendations” of the Grand Jury.
Findings
• F1: There has been a sizable ‘backlog’ of property tax default parcels for a number of years. The City Council agrees with this finding.
• F2: The size of the above referenced backlog was stable at -4200 for most of that time but is now growing by -325 parcels/year. Based on information provided above we believe it is clear the backlog is substantially greater than 4,200, although we do agree the backlog is growing significantly due to the lack of recent tax sales, which adds to the immediate need to systematically address the problem.
• F3: The processing of default properties into the condition for auction has - by virtue of staffing limitations – been relegated to a ‘delay’ status in favor of completion of higher priority and greater fiscal impact items by the Treasurer/Tax Collector.
Regardless of staffing limitations the Tax Collector and Board of Supervisors need to make sure this mandate is addressed by the County. Additionally, we believe that there is no excuse for anyone labeling this issue as lower priority than other items or areas of responsibility. The information provided above clearly indicates the fiscal impact of the inaction on various agencies.
• F4: It would take two completely dedicated (meaning non-transferrable to other priorities at any time) and well-trained staff in the Treasurer’s/Tax Collector’s office to handle year-to-year growth of the number of default parcels and reduce the backlog. Cost to the county to accomplish this would be offset by the revenues from a -500/year tax auction with expected ‘withdrawals’ and final sales.
Regardless of the assumptions made by the Grand Jury in making this finding, the Council agrees that two additional staff focusing on this mandated task is important and critical in addressing the problem. We further encourage the County to utilize any other resources available to bring this backlog under control, including additional contracted work like other counties do.
• F5: Data was transferred from a staff position inside of the County Administration Office to a staff position inside of the City of Clearlake that was not properly vetted for accuracy, applicability to the over-riding issue, and not passed by the appropriate elected official ultimately responsible for that data.
As described previously, the Clearlake data was provided directly to the City Manager from the Assistant Tax Collector, with the entire County level information coming from the County Administrative Office. Whether the information is provided directly by the “elected official” (Treasurer/Tax Collector), one of her staff or another County employee, the information comes from the same County system. We are perplexed on how we can “vet for accuracy” this data. Additionally, we are unaware of any mandate or regulation that restricts the “elected official” from putting additional limits on access to public records to one position. Unless the Grand Jury or County provides some type of specifics about the veracity of the data they previously provided to the City, we believe the data provided was accurate and was provided by a legitimate and official source. We do not believe that the Tax Collector has the ability to make the determination she will be the only person or official to provide public information under her responsibility or purview.
• F6: The Teeter Plan has been utilized and managed by the Controller/Auditor and is making the expected contributions to the cities and special districts.
The Council agrees the Teeter Plan has been making the expected contributions to the cities and special districts, as managed by the Auditor-Controller, however minimum expected payments to the County General Fund have not been made in each year due, at least in part, to the lack of tax auctions by the Tax Collector.
• F7: A group of elected city officials issued written ‘claims’ against a county-wide elected official and distributed these claims to multiple governmental groups (both inside of Lake County and in Sacramento.) It occurred that there was a ‘leakage’ of these claims to the local process and social media without performing a reasonable set of fact checking nor any sourcing of second- and third party independent corroboration of the data and the assumptions upon which those claims were based.
The City Council of Clearlake sent various agencies some information and a request for investigation into the lack of actions of the Tax Collector. The information in the letters was based on information directly provided from the County, not a second or third hand source that should require verification. Additionally, there was not a ‘leakage’ of the 2019 letters to the press. These are all public documents and should not be only accessible at the whims of the Tax Collector.
• F8: Communications between elected city officials and elected county officials are sometimes strained and occasionally non-existent.
The Council agrees communications are sometimes strained between groups of local officials as we all have different positions and interests in some topics. We can only speak to communication between the City of Clearlake officials and County officials. Communication between the Council members and our staff, with the Board of Supervisors, County Administrative Office and most departments is extremely high and very regular. The only real communication problem we have experienced over the past year has been with the Tax Collector’s Office. The Tax Collector has not made herself available for meetings and has been hesitant to respond to requests for information without influence from either the County Administrator or members of the Board of Supervisors. As the Council and our City Manager have shared on multiple occasions that we are ready to meet and discuss the issue and provide resources available to us to support the successful implementation of a strategy to solve this backlog of defaulted properties. We remain committed to doing so, regardless of our disagreement on certain aspects of the situation. Unfortunately, at this point not enough attention or resources has been granted to this issue by the Board of Supervisors or the Tax Collector and the City is committed to ensuring the County’s mandated responsibility to conduct regular tax sales is adhered to.
Recommendations:
• R1: County Administrative Office review and enact enhanced controls over data dissemination to departments not normally utilizing such data and to any non-county public or private entities.
The Council understands that the implementation of this recommendation will be the decision of the County Administrator and the Board of Supervisors, however it is troubling that the Grand Jury as a group tasked with oversight of local government agencies, would recommend the enactment of thresholds on release of public records that appear to be contrary to state law. We recommend review of the California Public Records Act.
( https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?division=7.&chapter=3.5.&lawCode=GOV&title=1.&article=1 . )
• R2: Two dedicated and trained staff members should be added to the Treasurer/Tax Collector office to focus exclusively on the tax default auction process. This will stop expansion of those default quantities and – over time- reduce the backlog. This is in full recognition of current ‘open’ positions in the department but is in addition to those positions.
The City Councils is supportive of any additional resources provided to address the backlog and expansion of defaulted properties within the City and larger County. Our only concern with this recommendation is we do not believe the history of inaction by the Tax Collector is solely based on a lack of staffing in the office, but a negligence in addressing the issue. The Board of Supervisors may consider placing additional staff under the leadership of a different department head, such as the County Administrator, in order to ensure they are focused entirely on the tax auctions.
• R3: All elected city officials and elected county officials should exercise extreme prudence in making disparaging claims (be they in public or to other governmental agencies) against the performance or motivation of any other elected official. If such claims are to be made, multiple/independent verification of information/data supporting such claims should be fully explored.
As elected officials the City Council is certainly sensitive to this issue. However, we believe in accountability. We are all accustomed to criticism of decisions we make, and the Council does not take lightly the decision to focus attention on the Board of Supervisors’ and Tax Collector’s attention to this issue. We believe that there has been a negligence of duty related to this issue and unfortunately the normal methods of collaboration have not worked to resolve this long-standing issue. This is the reason the issue was raised in a more public way. It should be noted however that neither the Tax Collector or the Board of Supervisors have been “disparaged” by our actions or correspondence. All of the City’s actions and commentary are rooted in facts. We do believe it is critical to hold elected officials responsible for their track record and in the case of regular tax auctions the County has fallen very short and deserves criticism and attention paid to this issue. In the case of the information used, as has been mentioned multiple times above, the information all came directly from the County and we have no reason to believe the data is inaccurate.
• R4: A regular and scheduled meeting of representative of the Clearlake (elected) city council, representatives of the (elected) Lakeport city council, and representatives of the (elected) Lake County Board of Supervisors should be instituted. The purpose of this meeting will be to bring matters of mutual concern to light and explore proactive and cooperative means of addressing these concerns.
The three elected bodies have conducted an annual joint meeting the previous two years. The intent of this meeting has been focused on economic development discussion, but the Clearlake City Council is certainly willing to discuss a wider range of topics of “mutual concern”.
In conclusion, the Council would also like to point out that the current year’s report appears to conflict significantly with the Grand Jury’s report from 2016-17, “Has Anybody Seen a Tax Lien Sale Recently?”. In the earlier report the Grand Jury was critical of the lack of regular tax auctions and stressed the following key points:
• Municipalities depend on local tax monies to finance the operation of their government.
• When a local municipality has adequate funds to operate, they can create an atmosphere that make people desire to live in their city.
• When improvements are made to either private residences or commercial buildings, the property tax revenues will increase.
• When property owners stop paying taxes due on their property or vacate their properties without paying taxes, the municipality will lose valuable tax monies. The loss of those types of tax monies will affect the municipality’s ability to fund their operations.
• When a tax lien property sells, it is hoped that the new owners of said property will invest in them, increasing their value and generating more tax revenue.
• A property is eligible for a tax sale when property taxes have been delinquent for five consecutive years. Vacant houses or lots can deteriorate to such an extent that the values of surrounding properties are negatively affected.
It is difficult to understand how the perspective of the Grand Jury can change so much from what is directly quoted above, to the 2019-2020 report where tax sales are not to be considered a high priority of the Tax Collector’s Office. The blight within Lake County and Clearlake is a result, in part, of the County’s failure to have regular tax auctions. The City Council wants positive investment in our City, and we need the County’s help in taking this matter seriously and allocating resources to cure the massive backlog.
The 2016-17 Grand Jury’s ultimate recommendation was that the County conduct annual tax sales. In this years’ report the Grand Jury recommends two additional staff be hired to conduct tax auctions. We agree.
Sincerely,
Russell Cremer, Mayor
Phil Harris, Councilmember
Dirk Slooten, Vice Mayor
Russell Perdock, Councilmember
Joyce Overton, Councilmember
CC: Honorable Michael S. Lunas, Presiding Judge of the Lake County Superior Court - 255 N. Forbes Street,
Lakeport, CA 95453
Lake County Treasurer/Tax Collector – 255 N. Forbes Street, Lakeport, CA 95453
Lake County Board of Supervisors – 255 N. Forbes Street, Lakeport, CA 95453
On Wednesday, Rep. Mike Thompson (CA-05) lauded the House passage of the Great American Outdoors Act, a bipartisan bill he coauthored and voted to pass that makes significant investments in the conservation of public lands, including fully and permanently funding the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
Thompson spoke on the House floor in favor of this bill.
“We are a nation full of incredible public lands and beautiful open spaces that we must work to preserve for generations to enjoy. That’s why today I was proud to vote to pass the Great American Outdoors Act, bipartisan legislation to do this important conservation work,” said Thompson. “This bill fully funds the Land and Water Conservation Fund, a proven method of preserving public lands while also supporting local economies. And it’s a win for our district, providing funding for preservation and park expansion projects in our communities and on our public lands. I look forward to this bill becoming law so we can continue protecting our great outdoors for our children and grandchildren,” he said.
Coauthored by Thompson, the Great American Outdoors Act will help fund many projects in California’s Fifth Congressional District.
The bill will help Napa and Sonoma Counties expand the existing parks in the Mayacamas Mountains and would help with the acquisition of the 200-acre Fitzsimmons Property and the McCormick Ranch.
Funding through the Land and Water Conservation could also assist with land protections in the Cedar Roughs Wilderness Area and the Berryessa Snow Mountain National Monument.
The legislation would also help with projects to restore wetlands in the Sonoma Baylands and restoring public lands like Skaggs Island. Land and Water Conservation Fund was an important part of funding open spaces in the district, such as the San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge and the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument.
The Great American Outdoors Act is a sweeping and bipartisan conservation bill that includes the following:
– Fully funding the Land and Water Conservation Fund at $900 million annually; and
– Establishing the National Parks and Public Land Legacy Restoration Fund to provide resources to the National Park Service, the U.S Forest Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land Management and the Bureau of Indian Education.
This legislation now heads to the president’s desk to be signed into law.
You can click here for a fact sheet on the Great American Outdoors Act.
Thompson represents California’s Fifth Congressional District, which includes all or part of Contra Costa, Lake, Napa, Solano and Sonoma counties.
In May, National Forests in California enacted state-wide campfire restrictions, until further notice, to protect the health and safety of communities and firefighters. Igniting, building, maintaining or using a campfire on National Forests in California remain prohibited, except for developed campgrounds and certain permitted facilities.
Check with local National Forests for any additional fire restrictions in place for specific locations.
Forest Service officials are taking this necessary step to ensure that firefighters are available to safely respond and manage incidents.
Ninety-five percent of all wildfires in California are human-caused, and many are a result of unattended campfires.
With the above-average fire season projected in much of California, and the combined potential for wildfires and smoke to impact communities and firefighters during this unprecedented pandemic, there is a need to focus on reducing or eliminating this large ignition source and do all we can to preserve firefighting resources.
“We need everyone now, more than ever, to help reduce the number of preventable wildfires,” said Deputy Regional Forester Anthony Scardina, for the USDA Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region. “We are in state-wide fire restrictions, yet illegal campfires continue to be an issue, putting a strain on firefighters and threatening communities.”
Forest visitors will still be able to use pressurized liquid or gas devices (stoves, grills or lanterns) with shut-off valves outside of developed campgrounds with a valid California Campfire Permit, which can be found at CA Campfire Permit.
The Forest Service manages 18 National Forests in the Pacific Southwest Region, which encompasses over 20 million acres across California, and assists State and Private forest landowners in California, Hawaii and the U.S. Affiliated Pacific Islands.
National forests supply 50 percent of the water in California and form the watershed of most major aqueducts and more than 2,400 reservoirs throughout the state.
For more information, visit www.fs.usda.gov/R5 .
Check with local National Forests for any additional fire restrictions in place for specific locations.
Forest Service officials are taking this necessary step to ensure that firefighters are available to safely respond and manage incidents.
Ninety-five percent of all wildfires in California are human-caused, and many are a result of unattended campfires.
With the above-average fire season projected in much of California, and the combined potential for wildfires and smoke to impact communities and firefighters during this unprecedented pandemic, there is a need to focus on reducing or eliminating this large ignition source and do all we can to preserve firefighting resources.
“We need everyone now, more than ever, to help reduce the number of preventable wildfires,” said Deputy Regional Forester Anthony Scardina, for the USDA Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region. “We are in state-wide fire restrictions, yet illegal campfires continue to be an issue, putting a strain on firefighters and threatening communities.”
Forest visitors will still be able to use pressurized liquid or gas devices (stoves, grills or lanterns) with shut-off valves outside of developed campgrounds with a valid California Campfire Permit, which can be found at CA Campfire Permit.
The Forest Service manages 18 National Forests in the Pacific Southwest Region, which encompasses over 20 million acres across California, and assists State and Private forest landowners in California, Hawaii and the U.S. Affiliated Pacific Islands.
National forests supply 50 percent of the water in California and form the watershed of most major aqueducts and more than 2,400 reservoirs throughout the state.
For more information, visit www.fs.usda.gov/R5 .
LAKE COUNTY, Calif. – Following a brief Tuesday morning public hearing, the Board of Supervisors unanimously approved selling a portion of county-owned property in Clearlake to the Lake Transit Authority, which will build a new regional transit hub at the site.
In January, the Board of Supervisors unanimously approved a resolution declaring the property at 7175 South Center Drive as surplus and authorizing the sale of a portion of the land to Lake Transit.
That resolution, and a letter the board approved sending at the same meeting, were meant to help Lake Transit with a grant application Lake Transit made that same week to California’s Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program, or TIRCP.
In April, Lake Transit received notification from TIRCP that it was receiving the $13 million grant it had sought, which will fund the transit hub and four hydrogen buses.
At Tuesday’s meeting, Deputy County Administrative Officer Susan Parker said the board had tasked staff with negotiating the property sale and determining the in-kind value of the direct public benefit from Lake Transit’s services.
Parker said the direct public benefit was determined to be $769,510. The appraised value of the property was $300,000 and the county agreed to sell the property to the agency for $200,000.
Supervisor Bruno Sabatier, whose district includes Clearlake, said he was very pleased the matter was before them.
He said the project won’t be just a transit hub for Lake County but an interregional hub connecting the county to Shasta County, Interstate 5 and the Bay Area. Sabatier added that he believes the hub will help move other projects along.
James Sookne, program manager for Lake Transit, said he was happy that the county and Lake Transit had come to the agreement, and he added that, like Sabatier, he believes it will be a huge project for Lake County.
In explaining the direct public benefit, Sabatier said Lake Transit gave emergency rides during the county’s wildland fires, provides rides for college students and a summer transportation program for youth, and also works with Social Services and Behavioral Health.
Board Chair Moke Simon, who also sits on the Lake Transit Authority Board of Directors, said the county’s low income residents really rely on the services.
“During the fires they were critical,” Simon said, adding they continued to give free rides to those in need following the fires.
Simon said Lake Transit offers great community benefit, and the transit hub will enhance the opportunity for growth throughout the entire county.
Lake Transit Executive Director Lisa Davey-Bates thanked the board and staff. “It’s a great project and we couldn't have done it without your support.”
Referring to the $13 million grant, Davey-Bates said Lake was the only rural county to receive so much funding for a transit project.
“We have a great project ahead of us,” she said explaining that it will build the transit hub and buy the new buses, adding there isn’t another rural county slated to get hydrogen buses.
She said they will work with community colleges on workforce development.
“It is a big project with a lot of opportunity,” Davey-Bates said.
Davey-Bates said the hub will connect as far north as Shasta County and down to Sacramento, with buses also to provide service to Mendocino County and down Highway 101 to Santa Rosa, connecting to other transit systems that go to the Bay Area. Two hydrogen buses also will travel Highway 29 to Napa County.
She said Lake Transit will hold a kickoff meeting with representatives of the grant program in the next couple of months, with hopes of getting the first allocation from the grant either later this year or early in 2021.
County Counsel Anita Grant pointed out that the resolution approving the sale also resolves outstanding issues with the remaining portions of the property.
The resolution explains that in 2019 the county hired a private survey firm to split Assessor’s Parcel No. 010-043-052 into three separate parcels “and by doing so, will, in cooperation with other public entities, advance multiple benefits to the public.”
The resolution does not give a size for the property, but the county GIS shows the total assessor’s parcel totals nearly seven acres.
A map – attached to the resolution – of the land designated for the transit hub appears to show it is approximately 2.88 acres.
The resolution said that of the two remaining parcels created by the parcel split the county began last year, one that runs along Highway 53 will be sold to the city of Clearlake to be used to develop future transportation routes and the other, which is where the Lake County Public Health Center is located, will be maintained by the county.
No public input was given and Sabatier moved to approve the resolution declaring the property as surplus and made a separate motion to authorize County Administrative Officer Carol Huchingson to execute the land purchase agreement with Lake Transit. Both motions passed with full board approval.
Email Elizabeth Larson atThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. . Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, or Lake County News, @LakeCoNews.
In January, the Board of Supervisors unanimously approved a resolution declaring the property at 7175 South Center Drive as surplus and authorizing the sale of a portion of the land to Lake Transit.
That resolution, and a letter the board approved sending at the same meeting, were meant to help Lake Transit with a grant application Lake Transit made that same week to California’s Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program, or TIRCP.
In April, Lake Transit received notification from TIRCP that it was receiving the $13 million grant it had sought, which will fund the transit hub and four hydrogen buses.
At Tuesday’s meeting, Deputy County Administrative Officer Susan Parker said the board had tasked staff with negotiating the property sale and determining the in-kind value of the direct public benefit from Lake Transit’s services.
Parker said the direct public benefit was determined to be $769,510. The appraised value of the property was $300,000 and the county agreed to sell the property to the agency for $200,000.
Supervisor Bruno Sabatier, whose district includes Clearlake, said he was very pleased the matter was before them.
He said the project won’t be just a transit hub for Lake County but an interregional hub connecting the county to Shasta County, Interstate 5 and the Bay Area. Sabatier added that he believes the hub will help move other projects along.
James Sookne, program manager for Lake Transit, said he was happy that the county and Lake Transit had come to the agreement, and he added that, like Sabatier, he believes it will be a huge project for Lake County.
In explaining the direct public benefit, Sabatier said Lake Transit gave emergency rides during the county’s wildland fires, provides rides for college students and a summer transportation program for youth, and also works with Social Services and Behavioral Health.
Board Chair Moke Simon, who also sits on the Lake Transit Authority Board of Directors, said the county’s low income residents really rely on the services.
“During the fires they were critical,” Simon said, adding they continued to give free rides to those in need following the fires.
Simon said Lake Transit offers great community benefit, and the transit hub will enhance the opportunity for growth throughout the entire county.
Lake Transit Executive Director Lisa Davey-Bates thanked the board and staff. “It’s a great project and we couldn't have done it without your support.”
Referring to the $13 million grant, Davey-Bates said Lake was the only rural county to receive so much funding for a transit project.
“We have a great project ahead of us,” she said explaining that it will build the transit hub and buy the new buses, adding there isn’t another rural county slated to get hydrogen buses.
She said they will work with community colleges on workforce development.
“It is a big project with a lot of opportunity,” Davey-Bates said.
Davey-Bates said the hub will connect as far north as Shasta County and down to Sacramento, with buses also to provide service to Mendocino County and down Highway 101 to Santa Rosa, connecting to other transit systems that go to the Bay Area. Two hydrogen buses also will travel Highway 29 to Napa County.
She said Lake Transit will hold a kickoff meeting with representatives of the grant program in the next couple of months, with hopes of getting the first allocation from the grant either later this year or early in 2021.
County Counsel Anita Grant pointed out that the resolution approving the sale also resolves outstanding issues with the remaining portions of the property.
The resolution explains that in 2019 the county hired a private survey firm to split Assessor’s Parcel No. 010-043-052 into three separate parcels “and by doing so, will, in cooperation with other public entities, advance multiple benefits to the public.”
The resolution does not give a size for the property, but the county GIS shows the total assessor’s parcel totals nearly seven acres.
A map – attached to the resolution – of the land designated for the transit hub appears to show it is approximately 2.88 acres.
The resolution said that of the two remaining parcels created by the parcel split the county began last year, one that runs along Highway 53 will be sold to the city of Clearlake to be used to develop future transportation routes and the other, which is where the Lake County Public Health Center is located, will be maintained by the county.
No public input was given and Sabatier moved to approve the resolution declaring the property as surplus and made a separate motion to authorize County Administrative Officer Carol Huchingson to execute the land purchase agreement with Lake Transit. Both motions passed with full board approval.
Email Elizabeth Larson at
LAKEPORT, Calif. – On Tuesday, the Lakeport City Council approved a resolution accepting a state grant for alcohol education and enforcement, gave the OK on contracts for building services and new generators, and bid farewell to the retiring city manager.
Police Chief Brad Rasmussen introduced the proposed adoption of a resolution accepting grant funding and joining the Lakeport Police Department into partnership with the State of California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, or ABC, as part of the city being awarded a state grant.
However, Rasmussen handed off the item to Officer Andrew Welter, who did the grant application and explained it to the council.
Welter said the Lakeport Police Department, in partnership with the Clearlake Police Department, submitted a joint application to ABC.
“We were awarded that grant,” in the amount of $24,975, Welter said.
Welter said the grant will allow officers to work overtime assignments on alcohol education and enforcement in both cities in partnership with ABC. The activity includes the “minor decoy” and shoulder tap operations in which people are asked to purchase alcohol for a minor.
Rasmussen said his department will do the fiscal management on the grant.
He said the main thing is managing alcohol sales, and reducing alcohol to minors and alcohol-related crime.
Another big effort will be focusing on educating the community, including offering training to licensees on how to make sure they're not running afoul of any alcohol sales laws, he said.
Councilman Kenny Parlet, who owns Lakeview Supermarket and Deli in Lucerne, said most of the licensees aren’t the problem, it’s their employees, some of whom may be in their job a short time.
He said it is important to offer education. “Enforcement is going to go on one way or the other.”
Rasmussen said that under the grant’s education component, they plan to offer training courses. He said such courses are well-received; the last time they held one a few years ago, they had as many as 60 people in attendance.
“I think it will be beneficial,” Rasmussen said.
Parlet asked that the city emphasize in its communications with the public that the program is about education, not trying to catch people doing things wrong.
Mayor George Spurr agreed. “It’s more about education than anything else.”
Councilwoman Mireya Turner moved to approve the grant resolution, with Councilwoman Stacey Mattina seconding and the council approving the motion 4-0. Councilman Tim Barnes was absent from the meeting.
Following the vote, council members congratulated Welter for his work on getting the grant.
The council then went on to consider Assistant City Manager Kevin Ingram’s request to approve a professional service agreement with 4LEAF Inc. for the provision of supplemental building services in the amount not to exceed $25,000.
Ingram said the contract was necessary to fill service gaps following the retirement of longtime city Building Official Tom Carlton. He said the funding will come from fees charged for the services, including inspections and plan examinations.
The council approved the contract 4-0.
Next, Public Works Director Doug Grider presented a contract with Leete Generators in the amount of $263,536 for four standby generators to replace current units at the police department, City Hall and the city’s corporation yard, where generators have had mechanical and capacity issues. A new generator also will be installed at the Silveira Community Center.
He said the generators – along with separate costs for installation and transfer switches – will be funded by the $300,000 Public Safety Power Shutoff Resiliency Allocation Grant the city received from the state.
In anticipation of regulation changes from the California Air Resources Board, Grider said the city sought bids from companies for generators with Tier 4 engines, as Tier 3 engines – which were less expensive to purchase – will no longer be compliant within the next three to five years.
Among the five bids the city received, Grider said only Leete responded to the request for Tier 4 engines.
“I think it’s going to be a good thing getting these things installed,” Grider said, adding they are pushing the envelope to get the generators installed before September. That’s the season when public safety power shutoffs take place.
Spurr asked about plans for the old generators. Grider said they haven’t made a decision yet but are considering mounting them on trailers so they could be transported and used as backup units if necessary.
Parlet thanked Grider and his staff for getting the grants. “Our team is doing a great job,” Parlet said.
City Manager Margaret Silveira also recognized Public Works staffer Ron Ladd and Utilities Superintendent Paul Harris for their efforts with the grant.
Mattina moved to approve the contract, with Parlet seconding and the council voting 4-0.
The council finished its main agenda items by voting unanimously to appoint Turner as the voting delegate for the League of California Cities Annual Conference, which will be held virtually Oct. 7 to 9. Parlet was selected to be the first alternate and Spurr the second alternate.
Council finishes with a farewell
Council members also congratulated Silveira on her last council meeting. She retires July 31.
“You will be sorely missed and I don't think it will be the same,” said Parlet.
“You’ve just been a real asset to the community and will never be forgotten, especially now that your name will be on the building,” Parlet added, referring to the council’s action at its July 7 meeting to name the community center in Silveira’s honor.
Silveira thanked the community, staff, business and elected officials for their support during her tenure as city manager.
“It’s been a quick 10 and a half years with the amazing support I’ve had from everyone here in Lakeport,” she said.
She thanked all of the council members who have served during her tenure, explaining that their leadership is crucial.
Silveira also thanked the council for the “amazing honor” of naming the community center after her. “
“That was just unbelievable,” and totally humbling, she said.
She said she also wanted the community to understand that it is getting an excellent city manager in Ingram, who the council has tapped to be her successor. Silveira thanked the council for that decision.
Ingram has knowledge of the community and planning, and a master’s degree in public administration, Silveira said.
“He’s really ready for the job,” she said. “I think he’s going to make a great leader.”
Silveira added, “I’ve been truly blessed with this opportunity to work here in Lakeport.”
Email Elizabeth Larson atThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. . Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, or Lake County News, @LakeCoNews.
Police Chief Brad Rasmussen introduced the proposed adoption of a resolution accepting grant funding and joining the Lakeport Police Department into partnership with the State of California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, or ABC, as part of the city being awarded a state grant.
However, Rasmussen handed off the item to Officer Andrew Welter, who did the grant application and explained it to the council.
Welter said the Lakeport Police Department, in partnership with the Clearlake Police Department, submitted a joint application to ABC.
“We were awarded that grant,” in the amount of $24,975, Welter said.
Welter said the grant will allow officers to work overtime assignments on alcohol education and enforcement in both cities in partnership with ABC. The activity includes the “minor decoy” and shoulder tap operations in which people are asked to purchase alcohol for a minor.
Rasmussen said his department will do the fiscal management on the grant.
He said the main thing is managing alcohol sales, and reducing alcohol to minors and alcohol-related crime.
Another big effort will be focusing on educating the community, including offering training to licensees on how to make sure they're not running afoul of any alcohol sales laws, he said.
Councilman Kenny Parlet, who owns Lakeview Supermarket and Deli in Lucerne, said most of the licensees aren’t the problem, it’s their employees, some of whom may be in their job a short time.
He said it is important to offer education. “Enforcement is going to go on one way or the other.”
Rasmussen said that under the grant’s education component, they plan to offer training courses. He said such courses are well-received; the last time they held one a few years ago, they had as many as 60 people in attendance.
“I think it will be beneficial,” Rasmussen said.
Parlet asked that the city emphasize in its communications with the public that the program is about education, not trying to catch people doing things wrong.
Mayor George Spurr agreed. “It’s more about education than anything else.”
Councilwoman Mireya Turner moved to approve the grant resolution, with Councilwoman Stacey Mattina seconding and the council approving the motion 4-0. Councilman Tim Barnes was absent from the meeting.
Following the vote, council members congratulated Welter for his work on getting the grant.
The council then went on to consider Assistant City Manager Kevin Ingram’s request to approve a professional service agreement with 4LEAF Inc. for the provision of supplemental building services in the amount not to exceed $25,000.
Ingram said the contract was necessary to fill service gaps following the retirement of longtime city Building Official Tom Carlton. He said the funding will come from fees charged for the services, including inspections and plan examinations.
The council approved the contract 4-0.
Next, Public Works Director Doug Grider presented a contract with Leete Generators in the amount of $263,536 for four standby generators to replace current units at the police department, City Hall and the city’s corporation yard, where generators have had mechanical and capacity issues. A new generator also will be installed at the Silveira Community Center.
He said the generators – along with separate costs for installation and transfer switches – will be funded by the $300,000 Public Safety Power Shutoff Resiliency Allocation Grant the city received from the state.
In anticipation of regulation changes from the California Air Resources Board, Grider said the city sought bids from companies for generators with Tier 4 engines, as Tier 3 engines – which were less expensive to purchase – will no longer be compliant within the next three to five years.
Among the five bids the city received, Grider said only Leete responded to the request for Tier 4 engines.
“I think it’s going to be a good thing getting these things installed,” Grider said, adding they are pushing the envelope to get the generators installed before September. That’s the season when public safety power shutoffs take place.
Spurr asked about plans for the old generators. Grider said they haven’t made a decision yet but are considering mounting them on trailers so they could be transported and used as backup units if necessary.
Parlet thanked Grider and his staff for getting the grants. “Our team is doing a great job,” Parlet said.
City Manager Margaret Silveira also recognized Public Works staffer Ron Ladd and Utilities Superintendent Paul Harris for their efforts with the grant.
Mattina moved to approve the contract, with Parlet seconding and the council voting 4-0.
The council finished its main agenda items by voting unanimously to appoint Turner as the voting delegate for the League of California Cities Annual Conference, which will be held virtually Oct. 7 to 9. Parlet was selected to be the first alternate and Spurr the second alternate.
Council finishes with a farewell
Council members also congratulated Silveira on her last council meeting. She retires July 31.
“You will be sorely missed and I don't think it will be the same,” said Parlet.
“You’ve just been a real asset to the community and will never be forgotten, especially now that your name will be on the building,” Parlet added, referring to the council’s action at its July 7 meeting to name the community center in Silveira’s honor.
Silveira thanked the community, staff, business and elected officials for their support during her tenure as city manager.
“It’s been a quick 10 and a half years with the amazing support I’ve had from everyone here in Lakeport,” she said.
She thanked all of the council members who have served during her tenure, explaining that their leadership is crucial.
Silveira also thanked the council for the “amazing honor” of naming the community center after her. “
“That was just unbelievable,” and totally humbling, she said.
She said she also wanted the community to understand that it is getting an excellent city manager in Ingram, who the council has tapped to be her successor. Silveira thanked the council for that decision.
Ingram has knowledge of the community and planning, and a master’s degree in public administration, Silveira said.
“He’s really ready for the job,” she said. “I think he’s going to make a great leader.”
Silveira added, “I’ve been truly blessed with this opportunity to work here in Lakeport.”
Email Elizabeth Larson at