11/24/06 Published letter to Pahrump Valley Times from long-time campers Bob Kelley and friends.

5/9/06 Over one year later, a 3/4" thick response to residents' concerns (see 4/7/05) about Park operation arrived from county counsel and management.  If contained no new information, was generally non-responsive to citizen concerns, and just restated previous county positions and attached copies of old documents.

3/13/06  CLM pays the county $1,819.84 for the 2005 lease of the hot springs and campground, based on an annual gross income of $181,983.50. This broke down as follows:

3/10/06  CLM provided a list of improvements to Inyo county government, which followed almost exactly the maintenance plan included in the local community's proposal, rather than their own.  It included simple repairs to electrical services, roof coverings and a lot of paint. (The county's reasoning in selecting CLM to manage the park, rather then the community nonprofit, was the "deep pockets" of CLM to do major renovations.)  They also planted a number of trees which later died, and have sinced fenced off the pool buildings to provide a single access.

2/10//06 PVT: CLM has no current plans for major improvements or ADA compliance. Previous disabled access pool costs $20 an hour now.

4/7/05 Inyo County Administrator Ron Juliff and Director of the Parks Dept. Chuck Hamilton took comments from Tecopa residents concerning a range of issues about the Hot Springs. Juliff stated that he would look into all concerns and respond to the community. Comments included:

• Private pool rentals ($20) for mixed gender bathing and audible sex activity;

• Soliciting customers aggressively for private pool use;

• Majority of full-time residents indicated they do not use pools since CLM;

• Pool chemicals higher and temperatures lower since CLM;

• Legal requirements were not met in county RFP process.

CLM Wetlands Pollution Incidents, Investigation and Citation

2/18/05 BLM Report on paint pollution at Hot Springs
2/15/05 Register story on Supervisor Cervantes in Tecopa
1/05 CLM Cited for Polluting Tecopa Wetlands

Our 12/4 Letter to the Editor    
Our 12/6 Letter to Water Control Agencies    
Download EPA Letter PDF   
Download 1 pg Report with photos   1.7 MG  PDF
12/3/04 Tecopa Treaty Officially Broken; CLM Lies About Pollution at http://www.pahrumpvalleytimes.com/2004/12/03/news/tecopa.html

11/27/04  CLM Disposes of Evidence, Polluting Again

11/24/04 CLM pollutes wetlands, Paint  is routinely poured directly into the hot springs outflow through the grate above. Please make comments!

CLM Posted Rates will go into effect on 11/4. CLM says they could still change.

10/8/04 CLM staff attend community meeting.

10/6/04  Women's baths being refurbished, and men's bath now shared on 3 hr schedule. Robin Flinchum Article 10/1/04.   

10/5/04 Supervisors voted to allow CLM's rates to prevail over current county ordinances, but contract stipulates they must be comparable to other Tecopa spas. It also states that Park must be operated in way that creates most revenue.

9/27/04  California Land Management (CLM) has arrived and is preparing to take over Management of the Tecopa Park and Hot Springs on 10/1/04. Price lists posted last week have already been taken down for further calculation. Posted CLM Rates. 

8/24/04 The Inyo County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to  sign a ten year contract with California Land Management for park operation through 9/30/2014, with two five year options to renew after that. 

1. The contract completely abrogates all aspects of the Tecopa Hot Springs Treaty, in consistent use for at least 132 years. 

2. No stipulations were included for traditional use (gender-separate, unclothed and free of all contaminants, and always available). At the 5/25/04 Supervisor's meeting, negotiators were directed to secure free or cheaper access for local residents, traditional use rules at least some of the time, and a $50,000/year specific capital improvement plan. However, the final decision gave CLM a free reign and promised 'minimal interference'. Read article.  CLM takes over on 10/1/04.

See J. Viereck Letter to Editor 9/14/04

See 9/11/04 community letter asking Grand Jury to investigate.

7/8/04 Inyo Register article about park employees. 

On 5/25/04 The Inyo County Board of Supervisors voted to direct Administrator Rene Mendez to begin negotiations with CLM (California Land Management). They asked that he include:
1. a timeline for scheduled major improvements @ $50,000/year, 
2. local concerns about maintaining traditional use of the waters,
3. including the option of bathing suits on an individual basis, 
4. free or lowered fees for Inyo County residents. 

However, they did not make these issues binding in the negotiations process. See article for CLM's dismissive response to the press on these issues. CLM proposes to begin in October, the first month with significant revenue. Download pages 1-2 of county's comparison of CLM and local community proposals.  Download pages 3-4 of county's comparison.

Talking Points for contacting media and officials:

• CLM's proposal includes raising camping fees, establishing a $5 charge for the baths and drastically changing the focus from a healing spa to a family recreation facility.  This violates the Tecopa Treaty, and discriminates against local voters, property owners, senior citizens, and low-income people. 

• CLM is making no specific commitment to improvements beyond painting. They are "waiting  a year to see if the campground is profitable". The county took the same approach in 2001 and haven't spent a cent since. We have promised a major overhaul in the next year, at very low cost.

• CLM claims they will win over the local community by 'aligning business interests' with ours. We have healing, legal and ecological interests, not just business. The only businesses nearby are their competition.

• CLM does not respond to 'traditional use' community concerns at all. 

• The huge majority of the community does not want CLM. An ordinance to make CLM's desired fee changes would violate the voters' wishes.

• If we seek a restraining order, would you send in your pledge for legal costs to fight this decision?

On Tuesday, May 4th, we submitted our responses to the Board of Supervisor's questions. the text can be read here or downloaded here.  It was in a binder which included 13 Appendixes with additional information about Pledges, Camp Hosts, Volunteers, Our new Advisory Board, photos of proposed improvements, etc. We will try to post more as time allows. We will be in Independence on May 25th for the vote on whether we get the contract or CLM.

On Tuesday, April 6th, the Inyo County Board of Supervisors voted on "a draft subset of questions with criteria designed to allow the Board to further evaluate the Requests for Proposal submitted by the top two respondents for the operation of the Tecopa Hot Springs Park and Campground." Our group and California Land Management have until May 7th to respond. A final decision on which group will be selected to operate the park and hot springs will be made by the Board on Tuesday, May 27th.

Latest criteria in pdf  form.    Compare Proposals (pdf).

On Tuesday, March 23^rd, the Inyo Board of Supervisors voted to continue the process of looking into concessionaire operation of the campground by requesting more information from two of the three applicants: California Land Management and our own proposal. In the three hour discussion that took place, they surprised Tecopans by acknowledging the importance of:

1. Protecting water quality as a unique health resource;
2. Maintaining a healing focus even if also including some recreational aspect for families;
3. Keeping the baths free or low-cost for local residents.

 The question was also raised about whether the Park had the water flow capacity for a third family pool. The one local concern they didn’t discuss very much was monthly camping rates. At the end of the discussion, which clearly showed a desire on everyone’s part to at least give a local group a chance, Michael Dorame shocked everyone by making a motion to just accept CLM as the concessionaire and start negotiations. The other four supervisors voted against him, 4-1. A new motion was passed, 4-1 again, to further investigate what operations would look like under either CLM or the Hummingbird Family Resource Center. At their next meeting in two weeks, April 6^th, the board will establish new criteria for comparison, such as a business plan for the park and a time schedule for repairs. Then, both groups will probably be given another month to reply.

Back to TecopaCA.com    Website by Blue Heronworks     Revised: January 31, 2008.

Copyright © 2004-08           Hummingbird Family Resource Center.       All rights reserved.