UnGovr Transcript
iHow this transcript is madeUnGovr transcribes the official recording with automated speech-to-text, separates speakers by voice, and matches voices to the seated roster. Names and attributions are AI estimates and may contain errors.Verify any quote yourself: click anywhere in the transcript and the official video jumps to that exact moment, so you can check any quote against the recording.0:05 – 0:1117 turns
All right, we will call this
And if we could please have roll call
Roll call — called by Unidentified speaker 3 · 1 under review
Show transcript
≫ Good afternoon, everyone. So is there any reordering of the agenda tonight?
Not tonight.
And any presentations? No presentations. All right, and so seeing that if there's anyone still looking to make public comment non-agendized make sure you have your speaker slip. If so then we will go ahead and open public comment for our non-agendized items and just not be accepting any further speaker slips.
We have two public comments We have John Roehner followed by Kevin
Little.
Good evening honorable mayor, council members, city staff and all others in attendance. All right my name is John Roehner and I wanted to introduce myself as a new public affairs manager for SoCal Gas. I cover San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara County. I like to say my coverage territory is Hearst Castle de Carpinteria, and it's the best, it's beautiful. I recently took on this role after Tim Mahoney retired about middle of the year last year. And he was in the role for about 27 years so very large shoes to fill.
My goal is to just get out and put a face to the name and let you know that anything that you would have reached out to Tim Mahoney please reach outs to me And I also wanted to state that SoCal Gas remains committed to supporting local governments and communities to provide safe, reliable and affordable energy delivery today ready for tomorrow. And please don't hesitate to reach out. I look forward to working with everybody here and thank you for your time.
Thank you very much. Is it possible to have you maybe leave your business card so we can get back the contact information? That'd be great.
Perfect. Thank you
very much.
Thank you
for coming
by. Okay, and then we have Mr. Kyle Levin.
Hello, City Council. Thank you for the time. I'm just going to take my two minutes of public comment to read aloud my letter that I sent 10 days ago to the city's council for the public record. Dear esteemed elected representatives of the great city of Buellton, thank you for your noble work executing the direction of our civic bureaucracy here in the beautiful geographic capital of Santa Barbara County.
Recently, during a November public meeting of this body I brought forward for the council's consideration ongoing concerns and issues I had regarding the behavior of management at Buellton's Community Garden. During my appeal to this body, I referenced the complaint I filed with the city on November 10th which outlines a series of increasingly alarming circumstances directly culminating in the targeted expulsion of a specific community gardener myself from Buellton's Public Garden.
At that time, I urge this council to make themselves familiar with the details of my formal complaint. I further urged action based on the details provided in that complaint to the city given the degree to which my family has suffered disenfranchisement of our rights as residents of the great City of Buellton to participate in all public forums Within our great metropolis, it is my opinion that the City of Buellton is required to formally revoke the Buellton Community Garden Organization's social license to operate in our city.
I see no alternative for the city given the non-profit entity's flagrant disregard for its stated purpose of providing a garden for the public's benefit. I have pointed out through specific documentation to the city's legal counsel, not only various specific violations of my personal rights as committed by the garden organization but also material ongoing harm being perpetrated against Buellton's community of gardeners, tangential organizations and the city itself. My official correspondence and documentation serve as notice to Buellton that the above referenced organization does not appear to be operating ethically or indeed legally within the borders of our great city. I ask this council weigh my appeals alongside the evidence I furnished, then move to deliberate a course of action to restore the city's public garden into the public domain.
As an active community gardener, community organizer, composting and seed-saving permaculture advocate, I avail myself and volunteer my services in support of all efforts the city makes towards accessibility for all residents to public gardening resources. Thank you for your attention and concern.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
0:11 – 0:238 turns
And just to confirm, Councillor, you've received the documentation being referenced? Yes. Thank you very much. Is there any further public comment this time?
No more
at
this time.
Thank you. We will now move to the consent calendar we have available for us, items 1 through 7. Is there...
Yes before you approve I do want to note that agenda item number 5 has a typo on attachment one it should reference July 2025 to December 2025 report instead of through December 2026. Thank
you very much Before we look for a motion to approve the consent calendar, would any City Council member like to pull an item?
Agenda Discussionitems moved / continued / pulled — click to expand
I'd like to pull Item 6 please. Okay and so we'll remove Item 6. Is there a motion for Items 1 through 5 and 7 at this time for approval? I
make a motion to approve.
Okay and do we have a second?
All right and so we will go to item six Establishment of City Council Priorities for 2026 and I guess Council Member Hornick if you'd like to speak on that item?
Yeah um I just was hoping to run some questions by city manager Scott Wolf who is not present tonight so he's gonna request to table that to our next meeting
Thank you. Do we need a motion or do we just do a continuation? Everyone good with
that?
We'll move this to the next meeting if we can. Are there any public hearings for us?
Thank you for coming tonight.
Thank you. I see how my customary effect on the audience. Um yeah, they were the lucky ones. Yeah You are not however 1000 trees. Uh just want to say that's rolling along, but I did want to Follow after the holidays. We have some trees left over that were available at 50% discount for So I was hoping to, I'm not sure if it should be necessary but I believe we were talking about storing some of those trees temporarily in boxes alongside the parking lot of the Wilmington property. And while that is there, while we're scoping this site, we noticed irrigation lines are pretty torn up and some of those areas and some of those trees are pretty Pretty much in need of some serious trimming and maintenance. So I just was going to ask staff to take a look at that and see if there's some standard maintenance stuff we could do.
And ≫ Should I bring up anything else? ≫
I have a whole thing, too. That's all. ≪ I'll cede my time to you unless you want to. It sounds almost more speculative now. I believe you're wanting to talk about our trip to Sacramento is what you wanted to say.
Okay. Yes. You attended some meetings and I was going to ask questions about the meetings you had in Sacramento with some of our state legislatures and thought it would be cool if
Just a shout out to the Triumph Foundation. I fell in on this deal with, they're the wheelchair-bound people and they had an event on Sunday so I was there volunteering with the Vikings and then I ended up, I sent a little note out and the guy, this is rugby on wheelchairs and he actually calls it murder ball And these guys come down and they roll it at each other and chase like basketball, rugby, and they hit each other. It's like bumper cars. And Carla said she was down there. I missed her playing but I went down there and I was in there for three rounds myself and got a nice blister out of the deal. But I just wanted to It was very fun and they enjoyed the venue very much.
I think it's in Santa Clarita, but they're kind of, but they come up here for events and also North County as well. So they try to get centered those people from Santa Maria and the north county that hadn't built until people didn't shorter for everybody. And it was a good event. And I'd also like to say thank you to the Aquatics Foundation and Mayor Silva for coming out and jumping in.
We had a good time, and I think we had a good turnout, and it was a good event with awareness. So I was hoping more people would show up, but maybe we'll do it on a warm day next time. And also, I went to the by the school when they had the auditions for Annie and there was probably 100 people in line. And it's what I just wandered in and just see everybody and they were all excited and so on. I didn't get to get back but I guess it went two days and they did all their additions and I just wanted to give a shout out The arts and culture committee are putting that together, and you're supportive of it. And I think it's going to be really good. Thank you.
I'm going to reiterate some of People are excited about what the Aquatic Center is going to bring to this community, and I think people are very invested to see Solvang and Buellton working together to make that happen. So it's very meaningful that both of these cities are working together to make this dream really come true for the residents that live here.
The other piece I was going to add on about the Triumph Foundation, because I also went to this event just for kind of public knowledge. They're much more than just adaptive sports. Their mission is to help children, adults and veterans to basically triumph after spinal cord or injury disorder. The Adaptive Sports Program is just one part of what they do. They actually have a pretty robust program through the city of Burbank I'm going to David, who is the man who has basically founded the North County branch of this. Basically said when people are in the hospital and they get injured, the doctors typically say okay you're injured and then that's that. And then that's where Triumph comes in to offer this kind of hope idea that your future looks different now, but you're still perfectly capable of still maintaining the quality of life that you had before.
So they also offer in addition to wheelchair rugby they offer like adaptive fencing which I actually got to experience at the Long Beach conference. They also offer power soccer and they also offer one other sport that I can't think of off the top of my head Yes, and basketball. Thank you very much. Yes, and basketball. And so it was just an incredible event to see differently abled people being able to participate in the sports program but one thing I'll say that the most moving part of it was when I was playing we had differently abled people of different ages there were two little girls that couldn't have been more than the age of like seven or eight they're a little and then you know you have able-bodied adults It's very unusual to actually see a community event that every person can participate in.
And I think that that's a really beautiful thing about adaptive sports and to Councilmember Sanchez's point, they are very much trying to build their program out and kind of expand up through North County. So I'm hoping in the future that they plan a lot more events here and we can get more exposure to these events It was just a really great event and I'm very, I was more than pleased that they chose Buellton to be the place that they decided to have this event. So it was very exciting as you know thanks and that is all thank you
≫ Great. Perfect, thank you. I have a lot here. Just to further build on to thanks to everyone who came for the polar bear plunge one thing I do want to say that we've often wondered is when we did the little challenge with solving, the piece that we do want to say is that we were able to announce $250,000 was additionally committed by the tribe at that point and part of that is just because of kind of the energy and everything going on that communities are stepping up where they're able to leverage Thank you
for joining us.
A month ago? Time is an enigma anymore, but at some point between the last meeting and now we went to Sacramento. And during that time we met with the staff of Assemblymember Greg Hart as well as got an actual meeting with now Senate Pro Tem Monique Lamone. And for both of them, we were able to talk about some of the concerns facing Buellton. But the number one that we spoke about was issues that we had experienced and expressed here on this dais on how do we provide We've talked about the struggles we experience from state legislation, that those who live locally don't have any kind of benefit necessarily available to have a priority given to them for living in the community that these projects are being built.
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0 motion to approve. Okay and do we have a second? I'll second. Great Okay,
Show transcript
We were not given any solutions for any reasons or that, but it was just kind of expressed that both myself and Vice Mayor Mead were talking about how it's difficult for communities who are willing to engage and be supportive and participatory with affordable housing. To not be able to have a guarantee element of that narrative that these are serving your neighbors in your local community. So we asked them to talk you know what our options then we're we're able to speak with staff and we followed up with staff just to get the conversation going I know at one point we've added in our priority list about looking at a housing trust to look into flexibility, but this really comes from a state level that I think we have to have that conversation for.
Prior to this, I know that we had attended meetings put on by Supervisor Laura Capps talking about cities being more willing It's really difficult to consider allowing or prioritizing and working for getting city land opened up for housing, for affordable housing when we don't even have the means of making state legislation work to make that work for the City of Buellton. So we were just trying to say how can you make affordable housing happen in your community but how can you make it work for your neighbors? So there was a lot of conversations taking place within that. I'll pause now as I feel Councilmember Hornick's eyes bore into me.
0:23 – 0:338 turns
I want to say thank you for that.
Thank you. And it was something that I think the staff, especially for Senator Lamone, it was a little bit of... It was a new problem they had had. No one's really approached being like how do we help locals get housed? Like we don't usually have that level of nuanced conversation so I was glad to at least start that discussion going on with it. Something else I just wanted to bring up to make you aware is that the city of Lompoc in partnership with their law enforcement has done a lot of riverbed I just want to make everyone aware that as many people reported there's been a bit of an increase in unhoused people present within the valley.
We are seeing because of the action taking place within the riverbed it usually displaces I just want to piggyback on that, too. I just want to piggyback and say a shout out and thank you ≫ Good morning, everyone. We are moving right along. So now we get into all the other meetings going on so I apologize how long this is going to take. We were able to get a meeting between Dr. Adam Bailey and Lieutenant Travis Henderson to start having a discussion in coordination of how to have emergency services prepared and normalized between the school district, I don't know what the proper grazing is, but when there's a suspicious person on line possibly with a weapon. I'm not sure what we call that these days, but that was discussed as well. So that took place and I'm grateful for them to follow up with that.
We had a meeting so there was a hub meeting that was called which was between the county's office with Joan Hartman solving the tribe and then the city of Buellton The reason for this was that earlier on we had a, it's called a CWPP, the Community Wildfire Prevention Plan. We all signed a letter trying to get this funding from the state to bring a grant funding for getting a valley-wide community wildfire prevention plan made.
Usually it's funded if there hasn't never been one who hasn't. We wrote a letter in support. It's about $280,000. The grant was denied. So we were contacted by the Firewise Council that this was denied, and they informed it. And I had pushed to say okay well we can't really say no to that necessarily these are things have to solve so I asked if it'd be possible to convene a meeting and I'm very grateful to Supervisor Hartman's office for helping facilitate bringing us all together to talk about We had a chance to talk about how maybe the tribe solving the county and Buellton could work together to either apply separately for grants, how we could talk about what type of funding is available within our own budgets at this time to make it happen.
But to really acknowledge that it's not really an option to not have a wildfire protection plan in place. If you get one of these in place, it allows a lot more state and federal funding for wildfire mitigation plans and wildfire. Most communities focus on an evacuation of their area. None of them had folks talked about the evacuation route goes directly through Buellton, and so we need to have a coordinated evacuation plan taking place for that. So we're having that. It allowed then for SBCAD to join for the River Trail conversation as well to talk about phase one and two. So there's a discussion First phase, work phase for that. So they have the funding secured and it does look like the 1.7 million that the tribe secured from the federal government is seeming to be able to be realized and received.
And that will help with getting some of the design pieces taken care of for the entire one but also it means that Buellton's design portion is looking to be fully funded to get that going so we can deal with our face first. There's no reason to wait for Buellton to move forward with it to get the other people in line. We have the luxury of the funding secured, the easements theoretically in place and we can get started on our design piece so Buellton is leading the charge for that one.
I'll pause, I assume, for
that. The luxury because the staffs could work right? That's it. Oh, yes, it has a luxury because stop was on the ball.
Yes. So there's that piece so that takes care of one. The next one we have is attended after the polar
It's been a while since we've had a staff report back. Oh, yeah.
So a CWPP is more of like an act as a plan that's more based on like regional so like we would have our cert program so they identify when in the CWPP it's like an objective third party that identifies here's your area here's your risks and then they would say your vulnerabilities and then cert would be the ones to like fill the gaps that we need to train our cert on evacuation procedures They're more of creating a data-based standard. So when we go out to grants for things, we have a community wide plan where CERT would be just for Buellton to solve for. So Buellton's CERT would execute plans within the CWP. Thank you.
Next up after the Polar Plunge, I went to Lompoc to the Communify event on their 211. There were 65 organizations there that range from mental health resources pop-up medical screening events for vision and diabetes and caretaker support for people who are for medical caretakers and things like that And I met with the CEO who is in talks about how to market more of these services to our Buellton and Valley residents since they haven't had a lot of opportunities to do so. But there were a lot of different organizations out there who can assist people in very specific ways. I know at one point, I went to find out what could help Buellton. I started shopping for myself like, I could use caretaker support, how lovely! So I just wanted to put it out there that Communify, if you go on their website, you can see all the organizations they have with it and they'll be coming back to follow up with us at some point to do outreach to let you know of ways that they could help serve people at Buellton.
Moving along, I would have had the luxury to go to the United Boys and Girls Club event on Friday. I just wanna acknowledge that we give all those gold cards but we had seven children receive their blue card. There will be a poster of those winners that'll be at the library if you'd like to go see the local kids who got their blue cards but we also have to celebrate that Sylvia Abara who is our assistant director for the Local Boys and Girls Club was named Assistant Director of the Year so it just kinda continues to show that Buellton small but punches above their weight for what they get going with them.
Next up, I also wanted to piggyback on the Annie musical. Thank you to Alison Fiery for everything she did. We had over 100 kids auditioning for it and a lot of staff volunteered. I know Candace Signa was there and others to make it happen. It was a really well done production. It felt very American Idol like the first episodes before you kind of get bored on this season but it was really neat to see all these kids come out but the number one thing I heard from it was parents saying how excited they were to have this opportunity for their kids and so I just want to thank this Council for Arts and Culture Thank you for everyone supporting that.
There's still more to go, so I apologize on this how many we're going to talk about. The Village Senior Apartments have opened and thank you for also Vice Mayor Mead who was in attendance for the ribbon cutting with me during that. At the time there were 22 units currently leased and they are working through that as well so there are more people moving in at the time.
If anyone hasn't had a chance to go by, you can stop by and there's the front office woman named Carla can speak with you if you'd like to be able to see one of the unoccupied units. You could see what they look like but that is available for you and thank you for everyone who came out to make that possible. We need to give a thank you to the Rotary Club who did the trash cleanup on McMurray Road. I was not able to attend, but they removed a dumpster worth of trash on McMurray, so thank you to everyone who made that happen and to the Rotary Club for bringing that together.
There's also a brainstorming meeting at the library to talk about how better to serve, so I think we owe former Mayor Holly Sierra and that entire Friends of the Library are doing more outreach of what the community wants to see in the library space. Thank you for everyone who attended that to bring ideas to that one. I was able to attend, I just did it myself, a door knocking on the avenue for Buellton Garden Apartments. So I went through every person living on the avenue with a paper and hand flyer in Spanish and English so I thank city staff who got that together and translated it just to make them aware that applications were available.
They did close that, they extended it one week but Buellton Garden Apartments accepted And they'll start scheduling interviews, but I did try and get at least a paper out to every person living on the avenue to help facilitate them getting their applications if they wanted to. Finally, I just want to check from public comment tonight. I just wanted to confirm with our councilor with what was brought up as a concern you had all the information documentation needed to respond to the concern by the resident this evening? Yes sir yes we did perfect And then finally, I just wanted to thank the council. I know Vice Mayor Meade, Council Member Sanchez, myself and Council Member Lewis were able to attend. Council Member Hornick was there in email spirit for the special meeting we all did for that and it was a Saturday given up on city staff time too as well so thank you guys for that to update our priorities or update our agenda but also to establish our priorities for the year which has been continued to next meeting so we can talk about more but I just want to thank you all for giving up your Saturday morning to do that and I think with that I can stop talking for a moment Great.
Is there any written communication tonight?
No written communications.
All right, any committee reports? Council Member Hornick? I
0:33 – 0:4919 turns
don't think so. Trying to remember what the last time we had a meeting was.
While you ponder, Council Member Sanchez do you have anything?
We did, I did have a CCWA meeting and we are getting a new director over at CCWA and he'll be coming in for the next meeting. There's a meeting at the end of this month and I'm gonna miss in April I'm going to be out of town I think for the The second meeting, so I think my alternative was Carla. And so we'll try to get you in the loop and we only do 2% of the water but we still have a vote.
Anyway and then I think that's it.
Were you going to join by Zoom John?
Yes.
You are okay. We just need the address
right
thanks that's April 23rd meeting
Vice Mayor Mead, any committee meetings?
So this meeting focused on some legislative updates, the potential federal impacts of medical and homelessness services and the adoption of a 2026 work plan. so the committee's priority for this year are going to be seniors and aging parks in open space and early learning and child care with homelessness and behavioral health integrated across all those 3 topics.
As a comment in the meeting, essentially homelessness and behavioral health are two really big themes that people mentioned that kind of bleed into everything else. And so that is why they're being worked into the other basically the three main topics. And then the committee also renewed statewide advocacy priorities and the proposed state budget that includes 500 million for homelessness programs now tied to new accountability measures.
It was my first meeting. It was very interesting. The next meeting will be in person in March on the 26th, so I will be attending that and I'll just keep the council posted on the fact that as legislature comes up that this particular committee wants us to lobby for or talk about,
So back to me again for a longer update. So first off was Air Pollution Control District, there was a fine that was placed on a local grower for a pollution violation And part of the agreement they have with that is in the funds received from a settlement, part of it goes to the community that was impacted negatively from the pollution. It ended up awarding $60,000 and two grants partially for the Buellton Union School District to do air filter replacement And then part of it was actually for the Children's Museum to do an air based exhibit so they, the $60,000 I think it was like 1545 I'm not exactly sure but 60k was approved both to the school district and the children's museum. So that was something that was approved by the AP CD board.
We're going to move on to SB CAG. It's the last portion. I have to check the final segment of it, but it gets you up to where it needed to go into around the zoo area. That does not mean the project is done. Of course we just now have the money to do the project. I think they are still planning for it to be completed by 2028, but the 101 widening has been completed for funding securing.
With that in mind, the SPCAG is starting to look I'm going to go ahead and get started. I know the 166 corridor is being brought up quite a bit between Santa Maria and Guadalupe as a priority that has been not dealt with very much. As part of their already funding plan, I think it's a $15 million project that they're looking for. That's on the books in planned for it.
That seems like pretty wide range ranging piece that that's just the maintenance and updating of it. Councilmember Hornick. I think it's important to note that the corridor study that we had asked for from a city standpoint is being worked through within Caltrans staff and should be getting back to us soon. I just think of it as a different context that was at the top of mind that you need to report back to us, so that's a promise element with it. That did open up a conversation though that it might be worthwhile though as we look at the skinning I'm going to go ahead and get started.
The top, the agreed upon numbers to do forecast population that then bleeds into arena numbers. So with that in mind, the big takeaway was for turret sounds weird to have to say this but fertility rates are down and mortality rates are up so that was a weird. ≫ Good morning, everyone. I'm going to ask them to do a breakdown of expected economic impact for these industries because if health care is going to be the fastest growing one, it might be good for us to plan accordingly that if that's also going to be the main economic driver. Most of Santa Barbara County has historically been viewed as ag being one of the great pillars but healthcare might be competing with that now in terms of jobs and economic pieces. It also allows us to have a discussion about how most of SBCAG's thoughts have been focused on commuters but not dealing with senior mobility, ADA mobility as we see that as the highest growing population.
So how will those services be able to accommodate the growing need of our senior population that is seen to overtake our workforce population in the next? Thank you, Mr. Chair. So do we get any hint at what our RINA numbers might look like next cycle? There is no RINA number predictions for that. It is just to say, what they have to agree upon is when using any kind of figures for RINA these have to be established as the numbers used for that so they give the numbers and then the decisions are made from them And then finally, nope that was SPCAG piece there. Oh the only other one I wanted to say is thank you to those who helped us get the 300 responses to our survey for the Williamson Green.
Staff will be synthesizing the data to be ready to present at the next ad hoc meeting for the 100 Hills site Williamson Green site which will be Wednesday February 18th from 6 to 8 p.m. at the library and so myself and council member Hornick will be there to discuss I'm going to be out of town that day. More to come. It's always, we're doing it live here, so
great. All
right, so we will follow up on that offline. Okay! And now time for business items. As a reminder of how we're handling business items, if anyone's looking to make public comment, we do ask that you submit public comment before opening public comment for each item and so I will turn it over to our... Are we going with Deputy City Manager tonight since you're sitting in that role or just plan? Do you want to be Finance Director? Just
Finance Director.
Okay, that
works. Okay.
Finance Director, please take it away.
Business item number eight, approval of transportation impact analysis TIA guidelines February 2026. And the staff contact is Irma Tucker contract city planner.
Thank you and good evening Mayor Silva and members of the City Council. As Ms. Zamora introduced the item this is the approval of a transportation impact analysis Also referred to for short as TIA guidelines. Just a little bit of background to start earlier this year, the council authorized the scope of work with ATE, the city's transportation engineers to assist with updating the interim TIA guidelines.
Which had been previously developed in conjunction with the draft land use and circulation element update, which was undertaken back in 2020-2021. The prior guidelines were intended to be interim with the goal of updating them when more accurate and appropriate usable thresholds were developed as part of the comprehensive general plan update, which is currently taking place. So this resulted in some proposed revisions to the interim TIA guidelines with the intent of making them the actual official TIA guidelines And these are set forth in the attachment to the staff report, which is part of the agenda packet.
The updated TIA guidelines represent a more user-friendly and implementable tool for traffic impact evaluation with standards that address the specific current traffic circulation and mobility concerns with the city. The guidelines address the following key issues. Alignment with the goals, policies and programs currently being developed for the city's Comprehensive General Plan update.
Consistency with new state CEQA guidelines such as VMT reduction that's VMT stands for Vehicle Miles Traveled Reduction which is a method to evaluate traffic impacts under CEQAs The guidelines also propose circulation assessment tools that are tailored to reflect Buellton's unique small town nature and its location at the crossroads of two regional highways.
We are implementing, I have already started to implement more early interface with Caltrans in conversations regarding development projects and the guidelines address better interface with Caltrans district policies regarding circulation impacts and needed infrastructure improvements to address growth not only in Buellton The project is being developed in Buellton, but also the growth in the surrounding regional area. Some of which some of the traffic funnels through the city and finally the TIA guidelines are proposing refinements to the criteria used to evaluate development project based traffic and circulation impacts.
And these would be projects that are in the pipeline and anticipated in the future. So just a quick review of the TIA guidelines, quick overview. There are two parts to the TIA guidelines. The first part is the local transportation study and this includes procedures to identify potential operational issues when evaluated against the city's circulation and transportation policies. So basically these are the local standards that we will use to evaluate Development proposed development projects and part 2 is the VMT analysis, and this includes procedures to determine if a proposed project has significant impact under CEQA based on VMT.
All projects applying for a development permit or other applicable land use permit will undergo initial screening by public works and planning staff to determine if an LTS, or VMT, or other focused analysis is required. The most major development projects would be required to do a local transportation study. This is the most sensitive to local circumstances and consistency with city policies, and this gives the City the most control over how impacts are mitigated.
Some projects would be subject to the vehicle miles traveled analysis particularly if CEQA is involved. And vehicle miles traveled measures the per person or per employee number of vehicle trips generated by a project and distances the vehicles will travel to and from a project. Rather than congestion levels at intersections, which we are used to seeing as evaluating as LOS. So we're trying to balance out the length of vehicle travel as well as local congestion and the local congestion on local streets will still be addressed under the Local Transportation Study portion of the guidelines.
And I would like to note here that Not all projects will require a VMT analysis. There are several types of projects that can be presumed to have less than significant impact, and generally smaller projects and local serving projects would typically be screened out. So the total fiscal impact on the city budget would be minimal There would be some additional routine staff time involved in screening potential project applications to determine the extent to which TIA studies are required.
However, once permit applications are submitted and fees are paid, staff time and other expenditures would be passed through to the project applicant. So the recommendation before the council tonight is that the council adopt the draft transportation impact analysis guidelines dated February 2026 and set forth in attachment one to the staff report. And thank you very much, that ends my presentation I'm available to answer any questions of the council.
0:50 – 0:5512 turns
Thank you very much. Do we have any questions for staff before we go to public comment?
Yeah I have a couple questions. How much is Caltrans involved in, I mean they have their own departments if somebody wants to put a driveway on Highway 246 does that have to go through Caltrans or do we deal with it? If we have a project do we deal with Caltrans and say this is where we want to put a driveway and how many trips in and out?
So typically as we have done in the past Encroachment permits from Caltrans are required for any type of improvements along Highway 246, including new driveways. And what we are doing and we've implemented this already is the city is actually reaching out to Caltrans early on to have the conversation in terms of what standards they would be looking at, rather than simply conditioning a project to apply for conditional use permits. So we are working more closely with Caltrans on that.
And did they have the final word on that or if we ask for something and then the Caltrans guy comes out says, we don't allow this big a driveway here. Or is this too close to the center section? Or
is that Caltrans has standards for how the driveways are designed Um, the width and distances in typical distances between driveways. But they are looking more and more to the city for policies that guide the location of those driveways And we're working together on how to minimize potential traffic conflicts coming in and out of the driveways, particularly along busy stretches of Highway 246. So they are looking to us for policy guidance on placement of ideal placement of driveways as well.
We would check with them first before we submit something that's out of the question. I don't want to waste a lot of time I just want to make a comment on something. If they have the standards and we can read the plans, is that I just don't want to have some dream of something and then come tell us you wasted all your time and you got to move your driveway this way or that way because it's there. So I just wanted like a streamlined report together.
Yes, that's exactly the objective And they're, we've been able to get meetings with them early on and have early on discussions about those types of issues.
Thank you very much. Any questions Vice Mayor
Mead? No questions at this time thank you.
Any questions Council Member Hornick? Yeah a couple thank you so
Erma, could you just explain to me a couple of things about our level of service? I think it says on page 57 in the report here we say that we've established a level of service threshold. Level C or better for signalized or un-signalized intersections with the following exceptions. Level of service D or better is acceptable for I have a couple of questions. One is about the 246 U.S. 101 ramps, Mcmurray road, industrial way and avenue flags intersections. Why did we accept that as level of service acceptable?
Okay, so you're asking why we went with the LOSD at the following intersections. Well those are the most congested intersections surrounding the freeway interchanges and is an area there's very limited ability to make the kind of improvements that would bring that to LOSC. And really, there are mechanisms such as striping, signalization timing that will help move traffic through those intersections If we kept it to LOSC, it would really affect the ability for us to move development projects through the city.
So we felt that by being able to allow this level of service just in the key areas, this would still provide I would like to hear from the applicant on how they design the overall circulation system to provide for adequate traffic flow. ≫ That is a good summary of what I just said, yes. Thank you.
0:56 – 1:0125 turns
The long term study analysis that needs to be done. And then we're also, we overlay our own sort of analysis which is the. Help me out here
transportation study.
Is that the LTS?
LTS, the local transportation study.
Correct? That's our study okay and then of course the VMT is the CEQA analysis right?
Correct.
Okay so I misspoke um and so we're establishing thresholds here for when our local study will be triggered um and when it would not right?
Well our local study will be triggered in most instances I'm going to talk a little bit about the intersection. A slower movement of traffic is inevitable and often it serves businesses well because businesses thrive on a certain amount of traffic. Being able to go slowly past their business rather than rushing past it, so one of the things that are being factors that are being evaluated in the circulation element for the general plan update is how do you balance out It's about moving traffic quickly through certain parts of the city versus having traffic flow down in some parts of the city where it actually benefits the business community. So we're trying to balance that out, and our traffic consultants felt that this represented a good balance.
This is establishing the guidelines for the study, right? It doesn't unless I missed it which is entirely possible. It doesn't have a location-based analysis as part of the study. Is that right?
May I jump in on some of my questions maybe because I think my question and your question may be linked up a little bit if that's okay. My question was is my understanding that like this what we're adopting here is to set a threshold of most if not all projects will trigger an LTS
We're setting an objective threshold for that.
which is Vehicles Mile Travel, which is not about anything to do with traffic. It's just about how many miles of travel are being created from this project coming to a city and that's more around the state's view on greenhouse gas emissions and less about the impact of circulation and traffic within a city correct?
Correct
So the LTS would most often always happen, and that's us looking at our traffic issues. But this sets a different standard for a VMT to be required, and that's more from a greenhouse gas thing. A VMT looks more about the environmental impact not on the circulation impact, correct?
Correct.
Okay, so you've set a standard for an LTS and then we've set an objective standard for when a VMT is triggered. But to your point, most major projects would require still the LTS. This just means some projects wouldn't require a VMT?
That
is correct.
Some projects wouldn't require a VMT or LTS?
A VMT. So some projects, if they don't hit the threshold we're establishing of the objective standards would not require a VMT because it doesn't seem to be a high enough impact of greenhouse gas emissions which is the intention of a VMt. Right right I see that
but okay so that really piggyback on my question. But the location-based analysis Is that a criteria being considered for the LTS stuff or no?
Okay, I would like to understand. Yeah,
the question
is how you're asking about location based criteria but before we move there, I would also like to point out that on page 58 It talks about if there are impacts, if the LOS falls below a certain threshold that deficiency plan and recommended improvements are required. So basically, if the LOS C or D is reached at intersections these The LTS enables us to require a deficiency plan on how a project may alleviate those impacts.
So previously, CEQA enabled us to do that but right now the way the state is heading we can't do that under CEQA but we can do it under our local policies which is why It's important that we strengthen our local policies, which is what the TIA guidelines represent to give the city the ability to mitigate some of those local impacts.
Okay, that's great. So I see under here Caltrans standards. So Caltrans will require a queuing analysis for any of those intersections we identified already as the ones who are impacted at level service below C, D or below. And that's if we enact LTS or not, right?
1:01 – 1:0825 turns
Well, if a project reaches that level they'll be required to do the LTS. Yeah.
I mean whether or not we pass anything today. That's a Caltrans requirement currently.
If Caltrans feels that there is a potential impact yes they would And Caltrans would ask for a traffic study. So traffic study will be triggered, yes.
Okay. Maybe I'm approaching this the wrong way. Are there any, like could you give me an example? Are there any projects that might evade any kind of LTS?
Very, I mean there's a threshold of oh gosh. And I think the flowchart on it would be the page 54 of the agenda packet shown it sets forth the screening criteria when The project generates 35 or more A.M., P.M. peak hour trips, or 250 or more ADT. They are required to do an LTS period.
Like is there something that we're aware of just so I could put in a frame of reference? Sorry to put you on the spot. I'm just curious.
Okay, well...
But why did staff pick that as a threshold? I guess this is another question I'm asking.
Okay, so there are some examples given on the next page of the type of projects that would fall under the 250 threshold. So single-family housing, some smaller multifamily housing to general office retail uses of certain size That may not trigger an LTS. However, the city still has the ability to require an LTS if there are special circumstances and that's at the call, you know, the city's call.
So...
Okay so it's just discretionary at some point?
Well yes if there is a legitimate apparent need It would be required. And the city has the ability to determine that.
Okay, and just one other question so I understand. That table you're referring to on page 55. The D U is that what is that dwelling
unit?
Okay, so under these guidelines 51 dwelling units to have less than 250 average daily trips would not require a long-term study. Is that right? A local transportation study.
It may not require a local transportation study
unless special
circumstances
apply.
There are other special circumstances. If we go back to the screening criteria, there's a lot of text underneath 35 and the 250 number and I will just read this over very quickly. No,
no, I see
it. It adds chips to an intersection that's already operating at an unacceptable LOS they need to do a LTS if a project conflicts with Any general plan or city policies or standards they need to do an LTS.
If
the project results in operational or safety concerns, they need to do an LTS so this gives us a this is what we were going for to give the City the ability to require an LTS when our local policies um when the project may be inconsistent with our local policies and we need to mitigate the impacts
I gotcha. And this is my last, I think my last question. I'm so sorry to harp on it. That's okay. It just relates to our level of service D or better as acceptable at the following intersections on the bottom page 57. Those identified on and off ramps, McMurray Road, Industrial Avenue flags those are like Those are almost our busiest intersections, all of them. So I'd just be concerned that we are precluding any analysis for what we just said here under adding trips to an intersection that's already identified as operating at unacceptable level when we have these major intersections in Buellton We have allowed them to be acceptable. Does that make sense?
We would we would require a deficiency plan in that case is what the goal of the LTL says if so, we wouldn't we would be able to come up with a plan and evaluate the potential of mitigating the impacts
1:08 – 1:1622 turns
Okay,
thank you. So I'm so sorry. So I can understand this and just in summary from it and this is kind of me just... My understanding is that at some point CEQA was a really great tool that was able to block development taking place. And over time the state has weakened the ability to use CEQAs as that means but what we've done here is created objective standards for an LTS to say that if a project hits these things, we will require an LTS. And we're creating an objective standard so it's predictable and developers know if X, Y or Z happens you will be required to do an LTS. If it doesn't no need for one. Is that correct to begin with?
That is correct.
And then what we're doing is saying that a VMT has its own set of rules. Now, we're kind of parsing out to say like if you do X, Y and Z then a VMT which is focused on what used to be much more CEQA kind of covering everything and now CEQAs becoming more and more specific. We're saying here's our standards for an LTS, here's our standards for a VMD just to confirm that's what we'r e doing here tonight.
This is correct
Great, and then the only other question I had is that you've actually strengthened in some ways the LTS for the city so the city has greater discretion to impose an LTS. Is that correct?
Yes, we have strengthened and that was an overarching goal of updating the TIE guidelines because with eroding our ability to do it under CEQA. We wanted to be able to have the tools to do it to address local impacts.
Great, so what you would this is a summary then. So what you are proposing and what staff's proposing? What's been workshopped here is as CEQA becomes less utilized for forcing some of these studies to happen we've strengthened our local ability to examine that in a more efficient and more objective standard.
Correct.
Thank you!
I have a question. I'll piggyback on that. No, no, it's just one of the clarity questions. You said objective standards but we still do have some subjective discretion in the long-term study analysis requirement right? You said that if there are certain conditions here like in one of those identified intersections we would require a long-term study or some mitigation effect is that right?
So not only objective but possibly subjective Or with discretion, excuse me.
With subjectivity and some discretion when we're evaluating policies it's hard to define metrics to the degree which would be required to be able to interpret every single potential impact on a or inconsistency upon a policy
Of course I think that's the reason. I just want to make sure that developers aren't going to look at this and be like, look your flowchart says this you can't give me any long-term study I have to do we still have a hey actually well because of this we can't.
Yeah inconsistency with city standards policies programs I'm going to turn my direction toward Mr. Murphy here if he was catching all of that and I forgive him if he wasn't but I just want to preclude the idea
I have a clarification.
≫ Is this a tool to slow
Thank you,
Mr.
Chair.
With respect to travel, which is what we're looking at here for years level of service and the amount of trips on roads were the really important thing. How crowded are we? How congested are we? They changed that because they said They want to cut down the state, changed its policy because they're less worried about local heavy traffic and they're more worried about sprawl. And they don't want people getting on the road and driving 60 miles to get to work so they're incentivizing, the state is under CEQA, they're incentivizing more dense building as long as it brings the vehicle miles traveled down So if you can get housing close to where jobs already are, they want to incentivize that. They don't want to incentivize people having to live far away because far away is where there's less traffic.
But with respect to what CEQA is about, it's about studying impacts. And so when they took level of service out and they focused just on vehicle miles traveled that caused a city like Buellton that has some pretty heavy traffic areas to not be able to study those traffic areas under CEQA. So we had to find a different way to study those heavy traffic areas. That's the local transportation study. So let's look for CEQA purposes, we'll do your vehicle miles traveled analysis and you can see in the staff report and the other report there are things that are carved out. A school for example is carved out you don't have to do a vehicle miles traveled study for a school but Buellton would still require a local transportation study for the school because that school is going to have traffic impacts and so we're going to make them do our local study.
That's all, that's all that having two different standards does. But no, CEQA's purpose is study and mitigate. It's just that what the mayor was saying is it's been used for so long as a way to stop projects people will go in and sue and say well we don't think you studied it right and you get a friendly judge and the judge says yeah go study it again and eight years later you're still doing iterations of studies and so the state has also tried to cut back on that and not have it be used as that tool
And I don't want to have this to be a tool to do that. The term, doing a CEQA to stop the development deal is something that's been done or maybe hasn't been done you can say it one way or the other but like you said you could put eight years later because somebody filed something and all we have our own local tool right cause an eight-year...
But our local tools not going to be covered by CEQALA it's gonna be covered by When the Buellton Planning Commission or the Buellton City Council approves a project, is the project consistent with our own tool? That's a very different level of review by the courts and there's a lot more discretion to the city council or to your planning commission because you're interpreting your own law. So I'm not at all concerned about the effect of that or about people using the LTS to stop projects. I think the LTS, what it will do is really help you guys condition projects so that they don't have too huge an impact but some of the carve outs that you see in here, some of the things you can look at they're gonna allow you to say hey wait before you put a project here maybe it should go you know a couple blocks we'll use the In-N-Out.
Hey the In-n-Out where it's going to be located that could be problematic but you know what if it was maybe a few blocks in a different direction that might be perfect That might really meet our needs without causing as much traffic. It's just a study tool and it's something that, you know again there's much more deference to you as a council to your Planning Commission under the law because this is your standard it's not a state standard.
1:17 – 1:2216 turns
Thank you for the clarification. My apologies on the speaking in
general. No, no, no. You were speaking plainly and that is how it's been used. And so the changes have been to get away from that and to really... But we could slow down development with more demanding an LTA. It's very unlikely that you would because people are used to it and frankly, it's already in there is a certain your circulation element in your general plan. Already requires consistency so if a project is inconsistent with your circulation element.
It's what the LTS does, what the standards do. Really they let developers know if I'm doing certain things I should probably build a traffic study into my time frame and into my cost for the project instead of waiting to get in and having staff say it later. This is something that's on paper that a developer can look at as they're starting to think and say, okay I know that my project is going to require this. I'll build it in all my assumptions financially and time wise as I'm moving along. And so it really helps them plan for what they're gonna do.
And then it helps you guys with mitigating what the impacts are. And so as Irma said, it provides a good balance.
Thank you. Do we have any public comment on this item?
No public comments.
Great, bring it back to Council for discussion or possible motion.
Thought that was a good discussion already. Good synopsis by everybody
Well, I didn't have any questions but I would like to comment. So one of the things that has really stuck with me is the idea that this idea of being proactive. That is something that our actually our consultants talked about with me at one of the events that they had even before I was on council and I specifically asked what's the best way to get developers who want to come to Buellton and develop things? And her response was, make sure that you have standardized policies that are very clear. So when builders come they know exactly what's expected of them before they get involved in a project. So just reiterating what Mr Murphy said this idea like to be honest with you I mean I love a flow chart so having this proactive policy to inform developers what We're expecting of them before they come actually makes their job a lot easier.
And it makes it very clear to them what built in wants from them and, to be honest with you that's where that's where developers want to be. They want to be in cities that know what they're doing that have these policies in place and makes it easy for them to come in and be like yeah. We got it. We're going to do our project is this, we need to do the LTA and we need to do the VMT fine. We only need to do one or the other fine they that proactivity I think is really important for us as a city to do um to keep building these relationships with people that want to invest in our city so that is my comment
I love predictability. I'm so grateful to the staff who have done so much within this. I think it's an interesting spectrum where it's like Vice Mayor Meade and Councilmember Sanchez point about how we want to have objective standards, you want developers to feel like you come in here, you know what you're going It still retains the ability for local control, which is very rarely available for cities. So I think this is a very proactive and thoughtful way to marry both concerns of how do we ensure that our locals feel like we're doing what's best for Buellton? How do we make sure developers know exactly what they're getting so that it can be a very amicable experience to work through? And in the gray areas that are still established, that's what a planning commission is for and that's what the council's for and that's what elected officials are for.
So there's...it leaves us with wiggle room there. I don't know how you did such a great job of threading the needle, but the staff deserves a lot of respect for that because this is not an easy thing to do. And it's really great to solve problems before they get here because it allows for thoughtful discussion. So thank you very much. I know this was a lot of work on your end.
Thank you.
I'll move to approve.
Roll-call vote Passed 3–0 move to approve. I'll second. Okay, · 1 under review
Show transcript
What a lovely chat we all just had. Thanks,
everybody. Thank you.
Thank
you for making it easier and figuring things out. And Mr. Murphy too. Thank you. All right moving along.
Okay, business item number nine. Resolution number 26-02 a resolution of the City Council of the city of Buellton California fixing that employers contribution under the Public Employees Medical and Hospital Care Act at an equal amount for employees and annuitants and revoking resolution number 25-17 and the contact is myself
Mr. Mayor, before you start Councilmember Sanchez reminded me before the meeting that as an annuitant he has an interest in this and so he will be recusing himself based on that financial interest.
1:22 – 1:286 turns
So tonight staff is presenting resolution number 26-02 which proposes an adjustment to the current employer's health contribution. Under the city's personnel rules, specifically rule 14 section 14.1, the city is required to provide health benefits to regular full time employees Additionally, under California Code Section 22892, the City Council must establish the employer-held contribution by resolution and ensure equal contributions for both employees and annuitants.
The most recent adjustment to the employer medical contribution was adopted through resolution number 25-17, which set the employer contribution at a cap of $1,800 per month and that became effective this year January 1st 2026. Since that time we're seeing significant premium increases for 2026 your attachment one shows the rates The HMO plans have increased by 11%, while the PPO plans have increased by 13.31%. The lowest premium that the City of Buellton offers is the HMO premium, so the lowest family HMO premium is now $2,000 $737.51. As a result, the current 1800 cap no longer reflects the actual cost of family coverage and creates a widening gap between the employer contribution and its premium cost.
At the January 10th Council workshop, the council provided direction to increase the employer contribution at 80% of the lowest family plan and include the increase in the new 26-27 budget and return for formal resolution for that approval. Tonight's resolution implements that direction. So staff recommends increasing the employer paid contribution to $2,190 per month per employee. This aligns with the lowest HMO premium.
Employees would remain responsible for any premiums exceeding that amount. And I want to note that increasing the employer paid health contribution also affects retirees In addition, we do have some employees that elect a cash-in-lieu if they do not elect the city's health plans. And any of the reasonings behind this could be that the employee chooses to purchase private insurance or they are covered by another health insurance through a family member coverage.
For those employees who elect cash in lieu, the current amount is $1,800. Staff recommends to review the cash in lieu. To limit them out to 85% of the monthly employer contribution, which in this case would be the $2190 per month or $2,000 per month, whichever is less. Importantly that $2000 per month would be the absolute cap for the cash allowance. This structure ensures that the City's financial exposure remains capped at $2,000 per month for those in cash-in-lieu and that those payments do not escalate as the premiums increase.
And it also ensures fiscal stability while still supporting employees who obtain coverage elsewhere. And part of looking at the premiums, staff will conduct a mid-year review of health insurance premiums annually. Usually the premiums come out during summer so it's in the intent for staff to come back to City Council and revisit the premiums at that time. Council will then consider any necessary adjustment to maintain alignment with the policy goal of covering 80% of the lowest family plan As I mentioned earlier, this increase also affects retirees.
There are currently 20 retiree subscribers. Only one is currently at the max amount of $1800 so that particular retiree will now be receiving the $2190 which is an increase of $390 per month as a result of the adjustment and then all other retirees will benefit proportionally based on their selected plan So for the fiscal impact of this increase, looking at fiscal year 26-27. The projected impact is an increase of $88,920 for full time employees and $4,680 for annuitants for a total increase of $93,600. These funds will be adequately appropriated between the department budgets So staff recommends that City Council adopt resolution number 26-02 to increase the employer paid health contribution to $2,190 per month.
Limit the in lieu payments to 85% of the employer contribution or $2000 per month whichever is less capped at the $2000 and direct staff to conduct an annual premium review This concludes my presentation and I'm open to any questions council may have.
We'll bring it back to Council for questions. Council Member Hornick?
I have significant questions, I was actually going to ask to continue this matter as well. I don't want to have to have staff do a report again but if you have questions I'd like to follow up with City Manager Scott Wolfe about so I was gonna request we table this till
next
meeting.
And Mr. Mayor in light of that I should ≫ Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to probably say right now with an absence and a recusal a resolution for the government code takes a majority vote of the whole council in order to pass so if
1:29 – 1:304 turns
I don't think you need to do staff report again, at least not for me. Oh
yeah let's give staff direction for this because so...
I would like to talk with Scott and possibly you Ms. Mora just to go over some of these particulars. I have a couple questions about I would like to do that if we can.
≫ Thank you. ≪ ≦ So we will move into closed session and our next regular scheduled meeting will be Thursday, February 26th at 6pm. Thank you all for joining us.