HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard Documents LAIN OFFICES OF
!" PORTER. SIMON. GRAHAM AND PHELPS
PROFESSIONAL. CORPORATION
JAMES L. PORTER, JR. MASONIC BUILDING DAMES L. PCRTER, JR.
(CALIFORNIA b NEVACA) COMMERCIAL ROW MICHAEL E. GRAHAM
JAMES ERNEST SIMON POST OFFICE BOX 2819 NEVACA O=F,CE
MICHAEL E. GRAHAM TRUCKEE. CALIFORNIA 95734 335 WEST FIRS- S-REET
(CALIFORNIA
IA b NEVADA) RENO. NEvA"A 69503
JOHN M. PHELPS (916) 587-3B62 002! 32 -67E7
PETER H. CUTTITTA
November 2, 1987si )
HAND-DELIVERED
Board of Directors COPlE.S TO:
TAHOE DONNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT BOARD:
Post Office Box 309
MANAGER:------------'
Truckee, California 95734
Dear Director:
I am writing in response to Director Cooley's memo to the
Board. I believe his memo reflects a misunderstanding of what
has occurred, quite possibly due to the newspaper's rather
sketchy reporting. I thought it best to put my response in
writing, rather than to use Board time on a rather lengthy
explanation.
This scenario involves two entities, which the newspaper
glosses over and treats as one. The first entity is the Truckee
Independence Committee (formerly the Truckee Incorporation
Committee) . The second entity is a temporary subcommittee of the
Independence Committee, simply called the Truckee Ad Hoc
Committee.
I will first discuss the Independence Committee.
The Truckee Independence Committee was formed in mid-1982,
for the purpose of investigating the feasibility of incorporation
of Truckee. The proposal that it began with in 1982 left all
special districts intact. When a financial consultant concluded
in 1983 that incorporation would be feasible, with the districts
intact, the Independence Committee adopted incorporation as its
goal.
As you know, I, and my firm, have been members and have been
involved with the Truckee Independence Committee since its
inception. It is important to understand that we participated on
the Independence Committee as private citizens. We have never
been directed by the PUD, or by any other of our four special
district clients, to represent them on the Independence
!^ Committee. We have never been paid for any of the time that we
have spent. On the other hand, I have always tried, on my own,
INCORP\history.ltr Page 1
Tahoe Donner Public Utility District
Board of Directors
November 2 , 1987
Page 2
to notify our firm's special district clients of anything
contemplated by the Independence Committee that might affect
them.
From the formation of the Independence Committee in 1982
through the November 1987 election, there have consistently been
strong pressures to include within the incorporation proposal the
consolidation of one or more special districts. These pressures
came from the Nevada County Board of Supervisors, from some of
the LAFCO commissioners, from members of the public, and finally
from the leaders of the opposition to incorporation.
Those that advocated consolidation of the districts had
different motives. Some proponents, as well as some opponents of
incorporation, argued persuasively that without consolidating the
districts, we were just creating a shell of a city, one more
additional fragmented governmental entity in Truckee. They
argued that consolidating the city with the districts would make
a single, strong, financially sound entity that could better
serve the community. Others' motives, in my opinion, were less
commendable. The Nevada County Supervisors wanted to force the
new city to take over the districts, at the outset, because they
knew that the districts would then fight incorporation, and it
would never pass.
For a number of reasons, at numerous Independence Committee
meetings, public "town hall" meetings, LAFCO meetings, and county
supervisor meetings, I consistently opposed the new city taking
over any special districts at the outset against their will.
That was the proposal we took to LAFCO, that LAFCO approved, but
that the voters narrowly rejected at last November' s election.
After the November election defeat, the Independence
Committee decided to try again. It decided to ask opponents of
incorporation to assist in drawing up the next incorporation
proposal. It formed a new, temporary subcommittee called the
"Truckee Ad Hoc Committee", for the sole purpose of drafting the
new incorporation proposal.
The Truckee Ad Hoc Committee consists of twelve members, six
of whom are incorporation supporters, and six of whom formerly
were opposed to, or were skeptical of, incorporation. The Ad Hoc
Committee members are as follows:
INCORP\history. ltr Page 2
Tahoe Donner Public Utility District
Board of Directors
November 2, 1987
Page 3
Incorporation Supporters Opponents or "Skeptics"
Dave Giacomini Joe Aguera
Robert Crippen Donna Spieler
Zina Krakowski-Davidson Jack McCormick
Dianne Jones Don Hossack
Dorie Guy Wally Stevens
John Phelps Norm Traverso
We asked all five of the successful city council candidates
to be on the Ad Hoc Committee. Three, Giacomini, Crippen and
Aguera, agreed. Two, Kathy Krieger and Pat Sutton, declined.
The Ad Hoc Committee held three public meetings in April and
May, 1987, where it discussed such topics as special districts,
boundaries; fire protection, etc. All special districts were
invited to each meeting, but few sent representatives. The Ad
Hoc Committee then directed me to draft a new proposal, using the
feedback from the public meetings, and present it to the Ad Hoc
Committee.
I therefore drafted a detailed incorporation proposal, and
presented it to the Ad Hoc Committee for discussion at meetings
on September 24 and October 1, 1987.
A copy of the proposal that I drafted is attached to this
letter. You can see that at page 8, item number 10 of the
proposal, as an Ad Hoc Committee member, I again proposed that
special districts be left intact, with the exception of the
Cemetery District, which formally asked that LAFCO investigate
the feasibility of combining it with the city.
At the Ad Hoc Committee meeting on October 1, 1987, nearly
all of the members that were present objected to leaving all of
the districts intact. They cited a number of reasons for their
objection, including the following:
A. The voters had previously rejected the same proposal.
B. It was a timid approach to incorporation.
INCORP\history. ltr Page 3
s^~ Tahoe Donner Public Utility District
Board of Directors
November 2, 1987
Page 4
C. We would only be creating a shell of a city.
D. It would leave Truckee fragmented between eleven
separate government entities, and dilute the quality of
services received by Truckee people.
E. Consolidation of one or more districts would strengthen
the city and the former district by combining their
resources and achieving economies of scale.
The Ad Hoc Committee discussed combining with several
districts. They rejected combining with the Truckee Sanitary
District, in part, because its boundaries are significantly
different from the proposed city's. They decided against
proposing to combine with the Recreation and Park District,
because it was perceived as a good but relatively poor district
that would not strengthen the new city. They rejected combining
with the Fire District because that district had previously
displayed horror at the prospect of being taken over, and because
it had little to offer the new city.
The members preferred consolidating with the PUD for several
reasons, including the following:
A. It was perceived as the most modern and most
progressive district, and the most likely to be open-
minded to the idea of combining with a new city.
B. It was perceived as the strongest, most financially
stable district, and therefore the best partner for the
new city.
C. It was perceived as well run, with new equipment and
facilities.
D. Its building could possibly serve as city offices.
E. The city and the district could share overhead on such
expenses as managerial salaries, office space, computer
and data processing, vehicle acquisition and
maintenance, and similar expenses.
F. If the PUD and the city combined smoothly and
efficiently, with no diminution in services, it would
reassure the remaining districts, so that they might
�.. consider consolidation at a later date.
INCORP\history.ltr Page 4
�— Tahoe Donner Public Utility District
Board of Directors
November 2, 1987
Page 5
G. It would appeal to the voters when they consider
incorporation.
At the October 1 Ad Hoc Committee meeting, I argued for one
and one-half hours against combining the PUD and the city. I
predicted that the PUD Board would strongly oppose its
consolidation with the city, and that if LAFCO approved
consolidation, the PUD would strongly oppose incorporation
itself. I was out-voted.
I was successful in persuading the Ad Hoc Committee to back
off proposinq an outright takeover, and to instead propose a
study and recommendation by LAFCO. Due to my efforts, the draft
proposal reads:
10. That the financial feasibility consultant analyze the
advantages and disadvantages of combining the new city
with the Truckee Donner Public Utility District, at the
time of incorporation, and make a recommendation for or
against such combining. If the consultant recommends a
combination, we propose that the issue be submitted to
the voters when they vote on incorporation.
11. That at some point after incorporation, the City
Council meet with the various boards of the other
special districts within the area, to determine whether
combining with any such districts would be mutually
advantageous to the City and the district. If so, the
issue should be presented to the voters at a later
election.
Within a week to ten days of the October 1 Ad Hoc Committee
meeting, I individually spoke with Peter Holzmeister, Jim Maass,
Joe Aguera, Pat Sutton, and John Corbett, and informed them of
the Ad Hoc Committee's draft proposal. They expressed varying
degrees of concern, but none seemed alarmed, and none chose to
place the issue on the Board's agenda.
It is important to understand that what the Ad Hoc Committee
came up with and published in the newspaper is still a draft.
Two public meetings are scheduled for November 5 and November 111
to discuss the draft. It can be amended. It has never been
submitted to the Truckee Independence Committee for discussion or
approval. It has always remained at the Ad Hoc subcommittee
�., level. The Truckee Independence Committee anticipates that after
INCORP\history.ltr Page 5
Tahoe Donner Public Utility District
Board of Directors
November 2 , 1987
Page 6
the two scheduled public meetings, the Ad Hoc Committee will vote
on a final proposal, which will then be presented to the Truckee
Independence Committee for approval.
At the upcoming November 12 LAFCO meeting, the Truckee
Independence Committee has asked LAFCO to waive the two-year
waiting period for an incorporation proposal, and to permit the
Independence Committee to apply to LAFCO this year. That is all
that LAFCO will decide on November 12. If LAFCO waives the two-
year waiting period, then in order to actually initiate
incorporation proceedings, the Independence Committee will have
to submit to LAFCO petitions signed by 25% of the registered
voters. Then and only then can an actual incorporation proposal
be submitted to LAFCO.
In summary, neither I nor my firm has ever supported the new
city taking over the PUD. We have consistently opposed it. The
Truckee Independence Committee itself has never supported the new
city taking over the PUD. What has happened is that a temporarv,
ad hoc subcommittee has proposed, in a draft proposal, for public
consideration, that LAFCO' s financial consultant consider the
feasibility of combining the city and the district, and make a
recommendation that could ultimately be voted upon.
My firm and I believe strongly in participating in community
organizations that have as their goal the betterment of our
community. Individual firm members have assumed leadership roles
in the Truckee Rotary Club, the Truckee Lions Club, the
Excellence in Education Foundation, the Downtown Merchants
Association, the Truckee Donner Chamber of Commerce, the North
Tahoe Fine Arts Council, the Truckee Donner Historical Society,
as well as the Truckee Independence Committee. Although we serve
as leaders in those organizations, we certainly don't control
them; nor should we. We do not agree with all positions that
these organizations take, and are often out-voted on particular
issues.
Our firm also represents four special districts and several
hundred individuals and businesses in Truckee. It would be
unfortunate for our firm and the community if we were unable to
participate as members in any community organization for fear
that the organization might take a position against, or disagree
with, one of our clients.
INCORP\history. ltr Page 6
Tahoe Donner Public Utility District
Board of Directors
November 2 , 1987
Page 7
I hope this assists you in understanding what has happened,
and what has not. I would be happy to answer any questions that
you might have.
Very truly yours,
PORTER, SIMON, GRAHAM AND PHELPS
Professional Corporation
J4HN M. PHELPS
JMP:lf
Attachment
cc: Peter Holzmeister
INCORP\history. ltr Page 7
INCORPORATION PROPOSAL - Draft 5 (9/25/87)
1. We propose that the boundaries of the new City be as
shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A.
Agree Disagree
2 . We propose that, at the incorporation election, voters
be given the choice of naming their community the "City of
Truckee" or the "Town of Truckee. "
Agree Disagree
3 . We propose that a City Manager form of government be
adopted.
Agree Disagree
4 . We propose that the initial election of the City Council
be held at the earliest possible date following the approval of
incorporation by the voters.
Agree Disagree
INCORP\Proposal .doc Page 1
5 . We propose that the initial election of City Council
members be an "at large" election.
Agree Disagree
6. We propose that the question be submitted to the voters,
at the time of the incorporation election, as to whether future
elections should be at large or by district.
Agree Disagree
7 . We propose that the only elected officials would be the
five City Council members, and that the City Secretary and
i^ -
Treasurer be appointed by the City Council .
Agree Disagree
8 . We propose that LAFCO conduct an initial study pursuant
to the California Environmental Quality Act, and that upon
completion of such initial study, a Negative Declaration be
issued.
Agree Disagree
INCORP\Proposal .doc Page 2
9 . We propose that LAFCO hire an independent feasibility
consultant to determine and advise LAFCO with respect to the
following matters:
a. The independent feasibility consultant's report should
include the financial feasibility of incorporation, those matters
set forth in this paragraph and elsewhere herein, and any
additional matters determined by LAFCO to require study.
Agree Disagree
b. Determine whether the incorporation of Truckee, as
proposed herein, is financially feasible, with the new City being
able to provide those services presently provided by the County
at a level equal to or greater than the level the County
provides, without imposing any new taxes or fees.
Agree Disagree
C. Summarize the general condition of roads within the
proposed City limits, review County road maintenance for the last
five years and the County' s current projected road maintenance
projects for the next several years, and compare the County' s
INCORP\Proposal .doc Page 3
past and projected performance to the performance that the City
will be capable of.
Agree Disagree
d. Make the investigation and recommendations with respect
to Police Protection as set forth herein.
Agree Disagree
e. Make the investigation and recommendations with respect
to Snow Removal as set forth herein.
Agree Disagree
f. Make the investigation and recommendations with respect
to Road Maintenance as set forth herein.
Agree Disagree
g. Make the investigation and recommendations with respect
to Building Inspection as set forth herein.
Agree Disagree
INCORP\Proposal.doc Page 4
r-,
h. Make the investigation and recommendations with respect
to Animal Control as set forth herein.
Agree Disagree
i. Make the investigation and recommendations with respect
to appropriations limit as set forth herein.
Agree Disagree
j . Make the investigation and recommendations with respect
to property tax transfer as set forth herein.
Agree Disagree
k. Review all effects of incorporation on the Truckee Fire
Protection District, and in particular its ability to prevent and
fight wildland fires. Calculate the average additional annual
cost to the City or to the Truckee Fire Protection District, as
appropriate, of fighting wildland fires, and of maintaining crews
and equipment, and training, for fighting wildland fires. In
consultation with the California Department of Forestry, the
Truckee Fire Protection District, the United States Forest
Service, all other responsible agencies, and other cities
similarly situated, determine the actual responsibility of each,
INCORP\Proposal.doc Page 5
r and how such responsibilities would be affected by incorporation
of Truckee. If appropriate, recommend an amount to be budgeted
yearly by the City for wildland fire protection, and a reserve
amount to be maintained for extraordinary expenses.
Agree Disagree
1. The Truckee Cemetery District has previously asked that
the Truckee Independence Committee ask LAFCO to investigate
whether there are any possible advantages to the District of
absorption by the City upon incorporation. We propose that the
independent feasibility consultant first confirm that the Truckee
Cemetery District still desires such an investigation, and if so,
determine if incorporation provides any possible advantages to
the District.
Agree Disagree
M. Report on the availability and cost of comprehensive
liability insurance for the new City, its council members,
officers , and employees ; and analyze and report on the
availability and effectiveness of the various existing co-
insurance pools made up of cities and other local governments,
such as the Small Cities Organized Risk Effort (SCORE) or the
INCORP\Proposal .doc Page 6
California Municipal Insurance Authority (CMIA) .
Agree Disagree
n. Determine if the new City could afford a vehicle
abatement program, and the approximate cost of an adequate
program.
Agree Disagree
o. Determine if the new City could afford a litter removal
program, and the approximate cost of an adequate program.
Agree Disagree
P. Determine if the new City could afford a snow-berm
removal program, at the time of snow-plowing, and the approximate
cost of an adequate program.
Agree Disagree
q. Prepare, as an introduction to the financial feasibility
study, a summary of the study, which summary shall be limited to
three pages and shall present the consultant's conclusion
INCORP\Proposal.doc Page 7
regarding the financial feasibility of incorporation.
Agree Disagree
10. We propose that all special districts located in the
Truckee area, including the Truckee Fire Protection District, the
Truckee Tahoe Airport District, the Tahoe Truckee Sanitation
Agency, the Truckee Sanitary District, the Truckee Donner Public
Utility District, the Truckee Donner Recreation and Park
District, the Truckee Cemetery District, the Tahoe Truckee
Unified School District, and the Tahoe Forest Hospital District,
be left intact and unaffected by incorporation.
Agree Disagree
11. We propose that LAFCO's independent legal counsel
determine and advise LAFCO with regard to which districts could,
at some point in the future, come under the jurisdiction of the
City, and which could not. We propose that LAFCO legal counsel
analyze and advise LAFCO on the different possible methods of
combining, in the future, the City with various special
districts, including the designation of a district as a
INCORP\Proposal .doc Page 8
"subsidiary district, " which would leave district boundaries
intact.
Agree Disagree
12 . We propose that, as to those special districts that
could, at some point in the future, come under the jurisdiction
of the City, that at a point at least three years after the
effective date of incorporation, the City Council explore with
the elected board of each district, whether the combining of such
district with the City would be mutually advantageous to the
residents of the City and to the residents of the district. If,
and only if, the combination is determined to be mutually
advantageous, the issue should be submitted to the voters of the
City and of the district, and the two should combine only if a
majority of the City voters and a majority of the district voters
approve.
Agree Disagree
13 . We propose that County Service Areas ("CSAs") 5
(Olympic Heights) , 6 (Blitz Tract) , 8 (Blitz No. 5) , 10 (Martis
Valley) , 11 (Ponderosa Palisades) , 19 (Donner View) , 4 (Tahoe
Donner) , and 9 (Glenshire) , be retained through Adoption of
Findings required by Government Code Section 56375 (p) . Further,
upon incorporation, all CSAs described above should be converted
r^
INCORP\Proposal .doc Page 9
from County service areas to City service areas so that all of
their affairs would be supervised by the City after
incorporation, and the County would be relieved of the burden of
supervision. All funds, equipment and property presently held or
owned by the individual CSAs would remain with the CSAs.
Agree Disagree
14 . We propose that LAFCO's independent legal counsel
determine and advise LAFCO and the public concerning all current
restrictions on the ability of a new city to impose new taxes or
fees or to raise current taxes or fees.
Agree Disagree
15. We propose that the new City take over all planning,
zoning, and land use decisions immediately upon election of a
city council, and that, pursuant to state law, adopt a new
general plan for the City within 30 months of the election.
Agree Disagree
16. Police Protection
a. Unless the City and the County agree otherwise, we
propose that the City take over police protection within the
incorporated limits at the earliest moment feasible to do so. We
s�
INCORP\Proposal .doc Page 10
propose that the independent feasibility consultant analyze
whether it is feasible for the City to immediately create its own
police force, independent of the County. If feasible, the
independent feasibility consultant should recommend to LAFCO what
County facilities and vehicles should be transferred to the City
upon incorporation, and the appropriate price and payment terms
for such facilities and vehicles.
Agree Disagree
b. We propose that immediately upon creation of the
City police department, all permanent full-time employees of the
County Sheriff' s Department serving in Truckee at the time of
such creation, who would otherwise lose their jobs due to
incorporation, be invited to apply to the City and shall be given
first preference in hiring, in order of seniority. Any former
County employees hired shall receive their current rates of pay,
accumulated seniority, vacation rights and credits, holiday
rights and credits, sick leave rights and credits, pension
rights, and all other employee benefits. The independent
feasibility consultant should recommend to LAFCO, and LAFCO
approve, an equitable method for the County to reimburse the City
for any vacation credit, holiday credit, or other employee
liabilities assumed by the City. The City shall be free to
determine the job duties of such employees once hired. In
addition, the City shall be free to select its Chief of Police
INCORP\Proposal .doc Page 11
from among the former County employees or through an outside
search.
Agree Disagree
17 . Snow Removal
a. Unless the City and County agree otherwise, we
propose that the City take over the snow removal within the
incorporated limits at the earliest moment feasible to do so. We
propose that the independent feasibility consultant analyze
whether it is feasible for the City to immediately create its own
snow removal department, independent of the County. If feasible,
the independent feasibility consultant should recommend to LAFCO
what County facilities and vehicles should be transferred to the
City upon incorporation, and the appropriate price and payment
terms for such facilities and vehicles.
Agree Disagree
b. We propose that immediately upon creation of the
City snow removal department, all permanent full-time employees
of the County Snow Removal Department serving in Truckee at the
time of such creation, who would otherwise lose their jobs due to
incorporation, be invited to apply to the City and shall be given
first preference in hiring, in order of seniority. Any former
County employees hired shall receive their current rates of pay,
INCORP\Proposal .doc Page 12
accumulated seniority, vacation rights and credits, holiday
rights and credits, sick leave rights and credits, pension
rights, and all other employee benefits. The independent
feasibility consultant should recommend to LAFCO, and LAFCO
approve, an equitable method for the County to reimburse the City
for any vacation credit, holiday credit, or other employee
liabilities assumed by the City. The City shall be free to
determine the job duties of such employees once hired. In
addition, the City shall be free to select its department
supervisor from among the former County employees or through an
outside search.
Agree Disagree
18 . Road Maintenance
a. Unless the City and County agree otherwise, we
propose that the City take over road maintenance within the
incorporated limits at the earliest moment feasible to do so. We
propose that the independent feasibility consultant analyze
whether it is feasible for the City to immediately create its own
road maintenance department, independent of the County. If
feasible, the independent feasibility consultant should recommend
to LAFCO what County facilities and vehicles should be
transferred to the City upon incorporation, and the appropriate
INCORP\Proposal .doc Page 13
price and payment terms for such facilities and vehicles.
Agree Disagree
b. We propose that immediately upon creation of the
City road maintenance department, all permanent full-time
employees of the County Road Maintenance Department serving in
Truckee at the time of such creation, who would otherwise lose
their jobs due to incorporation, be invited to apply to the City
and shall be given first preference in hiring, in order of
seniority. Any former County employees hired shall receive their
current rates of pay, accumulated seniority, vacation rights and
credits, holiday rights and credits, sick leave rights and
credits, pension rights, and all other employee benefits. The
independent feasibility consultant should recommend to LAFCO, and
LAFCO approve, an equitable method for the County to reimburse
the City for any vacation credit, holiday credit, or other
employee liabilities assumed by the City. The City shall be free
to determine the job duties of such employees once hired. In
addition, the City shall be free to select its department
supervisor from among the former County employees or through an
outside search.
Agree Disagree
INCORP\Proposal .doc Page 14
19 . Building Inspection
a. Unless the City and County agree otherwise, we
propose that the City take over building inspection within the
incorporated limits at the earliest moment feasible to do so. We
propose that the independent feasibility consultant analyze
whether it is feasible for the City to immediately create its own
City building inspection department, independent of the County.
If feasible, the independent feasibility consultant should
recommend to LAFCO what County facilities and vehicles should be
transferred to the City upon incorporation, and the appropriate
price and payment terms for such facilities and vehicles.
Agree Disagree
b. We propose that immediately upon creation of the
City building inspection department, all permanent full-time
employees of the County Building Inspection Department serving in
Truckee at the time of such creation, who would otherwise lose
their jobs due to incorporation, be invited to apply to the City
and shall be given first preference in hiring, in order of
seniority. Any former County employees hired shall receive their
current rates of pay, accumulated seniority, vacation rights and
credits, holiday rights and credits, sick leave rights and
credits, pension rights, and all other employee benefits. The
independent feasibility consultant should recommend to LAFCO, and
INCORP\Proposal .doc Page 15
^ LAFCO approve, an equitable method for the County to reimburse
the City for any vacation credit, holiday credit, or other
employee liabilities assumed by the City. The City shall be free
to determine the job duties of such employees once hired. In
addition, the City shall be free to select its department
supervisor from among the former County employees or through an
outside search.
Agree Disagree
20. Animal Control
a. Unless the City and County agree otherwise, we
propose that the City take over animal control within the
incorporated limits at the earliest moment feasible to do so. We
propose that the independent feasibility consultant analyze
whether it, is feasible for the City to immediately create its own
City animal control department, independent of the County. If
feasible, the independent feasibility consultant should recommend
to LAFCO what County facilities and vehicles should be
transferred to the City upon incorporation, and the appropriate
price and payment terms for such facilities and vehicles.
Agree Disagree
b. We propose that immediately upon creation of the
City animal control department, all permanent full-time employees
INCORP\Proposal .doc Page 16
`^ of the County Animal Control Department serving in Truckee at the
time of such creation, who would otherwise lose their jobs due to
incorporation, be invited to apply to the City and shall be given
first preference in hiring, in order of seniority. Any former
County employees hired shall receive their current rates of pay,
accumulated seniority, vacation rights and credits, holiday
rights and credits, sick leave rights and credits, pension
rights, and all other employee benefits. The independent
feasibility consultant should recommend to LAFCO, and LAFCO
approve, an equitable method for the County to reimburse the City
for any vacation credit, holiday credit, or other employee
liabilities assumed by the City. The City shall be free to
determine the job duties of such employees once hired. In
addition, the City shall be free to select its department
supervisor from among the former County employees or through an
outside search.
Agree Disagree
21. We propose that LAFCO set an appropriations limit as
recommended by the independent feasibility consultant.
Agree Disagree
22 . We propose that LAFCO set the property tax transfer,
pursuant to Government Code Section 56842, as recommended by the
INCORP\Proposal .doc Page 17
independent feasibility consultant.
Agree Disagree
23 . We propose that LAFCO determine the number of
registered voters within the proposed City limits.
Agree Disagree
24. We propose that LAFCO submit to the voters within the
proposed incorporated limits, at the time of the incorporation
election, the adoption of the same Transient Occupancy Tax (bed
tax) , as is currently assessed by Nevada County within the
Truckee area.
Agree Disagree
25. We propose that LAFCO identify all County mitigation
funds collected in Truckee or earmarked for use in Truckee, and
that all of such funds be transferred to the City, to be used in
the same manner as they were to be used by the County.
Agree Disagree
INCORP\Proposal.doc Page 18