A RESOLUTION approving the sale of Loyalton Mobile Home Park subject to the Tax Collector’s Power to Sell was discussed at the Sierra County Board of Supervisors’ meeting on Tuesday, August 2 in Downieville.
Sierra County Auditor/Treasurer-Tax Collector, Van Maddox recommended $265,700 as the minimum price, stating he’d had lots of phone calls, but no one actually bid. He stated this is property and worth something and if they sold this for little or nothing the schools, solid waste, general fund would eat a lot of property taxes. Maddox added it’s up to the Board to set the amount. He said there was an article that stated “we start it on a Friday and end it on a Monday.” He said there was no science behind it and these companies know very well when people bid. Maddox continued that there was a specific historical reason they do it on those days because they get the best interest on those days. He added that they are advised to doing it over the weekend as it usually gets the best price. Maddox recommended the $265,700, adding it will go back out to bid in early December. Board Chair Lee Adams questioned the amount and thought that was the minimum bid they had before. Maddox said yes, it was. Adams further questioned why they would want to go with that amount again if it didn’t work before? Maddox said it’s an operating mobile home park and if someone doesn’t have the money to fix it in the first place he doubts it will sell. Supervisor Paul Roen said he understood the State needing the County to try one more time to sell it and then the State will take some action. Maddox asked the Board, if they came down on price would they be giving it away to someone who has the resources or giving it away to someone who doesn’t. He added then they could end up with the same problem and have to start trying to sell it again. Maddox said the State made it clear they wanted to see this property up for sale one more time and then they would be willing to take away the permit altogether.
Supervisor Scott Schlefstein asked about the $146,807.56 that has to go back into taxes and assessments recovery. Maddox explained that Sierra County is a Teeter county where all entities get paid whether they collect on time or not. He said the Teeter concept was that property in California always goes up, but in the last decade property is not selling for what its worth. Maddox stated the problem is how do you make up that difference. Schlefstein asked if the $412,507 owed was in the three parcels and land value. Maddox said that is the taxes and penalties owed. Schlefstein thought with that amount owed, the $265,000 was the right number and made the motion to accept the resolution as presented.
Roen felt it was a reasonable number. Sierra County Planning Director Tim Beals wanted the Board and public to be aware that $192,000 of the $412,000 was a loss to the County solid waste budget, adding that is in part why the solid waste fee went up. The motion passed unanimously.
A MARIJUANA RESOLUTION calling an election for, and authorizing the submission to the voters of, an ordinance amending restrictions on marijuana cultivation, and consolidating the election with the November 8, 2016 Statewide General Election was discussed at the Sierra County Board of Supervisors’ meeting held in Downieville on August 2.
Board Chair Lee Adams said this item has been before a committee and the Board had both a draft resolution and draft ordinance before them. He asked the Board if they had any questions or comments. Supervisor Scott Schlefstein felt the ordinance needed to identify and define living areas and what that means. Schlefstein thought they needed to be careful on what they require inside a person’s house. Adams said they could strike it and leave it up to the homeowner on where to grow inside their home.
County Counsel David Prentice stated when they try to describe where to put it in a house it can’t be enforced. He thought striking it would be better than to try and define it. It was agreed upon to strike from the ordinance.
Supervisor Peter Huebner wanted to make sure residents with small parcels could grow outside. Adams said that residents with less than
two acres can have up to three plants outside with setback restrictions.
Adams wanted to define what multi-family means and what it doesn’t mean. Prentice said there was State law that defines multi-family residences. Sierra County Planning Director Tim Beals said the term “mother-in-law unit” isn’t used anymore; A RESOLUTION approving the sale of Loyalton Mobile Home Park subject to the Tax Collector’s Power to Sell was discussed at the Sierra County Board of Supervisors’ meeting on Tuesday, August 2 in Downieville.
Sierra County Auditor/Treasurer-Tax Collector, Van Maddox recommended $265,700 as the minimum price, stating he’d had lots of phone calls, but no one actually bid. He stated this is property and worth something and if they sold this for little or nothing the schools, solid waste, general fund would eat a lot of property taxes. Maddox added it’s up to the Board to set the amount. He said there was an article that stated “we start it on a Friday and end it on a Monday.” He said there was no science behind it and these companies know very well when people bid. Maddox continued that there was a specific historical reason they do it on those days because they get the best interest on those days. He added that they are advised to doing it over the weekend as it usually gets the best price. Maddox recommended the $265,700, adding it will go back out to bid in early December. Board Chair Lee Adams questioned the amount and thought that was the minimum bid they had before. Maddox said yes, it was. Adams further questioned why they would want to go with that amount again if it didn’t work before? Maddox said it’s an operating mobile home park and if someone doesn’t have the money to fix it in the first place he doubts it will sell. Supervisor Paul Roen said he understood the State needing the County to try one more time to sell it and then the State will take some action. Maddox asked the Board, if they came down on price would they be giving it away to someone who has the resources or giving it away to someone who doesn’t. He added then they could end up with the same problem and have to start trying to sell it again. Maddox said the State made it clear they wanted to see this property up for sale one more time and then they would be willing to take away the permit altogether.
Supervisor Scott Schlefstein asked about the $146,807.56 that has to go back into taxes and assessments recovery. Maddox explained that Sierra County is a Teeter county where all entities get paid whether they collect on time or not. He said the Teeter concept was that property in California always goes up, but in the last decade property is not selling for what its worth. Maddox stated the problem is how do you make up that difference. Schlefstein asked if the $412,507 owed was in the three parcels and land value. Maddox said that is the taxes and penalties owed. Schlefstein thought with that amount owed, the $265,000 was the right number and made the motion to accept the resolution as presented.
Roen felt it was a reasonable number. Sierra County Planning Director Tim Beals wanted the Board and public to be aware that $192,000 of the $412,000 was a loss to the County solid waste budget, adding that is in part why the solid waste fee went up. The motion passed unanimously.
A MARIJUANA RESOLUTION calling an election for, and authorizing the submission to the voters of, an ordinance amending restrictions on marijuana cultivation, and consolidating the election with the November 8, 2016 Statewide General Election was discussed at the Sierra County Board of Supervisors’ meeting held in Downieville on August 2.
Board Chair Lee Adams said this item has been before a committee and the Board had both a draft resolution and draft ordinance before them. He asked the Board if they had any questions or comments. Supervisor Scott Schlefstein felt the ordinance needed to identify and define living areas and what that means. Schlefstein thought they needed to be careful on what they require inside a person’s house. Adams said they could strike it and leave it up to the homeowner on where to grow inside their home.
County Counsel David Prentice stated when they try to describe where to put it in a house it can’t be enforced. He thought striking it would be better than to try and define it. It was agreed upon to strike from the ordinance.
Supervisor Peter Huebner wanted to make sure residents with small parcels could grow outside. Adams said that residents with less than
two acres can have up to three plants outside with setback restrictions.
Adams wanted to define what multi-family means and what it doesn’t mean. Prentice said there was State law that defines multi-family residences. Sierra County Planning Director Tim Beals said the term “mother-in-law unit” isn’t used anymore; it’s called a second unit. He told the Board there could be complete strangers and asked them to keep it in mind it still doesn’t alter the right to a parcel.
Supervisor Paul Roen said there were two scripts per parcel.
Adams also felt the Resolution’s first Whereas needed to mention the current ordinance hadn’t been rejected, it was subject to referendum and the Board decided to make changes and send it out to the voters, adding it wasn’t rejected it was challenged.
There were concerns about the height of the fence in the front yard and is presently set at six feet high. Adams said it was not to exceed four feet in the front yard with no growing in the front yard.
Prentice stated he could see some people not having any space but in the front yard. Adams said they could ask for a variance. In the audience, Pam from Pike had a couple concerns, one of which was the summary going on the ballot, adding she would like to see it more specific. County Clerk Recorder Heather Foster said they can only put 75 words or less on the ballot, but it will be more extensive in the voter information pamphlet. She said it will also include the website where it could be seen in its entirety. Pam questioned the fines and asked if they were the same fines that were included in the last ordinance. Prentice said no, adding the normal fines enacted are part of the county code and have the potential of changing by board action as time goes on. Pam felt greenhouses were unclear as in one part of the ordinance it was defined as outdoor and in another part it was defined as an accessory structure. Adams said the Board’s intent for a greenhouse in a traditional setting is considered outdoors because the potential for light and to be seen outside. She further questioned the very different requirements for what greenhouses can be made of. Pam was told if it’s attached to a building or where it is completely covered where no one can see inside it is considered an accessory structure. Pam concluded by telling the Board she’d like the 4th amendment language to require the inspection notice language so if there’s any legal action there is a paper trail.
Sarah, a Sierra County resident in the audience, urged the Board not to put this draft ordinance to the voters, stating a lot of flaws with it and if citizens voted on this any amendments could not be changed unless it’s taken up for another vote by the public. Sarah stated there was growing support of its use, adding tactics used in the past to control cannabis cultivation have not worked and felt a rapidly changing attitude toward cannabis. She gave each Board member an ordinance she said was in line with State law and felt it was in line with Sierra County values, urging the Board to look it over.
Adams told her his vote was not intending to shame the substance. He said how much is enough and how much is too much, adding the Board was just trying to find a balance and felt Sierra County was still the more liberal county in the neighborhood.
Roen made the motion to approve the draft resolution and put it forward to the voters. Motion approved unanimously in Beard’s absence.
Sierra County Auditor/Treasurer-Tax Collector, Van Maddox recommended $265,700 as the minimum price, stating he’d had lots of phone calls, but no one actually bid. He stated this is property and worth something and if they sold this for little or nothing the schools, solid waste, general fund would eat a lot of property taxes. Maddox added it’s up to the Board to set the amount. He said there was an article that stated “we start it on a Friday and end it on a Monday.” He said there was no science behind it and these companies know very well when people bid. Maddox continued that there was a specific historical reason they do it on those days because they get the best interest on those days. He added that they are advised to doing it over the weekend as it usually gets the best price. Maddox recommended the $265,700, adding it will go back out to bid in early December. Board Chair Lee Adams questioned the amount and thought that was the minimum bid they had before. Maddox said yes, it was. Adams further questioned why they would want to go with that amount again if it didn’t work before? Maddox said it’s an operating mobile home park and if someone doesn’t have the money to fix it in the first place he doubts it will sell. Supervisor Paul Roen said he understood the State needing the County to try one more time to sell it and then the State will take some action. Maddox asked the Board, if they came down on price would they be giving it away to someone who has the resources or giving it away to someone who doesn’t. He added then they could end up with the same problem and have to start trying to sell it again. Maddox said the State made it clear they wanted to see this property up for sale one more time and then they would be willing to take away the permit altogether.
Supervisor Scott Schlefstein asked about the $146,807.56 that has to go back into taxes and assessments recovery. Maddox explained that Sierra County is a Teeter county where all entities get paid whether they collect on time or not. He said the Teeter concept was that property in California always goes up, but in the last decade property is not selling for what its worth. Maddox stated the problem is how do you make up that difference. Schlefstein asked if the $412,507 owed was in the three parcels and land value. Maddox said that is the taxes and penalties owed. Schlefstein thought with that amount owed, the $265,000 was the right number and made the motion to accept the resolution as presented.
Roen felt it was a reasonable number. Sierra County Planning Director Tim Beals wanted the Board and public to be aware that $192,000 of the $412,000 was a loss to the County solid waste budget, adding that is in part why the solid waste fee went up. The motion passed unanimously.
A MARIJUANA RESOLUTION calling an election for, and authorizing the submission to the voters of, an ordinance amending restrictions on marijuana cultivation, and consolidating the election with the November 8, 2016 Statewide General Election was discussed at the Sierra County Board of Supervisors’ meeting held in Downieville on August 2.
Board Chair Lee Adams said this item has been before a committee and the Board had both a draft resolution and draft ordinance before them. He asked the Board if they had any questions or comments. Supervisor Scott Schlefstein felt the ordinance needed to identify and define living areas and what that means. Schlefstein thought they needed to be careful on what they require inside a person’s house. Adams said they could strike it and leave it up to the homeowner on where to grow inside their home.
County Counsel David Prentice stated when they try to describe where to put it in a house it can’t be enforced. He thought striking it would be better than to try and define it. It was agreed upon to strike from the ordinance.
Supervisor Peter Huebner wanted to make sure residents with small parcels could grow outside. Adams said that residents with less than
two acres can have up to three plants outside with setback restrictions.
Adams wanted to define what multi-family means and what it doesn’t mean. Prentice said there was State law that defines multi-family residences. Sierra County Planning Director Tim Beals said the term “mother-in-law unit” isn’t used anymore; A RESOLUTION approving the sale of Loyalton Mobile Home Park subject to the Tax Collector’s Power to Sell was discussed at the Sierra County Board of Supervisors’ meeting on Tuesday, August 2 in Downieville.
Sierra County Auditor/Treasurer-Tax Collector, Van Maddox recommended $265,700 as the minimum price, stating he’d had lots of phone calls, but no one actually bid. He stated this is property and worth something and if they sold this for little or nothing the schools, solid waste, general fund would eat a lot of property taxes. Maddox added it’s up to the Board to set the amount. He said there was an article that stated “we start it on a Friday and end it on a Monday.” He said there was no science behind it and these companies know very well when people bid. Maddox continued that there was a specific historical reason they do it on those days because they get the best interest on those days. He added that they are advised to doing it over the weekend as it usually gets the best price. Maddox recommended the $265,700, adding it will go back out to bid in early December. Board Chair Lee Adams questioned the amount and thought that was the minimum bid they had before. Maddox said yes, it was. Adams further questioned why they would want to go with that amount again if it didn’t work before? Maddox said it’s an operating mobile home park and if someone doesn’t have the money to fix it in the first place he doubts it will sell. Supervisor Paul Roen said he understood the State needing the County to try one more time to sell it and then the State will take some action. Maddox asked the Board, if they came down on price would they be giving it away to someone who has the resources or giving it away to someone who doesn’t. He added then they could end up with the same problem and have to start trying to sell it again. Maddox said the State made it clear they wanted to see this property up for sale one more time and then they would be willing to take away the permit altogether.
Supervisor Scott Schlefstein asked about the $146,807.56 that has to go back into taxes and assessments recovery. Maddox explained that Sierra County is a Teeter county where all entities get paid whether they collect on time or not. He said the Teeter concept was that property in California always goes up, but in the last decade property is not selling for what its worth. Maddox stated the problem is how do you make up that difference. Schlefstein asked if the $412,507 owed was in the three parcels and land value. Maddox said that is the taxes and penalties owed. Schlefstein thought with that amount owed, the $265,000 was the right number and made the motion to accept the resolution as presented.
Roen felt it was a reasonable number. Sierra County Planning Director Tim Beals wanted the Board and public to be aware that $192,000 of the $412,000 was a loss to the County solid waste budget, adding that is in part why the solid waste fee went up. The motion passed unanimously.
A MARIJUANA RESOLUTION calling an election for, and authorizing the submission to the voters of, an ordinance amending restrictions on marijuana cultivation, and consolidating the election with the November 8, 2016 Statewide General Election was discussed at the Sierra County Board of Supervisors’ meeting held in Downieville on August 2.
Board Chair Lee Adams said this item has been before a committee and the Board had both a draft resolution and draft ordinance before them. He asked the Board if they had any questions or comments. Supervisor Scott Schlefstein felt the ordinance needed to identify and define living areas and what that means. Schlefstein thought they needed to be careful on what they require inside a person’s house. Adams said they could strike it and leave it up to the homeowner on where to grow inside their home.
County Counsel David Prentice stated when they try to describe where to put it in a house it can’t be enforced. He thought striking it would be better than to try and define it. It was agreed upon to strike from the ordinance.
Supervisor Peter Huebner wanted to make sure residents with small parcels could grow outside. Adams said that residents with less than
two acres can have up to three plants outside with setback restrictions.
Adams wanted to define what multi-family means and what it doesn’t mean. Prentice said there was State law that defines multi-family residences. Sierra County Planning Director Tim Beals said the term “mother-in-law unit” isn’t used anymore; it’s called a second unit. He told the Board there could be complete strangers and asked them to keep it in mind it still doesn’t alter the right to a parcel.
Supervisor Paul Roen said there were two scripts per parcel.
Adams also felt the Resolution’s first Whereas needed to mention the current ordinance hadn’t been rejected, it was subject to referendum and the Board decided to make changes and send it out to the voters, adding it wasn’t rejected it was challenged.
There were concerns about the height of the fence in the front yard and is presently set at six feet high. Adams said it was not to exceed four feet in the front yard with no growing in the front yard.
Prentice stated he could see some people not having any space but in the front yard. Adams said they could ask for a variance. In the audience, Pam from Pike had a couple concerns, one of which was the summary going on the ballot, adding she would like to see it more specific. County Clerk Recorder Heather Foster said they can only put 75 words or less on the ballot, but it will be more extensive in the voter information pamphlet. She said it will also include the website where it could be seen in its entirety. Pam questioned the fines and asked if they were the same fines that were included in the last ordinance. Prentice said no, adding the normal fines enacted are part of the county code and have the potential of changing by board action as time goes on. Pam felt greenhouses were unclear as in one part of the ordinance it was defined as outdoor and in another part it was defined as an accessory structure. Adams said the Board’s intent for a greenhouse in a traditional setting is considered outdoors because the potential for light and to be seen outside. She further questioned the very different requirements for what greenhouses can be made of. Pam was told if it’s attached to a building or where it is completely covered where no one can see inside it is considered an accessory structure. Pam concluded by telling the Board she’d like the 4th amendment language to require the inspection notice language so if there’s any legal action there is a paper trail.
Sarah, a Sierra County resident in the audience, urged the Board not to put this draft ordinance to the voters, stating a lot of flaws with it and if citizens voted on this any amendments could not be changed unless it’s taken up for another vote by the public. Sarah stated there was growing support of its use, adding tactics used in the past to control cannabis cultivation have not worked and felt a rapidly changing attitude toward cannabis. She gave each Board member an ordinance she said was in line with State law and felt it was in line with Sierra County values, urging the Board to look it over.
Adams told her his vote was not intending to shame the substance. He said how much is enough and how much is too much, adding the Board was just trying to find a balance and felt Sierra County was still the more liberal county in the neighborhood.
Roen made the motion to approve the draft resolution and put it forward to the voters. Motion approved unanimously in Beard’s absence.
