government, conducted only programs formulated and funded by the federal government, and was subject to close supervision by the federal government in its activities. Id. at 811, 96 S.Ct. at 1974. Despite these federal controls, the Orleans Court determined that the state agency was not transformed into a federal agency and thus the employees of the agency were not employees of the federal government. Id. at 816, 96 S.Ct. at 1977. According to the Court, the determinative question was “not whether the [state agency] receives federal money and must comply with federal standards and regulations, but whether its day-to-day operations are supervised by the Federal Government.” Id. at 815, 96 S.Ct. at 1976; see also Logue v. United States, 412 U.S. 521, 93 S.Ct. 2215, 37 L.Ed.2d 121 (1973) (<HOLDING>). Under this analysis, DDS is an independent
holding that the county government not the federal government was liable for the taking of an air easement over plaintiffs property even though the airport was funded in part by a federal grant based on compliance with federal regulations holding that employees of county jail that housed federal prisoners pursuant to contract with the federal government were not federal employees even though county jail had to comply with federal rules and regulations holding that a county had no duty to bargain with a union of its employees holding that probation department employees are not county employees holding that just because a claim implicates a federal issue or involves construction of federal law does not necessarily give rise to a federal question and confer removal jurisdiction on a federal court