Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Air Quality topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Air-district proposes fee overhaul, suggests earlier end to annual burn-ban with holiday no-burn days; board seeks fee-by-fee comparison
Summary
The Lake County Air Quality Management District proposed a full rewrite of its fee rules and a change to the county’s burn-permit calendar, suggesting either a November 15 or earlier November 1 lift of the annual burn ban (the latter offset by a set of holiday no-burn days).
The Lake County Air Quality Management District (AQMD) on June 10 presented a multi-part proposal that would: (1) replace the district’s decades-old fee rules with a modern fee schedule aligned to staff time and emission impacts; and (2) revise the county’s burn-permit calendar by ending the district’s annual burn ban earlier in fall.
AQMD staff said the district’s permit and fee structure dates to the 1970s and that current fees recover roughly half of permit-program costs. Doug Gearhart, AQMD staff, presented a new fee framework that separates permit charges from annual emission-related fees, adds pre-application and CEQA-review fees, and creates administrative pass-throughs the district currently absorbs.
On burning, staff proposed two options for ending the district’s annual burn ban: (a) automatically lift the ban on Nov. 15 (the 20-year historical median lifting date); or (b) lift it on Nov. 1 but offset the extra days lost earlier in the season by declaring certain major holidays as no-burn days (example list proposed: Veterans Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas Eve, Christmas Day, New Year’s Eve, New Year’s Day, Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Presidents Day and Easter). AQMD staff said the daily burn-day decision would remain subject to local and Cal Fire safety assessments and that exemptions could still be granted for specified agricultural or large-scale burns when safe.
Board members asked for details before any submission to state or federal reviewers: a side-by-side comparison of old vs. proposed fees, a count of affected permit-holders in each category, and an analysis of multi-year phasing options to spread fee increases. Supervisors also asked staff to model impacts for specific categories (for example, gas stations and geothermal facilities) and to show how CPI increases had compared over time.
On the Nov. 1 vs. Nov. 15 question, several supervisors expressed support for an earlier lift of the ban (Nov. 1) if the district adopts a modest number of holiday no-burn days, to give more legal opportunity for prescribed and agricultural burning while protecting community health on days when people gather. Board members also directed staff to return the fee package with clearer comparatives and to delay formal submission to the state until the board reviews the fee schedule and supporting analysis.
Ending: AQMD staff will return with a detailed, line-by-line comparison of current and proposed fees, counts of permit holders by category, and a phasing proposal; the board signaled it supports rule updates but wants the fee impacts clarified before the district forwards the package to state reviewers.
