SIERRA SUN TIMES

Mariposa County hired Nichols Consulting Engineers, Chtd. in June of 2008 for $92,500 to conduct a ‘road inventory’ and ‘condition survey’ of 360 center-line miles of paved roads in the county. The firm did not do a study on the county dirt roads.

At the Tuesday June 23, 2009  Board of Supervisors meeting, Margot Yapp, P.E., Vice President of the firm presented a Power Point presentation to the Board of Supervisors on the findings in the report. Margot Yapp P.E. first displayed a map showing just how far the lane miles in Mariposa County would extend if both lanes were put into one lane, thus giving lane miles. The 725 lane miles would stretch from Mariposa to Portland, Oregon and would take about thirteen hours to drive. The 725 lane miles represents to the county a $152.8 million investment. The lane miles break down to 184 miles of Major Collector Roads, 205 lane miles of Minor Collector Roads and 336 lane miles of Residential/Local Roads. Total miles can be calculated by dividing the mentioned lane miles in half.

On a scale of 1-100 on the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) the county overall rates a 50, which is at the top of the Poor grouping and at the bottom of the At Risk grouping. A PCI of 100 would equal a road that would require no action be done to the road to improve it. Sections of Hornitos Road would rate a 100 PCI. A PCI of 75 would require chip sealing, a PCI of 45 would require an overlay and a PCI of less than 10 would require total reconstruction.

The 2008 PCI report has 27.2% of the roads in the Failed category, 27.5% of the roads in the Poor category, 18.3%  of the roads in the At Risk category and 27% of the roads in the Good category. The Residential/Local Roads have an average PCI of 38 and make up 43.5% of the road miles. The Minor Collector Roads have an average PCI of 56 and make up 29.5% of the road miles while the Major Collector Roads have an average PCI of 64 and make up 27% of the road miles. Compared to other counties Mariposa at a PCI of 50 is ahead of Madera at 48 and Amador at 31. Mariposa County is tied with Stanislaus at 50. Madera comes in at a 51 and Calaveras at 53. Fresno has the highest PCI of 79 due to all the major new roads that have been installed in the county during the last few years with the building boom.

Margot Yapp P.E. made mention that the county should concentrate on maintaining the roads that are in good shape as it costs far fewer dollars to keep them in good shape than fixing roads that require a total reconstruction. She quoted prices of $2.70 a square yard to chip seal and fog seal a road, $5.00-$5.50 a square yard to crack seal and chip seal a road, $17.00-$22.50 a square yard to overlay a road and $25.50-$56.00 a square yard to reconstruct the road.

The ideal budget to bring the roads up to a PCI average of 84 by 2013 would require $17.4 million a year. To maintain the roads at the average PCI of 50 that they have right now would require $5 million a year.  The Mariposa County budget for the year is currently $1.37 million a year. At that budget amount by the year 2013 the deferred budget to fix the roads rises from a current $62.9 million to $94.3 million with the PCI dropping to an average of 40.

With a road system worth $152.8 million the county adds just .9% annually to the upkeep of the roads from the General Fund. Costs are so high to maintain the roads because the roads are rapidly deteriorating and the price of asphalt has increased five fold from 1999 according to CalTrans figures. In concluding she said that the county pavement network will deteriorate to Fair and that the county should allocate sufficient funds to reduce the deterioration rate and finally to preserve the good roads first. Margot Yapp P.E. said this is like “Triage” to maintain the roads and also to resist calls to fix the worst roads. She said it will cost the same in five years to fix the worst roads as now.

Public Works Director Dana Hertfelder, said that the total road budget is $10.6 million a year and that $5 million goes to maintenance.  Of the money from the General Fund (1.3Million)  55% is for wages and benefits, 20% for equipment costs and 30% for materials, about $400,000 this year. He also said that the General Fund dollars do not go towards rehabilitation of the roads. He mentioned it is hard to plan for the future of roads without a dedicated funding source. The State, under certain programs, sometimes gives money and then does not give money. This changes on a year by year basis. He also said the County will receive $570,000 in Stimulus Funds, not the $2 Million that originally was spoken of, that will be used for Chip Sealing sections of Carleton Road, sections of Jerseydale Road and others. Mr. Hertfelder said there are problems with the smaller roads as they continue to deteriorate and they have low traffic volumes.
 
Supervisor Lyle Turpin said he has concerns about the roads in the Don Pedro Subdivision, as they are now around forty years old.
Supervisor Jim Allen mentioned that the County has taken on too many roads and that maybe the potholed roads can go back to dirt and gravel as some counties have done. Supervisor Allen also asked if the work could be contracted out. Mr. Hertfelder replied that all the paving jobs are bid out as the county does not have a paving machine and he doesn’t know if the pothole filling and crack sealing could be bid out.
Mariposa County CEO Rick Benson, mentioned that not all counties contribute General Fund dollars to road maintenance and Self Help Counties, that have a sales tax for their county, can get matching dollars for road maintenance.

Will their be any accountability for the over $145,000 (And possibly a lot more) that it cost to keep Mr. Johnson off of the job? That stated dollar figure does not include any County Staff time spent on this case. County Counsel work is already included in his salary but no records are kept of staff time besides the County Counsel, on copying and filing and anything else involved in this case. The CAO constantly recommended to keep Mr. Johnson off of the job and two current Supervisors (Brad Aborn and Lyle Turpin) were in total agreement while Supervisor Janet Bibby always voted no in keeping Mr. Johnson away from his job. Mariposa County CAO Rick Benson said that he would make the same decision again as he looked back at the case.

6-10-2009
Bryce Johnson Disability Retirement set Aside By Mariposa County Supervisors
The BOS yesterday voted to accept (5-0) the Administrative Law Judges proposed decision along with some technical changes to set aside the Disability Retirement on Bryce Johnson effective June 10, 2009.
This agenda item was all over in around three minutes as the two new supervisors, Jim Allen and Kevin Cann had nothing to say. Supervisor Lyle Turpin involved in this case since the beginning also had nothing to say. Supervisor Janet Bibby said that the Board of Supervisors job is to look after the best interest of the County along with the employee’s including Bryce Johnson. She went on the say that she did not agree with any of the Mariposa County past findings and that the County owes Mr. Johnson and his family a huge apology. Supervisor Bibby also said it is rare to have an employee refuse a disabilty retirement.  Chairman of the Board, Brad Aborn who has been involved for a couple of years on this case also had nothing to say during the discussion. After the vote of 5-0 Mr. Aborn mentioned something about ‘Behind the Scenes’ and that this was “Really a Mess.”

Cost to County Taxpayers so far: $145,825 

Links and mentions of the case on the Sierra Sun Times

11/09/2007
The Board approved the recommendation to reject the claim by Bryce Johnson for $500,000 against the county. 

4/04/2007 
 Mariposa County Board Of Supervisors give a Disability Retirement to Bryce Johnson on a 4-1 vote with Janet Bibby voting no. Mr. Johnson’s lawyer says this is going to cost the county money in the long run and that his client will eventually be back on the job.

At the May 26, 2009 Mariposa County Board of Supervisors Meeting under Public Presentation, Mariposa County Sheriff Brian Mueller, walked up to the podium and spoke into the microphone “I am Angry.” Mr. Mueller went on to say that he was angry but cautious on what he had to say about his department being dragged into the middle of the Coyote Springs concerns. That other departments could better serve the problems with Coyote Springs. He said that it was under his request that Sheriff Joel Bibby do an investigation on what was taking place at Coyote Springs during the evening hours.

Sheriff Joel Bibby was out taking photographs (without his patrol car or being in uniform) of Coyote Springs during the later evening hours of Saturday May 23, 2009. Theresa Castaldi, one of the Coyote Springs owners, observed and approached Mr Bibby as he was standing on the road.  She says that he said he was out for a walk. Mr Bibby lives miles away from Coyote Springs. On discussing this with Mr. Mueller he said to the SST that they had discussed the situation earlier on Saturday and Brian suggested to Joel Bibby that he keep it casual as far as not rolling up in a patrol vehicle. He also stated that it was a complaint that began this planning episode of taking photographs but declined  to say who made the complaint against Coyote Springs. Mr. Mueller also said that the photographs did not show anything but the reflection of some vehicles taillights reflection in the flash.

Mr. Mueller stated before the Board of Supervisors that no law was violated and that no department violation had occurred. He went on to say that in the future that it is his desire that his department not be used in issues with Coyote Springs. He also stated that he felt used and the department should not have been used and that it will not happen in the future unless it is a criminal complaint.

Coyote Springs Consultant Ken Baker next approached the podium and said that that he was hoping that the incident would have remained private.  He requested that the departments all meet and discuss Coyote Springs and to just back off on Coyote Springs.  He said that the County is instilling fear in folks if they speak up about Coyote Springs. Mr. Baker said that they are allowed to be open for business, that Coyote Springs is trying to bring a good image to the County, that they need the help of the County and not to let a few people destroy Coyote Springs.

Under Board Information Supervisor Janet Bibby (Sheriff Joel Bibby’s wife) said that she had received complaints against Coyote Springs without mentioning who complained to her. She said that a tour bus was parked behind the barn.  She said that she has received lots of calls saying that Line Dancing was being held out at Coyote Springs during the evening hours along with music. Also that people said that the barn was open and people were walking around the grounds.  She said that the Building Department had sent a status report to her.  Other Board members have not received any calls on Coyote Springs. Supervisor Bibby also stated that citizens are wondering why they have to be the ones to enforce the County rules and regulations, not the department heads.

Supervisor Bibby also mentioned that in a letter dated May 21, 2009 from the Building Department that none of the building code violations had been resolved at Coyote Springs.  She also said that people were observed in the red tagged barn at 10:30P.M. The letter also stated that no certification was completed on any of the buildings and that they all are unsafe for public safety. Janet went on to say that this has been an ongoing problem and that the citizens are right, that it is the Counties responsibility to take care of Coyote Springs. She said that she would like to give Coyote Springs her blessing and that the Board is bound by the rules of serial meetings on discussions about Coyote Springs. Again she read over the letter by Building Department Director Fred Lustenberger that stated “All unsafe for public assemblage.”

The SST asked Ken Baker about the events at Coyote Springs and he stated that Line Dancing was taking place but not in the red tagged barn, that folks were on the porch of the red tagged barn looking at merchandise for sale, such as shirts, as the porch was not red tagged. Also that tour buses were stopping at Coyote Springs. Mr Baker also said that is was really strange that Mr. Bibby should be out in the dark taking photos, out of uniform and not using his patrol vehicle.

On talking with Building Department Director Fred Lustenberger he said public Line Dancing cannot be held in any building without going through the permit process as this protects the public from getting hurt. He said that you could have a private family members birthday party in a barn and that would be okay, but when you invite the public all facilities have to meet code for fire exits, ADA and other requirements.

The following is the final actions that the BOS took on Coyote Springs Appeal back on January 27, 2009

(The transfer from a .PDF file to text did not occur perfectly but all the text is in place.)Actions numbers 6 & 7 are relevant and also under ‘Effects’ numbers 8 & 9 and the last paragraph about future developments.

 There was more talk at the last meeting from a few of the Committee members that if the Committee keeps getting more restrictive about what can be done under the definition of Ag-Tourism there will not be any Ag-Tourism in Mariposa County.

 In a few years the county will owe another $1.5 million dollars to CALPERS just to keep up with the current and retired employees benefits of the county. CALPERS also is making gestures that unless the Stock Market comes back that the 2010-2011 increase to Mariposa County could be in the neighborhood of another $1 million dollars
Also the County is going to have to come up with money to pay for the replacement of the new Firetrucks that they promised the residents they would set aside so another CSA (Special Assessment) for Firetrucks would not have to be done in fifteen years. That figure will probably be in the range of  $400,000 a year.  A total of around $3 Million dollars.

The failure of the Special Election and the Financial trouble the State is in, plus the United States Economy and the World Economy is all going to also affect Mariposa County. Property Taxes, Sales Taxes and TOT are all down in Mariposa County.

TOT (Bed Tax ) was in the $10 Million dollar range last year, so the County needs an increase in TOT of at least 30% over the next few years to possibly keep current with what could be owed. Is this possible?  Will the residents of the County stand by and think that all this extra TOT  money (If it increases) should go to pay for County Employee Benefits? The County has no outlook for any job creation so now Ag-Tourism just may help the County and some property owners out. This Ag Tourism Advisory Committee has a very important job in the future of Mariposa County residents and County finances.

We can only hope that what comes out of this Committee will be for the benefit of the residents of the County.