Lake County air district approves 2025–26 draft budget, directs staff to prioritize mandates and press state for funding

The Lake County Air Quality Management District board of directors approved a draft 2025–26 budget on a motion during a public hearing and issued a set of policy directions aimed at addressing staffing shortfalls, state funding risks, and growing monitoring requirements.

The actions taken Wednesday included a formal vote to approve the fiscal-year draft budget and separate votes directing staff to oppose further reductions in state subvention funding, to re-engage with the California Association of Air Pollution Control Officers (CAPCOA) when feasible, to prioritize mandated health- and risk-based programs, and to work with county human resources on recruitment and retention proposals.

The vote to approve the draft budget carried after a motion and second. Doug Deerhart, air district staff member, presented the budget materials and said the hearing was “basically a opportunity to present the budget and take public comment,” and noted the legal requirement for the hearing under the California Health and Safety Code, section 40131.

Why it matters: Lake County’s air district said rising program responsibilities, potential new state reporting requirements and reduced outside support are straining a small staff and a budget largely supported by permit fees. The board’s directions aim to preserve capacity for legally mandated work while seeking state support to offset new obligations.

Discussion and key concerns

Doug Deerhart told the board the district has not been fully staffed in nearly a decade and that multiple recent and proposed requirements are stretching operations. He listed items the district is tracking that could raise costs or workload: potential indirect-source reporting tied to AB 9914, separate and overlapping toxics and emissions inventory reporting requirements, an EPA asset-management initiative that could force equipment replacement cycles, and reductions in state calibration and audit support for ambient monitoring.

“We rely a lot on forecasting, and we have to do a lot more forecasting and, that type of activity ourselves,” Deerhart said, describing topographical and microclimate challenges around Clear Lake and elsewhere in the county. He warned that if the state reduces subvention funding, “permit fees have to make up the difference in the mandated activities of the district.”

Board members pressed on reserves, fees and staffing. Supervisor Spatier said, “Don't quote me on it, but it sounds like AB 9914 was ordered to inactive file at the request of Assembly Member Garcia on June 2,” indicating the bill’s immediate status was uncertain. Spatier also urged the district to raise reserves once a new fee schedule is finalized, noting current fee levels date to 1996.

Geysers monitoring consortium and Sonoma County

Deerhart described changes to the Geysers Air Monitoring Program (GAMP), saying the GAMP memorandum of understanding has not been updated in roughly 20 years and that Northern Sonoma County has stepped back from administrative duties. He told the board that industry funds the GAMP’s hard costs while local agencies have contributed staff time, and that Sonoma County’s withdrawal is putting extra administrative and financial work on Lake County.

One supervisor urged the district to seek compensation from Sonoma County if it keeps administrative duties but stops providing resources. Deerhart said staff were exploring options with county administration and the auditor/treasurer, including hiring a consultant or contractor to manage financial tasks if needed.

Monitoring equipment, calibration and potential costs

The district described several monitoring-related risks. Deerhart said EPA’s asset-management approach could define equipment lifespans and replacement schedules, which could require the district to replace monitors on a multi-year cycle. He estimated individual monitors can cost “25 to $50,000 a piece” and said the district operates roughly 15 different monitoring instruments; consultants hired by other districts have paid $100,000–$300,000 for compliance work that Lake County staff currently handle in-house.

Deerhart and board members also discussed the state’s shifting role in calibrations and audits for the ozone and ambient monitoring programs. “The state is basically stopping most of their support for the program,” Deerhart said, and if the state no longer performs calibrations and audits, the district will need additional dedicated staff to meet quality-assurance requirements.

Board motions and outcomes

- Approve fiscal year 2025–26 draft budget (motion moved and seconded). Outcome: approved (motion carries).

- Direct staff to oppose further state subvention cuts and seek increased state funding to cover legislative and state mandates affecting rural districts (motion moved and seconded). Outcome: approved (motion carries).

- Direct staff to continue participation on CAPCOA’s board of directors when feasible and to take a more active role in future years representing Lake County (motion moved and seconded). Outcome: approved (motion carries).

- Direct staff to continue prioritizing health impacts, health-risk complaints and mandated programs, followed by activities with regulatory time frames and funded activities; the board amended the proposed language to remove a clause placing voluntary programs explicitly “on hold” before the vote. Outcome: approved as amended; vote recorded 5–0.

- Direct staff to work with county human resources and county administration to review and develop improved recruitment and retention proposals and bring proposals back to the board. Outcome: approved 4–1.

Operational and budget details raised

Deerhart said the district’s reserves have been relatively stable in recent years; he cited an operating-reserve target that staff plan to formalize after the fee rule process concludes. The district expects revenue increases once a fee schedule revision is adopted, but Deerhart warned that any fee changes adopted late in the fiscal year would not generate revenue for the current year.

He also noted revenue changes coming into the district, including burn program revenue that previously flowed to fire agencies and the prospect of new geothermal projects in the area. At the same time, Deerhart reiterated that many new state and federal requirements come with no dedicated funding and that small rural districts lack the capacity of large urban agencies.

Next steps

Staff said they expect a draft revision of the GAMP memorandum of understanding by the end of the calendar year, with a more substantive draft likely in January or February for review. The board directed staff to return with any fee-rule proposals, a reserve policy after the fee process, and proposals on staffing and recruitment developed with county HR.

Public comment and staff appreciation

A member of the board thanked staff for doing emissions and toxics reporting in-house and noted that in-house work saves “six figures” compared with hiring outside contractors. Staff confirmed the loss of outside laboratory and some state services will increase workload and potentially costs.

The board adjourned the hearing after covering the listed items and moved on to the next agenda item.