Laserfiche WebLink
Santa Clara County Boar of Supervisors <br /> Tim Mulligan,Vector Control Manager <br /> January 13,2003 <br /> Rae 2 <br /> One of the key matters which needed to be resolved was the proper fly count to be <br /> used.,as a standard. Mr.Mulligan advised me that the fly count range was'between 50- <br /> 100. This range had been established down in Saiz Bernardino County. Mr.Mulligan <br /> advised me he unilaterally set the 50 fly count number as the Santa Clara County <br /> standard. We,asked for the suppor ing documentation,studies,etc... suppartixzg that 50 <br /> fly count standard. Mr. Mulligan advised me that he would try to find the support and <br /> provide it to us. I just received the completed data package supporting the staff report <br /> from Mr.1VMulligan's office late in the afternoon on Friday,January 10,2003,and have <br /> not had a reasonable time to carefully review the data and the conclusions. in addition,I <br /> am still missing any written reports,studies or data that forms the basis for the County's <br /> determination that a 54 fly count standard is the proper standard for application to Mr. <br /> Oliveira's Egg Ranch. <br /> After speaking with Mr.Mulligan at some length for a second time,it is my <br /> understanding that no such documentation exists. please let xne know if my <br /> understanding is in error,and forward to my attention any report or study which would <br /> aid my client in understanding the fly count standard and improving his egg farming <br /> operation. <br /> Our goal is to be the best neighbor possible within reasonable and fair parameters. <br /> Mr. Olivera is aware of Santa Clara County's coxa mitmont to preserving farming and <br /> ,ranching as part of its"Right to Faxen,ordinance. Unfortunately,because of the holidays <br /> and the County staff's time off,I did not receive the information I need to properly <br /> analyze the underlying data which supported the Staff Report,which in tura was the basis <br /> for the Board of Supervisors preliminary finding that a public nuisance existed and was <br /> caused by the Olivera Egg Ranch. It is important for the azrucably and mutually <br /> satisfactorily resolution of dais matter that the parties have a fair and adequate time to <br /> review the date,discuss the data with the staff,and have Mr. Olivera's consultant review <br /> the data and the staff report recommendations to see where areas for improvement exist, <br /> and where a.reasonable solution can be found. <br /> It has always been our intention to resolve this matter in an amicable and mutually <br /> satisfactory fashion.. In keeping with this intention,and pursuant to the request of County <br /> Counsel Kretchxner on Thursday,January 9,2003, a meeting between,the County,Mr. <br /> Olivera-and the property owner.representative had been tentatively scheduled for <br /> Thursday,January 16,2403,to discuss the situation and a mutually satisfactory <br /> resolution. Today,I received a call from Ms.Kretchmer that the County was not <br /> available on that date, so we are in the process of rescheduling an alternate date. <br /> In addition,we have agreed to develop an Insect Management Playa(IMP)to assist <br /> in the pro-active management of the flies on the Olivera Egg Ranch. I received a pro- <br /> forma Be from the County on]Friday,January 10,2003. Based on nay experience with <br /> other County plans,the process of developing a plexi can be time consuming,requiring <br />