Laserfiche WebLink
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING <br />Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 as this would be the least costly and provide <br />the greatest cost benefit. <br />Chairman Macht expressed his reservations about the project, <br />and County Engineer Roger Cain explained that staff had requested <br />a list of consultants. This procedure is necessary to avoid <br />further delays and requirements. <br />Commissioner Adams felt that we should move along with the <br />project but that protests should be filed. <br />Commissioner Eggert agreed and suggested filing a complaint <br />with the Legislature. <br />Chairman Macht directed staff to bring to the Board copies of <br />the prior studies for examination. <br />Roland DeBlois, Chief of Environmental Enforcement, advised <br />that the required study is specific in order to facilitate the <br />permit process. Both of the management plans have been approved <br />and this is an opportunity to restore some habitat and create some <br />new habitat. <br />Chairman Macht inquired whether this will provide a system to <br />supply some mitigation property within the scrub jay property the <br />County now owns, and Mr. DeBlois advised that the original plan <br />would not have expanded the area. <br />Commissioner Tippin returned to Chambers at 11:55 a.m. <br />ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by <br />Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved <br />the Consultant Services Contract with Smith <br />Environmental Services, as recommended by staff., and <br />directed staff to supply the Board with copies of <br />the prior management studies previously obtained in <br />order that a complaint can be filed with the <br />Legislature. <br />CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE <br />CLERK TO THE BOARD <br />NOVEMBER 7, 1995 51 BOOK 96,, 564 <br />