theSheetNews.com

In 2004 Mono County voters approved Measure E, which authorized the sale of up to $11.1 million in bonds of the Eastern Sierra Unified School District to finance school facilities described in the proposition. Today, as the funds begin to dwindle, questions are being asked regarding the bond and the obligation to use some of it to build a gym in Benton.

Some members of the community remember previous ESUSD Boards of Education earmarking some of this funding for a gym. Superintendent Don Clark, who was hired two years after Measure E was approved, however, stated at Wednesday night Board meeting held in Benton that while discussions had been had among previous Boards to this end, no formal resolution or vote was taken.

The proposition itself does not specifically mention a gym for Benton either. The ballot language back then stated “Eastern Sierra Unified School District Bond Measure E: To accommodate growth; repair and renovate aging electrical, plumbing and air-ventilation systems; modernize classrooms; improve technology to meet the demands of a 21st century education; become eligible for millions in state matching funds; improve student safety; all through a comprehensive plan.”

The question remains whether or not the discussions held by previous Boards were enough to constitute a commitment to the project. Current ESUSD Board members were divided.

“We need to revisit this using a portion of the bond money,” said Board member Melinda Melendrez, who represents the Benton area. “We probably couldn’t complete the gym but we could get it going and then use other money. We’re not investing in this school and it’s dwindling away.” Melendrez explained it as a vicious circle, comparing it to an experience she’d had while working at the Home Depot.

We weren’t making sales because we didn’t have enough people in the department and we couldn’t hire more people because we weren’t making sales, she explained. It was a vicious circle.

“We need to throw an investment into the school and make good on promises,” Melendrez added. “There are two local contractors who want to build a gym here. We just have to take the first step and invest in the school.”

Melendrez said Benton was just looking for a 6,000 square foot outbuilding where the children could play sports in the winter.

“If anyone has a legitimate reason why this school shouldn’t have a gym let me know and I’ll fight you for it,” Melendrez said.

“Can we revisit the bond to see what’s there and see if we can get some money out,” Board member Gabe Segura asked Clark. The answer was yes.

“We need to reprioritize projects and bring some money back to the gym,” Melendrez said.

Since the agenda item stated that the discussion would cover what other options the Board had to explore for funding the gym, Segura asked Clark what the other options were.

“There are four viable sources that I can think of,” Clark said. “Another bond specifically for a gym, a parcel tax, donations, and grants. But there aren’t any grants out there that I know of that would do this [build a gym].”

“We need to review which projects are priorities,” Segura said.

Board Chair John Peters, however, had a different opinion.

“We have spent more time on the gym than any other item,” Peters said. “It’s not exhausted but it’s been thorough. Nobody doesn’t want to see a gym here but I don’t see how a gym you’re describing is feasible with the remaining bond money.”

According to Clark, there is approximately $4 million left in the bond. He said that the money that has been used so far has gone to renovations at all campuses in the ESUSD, including approximately $2 million in Benton. The only school that hasn’t receive bond money is Lee Vining High School because it was completely rebuilt anyway after burning down 10 years ago, Clark said.

“We need something new at the table, funding-wise, to get the wheels turning,” Peters continued. “You can’t just start it hoping to get the money. Other sources need to be identified first.”

Melendrez disagreed, claiming that people need to see the District invest in the school and then other funding sources would be easy to find.

“There is $1.5 million [from the bond] that could have been allocated and would have built something, we can do something with this,” she said. “We can build a smaller gym with room for growth. All we need are four walls, a roof and a floor for now.”

She added that she refused to ask for another bond or a parcel tax at this time.

“We have to look at the whole district and its needs, and the amount of money remaining in the bond,” Peters argued.

When an idea of somehow partnering with Mono County was thrown on the table, Supervisor Fred Stump, who attended the meeting, took the podium.

“I’m getting complaints about this process because people don’t trust you,” Stump said to the Board. “They don’t trust you because they don’t have a clue as to what you’re doing. You need to send a letter to residents to explain your thought process. They haven’t seen the thorough process your describing.

“If promises must be broken, you need to explain why really well,” he said.

Stump addressed the idea that has been thrown around to turn Benton’s community center into the gym.

“The community center is off-campus and I’m not sure a conversion would do you any better,” he said. “If you’re serious about getting the County involved, let me know. I don’t think the community center idea is doable.”

Segura suggested that the Board add the discussion to its next agenda as an action item (Wednesday’s discussion did not allow any action to be taken).

“We haven’t exhausted every avenue,” Segura said. “I’d be willing to do some legwork and I’m sure Melinda would too. We need to exhaust everything.”

The Mono County Paramedic Program continues to exact a burdensome cost impact to the County, and there are no painless fixes. So following a disappointing consultant report from Fitch and Associates on how to cut costs last fall, and an impasse in County/Paramedic negotiations earlier this year, the Board of Supervisors agreed to hold a workshop with the Association in efforts to keep the conversation on the program moving forward.

The Association seized the opportunity to present the Supervisors with ideas of its own, hoping to sway the legislative body to look at giving the department more money from other pots, and actually charge for services rendered rather than cut back on personnel as Fitch had suggested.

At Tuesday’s regular Board meeting, Association President Rick Mitchell came before the Board in the workshop format with thoughts on a cooperative planning effort between the County and the Association. All of the Paramedics had reviewed Mitchell’s presentation and had the opportunity to comment on it, leaving Mitchell with the impression that it fairly represented the entire Association.

Mitchell explained that the medics were in favor of helping offset the $2.7 million burden the program puts on the County’s General Fund, but that they preferred to do so through revenue-raising methods, rather than cost-cutting.

“Fitch had a different focus then what should happen,” Mitchell said. “They wanted to cut personnel but then also wanted a lot of new programs. We want to avoid their ‘cut it to fix it’ approach.”

The Fitch Report suggested changing the system so that an EMS rig would be manned with one EMT and one Paramedic, rather than the current setup of two medics. This switch would be done over time through attrition. The Report also suggested that the County look at starting a Paramedicine Program. However, without enough or any input from vested parties and the community, the report left many, including the previous Board, with a bad taste in their mouth.

Mitchell wasn’t kidding when he said the focus of his presentation was on ways to raise revenue. He presented three ideas to cut costs, and about a dozen ways to generate revenue.

The three cost cutting measures were: cutting A-87 indirect costs, first responder funds, and removing the Fitch Consultant line item of $65,000 from the Paramedic’s budget.

Then he switched gears to revenue enhancement. Seemingly the most controversial idea he threw out was a rearrangement of the County’s Prop 172 funding. Prop 172 was a permanent sales tax increase approved by the voter in 1993 for first responder services.

“I realize this idea would just be taking money from one pocket and putting it into another,” Mitchell said.

Currently the medics don’t get a dime of this funding.

“It all goes to the Sheriff’s Department and the DA’s [District Attorney] office,” Mitchell said. “Twenty percent could justifiably go to the medics.” A number that Supervisor Fred Stump said he and Mitchell had discussed.

In 2012/13 the County received $1.2 million from this funding source. The language in the measure is loose enough that the DA’s office has been able to qualify to receive the funding over the years.

“172 was written to support emergency services and included law enforcement,” said Supervisor Stump. “It was oriented to any vehicle with emergency lights.”

“It [the fund distribution] can be changed,” said new County Finance Director Leslie Chapman. “It is at the County’s discretion.”

However, taking this money from the Sheriff’s Dept. and the DA could leave the County simply robbing Peter to pay Paul. The Sheriff’s Dept. and DA may require backfilling from the General Fund if this change occurred, leaving the Board back where it started.

Other ideas included a resident subscription program where a family would pay a fee that exempts them from the out of pocket expenses of an ambulance ride.

“Emergency services are usually covered by insurance companies, so it would only apply to non-emergency situations,” Mitchell explained. “But it would be a good tool to get in the door and educate people.”

Billing for service rendered was another idea. Currently, according to Mitchell the following services rendered by the Paramedics are currently not billed: CARE FLIGHT transfers, diabetic emergency drug treatment, SVT cardiac emergency treatment, asthma and other breathing treatment, and fire camp and fire line stand-byes. Mitchell suggested the Board consider a substantial base service fee, pointing out that some of these medications cost between $800-$1,000.

One criticism of the program has been that the paramedics aren’t kept busy enough so Mitchell suggested the County stop contracting with a private company for Mental Health Transfers and have the medics do it instead. These are mental health transfers requiring an ambulance, and currently the contract cost is $78,000.

Mitchell’s presentation also suggested an optional, Euro-style Ski Area Subscription Fee. When purchasing a ticket, skiers and riders would have the option to buy some insurance for the day with a dollar or two added to their ticket price.

Supervisor Byng Hunt said that was a good idea, but he wasn’t sure Mammoth Mountain CEO would go for it right now, since a new tax is already going to be placed on lift tickets once the Business Improvement District in Mammoth is in place.

“Even though it’s optional, there’s still the administration of it,” Hunt said.

Lastly, claiming that it was one of the very few things he agreed with Fitch on, Mitchell pointed to raising ambulance fees as another way to increase revenue for the program. Fees were last raised seven years ago.

All of Mitchell’s numbers added up to a savings of approximately $1.1 million to the Paramedic Program’s bottom line.

Mitchell also suggested structural changes to the department for long-term viability and accountability.

“Ambulance fees are the department’s single largest funding source at $1.2 million,” Mitchell explained. “Raising the number of transports to the hospital would raise revenue.” He suggested revisiting an idea that had been discussed with Gary Myers, former CEO and current Acting CEO at Mammoth Hospital regarding incorporation of the hospital’s two ambulances into the Paramedic Program.

Mitchell also suggested creating a Paramedic/Fire District on lands outside any existing fire district such as Swagger Creek, Devil’s Gate and Conway Ranch.

“If incorporated into a County or special Paramedic/Fire District, fire mitigation fees could be collected and divided with the nearest FPD [Fire Protection District] paying them something for the services they now provide for free,” stated Mitchell’s report. “A small percentage of property tax arising from those inside a new district could be divided between the Paramedic Program and the closest FPD who would now, by contract, provide the same structural fire protection services they had previously been providing under a Sphere of Influence obligation.”

“Some of these ideas are complex and may not be logistically feasible,” Stump concluded.

“It’s going to have to have a General Fund Subsidy,” Supervisor Tim Fesko said. “It just comes down to how much. Let’s keep the momentum going.”

Sporting a mushroom t-shirt that he later explained was a Bolete, Dr. Jonathan Bourne, who many may know as an anesthesiologist at Mammoth Hospital, took the pulpit Tuesday evening at the Green Church off of U.S. 395.

As the evening’s speaker for the Sierra Nevada Aquatic Research Laboratory’s (SNARL) lecture series, Bourne brought something new to the table — a disclaimer that he wasn’t an expert.

“Unlike most Americans, I’m not afraid to eat mushrooms,” he said. “But I’m not an expert, it’s just one of my many interests. Preparing for this lecture made me a lot more informed than I was.” (His disclaimer also included a statement that he had never used, and did not advocate the use of any hallucinogenic mushrooms, but he did later explain which ones would do the job.)

Bourne was born an Australian and grew up picking mushrooms in New York. Later, he joined the San Francisco Mycological Society and has been to the “Fungus Fair,” which is held each December and puts mushrooms on display.

In his mushroom exploration, Bourne has found two things: first, the further East in Europe that you go the more enthused people are about mushrooms. Bourne explained that in Russia, mushroom hunting is more popular than many sports. Second, there is no great resource to study the mushrooms of the Eastern Sierra. He referenced the Internet often as a source of mushroom identification and study.

Breaking up his talk with the occasional mushroom joke (“Why is the mushroom invited to all the parties? Because he was such a fungi [fun-guy].”), Bourne covered the mushroom gamut from definition, to identification, to edibility.

Mushrooms are the reproductive structures, or fruit, of certain fungi. They are built to release spores and are attached to a giant, spider web-like structure hidden underground or in a substrate. To identify mushrooms, Bourne suggested either going out with someone who knows what they are doing or joining a mycological society. Methods of identification include looking at the mushrooms appearance, size, season of growth, habitat, spore prints, which trees or substrates it attached to, and by dissection.

“People compare mushroom hunting to bird watching because you get outside,” Bourne said. While birds are more difficult to photograph, once you are able to snap a shot, the bird is usually easy to identify, Bourne explained. “Mushrooms are tougher to identify.”

Indeed, there was a whole segment of mushrooms he simply called “LBMs,” or “Little Brown Mushrooms.” Included in the LBM were edible, hallucinogenic and poisonous mushrooms, so eating LBMs should be done at your own risk.

“It’s hard to identify LBMs and most people don’t,” Bourne explained.

Types of fungi discussed included parasitic, saprophytic, and mycorrhizal fungi, also known as “wild mushrooms.” Mycorrhizal fungi live in mutually beneficial relationships with trees and plants.

As for edibility, Bourne emphasized identification as the most important way to decide whether or not to eat the mushroom you have harvested.

“Identify, identify, identify,” he stressed. “Only a few species can kill you but many can make you sick.” Bourne said there had been less than 100 deaths in the past 25 years from mushroom poisoning.

Eating only young, fresh and firm mushrooms was another piece of advice he offered, as well as cooking all wild mushrooms before consumption.

Mushrooms can be dried or frozen, and they can also cause idiosyncratic reactions; some people could get sick from a mushroom while other don’t, so be wary serving them at dinner parties. Not becoming ill right away from a mushroom doesn’t mean you’re in the clear, either.

“If you get sick in less than six hours after eating the mushroom, you’ll most likely be ok,” Bourne explained. “The deadly mushrooms take a day or two to make you sick.”

It is illegal to pick mushrooms in state and national parks, similar to the illegality of picking a flower or grabbing a rock. On the Inyo National Forest, Bourne said mushroom enthusiasts were allowed to pick mushrooms for personal use only.

He then went over many of the mushroom species, many of which grow in the Eastern Sierra.

The Amanita Muscaria, or toadstool, is common in the Eastern Sierra. It has an orange or yellow cap and is the mushroom of literature, as Bourne described. It’s the mushroom used in Alice in Wonderland and for good reason. The Amanita Muscaria is a hallucinogenic and is said to make things look bigger or smaller.

“Death is rare, except for one case I found where someone ate 24,” Bourne said.

Other amanitas, such as the Death Cap and the Destroying Angel are deadly, but Bourne did not believe these grow in the Eastern Sierra.

The Coprinus or “Inky Cap” mushroom will only make you sick is you drink alcohol along with it, while a Slippery Jack has a frog-like skin that should be removed before consumption.

Boletes, like the one on Bourne’s shirt have no gills and should always be cooked. The King Bolete, or as Bourne described it, the “Arnold Schwarzenegger of mushrooms,” has a higher protein content than any vegetable other than a soybean.

Bourne’s favorite mushrooms to pick and eat in the Eastern Sierra are the Puffballs, which come in many varieties.

From deadly to delicious, Bourne covered the topic of mushrooms in the Eastern Sierra with depth and clarity, as well as a little humor. In fact, if he hadn’t told us he wasn’t an expert, we never would have known at all.

The next SNARL lecture is scheduled for May 14, at 7 p.m. at the Green Church. Dr. Peter Alagona of UC Santa Barbara will present “40 Years of Endangered Species: Conflict and Conservation in California.” Lectures are free, but seating is limited so don’t be late. Videos of past lectures can be viewed at vimeo.com/channels/SNARL.

Imagine hiking a non-motorized trail that connects between the Mono Basin Scenic Visitor Center, the gateway community of Lee Vining, Lee Vining Canyon, and Yosemite National Park. Members of the Mono Basin Regional Planning Advisory Committee (RPAC) and the public that attended its meeting Wednesday night were asked to do just that during a workshop session. The timing seemed appropriate as Tioga Pass is expected to open this weekend and many people’s thoughts are on Yosemite.

According to Mono County’s website, “The Mono-Yosemite Gateway Trail Project is a community-based planning effort to develop a conceptual trail plan for the Mono Basin area connecting the town of Lee Vining through Lee Vining Canyon with possible connections into Yosemite National Park.

“The trail master plan will include trail alignment alternatives, design guidelines, trail access points, including trailheads, wayfinding, interpretation themes, strategies for long-term maintenance and operations, and opportunities for partnerships.”

On Wednesday evening, Mono County Associate Planner Heather deBethizy explained further that the County is currently seeing a revival of trail planning. “Recreation is key to the economy,” deBethizy said.

Eastern Sierra local Danna Stroud came up with the idea to use the Mono-Yosemite Gateway Trail Project as a pilot project for the larger concept of an Eastern Sierra Trail, deBethizy said. The County applied for and was awarded a grant from the National Park Service’s Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program. The grant does not fund the Mono-Yosemite Gateway Trail Project. Its purpose it to pay a facilitator from the National Park Service, Deborah Reardon, to help put together a conceptual plan for the project. Reardon was present at Wednesday’s meeting.

The planning document is expected to identify funding sources, Reardon explained.

“I can help facilitate leveraging community funds,” she said.

Part of the process is to inventory what currently exists and look at connecting what’s already out there.

As Reardon attempted to shift from the workshop’s Q&A segment to the small group exercise of reviewing maps, opposition to the process and the idea of the trail rose to the surface.

“You’re wrecking the terrain,” said Charlotte Lange, a representative of the Mono Lake Kutzadika Tribe stated. “You’ve been shutting down trails and now you’re starting a new one.” Lange was referring to recent trail closure implemented by the Forest Service through its Travel Management Decision.

“The Indian people don’t want the land torn up more,” Lange said. “Why not leave the land sacred? We are opposing this. We want to keep Lee Vining nice and not make it look like Yosemite.”

Lange went on to explain that there are places that the tribe does not want disturbed by tourists walking over the land.

RPAC member Mark Logan agreed that the trail should not be built but for different reasons.

“The Country’s broke,” Logan said. “Who’s going to pay for this? Why throw a bunch of money at this and then have it go to hell? Leave us alone, we don’t need another trail.”

Katie Bellomo, another RPAC member asked, “Do people want this? Are we in a rushed planning process for something people don’t want?”

Fellow RPAC member Bartshe Miller pointed out that there had been three previous meetings on this topic with zero opposition until that night.

“Whenever we get serious about something, people speak against it,” Miller said.

Forest Service Recreation Officer for the Mammoth-Mono Lake District, Jon Kazmierski pointed out that the idea had originated back in 2005 when community members asked to have Lee Vining Canyon campgrounds connected to the town.

“It’s about consolidating existing trails for better protection,” added RPAC member Chris Lizza. “This way people would only be using one trail instead of five.”

RPAC member Ilene Mandelbaum, however, shared a lot of Lange’s concerns. “Can we improve the pedestrian experience but keep it in harmony with the landscape? I’m concerned about directing tourism to untouched places.”

Debethizy said that nothing is ruled out at this time, everything is still very conceptual.

Lee Vining resident and community volunteer for the project Paul McFarland believed that the trail would be a benefit to the town of Lee Vining. “It would make it less of a pass through and more of a destination,” he said.

Trying to regain momentum for the workshop, Reardon explained that she had worked in other places with issues and disagreements such as those that surfaced Wednesday night. “Sometimes it helps to take a small section of trail and use it as a pilot,” she said.

Bellomo agreed. “It’s being billed as a large project and may be overwhelming to those just coming to the table.”

“Just linking some trails would be good,” added McFarland.

Those in attendance then broke into small groups. Each group looked at one of three maps of potential trail segments: Mono Lake to the Mobil Mart, the Mobil Mart to Lee Vining Canyon, and the trail to Yosemite.

In the groups, some spoke excitedly of having the trail go right through the town of Lee Vining to get a larger volume of hiker traffic passing by shops and lodging. Fantasies of hikers staying overnight in Lee Vining the night before and after hiking the trail circulated within the conversations.

The groups then reconvened and shared the input they had come up with from concrete ideas to philosophical ones, from trail alignments to interpretive signage.

“The whole tone of the evening changed,” McFarland told The Sheet on Thursday.

“It was a great discussion,” Kazmierski also said on Thursday. “There was a diverse set of interests represented, which showed that there is an interest in the area. We just have to figure out what’s the best thing to do.”

As for next steps, McFarland said the visioning process needed to continue. To do this, people should get out and start walking.

Contact deBethizy for info: 760.924.1812 or hdebethizy@mono.ca.gov. The goal is to have a draft of the conceptual plan completed by late 2013.

“There are still trust issues in the district and bringing this up without clarity and at a meeting time where no one can attend fuels the angst.”

These words from June Lake resident Ann Tozier at Wednesday’s Eastern Sierra Unified School District Board meeting set the tone for the public hearing held at 1 p.m in Bridgeport regarding transportation within the district.

Tozier and the few other members of the public who were present had to request time off work to attend. The core issue of the transportation discussed was once again the bus routes from Bridgeport to Coleville High School as well as from Bridgeport to Lee Vining High School. A Board workshop and meeting held in April brought the topic, which some have deemed an unnecessary discussion, to the surface.

Some Board members, as well as some members of the public would like to see one of the two routes cut. Those in favor of the cuts claim that dwindling student numbers were eventually make it unreasonable to send buses from Bridgeport in two directions (see “Wheels on the Bus,” April 20 Sheet).

Those, like Tozier, who are against the idea of a bus route cut wondered aloud on Wednesday what the issue was, and why the topic had been brought up in the first place when the schools and the students are currently balanced and happy.

“There are a lot of issues with this,” stated Board member Jimmy Little. “We need to look toward the future.”

Little said that there are dwindling numbers in Bridgeport and he felt it would be unreasonable to have a bus route that in a few years would be shuttling 2-3 students.

Fellow Board member Melinda Melendrez, however, felt that Little was being too pessimistic and that the District should offer a mode of transportation no matter what. Both Melendrez and Board member Gabe Segura felt that transportation should be dealt with on a year-by-year basis, assessing student numbers and modes of transit each year.

“We should address this when the issue presents itself,” Segura said.

Yet Little felt that the issue should be resolved now to save future student classes from wondering about the fate of transit each year. He was later accused of trying to “read the tea leaves” and getting ahead of the issue.

“Why do you think there has to be a year where we cut,” asked Melendrez.

Little became emotional when talking about the way his daughter had been used as a “pawn” in all of this, referring to rumors that he wanted to cut the bus route to Lee Vining in order to force his daughter to go to Coleville.

“I question the integrity of those challenging the [busing] issue if they’re using my daughter as a tool,” Little said. “That’s divisive. If I wasn’t comfortable with either school, we’d have a larger issue at the board level.”

Little felt that the two bus routes “divided kids up and doubled exposure to accidents.”

Melendrez, however, returned to the fact that there is a bus going in both directions from Bridgeport regardless of whether or not it is transporting high school students. Currently the bus driver who drives the south route lives in Bridgeport and simply drives the bus from Bridgeport down to Lee Vining picking up students along the way. This route was created three years ago with the closure of the Eastern Sierra Academy in Bridgeport. The District promised to run the route to Lee Vining for Bridgeport students for at least three years.

If the south route were cut, the District would go back to running things the way it did previously. The bus would be housed in Lee Vining, and the driver would have to commute to work.

With still so much division on the item, Board Chair John Peters pushed the idea of hiring a consultant to do a transportation study for the District. The scope of the study has not been nailed down. Currently the only thing on the table is whether to have the study done or not.

“We need to gain all of the knowledge we can to make the right choices,” Peters said. “Neither the public or the Board is as informed as it could be without bringing in experts from time to time. Facts are the best way to drive this.”

Segura, however, was not in favor of the study if it was simply going to address the two bus routes in question.

“There is no merit to do a study if it’s just busing from Bridgeport,” Segura said. “The Board is competent to handle that.”

Melendrez was also against a consultant.

“Bringing someone in from the outside is not a good idea,” she said. “They didn’t have an answer before, why would they be able to do anything more for us now?” Melendrez was referring to a portion of the discussion at the April 17 Board meeting when ESUSD Superintendent Don Clark explained that the consultant that the District is looking at using, Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT), had already done an overall study for Inyo and Mono counties. “But the transit system for Eastern Sierra Unified was deemed a ‘unique animal’ and they didn’t know what to do for us,” Clark had said last month.

Lee Vining parent Stacey Simon had another take on the idea of a consultant and a study.

“I don’t want an answer to the question,” she said. “I’m not willing to cut the route to Lee Vining or to Coleville, so I don’t want a study for a question I’ll never answer.”

Simon also pointed out that studies have a shelf life, so if the study was conducted now before the District really needed it, it could very well be stale by the time it’s used.

Clark then presented a chart he had compiled that showed projected student numbers for Bridgeport Elementary, Lee Vining Elementary, Antelope Elementary, Lee Vining High School and Coleville High School based on the current 2012/13-student body.

According to Clark’s numbers, which he admitted could fluctuate, by the 2016/17 school year there will be 31 students at Lee Vining High School and 61 at Coleville High School, a far cry from the more balanced 58 at LVHS and 55 at Coleville this school year. These numbers are based on where students in grades 5-8 at the elementary schools told their teachers they planned to go to high school at this time.

“The kids could change their minds, but these numbers are based on what they’re saying they want to do now,” Clark told The Sheet on Thursday.

The Board took no action on the topic at Wednesday’s meeting.

Pictured: John Geyer/

In one of the most well-attended opening night lectures put on by the Sierra Nevada Aquatic Research Laboratory (SNARL), ground source heat pump expert and self-proclaimed “geo-junkie,” John Geyer laid out the what and how of this geothermal technology. The lecture was co-sponsored by the High Sierra Energy Foundation.

Geyer claimed that the Eastern Sierra has “one of the best reservoirs [of geothermal ground source heat] I’ve seen,” and explained that Mammoth should be tapping into this natural source of heat for tax-based buildings and schools.

“The proven, 60-year-old technology works as promised and is available everywhere,” he explained to the audience.

The system, which is installed mostly underground, pulls a quarter of its energy from the grid while the remaining three-quarters is pulled from the heat in the ground. Ground heat depends on your latitude.

“Which means,” Geyer noted, “that the system is 75 percent renewable, sustainable and honestly ‘green.’ There’s elegance in its simplicity.”

As a geothermal designer, trainer and consultant for 20 years, Geyer was able to say from experience that the system is 350-500 percent efficient.

“This is THE green technology,” he said. “And I’ve worked with all the others except fuels cells.”

The only downside of working with ground source heat pumps is the hidden nature of the system.

“It’s disappointing when you take someone out to see your work and they have no idea it’s there,” Geyer joked.

Part of the novelty of a ground source heat pump system is that you “set it and forget it,” Geyer repeated several times. He emphasized that unlike traditional heating and cooling systems, ground source heat is constantly on.

“You can’t have the ground give you a quick shot of heat,” he explained. So you set the system and let nature do the rest.

“You don’t need a PhD to run it. A second grader can do it.”

And once it’s set, you won’t even know it’s on, Geyer promised.

However, in order to truly convince the crowd Geyer knew he had to talk money.

“It always comes down to money,” he said knowingly. So he presented a chart, which displayed Mammoth energy costs at 1 million BTUs, over 4-5 days in a 2,000 square-foot home. The price for an electric furnace was $61.85, heating with propane was $50.92, natural gas was $18.75, and the cost to heat with a geothermal heat pump was $15.46.

So while the system will cost twice as much as a traditional system to install, it also costs half as much to operate, and the payback begins 30 days from installation when you pay your bills.

“The risks are minimal with a properly designed ground loop,” Geyer said. “Get it right once and you’re good forever.” An added bonus for Eastern Sierra locals: there’s nothing to put outside, aboveground that could become damaged by snow loads, critters or other natural phenomena.

As Geyer explained this type of system needs to be brought into the mainstream because it uses less electricity and our current system has a finite capacity. Plus California’s electricity rates the third highest in the nation, according to Geyer, so why not geothermal?

“You can create your own infrastructure,” Geyer concluded. “You get what you pay for.”

The next SNARL lecture is scheduled for May 7, at 7 p.m. at the Green Church. Mammoth Hospital’s own Dr. Jonathan Bourne will give an “Introduction to the Mushrooms of the Eastern Sierra.” Lectures are free, but seating is limited so don’t be late.

On Thursday, the Mono County Board of Supervisors met in closed session for an agenda item titled, “CAO Position – Public Employment.”

When asked via text if the Supervisors planned to choose a new County Chief Administrative Officer during this meeting, Supervisor Larry Johnston replied, “No, we’re just looking at the first batch of screened resumes, which have been gathered to date.”

In other CAO news, Acting Interim CAO Lynda Salcido was reported to have broken her hip while on a recent vacation.

On Wednesday, the Eastside Biomass Project Team came together with preliminary rankings for the six proposals it received from consultants interested in producing a Biomass Feasibility Study for Mono County.

The Eastside Biomass Project Team is a group of local agency partners exploring the feasibility of a heat and/or power biomass facility in the County (see last week’s Green Sheet story, “Which Burn is Best?”). The first step in their process is to hire a consultant to produce the feasibility report. At its meeting in March, the Team expected to receive one or two responses to its Request for Proposals (RFP), instead it received six.

AESC, ANTARES, TetraTech, TSS, Veolia Energy and SCR were the six firms that threw their hats in the ring for a chance at the consulting contract. Prior to Wednesday’s meeting group members individually reviewed and ranked each of the proposals based on set criteria. Mono County Analyst Wendy Sugimura, who serves as staff support for the group, compiled each individual’s rankings into an overall evaluation matrix. The group then reviewed and discussed this matrix on Wednesday.

Through the ranking process TetraTech came out on top with TSS, SCR, AESC and ANTARES following closely behind. Veolia Energy trailed in the last position, in part due to the huge price tag attached to its proposal. At nearly $150,000, Veolia’s fee proposal was nearly three times the $50,000 budget the Biomass Team has to work with. TetraTech was over budget as well at approximately $88,000 but the group still wanted to keep them on the table and hoped the firm would “sharpen its pencil” and negotiate on price.

“All of the firms knew the budget was $50,000 when preparing their proposals, but I didn’t make that a hard cap,” Sugimura said of the language in the RFP. “I said the budget was $50,000 but that we would like to know what it would take to give a good product.”

“They were all good proposals with slightly different nuances,” said Team Member and Mammoth Lakes Fire Chief Brent Harper.

The group reviewed why each individual ranked each proposal the way they did, and discussed price, local versus out of state, and how they felt each consultant would work with staff as reasons to use one consultant over another.

Members agreed that TetraTech, TSS and SCR were the firms they would like to look at further, but rather than re-ranking to make them fit the top three slots, they ultimately decided to offer interview opportunities to the top five firms on the list, which also included AESC and ANTARES. Veolia was thrown out because of its high price tag.

“I expected proposals to stay within 10-15 percent of the $50,000,” Sugimura said of her surprise at the price discrepancies. Team members agreed.

The Team hoped that concerns surrounding each of the firms would be vetted during the interview process. For example, Sugimura was concerned that SCR had the technical expertise needed and was afraid she would end up having to manage them to a greater extent then the others. Others such as Mono County Supervisor Byng Hunt felt that TetraTech would be too big of a firm to work with.

“They are so big and broad, we’d be small peanuts,” Hunt said. “I’m afraid we’d get lost in the mix with them.” He also pointed out that TetraTech had zero experience in California.

Concerns such as these surrounded each of the firms, so the Team began to compile a list of questions to ask during interviews that would address each concern universally with all of the firms.

Sugimura was expected to contact the firms to see if they were interested in participating in the interview process.

“They are already incurring costs [by putting together the proposals], so they might not want to spend anymore time or money on an interview process,” she said.

Interviews for those firms interested will be conducted on May 15 and 20.

The Biomass Team will also be discussing its project with the Mammoth Unified School District to see if a proposed solar project at MUSD could be entwined with the potential Biomass Facility. (See Geisel’s story page 8.)

Kimmy Fasani, Chris Benchetler host cancer awareness event

Cancer isn’t easy to talk about. Whether you’ve survived it personally, gone through the battle with a loved one, or know someone who knows someone with cancer of any kind, it’s a tough road to travel. Sometimes it’s an even tougher disease to discuss because of the heartache and uncertainty attached to it.

But Mammoth local and professional snowboarder Kimmy Fasani and her husband, pro skier Chris Benchetler, are looking to create a community where people can feel comfortable sharing their stories about cancer while enjoying the positive vibe of an active lifestyle, and they’re starting with an event next weekend.

Fasani, known in the industry as the first woman rider to complete a double back flip both in the backcountry and in the park, is an ambassador for B4BC, or Boarding for Breast Cancer. B4BC is a non-profit foundation dedicated to providing education, prevention and support programs for young people and the action sports community at large. B4BC promotes early detection and a healthy, active lifestyle as the best means of breast cancer prevention.

For Fasani and Benchetler, the desire to help is personal. While not having been touched by breast cancer, both athletes lost their fathers to lung cancer, an experience that brought them together at the beginning of their relationship.

“Cancer is cancer,” Fasani told The Sheet this week of the reasons behind her support of B4BC. “We all have a six degrees of separation connection to it.”

Signing on as a rider for B4BC gave Fasani a platform to share her story.

“It allows me to speak my voice,” she said. “I’ve been aligning myself with companies that show who I am. You only have a short time to be a role model in this sport. It’s not about the money, it’s about awareness and making an impact.”

Husband Chris is just as supportive of the endeavor, but seeing as how B4BC is a non-profit for breast cancer awareness, Fasani, as a woman, was the better choice for ambassador. The couple does, however, hope to someday start their own foundation that raises money for kids whose parents are battling cancer and might not be able to afford to send them out on the hill to ski or ride anymore.

For Fasani, raising cancer awareness has become even more important in the last few years. Her mother, Judy Fasani, was diagnosed with Non-Hodgkins Follicular Lymphoma, a cancer of the blood that is currently deemed incurable, just months before Kimmy’s marriage to Chris in 2011.

Still living with and battling the disease today, Judy will be in attendance next weekend as Kimmy and Chris host the last leg of the Shred the Love Tour, B4BC’s premier winter event. This fundraiser not only benefits B4BC’s Survivorship Fund, but proceeds from next weekend’s event will also go to Mammoth Hospital’s cancer outreach programs.

The weekend kicks off with “It’s Personal,” an intimate dinner and fundraising benefit with Kimmy and Chris held Friday evening, May 3.

Dinner is from 6-8 p.m. at the Underground Lounge with a maximum seating of 45 people. Tickets are $100 each. It will be an intimate evening where stories will be shared, including that of Mammoth’s own Danielle Bauman (formally Eastman) who has been battling breast cancer.

Following dinner the event opens to the public from 8-10 p.m. for a silent auction.

On Saturday, May 4, it’s time to get out and get active. Beginning at 9 a.m. head to the Village at Mammoth for an hour-long yoga session ($10 donation requested). Then head up to Mammoth Mountain for a Lap-a-Thon and/or some runs on the public racecourse, which will be set up especially for the event.

“The Lap-a-Thon begins at 11 a.m. and will lap Chair 1 for two hours,” Fasani explained. Similar to a jog-a-thon, the Lap-a-Thon is based on pledges for how many laps a participant can make in the two-hour time period. A $50 minimum is required.

The racecourse will be open from 10 a.m. to noon and a $10 donation is requested. Prizes for the most laps and the top fundraiser at the Lap-a-Thon will be awarded, as well as a prize for the fastest time on the racecourse. The awards as well as a raffle will be presented from 1-2 p.m. on the back patio of the team headquarters building at Main Lodge, the main meeting area for the event.

Through all of her experiences with cancer, snowboarding has kept Fasani grounded and given her a release for some of her pain. She understands first hand the benefits of staying healthy and active during hard times, which is why next weekend’s event is near to her heart.

“Snowboarding was my outlet when my dad died,” Fasani expressed. “It’s important to find happiness in times of struggle.”

To learn more about next weekend’s event or to purchase tickets for Friday night’s dinner, visit www.stayclassy.org/b4bckimmyfasani.

Advanced registration for the Lap-a-Thon is required. Visit www.stayclassy.org/ShredtheLove to sign up by starting to fundraise or donate.

Lift tickets are required for on-hill activities, but will be offered at discounted prices for those participating in the event. Adults $59, Teen $44, and Child $21.

(Photo: Blotto)

If it ain’t broke, why fix it? That was the question on the minds of several Eastern Sierra Unified School District parents at the ESUSD Board meeting Wednesday night when the discussion of cutting one of the two buses for Bridgeport students was raised.

Currently, Bridgeport students have the option of busing to either Lee Vining High School or Coleville High School. They were given this option a few years ago when ESUSD closed down the Eastern Sierra Academy due to budget constraints, leaving Bridgeport high school students and their parents without an in-town choice.

Since then the two bus routes have allowed both Coleville and Lee Vining high schools to prosper, according to parents Wednesday night because they have similar-sized student bodies.

At an April 3 ESUSD School Board workshop, however, the Board discussed the idea of bringing in a consultant to study ESUSD’s transit system, specifically to look at whether or not a bus route from Bridgeport should be cut with the route from Bridgeport to Lee Vining seemingly on the chopping block.

“Things are going well right now and both schools are thriving,” said Geoff McQuilkin, parent of two Lee Vining Elementary School students. “Busing helps that. So what issues need to be studied? What’s the problem you’re trying to solve? You’re going to need to vent these things before a consultant is hired because they are going to ask you these questions.”

Under scrutiny Wednesday night was whether or not the Board had made a decision about hiring a consultant at that April 3 workshop. If it had, it would be in violation of the Brown Act because the workshop was not noticed for action.

“Decisions were made even if no action was taken,” said Pam Haas-Duhart who attended the April 3 workshop. “Why waste money on a study when a decision has already been made?”

She added that Board members came into that workshop with their minds made up and that the phrase “transitional phase-out for a bus” was used.

“Board members are focused on their own agendas and not what’s best for the area they represent,” Haas-Duhart added.

Lee Vining High School teacher, Sarah Taylor as well as Lee Vining parent Stacey Simon both urged the Board to continue busing in both directions, pointing to Mono County’s large geographical base as a way of life.

“It’s worth it to spend a lot of money on transportation,” Taylor said. “Our geography is very spread out and all the kids can’t go to one school. So why change the busing when it has made things super positive and competitive with two, similar-sized high schools? Why set up one school to struggle with a small base?”

“We need to preserve what we have,” Simon added. “Running the bus is a nominal cost of gas and wear and tear. One year is probably the cost of hiring the consultant.” She pointed out that even if Lee Vining students were not on the bus it would still have to drive south from Bridgeport to pick up Mono City students.

ESUSD Superintendent Don Clark, whose contract was extended until 2015 by the Board just prior to the busing conversation on Wednesday, said that the cost of the study would not exceed $5,000.

The consultant that the District is looking at using, Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT), has already done an overall study for Inyo and Mono counties, according to Clark.

“But the transit system for Eastern Sierra Unified was deemed a ‘unique animal’ and they didn’t know what to do for us,” Clark said.

Members of the audience asked how the consultant would know what to do for the District now, when it hadn’t before, but no answer was given.

Brianna Brown, a middle school teacher in Bridgeport did speak out in favor of a potential bus cut.

“Bridgeport is a declining enrollment,” Brown said. “Our numbers are getting smaller so we need to look into the future, not at the current situation. Are we cutting other things because of transportation? Next year we’ll be sending two students south and four north. Are we hurting the sites by splitting these small numbers up?”

Taylor did not think splitting small numbers was a bad thing. “Sometimes two to three more students can make a big difference for the basketball team, or whatever,” she said.

Another issue that came up was whether or not it was safer to bus from Bridgeport to Lee Vining or from Bridgeport to Coleville. Arguments were made for both sides, but in a letter from June Lake resident Ann Tozier, she stated that she had statistics from Caltrans (where her husband is employed) that show it is actually safer to drive south.

Dwain Chichester, a Bridgeport resident disagreed, however, saying that his statistics from the Mono County Sheriff’s Department showed it to be safer to drive north. He also felt that it was unfair that as a Bridgeport resident he had to fund two busses with his tax dollars.

Board member Gabe Segura weighed in and was in favor of keeping the busing the way that it is.

“Putting either route on the chopping block would be detrimental,” Segura said. “The best thing for the children is to keep busing to both sides.”

But Board member Jimmy Little felt there was no good reason not to talk about it.

“It’s divisive when we have the passion we have,” Little said. “But the loudest voices don’t make it right. As a Board we also have to listen to the whispers. People have legitimate concerns but don’t want to voice them at the podium.”

Little said the purpose of hiring a consultant would be to provide an objective opinion.

Board member Bob Tems added that he would be in favor of keeping the busses running as they are now, but that the District should have a plan in place to be prepared if Governor Jerry Brown ever gets his way and cuts huge chunks of funding for transportation.

“We’ll give a choice as long as the funding is there,” Tems said, adding that he felt that the parents of Bridgeport students should have the biggest voice in the discussion.

Segura, however, disagreed. “We all have an equal voice in this. Open election boundaries mean that everyone has a voice. The school board should not be a soap box for anyone who’s having an issue at home choosing where to go.”

Some have said that Board member Jimmy Little’s daughter wants to go to Lee Vining but he wants her to go to Coleville. If there’s no bus route to Lee Vining then he doesn’t have to be the bad guy.

Board member Melinda Melendrez agreed with Segura. “Make your decisions at home and keep busing both ways,” she said. “Kids are the bottom line. Who are you to say what’s going to happen in the future?”

She also felt that people who are unhappy needed to step up. “Provide a letter if you don’t want to speak up,” she said. A stack of more than 100 letters from concerned community members was provided to each Board member.

Melendrez also felt that giving Bridgeport students the choice of going north and south was actually allowing them to become responsible adults.

The last Board member to speak was John Peters who said that the comment about the “transitional bus phase out” came from him but that the phase out of a bus was not discussed one way or another.

“I won’t debate what was said,” Peters explained. “I’m a businessman and from a fiscal standpoint I feel we have to look at planning seriously. There are people out there who are experts on the business of schools. Outside information can be refreshing, especially in a controversial situation. We should learn as much as we can.”

Peters added that the Board was working to air out all the information in public forums and was representing the entire district.

No action was taken on Wednesday. Continued discussions are expected.