Funding Opportunities
HUD: Community Development Block Grants
The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program supports community development activities to build stronger and more resilient communities. Activities may address needs such as infrastructure, economic development projects, public facilities installation, community centers, housing rehabilitation, homeowner assistance, etc.
USDA: Multifamily Programs
Multifamily Housing assists rural property owners through loans, loan guarantees, and grants that enable owners to develop and rehabilitate properties for low-income, elderly, and disabled individuals and families as well as domestic farm laborers. The program works with the owners of its direct and farm labor housing loan properties to subsidize rents for low-income tenants who cannot afford to pay their full rent.
State of California: Homekey Program
Homekey is an opportunity for state, regional, and local public entities to develop a broad range of housing types, including single-family homes and multifamily apartments and the conversion of commercial properties and other existing buildings to permanent or interim housing.
EVALUATION FRAMEWORK: HOUSING AVAILABILITY & LAND USE
Goal: Increase stock and availability of housing units with a focus on affordability for regional workforce.
Partners/Champions: County planning and zoning departments, City of Los Angeles, Federal and State government entities Objectives Action Items Timeline Metrics for Success
Increase amount of
available land for private
development.
• Explore opportunities to purchase, trade, or
lease land from public entities who own or
manage land in the region
• Identify any parcels in unincorporated areas
that are eligible for private purchase and
explore opportunities to incentivize private
purchase and development of these lands
Long-term
(3-5 years)
• Exploration of processes for land trades, purchase,
or lease of public lands
• Assessment of status of past negotiations and
strategic direction for utilization or sale of any
procured land
Work to improve and
expand housing stock
on available land.
• Identify areas with opportunities for infill
redevelopment, in both residential or nonresidential zones, to take advantage of existing infrastructure and create additional
housing where available land is limited
• Consider the creation of overlay districts
to promote higher density or mixed-use
development in nonresidential zones
• Pursue federal and state funding programs
designed to redevelop, improve, or maintain
conditions of existing housing stock
Short-term
(1-2 years)
• Complete housing needs assessment and strategic
plan
Expand additional
housing options within
affordable range for
regional workforce.
• Identify and potentially incentivize
opportunities for workforce (low- and
moderate- income) housing near
employment centers
• Explore opportunities for employers to
contribute to or develop housing for yearround and seasonal employees Medium-term
(2-3 years)
• Complete funding scan
• Convene business resources group and establish
workforce housing working group
Appendix
Appendix A: Resolution
The formal adoption of the CEDS by the Eastern Sierra Council of Governments (ESCOG) will take place in the coming weeks after the following groups formally adopt a resolution of support after the finalization of this document: Alpine County, Inyo County, Mono County, Town of Bishop, and Town of Mammoth Lakes. Below is the language planned for the resolution that will be considered by the ESCOG Board of Directors at an upcoming meeting
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF EASTERN SIERRA COUNCIL OF
GOVERNMENTS JPA APPROVING THE EASTERN
SIERRA COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
STRATEGY FOR ALPINE, INYO AND MONO COUNTIES
AS PREPARED AND AUTHORIZING THE STRATEGY TO
BE SUBMITTED TO THE U.S. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ADMINISTRATION
WHEREAS, U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration (EDA) requires the preparation and adoption of a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) to be approved by the Alpine County Board of Supervisors, the Inyo County Board of Supervisors, the Mono County Board of Supervisors and the EDA prior to consideration of certain federal funding; and
WHEREAS, A CEDS is a document developed by jurisdictions for the EDA to apply for vital funding for community economic development initiatives; and WHEREAS, The Counties of Alpine, Inyo and Mono conducted its CEDS process following federal Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 13 CPR §303.6; and
WHEREAS, The CEDS takes into account and, where appropriate, incorporates or leverages other regional planning efforts, including the use of available federal funds, private sector resources, and state support which can advance a region’s CEDS goals and objectives; and
WHEREAS, The CEDS process analyzes existing regional conditions, opportunities, and global economic conditions, leading to a region-specific strategy-driven plan for economic prosperity; and
WHEREAS, The CEDS must be updated every five years to stay relevant with changing economic conditions and to qualify for U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA) funding assistance under its Public Works and Economic Adjustment Assistance programs; and
WHEREAS, EDA has been an important partner in financing economic development projects; and
WHEREAS, In addition to summarizing the status of the local economy and areas of opportunities, the focal point of the CEDS is identification of projects that may be eligible for federal grant funding; and
WHEREAS, Adoption of the CEDS is a federal requirement which the Alpine County, Inyo County and Mono County, and qualified organizations within the region, must meet to apply to EDA for Public Works or Economic Adjustment Assistance Program grants; and
WHEREAS, the Eastern Sierra Council of Governments serves as a regional joint powers authority representing Inyo County, Mono County, the Town of Mammoth Lakes, and the City of Bishop, and is the appropriate regional organization to serve as the lead agency to submit the CEDS to the EDA; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of the Eastern Sierra Council of Governments JPA that
1. After reviewing the CEDS document attached hereto as Exhibit A, hereby approves the report and authorizes the submission of the CEDS to the EDA.
2. Adoption of this Resolution is not a Project as that term is defined by the California Environmental Quality Act.
Passed and adopted this ___ day of ________
Jeff Griffiths, Chair, Eastern Sierra Council of Governments ATTEST:
Clerk
Appendix B: CEDS Steering Committee &
Participating Organizations
The CEDS Steering committee included community leaders from across the region, as well as representatives from the Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC). The group met regularly to guide the CEDS process and offer perspectives from their respective communities and the region as a whole. The steering committee included:
SARAH BOLNIK
Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC)
BOB BURRIS
Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC)
JT CHEVALIER
Economic Development Director & Public Information Officer, Alpine County
CHRIS EGAN
Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC)
LIZ GRANS
Economic Development Manager, Mono County
BARBARA HAYES
Chief Economic Development Officer, Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC)
DANIEL HOLLER
Town Manager, Town of Mammoth Lakes
ELAINE KABALA
Executive Director, Eastern Sierra Council of Governments
MEAGHAN MCCAMMAN
Assistant County Administrator, Inyo County
SANDRA MOBERLY
Community & Economic Development Director, Town of Mammoth Lakes
TERRANCE ROGERS
Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC)
JEFF SIMPSON
Economic Development Director, Mono County
Appendix C: Verification of the 30-Day Public Comment Period The 30-day public comment period opened on July 31, 2023 and closed on September 1, 2023. The draft CEDS and an online form for members of the public to freely enter their thoughts were published on ESCOG’s website, www.escog.gov, and promoted to the public by members of the steering committee.
All comments submitted during the 30-day public comment period are appreciated and included here to take into consideration to inform next steps as ESCOG and partners across the region take steps to continue planning and execute implementation. ESCOG is also encouraged to review and update the CEDS regularly as more data is gathered and recommendations can become more targeted with specific projects.
While the ESCOG is responsible for developing and maintaining the regional CEDS, the deployment of this CEDS requires efforts to be advanced by many organizations within the ecosystem across the region.
All comments are listed below with the county of the commenter noted (if it was provided). The body of each comment is shared exactly how it was entered into the online comment portal. This includes errors related to spelling, grammar, and punctuation.
Comment (with County of representation, if identified) Response [Inyo County] Please be aware that goverment funds used for housing now limits landlords ability to manage those properties. There are new laws regarding this type of funding/loans.
Where can the community see the entire ceds package. There was more information shown to the City Council, that is not shown here.
Does the city/county have a list of non-occupied homes in the area? Is there a list of airbnb homes in the area. Two sources of housing that are not mentioned in the ceds.
Flagged for further discussion: The material included in this report constitutes the entire CEDS package, although local governments may discuss a number of topics tangential to the CEDS or in order to inform the CEDS.
Accepted: ocal housing policies and practices vary throughout the CEDS region, and we recommend reaching out to your local elected officials to inquire about such a list. Language has been added to the draft acknowledging the potential effects of second-home ownership and shortterm rentals on the housing stock throughout the region. [Mono County] think long term goals and how to get there with smart growth in mind Accepted [Inyo County] Most of this document appears to be boilerplate language that repeats information that is already well known.
It appears to make no mention of really expanding on and encouraging the development of mineral extraction within the region which is greatly needed for jobs and construction projects. The area’s history and development was from mining and lumber industry and the resources still exist within the area and aren’t being utilized. The area needs surface mining operations for gravel, DG, cinders, and sand for road construction and maintenance and for private construction projects.
Right now, there are no available local sources for that and most of it is hauled into the area from Kern and Nevada.
Economic development in the area will benefit from reliable, locally sourced material and this needs to start with BLM, the USFS, State Lands commission, and LADWP who have something to do with mining.
Flagged for further discussion: While the region’s important history as a collection of mining communities is discussed in the CEDS, mining did not emerge as an industry with high growth rates or a large economic impact in the present-day. Expanding mining operations in the region may be further complicated by the lack of available land and environmental conservation and preservation efforts. That said, construction and manufacturing did emerge as growing industries, with wood product manufacturing showing modest growth. These industries may play an important role in the infrastructure needs referenced.
[Inyo County] In the draft CEDS document, the median housing costs seem low, especially housing anywhere near employment opportunities. I’ve always paid almost twice that in rent in the past decade, and it’s increased annually since Covid-19. I assume this uses ACS data. What’s shown doesn’t reflect what full-year, employed residents pay. I’m not sure usual methodology makes sense in a mountain community with such unusual constraints. Those moving here to fill positions needed to grow/diversify the economy will pay much more.
The issue with housing costs and availability is addressed, but may be under-developed in the plan and may need more recent data with more granularity. Perhaps greater segmentation of the data would show more opportunities and a better representation of the issues faced in an economic development framework.
Accepted: Additional discussion of ACS methodology and the potential for higher housing costs than reflected by the ACS has been added.
Additionally, a short section titled “Seasonal Homes and Vacancy” has been added to discuss the prevalence of seasonal residents and their impact on the data included in this report.
Flagged for further discussion: This comment demonstrates the importance of the recommendation related to conducting a housing needs assessment with a strategic plan.
[Inyo County] More tourism needs to be brought to the 395 corridor of Lone Pine, Big Pine, Independence, etcetera, even Bishop, these communities are dying. Lack of medical, lack of services, lack, lack, lack. Go visit Gardnerville just across the border in Nevada and see a thriving “cute” community. A place you want to visit (not referring to gambling), that has a charm as you drive through and makes you want to stop even if you have no reason to. Right now all these ES 395 cities are basically drive through cities, like flyover states. Make them a reason to visit for tourists to spend dollars, year round. A place that young families will want to come and put down roots and start families. Without opportunity nothing will survive.
Flagged for further discussion
Comment (with County of representation, if identified)
[Mono County] Yes, infrastructure is good and of course so is tourism, which is the life blood for many full-time residents.
What we don’t want is Disneyland in ML resulting in manifestations of more trash, more cigarette butts, more traffic, more diesel and tail pipe pollution for those of us who enjoy walking and biking around town, and air b and b rental properties continuing to price out and reduce housing opportunities for residents and seasonal mountain employees and the perceived need to cut down trees to build more low income housing, or competition to be the new Vail with continuous sprawl and an ever-expanding footprint into natural lands. (It is upsetting to see a street that is named for what beautiful thing used to be there but was destroyed for the development.) Always take into consideration the environment/ecosystem/climate costs (i.e. removing mature trees and disrupting soil and meadowlands, water, CO2 and methane production/capture). For example, petroleum- based plastic covering on forest soil is a travesty and is flat out wrong on so many levels. This should be banned already. I think your shuttle and City wide/county wide vehicle fleet should be electric with more charging stations around town. THINK OF WAY TO CUT ML’S CARBON FOOTPRINT NOT ADD TO IT!!!!!! THIS IS OUR #1 RESPONSIBILITY! An effective ZERO WASTE policy and executable and enforceable plan is not an option but a necessity for EVERYTHING that is currently landfilled ASAP; especially with the increase in tourism. In the meantime, hire a team to clean up after them and their cigarette butts (tobacco ban ordinance should be considered). You are correct that all building and expansion must be carried out with the best available science in mind and with the input from tribal representatives for our best shot at resiliency and adaptation to unpredictable and increasingly extreme climate conditions. For example, indigenous peoples hold the knowledge of how to best manage the forest and grasslands. Invite them to take on these important roles, avoid tokenism, and compensate them well for their time to sit at your table and provide input for your plans. Mammoth’s beauty is unparalleled. THE BIGGEST THING WE NEED TO DO IS LEAVE IT ALONE AND NURTURE IT. If the tribal members do come to the table, hopefully they will echo that exploitation and growth is not always the best answer. Progress does not always equal development. Thank you for your caring and consideration. I have a full-time job, but I am glad to help pro-bono to implement any or all of the above-mentioned policies and solutions. Respectfully, [REDACTED] Response
Accepted: We agree that sustainability and conservation of natural resources must be a top priority for the region. We hope that this plan’s third focus area, Resilience and Sustainability, addresses the items discussed here. Specifically, we hope that the second objective, “Enhance the network of industry and community stewards to develop, adopt, and promote guidelines for sustainable tourism” is embraced as the first step of many towards ensuring that economic growth does not come at the expense of the region’s environment and natural resources.
The strengthening of tribal relationships and ongoing partnerships with tribal communities is also critical in the implementation of the CEDS. [Mono County] On Page 9, under Cultural Assets, I would recommend removing mining from the list of things that add to our rich history.
Pg. 11, Add John Muir Trail to the discussion about the backpacking opportunities on the PCT.
On page 15, the Median Monthly Housing Costs look low to me. I understand this came from the ACS but are there any other sources? I think if not then we should make note that there is a lack of available housing stock to rent so the Percent of Cost Burdened Household in Figure 8 appears artificially low.
On page 22, under Air Quality, add information about the challenges faced at the Dry Owens lake bed and Mono Lake with respect to PM 10 particulate matter.
A threat we face as a region that I did not see specifically called out is the risk that our rural hospitals face as reimbursement rates continue to be inadequate to cover costs. That poses risks to community members in terms of access and also to local employment because healthcare jobs are a key component of our workforce.
Flagged for Further Discussion
Accepted
Accepted: Additional discussion of ACS methodology and the potential for higher housing costs than reflected by the ACS has been added.
Accepted
Flagged for Further Discussion
Comment (with County of representation, if identified) Response [Inyo County] page 13 (median household income) -- how are these computed? is tehre a way to compute it for permanent residents?
page 28 (figure 13) -- that figure is gross and not very informative. We should change it from a venn diagram to a table. venn diagrams are typically normalized so the two circles are the same size. This is not the case here, so this shouldnt’ be a venn diagram. One question about the data here, though: it would be good to know of the large number of people who “live in the selection area, employed outside”, how many of those are remote jobs? I ask because those don’t really require commuting, which seems to be what this figure is trying to get at (and concluding when they say this figure indicates many residents are seeking jobs outside the region).
SWOT analysis pie charts (pages 30-33): those pie charts aren’t well described. I have no idea what they mean from reading the document. For example, in the first one (Access and Connectivity) is this saying that 14% of the respondents think broadband access is the biggest challenge we face? 14% of respondents think it’s a problem? 14% think it’s an asset that we have? There needs to be some description (at the very least a legend) that says what these graphs are actually showing.
Same comment also applies to the next section -- what are these pie charts indicating? are they indicating what respondents think is the main strength/weakness/issue? it’s not clear what those pie charts are saying.
Goal 1: (access and connectivity) -- can you expand on the goal about road conditions? I’m not clear why this is a priority for economic development. is there any indication that our economic development is currently stifled by the lack of road stuff?
Goal 3: I feel like part of diversification should include industries that take advantage of the natural resources we have here (but not like the old-school way of thinking, i.e., mining). I would imagine things like city of bishop has access to a lot of water, so hydroponic growing; or solar farms; the kind of things that make use of our resources to diversify industries but in novel ways. Also, I think we should also look at what kind of remote jobs people in the area are getting, and focus efforts on making sure we have schools to gain the skills needed for those jobs.
Goal 5 (housing): that’s a worthwhile goal, but do we really think CEDS is the one that’s going to do this? Accepted: This data is from the American Community Survey. A short section titled “Seasonal Homes and Vacancy” has been added to discuss the prevalence of seasonal residents and their impact on the data included in this report.
Flagged for Further Discussion: This figure is not technically a Venn diagram, although it does have the same shape as a Venn diagram. The figure is produced by the US Census Bureau and does not address remote work.
Accepted: Additional language has been added to help clarify the figures referenced.
Accepted: Additional language has been added to help clarify the figures referenced.
Flagged for Further Discussion: Flooding and severe winter weather have, in recent years, caused road closures that render businesses and attractions inaccessible. Transportation infrastructure is vital to the exchange of commerce and workers.
Accepted: An expanded targeted industry analysis has been added to the recommendations.
Flagged for Further Discussion: The CEDS implementation falls on a broad coalition of stakeholders, and the CEDS can be a supporting tool accessing federal funding to support housing if appropriate programs are available.
Comment (with County of representation, if identified) Response [Inyo County] Hello and thank you for this strategy report. My name is [Redacted] and I work as [Redacted].
I am very concerned about the absence of local food systems considerations in the current CEDS draft of July 31st. I understand that this may reflect a lack of responses in this domain from your respondents, rather than your own grevious ommission. However, I believe that the SWOT Analysis results significantly downplay the opportunities for local food systems development and investment.
Considering our location, natural resources, and existing industries, we have very important potential for building up our local food economy through sustainable agritourism development. Many ranchers I have spoken with express a keen need for expanding local meat processing capacities. Restaurants currently have to import much of their food, resulting in lost local revenues sub-par culinary experiences for our region’s guests and residents, even with food service being one of our major industries. I would propose that your final report recommend a “local food system assessment.” Better yet, if your team can do the research now, please include one as an appendix, as was recently done with the The Bay Area Food Economy: Existing Conditions and Strategies for Resilience, attached to the Bay Area’s CEDS). I would be glad to particpate in those discussions and bring Tribal stakeholders to the table as best I can.
Thank you,
[Redacted]
Flagged for Further Discussion: The comment is from an individual affiliated with one of the area’s indigenous tribes. The recommendation for a local food system assessment connects other comments and opportunities related to economic diversification and leveraging the tourism industry in the CEDS. This is a strong example of what can come from advancing the objective to “build upon and transform opportunities for businesses to convene by industry sector to better understand and address common issues related to supply chain, workforce, etc.” Because this person expressed a desire to be involved with future issues on this matter, their contact information has been share with a representative of ESCOG. This may be a great relationship to nurture to help with strengthening connections with tribal communities.
[Inyo County] Page 9 – states “around half of the visitors that come to the region come from other areas of California.” Do you know where this info is coming from? Is it possible to add something that addresses the long-haul travelers and international visitors that come to see the iconic places in our region?
wildlife viewing, birdwatching and landscape photography.
other areas? Is it skewed because of the seasonality of employment in the ski areas? Lastly, I don’t know where exactly this would fit in….
It is mentioned several times that our tourism industry is “robust.” That’s good, but there is still room for improvement and growth in this sector. Bishop’s average annual hotel occupancy is only at 70%. That means we could sell 93K more room nights per year – without building even one more hotel. We’ve made good progress in smoothing out the severe seasonality, but there is much work to be done there. If we can fill the rooms in the slower season, this would lead to better year-round employment for everyone employed in hospitality.
Also, in speaking about job training/education, it would be good to see some emphasis on improving skills/knowledge of hospitality workers. There are good careers in this sector in management and all of the local hotels and restaurants have trouble finding management level employees. (and the pay is darn good!) Accepted: This information is from a Tourism Industry study conducted by Mono County. A citation has been added, along with a sentence noting other types of visitors.
Flagged for Further Discussion
Accepted
Accepted
Flagged for Further Discussion: Additional language has been added about the prevalence of second-home owners and their potential effect on the data.
Accepted: The continued growth of the tourism sector (in an environmentally conscious manner) is a focus of recommendations across focus areas. These include BRE programming recommendations, as well as transportation infrastructure improvements to continue to address seasonality.
Flagged for Further Discussion
Mammoth Lakes Town Council
Agenda Action Sheet
Title: Continuation of emergency work authorized under Resolutions 23-29 and 23-
54. Council Meeting Date: 11/1/2023
Prepared by: Daniel C. Holler, Town Manager
Recommended Motion: Council finds it is necessary to continue the emergency work authorized under Resolutions 23-29 and 23-54 to provide for public welfare and safety.
Summary:
Town facilities and infrastructure impacted by the extreme winter weather are still in a state of disrepair impacting the welfare and safety of the community. Damage to sidewalks, drainages, fencing, signage, and facilities is substantial. Staff have found additional damage to curbs and gutters, drain inlets, signage, fencing, facilities, ADA detectable surfaces, and sidewalks and repairs are necessary for public welfare and safety. On May 17, 2023, the Council adopted Resolution 23-29 authorizing the emergency repair of these damages and the procurement of the necessary equipment, services, and supplies for the repair, without a competitive bidding process.
On July 12, 2023, the Council adopted Resolution 23-54 authorizing the emergency repair of these damages and the procurement of the necessary equipment, services, and supplies for the repair, without a competitive bidding process due to damages at the Mammoth Yosemite Airport. The need for the work authorized by these two resolutions continues to be necessary to provide for public welfare and safety. Copies of the resolutions are attached for Council information. All of the work is being finalized and projects will be closed out prior to the next regular Council meeting.
RESOLUTION 23- 29
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MAMMOTH
LAKES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT EMERGENCY
CIRCUMSTANCES JUSTIFY AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR TOWN
INFRASTRUCTURE AND FACILITIES DAMAGED BY EXTREME WEATHER
INCLUDING FENCING, PARKS, REGULATORY, STREET AND WAY
FINDING SIGNAGE, SIDEWALK, CURB, GUTTER, DRAINAGE INLETS, ADA
REQUIRED DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACES AND RELATED ITEMS
WITHOUT COMPETITIVE BIDDING
WHEREAS, California law generally requires the Town to award contracts for public projects" in excess of $1, 000 to the lowest bidder after the completion of a competitive bidding process; and
WHEREAS, Public Contract Code Section 20168 provides that in case of emergency the Town Council may pass a resolution by a four -fifths vote declaring that the public interest and necessity demand the immediate expenditure of Town funds to safeguard life, health, or property, and that if such a resolution is adopted the Town may expend any sum required in the emergency without complying with competitive bidding requirements; and
WHEREAS, Public Contract Code Section 22050 authorizes the Town Council, with a four -fifths vote, to " repair or replace a public facility, take any directly related and immediate action required by that emergency, and procure the necessary equipment, services, and supplies for those purposes, without giving notice for bids to let contracts" ifthe Town Council finds, based upon substantial evidence, that the emergency will not permit a delay resulting from a competitive solicitation for bids, and that the action is necessary to respond to the emergency; and
WHEREAS, Mammoth Lakes has experienced extreme weather conditions during the winter of 2022- 2023, with historic accumulations of snow, leading the Town Manager to proclaim a state of emergency on March 3, 2023, which proclamation was ratified by the Town Council on March 7, 2023, with a renewed state of emergency declared by the Town Manager on March 27, 2023 and ratified by proclamation ofthe Town Council on March 31, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the extreme weather conditions, response and snow accumulations have caused significant damage to Town facilities and infrastructure including damage to fencing, curbs, gutters, drain inlets, roads, ADA required Detectable Warning Surfaces, street signs, wayfinding signs, warning signs and regulatory signage; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that as a result ofthe weather - caused damage to Town facilities and infrastructure and pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 20168 the public interest and necessity demand the immediate expenditure of public money to safeguard life, health, safety, and property in the Town of Mammoth Lakes; and
Resolution No. 23- 29
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that based on substantial evidence, including without limitation the staff report presented to the Town Council on May 17, 2023, pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22050, the emergency will not permit a delay resulting from a competitive solicitation for bids, and that responding to the emergency requires repair of public facilities and infrastructure, other directly related and immediate actions, and procurement of the necessary equipment, services, and supplies for those purposes, without a competitive bidding process.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Mammoth Lakes as follows:
Section 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 2. The Town Council hereby directs and authorizes the Town Manager and Public Works Director to contract for repairs to Town facilities and infrastructure damaged by the winter of 2022- 2023, to take any directly related action, and to procure the necessary equipment, services, and supplies for the repairs, without a competitive bidding process.
Section 3. Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22050, the Town Council shall review the emergency action authorized by this resolution at its next regular meeting and at each regular meeting thereafter until the emergency repair work is complete, to determine, by a four -fifths vote, that there is a need to continue the action.
Section 4. The Town Clerk shall certify as to the adoption of this resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17' h
day of T
ATTEST:
J lE GRAY, Town Jerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF MONO ) ss.
TOWN OF MAMMOTH LAKES)
I, JAMIE GRAY, Town Clerk of the Town of Mammoth Lakes, DO HEREBY CERTIFY under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. 23- 29 adopted by the Town Council of the Town of Mammoth Lakes, California, at a meeting thereof held on the 17th day of May 2023, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Bubser, Rea, Rice, Mayor Pro Tern Sauser, and Mayor Wentworth
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
DISQUALIFICATION: None
JANO GRAY,- Town Cleril
RESOLUTION 23- 54
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MAMMOTH LAKES, STATE
OF CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT EMERGENCY CIRCUMSTANCES JUSTIFY AWARDING
A CONTRACT FOR TOWN INFRASTRUCTURE DAMAGED BY EXTREME WEATHER
INCLUDING FENCING AND RELATED ITEMS AT THE MAMMOTH YOSEMITE AIRPORT
WITHOUT COMPETITIVE BIDDING
WHEREAS, California law generally requires the Town to award contracts for " public projects" in excess of $1, 000 to the lowest bidder after the completion of a competitive bidding process; and WHEREAS, Public Contract Code Section 20168 provides that in case of emergency the Town Council may pass a resolution by a four -fifths vote declaring that the public interest and necessity demand the immediate expenditures of Town funds to safeguard life, health, or property, and that if such a resolution is adopted the Town may expend any sum required in the emergency without complying with competitive bidding requirements; and
WHEREAS, Public Contract Code Section 22050 authorizes the Town Council, with a four - fifths vote, to " repair or replace a public facility, take any directly related and immediate action required by that emergency, and procure the necessary equipment, services, and supplies for those purposes, without giving notice for bids to let contracts" if the Town Council finds, based upon substantial evidence, that the emergency will not permit a delay resulting from a competitive solicitation for bids, and that the action is necessary to respond to the emergency; and WHEREAS, Mammoth Lakes has experienced extreme weather conditions during the winter of 2022- 2023, with historic accumulations of snow, leading the Town Manager to proclaim a state of emergency on March 3, 2023, which proclamation was ratified by the Town Council on March 7, 2023, with a renewed state of emergency declared by the Town Manager on March 27, 2023, and ratified by resolution ofthe Town Council on March 31, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the extreme weather conditions, response and snow accumulations have caused significant damage to the Town infrastructure including damage to the fence surrounding the Mammoth Yosemite Airport (Airport); and
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that as a result ofthe weather -caused damage to Town infrastructure and pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 20168 the public interest and necessity demand the immediate expenditure of public money to safeguard life, health, safety, and property in the Town of Mammoth Lakes; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that based on substantial evidence, including without limitation the staff report presented to the Town Council on July 12, 2023, pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22050, the emergency will not permit a delay resulting from a competitive solicitation for bids, and that responding to the emergency requires repair of public infrastructure, other directly related and immediate actions, and procurement of the necessary equipment, services and supplies for those purposes, without a competitive bidding process.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Mammoth Lakes as follows:
Resolution No. 23- 54
Section 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 2. The Town Council hereby directs and authorizes the Town Manager to contract for repairs to Town infrastructure damaged by the winter of 2022- 2023 at the Airport, to take any directly related action, and to procure the necessary equipment, services, and supplies for the repair, without a competitive bidding process.
Section 3. Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22050, the Town Council shall review the emergency action authorized by this resolution at its next regular meeting and at each regular meeting thereafter until the emergency repair work is complete, to determine, by a four -fifths vote, that there is a need to continue the action.
Section 4. The Town Manager and Finance Director are authorized to amend the FY23- 24 Budget in the amount of two hundred and fifteen thousand dollars ($215, 000) plus up to a 20% contingency amount to fund the emergency work utilizing resources in Fund 990.
Section S. The Town Clerk shall certifv as to the adoption of this resolution.
APPROVD AND ADOPTED this 12'' day of July 2023.
ATTEST:
c
MIE GRAY, Town Cl rk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF MONO ) ss.
TOWN OF MAMMOTH LAKES)
I, JAMIE GRAY, Town Clerk of the Town of Mammoth Lakes, DO HEREBY CERTIFY under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. 23- 54 adopted by the Town Council of the Town of Mammoth Lakes, California, at a meeting thereof held on the 12t" day of July 2023, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Bubser, Rea, Rice, Mayor Pro Tern Sauser, and Mayor Wentworth
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
DISQUALIFICATION: None
Agenda Item ________
File No. ____________
AGENDA BILL
Subject: Councilmember Reports
Initiated by: Jamie Gray
______________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND:
Each member of the Town Council is appointed to serve as a Town representative to a number of committees, commissions, and organizations.
These groups meet infrequently and from time to time the representatives will report to the rest of the Council at a regularly scheduled meeting.
In addition, Councilmembers on occasion participate in meetings, conferences and seminars, and their reports on these educational opportunities are of benefit to the rest of the Council.
ANALYSIS/DISCUSSION:
California Government Code requirements pertaining to the open meeting act stipulate that all items for discussion must be listed on the agenda before the matter can be discussed and/or acted upon. To meet this requirement, and the intent of the Brown Act, Councilmember Reports are listed on each agenda to allow representatives to report to the rest of the Council at these meetings.
The following is a list of the commission/committees on which members of the Council serve:
Land Use:
Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) – Rea, Rice, and Bubser as alternate
Airport Land Use Commission – Rea, Rice, and Bubser as the alternate Mono County Collaborative Planning Team (CPT) – Senior Planner Kim Cooke and Rice as alternate
Intergovernmental Relations:
Town and County Liaison Committee – Sauser, Bubser, and Town Manager and Rea as alternate
Desert Mountain Division of the League of California Cities – Sauser and Town Manager as alternate
Eastern Sierra Council of Governments (ESCOG) – Bubser, Wentworth, and Sauser as alternate
Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District – Wentworth and Bubser as alternate
League of California Cities City Voting Delegate – Sauser and the Town Manager as the alternate
California Joint Powers Insurance Authority Board – Rea and Assistant to the Town Manager as alternate
Transportation:
Local Transportation Commission (LTC) – Wentworth, Sauser, and Paul Chang; Town Manager as alternate
Eastern Sierra Transit Authority (ESTA) Board – Bubser and Sauser Local Issues:
Mammoth Lakes Tourism (MLT) Board – Sauser
Mammoth Lakes Recreation (MLR) Board – Rea
Mammoth Lakes Housing (MLH) Board – Rice
Treasury Oversight Committee – Finance Director; Town Manager as alternate LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS:
According to the California Open Meeting Act, commonly referred to as the Brown Act, the agenda must reflect every matter to be discussed by a governing body.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
This agenda bill is submitted for information only.