6 FPD Lake Draft FIRE MSR 3 · March 2015 Service Review and Sphere of Influence! 1!! EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Five protection districts in Lake including the Kelseyville FPD, Lake County

LAKE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION

6 FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICTS

MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEWS

AND

SPHERES OF INFLUENCE

1. KELSEYVILLE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 2. LAKE COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 3. LAKEPORT FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 4. NORTHSHORE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 5. SOUTH LAKE COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 6. LAKE PILLSBURY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT

MARCH 2015

LAKE LAFCO FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICTS March 2015 Service Review and Sphere of Influence

1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Five protection districts in Lake including the Kelseyville FPD, Lake County FPD, Lakeport FPD, Northshore FPD and South Lake County FPD all work together to provide fire protection and emergency medical services to the majority of the population within Lake County. A sixth fire district, the Lake Pillsbury FPD is isolated in the northern part of Lake County. The five larger fire protection districts all provide ambulance service and are working together with the Lake County Board of Supervisors to form a Joint Powers Authority to provide ambulance service to the County under one license with uniform training for all the districts within the JPA. A brief comparison of the fire protection districts is shown in the following table: FPD Population

Estimate Revenue Budget 2013-14

Expenses Budget 2013-14

Parcel Tax for SFD

Stations Calls

KFPD 11,500 $2,718,238 $2,976,700 $19.00 2 1281 LCFPD 19,500 $2,828,957 $3,770,816 Clearlake

$60.00 Lower Lake

$45.00

6 5000

LFPD 7,000 $1,759,933 $2,263,368 City area $39.60

County area $30.00

2 2862

NFPD 12,000 $2,172,904 $2,886,548 Lucerne Clearlake Oaks

$60.00 Upper Lake

$52.50 Nice

$45.00

7 2636

SLCFPD 12,983 $2,577,724 $2,957,054 $52.50 4 1201 LPFPD 1,000 $18,168 $23,835 $60.00 1 * Lake County1

**63,983

*Information not available **The population estimate does not include tourists which add a significant number of people to the County who also require fire protection and emergency medical services. The recommendation for the Sphere of Influence for each district is that is remain the same as the District Boundary.

1 US Census Bureau, http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06033.html, February 12, 2014


2


1

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 LAKE COUNTY BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 3 KELSEYVILLE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 4 LAKE COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 5 LAKEPORT FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 6 NORTHSHORE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 7 SOUTH LAKE COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 8 LAKE PILLSBURY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 ABBREVIATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 DEFINITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 PREPARERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .102

LAKE LAFCO Service Review AND SOI March 18, 2015 - 6 FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICTS

1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Legal Requirements for Service Reviews The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 requires LAFCO review and update SOIs not less than every five years, as necessary and to review municipal services before updating SOIs. The requirement for service reviews arises from the identified need for a more coordinated and efficient public service structure to support California’s anticipated growth. The service review provides LAFCO with a tool to study existing and future public service conditions comprehensively and to evaluate organizational options for accommodating growth, preventing urban sprawl, and ensuring that critical services are provided efficiently. 1.2 Service Review Determinations Effective January 1, 2008, Government Code §56430 requires LAFCO to conduct a review of municipal services provided in the county by region, sub-region or other designated geographic area, as appropriate, for the service or services to be reviewed, and prepare a written statement of determination with respect to each of the following topics:

1. Growth and population projections for the affected area;

2. The location and characteristics of any disadvantaged unincorporated communities within or contiguous to the SOI (effective July 1, 2012);

3. Present and planned capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services,

including infrastructure needs or deficiencies (including needs or deficiencies related to sewers, municipal and industrial water, and structural fire protection in any disadvantaged, unincorporated communities within or contiguous to the sphere of influence);

4. Financial ability of agencies to provide services;

5. Status of, and opportunities for shared facilities;

6. Accountability for community service needs, including governmental structure

and operational efficiencies; and 1.3 Service Review Process For local agencies, the Service Review process involves the following steps:

• Outreach: LAFCO outreach and explanation of the project • Data Discovery: provide documents and respond to LAFCO questions • Profile Review: internal review and comment on LAFCO draft profile of the

agency • Public Review Draft Service Review: review and comment on LAFCO draft

Service Review • LAFCO Hearing: attend and provide public comments on Service Review


2

1.4 Service Reviews and CEQA Service Reviews are exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to §15262 (feasibility or planning studies) or §15306 (information collection) of the CEQA Guidelines. LAFCO’s actions to adopt Service Review determinations are not considered “projects” subject to CEQA. The Service Review process does not require LAFCO to initiate changes of organization based on service review findings, only that LAFCO identify potential government structure options. However, LAFCO, other local agencies, and the public may subsequently use the determinations to analyze prospective changes of organization or reorganization or to establish or amend SOIs. Within its legal authorization, LAFCO may act with respect to a recommended change of organization or reorganization on its own initiative (e.g., certain types of consolidations), or in response to a proposal (i.e., initiated by resolution or petition by landowners or registered voters). 1.5 Sphere of Influence Updates 1.5.1 Sphere of Influence Purpose Once LAFCO has adopted its Service Review determinations, it must update the SOIs for the six fire protection districts. The LAFCO Commission determines and adopts the spheres of influence for each agency. A CEQA determination is made by LAFCO on a case-by-case basis for each sphere of influence action and each change of organization, once the proposed project characteristics are sufficiently identified to assess environmental impacts. The Commission is charged with developing and updating the Sphere of Influence (SOI) for each city and special district within the county.2 An SOI is a LAFCO-approved plan that designates an agency’s probable future boundary and service area. Spheres are planning tools used to provide guidance for individual boundary change proposals and are intended to encourage efficient provision of organized community services and prevent duplication of service delivery. Territory cannot be annexed by LAFCO to a city or a district unless it is within that agency's sphere. The purposes of the SOI include the following:

• to ensure the efficient provision of services, • to discourage urban sprawl and premature conversion of agricultural and

open space lands, and • to prevent overlapping jurisdictions and duplication of services.

2 The initial statutory mandate, in 1971, imposed no deadline for completing sphere designations. When most LAFCOs failed to act, 1984 legislation required all LAFCOs to establish spheres of influence by 1985.


3

LAFCO does not have the authority to directly regulate land use, dictate internal operations or administration of any local agency, or set rates. LAFCO is empowered to enact policies that may indirectly affect land use decisions. On a regional level, LAFCO promotes logical and orderly development of communities as it considers and decides individual proposals. LAFCO has a role in reconciling differences between agency plans so that the most efficient urban service arrangements are created for the benefit of current and future area residents and property owners. The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg (CKH) Act requires LAFCo to develop and determine the SOI of each local governmental agency within the county and to review and update the SOI every five years, as necessary. LAFCOs are empowered to adopt, update and amend the SOI. They may do so with or without an application and any interested person or agency may submit an application proposing an SOI amendment. 1.5.2 Sphere of Influence Requirements While SOIs are required to be updated every five years, as necessary, this does not necessarily define the planning horizon of the SOI. The term or horizon of the SOI is determined by each LAFCO. In the case of Lake LAFCO, the Commission’s policies state that an agency’s SOI shall generally include land that is anticipated to be annexed within the next twenty years with a near term sphere horizon for lands likely to be annexed within five years in certain cases. Fire District Spheres include land within the probable growth boundary and therefore anticipated to be annexed in the next 20 years. LAFCO may recommend government reorganizations to particular agencies in the county, using the SOIs as the basis for those recommendations. In determining the SOI, LAFCO is required to complete an Service Review and adopt the seven determinations previously discussed. In addition, in adopting or amending an SOI, LAFCO must make the following determinations:

1. Present and planned land uses in the area, including agricultural and open-space lands;

2. Present and probable need for public facilities and services in the area;

3. Present capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public service that the

agency provides or is authorized to provide;

4. Existence of any social or economic communities of interest in the area if the Commission determines these are relevant to the agency; and

5. Present and probable need for water, wastewater, and structural fire protection

facilities and services of any disadvantaged unincorporated communities within the existing sphere of influence.

The CKH Act stipulates several procedural requirements in updating SOIs. It requires that special districts file written statements on the class of services provided and that


4

LAFCO clearly establish the location, nature and extent of services provided by special districts. By statute, LAFCO must notify affected agencies 21 days before holding a public hearing to consider the SOI and may not update the SOI until after that hearing. The LAFCO Executive Officer issues a report including recommendations on the SOI amendments and updates under consideration at least five days before the public hearing. 1.5.3 Possible Approaches to the Sphere of Influence LAFCO may recommend government reorganizations to particular agencies in the county, using the SOIs as the basis for those recommendations. Based on review of the guidelines of Lake LAFCO as well as other LAFCOs in the State, various conceptual approaches have been identified from which to choose in designating an SOI. These seven approaches are explained below: 1) Coterminous Sphere: A Coterminous Sphere means that the sphere for a city or special district that is the same as its existing boundaries. 2) Annexable Sphere: A sphere larger than the agency’s boundaries identifies areas the agency is expected to annex. The annexable area is outside its boundaries and inside the sphere. 3) Detachable Sphere: A sphere that is smaller than the agency’s boundaries identifies areas the agency is expected to detach. The detachable area is the area within the agency bounds but not within its sphere. 4) Zero Sphere: A zero sphere indicates the affected agency’s public service functions should be reassigned to another agency and the agency should be dissolved or combined with one or more other agencies. 5) Consolidated Sphere: A consolidated sphere includes two or more local agencies and indicates the agencies should be consolidated into one agency. 6) Limited Service Sphere: A limited service sphere is the territory included within the SOI of a multi-service provider agency that is also within the boundary of a limited purpose district which provides the same service (e.g., fire protection), but not all needed services. Territory designated as a limited service SOI may be considered for annexation to the limited purpose agency without detachment from the multi-service provider.


5

This type of SOI is generally adopted when the following four conditions exist: a) The limited service provider is providing adequate, cost effective and efficient

services b) The multi-service agency is the most logical provider of the other services c) There is no feasible or logical SOI alternative, and d) Inclusion of the territory is in the best interests of local government organization

and structure in the area Government Code §56001 specifically recognizes that in rural areas it may be appropriate to establish limited purpose agencies to serve an area rather than a single service provider, if multiple limited purpose agencies are better able to provide efficient services to an area rather than one service district. Moreover, Government Code Section §56425(i), governing sphere determinations, also authorizes a sphere for less than all of the services provided by a district by requiring a district affected by a sphere action to “establish the nature, location, and extent of any functions of classes of services provided by existing districts” recognizing that more than one district may serve an area and that a given district may provide less than its full range of services in an area. 7) Sphere Planning Area: LAFCO may choose to designate a sphere planning area to signal that it anticipates expanding an agency’s SOI in the future to include territory not yet within its official SOI. 1.5.4 SOI Amendments and CEQA LAFCO has the discretion to limit SOI updates to those that it may process without unnecessarily delaying the SOI update process or without requiring its funding agencies to bear the costs of environmental studies associated with SOI expansions. Any affected local agency or individual may file a request for an SOI amendment. The request must state the nature of and reasons for the proposed amendment, and provide a map depicting the proposal. LAFCO may require the requester to pay a fee to cover LAFCO costs, including the costs of appropriate environmental review under CEQA. LAFCO may elect to serve as lead agency for such a review, may designate the proposing agency as lead agency, or both the local agency and LAFCO may serve as co-lead agencies for purposes of an SOI amendment. Local agencies are encouraged to consult with LAFCO staff early in the process regarding the most appropriate approach for the particular SOI amendment under consideration. Certain types of SOI amendments are usually exempt from CEQA review. Examples are SOI expansions that include territory already within the bounds or service area of an agency, SOI reductions, and zero SOIs. SOI expansions for limited purpose agencies that provide services (e.g., fire protection, levee protection, cemetery, and resource conservation) needed by both rural and urban areas are typically not considered growth-inducing and are likely exempt from CEQA. Similarly, SOI expansions for districts serving rural areas (e.g., irrigation water) are typically not considered growth-inducing.


6

Remy et al. write In City of Agoura Hills v. Local Agency Formation Commission (2d Dist.1988) 198 Cal.App.3d480, 493-496 [243 Cal.Rptr.740] (City of Agoura Hills), the court held that a LAFCO’s decision to approve a city’s sphere of influence that in most respects was coterminous with the city’s existing municipal boundaries was not a “project” because such action did not entail any potential effects on the physical environment.3 The spheres of influence recommended in this report are coterminous with the district boundaries or areas of existing fire protection services and will be exempt from further environmental review. 1.6 Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities (DUCs) On October 7, 2011, Governor Brown signed SB 244, which makes two principal changes to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000. SB 244 requires LAFCOs to: (1) deny any application to annex to a city territory that is contiguous to a disadvantaged unincorporated community (DUC) unless a second application is submitted to annex the disadvantaged community as well; and (2) evaluate disadvantaged unincorporated communities in a municipal service review (Service Review) upon the next update of a sphere of influence after June 30, 2012. The intent of the statute is to encourage investment in disadvantaged unincorporated communities that often lack basic infrastructure by mandating cities and LAFCOs to include them in land use planning. SB 244 defines disadvantaged unincorporated community as any area with 12 or more registered voters, or as determined by commission policy, where the median household income is less than 80 percent of the statewide annual median. SB 244 also requires LAFCOs to consider disadvantaged unincorporated communities when developing spheres of influence. Upon the next update of a sphere of influence on or after July 1, 2012, SB 244 requires LAFCO to include in an Service Review (in preparation of a sphere of influence update): 1) The location and characteristics of any disadvantaged unincorporated

communities within or contiguous to the sphere; and 2) The present and planned capacity of public facilities, adequacy of public

services and infrastructure needs or deficiencies including needs or deficiencies related to sewers, municipal and industrial water, and structural fire protection in any disadvantaged unincorporated community within or contiguous to the sphere of influence.

In determining spheres of influence, SB 244 authorizes LAFCO to assess the feasibility of and recommend reorganization and consolidation of local agencies to further orderly development and improve the efficiency and affordability of infrastructure and service delivery. 3 Remy, Michael H., Tina A. Thomas, James G. Moose, Whitman F. Manley, Guide to CEQA, Solano Press Books, Point Arena, CA, February 2007, page 111.


7

1.7 Fire Protection Issues The following is a general discussion of fire protection issues including Mutual Aid, Dispatch, Response Time, Staffing and Water Supply: 1.7.1 Mutual Aid Issues Most of the fire protection and EMS providers primarily serve their own jurisdictions. Given the critical need for rapid response, however, there are extensive mutual aid efforts that cross jurisdictional boundaries. Mutual aid refers to reciprocal service provided under a mutual aid agreement, a pre-arranged plan and contract between agencies for reciprocal assistance upon request by the first-response agency. In addition, the jurisdictions rely on automatic aid primarily for coverage of areas with street access limitations and freeways. Automatic aid refers to reciprocal service provided under an automatic aid agreement, a prearranged plan or contract between agencies for an automatic response for service with no need for a request to be made. 1.7.2 Fire and EMS Dispatch Issues Dispatch for fire and medical calls is increasingly becoming regionalized and specialized. This increased regionalization and specialization is motivated by the following factors: 1) Constituents increasingly expect emergency medical dispatching (EMD), which

involves over-the-phone medical procedure instructions to the 911 caller and requires specialized staff.

2) Paramedics increasingly rely on EMD, which also involves preparing the

paramedic en-route for the type of medical emergency and procedures. 3) Dispatch technology and protocols have become increasingly complex. 4) Modern technology has enabled better measurement and regulatory oversight of

fire department (FD) response times, and increased pressure for FDs to meet response time guidelines.

5) FDs need standard communication protocols due to their reliance on mutual aid. 6) Dispatching of calls from cell phones is particularly inefficient due to multiple

transfers, length of time the caller spends on hold and lack of location information. Response times are further delayed when callers that are unfamiliar with the area are unable to describe rural locations to the dispatch personnel.

7) All new cell phones are now equipped with GPS; however, it will take a few years

for all old phones to be replaced by phones with GPS capability and/or construction of specialized cell phone towers.


8

8) NFPA recommends a 60-second standard for dispatch time, the time between the placement of the 911 call and the notification of the emergency responders. The Center for Public Safety Excellence recommends a 50-second benchmark for dispatch time.

9) There are clear economies of scale in providing modern fire and medical

dispatch services. 1.7.3 Fire and EMS Response Time Issues Response times reflect the time elapsed between the dispatch of personnel and the arrival of the first responder on the scene. For fire and paramedic service, there are service standards relating to response times, dispatch times, staffing, and water flow. Particularly in cases involving patients who have stopped breathing or are suffering from heart attacks, the chances of survival improve when the patient receives medical care quickly. Similarly, a quick fire suppression response can potentially prevent a structure fire from reaching the “flashover” point at which very rapid fire spreading occurs—generally in less than 10 minutes.4 The guideline established by the National Fire Protection Association5 (NFPA) for fire response times is six minutes at least 90 percent of the time, with response time measured from the 911-call time to the arrival time of the first-responder at the scene.6 The fire response time guideline established by the Center for Public Safety Excellence (formerly the Commission on Fire Accreditation International) is 5 minutes 50 seconds at least 90 percent of the time.7 1.7.4 Fire Protection Staffing Issues For structure fires, NFPA recommends that the response team include 14 personnel—a commander, five water supply line operators, a two-person search and rescue team, a two-person ventilation team, a two-person initial rapid intervention crew, and two support people. The NFPA guidelines require fire departments to establish overall staffing levels to meet response time standards, and to consider the hazard to human life, firefighter safety, potential property loss, and the firefighting approach.

4 NFPA Standard 1710, 2004. 5 The National Fire Protection Association is a non-profit association of fire chiefs, firefighters, manufacturers and consultants. 6 Guideline for a full structure fire is response within ten minutes by a 12-15 person response team at least 90 percent of the time. 7 Commission on Fire Accreditation International, 2000.


9

NFPA recommends that each engine, ladder or truck company be staffed by four on-duty firefighters, and that at least four firefighters (two in and two out), each with protective clothing and respiratory protection, be on scene to initiate fire-fighting inside a structure. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standard requires that when two firefighters enter a structure fire, two will remain on the outside to assist in rescue activities.8 For emergency medical response with advanced life support needs, NFPA recommends the response team include two paramedics and two basic-level emergency medical technicians. 1.7.5 Firefighter Certification According to the California State Fire Marshal, all volunteer and call firefighters must acquire Firefighter I certification; however, there is no time limit as to how long they may work before attaining certification. Firefighter I certification requires completion of the 259–hour Firefighter I course, which includes training on various fireground tasks, rescue operations, fire prevention and investigation techniques, and inspection and maintenance of equipment. In addition to the course, Firefighter I certification also requires that the applicant have a minimum of six months of volunteer or call experience in a California fire department as a firefighter performing suppression duties. 9 1.7.6 Fire Protection Water Supply Issues For structure fires, NFPA recommends the availability of an uninterrupted water supply for 30 minutes with enough pressure to apply at least 400 gallons of water per minute. 1.7.7 Planning and Management Pre-planning for future capital improvement needs is considered a best management practice, which is recommended for all public agencies regardless of size. Fire protection districts should have a formal capital improvement plan (CIP). CIPs can be tailored to the needs of the agency, but should include a list of anticipated replacement and improvement needs with an anticipated timeline for completion and a financial plan for achieving those goals. It is recommended that a CIP have a planning horizon of at least five years and be updated annually to reflect current conditions.

1.7.8 Special District Fire Protection Financing Sources

R e v e n u e S o u r c e s

Fire service providers rely on a variety of revenue sources to fund fire agency operating costs. Primary funding sources typically include the following:

! Property taxes,

! Special taxes or benefit assessments,

8 United States, 29 CFR 1910.134. 9 State Fire Marshall, Course Information and Required Materials, 2007, p. 44.


10

! Service charges,

! Intergovernmental funds and grants,

! Facility and development impact fees,

! Use or sale of money and property, and

! Fundraising efforts.

As of FY 11-12, there were 340 fire protection districts in California, 19 of which were governed by the Board of Supervisors of a county and 10 governed by a city council. In addition, there were numerous multi-service special districts (i.e., community services districts and public utility districts) that also provided fire protection services in some form. Of the special districts that provided fire protection in FY 11-12, ad valorem property tax revenues comprised the most significant portion of the agencies’ budgets. Voter approved special taxes or benefit assessments comprised approximately six percent of total revenues of all of the districts combined. Service charges in the form of reimbursement from the State for use of strike teams, plan review and permit issuance, and other charges for services constituted just over 18 percent of total revenue sources. The agencies periodically receive intergovernmental funds, grants and donations—averaged out these funds account for about eight percent of the districts’ budgets. Districts also make use of facility and development impact fees to pay for capital improvements. Statewide revenue sources as reported by the State Controller’s Office for special districts that provide fire protection services are shown in Figure 1-1.

Figure 1-1: Statewide Special District Fire Protection Revenue Sources (FY 11-12) Revenues Total % Taxes and Assessments

Current Secured and Unsecured (1%) $1,808,943,181 65.6%

Voter Approved Taxes and Assessments $168,122,049 6.1%

Special Assessments (Mello/Roos, Mark/Roos) $2,950,496 0.1%

Prior Year and Penalties ($422,299) 0.0%

Licenses, Permits, and Franchises $18,113,917 0.7% Fines, Forfeits, and Penalties $4,322,720 0.2% Revenue From Use of Money and Property

0.0%

Interest Income $7,404,861 0.3%

Rents, Concessions, and Royalties $3,499,457 0.1%

Intergovernmental

0.0%

Federal $42,761,893 1.6%

State $55,490,789 2.0%

Other Governmental Agencies $122,835,790 4.5%

Charges for Current Services $475,362,100 17.2% Self Insurance Member Contributions and Claim Adjustments $0 0.0% Other Revenues $46,959,841 1.7% Total Revenues $2,756,344,795


11

A d V a l o r e m P r o p e r t y T a x e s

Property taxes made up 65.6 percent of revenues among statewide fire districts. Many agencies rely almost entirely on property tax revenue to provide services, with negligible revenues coming from other sources. As a funding source, property taxes are constrained by statewide initiatives that have been passed by voters over the years.

Proposition 13, which California voters approved in 1978, limits the ad valorem property tax rate, limits growth of the assessed value of property, and requires voter approval of certain local taxes. Generally, this measure fixes the ad valorem tax at one percent of value, except for taxes to repay certain voter approved bonded indebtedness. In response to the adoption of Proposition 13, the Legislature enacted Assembly Bill 8 (AB 8) in 1979 to establish property tax allocation formulas. Generally, AB 8 allocates property tax revenue to the local agencies within each tax rate area based on the proportion each agency received during the three fiscal years preceding adoption of Proposition 13. This allocation formula benefits local agencies, which had relatively high tax rates at the time Proposition 13 was enacted.

Proposition 98, which California voters approved in 1988, requires the State to maintain a minimum level of school funding. In 1992 and 1993, the Legislature began shifting billions of local property taxes to schools in response to State budget deficits. Local property taxes were diverted from local governments into the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) and transferred to school districts and community college districts to reduce the amount paid by the State general fund. Local agencies throughout the State lost significant property tax revenue due to this shift.

In addition to these constraints, the districts have faced declining property values over the last five years, which has resulted in reduced property tax revenues for the agencies. The most significant drop in property tax revenue throughout the State was experienced between FY 09 and FY 10.

S p e c i a l T a x e s a n d B e n e f i t A s s e s s m e n t s

The most significant financing constraints for fire and EMS services are legal requirements that limit property taxes and require voter approval of new taxes and tax increases. A special tax requires approval by two thirds of voters. Several fire districts in the State have also made use of benefit assessment revenue, which requires a simple majority for voter approval. For a benefit assessment it is required that the agency attribute distinct benefit to each parcel, while a special tax may be used to fund services with a general benefit to all parcels. Approximately six percent of special district fire protection funds statewide come from a special tax or benefit assessment.

Several of the geographically larger districts that are comprised of primarily agricultural, open space and minimal low-density residential properties face a particular challenge in that a special tax or benefit assessment would not collect the necessary revenue to substantially augment services.

S e r v i c e C h a r g e s

Service charges comprised 18 percent of revenues among the fire districts statewide in FY 11-12. Service charges include billing for providing emergency medical and ambulance services, fees charged for contract services, reimbursement from the State for use of strike teams, fees for services such as fire inspections and building approvals,


12

charges for specialty emergency services, and charges to non-residents for services rendered.

Districts may occasionally respond to state fires with their strike teams or as members of a strike team and get reimbursed for it from the State of California Department of Forestry and Fire. District duty on a strike team or task force is compensated at predetermined rates depending on the rank of the firefighter and the type of the equipment used for the fire.

Billing for services may include fees for reports and permits, plan review, operating permits, and field inspections, to name a few.

Districts can choose to charge for response to certain services to recoup costs. Additionally, some districts have chosen to adopt charges specifically for non-residents, as residents are already contributing funds for the services. Many districts have reported challenges in collecting these service fees after response, as the invoices often go unpaid.

G r a n t s

Among fire protection districts statewide, grant funds comprised approximately eight percent of revenues in FY 11-12. Common sources of grant funds for fire protection purposes are the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG) program and Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) program, the U.S. Fire Administration (a division of FEMA), and the Cal Fire Volunteer Fire Assistance program, among other sources.

P r o p o s i t i o n 1 7 2

Proposition 172 was enacted to help offset property tax revenue losses of cities and counties that were shifted to the ERAF for schools in 1992. Proposition 172, enacted in 1993, provides the revenue of a half-cent sales tax to counties and cities for public safety purposes, including police, fire, district attorneys, corrections, and lifeguards. Proposition 172 also requires cities and counties to continue providing public safety funding at or above the amount provided in FY 92-93 if these counties or cities are the recipients of Prop 172 funds.10

While counties are not required to, many share Proposition 172 funds with local fire protection districts, particularly those formed prior to 1978 (the enactment of Proposition 13), which rely heavily on property tax revenues to provide services and were impacted by the ERAF shifts.

D e v e l o p m e n t I m p a c t F e e s

A common means to finance growth induced capital needs is through development impact fees or capital facility fees, which ensure that new construction and development covers the cost of the related capital improvements necessary to maintain a certain level of service. Revenues associated with development impact fees have been minimal in

10 The maintenance of effort provision for local public safety spending requires cities and counties to fund public safety at the 1992-‐93 levels, adjusted annually by a cost-‐of-‐living factor commencing with the 1994-‐95 fiscal year.


13

recent years given the dearth of new development in most areas of the State. Development impact fees statewide constituted only 0.1 percent of revenue sources for the fire protection districts in FY 11-12.

To meet constitutional and statutory requirements, the amount of a given fee must be determined by a formula that is consistently applied and based upon a proportional distribution of costs following “rational nexus” principles. Rational nexus means that a direct relationship exists between the fee charged to new development and the demonstrable need for public improvements and that the fee is proportional to benefits or impacts caused by new development.

A u x i l i a r y A s s o c i a t i o n s

Fire districts conduct fundraising in several forms—directly through district staff, via a nonprofit firefighters association related to the district, and via nonprofit auxiliary groups dedicated to fundraising and supporting a particular district. Fundraising efforts and donations provide a nominal supplement to fire district revenues throughout the State.

Fundraising efforts are generally not conducted directly by the fire districts, but are instead conducted by the firefighters association or auxiliary group. Each fire protection district generally has a firefighters association linked to it. In addition to fundraising efforts on behalf of the district, the district firefighter associations often conduct fundraising efforts on behalf of other nonprofit foundations and organizations, such as the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation and the Firefighters Burn Institute. A minority of districts have auxiliary groups, in addition to the firefighters association, which are often comprised of firefighter family members and dedicated to fundraising efforts for their respective districts.

1.7.9 Proposition 172 and Local Fire Protection

In 1992, facing serious budget deficits, the California Legislature and Governor Wilson instructed county auditors to shift the allocation of local property tax revenues from local government to “educational revenue augmentation funds” (ERAFs), directing that specified amounts of city, county and other local agency property taxes be deposited into these funds to support schools. School funding from the state general fund was reduced by a commensurate amount. To cushion the impact of the ERAF shifts, the California Legislature and Governor Wilson submitted to the voters a proposal for a new half cent sales tax to be dedicated to local public safety including sheriff, police, fire, county district attorneys, corrections, and ocean lifeguards. Proposition 172, the Local Public Safety Protection and Improvement Act of 1993, was approved by 58 percent of the voters.

The one-half cent sales tax imposed by Proposition 172 is collected by the State Board of Equalization and apportioned to each county based on its proportionate share of statewide taxable sales. Each county is required to deposit this revenue in a Public Safety Augmentation Fund to be allocated by the County Auditor to the county and cities within the county.

Within each county Proposition 172 allocations are allocated to cities and the


14

county based on the contributed ratio of ERAF funds. Because the intent of Proposition 172 is to mitigate the impacts of the ERAF property tax shifts on public safety services, cities that were not impacted by this phase of the shift do not receive Proposition 172 revenues. Counties contribute approximately 77 percent of all ERAF funds, while cities contribute 14 percent, and special districts contribute seven percent. Therefore counties, as the primary contributors of ERAF funds, are the primary recipients of Proposition 172 funds. Fire and police special districts receive no direct Proposition 172 funding as these agencies experienced the least impact from the ERAF shifts.

Counties have discretion in sharing their Proposition 172 money with fire districts in their respective counties. There are several counties in California that have adopted this practice. Out of the studied sample of 28 California counties, seven counties share their Proposition 172 funds with fire agencies in their respective counties.11 Each county that chooses to share some of its Proposition 172 funds with the fire protection districts has its own sharing formula, whether it be a percentage share of the total funds appropriated to the County or specific contributions of equipment or vehicles.

For example, the County of Colusa designates 13 percent of the annual Proposition 172 funds to its fire protection agencies. The six recipient rural fire protection districts divide the assigned percentage among themselves based on a distribution formula.

The County of Humboldt shares 1.8 percent of its total Proposition 172 revenue with its 23 local fire protection districts. The Fire Chiefs Association provided the County with an allocation formula for distribution of the assigned percentage.

Monterey County allocates 9.13 percent of the Proposition 172 income to the Association of Firefighters and Volunteer Fire Company that further distributes this portion to fire protection districts.

An analysis of district funding levels in counties with a Proposition 172 sharing structure compared to those without revealed that districts in counties that receive a portion of the Proposition 172 funding more often operate within their total annual revenues. Annual expenses of those districts that did not receive a portion of the funding were more likely to exceed their total revenue sources. In FY 11-12, of the districts sampled that do receive a portion of the Proposition 172 funding, the median district’s expenses were within total revenues by approximately one percent. By comparison, of those districts that do not receive a portion of the Proposition 172 funding, the median district’s expenses exceeded revenues by approximately two percent.

General plans of many counties, including Lake County, have policies related to promotion and enhancement of fire services across these counties. For instance, Lake County General Plan contains a policy that states that “the County shall promote 11 Amador, Calaveras, Colusa, Fresno, Humboldt, Monterey, and Nevada counties share Proposition 172 funds with their fire protection districts.


15

expansion of fire protection services to continue to meet County needs.” In order to implement such a policy the County will need to prevent its fire protection districts from becoming insolvent, which would result in a reduction of fire protection resources.

California laws permit all local agencies, including special districts, to file for relief under Chapter 9 bankruptcy. In order to be eligible, a special district has to meet certain criteria: 1) be insolvent,12 2) have no feasible alternatives to bankruptcy, and 3) demonstrate intent to develop a plan to adjust debts. Since 2010, two special districts have filed for bankruptcy in California, both of which were healthcare districts. Counties are not obligated to help special districts avoid insolvency and bankruptcy.13 Insolvent districts may be dissolved by LAFCOs through LAFCO-initiated dissolution process.

1.7.10 Emergency Medical Services - Ambulance Issues In the early 1980’s only a few fire departments in Lake County provided full-time Emergency Medical Services (EMS) transport services. The remaining departments provided EMS service as needed when capable resources were available. If not, ambulance services were provided by a local private ambulance service provider. At one point, in Lake County there were three different private providers simultaneously offering EMS transport services, this resulted in a failure of the private providers to sustain a viable business and operations resulting in the local fire districts having to bridge the gaps in service when private providers were unable to maintain a continuity of operation.

Over the years, the following private providers operated in Lake County; Clearlake Ambulance, Community Ambulance, Northern Pacific, Lake County Medi-Vac, Nor-Pac and Redwood Empire Life Support (RELS). Each of these providers struggled to meet the needs of the increasing population and incident responses, including emergency 911 and inter-facility (medical) transports (IFTs). At the same time, our two base hospitals, St Helena Hospital Clearlake and Sutter Lakeside Hospital modified their status to Critical Access, which decreased the capabilities of bed, equipment and personnel.

The end result was that Lake County had two base hospitals offering a decrease in services provided, with a maximum available bed status of twenty-five each. This resulted in an increase in the amount IFTs out of the Lake Operational Area to facilities as far away as San Francisco, for specialized and/or higher level of care. From approximately 1986 through March 22, 2004, RELS went from three or four ambulances providing emergency 911 and Inter-facility (medical) transfer (IFT) services, to only two and at times no ambulances available for service.

12 A local government is considered insolvent if it is unable to 1) pay its current obligations or 2) pay obligations that will become due during the next fiscal year.

13 In the case of special districts providing water and wastewater services, if the special district becomes outright insolvent and no alternative and willing service provider is identified, the California Department of Health Services would likely declare a public safety emergency and contract with a third party to provide short-‐term management of the water and sewer systems while securing reimbursement costs through liens on individual properties in the area.


16

This resulted in the fire districts that provided ambulance services having to assist in addressing the increased needs within their communities. This was accomplished through mutual aid and other service modifications within the fire districts for the period of time when a private provider was unavailable. In some instances this spanned 24-hours. Also included were times of vehicle and equipment failure, which occurred frequently with the private provider. From 1986 through March 22, 2004, the Lake County Emergency Medical Care Committee (EMCC) received an increase in complaints from base hospitals, community leaders, citizens and fire districts regarding the lack of continuity of ambulance services provided to Lake County by the private provider. On March 22, 2004 at 2:15, Redwood Empire Life Support (RELS) contacted local fire districts to advise them they were no longer going to provide service to Lake County, and would be ceasing operations in 15 minutes.

For example, the Lake County Fire Protection District was required to take immediate action since the district responded to approximately 38% of the entire counties calls. At the time the Lake County Fire Protection District was limited on Advanced Life Support personnel, equipment, supplies and transport unit resources. The District initiated an emergency declaration based on an EMS division implementation plan that had been developed and revised several times over the period of 1997-2004 due to the instability of RELS within the district. The emergency declaration provided latitude to employee personnel and to procure equipment and supplies to support complete EMS operations. Similar actions were conducted by the other fire districts within Lake County to meet the emergency situation within the County. Within 15 minutes RELS employees were contacted and immediately employed by the fire districts of Lake County. The fire districts also assessed and discussed equipment and supply issues amongst one another, to ensure there was a continuity of operation countywide.

This transition was seamless and without incident. The communities served were unaware of the transition that had occurred, but moreover, it had increased and enhanced the capabilities of local fire districts in Lake County. Each of the districts pursued grants, general budget funds and other avenues to sustain, enhance and expand all hazard capabilities to the citizens of Lake County. For the fire districts of Lake County, up to 80% of the incidents are EMS based, and have become a standard of goals and objectives the districts strive to maintain. Since the transition on March 22, 2004, the fire districts of Lake County have increased their resource capabilities and services provided. There is now staff a minimum of 12-14 emergency 911 ambulances and three IFT ambulances (24/7/365), to support the two base hospitals transferring patients out of the county for specialized and/or higher level of care.

The fire districts of Lake County have a total of 26 ambulances available to be staffed in the event of an emergency and/or disaster, whether it is of natural and/or manmade occurrences. This has been executed in several countywide functional exercises in 2007, 2008 and 2010, as well as an actual incident response to Colusa County for a multi-casualty tour bus collision. Lake County deployed nine fully equipped and staffed ambulances through a mutual aid request to the Lone Star incident while still maintaining 13 ambulances within the Lake County. An after-action report was conducted to support the response. EMS is a major component of the services provided through the local fire districts. It is completely supported by a comprehensive mutual aid agreement through the Lake County Fire Chief’s Association. These same resources are utilized to support all types of emergency response operations as needed countywide.


17

The Inter-Facility Transfer program is one of several integrated services provided by FPD/EMS system. The County’s IFT program is operated by the fire districts of Lake County, it is ran separately from the County’s emergency 911 operations. “The County’s EMS system is conducted 24/7/365 and is supported by off-duty and part-time personnel”. At no time are emergency 911 resources decreased to support ITF operations. Funds generated by EMS services have become an integral component to annual operating budgets of the Fire Protection Districts and are managed by fire chief’s of each fire department in Lake County. This service as well as other services provided are overseen by the fire district Boards of Directors. The funds realized through the EMS system are utilized for the sustainability; enhancement and expansion of services provided for landowners, residents, communities and visitors of Lake County.

As such, fire districts of Lake County serve as patient advocates and are continuously striving to increase and enhance pre-hospital services provided to Lake County citizens through a continuous quality improvement program to ensure quality assurance and quality improvement, which is accomplished through a previously developed evaluation process and implementation of improvements, as needed. The fire districts develop and assist in the implementation of increased/expanded services provided to Lake County residents and landowners. For example, the use of 12-lead cardiac monitors in the field resulting in patients immediately being able to be transported via air ambulance to a cardiac facility for further treatment, resulting in a decrease in long term cardiac damage.

Another program is the Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP), which is similar to what is utilized in homes to address sleep apnea conditions. The CPAP device is placed on the patient in the field. The end result is 90% or more of these patients are released from the emergency hospital department within 12-18-hours, as opposed to an extended hospital stay and placement on ventilators for recovery purposes for patients not receiving immediate CPAP treatment.

The fire districts of Lake County strive to sustain, enhance and expand the best possible service to the communities we serve. However, this can be jeopardized in the event any portion of the existing EMS infrastructure is compromised by external influences. External influences entering into this now stable environment could result in an implosion of all 911 fire, rescue and EMS services the fire districts of Lake County provide, due to a loss of funding.

Fire districts in Lake County have conducted an assessment and have determined that in the event of a loss of the existing IFT program, a total of 11-full and/or part-time personnel would be laid off. In the event districts were to lose emergency 911 transport privileges, there would be a resultant loss of a total of 56-full time and/or part-time personnel. This would drastically impact current and future service to Lake County communities as well as increases Insurance Service Organization (ISO) ratings, which would result in higher insurance rates for Lake County landowners and residents. In order to maintain the level of service of fire and EMS services in terms of reliability and coverage for all residents and landowners of Lake County, the County should support the provision of ambulance services to be provided by local fire protection districts within Lake County.


18

2 LAKE COUNTY BACKGROUND 2.1 Lake County Overview Lake County was formed in 1861 from parts of Napa and Mendocino counties, but the area had settlers from at least the 1840s. Lake County has long been known as a farming community. Vineyards were planted in the 1870s. By the early 20th century the area was earning a reputation for producing some of the world's greatest wines. However, in 1920, Prohibition ended Lake County's wine production. Most of the vineyards were ripped out and replanted with walnut and pear farms. A re-emergence of the wine industry began in the 1960s when a few growers rediscovered the area's grape growing potential and began planting vineyards. The area went from fewer than 100 acres of grapevines in 1965 to over 8,300 acres of vineyards in 2012.14 Within Lake County are two incorporated cities, Clearlake, the largest city; and Lakeport, the county seat. Other communities include the following: Anderson Springs Blue Lakes Clearlake Oaks Clearlake Park Cobb Finley Glenhaven Hidden Valley Lake Kelseyville Loch Lomond Lower Lake Lucerne Middletown Nice Clear Lake Rivieras (Riveria West, Riveria Heights, and Riveria) Soda Bay Spring Valley Upper Lake Witter Springs Many of these small communities may have had individual fire protection districts in the past. However, over time, the communities have worked together to dissolve several smaller districts and forming five larger fire protection districts within the County.

14 Lake County Department of Agriculture 2012 Crop Report.


19

2.2 Lake County Population Data According to the South Lake County FPD, a once adequate rural fire protection system based on fire flow and fire protection capability will no longer be sufficient. In addition to fire protection problems posed by growth, the issues of larger dwelling structures requiring greater fire flow considerations requires a rapid and effective response to every call with adequate equipment and water essential to preventing a catastrophic fire (as experienced in Nevada County in 1988 during the 49er Fire). The following population data shows that Lake County lost population following the 2010 Census:

US Census Bureau Population Data15 Lake County California Population, 2012 estimate 63,983 37,999,878 Population, 2010 (April 1) estimates base 64,665 37,253,959 Population, percent change, April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2012 -1.1% 2.0% This small decline was probably due to the recession and the population is expected to increase in the future. In addition, Lake County has a large number of tourists so the population needing fire protection and emergency services is significantly larger than the base population. 2.3 Lake County Building Permits The South Lake County Fire Protection District presented the following information regarding Lake County Building Permits. Lake County Building Permits: Lake County Building Department issued a total of 1,321 residential building permits in a ten-year period. Expected New Building Construction During the Next 10 Years: Expected new building construction based upon residential building permits issued during the last eight years: 251 in year 2003 325 in year 2004 267 in year 2005 185 in year 2006 106 in year 2007 49 in year 2008 6 in year 2009 35 in year 2010 28 In year 2011 29 In year 2012 1,321 total dwellings divided by 9 = 144 x 10 years = 1,440 new dwellings



20

Lake County Average Dwelling Size: Average new dwelling based upon residential building permits issued during the last seven years: 2,374 square feet in year 2003 2,481 square feet in year 2004 2,754 square feet in year 2005 2,770 square feet in year 2006 3,016 square feet in year 2007 2,803 square feet in year 2008 1,935 square feet in year 2009 1,979 square feet in year 2010 2,024 square feet in year 2011 1,831 square feet in year 2012 23,967 total square feet divided by 10 = 2,396 average square feet Lake County Population Impact: Lake County uses a 2.5 residency factor for estimating the population within the Census Tracts that cover the District. 1,321 new dwellings x 2.5 = 3,302 new residents by 2023 2.4 Lake County Household Income The following information on Median Household Income is presented because the definition of a Disadvantaged Unincorporated Community states that the residents of a DUC have a Median Household Income less than 80% of the State Median Household Income. Median Household Income and Poverty16 Lake County California Median household income, 2008-2012 $38,147 $61,400 Persons below poverty level, percent, 2008-2012 23.7% 15.3% Eighty percent of the State Median Household Income would be $49,120. Thus, the Median Household Income for Lake County is less than 80% of the State Median Household Income.



21

3 KELSEYVILLE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 3.1 Kelseyville FPD Community Background The Kelseyville Fire Protection District, encompasses 90 square miles and includes the communities of Kelseyville, Soda Bay, Riviera Heights, Buckingham, Riviera West, Konocti Bay and Clearlake Riviera as well as Mt. Hannah. 3.1.1 Kelseyville Kelseyville Overview17 Kelseyville (formerly, Kelsey, Kelsey Creek, Kelsey Town, Peartown, and Uncle Sam) is a census-designated place (CDP) located 6 miles southeast of Lakeport at an elevation of 1384 feet. Kelseyville, at the western base of Mt. Konocti between Highway 29 and Clear Lake, is akey agricultural center in Lake County. Once known as the “Pear Capital of the World,” the area is also known for walnuts and wine grapes. The community contains numerous retail shops and is in close proximity to Clear Lake State Park, which includes a visitor’s center, camping, boating, hiking, and swimming facilities. With administrative offices in Kelseyville, the Kelseyville Unified School District provides educational services within the community. The Kelseyville Unified School District operates three elementary schools, one middle school, and two high schools. Water is provided by the Kelseyville County Waterworks District No. 3 through its two wells. Groundwater provides the primary water source for both municipal and agricultural water users. Kelseyville is within the Big Valley Water Inventory Unit. Wastewater service is also provided by the Kelseyville County Water Works District, with its treatment facility located just north of the community. Points of Interest include the Historic Downtown and Clear Lake State Park. Kelseyville History The place was originally called Kelsey Town in honor of Andrew Kelsey, the first American settler in Lake County. He was killed in 1850 in an uprising against him by a band of Pomo enslaved by Kelsey. This episode ended with the Bloody Island Massacre. The first blacksmith's opened in 1857. The place was called Uncle Sam after Mount Uncle Sam (now Mount Konocti). The Uncle Sam post office opened in 1858 and changed its name to Kelseyville in 1882.

17 Lake County General Plan, September 2008, Page 2-‐6


22

Kelseyville Population Data The Kelseyville population was 3,353 at the 2010 census, up from 2,928 at the 2000 census. The population lived in 1,224 households, out of which 438 (35.8%) had children under the age of 18 living in them. There were 323 households (26.4%) made up of individuals and 163 (13.3%) had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.74. There were 822 families (67.2% of all households); the average family size was 3.31. The population was spread out age as follows:

Kelseyville Age Distribution 2010 Under the age of 18 883 people 26.3% 18 to 24 298 people 8.9% 25 to 44 783 people 23.4% 45 to 64 912 people 27.2% 65 years of age or older 477 people 14.2% The median age was 38.0 years. For every 100 females there were 101.3 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 98.2 males. There were 1,329 housing units of which 785 (64.1%) were owner-occupied, and 439 (35.9%) were occupied by renters. The homeowner vacancy rate was 1.7%; the rental vacancy rate was 7.0%. There were 1,992 people (59.4% of the population) living in owner-occupied housing units and 1,357 people (40.5%) living in rental housing units 3.1.2 Soda Bay Soda Bay is a census-designated place located on Clear Lake, 7.5 miles east-southeast of Lakeport, at an elevation of 1398 feet. The population was 1,016 at the 2010 census. A resort at the place, called Soda Bay Springs, could by 1910 accommodate 150 guests.18 The Census reported that 1,008 people (99.2% of the population) lived in 462 households, out of which 88 (19.0%) had children under the age of 18 living in them. There were 141 households (30.5%) made up of individuals and 53 (11.5%) had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.18. There were 277 families (60.0% of all households); the average family size was 2.66. The population was spread out in age as follows:

Age Distribution Soda Bay 2010 Under the age of 18 169 people 16.6% 18 to 24 66 people 6.5% 25 to 44 156 people 15.4% 45 to 64 364 people 35.8% 65 years of age or older 261 people 25.7% The median age was 54.0 years. For every 100 females there were 99.6 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 97.4 males. 18 Durham, David L. (1998). California's Geographic Names: A Gazetteer of Historic and Modern Names of the State. Quill Driver Books. p. 146. ISBN 9781884995149.


23

There were 707 housing of which 334 (72.3%) were owner-occupied, and 128 (27.7%) were occupied by renters. The homeowner vacancy rate was 5.8%; the rental vacancy rate was 14.1%. There were 706 people (69.5% of the population) living in owner-occupied housing units and 302 people (29.7%) living in rental housing units. 3.1.3 Riviera Heights Riviera Heights Subdivision was originally formed in the early 1970's, with 701 lots for sale. Due to merging of lots, Riviera Heights Subdivision currently has 645 parcels owned by 512 members. Approximately 312 lots have been developed. At this time there is one home under construction. Riviera Heights sold their Water Company in August of 1992 to Lake County Special Districts out of Lakeport.19 3.1.4 Buckingham Buckingham Park (formerly, Buckingham Peninsula) is located on the south shore of Clear Lake, on the peninsula just south of The Narrows and 4.8 miles northeast of Kelseyville at an elevation of 1414 feet. The name comes from a family that lived at the site in the 1880s and 1890s. The Buckingham Park residents have a Kelseyville address. According to the General Plan Background Report, the District serves a population of 800 permanent residents20 with a total of 450 connections.21 Growth in the community of Buckingham Park is limited to a large degree by the geography of the immediate area because Clear Lake surrounds the community on three sides. 3.1.5 Riviera West, Konocti Bay and Clearlake Riviera Clear Lake Riviera was established in 1964. There are 1543 homes, 19 commercial properties, and 1248 undeveloped parcels, spread out over five square miles, at an altitude of 1755 feet.22 The Lake County General Plan describes Clear Lake Riveria as follows

The Clear Lake Riviera community area is located east of Kelseyville on Highway 281 north of its intersection with Highway 29. Originally developed in the 1960s, Clear Lake Riviera is now the fastest growing subdivision in the Rivieras planning area. The area is primarily residential, but its commercial area is developing to provide services, including groceries, restaurants and real estate offices. The area provides limited public lake access through a small restaurant and RV park on Konocti Bay. Clearlake Riviera is located within the Thurston Lake Water Inventory Unit 2007 Population: 3,854 (estimate)

19 Riveria Heights Homeowners Association, http://www.rivieraheights.com/, February 6, 2014. 20 Buckingham Park WD, July 13, 2007. 21 Buckingham Park Water District, Budget 2009-2010, http://bpwd.web.officelive.com/publichearing.aspx 22 Clear Lake Riviera Community Association, http://www.clrca.com/sub_category_list.asp?category=9&title=About+Us, February 6, 2014.


24

Clear Lake Riviera is served by the Kelseyville Unified School District, which operates an elementary school in the community. Additional schools are nearby in the town of Kelseyville, approximately 15 miles from Clear Lake Riviera. Water is provided within the Clear Lake Riviera subdivision by the Mount Konocti Mutual Water Company. Outside of the subdivision, water is obtained either directly from the lake or from individual wells. Wastewater service is provided by individual septic systems. The Konocti Hills Golf Course loops through the eastern side of the subdi-vision. Konocti Harbor Resort and Spa is also nearby.23

3.1.6 Mt. Hannah. County Service Area (CSA) #22/Mt. Hannah currently includes 36 Connections (36 Single Family Dwelling (SFD) equivalents), serving a population of 87 residents. 3.2 Kelseyville FPD Background 3.2.1 Kelseyville FPD Overview The Kelseyville FPD was consolidated with the Big Valley FPD in 1959. The Kelseyville FPD serves a geographical area consisting of urban development interfacing with wildland areas. Kelseyville Fire Protection District is a full service, all-risk Fire Department, providing state-of-the-art services such as Advanced Life Support (ALS), Emergency Medical Services (EMS), residential, commercial and wildland fire suppression, technical rescue services, fire prevention code enforcement, public education, and community service. According to the Kelseyville FPD website, “The members of Kelseyville Fire Protection District are dedicated to providing for the safety and welfare of the Community through preservation of life, property and the environment.” 3.2.2 Kelseyville FPD Mission Statement The mission statement for the Kelseyville Fire Protection District is as follows: “The Kelseyville Fire Protection District was formed as an arm of local government to function for the good of the citizens it protects. The Fire District provides services which are both legal and necessary to protect lives and property.”24

23 Lake County General Plan 2008, Page 2-4. 24 Kelseyville FPD, http://kfd.bitsculptor.com/, January 28, 2014


25

3.2.3 Kelseyville FPD Contact Information Contact information for the Kelseyville FPD is as follows: Physical Address: Kelseyville Fire Protection District

4020 Main Street, Kelseyville, CA 95451 Mailing Address: Kelseyville Fire Protection District

PO Box 306, Kelseyville, CA 95451-0306 Phone: 707-279-4268 Fax: 707-279-4422 E-Mail: [email protected] 3.2.4 Kelseyville FPD Board of Directors The members of the Kelseyville FPD Board of Directors are as follows: David Borjon (term ends 2015) Felicia Bridges (term ends 2017) Herbert T. Colt (term ends 2017) Paul Laurenroth (term ends 2017) Michael Powers (term ends 2015) The Kelseyville Fire Protection District Board of Directors meets at Station 55, 4020 Main Street, Kelseyville, on the second Wednesday of each month at 9am. Meeting times and date are subject to change without notice. The public is encouraged to attend meetings. Persons interested in attending are recommended to call Station 55 in order to ensure the meeting date/time has not been changed.25 3.2.5 Kelseyville FPD Personnel Kelseyville Fire employs thirteen (13) full-time personnel as well as ten (10) volunteer’s to accomplish its Mission. Robert L “Mike” Stone is the Fire Chief. Staffing is provided for fire prevention, training, communications, and two (2) Fire Stations. The training meetings are held on the second Tuesday of each month from 6 to 9 pm at the Fire Station at 4020 Main Street, Kelseyville. The Volunteers have a separate organization with separate funds which they augment through an annual Pancake Breakfast. 3.2.6 Kelseyville FPD Equipment The Kelseyville FPD website summarizes the equipment as follows: The Department operates two (2) engine companies, three (3) medic-ambulances a Fire Chief Officer and Battalion Chief Officer from two (2) stations, 24-hours a day, 365 days a year. The department cross staffs type I Pierce and type II Weststates structure engines, rescue truck, a water tender, one (1) brush truck and three (3) paramedic staffed ambulances.26

25 Kelseyville FPD, http://kfd.bitsculptor.com/home/board-of-directors/, January 28, 2014. 26 Kelseyville FPD, http://kfd.bitsculptor.com/about-us/, January 28, 2014.


26

The list of vehicles insured for the Kelseyville Fire Protection District is as follows:

Kelseyville Fire Protection District Vehicles 2013-14 Number Year Make Model PE Code Value

1 1976 Ford Pumper PR $50,000

3 1990 Dodge Mini-pumper MP $20,000 4 1979 Ford Tanker T $75,000 5 1995 International Rescue Light RTL $100,000 6 2001 Ford Ambulance-ALS ALS $60,000 7 1998 Ford Crown Victoria OTH ACV 8 2005 Freightliner Pumper PR $245,000 9 2006 Ford Ambulance-ALS ALS $130,000

10 2004 Ford Ambulance-ALS ALS $75,000 11 1998 Freightliner Tanker T $78,000 12 2012 Polaris All Terrain Vehicle ATV $15,000 13 2008 Fireblast 451 FireFlash Semi Trail OTH $343,000 14 1929 GMC Antique OTH $15,000 15 1989 International Pumper PR $20,000 16 2011 Dodge Chief Vehicle OTH $29,000 17 2000 Lifeline Ambulance-ALS ALS $20,000 18 2012 Dodge Chiefs Vehicle OTH $29,572 19 2011 Big Tex Utility Trailer OTH $2,272 20 1996 Pierce Pumper PR $30,000 21 2000 Ford Ambulance-ALS ALS $19,500

3.2.7 Kelseyville FPD Water Supply Mark Dellinger, from Lake County Special Districts, made the following comments regarding water supply for the Kelseyville FPD in December 2013:

In 2007, significant improvements to the water system were completed that address supply, storage, and pressure. The improvements were funded through loans and a grant from the US Department of Agriculture rural Utilities Service. This included a physical pipeline connection between the Kelseyville and Finley water systems. A new well was added to the supply system that produces over 500 gpm. A total of 4 wells now supply the distribution and storage system. The storage capacity was increased from 500,000 gallons to 1.5 million gallons. Nearly 12,000 lineal feet of 8-inch, 10-inch, and 12-inch diameter pipe was added to the distribution system.


27

As a result of the pipeline connecting to the Kelseyville and Finley water systems, both water quality and water pressure have been improved in the Finley system. In December 2013, pressure and flow readings were taken at 4 fire hydrant locations in the Kelseyville water distribution system. The results are as follows: End of Fifer Road (Bell Hill Road area): 540 gpm @12.5 psi (dynamic) 60 psi (static) End of Vista Mtn. Estates road: 816 gpm @28 psi (dynamic) 70 psi (static) End of Sylar Lane: 345 gpm @ 5 psi (dynamic) 80 psi (static) Gaddy Lane (west of Post Office): 345 gpm @ 5 psi (dynamic), 90 psi (static) In 2014, additional pipeline will be installed within the Bell Hill Road area which will further improve both pressure and flow conditions in the portion of the distribution system27

3.2.8 Kelseyville FPD Calls The following table shows the Kelseyville Fire Protection District calls for 2012. The medical calls are 72% of the total calls and this is typical of most fire districts.

Kelseyville FPD Calls 2012 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Fire Structure 6 5 3 0 2 3 0 3 5 2 2 0 31

Wildland 1 1 0 3 3 6 6 14 4 3 1 0 42 vehicle 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 5 other 2 2 1 3 4 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 15

Med Aid

Transport 69 46 44 60 54 44 64 47 63 31 46 61 629 No Trans. 20 16 25 14 24 34 25 26 21 26 23 37 291

Other MVA 8 6 6 3 6 4 4 5 5 2 6 8 63 Smoke ck 3 1 3 3 1 1 4 6 2 2 1 2 29 Public 15 8 8 9 7 10 9 12 7 12 4 10 111 False alm 7 2 0 3 4 1 3 6 3 4 4 2 39 Haz Con 1 2 2 2 1 4 2 1 1 2 3 5 26 MVA/tran 0 3 1 1 2 2 4 1 3 0 2 4 23 1281

Ambulance service is provided on both a 911 emergency basis and for inter-facility transfers (IFT). The five fire protection districts are in the process of forming a Joint Powers Authority to operate the inter-facility transfers to provide for better service and coordinated use of equipment.

27 Lake County Special Districts, Mark Dellinger, Administrator, 230 North Main Street, Lakeport CA 95453, Phone 707-263-0119, Fax: 707-263-3836, E-Mail: [email protected], December 16, 2013.


28

3.2.9 Kelseyville FPD Budget The Kelseyville FPD keeps all funds with the Lake County Auditor and pays the bills through the County Claims process.

Kelseyville Fire Protection District Budget 2013-14 REVENUE 2011-12

Actual 2012-13 Actual

2013-14 Adopted

PROPERTY TAXES 10-10 Current Secured 1,233,142 1,232,220 1,227,130 10-20 Current Unsecured 28,448 28,044 28,228 10-25 Supplemental 813-Current (2,732) (5,978) 0 10-35 Supplemental 813-Prior 3,207 3,765 3,000 10-40 Prior Unsecured 1,050 1,059 2,000 PERMITS 21-60 Other 10,533 10,580 10,000 FINES, FORFEIT, PENALTIES 31-82 Criminal Fines 170 2,720 0 REVENUE FROM USE OF MONEY 42-01 Interest (29) 447 0 STATE AID 54-60 HOPTR 17,100 16,888 16,880 54-90 Other 422,887 271,242 210,000 OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES 56-30 Other 0 22,648 0 PUBLIC PROTECTION 68-60 Institutional Care and Services* 974,678 1,179,627 1,000,000 OTHER CURRENT SERVICES 69-29 Fire Protection** 178,352 180,854 175,000 OTHER 79-90 Miscellaneous*** 12,646 15,654 6,000 SALES 79-60 Sales of Fixed Assets 0 576 0 OPERATING TRANSFERS 81-22 In**** 43,787 49,013 40 TOTAL REVENUE 2,923,239 3,009,359 2,718,238 *These funds come from billing for ambulance service. ** These funds come from the special fire protection tax of $19 per home (and according to the schedule for commercial buildings) for fire protection. *** These funds come from such things as the cost for a fire report. **** These funds come from the $1 per square foot mitigation fee charged for new buildings.


29

Kelseyville Fire Protection District Budget 2013-14 EXPENSES

2011-12 Actual

2012-13 Actual

2013-14 Adopted

SALARIES AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 01-11 Permanent 696,653 708,386 870,717 01-12 Extra Help (part-time employees) 332,335 401,907 470,986 01-13 OT, Holiday, Standby 110,487 145,441 132,600 01-14 Other, Term 9,919 1,921 0 02-21 FICA 18,364 18,043 20,400 02-22 PERS 233,771 241,550 276,260 02-23 PERS-Co Paid Employee Con 88,229 76,849 85,680 02-28 Deferred Compensation 1,330 1,330 1,331 03-30 Health/Life Insurance 179,559 181,228 185,000 03-31 Unemployment 413 2,263 10,000 03-32 Opt Out (of health insurance) 9,624 13,292 14,000 04-00 Worker’s Compensation 93,476 105,116 163,000 SERVICES AND SUPPLIES 11-00 Clothing &Personal Supplies 10,318 20,921 15,000 12-00 Communications 36,815 37,437 43,535 14-00 Household Expense 6,691 6,872 6,500 15-10 Other 26,418 24,852 28,000 17-00 Maintenance-Equipment 36,898 48,014 67,500 18-00 Maintenance Buildings &

Improvements 6,470 5,877 10,000

20-00 Memberships 1,340 1,089 1,350 22-70 Supplies 2,095 2,424 2,500 22-71 Postage 1,052 643 1,000 23-80 Professional/Specialized Services 539,540 372,527 200,000 24-00 Publication and Legal Notices 279 242 250 27-00 Small Tools and Instruments 931 1,693 2,000 28-30 Supplies and Services 8,009 6,889 15,589 28-48 Ambulance Exp.-oxygen/med/ sup 26,313 30,782 31,500 29-50 Transportation & Travel 61,351 79,557 90,000 30-00 Utilities 26,998 29,890 30,000 38-00 Inventory Items 8,194 7,184 8,500 OTHER CHARGES 42-10 Notes & Loans 235,782 217,777 163,450 48-00 Taxes and Assessments 51 51 52 CAPITAL ASSETS 62-72 Autos & Light Trucks 51,831 90,051 30,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES/APPROPRIATIONS

2,861,536 2,881,798 2,976,700

Net Cost (61,703) (127,561) 258,462


30

3.2.10 Kelseyville FPD Audit28 Net Assets The Kelseyville FPD Audit showed the following Net Assets for the year ending June 30, 2012. Kelseyville FPD Modified Cash Basis Statement of Net Assets, June 30, 201229

Total Governmental Activities Assets Cash and Investments (governmental funds) $204,232 Capital assets Non-depreciable 179,285 Depreciable, net 2,830,633 Total Capital Assets* 3,009,918 TOTAL ASSETS 3,214,150 Liabilities** Long-term Liabilities Due within one year 245,449 Due in more than one year 1,771,241 TOTAL LIABILITIES 2,016,690 Net Assets Invested in capital assets, net of related debt 1,276,606 Restricted for capital improvement 1 Unrestricted (79,147) TOTAL NET ASSETS (governmental activities) $1,197,460 *Capital assets used in governmental activities are not financial resources and therefore are not reported in the governmental funds balance sheets. ** Liabilities may include Loans payable, Capital leases payable, and compensated absences of employees. Cash and Investments Cash and investments as of June 30, 2012 were are follows:30 Cash: Cash on hand $100 Deposits (less outstanding checks) 5,200 Total Cash 5,300 Investments: Lake County treasurer’s pool 198,932 Total Investments $198,032 Total Cash and Investments $204,232

28 Kelseyville FPD, Audit for the Year Ended June 30, 2012, Prepared by Smith & Newell, Certified Public Accountants, 1425 Butte House Road, Yuba City CA 95993, Phone: 530-673-9790, Fax: 530-673-1305, April 10, 2013. 29 Kelseyville FPD, Audit for the Year Ended June 30, 2012, Prepared by Smith & Newell, Certified Public Accountants, 1425 Butte House Road, Yuba City CA 95993, Phone: 530-673-9790, Fax: 530-673-1305, April 10, 2013, Page 3. 30Kelseyville FPD, Audit for the Year Ended June 30, 2012, Prepared by Smith & Newell, Certified Public Accountants, 1425 Butte House Road, Yuba City CA 95993, Phone: 530-673-9790, Fax: 530-673-1305, April 10, 2013, Page 13.


31

Employees’ Retirement Plan31 The Kelseyville FPD contributes to the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS), an agent multiple-employer public employee defined benefit plan. PERS provides retirement and disability benefits, annual cost-of-living adjustments, and death benefits to plan members and beneficiaries. PERS acts as a common investment and administrative agent for participating public entities within the State of California. Benefit provisions and all other requirements are established by statute. Copies of PERS annual financial report may be obtained from their Executive Office at 400 Q Street, Lincoln Plaza East, Sacramento CA 95811. Miscellaneous plan members are required to contribute 7 percent of their annual covered salary. Safety plan members are required to contribute 9 percent of their annual covered salary. The District is required to contribute the actuarially determined remaining amounts necessary to fund the benefits for its members. The actuarial methods and assumptions used are those adopted by the PERS Board of Administration. The required employer contribution rate for fiscal year 2011-12 was 2.16 percent for miscellaneous employees and 29.27 percent for safety employees. The contribution requirements of the plan are established by State statute and the employer contribution rate is established and may be amended by PERS. For fiscal year 2011-12, the District’s annual pension cost of $239,561 for PERS was equal to the District’s actual contributions. The required contributions for fiscal year 2011-12 were determined as part of the June 30, 2009, actuarial valuation using the entry age normal actuarial cost method. The actuarial assumptions included the following: a) 7.75 percent investment rate of return (net of administrative expenses) b) projected annual salary increases of 3.55 percent to 14.45 percent, depending on

age, service, and type of employment, and c) 3.25 percent inflation d) 3.25 percent payroll growth and e) individual salary growth based on a merit scale with assumed annual inflation of

3.00 percent and annual production growth of 0.25 percent. The actuarial value of PERS assets was determined using techniques that smooth the effect of short term volatility in the market value of investments over a fifteen year period (smoothed market value). Initial unfunded actuarial accrued liability is being amortized as a level percentage of projected payroll on a closed basis. All changes in liability due to plan amendments, changes in actuarial assumptions, or changes in actuarial methodology are amortized separately over a 20 year period. 31Kelseyville FPD, Audit for the Year Ended June 30, 2012, Prepared by Smith & Newell, Certified Public Accountants, 1425 Butte House Road, Yuba City CA 95993, Phone: 530-673-9790, Fax: 530-673-1305, April 10, 2013, Pages 20-21.


32

All gains or losses are tracked and amortized over a rolling 30 year period with the exception of gains and losses in fiscal years 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11 in which each year’s gains or losses will be isolated and amortized over fixed and declining 30 year periods (as opposed to the current rolling 30 year amortization). If the plan’s accrued liability exceeds the actuarial value of plan assets, the annual contribution with respect to the total unfunded liability may not be less than the amount produced by a 30 year amortization of the unfunded liability. The table below presents three year trend information. Fiscal Year Ending

Annual Pension Cost (APC)

Percentage of APC Contributed

Net Pension Obligation

June 30, 2010 $183,995 100% - June 30, 2011 175,486 100% - June 30, 2012 239,561 100% - The miscellaneous plan and the safety plan had less than 100 active members in at least one valuation since June 30, 2003, therefore it is required to participate in a risk pool and does not present individual plan funded status. Other Postemployment Benefits (OPEB) 32 The District has agreed to pay postemployment health insurance benefits for the retired fire chief until age 65. This benefit was negotiated by contract. These benefits are financed on a pay-as-you-go basis. At June 30, 2010, the District was required to implement GASB Statement No. 45. However, the District has not had an actuarial valuation of the OPEB plan and has not recorded the OPEB liability. The amount paid on the pay-as-you-go basis for the year ended June 30, 2012 was $2,592. Joint Ventures33 The District is a participant in Fire District’s Association of California-Fire Agencies Self Insurance Systems, the purpose of which is to provide worker’s compensation benefits to each member agency including claims administration and program administration. Complete financial information can be obtained from the Association office at 1831 K Street, Sacramento, California 95814.

32 Kelseyville FPD, Audit for the Year Ended June 30, 2012, Prepared by Smith & Newell, Certified Public Accountants, 1425 Butte House Road, Yuba City CA 95993, Phone: 530-673-9790, Fax: 530-673-1305, April 10, 2013, Page 21. 33 Kelseyville FPD, Audit for the Year Ended June 30, 2012, Prepared by Smith & Newell, Certified Public Accountants, 1425 Butte House Road, Yuba City CA 95993, Phone: 530-673-9790, Fax: 530-673-1305, April 10, 2013, Page 21.


33

Risk Management34 The District is exposed to various risks of loss related to torts; theft of, damage to, and destruction of assets; errors and omissions; injuries to employees; and natural disasters. The District has joined together with other fire districts in the state to participate in the Fire District’s Association of California-Fire Association Self Insurance System. This joint venture is a public entity risk pool which serves as a common risk management and insurance program for workers compensation coverage for 199 member fire districts. The District pays an annual premium to the joint venture for its insurance coverage. The agreement with the joint venture provides that they will be self-sustaining through member premiums and will reinsure through commercial companies for excess coverage. The District continues to carry commercial insurance for all other risks of loss. Settled claims resulting from these risks have not exceeded commercial insurance coverage in any of the past three fiscal years. Commitments and Contingencies There are potential claims and legal actions pending against the District for which no provision has been made in the financial statements. In the opinion of the District management and legal counsel, liabilities arising from these claims and legal actions, if any, either will not be material or cannot be estimated at this time. Pollution Remediation The District has two parcels of land, 4020 Main Street and 4030 Main Street in Kelseyville that have been determined to have underground storage tank contamination. In March 1995 the District removed a 1,000 gallon tank from the district owned property at 4020 Main Street. In June 1995 soil was removed from the site and gas was detected. In 1999 monitoring wells were drilled at the site. In May 2000, the District purchased the property at 4030 Main Street that was previously determined to be contaminated and in need of cleanup. The District is working with a consultant and the California State Water Resources Control Board to study the contamination and determine the cleanup or mitigation actions to be taken. The cleanup activities needed and associated costs are not full known at this time so no provision has been made in the financial statements.

34Kelseyville FPD, Audit for the Year Ended June 30, 2012, Prepared by Smith & Newell, Certified Public Accountants, 1425 Butte House Road, Yuba City CA 95993, Phone: 530-673-9790, Fax: 530-673-1305, April 10, 2013, Page 22.


34

3.3 Kelseyville FPD Service Review 3.3.1 Kelseyville FPD Service Review Determinations on Growth and Population

Projections 1-1) On March 10, 2011, the State Department of Public Health issued a new permit

for the Soda Bay water system which includes a connection restriction until the system can demonstrate adequate treatment capacity.35

1-2) The expansion of the supply and treatment capabilities within the Kelseyville

water system have been the primary focus within the system and those goals were successfully completed. Future improvement goals, with regard to the distribution system (mainly piping and looping) are needed in the near term for the existing customer base and reasonable future growth. In order to comply with the conditions of the USDA/RUS loan that funded the system improvements in 2006, connections to the Kelseyville water system are mandatory. 36

1-3) County Service Area #22, was formed (with the dissolution of its predecessor,

Mt. Hannah Water Company) to establish a domestic water system for the residents within the community in Mt. Hannah. This is a small CSA that serves approximately 38 dwellings. 37

1-4) The Lake County General Plan38 shows the following population increases for the

communities within the Kelseyville FPD: 2010 2030 Kelseyville 3353 5304 Clearlake Rivieras 4090 6077 Soda Bay 1016 1395 3.3.2 Kelseyville FPD Service Review Determinations on Disadvantaged

Unincorporated Communities 2-1) Although Kelseyville meets the DUC criteria of Median Household Income below

80% of the State Median Household Income, Lake LAFCO and Lake County have not designated any Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities within the Kelseyville FPD. (Clearlake Rivieras and Soda Bay have Median Household Incomes above the DUC limit.)

2-2) The Kelseyville FPD provides fire protection and emergency medical service to

all residents throughout the District.

35 Lake County Housing Element 2012, Page 4-4. 36 Lake County Housing Element 2012, Page 4-5. 37 Lake County Housing Element 2012, Page 4-5. 38 Lake County General Plan, September 2018, Page 2-15.


35

3.3.3 Kelseyville FPD Service Review Determinations on Capacity and Infrastructure 3-1) The Kelseyville FPD has adequate staff and equipment to provide fire protection

and emergency medical service to all residents throughout the District. 3-2) The Kelseyville FPD has 13 paid fire fighters and 10 volunteers.39 3.3.4 Kelseyville FPD Service Review Determinations on Financing 4-1) The Kelseyville FPD must be vigilant to manage the complicated finances of the

District to remain financially viable. 4-2) The proposed Joint Powers Authority for Inter-Facility Medical Transfers should

help to stabilize the District finances. 3.3.5 Kelseyville FPD Service Review Determinations on Shared Facilities 5-1) The Kelseyville FPD participates in the Lake County Fire Chiefs Association. 5-2) The Kelseyville FPD uses the County Auditor to maintain funds. 5-3) Kelseyville FPD relies on Finley CSA, Mt. Hannah CSA, Buckingham Water

District, Mt. Konocti Mutual Water Company, Lake County Special Districts and Riviera West Mutual Water Company. 40

5-4) The Kelseyville FPD is working to form a Joint Powers Authority for Inter-Facility

Medical transfers. 5-5) The Kelseyville FPD cooperates with CALFIRE and other fire protection districts

in Lake County. 3.3.6 Kelseyville FPD Service Review Determinations on Local Accountability

and Governance 6-1) The Kelseyville FPD has an active governing board and meets regularly. 6-2) The Kelseyville FPD has a website but it could be more complete.

39 Kelseyville FPD, LAFCO Information, December 2013. 40 Kelseyville FPD, LAFCO Information, December 2013.


36

3.4 Kelseyville FPD SOI The recommendation for the Kelseyville FPD Sphere of Influence is that it be coterminous with the District boundary. 3.4.1 SOI Determinations on Present and Planned Land Uses in the Kelseyville

Fire Protection District Area, Including Agricultural and Open Space Lands 1-1] The land uses in the Kelseyville FPD area are expected to stay the same and

limited growth will occur through in-fill development. 1-2] Kelseyville is within the Kelseyville planning area and has a Community Growth

Boundary in the Lake County General Plan.41 1-3] Soda Bay and Clearlake Rivieras are within the Rivieras Planning Area and each

has a Community Growth Boundary.42 3.4.2 SOI Determinations on Municipal Services—Present and Probable Capacity

and Need for Kelseyville FPD 2-1] The need for fire protection and emergency medical services will continue into

the future. 3.4.3 SOI Determinations on the Present Capacity of Public Facilities and

Adequacy of Public Services Provided by Kelseyville FPD 3-1] The capacity of the Kelseyville FPD is adequate and the services provided are

adequate and will remain so provided that funding can be maintained.

41 Lake County General Plan, September 2018, Page 2-2. 42 Lake County General Plan, September 2018, Page 2-2.


37

3.4.4 SOI Determinations on Social or Economic Communities of Interest for

Kelseyville FPD 4-1] Kelseyville is an economic and social community and the smaller communities in

the District depend on Kelseyville for services. 4-2] The Kelseyville Fire Protection District and the volunteers provide a focus for the

community. 4-3] The Kelseyville Fire Protection District maintains a website to keep the

community informed about District activities and programs. 3.4.5 SOI Determinations on Disadvantaged Unincorporated Community Status

for Kelseyville FPD 5-1] Although Kelseyville meets the DUC criteria of Median Household Income below

80% of the State Median Household Income, Lake LAFCO and Lake County have not designated any Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities within the Kelseyville FPD. (Clearlake Rivieras and Soda Bay have Median Household Incomes above the DUC limit.)

5-2] The Kelseyville FPD provides fire protection and emergency medical service to

all residents throughout the District.


38


39

4 LAKE COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 4.1 Lake County FPD Community Background 4.1.1 City of Clearlake City of Clearlake Background The City of Clearlake is the largest community within the Lake County FPD. The City of Clearlake is located northeast of Santa Rosa along State Highway 53 near the southeast portion of Clear Lake and south of the Mendocino National Forest. The City of Clearlake elevation is 1417 feet above sea level. The City of Clearlake, was incorporated on November 14, 1980 following an election whereby the registered voters approved the incorporation by a narrow margin (1750 in favor and 1711 opposed). Clearlake is the largest city in Lake County in both geographic area and population. The City is located along the southeast shore of Clear Lake just north of Cache Creek. City of Clearlake Demographics The 2010 US Census reported that Clearlake had a population of 15,250. According to the State Department of Finance, the January 1, 2013 population of Clearlake is 15,192. The 2010 Census reported that 14,790 people 5,970 households, out of which 1,859 (31.1%) had children under the age of 18 living in them; 1,898 households (31.8%) which were made up of individuals and 739 (12.4%) had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.48. There were 3,418 families (57.3% of all households); the average family size was 3.11. The City of Clearlake population was spread out in age as follows:

CITY OF CLEARLAKE POPULATON AGE GROUPS

Under the age of 18 3,656 people 24.0% 18 to 24 1,528 people 10.0% 25 to 44 3,384 people 22.2% 45 to 64 4,389 people 28.8% 65 years of age or older 2,293 people 15.0% The median age was 39.9 years. For every 100 females there were 99.9 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 96.6 males.


40

There were 8,035 housing units in the City of Clearlake 2010, of which 3,190 (53.4%) were owner-occupied, and 2,780 (46.6%) were occupied by renters. The homeowner vacancy rate was 5.9%; the rental vacancy rate was 12.1%. The population is almost evenly divided between owners and renters with 7,595 people (49.8% of the population) in owner-occupied housing units and 7,195 people (47.2%) in rental housing units. The City of Clearlake includes 32.9% of the population below the poverty level.43 This can make it difficult to finance new improvements for the City. Based on the 2010 Census, the City of Clearlake is considered a Disadvantaged Community. The Median Household Income for the City of Clearlake is $28,604 which is significantly less than 80% of the State Median Household Income ($49,306).44 4.1.2 Lower Lake Lower Lake (formerly, Grantville) is a census-designated place (CDP) located 13 miles east-southeast of Kelseyville at an elevation of 1371 feet. The population was 1,294 at the 2010 census, down from 1,755 at the 2000 census. Lower Lake is also an Indian Rancheria. Lower Lake was founded by E. Mitchell in 1858 and he built the first house there. The first post office opened in 1858 as well.45 The Census reported that 1,291 people (99.8% of the population) lived in 552 households, out of which 146 (26.4%) had children under the age of 18 living in them. There were 190 households (34.4%) made up of individuals and 73 (13.2%) had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.34. There were 322 families (58.3% of all households); the average family size was 2.99. The population was spread out in age as follows:

Lower Lake Age Distribution 2010 Under the age of 18 259 people 20.0% 18 to 24 96 people 7.4% 25 to 44 254 people 19.6% 45 to 64 449 people 34.7% 65 years of age or older 236 people 18.2% The median age was 46.5 years. For every 100 females there were 99.7 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 100.2 males. There were 705 housing of which 389 (70.5%) were owner-occupied, and 163 (29.5%) were occupied by renters. The homeowner vacancy rate was 6.2%; the rental vacancy rate was 13.7%. There were 938 people (72.5% of the population) living in owner-occupied housing units and 353 people (27.3%) living in rental housing units.

43 US Census Bureau, http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0613945.html, May 31, 2013 44 US Census Bureau, http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0613945.html, May 31, 2013 45 Durham, David L. (1998). California's Geographic Names: A Gazetteer of Historic and Modern Names of the State. Quill Driver Books. p. 99. ISBN 9781884995149.


41

4.2 Lake County FPD Background 4.2.1 Lake County FPD Location The Lake County Fire Protection District encompasses over 146 square miles of Lake County. The south edge of the District reaches to the northern boundary of the South Lake County FPD, which extends to the Napa county line. To the north, the District contacts the Northshore FPD. To the west of the Lake County Fire District is the Kelseyville Fire Protection District. Contact information for the Lake County FPD is as follows: Lake County FPD, 14815 Olympic Drive, Clearlake CA 95422 Phone: (707) 994-2170 Fire Chief: William Sapeta 4.2.2 Lake County FPD Mission Statement The Lake County Fire Protection District Mission Statement is as follows: The primary mission of the Lake County Fire District is to provide a range of programs designed to protect lives and property of the inhabitants therein from the adverse effects of fire, sudden medical emergencies ,and or, exposure to dangerous conditions created by man or nature.46 4.2.3 Lake County Fire Protection District Board of Directors The Board of Directors for the Lake County Fire Protection District is as follows:

1. Russell Cremer (term expires 2017) 2. Robert Gordon (term expires 2015) 3. Tom Meisenbach (term expires 2017) 4. Russell Perdock (term expires 2015) 5. John Spriet (term expires 2015) 6. Michael Thomas (term expires 2017) 7. Diane Watson (term expires 2017)

The Board meetings are held on the fourth Tuesday of each month at 5:30 pm. 4.2.4 Lake County Fire Protection District Fire Stations The Lake County FPD operates the following fire stations: Fire Station 70 (Headquarters Station) Fire Department Administration Fire Station 71 (Airport Station) Fire Station 72 (Clearlake Park Station) Fire Station 73 (Pine Dell Station) Status: Unstaffed (volunteer augmented) Fire Station 65 (Lower Lake Station) Fire Station 66 (Jago Bay Station)

46 Lake County FPD, http://lakecountyfire.com/Missionstmt.html, January 28, 2014


42

4.2.5 Lake County Fire Protection District Equipment47 The Lake County FPD has the following equipment: E-165 Type-3 Wildland Engine E-365 Type-3 Wildland Engine E-350 Ford HAZ-MAT Support unit M-470 Type-2 Medium Duty Rescue Ambulance T-170 Type-1 Aerial Ladder truck E-370 Type-3 Wildland Engine E-470 Type-3 Wildland Engine E-170 Type-1 Structural Fire Engine E-1070 Type-3 Wildland Engine /Type-2 Watertender M-170 Type-2 Rescue ambulance R-570 Light / Medium duty technical rescue unit S-770 Type-4 Wildland engine U-703 Battalion chief / quick response (ALS) vehicle U-170 Utility Vehicle WT-870 Type-1 Watertender The Lake County Fire Protection District currently deploys two 24 hour Advanced Life Support (ALS) ambulances, a number of ALS reserve ambulances, and ALS complemented engine companies. The District also provides both ALS and BLS (Basic Life Support) ambulances on a rotating basis for emergency transfer from local hospitals to facilities of higher levels of care. 4.2.6 Training-Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) The Training-Continuous Quality Improvement Program educates and trains personnel to the highest standards in quality patient care. All Patient Care Reports (PCRs) are reviewed for completeness, accuracy and protocol compliance. The CQI program processes any concern or issue by patient, family member, or medical authority through its established channels.

47 Lake County FPD, http://lakecountyfire.com/Apparatus.html, January 28, 2014


43

To assure continuous quality improvement of the paramedics, the Lake County Fire Protection District has implemented an evaluation system to enhance the paramedics’ knowledge and skill. The (CQI) coordinator assesses each selected PCR regarding County policies and procedures, rapid patient assessment and interventions, interpretation of cardiac rhythms, and manipulative skills such as intubation and intravenous access. This knowledge can be beneficial in identifying specific needs for individual employees and volunteers, which then improves the district's overall service levels.48 4.2.7 Lake County FPD Staff and Calls The Lake County FPD has 22 paid staff and 25 volunteers. The District responds to over 5,000 calls per year. The Lake County FPD volunteers have a nonprofit organization which works to obtain grants for equipment and to do various projects which benefit the District. 49 4.2.8 Lake County FPD Water The City of Clearlake provides does not provide domestic water service. Residents, businesses and landowners rely upon domestic water services provided by other entities. Property developers are required to install water lines that connect to the applicable water system depending upon the location unless site conditions and the proposed project permit the use of a private well. Domestic water systems within the City Limits of the City of Clearlake and Lower Lake rely upon surface water supplies from Clear Lake and its tributaries. Clearlake is within the Shoreline Water Inventory Unit. 50 Water service is provided by the following:

Water Providers for City of Clearlake Water Service Number of

Connections Rate

Monthly Charge for Connection

Cost for 100 cubic feet of water

Golden State Water Company51 14595 Olympic Drive, Clearlake, CA 95422 (707) 994-0118

2,178 $49.65 $5.75

Highlands Mutual Water Company52 14580 Lakeshore Dr., Clearlake, CA 95422 (707) 994-2393

2,800 $33.00 $3.00

Konocti County Water District53 15449 Stanyon, Clearlake, CA 95422

2,000 $28.00 $2.50

48Lake County FPD, http://lakecountyfire.com/EMS.html, January 28, 2014. 49 Lake County FPD, William Sapeta, Fire Chief, Phone: (707) 994-2170, February 14, 2014. 50 Lake County General Plan, September 2008, Page 2-13, http://www.co.lake.ca.us/Assets/CDD/2008+General+Plan+Final+Version/2008+General+Plan+Docs/Chapter+2+-+Community+Profiles.pdf, February 19, 2013. 51 Golden State Water Company14595 Olympic Drive, Clearlake, CA 95422, (707) 994-0118, October 15, 2013. 52Highlands Mutual Water Company, 14580 Lakeshore Dr., Clearlake, CA 95422, (707) 994-2393, October 15, 2013. 53 Konocti County Water District, 15449 Stanyon, Clearlake, CA 95422, (707) 994-2561, October 15, 2013.


44

(707) 994-2561


45

The community of Lower Lake gets water from the Lower Lake County Water District #1. The water for fire protection is described as follows:

The original system included a number of wharf hydrants with a few dry barrel hydrants. Only dry barrel hydrants have been added recently. In most areas, the frequency of hydrants along streets is normal; but in some areas there are too few hydrants. Flows and pressures at hydrants on six inch or larger water lines are good due to the high prevailing static pressures. Hydrants on small diameter lines will produce substandard flows and residual pressures (under 500 gpm, under 20 psi) despite the high prevailing static pressures. The California Department of Health Services suggests that a commercial district should have a fire flow of 2,000 gpm for two hours which can be obtained by using two dry barrel hydrants that are on separate small mains, or on the same large main. Lake County requires 750 gpm in urban residential areas and 500 gpm in rural residential areas. These values are not attainable in many areas of the District. The new (2006) storage tank at the Mill Street location will provide the additional water needed for fire protection. Considering the rural grassland and woodland nature of the Rancho Sendero and Twin Lakes areas, the proximity of grasslands and woodlands to the town of Lower Lake, maintaining maximum possible fire flows and large fire reserves for property protection in the event of wildfires should be a priority.54

54 Lake LAFCO, Service Review Lower Lake County Water District #1, October 2010, Pages 15-16.


46

4.2.9 Lake County FPD Budget The following tables show the Lake County FPD Budget with Revenue shown first and then Expenses. The Expenses appear to exceed the Revenue.

Lake County Fire Protection District Budget 2013-14 REVENUE 2011-12


2013-14 Adopted

PROPERTY TAXES 10-10 Current Secured 644,209 962,395 919,047 10-15 ERAF-SRAF 0 59,172 0 10-20 Current Unsecured 22,150 21,660 21,000 10-25 Supplemental 813-Current (2,092) (4,614) (5,000) 10-35 Supplemental 813-Prior 2,527 2,962 2,500 10-40 Prior Unsecured 828 824 500 PERMITS 21-60 Other 11,076 10,340 9,000 FINES, FORFEIT, PENALTIES 31-95 Penalties and Cost on

Delinquencies 29,563 38,689 30,000

REVENUE FROM USE OF MONEY 42-01 Interest 12,437 10,506 10,112 STATE AID 54-60 HOPTR 13,314 13,044 13,000 OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES 56-30 Other 398,054 134,116 120,641 PUBLIC PROTECTION 68-60 Institutional Care and Services 919,965 990,228 967,157 OTHER CURRENT SERVICES 69-29 Fire Protection* 704,737 711,009 681,000 OTHER 79-90 Miscellaneous 50,363 44,870 30,000 79-91 Cancelled Checks 554 504 0 SALES 79-60 Sales of Fixed Assets 9,900 5,250 15,000 OPERATING TRANSFERS 81-22 In 30,000 20,000 15,000 RESIDUAL EQUITY TRANSFERS 81-31 Residual Equity Transfer 7,406 81,205 0 TOTAL REVENUE 2,854,991 3,102,160 2,828,957 *The Lake County FPD has a special tax of $60 per residence in the Clearlake area and $45 per residence in the Lower Lake area.55

55 Lake County FPD, William Sapeta, Fire Chief, Phone: (707) 994-2170, February 14, 2014.


47

Lake County Fire Protection District Budget 2013-14 EXPENSES

2011-12 Actual

2012-13 Actual

2013-14 Adopted

SALARIES AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 01-11 Permanent 1,191,473 1,176,544 1,231,048 01-12 Extra Help 62,704 99,088 123,000 01-13 OT, Holiday, Standby 178,514 154,044 170000 02-21 FICA 23,522 24,512 91,443 02-22 PERS 336,219 326,267 354173 02-23 PERS-Co Paid Employee Con 106,260 107,004 118229 03-30 Health/Life Insurance 340,177 407,985 591600 03-31 Unemployment 10,212 11,252 32,497 04-00 Worker’s Compensation 99,412 102,166 146,000 SERVICES AND SUPPLIES 11-00 Clothing &Personal Supplies 30,102 23,421 65,000 12-00 Communications 70,450 130,036 139,300 14-00 Household Expense 2,121 3,445 5500 15-10 Other 2,479 2,210 5,200 15-12 Public Liability 32,991 36,301 40,000 17-00 Maintenance-Equipment 36,280 74,882 65,000 18-00 Maintenance Buildings &

Improvements 2,561 5,326 18,000

20-00 Memberships 4,400 2,487 4,300 22-70 Supplies 4,778 6,614 7,500 22-71 Postage 1,102 1,110 2,000 22-72 Books & Periodicals 1,297 1,684 2,200 23-80 Professional/Specialized Services 20,588 26,285 37,500 24-00 Publication and Legal Notices 355 143 500 27-00 Small Tools and Instruments 647 162 2,200 28-30 Supplies and Services 37397 40,464 47,500 28-48 Ambulance Expense 104,836 127,567 150,000 29-50 Transportation & Travel 48,033 57,347 65,000 30-00 Utilities 54,635 39,293 48,100 OTHER CHARGES 42-10 Notes & Loans 88,352 65,525 68,104 48-00 Taxes and Assessments 1,412 329 1,450 CAPITAL ASSETS 61-60 Current 0 59,000 25,000 62-71 Office 0 0 3,500 62-72 Autos & Light Trucks 65,000 0 0 62-74 Other 21,565 57,807 93,472 62-76 Fire Hoses 3,366 0 6,000 APPROPRIATIONS FOR CONTINGENCIES 90-91 Contingencies 0 0 10,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES/APPROPRIATIONS

2,983,240 3,170,300 3,770,816

Net Cost 128,249 68,140 941,859


48

4.3 Lake County FPD Service Review 4.3.1 Lake County FPD Service Review Determinations on Growth and

Population Projections 1-1) The City of Clearlake is in the process of preparing a General Plan. 1-2) The City of Clearlake expects moderate growth. 1-3) The community of Lower Lake is covered by the Lake County General Plan. 1-4) A small amount of growth is expected for the Lower Lake area. 1-5) The Lake County General Plan shows the following population projections for the

City of Clearlake and Lower Lake: 56 2010 2030 City of Clearlake 15,250 23,805 Lower Lake 1,294 3,179 1-6) Growth in tourism will increase the population of the Lake County FPD,

especially on holidays and weekends. 4.3.2 Lake County FPD Service Review Determinations on Disadvantaged

Unincorporated Communities 2-1) Although both the City of Clearlake and Lower Lake meet the DUC criteria of

Median Household Income below 80% of the State Median Household Income, Lake LAFCO and Lake County have not designated any Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities within the Lake County FPD.

4.3.3 Lake County FPD Service Review Determinations on Capacity and Infrastructure 3-1) The Lake County FPD has adequate capacity and equipment. 3-2) The Lake County FPD has 22 paid staff and 25 volunteers.

56 Lake County General Plan, September 2018, Page 2-15.


49

4.3.4 Lake County FPD Service Review Determinations on Financing 4-1) The Lake County FPD has a special fire protection tax on each residence. 4-2) Maintaining the funding for the services provided is the responsibility of the Board

of Directors. 4.3.5 Lake County FPD Service Review Determinations on Shared Facilities 5-1) The Lake County FPD is working with the other fire protection districts to form a

Joint Powers Authority or similar organization to provide for one ambulance service throughout the County. The JPA would get one license for the service which would save work for each fire protection district.

5-2) The Lake County FPD keeps funds with Lake County. 5-3) The Lake County FPD works with the Lake County Sherriff to provide for

dispatch. 5-4) The Lake County FPD works with the Golden State Water Company, Highlands

Mutual Water Company, Konocti County Water District and Lower Lake County Waterworks District #1 for water supply.

4.3.6 Lake County FPD Service Review Determinations on Local Accountability

and Governance 6-1) The Lake County FPD has regular Board of Directors meetings which comply

with the Brown Act and are open to the public. 4.4 Lake County FPD SOI The recommendation for the Lake County FPD Sphere of Influence is that it be the same as the District boundary. 4.4.1 SOI Determinations on Present and Planned Land Uses in the Lake County

Fire Protection District Area, Including Agricultural and Open Space Lands 1-1] Growth will occur within and adjacent to developed areas so the Lake County

FPD will have to deal with both urban and wildland emergencies in the future.


50

4.4.2 SOI Determinations on Municipal Services—Present and Probable Capacity

and Need for Lake County FPD 2-1] The need for the Lake County FPD will continue and will increase as the

population ages and there will be even more medical emergencies. 4.4.3 SOI Determinations on the Present Capacity of Public Facilities and

Adequacy of Public Services Provided by Lake County FPD 3-1] The capacity of facilities and adequacy of services provided by Lake County Fire

Protection District is good. 3-2] The Lake County FPD maintains several fire stations to provide coverage for the

District. 3-3] The Board and the Volunteer Organization work to unify the various parts of the

District. 4.4.4 SOI Determinations on Social or Economic Communities of Interest for

Lake County FPD 4-1] The City of Clearlake and the community of Lower Lake, both within the Lake

County Fire Protection District Boundaries, have separate identities but in terms of fire and EMS services work together as a unified fire protection and emergency services agency since 2001.

4.4.5 SOI Determinations on Disadvantaged Unincorporated Community Status

for Lake County FPD 5-1] Although both the City of Clearlake and Lower Lake meet the DUC criteria of

Median Household Income below 80% of the State Median Household Income, Lake LAFCO and Lake County have not designated any Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities within the Lake County FPD.


51


52

5 LAKEPORT FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Lakeport Fire District is an independent fire district located in the county seat of Lake County, on the western shore of Clear Lake. The Lakeport Fire District is also known as the Lakeport County Fire Protection District. 5.1 Lakeport Background 5.1.1 Lakeport Community Lakeport Overview Lakeport is the oldest incorporated (1888) community in Lake County and is the Lake County seat.57 The City is located along State Highway 29 on the western shore of Clear Lake. The Lakeport area is described as follows:

The City’s permanent trade area population is approximately 35,000. Per capita sales figures are among the highest in the region and are typically higher than the State’s average. With a population just over 5,100, Lakeport maintains a small town character and low crime rate. The City of Lakeport provides an opportunity for growth and a number of benefits for business and industry, including a pro-business community, affordable housing, and a variety of buildable sites within the 2.7 square mile City limits.

Local festivals include the following:

• Lake County Fair • Lake County Rodeo • Tule Boat Festival (and the annual Cardboard Regatta)

Lakeport Population Data The 2010 US Census reported that Lakeport had a population of 4,753. There were 2,002 households, out of which 563 (28.1%) had children under the age of 18 living in them. There were 665 households (33.2%) made up of individuals and 328 (16.4%) had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.31. There were 1,173 families (58.6% of all households); the average family size was 2.93. The population was spread out in age as follows:

City of Lakeport Age Distribution 2010 Under the age of 18 1,031 people 21.7% 18 to 24 352 people 7.4% 25 to 44 1,033 people 21.7% 45 to 64 1,384 people 29.1% 65 years of age or older 953 people 20.1% The median age was 44.2 years. For every 100 females there were 90.8 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 86.8 males.

57 City of Lakeport, http://www.cityoflakeport.com/, July 4, 2010.


53

There were 2,395 housing units of which 1,198 (59.8%) were owner-occupied, and 804 (40.2%) were occupied by renters. The homeowner vacancy rate was 5.1%; the rental vacancy rate was 8.4%. There were 2,661 people (56.0% of the population) living in owner-occupied housing units and 1,955 people (41.1%) living in rental housing units. 5.2 Lakeport FPD Overview 5.2.1 Lakeport FPD History The Lakeport Fire Department was formed in 1894 to provide fire protection to the City of Lakeport. In 1956 the Lakeport County Fire Protection District was formed to provide fire protection to the unincorporated areas of Lakeport. The Lakeport County Fire Protection District merged with the Lakeport Fire Department to provide unified fire protection for the area. 5.2.2 Lakeport FPD Contact Information Contact Information for the Lakeport Fire District is as follows: Mailing Address: 445 North Main Street, Lakeport CA. 95453 Phone and E-mail: 707-263-4396, [email protected] Fire Chief: Doug Hutchison 5.2.3 Lakeport FPD Board of Directors Board Members are appointed by the Lake County Board of Supervisors and are as follows:

Gerry Mills, Chairman Bill Whipple John Whitehead Donald Davidson Randall Williams

The Board of Directors meets at 6:00 pm on the second Tuesday of each month at the Main Station, 445 North Main Street, Lakeport, CA 95453. The agendas are posted at the Fire Station.

5.2.4 Lakeport FPD Mission Statement The Lakeport Fire Protection District’s mission is to be a leading emergency service Department by:

• Meeting the need of our community in fire prevention, fire suppression, and rescue

• Utilizing and improving the dedication and skills of our people • Constantly improving all of our services and operation

In carrying out this mission The Lakeport County Fire Protection District will: • Give top priority to firefighter safety and equipment concerns • Encourage the professional and personal development of our members • Work as teams to take full advantage of our skills, knowledge and

creativity • Communicate openly and honestly to our members and community to

inspire trust and confidence


54

5.2.5 Personnel The Lakeport Fire District provides fire protection and ALS ambulance service to the citizens in the unincorporated and incorporated areas of Lakeport. The Lakeport Fire District operates out of two fire station locations:

• Headquarters (Station 50) is located at 445 North Main Street. • Substation (Station 52) is located at 3600 Hill Road East.

Lakeport Fire responds to over 3,000 calls per year including structure and Wildland Fires, vehicle accidents, and medical aid. The Main Station (Station 50) is staffed with 4 personnel on duty at all times. The District uses a combination fire department, paid and volunteer as follows:

• Paid staff includes 1 Chief, 3 Captains, 6 Firefighters, and 1 District Secretary. • Volunteer staff includes 1 Deputy Chief, 3 Lieutenants, 5 Fire Apparatus

Engineers, and 14 Firefighters.58 Training drills are held on the first Wednesday of each month from 6 to 9 pm. 5.2.6 Lakeport FPD Equipment The Lakeport Fire District has the following equipment: HM-5011 1982 Ford Haz-Mat response vehicle Air-5011 1986 Chevy Air Support vehicle WT-5011 1984 Kenworth Water Tender E-5211 1987 Pierce Type 1 Fire Engine E-5011 1991 Seagrave Type 1 Fire Engine E-5012 2001 Spartan Type 1 Fire Engine E-5021 1997 Navistar Type 2 Fire Engine E-5031 1975 International Type 3 Fire Engine T-5011 1999 Seagrave Type 1 Ladder Truck (75 foot) U-5011 1995 Chevy Type 1 Utility Pick-up U-5021 1996 Chevy Type 2 Utility SUV M-5011 1993 Ford ALS Ambulance M-5012 2008 Dodge ALS Ambulance M-5013 2004 Ford ALS Ambulance M-5014 2009 Dodge ALS Ambulance M-5015 2002 Ford ALS Ambulance C-500 2008 Dodge Type 1 Utility Pick-up

58 Lakeport County FPD, http://www.lakeportfire.com/about/, January 28, 2014.


55

5.2.6 Lakeport Fire District Calls and Response Time The Lakeport Fire District calls for 2012 are shown below:

Calls Received in 2012 Structure fires 47 Medical 2,102 Grass fires 14 False alarms 107 Public assist 106 Hazard conditions 12 Other 474 Total Calls 2,862 As is common with most fire protection district the medical calls (74%) outnumber all other calls combined. The ISO Rating for the Lakeport Fire District was done January 28, 2008 with the following classifications: CLASS 4, applies to properties within 5-road miles of a recognized fire station and within 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant or alternate water supply. CLASS 8B, applies to properties beyond 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant but within 5-road miles of a recognized fire station. CLASS 10, applies to properties over 5-road miles of a recognized fire station. The average response time for all responses within district boundaries is two to four minutes. Travel time to specific incidents is dependent upon distance from station location. Time is also dependent on the season, traffic, weather and remoteness. Difficulties during winter months include road conditions, road surface, traffic, weather (rain or snow) and areas in remote locations. 4.2.7 Lakeport County FPD Water Supply The Lakeport Fire District has hydrants in the following areas: Finley City of Lakeport Konocti Vista Casino Mission Rancheria North Lakeport (in the County) Robin Hill 4.2.8 Lakeport Volunteer Firefighter's Association The Lakeport Volunteer Firefighter’s Association is a nonprofit organization that is made up of both professional and volunteer firefighters, from the Lakeport Fire District. The association currently has 28 members. The association officers are as follows:

Darren Wells - President Kim Borjorques - Vice President Dan Kane - Treasurer Keith Fricker - Secretary

Starting in 2010, the Association has raised funds by holding an Annual Dinner, Dance, and Auction in October.


56

5.2.9 Lakeport FPD Budget

Lakeport County Fire Protection District Budget 2013-14 REVENUE 2011-12


2013-14 Adopted

PROPERTY TAXES 10-10 Current Secured 709,628 739,941 725,500 10-20 Current Unsecured 18,038 17,803 17,900 10-25 Supplemental 813-Current (1,736) (3,797) 0 10-35 Supplemental 813-Prior 2,065 2,447 2,000 10-40 Prior Unsecured 665 672 0 PERMITS 21-60 Other 8,142 8,441 8,000 FINES, FORFEIT, PENALTIES 31-95 Penalties and Cost on

Delinquencies 7 24 0

RENTS AND CONCESSIONS 42-10 Rents and Concessions 2,520 2,520 2,500 REVENUE FROM USE OF MONEY 42-01 Interest 1,039 2,809 2,000 STATE AID 54-60 HOPTR 10,842 10,721 10,000 54-90 Other 33,792 0 0 OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES 56-30 Other 128,055 73,763 16,303 PUBLIC PROTECTION 68-60 Institutional Care and Services 1,081,525 1,191,952 735,685 OTHER CURRENT SERVICES 69-29 Fire Protection* 217,830 221,554 214,000 OTHER 79-90 Miscellaneous 28,035 2,144 0 79-91 Cancelled Checks 0 57 0 OPERATING TRANSFERS 81-22 In 42,348 97,443 42,348 RESIDUAL EQUITY TRANSFERS 81-31 Residual Equity Transfer 0 47,537 0 TOTAL REVENUE 2,282,795 2,416,031 1,759,933 *Fire assessment from Prop. 218 passed 2002. The City of Lakeport and the County area each have a separate assessment schedule. A single-family home in the City of Lakeport would pay $39.60 per year and in the County a single-family home would pay $30.00 per year. Other types of structures would pay according to the schedule.


57

Lakeport County Fire Protection District Budget 2013-14 EXPENSES 2011-12


2013-14 Adopted

SALARIES AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 01-11 Permanent 580,179 629,746 696,760 01-12 Extra Help 274,141 336,540 309,000 01-13 OT, Holiday, Standby 96,331 119,263 170,000 02-21 FICA 19,678 23,731 35,000 02-22 PERS 243,179 265,072 291,500 03-30 Health/Life Insurance 235,463 248,331 256,000 03-31 Unemployment 8,405 0 7,500 03-39 State Disability 0 0 5 04-00 Worker’s Compensation 67,725 74,028 90,000 SERVICES AND SUPPLIES 11-00 Clothing & Personal Supplies 8,822 8,674 9,350 12-00 Communications 4,240 6,014 7,000 14-00 Household Expense 1,875 2,055 2,500 15-10 Other 29,093 31,136 33,400 17-00 Maintenance-Equipment 10,535 94,166 20,000 18-00 Maintenance Buildings &

Improvements 1,771 6,189 11,000

20-00 Memberships 3,096 2,565 3,800 22-70 Supplies 2,787 3,393 4,800 22-71 Postage 850 991 1,200 22-72 Books & Periodicals 1,125 1,424 1,300 23-80 Professional/Specialized Services 58,222 56,473 59,000 24-00 Publication and Legal Notices 57 105 250 25-00 Rents & Leases-Equipment 42,348 42,348 42,348 26-00 Rents & Leases-

Buildings/Improvements 0 0 5

27-00 Small Tools and Instruments 256 234 4,100 28-30 Supplies and Services 623 2,693 2,500 28-48 Ambulance Expense 109,844 133,188 130,000 29-50 Transportation & Travel 3,815 2,948 4,500 30-00 Utilities 59,952 6,219 65,000 OTHER CHARGES 48-00 Taxes and Assessments 42 42 50 CAPITAL ASSETS 62-71 Office 5,000 0 0 62-72 Autos & Light Trucks 0 38,875 0 62-74 Other 117,818 5,363 5,500 TOTAL EXPENDITURES/APPROPRIATIONS

1,987,272 2,198,206 2,263,368

Net Cost (295,523) (217,825) 503,435


58

5.3 Lakeport FPD Service Review 5.3.1 Service Review Determinations on Growth and Population Projections for

Lakeport FPD 1-1) Whether the area around Lakeport grows within the City or within the County the

Lakeport FPD will be responsible for the fire protection and emergency services. 1-2) The City of Lakeport is expected to increase from a 2010 population of 4755 to a

population of 8731 in 2030.59 5.3.2 Service Review Determinations on Disadvantaged Unincorporated

Communities near Lakeport FPD 2-1) Although the City of Lakeport Median Household Income is below the DUC

standard of 80% of the State Median Household Income, the City of Lakeport is incorporated and thus is not a Disadvantaged Unincorporated Community.

5.3.3 Service Review Determinations on Capacity and Infrastructure for Lakeport

FPD 3-1) The Lakeport FPD has adequate equipment and capacity. 3-2) The Lakeport FPD paid staff includes 1 Chief, 3 Captains, 6 Firefighters, and 1

District Secretary; the volunteer staff includes 1 Deputy Chief, 3 Lieutenants, 5 Fire Apparatus Engineers, and 14 Firefighters.60

5.3.4 Service Review Determinations on Financing for Lakeport FPD 4-1) The District benefits from using volunteers as well as paid staff. The District has

implemented mitigation fees and other sources of revenue to augment revenues.

59 Lake County General Plan, September 2018, Page 2-15. 60 Lakeport County FPD, http://www.lakeportfire.com/about/, January 28, 2014.


59

5.3.5 Service Review Determinations on Shared Facilities for Lakeport FPD 5-1) The Lakeport FPD support the concept of a JPA for Ambulance Services so that

the JPA will be the designated provider for ambulance services, fees and training will be coordinated throughout the County.

5-2) The Lakeport FPD keeps all funds with Lake County. 5-3) The Lakeport Fire District has hydrants in the following areas: Finley City of Lakeport Konocti Vista Casino Mission Rancheria North Lakeport (in the County) Robin Hill 5.3.6 Service Review Determinations on Local Accountability and Governance

for Lakeport FPD 6-1) The Board of Directors for the Lakeport FPD holds regular meetings open to the

public. 5.4 Lakeport FPD SOI The recommendation for the Lakeport FPD Sphere of Influence is that it be the same as the District Boundary. 5.4.1 SOI Determinations on Present and Planned Land Uses in the Lakeport

County Fire Protection District Area, Including Agricultural and Open Space Lands

1-1] The Lake County Community Development Department has prepared a draft

General Plan Map for the update of the Lakeport Area Plan. This Map is an ongoing effort to show the locations of planned uses for the Lakeport Area of Lake County. Once the Lakeport Area Plan update is adopted, there will be a clearer picture of land uses, policies and the use of natural resources such as groundwater.

1-2] The City of Lakeport is responsible for the land use planning within the City limits

and the County of Lake is responsible in the unincorporated areas.


60


and Need for Lakeport FPD 2-1] There will be a continuing need for the Lakeport FPD to provide fire protection

and emergency services. 5.4.3 SOI Determinations on the Present Capacity of Public Facilities and

Adequacy of Public Services Provided by Lakeport FPD 3-1] The capacity of the facilities and the services provided by the Lakeport FPD are

adequate now and for the future. 5.4.4 SOI Determinations on Social or Economic Communities of Interest for

Lakeport FPD 4-1] The area within the City of Lakeport and the surrounding area function as one

community for social and economic purposes. Churches, schools and businesses serve the entire area. The Lakeport FPD provides a unifying focus for the community.

4-2] The Lakeport FPD has a website to provide information to the community. 5.4.5 SOI Determinations on Disadvantaged Unincorporated Community Status

for Lakeport FPD 5-1] Although the City of Lakeport Median Household Income is below the DUC

standard of 80% of the State Median Household Income, the City of Lakeport is incorporated and thus is not a Disadvantaged Unincorporated Community


61


62

6 NORTHSHORE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 6.1 Northshore FPD Communities The Northshore Fire Protection District was formed in 2006 with the consolidation of four fire protection districts and includes 357 square miles. The communities within the Northshore FPD retain their individual identities and are briefly described below. 6.1.1 Upper Lake Upper Lake (formerly, Upper Clear Lake and Upperlake) is a census-designated place (CDP) located 8 miles north of Lakeport at an elevation of 1345 feet. The population was 1,052 at the 2010 census, up from 989 at the 2000 census. The Habematolel Pomo of Upper Lake are headquartered here. The Hayville Sulphur Spring, formerly used medicinally, is located 5 miles northwest of Upper Lake. The settlement began in 1856, when William B. Elliott opened a blacksmith's shop. The Upper Clear Lake post office opened in 1871, changed its name to Upper Lake in 1875, to Upperlake in 1905, and then back to Upper Lake in 1906.61 The 2010 US Census reported that 1,043 people lived in 390 households, out of which 142 (36.4%) had children under the age of 18 living in them. There were 100 households (25.6%) made up of individuals and 44 (11.3%) had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.67. There were 260 families (66.7% of all households); the average family size was 3.18. The population was spread out in age as follows:

Upper Lake Age Distribution 2010

Under the age of 18 280 people 26.6% 18 to 24 96 people 9.1% 25 to 44 252 people 24.0% 45 to 64 286 people 27.2% 65 years of age or older 138 people 13.1% The median age was 36.3 years. For every 100 females there were 91.3 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 84.7 males. There were 440 housing units of which 267 (68.5%) were owner-occupied, and 123 (31.5%) were occupied by renters. The homeowner vacancy rate was 3.2%; the rental vacancy rate was 6.8%. There were 683 people (64.9% of the population) living in owner-occupied housing units and 360 people (34.2%) living in rental housing units.

61 Durham, David L. (1998). California's Geographic Names: A Gazetteer of Historic and Modern Names of the State. Quill Driver Books. p. 162. ISBN 9781884995149.


63

6.1.2 Nice Nice is a census-designated place (CDP) located 4.5 miles southeast of Upper Lake at an elevation of 1362 feet. The population was 2,731 at the 2010 census, up from 2,509 at the 2000 census. The town was originally called Clear Lake Villas, until Charles William Bayne renamed the place after his former home town, Nice, France, around 1930. The Nice post office opened in 1930.62 The Census reported that 2,719 people lived in 1,234 households, out of which 291 (23.6%) had children under the age of 18 living in them. There were 437 households (35.4%) made up of individuals and 165 (13.4%) had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.20. There were 676 families (54.8% of all households); the average family size was 2.79. The population was spread out in age as follows:

NICE AGE DISTRIBUTION 2010 Under the age of 18 505 people 18.5% 18 to 24 238 people 8.7% 25 to 44 549 people 20.1% 45 to 64 926 people 33.9% 65 years of age or older 513 people 18.8% The median age was 46.6 years. For every 100 females there were 99.2 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 98.9 males. There were 1,652 housing units of which 711 (57.6%) were owner-occupied, and 523 (42.4%) were occupied by renters. The homeowner vacancy rate was 2.7%; the rental vacancy rate was 7.6%. There were 1,489 people (54.5% of the population) living in owner-occupied housing units and 1,230 people (45.0%) living in rental housing units. 6.1.3 Lucerne Lucerne (formerly, Clear Lake Beach) is a census-designated place (CDP) located 7.25 miles east-northeast of Lakeport at an elevation of 1329 feet. The population was 3,067 at the 2010 census, up from 2,870 at the 2000 census. The Census reported that 3,032 people lived 1,372 households, out of which 308 (22.4%) had children under the age of 18 living in them. There 498 households (36.3%) made up of individuals and 235 (17.1%) had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.21. There were 715 families (52.1% of all households); the average family size was 2.81.

62 Durham, David L. (1998). California's Geographic Names: A Gazetteer of Historic and Modern Names of the State. Quill Driver Books. p. 113. ISBN 9781884995149.


64

The population was spread out in age as follows:

LUCERNE AGE DISTRIBUTION 2010 Under the age of 18 554 people 18.1% 18 to 24 245 people 8.0% 25 to 44 593 people 19.3% 45 to 64 1,020 people 33.3% 65 years of age or older 655 people 21.4% The median age was 48.5 years. For every 100 females there were 100.5 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 98.8 males. There were 1,833 housing units of which 848 (61.8%) were owner-occupied, and 524 (38.2%) were occupied by renters. The homeowner vacancy rate was 3.8%; the rental vacancy rate was 8.0%. There were 1,736 people (56.6% of the population) living in owner-occupied housing units and 1,296 people (42.3%) living in rental housing units. 6.1.4 Clearlake Oaks Clearlake Oaks (formerly, Stubbs and Clear Lake Oaks) is a census-designated place (CDP) located on the extreme south east of Clear Lake, 13 miles east-southeast of Lakeport, at an elevation of 1,335 feet. The population was 2,359 at the 2010 census, down from 2,402 at the 2000 census. The Census reported that 2,359 people lived in 1,178 households, out of which 183 (15.5%) had children under the age of 18 living in them, There were. 442 households (37.5%) made up of individuals and 249 (21.1%) had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.00. There were 628 families (53.3% of all households); the average family size was 2.57. The population was spread out in age as follows:

CLEARLAKE OAKS 2010 AGE DISTRIBUTION Under the age of 18 323 people 13.7% 18 to 24 120 people 5.1% 25 to 44 350 people 14.8% 45 to 64 828 people 35.1% 65 years of age or older 738 people 31.3% The median age was 54.9 years. For every 100 females there were 98.9 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 97.7 males. There were 1,823 housing units of which 823 (69.9%) were owner-occupied, and 355 (30.1%) were occupied by renters. The homeowner vacancy rate was 5.9%; the rental vacancy rate was 9.8%. There were 1,535 people (65.1% of the population) living in owner-occupied housing units and 824 people (34.9%) living in rental housing units.


65

6.2 Northshore FPD Background Northshore FPD provides, advanced life support (ALS) and basic life support (BLS) medical services and transports, inter-facility transports from hospital to hospital, low and high angle rescues, patient extrication from entrapment as a result of vehicle accidents, firefighter support/ rehab services throughout the county, available to any requesting agency, limited hazardous material responses, and a fully functioning dive team for recovery and rescue. NFPD also has a boat capable of providing up to 500 gallons per minute of water used for fires on or near the water as well as rescue capabilities. 6.2.1 Northshore FPD Contact Information and Fire Stations The Northshore FPD contact information is as follows: Mailing address: Northshore FPD, PO Box 1199, Lucerne, Ca. 95458 Phone number and email: 707-274-3100, [email protected] Fire Chief name, address: Jay Beristianos, Fire Chief, 6257 Seventh Av., Lucerne 95458 The fire stations for the Northshore FPD are as follows: Blue Lakes Station, 5200 West Highway 20, Upper Lake CA 95485 (Unstaffed) Upper Lake Station, 9420 Main Street, Upper Lake, CA 95485 Phone: 707-275-2446 Monday to Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 pm Nice Station, 3780 Manzanita Avenue, Nice, CA 95464 Phone: 707-274-8834, Fax: 707-274-8095 Staffed 24 hours per day, 365 days per year Lucerne Station, 6257 Seventh Avenue, PO Box 1199, Lucerne, CA 95458 Phone: 707-274-3100, Fax: 707-274-3102 Business Hours: Monday to Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 pm. Staffed 24 hours per day, 365 days per year Glenhaven Station, 9458 East Highway 20, Glenhaven CA Unstaffed Clearlake Oaks Station, 12655 East Highway 20, Clearlake Oaks, CA 95423 Phone: 707-998-3294, Fax: 0707-998-3498 Staffed 24 hours per day, 365 days per year Spring Valley Station, 3187 Tamarack Way, Clearlake Oaks, Ca 95423 (Unstaffed) 6.2.2 Mission Statement The mission statement for the Northshore FPD is as follows: The mission of the Northshore Fire Protection District is to protect lives, the environment, and property by providing prompt skillful, and cost effective fire protection and life safety services.


66

6.2.3 Board of Directors The Northshore FPD Board members represent various areas of the District as follows:

Mike Martinez, Lucerne (term expires 2014) Jim Burton, at large (term expires 2014) Ron Talbott, Upper Lake (term expires 2016) Dara Phillips, Nice (term expires 2014) Lynn Ringuette, Clearlake Oaks (term expires 2016)

The Board of Directors meets the first Wednesday of each month. The Board meetings rotate every month from station to station beginning at 6:30 pm. The agendas are printed and posted at the fire stations and on the District website. 6.2.4 Equipment The equipment for the Northshore FPD is shown below for each station:

Northshore FPD Clearlake Oaks Fire Station Apparatus Type Year Tank Size GPM Comments Engine 7511 HME 2010 1000 1500 Engine 7521 3D/Freightliner 1995 500 500 Engine 7721 Van Pelt 1981 1250 1000 Engine 7561 Ford/Fouts Bros. 2006 300 150 Water Tender 7511

Kenworth/Fouts Bros.

2010 2000 1000

Utilty-7511 Dodge 1981 Utility Pick up Boat 7511 Alumaweld 1989 500 Fire/Rescue Engine 7741 Chevy 3500 1992 250 150 Medic 7511 Ford/Braun 2011 Ambulance Medic 7512 Ford/Lifeline 2000 Ambulance

Northshore FPD Lucerne Fire Station Apparatus Type Year Tank Size GPM Comments Engine 8011 Ford/FMC 1989 750 1250 Engine 8021 International/

Ferrara 2007 500 1250

Engine 8061 Ford/Fouts 2006 300 150 Support 8011 Ford 1990 Breathing air

support/ rehab Repair 8021 Ford 1996 Mechanic repair

truck Medic 8011 Ford/ Modular 1998 Ambulance Medic 8012 Ford/ Modular 2003 Ambulance


67

Northshore FPD Nice Fire Station

Apparatus Type Year Tank Size GPM Comments Engine 8511 KME/

International 1991 1000 1250

Engine 8512 1988 FMC 1989 500 1500 Engine 8532 KME/GMC 1985 500 500 Engine 8561 Ford / Fouts 2006 300 150 Medic 8511 Ford/ Braun 2011 Ambulance Medic 8512 Dodge Sprinter/

Leader 2009 Ambulance

Northshore FPD Upper Lake Fire Station

Apparatus Type Year Tank Size GPM Comments Engine 9011 Westates 1998 500 1250 Engine 9021 Interantional/

Ferrara 2005 500 1250

Engine 9131 International 1980 500 500 Engine 9061 Ford/ Fouts 2006 300 150 Support 9011 Ford/ Modular 1998 Firefighter rehab

vehicle Rescue 9011 Ford/ Lifeline 2000 Dive/Rescue truck Medic 9011 Ford Van Type 2005 Ambulance 6.2.5 Calls The Northshore FPD answered 2636 calls in 2013 divided by type as follows:

Northshore FPD 2013 Calls63 Major Incident Type Number of

Incidents Percent of Total

Fired 126 4.78% Overpressure rupture, explosion, overheat-no fire 6 0.23% Rescue/Emergency Medical Service 2011 76.29% Hazardous Condition-no fire 47 1.78% Service Call 230 8.73% Good Intent Call 162 6.15% False Alarm and False Call 50 1.90% Severe Weather and Natural Disaster 3 0.11% Special Incident Type 1 0.04%

TOTAL 2636 100.00% The Northshore FPD is similar to other fire protection districts because the most common type of call is for rescue and emergency medical service. The calls were divided among the fire stations as follows: 63 Northshore FPD, January 2, 2014.


68

Northshore FPD 2013 Calls64

Station Count Clearlake Oaks Station 984 Glenhaven Station 12 Spring Valley Station 7 Lucerne Station 724 Nice Station 673 Upper Lake Station 225 Blue Lakes Station 11

Total 2636 6.2.6 Northshore FPD Budget All fire districts have been hampered in raising fees as a result of the CALFIRE tax implemented in 2011 of $150 per house on houses within the State Responsibility Area or $135 per house if within a fire protection district. The districts that combined to form the Northshore FPD had parcel taxes for fire protection before the formation of the Northshore FPD. These taxes are still in effect. The tax for a single family home in each area is as follows: Upper Lake: $52.50 Nice: $45.00 Lucerne: $60.00 Clearlake Oaks: $60.00 Each area has a full schedule for the various types of development which would be more or less than the single family home fee shown above. The Northshore FPD Budget is shown below:

64 Northshore FPD, January 2, 2014.


69

Northshore Fire Protection District Budget 2013-14 REVENUE

2011-12 Actual

2012-13 Actual

2013-14 Adopted

PROPERTY TAXES 10-10 Current Secured 746,222 869,016 768,876 10-15 ERAF-SRAF 0 56,045 0 10-20 Current Unsecured 19,880 19,399 20,612 10-25 Supplemental 813-Current (1,914) (4,146) 500 10-35 Supplemental 813-Prior 2,574 2,875 4,000 10-40 Prior Unsecured 771 745 1,600 PERMITS 21-60 Other 9,829 9,522 9,200 FINES, FORFEIT, PENALTIES 31-95 Penalties and Cost on

Delinquencies 237 208 500

REVENUE FROM USE OF MONEY 42-01 Interest 8,033 8,910 10,000 STATE AID 54-60 HOPTR 11,952 11,682 11,676 OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES 56-30 Other 168,411 0 1,000 CHARGES FOR SERVICES 66-30 Agricultural Services 34,887 36,588 35,640 PUBLIC PROTECTION 68-60 Institutional Care and Services 515,704 586,414 510,000 OTHER CURRENT SERVICES 69-20 Other 45,778 60,504 2,500 69-29 Fire Protection 632,586 656,632 652,000 OTHER 79-90 Miscellaneous 0 0 104,800 79-91 Cancelled Checks 409 10 0 79-99 Donations 2,822 4,956 0 SALES 79-60 Sales of Fixed Assets 7,500 0 0 OPERATING TRANSFERS 81-22 In 2,610 34,012 40,000 RESIDUAL EQUITY TRANSFERS 81-31 Residual Equity Transfer 146,091 3,664 0 TOTAL REVENUE 2,354,379 2,357,036 2,172,904


70

Northshore Fire Protection District Budget 2013-14 EXPENSES 2011-12


2013-14 Adopted

SALARIES AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 01-11 Permanent 731,807 936,173 993,900 01-12 Extra Help 217,274 61,443 130,800 01-13 OT, Holiday, Standby 142,012 44,755 65,000 02-21 FICA 34,011 12,826 11,200 02-22 PERS 299,999 276,720 342,000 03-30 Health/Life Insurance 173,082 242,377 347,500 03-31 Unemployment 10,038 2,929 61,000 03-39 State Disability 9,477 5,239 11,100 04-00 Worker’s Compensation 50,426 112,402 128,000 SERVICES AND SUPPLIES 11-00 Clothing &Personal Supplies 7,290 9,190 15,500 12-00 Communications 91,670 95,869 100,500 14-00 Household Expense 4,891 5,851 11,100 15-10 Other 40,481 37,708 0 15-12 Public Liability 0 0 45,000 17-00 Maintenance-Equipment 72,721 92,487 96,900 18-00 Maintenance Buildings &

Improvements 14,540 16,921 11,745

19-40 Medical, Dental Lab Expenses 31,725 35,900 48,000 20-00 Memberships 3,928 4,720 5,100 22-70 Supplies 2,617 4,320 6,000 22-71 Postage 1,952 1,514 2,500 22-72 Books & Periodicals 463 99 600 23-80 Professional/Specialized Services 38,872 37,206 40,100 24-00 Publication and Legal Notices 468 0 1,000 25-00 Rents and Leases Equipment 2,216 4,744 5,000 27-00 Small Tools and Instruments 81 32 4,000 28-30 Supplies and Services 7,097 8,497 18,740 28-48 Ambulance Expense 42,440 61,176 72,700 29-50 Transportation & Travel 53,794 62,978 78,200 30-00 Utilities 46,643 40,283 48,800 OTHER CHARGES 42-10 Notes & Loans 63,617 47,091 49,900 46-20 Judgments 0 200,800 0 CAPITAL ASSETS 61-60 Current 10,245 17,009 16,500 62-71 Office 0 2,203 6,000 62-72 Autos & Light Trucks 0 23,352 30,500 62-74 Other 236 17,659 15,000 62-76 Fire Hoses 0 1,367 15,000 APPROPRIATIONS FOR CONTINGENCIES 90-91 Contingencies 0 0 51,663 TOTAL EXPENDITURES/APPROPRIATIONS 2,136,113 2,524,200 2,886,548 Net Cost (218,266) 167,164 713,644


71

6.3 Northshore FPD Service Review 6.3.1 Service Review Determinations on Growth and Population Projections for

Northshore FPD 1-1) The four communities within the Northshore FPD all have area plans as part of

the Lake County General Plan and growth boundaries which show that growth will be allowed near to developed areas.

1-2) At the time of formation the Northshore FPD was estimated to have a population

of 12,000 with 5,000 dwelling units and 9,500 registered voters.65 1-3) The population projections for the four communities within the Northshore FPD

are shown in the Lake County General Plan as follows: 66 2010 2030 Upper Lake 1052 1791 Nice 2731 4545 Lucerne 3067 5199 Clearlake Oaks 2359 4351 1-4) The tourism population is also expected to grow. 6.3.2 Service Review Determinations on Disadvantaged Unincorporated

Communities for Northshore FPD 2-1) Although all four communities (Upper Lake, Nice, Lucerne, and Clearlake Oaks)

have Median Household Incomes below the DUC standard of 80% of the State Median Household Income, the Lake LAFCO and Lake County have not designated any DUCs in the Northshore FPD.

65 Lake LAFCO, Executive Officer’s Report, Northshore FPD SOI, Dissolution and Formation, October 18, 2006. 66 Lake County General Plan, September 2018, Page 2-15.


72

6.3.3 Service Review Determinations on Capacity and Infrastructure for

Northshore FPD 3-1) The capacity and infrastructure for the Northshore FPD are adequate. 3-2) The cooperation of the various stations within the Northshore FPD enhances the

capacity of the District to meet the fire protection and emergency medical needs of the area.

3-3) The Northshore FPD has 19 full-time paid personnel which includes one

administrative secretary, 6 temporary personnel and 30 volunteers. 6.3.4 Service Review Determinations on Financing for Northshore FPD 4-1) The Northshore FPD has budgeted more for expenses than projected revenue

but funds may be saved as the fiscal year progresses. 6.3.5 Service Review Determinations on Shared Facilities for Northshore FPD 5-1) The Northshore FPD uses the County to keep funds and process claims. 5-2) The Northshore FPD is in favor of the proposed Joint Powers Authority for

Ambulance Service. 5-3) NFPD has contracts to provide personnel, engines/equipment and water tenders

to USFS and CALFIRE. CALFIRE responds to all calls in the Clearlake Oaks area during fire season per and Automatic Aid agreement.

5-4) NFPD relies on water from the Clearlake Oaks County Water District, Glenhaven

Mutual Water Company, California Water Service-Lucerne, Nice Mutual Water Company and Upper Lake County Water District.

6.3.6 Service Review Determinations on Local Accountability and Governance

for Northshore FPD 6-1) The Northshore FPD has regular Board meetings with agendas posted at the fire

stations and on the District website. 6-2) The Northshore FPD maintains fire stations in various areas to serve the District. 6-3) The Northshore FPD Board alternates the meeting locations to be in the four

main communities at different times.


73

6.4 Northshore FPD SOI The recommendation for the Northshore FPD Sphere of Influence is for the Sphere to be the same as the District boundary. 6.4.1 SOI Determinations on Present and Planned Land Uses in the Northshore

Fire Protection District Area, Including Agricultural and Open Space Lands 1-1] The four main communities within the Northshore FPD (Upper Lake, Nice,

Lucerne, Clearlake Oaks) all have Community Growth Boundaries as part of the Lake County General Plan.


and Need for Northshore FPD 2-1] The three communities of Upper Lake, Nice, and Lucerne all increased in

population between 2000 and 2010, only Clearlake Oaks had a slight decline, so the services of the Northshore FPD will still be needed in the future.

6.4.3 SOI Determinations on the Present Capacity of Public Facilities and

Adequacy of Public Services Provided by Northshore FPD 3-1] The Northshore FPD has an adequate number of fire stations and adequate

equipment to serve the population. 6.4.4 SOI Determinations on Social or Economic Communities of Interest for

Northshore FPD 4-1] The Northshore FPD is developing a community spirit within the entire District

while preserving the sense of community for the historic towns within the District. 6.4.5 SOI Determinations on Disadvantaged Unincorporated Community Status

for Northshore FPD 5-1] Although all four communities (Upper Lake, Nice, Lucerne, and Clearlake Oaks)

have Median Household Incomes below the DUC standard of 80% of the State


74

Median Household Income, the Lake LAFCO and Lake County have not designated any DUCs within the Northshore FPD.


75


76

7 SOUTH LAKE COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT SLCFPD is an independent special district with an elected Board of Directors, which was formed in 1925 as the Middletown Fire Protection District. The Lake County Board of Supervisors appointed the Board of Directors until 1988, when it was changed to an elected board. The District was renamed as the South Lake County Fire Protection District on March 18, 1987. 7.1 South Lake County FPD Communities 7.1.1 Middletown Middletown (formerly, Middle Station and Middleton) is a census-designated place located 17 miles south of Lower Lake at an elevation of 1099 feet. The population was 1,323 at the 2010 census, up from 1,020 at the 2000 census. Middletown was given its name because it is halfway between Lower Lake and Calistoga to the south. The first house was built at the site by J.H. Berry in 1870. The town began in 1871. The Middleton post office opened in 1871 and changed its name to Middletown in 1875. Middletown enjoyed a robust quicksilver mining industry through the end of the 19th century. By the early 1900s, cattle and sheep ranching were prominent, along with some limited pear and walnut production. A resort economy sprung up around the various natural springs, and the area around Middletown attracted vacationers from the Bay Area through the 1950s. As travel costs decreased, tourism to the resorts diminished as patrons were able use air travel to vacation in more far flung places. Many of the resorts closed in the 1960s. In the 1970s and early 1980, exploitation of nearby geothermal resources brought an influx of workers into the local economy. Electrical power plants powered by "steam wells" were built in the mountains above Middletown. As housing prices in the Bay Area increased in the late 20th century, Middletown and nearby Hidden Valley Lake enjoyed a population boom as commuters moved to the Middletown area looking for affordable housing; keeping their jobs 50 to 100 miles away in Santa Rosa, Napa, and San Francisco. Middletown is currently populated primarily by commuters and retirees, enjoying a modest tourist trade based primarily on Harbin Hot Springs and the Twin Pine Casino located on the local Rancheria south of the town. The 2010 US Census reported that 1,317 people lived in 508 households of which 189 (37.2%) had children under the age of 18 living in them, 140 households (27.6%) were made up of individuals and 52 (10.2%) had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.59. There were 336 families (66.1% of all households); the average family size was 3.15.


77

The population was spread out in age as follows:

MIDDLETOWN AGE DISTRIBUTION 2010 Under the age of 18 376 people 28.4% 18 to 24 114 people 8.6% 25 to 44 309 people 23.4% 45 to 64 374 people 28.3% 65 years of age or older 150 people 11.3% The median age was 37.4 years. For every 100 females there were 102.9 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 103.2 males. There were 557 housing of which 251 (49.4%) were owner-occupied, and 257 (50.6%) were occupied by renters. The homeowner vacancy rate was 3.8%; the rental vacancy rate was 4.1%. There were 659 people (49.8% of the population) living in owner-occupied housing units and 658 people (49.7%) living in rental housing units. 7.1.2 Anderson Springs The 129-year old Anderson Springs community lies below the ridgeline of the Mayacmas Mountains, approximately five miles west of Middletown and is accessed from State Highway 175. An area that once drew visitors to medicinal springs and hot baths, Anderson Springs is now a small residential community for a year-round and vacationing population. Schools are located in Middletown. In 1874, the Anderson Springs resort opened by Anderson family.67 The original hotel was built in 1876 and could accommodate about 30 guests. Bathhouses were near the hotel, but the hot spring was 2,500 feet away with water conducted through a wooden pipe. A steam bath was arranged over a hot spring on the bank of the Creek. For many years daughters of Dr. Anderson ran the resort. In 1910 the hotel and cottages provided accommodations for 150 guests.68 The Anderson heirs sold the resort property to A.R. Meade and he sold lots for vacation homes in the 1920’s and 1930’s. 69 The Community Services District was formed in 1984 and serves 194 homes.70 The full-time population of the area is less than 500 but is increased with vacation residents to a seasonal high of 1100.71

67 http://www.lakecounty.com/history.htm, Sept. 17, 2007 68 http://www.andersonsprings.org/History.html, Sept.17, 2007 69 http://www.andersonsprings.org/History.html, September 17, 2007 70 Anderson Springs CSD, Meriel Medrano, Phone: (707)987-0277, December 22, 2009. 71 County of Lake, Community Development Department, “Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report and Notice of Scoping Meeting,” December 14, 2009, Page 1.


78

7.1.3 Cobb Cobb is a census-designated place (CDP) located 1 mile northwest of Whispering Pines at an elevation of 2631 feet. The population was 1,778 at the 2010 census, up from 1,638 at the 2000 census. The Geysers Geothermal Field is located just south of Cobb. The 2010 US Census reported that 1,778 people lived 789 households, out of which 179 (22.7%) had children under the age of 18 living in them, 208 households (26.4%) were made up of individuals and 70 (8.9%) had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.25. There were 526 families (66.7% of all households); the average family size was 2.68. The population was spread out as follows:

COBB AGE DISTRIBUTION 2010 Under the age of 18 305 people 17.2% 18 to 24 119 people 6.7% 25 to 44 337 people 19.0% 45 to 64 751 people 42.2% 65 years of age or older 266 people 15.0% The median age was 50.1 years. For every 100 females there were 105.1 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 106.9 males. There were 1,064 housing units of which 616 (78.1%) were owner-occupied, and 173 (21.9%) were occupied by renters. The homeowner vacancy rate was 3.4%; the rental vacancy rate was 8.9%. There were 1,369 people (77.0% of the population) living in owner-occupied housing units and 409 people (23.0%) living in rental housing units. 7.1.4 Coyote Valley and Hidden Valley Lake Coyote Valley is located just northeast of Middletown on State Highway 29. Most of the population in Coyote Valley resides in the Hidden Valley Lake area, a master-planned community started in 1968. This area is located adjacent to the man-made Hidden Valley Lake that offers boating, fishing, and swimming activities. The Hidden Valley Lake Golf Course is also within the community. The Coyote Valley community is dominated by single family housing, but does contain some commercial and light industrial uses. The population is estimated to be about 7,000. 7.1.5 Jerusalem Valley The South Lake County FPD annexed 17,000 acres known as Jerusalem Valley in 2006.72 This area extends from the Hidden Valley Lake area east to the Napa/Lake County line. Land uses in the area are primarily range, rural lands and rural residential.73

72 Lake LAFCO, Resolution 2006-0005 Jerusalem Valley Annex to SLCFPD July 19, 2006. 73 Lake LAFCO, Executive Officer’s Report, Jerusalem Valley Annex to the SLFPD, July 19, 2006.


79

7.2 South Lake County FPD Background 7.2.1 History The South Lake County Fire Protection District (SLCFPD) serves an area of approximately 285 square miles in the southern portion of Lake County and is the third largest fire district in the state of California. Napa County bounds the District on the south, Sonoma County on the west, the Kelseyville Fire Protection District on the north and the Lake County Fire Protection District on the north/east. In 1949, SLCFPD annexed the areas of the geothermal geyser industry. In October of 1989, the District annexed 6,500 acres in the Loch Lomond area. In 2006, the District annexed 17,000 acres in the Jerusalem Valley area. At this time, mutual aid agreements have also been developed with CALFIRE/Napa County for fire protection and emergency medical services on Highway 29 between the Napa County line and the Robert Louis Stevenson Memorial State Park as well as the area of the Lake/Napa County line on Butts Canyon. 7.2.2 Contact Information South Lake County FPD The contact information for the South Lake County FPD is as follows: South Lake County FPD PO Box 1360 21095 State Highway 175 Middletown, CA 95461 Phone: (707) 987-3089 Fax: 7079879478 E-Mail: [email protected] Fire Chief: Jim Wright, Cell Phone: 707-225-7578 7.2.3 Board of Directors The Board of Directors for the South Lake County FPD is listed below: James Abell (term expires 2017) Rob Bostock (term expires 2015) James Comisky (term expires 2015) Madelyn Martinelli (term expires 2015) Wayne Nelson (term expires 2015) The Board of Directors meets on the third Tuesday of each month at 7:00 PM at the Middletown Fire Station, 21095 State Highway 175, Middletown, CA. 7.2.4 SLCFPD Stations and Equipment The South Lake County FPD has four fire stations as follows:


80

Station 60: 21095 Hwy 175, Middletown, CA (District Headquarters) This building is two stories, 11,650 square feet, built in 1992 and is owned by the District. The station has a conference room, administrative and personnel office, meeting room and kitchen area, two bathrooms, and four bay sections with drive through opening doors on the first floor. The second floor has living quarters with four sleeping rooms, full kitchen, computer bay and living quarters, two full sized bathrooms each with lockers, change stations and showers. On-site is an emergency propane generator. This building is equipped with a fire sprinkler system. The equipment housed at this station is as follows: Engines 6011 and 6031 Water Tender 6011 Rescue 6031 Medics 6011 and 6012 OES 359 Staff Pickup Station 62: 16547 Hwy 175, Cobb, CA This building is single story concrete block building of 5,520 square feet built in 1972 and is owned by the District. There is no shop area. The station has five apparatus bays consisting of 2,740 square feet, a 740 square feet kitchen area and living/office space with 2-bed dormitory, two 60 square foot bathrooms, a 500-gallon gasoline fuel tank, a 500-gallon diesel tank, and an emergency propane generator. The addition of a 1,920 square foot modular in fiscal year 2012-13 will replace the inadequate 740 square feet kitchen/living space. This area was less than ideal with no separation between work and living quarters. The addition will allow for expansion of staffing levels based on emergency activity or public demand placed on the station by development and growth. The inadequate area will become the office space, creating a more inviting and professional office environment for the public to conduct business. This building is not equipped with a fire sprinkler system. The equipment housed at this station is as follows: Engines 6221 and 6231 Medic 6211 Snow Cat 6201 Utility 6221 Station 63: 19287 Hartmann Rd, Hidden Valley Lake, CA This building is a two story concrete block building of 2,740 square feet built in 1980 and is owned by the District. The lot size is 275,000 square feet and is owned by the District. There is no shop or storage area. The station has three apparatus bays consisting of 1,620 square feet and living quarters with dormitory of 1,120 square feet (720 square feet downstairs and 400 square feet upstairs), and emergency propane generator. This building is not equipped with a fire sprinkler system.


81

The equipment housed at this station is as follows: Engine 6321 Medic 6311 Utility 6321 Station 64: 10331 Redwood Rd, Loch Lomond, CA, This building is a 3,600 square foot single story frame/concrete block built in 1959 and is owned by the District. The station has four apparatus bays consisting of 2,400 square feet, kitchen area, two bathrooms of 80 square feet, and an emergency propane generator. This building is not equipped with a fire sprinkler system. The equipment housed at this station is as follows: Engine 6421 Utility 6421 Water Tender 6411 7.2.5 Call Volume The call volume for the South Lake County FPD has increased as follows: 1994= 406 2002= 989 2010= 979 1995= 372 2003= 881 2011= 1173 1996= 425 2004= 1122 2012= 1201 1997= 634 2005= 772 1998= 770 2006= 787 1999= 752 2007= 810 2000= 810+ 2008= 869 2001= 960+ 2009= 876 The South Lake County FPD calls for 2012 included the following types of calls: Vegetation Fires 41 3% Structure Fires 21 2% Other Fires 71 6% Vehicle Accidents 155 13% Medical Calls 812 68% Hazmats/FMS 27 2% Public Assistance 58 5% Other 16 1% TOTAL 1201 100% The South Lake County FPD is similar to the other fire protection districts in that the majority of the calls are medical calls. The South Lake County FPD has different ISO ratings in various parts of the District including ratings of 6, 7, 8, and 10.


82

7.2.6 Water Supply The South Lake County FPD relies on seven municipal water companies and private water sources. 7.2.7 South Lake County FPD Volunteers The South Lake County Fire Volunteer Firefighters Association Inc. consists of 25 volunteers. The volunteers include 4 Fire Captains, 3 EMTs and 3 paramedics. The District was staffed exclusively with volunteers until the first paid member was employed in 1978. The Fire Sirens is a District auxiliary organization, which was established April 1985 and supports programs for the District’s operations. The Fire Sirens have provided significant support to this District by raising funds to purchase equipment for the fire department. They also support personnel during training and emergency incidents by providing food and beverages. Training drills are held on the second and fourth Wednesdays of each month at 7:00 PM at the Middletown Station 60. 7.2.8 South Lake County FPD Budget The South Lake County FPD budget is shown below. The District has a parcel tax with various fees depending on the type of development. The fee for a single family home is $52.50 per year. The District also has mitigation fees for new construction. The Budget shows a higher amount for expenditures than for revenue but the actual expenses may be lower.


83

South Lake County Fire Protection District Budget 2013-14 REVENUE

2011-12 Actual

2012-13 Actual

2013-14 Adopted

PROPERTY TAXES 10-10 Current Secured 1,175,780 1,178,445 1,226,500 10-15 ERAF-SRAF 0 112,622 0 10-20 Current Unsecured 26,845 26,167 27,000 10-25 Supplemental 813-Current (2,516) (5,563) 0 10-35 Supplemental 813-Prior 3,028 3,554 0 10-40 Prior Unsecured 985 986 0 PERMITS 21-60 Other 10,555 10,988 0 RENTS AND CONCESSIONS 42-10 Rents and Concessions 0 0 8,000 REVENUE FROM USE OF MONEY 42-01 Interest 9,533 7,072 9,200 STATE AID 54-60 HOPTR 15,920 15,758 16,000 54-90 Other 19,981 241,666 35,000 OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES 56-30 Other 255,285 315,551 101,245 PUBLIC PROTECTION 68-60 Institutional Care and Services 275,244 454,033 361,251 OTHER CURRENT SERVICES 69-20 Other 95,118 97,556 99,000 69-29 Fire Protection 435,290 428,188 411,700 OTHER 79-90 Miscellaneous 20,461 19,343 13,400 79-91 Cancelled Checks 43,287 9,586 0 79-93 Insurance Proceeds 7,801 0 0 SALES 79-50 Revenue Applicable Prior Year 14,381 90,192 28,080 79-70 Other Sales-Miscellaneous 2,910 5,035 0 OPERATING TRANSFERS 81-22 In 7,244 156,272 45,353 LONG-TERM NOTES 82-01 Capital Assets 0 0 195995 TOTAL REVENUE 2,416,772 3,167,451 2,577,724


84

South Lake County Fire Protection District Budget 2013-14 EXPENSES

2011-12 Actual

2012-13 Actual

2013-14 Adopted

SALARIES AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 01-11 Permanent 5,700 5,700 6,000 01-12 Extra Help 54,395 109,543 98,000 01-13 OT, Holiday, Standby 0 51,904 35,000 02-21 FICA 4,597 12,810 10,800 03-30 Health/Life Insurance 26,033 30,137 32,000 03-31 Unemployment 3,349 7,169 8,700 04-00 Worker’s Compensation 15,168 11,972 16,700 SERVICES AND SUPPLIES 11-00 Clothing &Personal Supplies 17,645 46,729 9,000 12-00 Communications 7,629 6,443 10,960 13-00 Food 2,448 3,188 2,500 14-00 Household Expense 3,664 4,630 3,000 15-10 Other 43,035 45,938 49,500 17-00 Maintenance-Equipment 18,796 9,801 8,600 18-00 Maintenance Buildings &

Improvements 29,767 16,776 24,000

20-00 Memberships 2,815 2,630 3,400 22-70 Supplies 2,362 3,199 3,000 22-71 Postage 484 514 946 22-72 Books & Periodicals 216 168 2,590 23-80 Professional/Specialized Services 2,099,712 2,185,199 2,400,460 24-00 Publication and Legal Notices 529 52 1,100 27-00 Small Tools and Instruments 417 1,545 9,000 28-30 Supplies and Services 23,054 51,706 26,450 28-48 Ambulance Expense 42,573 34,554 44,400 29-50 Transportation & Travel 2,370 3,330 3,000 30-00 Utilities 39,699 42,695 45,100 38-00 Inventory Items 23,607 10,683 15,500 OTHER CHARGES 42-10 Notes & Loans 27,165 27,165 52,518 48-00 Taxes and Assessments 81 81 100 CAPITAL ASSETS 61-60 Current 61,132 8,763 0 61-69 Prior 61,132 8,763 20,000 62-74 Other (17) 40,270 14,700 62-79 Prior Years 9,296 0 0 TOTAL EXPENDITURES/APPROPRIATIONS

2,600,731 3,113,873 2,957,054

Net Cost 183,959 (53,587) 379,330


85

7.3 South Lake County FPD Service Review 7.3.1 Service Review Determinations on Growth and Population Projections for

South Lake County FPD 1-1) The South Lake Fire Protection District has an area of 285 square miles with a

current population of approximately 11,000 residents living in 4 distinct communities (Middletown, Hidden Valley, Cobb and Loch Lomond). New construction and proposed developments include the following:

1. Kimco Development is proposing several projects in the Hidden Valley area including

the development of 380 single family houses, a 50 to 60-unit apartment building, a 50-unit senior apartment complex, a 49-bed assisted care facility, 105,000 to 120,000 square feet of retail space, a 15,000 to 20,000 square foot movie theater, a 50,000 square foot motel, and 20,000 to 30,000 square feet of general office space.

2. Meadowwood Subdivision is developing a 46-unit subdivision at Santa Clara Road

and Timm Way in Middletown in two phases. 3. Apartment complexes and cluster homes are currently being built in Middletown and

more have been proposed. 4. Calpine’s Geothermal Industry is expanding at the Geysers. 5. Pinnacle Homes have purchased the Crazy Creek Glider property and propose to

build 50 to 300 homes at the 487-acre site at 18896 Grange Road. 6. Additional amenities are being proposed for the Jelly Stone Campground site in the

Cobb area. They include an 18-hole miniature golf course, conversion of six of its RV sites to guest cabins, a 2,000 square feet game room, a 4,664 square feet store and restaurant facility, a 2,184 square feet addition to the stage area, recreation hall with kitchen facilities, a 600 square feet popcorn stand and projector studio for outdoor movies and replacement of their existing laundry facility with new bathroom and laundry facility.

7. Renovation and reconstruction is proposed for Pine Grove Resort’s existing 30-acre

property in Cobb. They include a 500-seat outdoor amphitheater, 108 cottages, full service spa, renovated recreation hall, micro-brewery, and nature trails. Currently, there are 25 cabins, 36 mobile home sites and 17 RV sites at the resort.


86

8. Renovation and construction of new facilities is proposed for the resort property historically known “Howard Hot Springs.” Avalon Springs plans to serve an anticipated 120 customers per day in 67 guest units. An additional 30 units are also proposed for the housing of approximately 60 on- site employees. The project proposal is broken into three phases: The first phase focuses on the renovation of the existing lodge and renovation of guest units and hot springs facilities. Phase two will further develop the site’s meeting capacity, development of additional resort services, employee housing and the development of a new campground facility. The final phase of the project includes the full build-out of the proposed eco-village and development of the Special Events site.

9. A new Senior Center and Library Complex have been completed. This development

has enhanced downtown Middletown and makes the community more attractive for new development.

10. The Old Hoberg Resort was purchased by Golden Leaf Productions with the intent of

revitalizing the property and bringing it back as a resort providing conference spaces, guest accommodations, and a timeshare component with many other amenities. Movie shots are planned for the property starting in spring of 2011. This ongoing project will be completed in phases over the next several years.

11. Tenant occupancies located within the Coyote Valley Plaza now have new

businesses, a pharmacy, restaurant, fitness center, and two other business type establishments have already taken hold with several more spaces left to be filled in 2012.

12. Seen in Middletown are the re-establishment of the Jolly Cone and other tenant

improvements. 1-2) The Lake County General Plan shows the following growth projections for the

South Lake County FPD: 74 2010 2030 Coyote Valley 7,434 11,046 Middletown 1,323 2,091

74 Lake County General Plan, September 2008, Page 2-15.


87

7.3.2 Service Review Determinations on Disadvantaged Unincorporated

Communities near South Lake County FPD 2-1) Although Middletown meets the DUC criteria of Median Household Income below

80% of the State Median Household Income, Lake LAFCO and Lake County have not designated any Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities within the South Lake County FPD. (Cobb and Hidden Valley Lake have Median Household Incomes above the DUC limit.)

7.3.3 Service Review Determinations on Capacity and Infrastructure for South

Lake County FPD 3-1) The equipment and capacity for the South Lake County FPD are adequate. The

District has 12 paid firefighters and 18 volunteers.75 3-2) The SLCFPD operates two emergency Advanced Life Support ambulances on a

24/7 basis.76 3-3) The South Lake County FPD has capital improvement plans in place to maintain

and improve equipment and buildings. 7.3.4 Service Review Determinations on Financing for South Lake County FPD 4-1) The South Lake County FPD has a parcel tax for fire protection. 4-2) The South Lake County FPD has mitigation fees for new development. 4-3) The South Lake County FPD uses volunteers to keep the cost of staff lower. 4-4) The South Lake County FPD budgets for more expenses than revenues.

75 Lake LAFCO, Executive Officer’s Report, Jerusalem Valley Annex to the SLFPD, July 19, 2006. 76 Lake LAFCO, Executive Officer’s Report, Jerusalem Valley Annex to the SLFPD, July 19, 2006.


88

7.3.5 Service Review Determinations on Shared Facilities for South Lake County

FPD 5-1) In order to provide stability, SLCFPD on June 15, 2000, voted to integrate their

services with those of the CALFIRE effective July 1, 2000. The District contracts with CALFIRE for administrative services. 77

5-2) Due to the loss of geothermal tax revenue, fiscal constraints have encouraged

SLCFPD to re-negotiate a three-year contract with Calpine in 2007 to provide Emergency Medical Services (Basic and Advanced Life Support), certifiable training to Calpine employees in Standard Industrial First Aid, First Responder and CPR, as well as Fire Prevention and Control training, along with OSHA compliance training to the Calpine Health and Safety group. SLCFPD will also work with Calpine to coordinate the Geysers’ Emergency Preparedness and Response Plans and conduct Emergency Response Drills.

5-3) Dispatch services for the South Lake County FPD are provided by CALFIRE

Sonoma Lake Napa Unit through contract. 78 5-4) The South Lake County FPD is in favor of the JPA for ambulance service

throughout Lake County. 5-5) The South Lake County FPD relies on seven municipal water

companies/districts, including CSA No. 18 (Cobb), Callayomi County Water District (Middletown), and private water sources.

7.3.6 Service Review Determinations on Local Accountability and Governance

for South Lake County FPD 6-1) The South Lake County FPD Board of Directors meets regularly at the Fire

Station in Middletown.

77 Lake LAFCO, Executive Officer’s Report, Jerusalem Valley Annex to the SLFPD, July 19, 2006. 78 Lake LAFCO, Executive Officer’s Report, Jerusalem Valley Annex to the SLFPD, July 19, 2006.


89

7.4 South Lake County FPD SOI The recommendation for the South Lake County FPD Sphere of Influence is that it be the same as the District boundary. 7.4.1 South Lake County Fire Protection District Area, Including Agricultural and

Open Space Lands 1-1] SLCFPD contains extensive areas of brush and timber that create high and

extreme fire hazards to both urban and rural residential developments in which individual dwellings and small developments have been constructed with concentrations in the central and northern portions of the District. Because of this, the fire district has spearheaded and supported the South Lake Fire Safe Council’s Chipper/Abatement Program. Since 2003, the Council has funded the completion of over 10 miles of shaded fuel breaks in the communities of Loch Lomond, Pine Summit, Pine Grove, Rancheria, Seigler Canyon, Seigler Springs, the Cobb School, and the Summit Pool.

1-2] There are numerous areas within SLCFPD where access for fire-fighting

apparatus to structures is not available due to inadequate roads or bridges. The load limits on Big Canyon Road bridges prevents access of apparatus and the inability to use this road significantly increases response times from the Middletown and Hidden Valley stations to the Loch Lomond area.

1-3] The South Lake County Fire Protection District includes two Planning Areas in

the Lake County General Plan: Cobb Mountain and Middletown.79 1-4] Middletown and Coyote Valley each have Community Growth Boundaries in the

Lake County General Plan. 80 7.4.2 SOI Determinations on Municipal Services—Present and Probable Capacity

and Need 2-1] The need for the South Lake County FPD to serve the existing 11,000 residents

and additional residents to come will continue.

79 Lake County General Plan, September 2008, Page 2-2. 80 Lake County General Plan, September 2008, Page 2-2.


90

7.4.3 SOI Determinations on the Present Capacity of Public Facilities and

Adequacy of Public Services Provided by South Lake County FPD 3-1] The fire protection and emergency medical services provided by the South Lake

County FPD are adequate. 7.4.4 SOI Determinations on Social or Economic Communities of Interest for

South Lake County FPD 4-1] There are four communities within the South Lake County FPD and the District

has to work to unite them for support of fire protection and emergency medical services.

4-2] The District maintains fire stations in each of the four communities to serve the

entire area. 4-3] It is an economic benefit for the communities to have fire protection and

emergency medical services available. 7.4.5 SOI Determinations on Disadvantaged Unincorporated Community Status 5-1] Although Middletown meets the DUC criteria of Median Household Income below

80% of the State Median Household Income, Lake LAFCO and Lake County have not designated any Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities within the South Lake County FPD. (Cobb and Hidden Valley Lake have Median Household Incomes above the DUC limit.)


91


92

8 LAKE PILLSBURY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT The Lake Pillsbury Fire Protection District is located in the northern part of Lake County and is surrounded by the Mendocino National Forest. The District is included for the sake of completeness but is remote and isolated form the other five fire protection districts in Lake County. 8.1 Lake Pillsbury Community Lake Pillsbury is an artificial lake in the Mendocino National Forest created from the waters impounded from the Eel River by Scott Dam. Elevation is 1,818 feet with 65 miles of shoreline and covering 2,003 acres. Activities in the Lake Pillsbury Recreation Area include power boating, fishing, swimming, sailing, picnicking, hiking and hang gliding. There are two main access roads to the lake. At the north end of the lake is a small gravel airstrip. In 1906, W.W. Van Arsdale formed the Eel River Power and Irrigation Company and contracted with the city of Ukiah for a hydroelectric generating station to increase electricity supply for the city. A diversion dam was built on the Eel River and a mile-long tunnel was constructed to divert water into the Russian River. A powerhouse was constructed in Potter Valley. It was called the Potter Valley Project or Eel River Project. Later that year, the Snow Mountain Water and Power Company incorporated and took over the project from Van Arsdale's company. By 1908 water was being diverted to the power plant and then to the Russian River. Part two of the project was building the dam which created Lake Pillsbury, located 12 miles upstream. Scott Dam was completed in 1921 as a concrete gravity structure, 138 feet high, 805 feet long at its crest, and impounding a maximum capacity of 86,400 acre-feet. It maintains water flow to the hydroelectric plant during times of low water runoff. Pacific Gas and Electric Company acquired the project in 1933, and maintains the facilities today. The lake is named for one of the founders of Snow Mountain Water and Power Company. The Pillsbury hydroelectric plant is the only one in the north coast region of California. The Eel River Project is now known as the Potter Valley Project. There are five campgrounds, two group campgrounds, two paved boat ramps and a resort at the lake. The Lake Pillsbury Resort operates a marina with rentals, boat slips and supplies. All types of boating are allowed, including boat camping. California Department of Fish and Game stock the lake with trout annually. Other fish include black bass and steelhead. Hiking trails at the Lake include an interpretive nature trail at Sunset Campground and the four mile Lake Shore Loop Trail. Other nearby recreational opportunities include the Snow Mountain Wilderness located east of Lake Pillsbury. The Bloody Rock historic area is located within the wildlife refuge north of the lake as well as the Eel River and the Wild and Scenic Black Butte River.


93

8.2 Lake Pillsbury Fire Protection District 8.2.1 Lake Pillsbury FPD Background Lake Pillsbury Fire Protection District (FPD) is in the upper north end of Lake County, extending from Lake Pillsbury on the southeast to the County line on the north and west. The District boundary constitutes several non-federally owned in holdings within the National Forest. Contact information is as follows: Lake Pillsbury Fire Protection District, 29501 Fuller Dr., Potter Valley, CA 95469 Phone: (707) 824-9532 8.2.2 Lake Pillsbury FPD Personnel The Lake Pillsbury Fire Department is made up of 16 volunteers. There is volunteer training two Saturdays per month with a training officer from the Northshore FPD. 8.2.3 Lake Pillsbury FPD Facilities and Equipment The District has no fire station. Rather, the community of Pillsbury Ranch has allocated building space to house one engine and one emergency first response vehicle near the entrance gate to the 450 lot community. Fire Department equipment is as follows:

Lake Pillsbury FPD Equipment Type Year Tank size gpm 195 GMC 1985 100 gal 750 Type III 295 International 1968 500 gal 500 Type III 395 International 1964 500 gal 300 Model I Rescue Chevy Van 1968 Van The “Lake County Community Wildfire Protection Plan” suggested that the Lake Pillsbury FPD could benefit from the addition of paid firefighters, radio communications, and additional sites for 911-use, as well as more funding for training and equipment replacement. 81 The same plan showed the following information for the Lake Pillsbury FPD:

Summary of Assets and Associated Wildfire Risks for Lake Pillsbury FPD82 Assets at Risk

Fuel Hazard

Risk of Wildfire Occurrence

Structural Ignitability

Fire- Fighting Capability

Overall Risk Observations

Low High High High Low High wildfire threat, surrounding fuels. USFS in-holding community, limited fire protection capacity. Limited water supply outside LP Ranch.

81 Lake County Community Wildfire Protection Plan, Overview and Summary, Page 8. 82 Lake County Community Wildfire Protection Plan, Overview and Summary, Page 10.


94

8.2.4 Lake Pillsbury Fire Protection District Budget The Lake Pillsbury Fire Protection District Budget is shown below:

Lake Pillsbury Fire Protection District Budget 2013-14 2011-12


2013-14 Adopted

PROPERTY TAXES 10-10 Current Secured (32) (64) 0 FINES, FORFEIT, PENALTIES 31-95 Penalties & Cost on Delinquencies 220 369 0 REVENUE FROM USE OF MONEY 42-01 Interest 29 51 0 OTHER CURRENT SERVICES 69-29 Fire Protection* 16,904 17,286 18,168 OTHER 79-91 Cancelled Checks 0 30 0 TOTAL REVENUE 17,121 17,672 18,168

SALARIES AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 01-11 Permanent 2,796 3,280 6,000 02-21 FICA 570 726 1,200 03-31 Unemployment 133 165 240 03-39 State Disability 36 38 60 04-00 Worker’s Compensation 670 501 700 SERVICES AND SUPPLIES 15-10 Other 5,118 5,064 5,300 17-00 Maintenance-Equipment 743 2,024 7,414 22-71 Postage 0 45 46 23-80 Professional & Specialized Services 2,930 5,545 1,675 28-80 Supplies and Services 1,200 1,200 1,200 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 14,196 18,588 23,835 Net Cost (2,925) 916 5,667 * Vacant parcels are assessed $18 per year, while developed parcels are assessed $60 per year.


95

8.3 Lake Pillsbury FPD Service Review 8.3.1 Lake Pillsbury FPD Service Review Determinations on Growth and

Population Projections 1-1) The Lake Pillsbury FPD area is not expected to grow in population because it is

surrounded by the Mendocino National Forest. 8.3.2 Service Review Determinations on Disadvantaged Unincorporated

Communities near Lake Pillsbury FPD 2-1) Lake LAFCO and Lake County have not designated any Disadvantaged

Unincorporated Communities and there are no cities in the area that could annex a DUC within the lake Pillsbury FPD.

8.3.3 Service Review Determinations on Capacity and Infrastructure for Lake

Pillsbury FPD 3-1) The Lake Pillsbury FPD has limited capacity and equipment. 8.3.4 Service Review Determinations on Financing for Lake Pillsbury FPD 4-1) The Lake Pillsbury FPD has a limited budget due to the small population. 8.3.5 Service Review Determinations on Shared Facilities for Lake Pillsbury FPD 5-1) The nearest ambulance service is from the Northshore FPD Upper Lake Fire

Station. 8.3.6 Service Review Determinations on Local Accountability and Governance

for Lake Pillsbury FPD 6-1) The Lake Pillsbury FPD Board of Directors meets as needed.


96

8.4 Lake Pillsbury FPD SOI The recommendation for the Lake Pillsbury FPD Sphere of Influence is that it be the same as the District boundary. 8.4.1 Lake Pillsbury Fire Protection District Area, Including Agricultural and

Open Space Lands 1-1] The Lake Pillsbury FPD is limited to the area within the existing boundary due to

the Mendocino National Forest surrounding the District. 8.4.2 SOI Determinations on Municipal Services—Present and Probable Capacity

and Need for Lake Pillsbury FPD 2-1] There is a need for the Lake Pillsbury FPD to protect the homes within the

Pillsbury Ranch development. 8.4.3 SOI Determinations on the Present Capacity of Public Facilities and

Adequacy of Public Services Provided by Lake Pillsbury FPD 3-1] The Lake Pillsbury FPD facilities are barely adequate but are the most that the

residents can provide. 8.4.4 SOI Determinations on Social or Economic Communities of Interest for

Lake Pillsbury FPD 4-1] The Lake Pillsbury FPD does provide a focus for the Lake Pillsbury community

and it is in the economic interest of the community to protect the area with a volunteer Fire Department.

8.4.5 SOI Determinations on Disadvantaged Unincorporated Community Status 5-1] Lake LAFCO and Lake County have not designated any Disadvantaged

Unincorporated Communities and there are no cities in the area that could annex a DUC within the Lake Pillsbury FPD.


97


98

ABBREVIATIONS AB Assembly Bill ADA Americans with Disabilities Act ADBA also doing business as ALS Advanced Life Support APC Annual Pension Cost BLS Basic Life Support CALFIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CDP Census Designated Place CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CIP Capital Improvement Plan CPR cardiopulmonary resuscitation CSA County Service Area CSD Community Services District DUC Disadvantaged Unincorporated Community EMS Emergency Medical Services EMT Emergency Medical Technician ERAF-SRAF Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund/

Supplemental Revenue Augmentation Fund FD Fire Department FDAC-FASIS Fire District Association of California- Fire Agency Self-Insurance System FICA Federal Insurance Contributions Act (Social Security) FPD Fire Protection District FY Fiscal Year gal gallon GMC General Motors Corporation gpm gallons per minute HOPTR Home Owner Property Tax Relief IFT Inter-Facility Transfers (Ambulance Service)


99

IMT Incident Management Team ISO Insurance Service Office JPA Joint Powers Agreement KFPD Kelseyville Fire Protection District LAFCO Local Agency Formation Commission LFPD Lakeport Fire Protection District LCFPD Lake County Fire Protection District LP Lake Pillsbury LPFPD Lake Pillsbury Fire Protection District NFPD Northshore Fire Protection District NFPA National Fire Protection Association Service Review Municipal Service Review (LAFCO) MVA Motor Vehicle Accident OSHA Occupational safety and Health Administration OT Over-time PERS (California) Public Employee Retirement System PPE personal protective equipment psi pounds per square inch (pressure RV Recreational Vehicle SB Senate Bill SCBA Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus SFD Single Family Dwelling SLCFPD South Lake County Fire Protection District SOI Sphere of Influence (LAFCO) SR State Route SUV Sport Utility Vehicle USDA/RUS United States Department of Agriculture/Rural Utilities Service


100

DEFINITIONS Advanced Life Support (ALS): Special services designed to provide advance prehospital care by a certified EMT Paramedic pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 1797.52. Agriculture: Use of land for the production of food and fiber, including the growing of crops and/or the grazing of animals on natural prime or improved pasture land. Ambulance: Any vehicle specially constructed or modified, equipped and used for the purpose of transporting sick, injured, invalid, convalescent or otherwise incapacitated persons and which has met all license and other requirements in applicable federal, state and local law and regulations. Aquifer: An underground, water-bearing layer of earth, porous rock, sand, or gravel, through which water can seep or be held in natural storage. Aquifers generally hold sufficient water to be used as a water supply. Basic Life Support (BLS): Emergency first aid and cardio-pulmonary resuscitation procedures pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 1797.60. Bond: An interest-bearing promise to pay a stipulated sum of money, with the principal amount due on a specific date. Funds raised through the sale of bonds can be used for various public purposes. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): A State Law requiring State and local agencies to regulate activities with consideration for environmental protection. If a proposed activity has the potential for a significant adverse environmental impact, an environmental impact report (EIR) must be prepared and certified as to its adequacy before taking action on the proposed project. Defensible Space: That area which lies between a residence and an oncoming wildfire where the vegetation has been modified to reduce the wildfire threat and which provides an opportunity for fire fighters (and the homeowner) to safely defend the residence. Emergency: A condition or situation in which an individual has a need for immediate medical attention, or where the potential for such need is perceived by emergency medical personnel or a public safety agency. Emergency Call: A request for the dispatch of an ambulance to any sudden unforeseen need for medical attention. Emergency Medical Care Services (EMS): The services utilized in responding to a medical emergency. Emergency Medical Technician-I (EMT-I): An individual trained and certified in basic life support pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 1797.80. Emergency Medical Technician-ID (EMT-ID): An individual who has been trained and accredited in early defibrillation pursuant to Title 22, California Code of Regulations, Section 100064(a)(1). Emergency Medical Technician-P (Paramedic): An individual, who is trained, licensed within California, and accredited within the North Coast EMS region in advanced life support pursuant to the California Health and Safety Code and Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations.


101

Environmental Impact Report (EIR): A report required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act that assesses all the environmental characteristics of an area, determines what effects or impact will result if the area is altered or disturbed by a proposed action, and identifies alternatives or other measures to avoid or reduce those impacts. (See California Environmental Quality Act.) First Responder Services: The provision of a coordinated, immediate, non- transport response to medical emergencies First Responder Unit: Any ground vehicle, watercraft or aircraft specifically designed, constructed, modified, equipped, arranged, maintained, operated, used or staffed to meet the minimum standards, in accordance with state laws and regulations, of providing a coordinated, immediate, non-transport response to medical emergencies. Impact Fee: A fee, also called a development fee, levied on the developer of a project by a county, or other public agency as compensation for otherwise-unmitigated impacts the project will produce. California Government Code Section 66000, et seq., specifies that development fees shall not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged. To lawfully impose a development fee, the public agency must verify its method of calculation and document proper restrictions on use of the fund. Infrastructure: Public services and facilities such as sewage-disposal systems, water-supply systems, and other utility systems, schools and roads. Land Use Classification: A system for classifying and designating the appropriate use of properties. Leapfrog Development: New development separated from existing development by substantial vacant land. Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO): A five-or seven-member commission within each county that reviews and evaluates all proposals for formation of special districts, incorporation of cities, annexation to special districts or cities, consolidation of districts, and merger of districts with cities. Each county’s LAFCO is empowered to approve, disapprove, or conditionally approve such proposals. The LAFCO members generally include two county supervisors, two city council members, and one member representing the general public. Some LAFCOs include two representatives of special districts. Local Responsibility Area (LRA): Land which is not under State or Federal financial responsibility for preventing and suppressing fires such as the incorporated area of a city. Mello-Roos Bonds: Locally issued bonds that are repaid by a special tax imposed on property owners within a community facilities district established by a governmental entity. The bond proceeds can be used for public improvements and for a limited number of services. Named after the program’s legislative authors. Ranchette: A single dwelling unit occupied by a non-farming household on a parcel of 2.5 to 20 acres that has been subdivided from agricultural land. State Responsibility Area (SRA): Areas of the State in which the financial responsibility of preventing and suppressing fires has been determined by the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection to be primarily the responsibility of the State.


102

Urban: Of, relating to, characteristic of, or constituting a city. Urban areas are generally characterized by moderate and higher density residential development (i.e., three or more dwelling units per acre), commercial development, and industrial development, and the availability of public services required for that development, specifically central water and sewer service, an extensive road network, public transit, and other such services (e.g., safety and emergency response). Development not providing such services may be “non-urban” or “rural”. CEQA defines “urbanized area” as an area that has a population density of at least 1,000 persons per square mile (Public Resources Code Section 21080.14(b)). Urban Intermix: An intermingling of structures and natural forest fuels within a forest setting. Urban Services: Utilities (such as water, gas, electricity, and sewer) and public services (such as police, fire protection, schools, parks, and recreation) provided to an urbanized or urbanizing area. Wildfire: Any unwanted fire occurring in a wildland setting. Wildland: Uncultivated land, other than fallow, neglected or maintained for such purposes as wood or range-forage production, wildlife, recreation, protective watershed cover, or wilderness. Wildlife Habitat: Vegetation, climate and other natural conditions suited to the life needs for an animal species to survive and reproduce. Zoning: The division of a city by legislative regulations into areas, or zones, that specify allowable uses for real property and size restrictions for buildings within these areas; a program that implements policies of the general plan.


103

REFERENCES Anderson Springs CSD, Meriel Medrano, Phone: (707)987-0277, December 22, 2009. Buckingham Park WD, July 13, 2007. Buckingham Park Water District, Budget 2009-2010,

http://bpwd.web.officelive.com/publichearing.aspx City of Lakeport, http://www.cityoflakeport.com/, July 4, 2010. Clear Lake Rivera Community Association,

http://www.clrca.com/sub_category_list.asp?category=9&title=About+Us, February 6, 2014.

Commission on Fire Accreditation International, 2000. County of Lake, Community Development Department, “Notice of Preparation of an

Environmental Impact Report and Notice of Scoping Meeting,” December 14, 2009, P.1. County of Lake, Detail of Financing Sources and Financing Uses, Independent Special District

Funds, Fiscal Year 2013-14, Pages B-15 through B-25. Durham, David L. (1998). California's Geographic Names: A Gazetteer of Historic and Modern

Names of the State. Quill Driver Books. ISBN 9781884995149. Golden State Water Company14595 Olympic Drive, Clearlake, CA 95422, (707) 994-0118,

October 15, 2013. Highlands Mutual Water Company, 14580 Lakeshore Dr., Clearlake, CA 95422, (707) 994-2393,

October 15, 2013. http://www.lakecounty.com/history.htm, Sept. 17, 2007 http://www.andersonsprings.org/History.html, September 17, 2007 Kelseyville FPD, Audit for the Year Ended June 30, 2012, Prepared by Smith & Newell, Certified

Public Accountants, 1425 Butte House Road, Yuba City CA 95993, Phone: 530-673-9790, Fax: 530-673-1305, April 10, 2013

Kelseyville FPD, http://kfd.bitsculptor.com/, January 28, 2014 Kelseyville FPD, LAFCO Information, December 2013. Konocti County Water District, 15449 Stanyon, Clearlake, CA 95422, (707) 994-2561, October

15, 2013. Lake County Community Wildfire Protection Plan, Overview and Summary. Lake County Department of Agriculture 2012 Crop Report. Lake County FPD, William Sapeta, Fire Chief, Phone: (707) 994-2170, February 14, 2014. Lake County General Plan, September 2008.


104

Lake County Housing Element 2012. Lake County Special Districts, Mark Dellinger, Administrator, 230 North Main Street, Lakeport CA

95453, Phone 707-263-0119, Fax: 707-263-3836, E-Mail: [email protected], December 16, 2013.

Lake LAFCO, Executive Officer’s Report, Jerusalem Valley Annex to the SLFPD, July 19, 2006. Lake LAFCO, Executive Officer’s Report, Northshore FPD SOI, Dissolution and Formation,

October 18, 2006. Lake LAFCO, Resolution 2006-0005 Jerusalem Valley Annex to SLCFPD July 19, 2006. Lakeport County FPD, http://www.lakeportfire.com/about/, January 28, 2014. NFPA Standard 1710, 2004. Northshore FPD, January 2, 2014 Remy, Michael H., Tina A. Thomas, James G. Moose, Whitman F. Manley, Guide to CEQA,

Solano Press Books, Point Arena, CA, February 2007, page 111 Riviera Heights Homeowners Association, http://www.rivieraheights.com/, February 6, 2014. South Lake County FPD, LAFCO Information, 2013. State of California, Fire Marshall, Course Information and Required Materials, 2007, p. 44. US Census Bureau, CDP Data, Lake County. US Census Bureau, http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0613945.html, May 31, 2013 US Census Bureau, http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06033.html, February 12, 2014 United States, 29 CFR 1910.134. PREPARERS Lake LAFCO, John Benoit, Executive Officer PO Box 2694, Granite Bay CA 95746 707-592-7528, [email protected] Christy Leighton, Planning Consultant 555 E. Willow Street, Willows CA 95988 530-934-4597, [email protected]

Documents

6 FPD Lake Draft FIRE MSR 3 · March 2015 Service Review and Sphere of Influence! 1!! EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Five protection districts in Lake including the Kelseyville FPD, Lake County