BodyBoard of Supervisors
MeetingRegular Meeting
Date📅 January 17, 2012

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.
  1. PendingQueued for transcription.
  2. AIYou are hereAuto-transcribed and summarized; not yet human-verified.
  3. VerifiedReviewed and corrected by a person.

0:00 – 0:026 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed0:00 · ≈ 9:00 AM

¶. Good morning, everybody. I would like to call this regular meeting of the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors to order. Mr. Allen, would you please call the roll?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed0:47 · ≈ 9:00 AM

Mr. Lagunino? Present. Mr Carbajal? Here. Ms Wolfe?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed0:51 · ≈ 9:00 AM

Here.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed0:51 · ≈ 9:00 AM

Ms Gray? Present. Ms Farr?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed0:53 · ≈ 9:00 AM

Here Would you all

Pledge of Allegianceceremonial · click to expand · ≈22s recited, not transcribed
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed0:54 · ≈ 9:00 AM

please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance

All right, and now I'll entertain a motion to approve the minutes of January 10th unless there are some changes. Motion? Do I have a second? Second, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. All right I'm going to reorder the agenda just a little bit this morning and we're going to take public comment first and the reason for that is that we want to do a special recognition for our public safety personnel and our firefighters that are here like to call Chief Dyer up As probably all of you know, we had a terrible accident with one fatality on Highway 101 just south of Buellton a few days ago. And all of our public safety personnel were involved. Our firefighters after CHP were first on the scene.

So while our hearts and our thoughts and our condolences go out to the family of the person that died, there wasn't quite miraculous rescue of a mother and two children. And so Chief Dyer is here with his members of his station that were involved with that and he's going to tell us some more about it. Chief?

0:02 – 0:148 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:34 · ≈ 9:02 AM

Madam Chair, your Honorable Board, ladies and gentlemen, CEO, County staff. Last week we had an incredible rescue just south of Buellton on the 101 Freeway South. I've got a quick PowerPoint I'll go through quickly to show you exactly what happened. We had a total of 39 personnel there, eight fire engines, two water tenders, a helicopter, a dozer, rescue ambulance and air light unit, hazardous material unit, three command chief officers and a hazmat unit inspector.

So as you see through the first slide, you can see that there's a car. There was a big rig that rear-ended a car and the car is teetering on the side of the bridge with three victims inside, woman and two of her minor children. The driver of the big rig is below roughly 100 feet below the bridge. The big rig had gone over the bridge and caught on fire, and the person driving that truck had passed away. Now this incident was really a special type of incident. It was complex. You had a fire, a hazardous material incident. You had a technical rescue involved here as well as an ALS transport with three passengers In the vehicle, passenger space intrusion that we call it as a paramedic.

A couple of them had to be flown out so going to the next slide you can see what's left of the car and it's just amazing that We were able to get those three people out. But the biggest thing was we had to try to stabilize the vehicle once it was on, once we got there because it was getting ready to fall off the bridge and with the length of you know the bridge was above the ground they you know the three passengers in the car probably would have perished as well so that was the number one goal next Then you can see, as it's teetering over on the side of the bridge another aspect in here and I believe the next slide will show. Give me the next slide. No it still doesn't show.

You all heard about the Navy Seabees that were there. The Navy Seabees had a crane that they were able to put right underneath the car there to stabilize it, to keep it from going over the side. Now our rescuers also utilized a tow truck and they had no less than 10 rope systems on this vehicle to try to stabilize the vehicle and make sure because that's number one because once we started trying to cut them out, the vehicle was just teetering there on the bridge And then you also had first responders that were putting their lives in jeopardy, even getting close to the car. Next.

As you can see they're still working on the vehicle and below there roughly 100 feet below is the truck. Now the truck had leaked out roughly 100 gallons of diesel fuel out of the saddle tanks so we had a hazardous material incident. We had a fire originally and at the time we didn't know if we had rescue or not. We ended up having a recovery And then we had a hazardous material incident, which we had to make sure that the fuel wasn't running down the creek. We dyked it and stabilized the hazmat incident at the same time handling the technical rescue above.

As you can see, we had lot of personnel there. It was a labor-intensive incident and these type of incidents are, and the helicopters are waiting there to get the people out of the car and get them transported. Next. And as you can see, we have a ladder draped across there and as the Navy Seabees are in there trying to stabilize the vehicle. Next. There it is. That's a good picture right there.

We contacted the Navy Seabees. Maybe we could recognize them at a later date. They weren't able to make it up this morning but they were a huge help with this unique piece of equipment And there as you can see, we're trying to get the mother out of the car and you can see people just dangling over 100 foot. A drop there, which is it's just amazing what these firefighters did there. You know they're cross-trained in technical rescue hazardous materials. They're all EMT some of them are paramedics and you know when they show up on scene this is what you get. You get somebody that's cross trained that can do all these different type of skills next And it's just, I mean it's amazing that these three people were still viable and living inside the car.

It was just amazing and you know it took hours and hours to get them cut out. And that's part of the wreckage below And again, thank God that the fire wasn't too intense to where it wouldn't have impacted the bridge. Because I'm sure you've heard of some of those tanker fires that have occurred recently in Santa Corita and down in Montebello where the bridge was impacted and the bridge had to be replaced.

I think that's it. If the board pleases, I'd like to call the names of the folks up here if that's okay? Captain Michael Dulcheri, come on up as I call your names. You're going to come on up here. And they're all most of them you know it was kind of like trying to pull teeth to get them to show up because they just want to this is what they do. They come to work to do this and but I think it's a very special time. Engineer Fred Tan and as I call your names come on up.

Firefighter Chris Hanson. Captain Mike Klusik. Captain Sabin Perkins, Captain Larry Ryan, Captain Anthony Storinetta, Engineer Mark Acosta, Firefighter Paramedic Greg Knuckles, Captain Gordon O'Neill, Engineer Jeff Snyder, Firefighter Travis Simmons, Engineer Gregg Taylor, Firefighter Cesar Martinez, Firefighter Paramedic Jesse Esparza, Firefighter Paramedic Rob Mack, Captain Chris McCarty, Engineer Jason Toole, Firefighter Paramedics Michael Matlock.

Captain Bob Tanner, Captain Glenn Fidler, Helicopter Crew Chief Al Cuoff, Helicopter Pilot Chris Vangenberg, Division Chief Ray Navarro, Division Chief Bob Bell, Battalion Chief Woody Enos and HMU Steve Mattern. Now Chief Enos, wherever he is was the incident commander on the incident. He was the first-in battalion chief coming from the North Battalion. And I mean, it's just an amazing sight when you come on something like this. You have fire below with fuel running down the creek and then you have people's lives in danger up there. And they took decisive action and they're all heroes. So with that...

Also, I think I'd be remiss if I didn't say that we also had a lot of help there. We had the Sheriff's Department, we had CHP, we had the CBs, we had AMR paramedics, we have Caltrans paramedics and with that, we all worked extremely well together and I think you could be proud of our public safety workers in this county. They all worked extremely well together and this was a positive outcome. This is what you get when you get this type of team working on an incident like this.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed10:48 · ≈ 9:10 AM

Well, we are immensely proud of you every day. But we really want to particularly commend you for this incident because as you said it was multiple hazard and the skill, the bravery, the heroism of the firefighters and all of our public safety CHP in the Sheriff's Department is just outstanding so we just can't thank you enough. And I'm just going to see if other people on the board want to make comments. Supervisor Wolf?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed11:14 · ≈ 9:11 AM

Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you Chief Dyer for this opportunity for me personally and for the community to thank you and the other public safety responders For those of us who are out in the community, I just want you to know that every place I went after this incident people were talking about the incredible bravery and heroism that all of you exhibited.

I think what Chief Dyer mentioned about the logistics of pulling this off is quite remarkable and I think I think that's one of the things that I've always admired about public safety and you folks, is to make sure there is a good assessment of the situation before you rush in. And I think in a precarious situation like this it obviously pays off. So many of us have wanted to thank you for all your efforts in fighting wildfires and home fires But this is a little bit different, yet we know that this is something that you do all the time.

And yet we had a tragedy in losing an individual but the fact that you were able to rescue a mom and her two children Amazingly I'm speechless. So thank you, thank you very much. Thank you Supervisor Wolf. Supervisor Lavagnini?

not transcribed≈6s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7212:51 · ≈ 9:12 AM

Thank you Madam Chair. I just want to piggyback on that as well and Chief I know every time we have a situation there's not a lot like this but every time public safety steps up somebody always says well that's just what we do, that's our job. But looking at that picture that's not what your job That's not just a job. I mean, it's not somebody crawling over, crawling onto that car and digging those people out of there is amazing. Saw you guys on Good Morning America.

You did everybody proud and I'm just waiting to see who's going to play you guys in the movie so congratulations!

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed13:26 · ≈ 9:13 AM

Thank you Supervisor Lavinia. Supervisor Carbajal?

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction13:30 · ≈ 9:13 AM

I was on my way back from Cuyama that day and came across the scene, probably a few hundred yards away from where it actually transpired. We were being rerouted through the 154. So it happened to be in communication with Commander Scoba who informed me of some of the particulars but not all of the incident in terms of what had transpired. It wasn't until later that we learned all the details of the heroism and Tragedy and the complexity of the situation at hand.

But you know, I'm going to spare the long speech other than on behalf of all our residents who day in and day out value their safety and value their quality of life. Thank you for what you do.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed14:18 · ≈ 9:14 AM

Thank you Supervisor Carball. Supervisor Gray?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed14:20 · ≈ 9:14 AM

Thank you. I'm not surprised That you did what you did, and I think those three folks were just damn lucky that that happened in Santa Barbara County and not somewhere else because you got it done. Thank you so much.

0:14 – 0:217 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed14:39 · ≈ 9:14 AM

Thank you for all being here. Thank you everybody. And as we are still in public comment, Mr. Allen do we have any requests to speak from the public?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed15:27 · ≈ 9:15 AM

We have two requests to speak Madam Chair. We'll start with Dr. Robert Johns to be followed by Sherry Fisher.

CommentDr. Robert JohnsProposed · by introduction15:55 · ≈ 9:15 AM

Thank you, Madam Chair. I am no act to follow that There's no fat guys on that team so Even in the old guys, you know, so But now let's get down a serious business here If only the racism the discrimination in this county Could be could be decreased, just decreased curb by the enthusiasm that we see here in this room. Now if all of us would practice what we want to put into place with this tremendous emergency team and that team was on Good Morning America I would like Was on Good Morning America because of its inroads in discrimination, it's in roads in.

Racism and boy I've got a list of racist. Events that occur here in this county if we only could put together what happened yesterday, maybe a few people. 100 people or so in dealer gear practice. Plaza wanted to have some remembrances of Martin Luther King. And I'm no person to speak about Martin Luther King, might feel ashamed of myself even to say those words because I'm nowhere near where he is or was.

He is, he is. But when we have the fraud that was practiced December 13th in this county and when we have a supervisor who And I won't get into it totally here because there's too many people around. A supervisor who won't defend and work for his own people, Mexican-American people. And you are Mexican-American, aren't you, Carbohol? Because on December the 13th, there was a fraud implementation by this county.

And this county said we want no more fraud. And I got 49 seconds to end this up. But the fraudulent practices of someone calling themselves the mayor of Montecito, here in this little paper which I've never seen before. Now if this came out through a If it came through a legitimate, like Montecito Journal I'd say hmm yeah but this is a fraudulent practice for someone to call themselves the mayor of Montecito and that's what I'm talking about. While your wife works for the county you say hey, you know?

You practice fraudulent procedures and you far Your 2012 election, 2008 election. In 2008 that was fraudulent. My time is up. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed18:59 · ≈ 9:18 AM

Thank you Dr. Johns.

CommentDr. Robert JohnsProposed · by introduction19:00 · ≈ 9:19 AM

Our

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed19:00 · ≈ 9:19 AM

final speaker is Sherry Fisher.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 6Proposed19:03 · ≈ 9:19 AM

Welcome Ms. Fisher. Good morning, Chair Farr and members of the Board. I want to say that it's a proud moment to stand here after those gentlemen and ladies. And I don't usually tear up about public transit but I do have tears in my eyes this morning. I want to tell you that ridership on MPD's routes that serve UCSB and City College has increased substantially to the point where its 30% more than last year.

Scheduled buses aren't sufficient to provide the room necessary for the student riders. And to avoid leaving students at the stops, we've created additional service and boosters at substantial additional expense. Even so there's a lot of times when we still can't pick up students and we have people standing at the corner waiting for the next bus which may get them to school late in that case.

In an effort to provide additional space, we are considering the future purchase of articulated buses. Typically an articulated bus is 60 feet long with an articulated portion in the middle that allows the trailer to bend as it goes around corners therefore making it possible to traverse our streets. We're not talking about our Residential streets, we're talking here about our freeways. So for example the line 15 from City College to UCSB and back is a service that's highly impacted We're hopeful that these buses would allow us to serve the existing demand without increasing the level of service that we provide obviously a cost issue Potentially it might even allow us to meet the demand with a reduced number of booster trips this would be sufficient Would be important to us.

Staff has been in discussion with other transit agencies across the nation to talk about the issues of operating and maintaining these vehicles. We are not purchasing these vehicles at this point, but we are going to start a demonstration with one vehicle that will be loaned to us on a lease basis by Nova who provides some of our other vehicles. So I don't want you to be surprised if there is a 60 foot bus going down the freeway providing service between City College and Thank you. Thank you for being here.

not transcribed≈19s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

0:21 – 0:264 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed21:28 · ≈ 9:21 AM

All right, that finishes our public comment portion and we'll move on to the administrative agenda. I will entertain a motion on items A1, 2 and 3, the resolutions that are going to be presented only. So moved. Thank you. Second? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. All right Mr. Allen if you will read A1 That's fine. The first one, the first A1 is by Supervisor Wolf. Supervisor Wolf did you want to introduce

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed22:09 · ≈ 9:22 AM

this? Yes, that would be great. Thank you. I see Kathy Gallagher coming to the podium and Ms. Gallagher, I'm sure will introduce the folks that are with her. This is a resolution that acknowledges National Eligibility Professionals Month of January 2012. It's my honor to have this opportunity For folks to hear a little bit about what our eligibility workers do, as they are really the first line of communication for so many people in need.

As we've discussed poverty on this dais I think it's important to point out, as we all know importance of that human face. So when, when people come to the county for services or funding it is the face of the eligibility workers who they meet compassionate smart eligibility workers. So it's my honor to present this resolution to Ms. Gallagher to all of the eligible eligibility workers who do so much for our County and Mr. Clerk will read the resolution into the record

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed23:26 · ≈ 9:23 AM

Madam Chair, members of the Board. This is item A1. It's a resolution declaring National Eligibility Professionals Month January 2012 whereas January is designated as National Eligibility Professionals Month affording an opportunity to recognize the performance of Santa Barbara County's eligibility staff and their role in maintaining our community safety net providing assistance to thousands of individuals and families seeking to build strength and progress toward achieving economic self-sufficiency And whereas, Santa Barbara County's eligibility professionals are often the first to communicate with an individual or family in need. They're required to perform many tasks on a daily basis that require skills in handling crisis situations, analyzing financial and personal information, coordinating case management, and exercising compassion in working with community members in need of public assistance.

And whereas eligibility professionals are continually faced with reconciling an environment of rapidly changing policies, procedures and technological advances with quality control requirements as well as doing more with less due to budgetary constraints. They help identify best practices and support continuous improvement in innovation. And whereas, Santa Barbara County's eligibility professionals have been at the forefront of public social service recognizing the importance of customer service at the highest levels ensuring that those qualified for benefits receive them.

Now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors recognizes and commend the eligibility professionals of Santa Barbara County Department of Social Services In recognition of National Eligibility Professionals Month, January 2012. In addition the board encourages all to recognize the important role of eligibility professionals and the role they play in maintaining our community safety net by helping to ensure individuals and families receive the help they need passed and adopted today.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed25:25 · ≈ 9:25 AM

Thank you Madam Chair and Board. I would like to introduce to your board our two eligibility workers who are here with us today, Laura Valencia and Alejandro Passano. I am so proud to be the director of a department with such wonderful dedicated staff. As the resolution indicated, eligibility workers are the first people that our families see who find themselves in crisis. Very difficult stage of their lives.

Being an eligibility worker takes a lot of training and intelligence but it takes a very deep never-ending reservoir of patience and empathy And I am so very proud of our eligibility workers that provide that service to a very high caseload as a result of this recession. They have taken on extra work and find themselves in very stressful circumstances, so we really appreciate your recognition and appreciation. Thank you very much.

0:26 – 0:326 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed26:33 · ≈ 9:26 AM

Thank you. Our next resolution to be presented is our Resolution of Accommodation honoring Ray Munoz of the Sheriff's Department as the January 2012 County of Santa Barbara Employee of the Month. We could have... The sheriff is here? I have to say that, and I'm going to have Supervisor Carbajal go ahead and take that down while the clerk reads it. But I also wanted to say that not only do we always appreciate this time where we can honor our employees for their outstanding work but it's also an opportunity to find out different things about our employees like the fact that you have an incredible Coca-Cola memorabilia collection. So I think we'd like to see that sometime.

Mr. Allen if you could go ahead and read this.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed27:17 · ≈ 9:27 AM

Madam Chair members of the board this is a resolution of commendation for Ray Munoz, the Sheriff's Department employee of the month for January 2012. Whereas Ray Munoz began his career at the county at the sheriff's office on October 22nd 1984 as a utility worker he was assigned to the custody division and for his first three years and worked the next 24 years in his current position in special services.

And whereas, Ray adeptly coordinates and manages the maintenance of the vehicle fleet shifting vehicles to and from operations for maintenance on a daily basis. He's responsible for supervising the inmate car wash crew and ensuring that all vehicles are clean. And whereas, Ray provides much needed logistical support to major sheriff's operations such as Halloween delivering supplies and materials to the Isla Vista Foot Patrol office He remains active during the operation moving the necessary materials along the various law enforcement sites.

And whereas, Ray is the ultimate support person of the Sheriff's Office. He's upbeat, friendly, enthusiastic and always willing to lend a helping hand with a positive attitude and a can-do approach. Whereas, Ray's energy level is boundless as witnessed by his bike riding to and from work including this steep uphill climb at the Sheriff office. And whereas Ray's a big Lakers fan, and fellow workers know that even after the team's crushing loss, Ray maintains a cheerful composure.

And whereas Ray's Coca-Cola memorabilia collection is larger than that of the Coca-Cola Museum in Atlanta, Georgia. Now therefore it is hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors recognizes Ray for his exceptional accomplishments and contributions as Employee of the Month for Santa Barbara County for January 2012. Passed and adopted today.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed28:55 · ≈ 9:28 AM

Thank you so much, Ray.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 8Proposed29:12 · ≈ 9:29 AM

Madam Chair, members of the board if I may. The Sheriff's Office is an extremely decentralized and diverse organization and if you take into account our full-time or part time and our volunteer staff there's about 800 people that comprise The workforce of the sheriff's office and they are located in 25 different work sites located throughout the county is almost 2400 square miles. So it's a logistical job to be sure to try to make sure that those men and women who work each and every day to protect and serve The residents and the visitors of Santa Barbara County are properly equipped and supplied. And our special services section is like a quartermaster function in the military. These are the men and women who make sure that the men and women at the Sheriff's Office have all of the supplies that they need to make sure that they can deliver that service, and everything from paper towels to road flares to uniforms to ammunition All of it comes through special services and it creates a, it's a tremendous job.

It's a tremendous burden to try to make sure that everyone is equipped as they need to be to provide these services. Ray is a real shining light in terms of an employee who not only maintains that positive can-do attitude but is always there to give himself 100% to make sure that those functions are taken care of. And whether it's making sure that the cars are washed or Supplies are delivered, as I say, a variety of different kinds. Ray is always there to make sure that it happens and I know that I speak for all of my other colleagues at the Sheriff's Office when I say that we are all very proud and appreciative to have Ray Munoz as our colleague as well. So congratulations, Ray. Well done.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 9Proposed31:05 · ≈ 9:31 AM

Thank you Board of Supervisors. I'm honored today to receive this award, the County Employee of the Month Award at this time and I want to thank Sheriff Bill Brown, Under Sheriff Jim Peterson and Chief Peter Banks and Doug Martin. Thanks. Appreciate it. Thanks a lot. Have a great day.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed31:28 · ≈ 9:31 AM

Thank you for your service. And now the last resolution that we're going to be presenting today is a resolution of commendation honoring Michael B. Emmons, our county surveyor who's going to be retiring after over 14 years of dedicated service to the county but I think a career as a surveyor that spans at least 30 years. We're very proud to be able to honor you in this way but also very sad to be losing you. You've certainly been Such a shining light not only for Santa Barbara County in the way that you've represented our county as our county surveyor But for all the work that you have done statewide In all of the different organizations that you've been a part of so We wish you well in retirement, but we're certainly sorry to see you go And I think that all the board should go down and honor mr.

Evans here on his retirement Mr.. Allen

0:32 – 0:4210 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed32:32 · ≈ 9:32 AM

Madam Chair, members of the Board. This is a resolution of commendation in the matter of the retirement of Michael B. Emmons, Santa Barbara County Surveyor. Whereas Michael B. Emmons has faithfully served as the county surveyor for the County of Santa Barbara for over 14 years and whereas Mike Emmons began county employment on November 3 1997 as the county surveyor overseeing recording of maps record of surveys processing of certificates of compliance and managing field surveys for other county projects And whereas, prior to his appointment in Santa Barbara County, Mike worked for 16 years for Orange County in the surveying profession.

And whereas, Mike Emmons was also charged with other special projects such as the county supervisorial redistricting process. He chaired the Surveyor Policy Committee of the County Engineers Association of California, is a member of the Land Surveyors Technical Advisory Committee for the Board of Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors and Geologists and served as Secretary for the League of California Surveying Organizations.

Whereas Mike is respected throughout the state of California for his abilities and professionalism, winning the title County Surveyor of the Year in 2010 from the California State Association of Counties. And by volunteering his service as a test reviewer for the Professional Surveyor Licensing Board to ensure competency in newly licensed land surveyors. And whereas it is rumored that due to Mike's attention to detail and maintenance of his automobiles he has accumulated somewhere over 1.2 million miles traveled without one trip to an auto repair shop.

And whereas, Mr. Emmons' service to the public and his presence in the county family, in particular Public Works Department has benefited the citizens of Santa Barbara County, the surveying profession and all those who've worked with him. Now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Barbara State of California commends and thanks Michael E. Emmonds for his service to the County of Santa Barbara and wishes Mike and his wife Terry the very best in their retirement with many years of quality GPS reception.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed34:50 · ≈ 9:34 AM

Madam Chair, members of the Board. This may be a little harder than I thought it would be so I wrote myself a couple of notes just thinking about what to say but since this is the last time that I'll get to address your board I'm going to take a couple extra minutes to thank some people that are special within the county family I'd like to start with your board. I've appreciated working for your board for the past 14 years during the various projects that we've done, particularly I've appreciated your support with my decision-making and a confidence that you've had in me as your county surveyor, particularly as it relates to certificates of compliance. Those are very complex issues and I appreciate your support with that.

I also found that the redistricting process to be quite fascinating, and that was a lot of fun with you and your staff. It was quite entertaining. Next, I think I need to go to the executive team of Public Works. Public Works is a terrific department and I'd like to express my thanks to Scott McAulpin, Mark Schleich, Dacey Morgan who's no longer here but Mark Paul and particularly Tom Fairam. Tom Fairam has been exceptional for our division and always supported us and I appreciate that very much.

I'd also like to thank the members of Public Works in our department that have made my job easier with their tireless effort. People such as Richard Navarro, Larry Lohman, Mark Totram and John Frye. They work tirelessly in the department and I think they're great people and we're lucky to have them here. I have two special people that I'd like to recognize today.

One is Kevin Reddy from County Council, he spent thousands of hours with me on difficult issues with boundary questions, title interests and he's been an exceptional person to work with so I very much appreciated him. And the second one is somebody who's helped me personally with personnel issues and with just general guidance when I first got here until even today. And that's Rochelle Camozzi from the Treasurer's Office. I've appreciated her friendship very much here.

In 1981, the economic times were pretty much as they are today as far as construction is concerned. I had a family-run business that was in marble and granite and we did a lot of construction across the Southwest but that failed and I was looking for a job and I got two offers on the same day. It took me almost a year and I got two offers on the same day. One was for an auto mechanic at the County of Orange working for the motor pool which I understand now you've heard that I know something about that And the other was for a position as an engineering technician in the County Surveyor's Office.

I didn't have any idea what surveying was and I never dreamed that I would go through what I've gone through, but it's been a terrific profession and ending up here today as your county surveyor has just been a dream come true. I appreciate the people that are here and I appreciate the beautiful place that you have. Now that I'm at the end of my journey, I'd like to thank my staff individually if I may, Supervisor, for their efforts in making County Surveyor's Office the best it could be. So if they could please stand, I would appreciate it.

First, over here we have Connie Adams. I'd like to thank her. Mike Colley. If you could stand up and make sure I don't miss anybody. Jeff Havlick. Scotty Bricken. Rob Murphy. Danielle Matlosky. Rob Murphy's in the back. Jerry Minimiller. And behind Jerry is Eric Ridgeway. And Alex, who's going to be your next interim county surveyor as long as we approve item A-17 today which I hope you

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 11Proposed39:14 · ≈ 9:39 AM

will.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed39:16 · ≈ 9:39 AM

I hope I haven't missed anyone.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 11Proposed39:19 · ≈ 9:39 AM

Anybody

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed39:19 · ≈ 9:39 AM

else? Oh Todd Cullison and also Randy Jokla who is probably busy right now working in the dirt in Taheka's landfill. Finally, there's two people in my life that I need to thank. And without their support and encouragement 14 years ago, I would not have come to Santa Barbara County. I would've stayed in Orange County. But they've given me that throughout my career here and they've supported me in everything I've done. That's my wonderful wife Terri and my very special daughter Amanda.

So with that said, I'd like to express our gratitude to your board for this opportunity and let you know that if you need any auto repairs, I'll probably open a shop sometime soon. So thank you very much.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed40:19 · ≈ 9:40 AM

Thank you so very much for your years of service. All right, we will move on to the rest of our administrative agenda. Is there any items that members of the board would like to pull for discussion? Nothing over here? Any members of the public who'd like to speak to administrative agenda?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed40:55 · ≈ 9:40 AM

Yes, Madam Chair. We have requests to speak on items A4, A6, A12, A14 and A17. And if you'd like we can start in Santa Maria with Mr. Caldwell. He has requests to speak on items A4 A12 and A14 and I can read those into the record.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed41:21 · ≈ 9:41 AM

Okay why don't we go ahead and do that then?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed41:25 · ≈ 9:41 AM

Madam Chair, Item A4 is from the Auditor-Controller. We request that the Board receive and file the 2010-11 Mitigation Fee Act Annual Report for the Countywide Orchid & Glebe Development Impact Fee Programs. Item A-12 is from General Services. Request that the board consider recommendations regarding the California Coastal Conservancy grant agreement and resolution for the Tognizini property acquisition. This is in the Point Zoll Reserve.

And item A-14, this is from Planning and Development, is to consider recommendations regarding the Montecito Growth Management Ordinance Annual Director's Report. And Mr. Caldwell will have five minutes for those three items.

0:42 – 0:473 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed42:01 · ≈ 9:42 AM

Good morning, Mr. Caldwell.

PresenterAndy CaldwellCoLabProposedself-stated42:04 · ≈ 9:42 AM

Madam Chair, members of the Board, I'm Andy Caldwell. I'm representing CoLab. It's pretty tough to cover admin items in one and a half minutes each, but I draw your attention to all three of these issues have an effect upon our economy, and we'd like an explanation on each one of them. On the fee schedule, the 24-hour convenience store in Orkut is charged $84,000 per 1,000 square feet For impact fees, in Goleta it's charged $332,000 per 1,000 square feet. A multiplier of about four times. A bank with a drive-thru in Orchid is $36,751 per 1,00 square feet but in Goleta that's 551,000 factor of 15.

There's no rhyme or reason why a traffic impact fee wouldn't have the same multiplier between Orchid and Goleta. We think this fee schedule is way off base, we draw your attention to it each and every year. And secondly, it's one of those hidden costs of doing business why more people are not investing here in creating services here, jobs here, and more importantly property taxes.

Which brings me to the next issue, and that is the purchase of the Tognazzini property. Here we're spending $3 million of taxpayer funds and you know funds that in some cases from non-profits but that's on top of the millions you've already spent In some cases you were by, you've bought in the name of taxpayers conservation mountainsides. Not flat land not land that's usable for park and not even land right now that's accessible except by walking or biking.

You know you look at Goleta Beach You need millions of dollars to keep Goleta Beach open and functioning, to serve millions of people. We don't have money for that. Jerry Brown's threatening to close beaches and skate parks throughout the state but somehow we've got $3 million plus the other millions on top of it to buy land that is virtually worthless for recreational purposes.

You're part of the problem in the fact that you see dollar signs and the concept of free money, and you go for it without asking the hard questions. And encouraging the state government and even the voters when they vote for these bond measures to get their priorities in order. Finally this issue of the Montecito growth management This county is foregone between 5 to 10 million dollars in property taxes because not only do you have this rule saying that growth and Montecito, one of the most affluent desirable communities in the entire nation. Has to be limited, but you have a use it or lose it system that you don't save the allotment so that people in future years can use those allotments and the allotments that you have lost.

The allotments that you let fall off the table amount to 5-10 million in property taxes for this county. So whether you look at the traffic impact fees that hinder somebody from even wanting to do business or being able to do business, it's not just banks or 7-Elevens. It's housing, it's stores, it shopping centers. It could be daycare centers or churches. You're not doing anything to address these underlying issues. You need to tweak this, you need to get your priorities in order, you need to educate the voters and again with the Tognazzini property, you're taking more property off the tax rolls.

And this is the kind of stuff you should be discussing instead of sticking this on the A agenda. You're part of the problem, you're not turning the ship around. And you need to take some decisive action as versus business as usual on the admin calendar each and every Tuesday. Thank you.

not transcribed≈15s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed46:56 · ≈ 9:46 AM

Our next speaker is here in Santa Barbara, Suzanne Riordan. She'd like to speak on item A6 which comes from the County Executive Office to receive and file quarterly AB 109 impacts report for October through December 2011 and performance measure definitions.

0:47 – 0:492 turns

CommentSuzanne RiordanProposed47:13 · ≈ 9:47 AM

Ms. Riordan? Good morning. So our organization Families Act is concerned about people who have co-occurring mental health disorders and substance use disorders And who are cycling through the revolving door. And we've been meeting with the Chief of Probation and the Deputy Chief of the Jail to talk about how we can use some of these funds that are coming back from the state in a way that will begin to interrupt this revolving door, and lower our recidivism rate. And we're very hopeful that we'll be able to actually put some of the money coming in July towards programs that will really make a difference for these people.

People that are being referred to as non, non, nons. They're non-serious. Their crimes were non-serious, nonviolent and didn't warrant serious sexual offenses. So you have to ask why were they going to be going to prison? Why did they go to prison? This is a question that a lot of people in our community are asking. Why are these non, non, nons in the system to begin with? Well, they have drug and alcohol problems. on the whole. They have some degree of mental health problems, some of them.

So what are we going to do to turn this around? One of the key elements that we've identified at Families Act is jobs. People that are not severely mentally ill who won't be able to qualify for disability benefits. How you gonna interrupt the cycle for them? One of the things that they're facing is if they have a felony, if they have an alcohol and drug problem. If they maybe don't have a stable residence, they can't find work. So we're proposing that this community put some time and some money coming back from the state maybe into a program, a pilot program or workforce program to see how we can provide case management to these people, job skills training and actual jobs. And then once we've worked out the bugs, we'd like to see A community enterprise center created that would create businesses, local businesses that might be worker co-ops or not and would provide meaningful work for this population among others.

So we hope that we can continue to work with the probation department, with the jail, with the community corrections partnership and come up with some solutions that are really going to be able to interrupt this revolving door. And we'd love to talk to the county to the county CEO about that someday because we have some ideas. Thank you so much. Thank you, thank you for your

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed49:49 · ≈ 9:49 AM

comments. Next speaker?

0:49 – 0:5518 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed49:52 · ≈ 9:49 AM

Madam Chair and members of the board our final speaker is Dr. Robert Johns he'd like to speak on item A-17 it's from Public Works. It's to approve the appointment of Alexander Jebremovich Assistant County Surveyor as Interim County Surveyor as of January 29 2012

CommentDr. Robert JohnsProposed · by introduction50:34 · ≈ 9:50 AM

I'm hoping that the interim County Supervisor, County Surveyor will be interim. And I'm hoping that you're going to do a search for that position? That's correct isn't it Carbonell? You're not gonna just put him in there as the interim. You're going to do a search, a search, a diverse search. A search based on... Dr. Challenger

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed51:05 · ≈ 9:51 AM

your comments are directed to all the board.

CommentDr. Robert JohnsProposed · by introduction51:07 · ≈ 9:51 AM

Okay. Far. Wolf. I will direct my comments to all the board. And I hope that all of you will be looking for a diverse search, not just placing them in the position. I think I kind of... You get my point? Thank you. I did want to comment on one but somehow or another Not on one, but on. On nine, but it's somehow no you didn't get my on each. County executive officer I wanted to comment on. I have a few minutes here left. Could I do that Madam Chair?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed52:03 · ≈ 9:52 AM

You can finish your time on that item

CommentDr. Robert JohnsProposed · by introduction52:06 · ≈ 9:52 AM

OK now. It says here that Walters Thomas Walters. That wouldn't be, and I'm talking to the whole board. That would not be any relationship to Mrs. Walters, the executive officer here. I'm sure there's no relationship. I am sure there is no relationship because it's too much money being dealt out here now but I want to say this is that too much of this type of thing has gone on in this county where relationships are personal

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed52:44 · ≈ 9:52 AM

Dr. John, we're talking about if you're talking about A8, you're talking about the contract with Thomas Walters and Associates. Our CEO's name is Waller.

CommentDr. Robert JohnsProposed · by introduction52:57 · ≈ 9:52 AM

Oh, jeez. Well, you see? I somehow know they got that confused. I'm sorry, I'm very sorry. I apologize to you but too much of that type of relationship goes on where there's connections.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed53:12 · ≈ 9:53 AM

Did you want to speak to the contract Dr. Jones?

CommentDr. Robert JohnsProposed · by introduction53:15 · ≈ 9:53 AM

No, I didn't. I just wanted to make sure that there was no handy-pandy going on in this county. Thank you very much.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed53:25 · ≈ 9:53 AM

All right. That's our last speaker, Mr. Allen?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed53:28 · ≈ 9:53 AM

That's correct.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed53:29 · ≈ 9:53 AM

Okay. So then I'll go ahead and entertain a motion to approve the admin agenda. I'm sorry. Yes, Supervisor

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7253:35 · ≈ 9:53 AM

Levin. Going back to A4, Mr Caldwell had brought up a few good questions, I thought, and I think Mr. Geis, somebody from Mr. Geis' staff was wanting to... Is it great? Just wondering why there is a disparity between the two

CommentCraig LevinProposedself-stated53:55 · ≈ 9:53 AM

Thank you, Supervisor Levin. Craig Levin, Division Chief Advanced Accounting in the Auditor-Controller's Office. So impact fees, there is a nexus between the impact of the development cost and the fee that is charged. And in Orchid, you have an area that has not as well developed as Goleta, and as a result, the impact fees are based around establishing interconnections to the 101 freeway And those are big, high-value projects.

And that's likely the reason why those fees are higher than they are in Caltrans, which is a more established area.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed54:32 · ≈ 9:54 AM

Supervisor Levin, does that answer your question? Okay. I do think that the question of the impact fees is something that we raised before and that the CEO's office is going to be looking into because they haven't been updated either within the community plan areas or in the other unincorporated areas so I'm hoping that's something that the board will be able to look at here in the coming year.

Thank

CommentRobert ShullProposed54:56 · ≈ 9:54 AM

you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed54:57 · ≈ 9:54 AM

All right, and with that if there's no other comments move for approval. Okay I have a motion. A second? On the admin? Second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. Do we need to take a break or should we just go ahead and move on to departmental? Okay all right why don't we go ahead and move on to the D agenda then.

I can ask you to keep your voices down here as you exit the hearing room.

0:55 – 1:1117 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed55:35 · ≈ 9:55 AM

Madam Chair, while we wait for individuals to leave the hearing room, we could go ahead and continue items D4 and D5. There's a memo received to continue both of those items to your hearing on February 7th.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed55:47 · ≈ 9:55 AM

Okay. D4 and D5

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed55:50 · ≈ 9:55 AM

have

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed55:50 · ≈ 9:55 AM

both asked to be continued

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed55:52 · ≈ 9:55 AM

until

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed55:53 · ≈ 9:55 AM

the hearing of February 7th?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed55:54 · ≈ 9:55 AM

That's correct. 4 is from Public Health, to consider recommendations regarding the Emergency Medical Services Agency proposed new fee and existing fee increase. And item 5, Ag Commissioner hearing to consider recommendations regarding the revision of Chapter 34C of the County Code Weights & Measures and the adoption of the Ag Commissioner's revised fee schedule. And those will both be heard on February 7th.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed56:16 · ≈ 9:56 AM

Okay, so do we have a motion to continue this? Okay. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Alright, so now we will go back to departmental item number one. Mr. Allen, if you'd read that into the record please.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed56:33 · ≈ 9:56 AM

Madam Chair and members of the board, item number one comes to the board from Supervisor Carbajal. It's a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the County of Santa Barbara Poverty Initiative and Assessment.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed56:42 · ≈ 9:56 AM

Thank you. Supervisor Carbajal.

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction56:44 · ≈ 9:56 AM

Thank you, Madam Chair. This is a similar item like the item that I brought to the board in December where four-fifths majority was needed to fund $30,000 from contingency which would be matched by federal dollars coming from the Social Services Department. We obtained a majority but not four votes and so I was delighted when I was engaged in some communication with the Santa Barbara Foundation.

They expressed an interest in partnering with the county and funding the $30,000 that would be needed which would be matched by the federal resources. And it's really no different than that item other than the resources now have been made possible by the foundation. Ms. Martha Harmon is here from the foundation if there are any questions. A partnership that is being codified in an MOU to move this item forward and to be able to successfully complete it.

The one thing that became evident from our last discussion is that one of the objectives of this poverty assessment is really to look at All the services that currently exist going to serve the population that find themselves in poverty. And to really be instructive for us and the foundations and other non-profits as to what those services are, whether there might be overlaps but with the objective to maximize our resources.

It's really that is one of the perhaps most important outcomes that we seek to achieve with this effort. Right now I think we do have some information, but the analysis is lacking that really will help us be more strategic in maximizing our dollars. And I think we can't argue with trying to make our dollars go as far as possible especially in these tough economic times.

Kathy, if you could come forward and perhaps add to that. I know Ms. Harmon is here should there be any questions but I think this is going to provide for a great private public partnership that will come up with the win-win actually so Kathy?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed59:33 · ≈ 9:59 AM

Thank you Supervisor Carbajal through the chair. I am Kathy Gallagher, Social Services Director and you may recall that on November 15th we did make a presentation to your board about the poverty initiative that was based on the data that was coming out of the 2010 census. That was somewhat alarming to those of us in the business I'm not going to make another presentation, you'll be glad to hear that.

I just wanted to highlight a couple of those statistics that are very meaningful to us. The poverty rate in Santa Barbara County has increased by 52% since 2007. 2007 is recognized as the beginning of the recession. There are 75,000 people or 18% of our population living below the federal poverty level in Santa Barbara County. There are a total of 96,000 children living in our county of which 21,000 of those children or 22% are living below the federal poverty level and that's significant. That's a little bit higher than the statewide average.

Fifty percent of the families living in Santa Barbara County are living below the minimum self-sufficiency standard of living that is calculated by various professional organizations around the country. The rate of poverty for the elderly is officially, according to the census, 7%. But as I noted in my previous presentation, the federal poverty level rate for one person is equal to the Social Security benefit for one person.

So those folks living solely on Social Security have no 401k, have no retirement or pension benefits are really living on the margin. They are virtually in poverty. So this is what we know now. What we don't know from this data is, are families and the elderly in poverty concentrated in specific areas in our county? Are there specific groups that are suffering at a higher rate than others?

We also don't know if there are any correlations between poverty and health status, between poverty and educational status, family dysfunction. We know that poverty and unemployment creates stress on people. And we know from past studies that these health impacts, educational impacts, family dysfunction which are typically domestic violence, child abuse, elder abuse Those rates do rise. There is an impact, there is a correlation nationally. What does it look like in Santa Barbara County? We also don't know who are the people in poverty. How serious is our problem? Is it going to be a long-range problem that we need to address with long range solutions Or is it likely to be a shorter range problem that when the economy picks up, jobs are created we may see significant reduction in our poverty level which is of course what we all hope for.

What the Poverty Initiative will do, and with many thanks to the Santa Barbara Foundation for stepping forward to participate in this, is as Supervisor Carbajal pointed out one of the goals is to create the inventory of services across the county looking at not only county services but city services, private non-profit services, educational health care services. To identify what are we doing to support people in poverty in Santa Barbara County And are there any overlaps? Can we be more efficient in the delivery and more cost-effective in the delivery of those services, and how can we without increasing funding to this, how can we marshal those services and target those services with the maximum impact. So that is one of the goals.

Another goal is to identify strategies using known best practices that can target and focus our efforts on achieving improvements and positive outcomes in these areas of health status and health access, educational success and attainment as well as hopefully reductions in family dysfunction reports of domestic violence child abuse etc. The report that we create will come back to your board. The report and the recommendations will be a product of a community stakeholder process involving the Santa Barbara Foundation, representatives from cities and counties, and from our partner non-profits. We hope to have a product to bring back to your board in the middle of 2012, in time for any consideration that you may feel appropriate as part of your budget process.

And with that, any questions I'm here to answer? And I know Martha Harmon is here from the Foundation as well.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:04:44 · ≈ 10:04 AM

Thank you Ms. Gallagher. Questions from the Board? Supervisor Fray?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed1:04:48 · ≈ 10:04 AM

Thank you. Ms. Gallagher, knowing that I tremendously admire you, I think you're very, very talented. It's very difficult to explain to constituents why we don't know what poverty is and why we don' t know where it is located because after you folks brought this to us the last time, that was what I was getting with resistance. You understand what I'm saying? It does not make sense. That we don't know.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed1:05:23 · ≈ 10:05 AM

I do, and that's a very good question because indeed I get those questions all the time as well. What we are seeing as part of this economy is that a new subset of individuals and families are falling into poverty And many of those are, had been what we would normally classify as middle class families. And they've lost their employment, lost their job. They've run through their unemployment benefits. They've run through their savings. They have sold possessions and they are now at a level of destitution and poverty.

Others are perhaps at a slightly higher level, haven't reached that poverty level yet. And some of these are our neighbors in our middle class neighborhoods we don't always know what's going on in the house next door and across the street. We don't know that people are slipping into poverty And some of those people come to our offices and some do not. And some are relying on help from relatives and friends, and as I said, some haven't totally worked through their savings yet or their possessions.

As we project out with the economy, and we're not seeing the level of improvement in the economy to keep pace with the loss that people and families are experiencing, The projection is that we're going to continue for at least the next few years to see an increase in these poverty rates. People are not gonna be able to get back into employment and those that get back into employment aren't gonna be at the levels of earnings that they had in their previous employment. Then looking at the domino effect, that may mean that even more people are going to find themselves unable to make those house payments. The house payment, the car payment that they accrued when they were working was at a level they could afford at that time. Now if they go back to work at a lower paying job, they may not be able to afford their house payment and car payment so we're projecting that we're going to continue to see some people slipping into poverty in our county And I think that's what one of the elements that we consider most important about this initiative is to try to identify how we can best provide some supports for that group of folks.

We always have a group that are going to struggle because of a lack of education, a lack of job training. They come into social services department needing assistance We provide some job training assistance and what have you, and there's always going to be typically younger people coming in to us for that purpose. There is now a four-year time limit on supports for people coming into our department for cash assistance. You can't receive cash assistance, CalWORKs program, the Welfare to Work Program any longer than 48 months.

But again, we are seeing this subset of people who never would have come to our department that had been higher income individuals. And we want to identify how we can best provide supports for both sets of families and elderly in our county.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:08:42 · ≈ 10:08 AM

And Ms. Gallagher, just to kind of piggyback onto that, I think besides people that were doing fine a few years ago in the middle class that are now struggling in the way you described, we know through our work with the Adult Aging Network that there are so many seniors who were kind of on the edge to begin with that are now slipping over the edge. And I've heard more than one example of people in the community that were involved in a food distribution, but all of a sudden looked up and found somebody that they knew in line and were quite surprised. So I think that's kind of the hidden face of this that we're talking about.

You know, I certainly see this as a way to encourage the public-private partnerships. I think one of the examples I look to is what evolved for the warming centers which has ended up to be a wonderful partnership between the county, the cities, the philanthropic community, the nonprofits and faith communities And it's now being organized not by the county, although the county is participating in it. And I think it's just one more way that we need to figure out not only what the face of poverty is but how it's different in different parts of the county. So there may be parts of the county where families are more impacted and maybe parts of the county where seniors are more impacted. And if we don't have that kind of level of detail, it's hard to put together these kinds of partnerships community-by-community because that's, I think, how we get people involved How we get people to volunteer is when it's people in their own neighborhood and in their own community that they want to help.

So, Supervisor Carbajal?

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction1:10:21 · ≈ 10:10 AM

Thank you Madam Chair. Kathy I just want to thank you and Martha and the Santa Barbara Foundation for Just really doing a great job of helping this come together the way it has, and answering all the questions. My pleasure. I think amplifying what I think we attempted to do in December. I also want to recognize Eric Freedman in my office who's in the back who took the lead on this project working with Kathy and the Santa Barbara Foundation.

The one statistic that I just wanted to illustrate that I think would be really important to understand in addition to all the other data that exists is that while we know poverty is higher in the North County, what caught my attention was that for children it's equal or a little bit higher in South County.

not transcribed≈7s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

1:11 – 1:1613 turns

CommentRobert ShullProposed1:11:12 · ≈ 10:11 AM

Correct.

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction1:11:12 · ≈ 10:11 AM

So it was an interesting revelation to know that and the reason of why we're trying to understand why and what are the implications, and how are we serving that population appropriately. So thank

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:11:29 · ≈ 10:11 AM

you. Thank

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:11:31 · ≈ 10:11 AM

you. Supervisor Wolf? Thank you Ms. Gallagher. I appreciate your comments I just wanted to ask you, and maybe you touched on this and I missed it. But when we're talking about federal poverty levels, we're looking at a certain rate but I'm also wondering if this study will look It's not it's not officially called a poverty rate, but it's the rate. I'm sure you know the word I'm looking for. It's what it is within Southern California, Southern Santa Barbara County to

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed1:12:14 · ≈ 10:12 AM

What it takes to live, basically. Basically, yeah. Yes that's called the self-sufficiency rate and that is published nationally for all counties in the nation and in Santa Barbara County my memory serves me around $65,000 a year for a family of four. Right,

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:12:36 · ≈ 10:12 AM

and the federal poverty rate

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed1:12:39 · ≈ 10:12 AM

For a family of four, $21,000.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:12:42 · ≈ 10:12 AM

So I think that's such a huge difference and I really do hope that this study will take into account The other index because. You know, while while family may not necessarily be in poverty there certainly being challenged and there we need to identify those folks as well.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed1:13:08 · ≈ 10:13 AM

Absolutely yes, we will be looking at that supervisor Wolf.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:13:13 · ≈ 10:13 AM

Thank you Miss Gallagher Mr Allen. We have I'm sorry Supervisor Gray did you want me coming?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed1:13:17 · ≈ 10:13 AM

I just wanted to ask one more question I'd love to hear, Miss Harmon was kind enough to come into my office and chat with me about this. And so now that I'm acquainted with her, I'd like to have it on the record as to what Santa Barbara Foundation is doing or planning on getting out of this initiative and what their participation level will be or won't be.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:13:45 · ≈ 10:13 AM

Welcome, Ms. Harmon. Thank you for being here.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:13:48 · ≈ 10:13 AM

Thank you Madam Chairman and members of the board. The Santa Barbara Foundation as you know is a community foundation for the entire county and so we fund a lot of things very broad based. In the last few years we've been putting increasing number of dollars in the health and human services area. As we talk to our donors because as you know it's the donors who provide the dollars for distribution They are asking us more and more for very specific data. And they're asking what are the other groups doing? What is, what are the governmental entities doing? What are the corporate entities doing?

And so from our standpoint we would like to have the very specific data to help inform our grant making and also to assist some of our donors as they make their decisions. So what we're looking for here is not merely a report of what's going on that sits on the shelf, because I can't go back to my board after having recommended a $30,000 distribution and then have nothing have happened. So not only are we looking for data, we are also hopeful that the county will use this information so there are more efficiencies through county government.

We are also looking at how The county is working with the non-profits and how they can work better together. And also we're looking at what are the best practices, some from around the country as to how we can be more efficient in the delivery of our services? This would be something that we could possibly see some initiatives coming out of if there's some things that you all are interested in doing that match with some of what our donors want to do But clearly we do not see this as something that is just plain information that will not be used. And I've been very impressed by the staff here, as we've been working with Kathy and other members of the staff, and we feel very confident that bringing in a consultant to pull all of this data together...

The data is not right now it doesn't sound like a lot of the different The different departments have the same kind of data collection. So if we can get a consultant in to pull that information together and move forward, we would just be very pleased to be a part of this. And the Chair mentioned the public-private partnership. Going forward in this economy there is no way that any of us are going to be able to do this by ourselves and so what we're hoping is that this will serve as a model and also in the future that there may be other ways that we may be able

1:16 – 1:2213 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:16:31 · ≈ 10:16 AM

Supervisor Wolf. Supervisor Fray, did you have any more questions?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:16:34 · ≈ 10:16 AM

While you're here I just wanted to thank you and the foundation for coming forward and working with the county. We did try and make this A public-public initiative, but unfortunately it didn't work out that way. So I just thank you. I thank Supervisor Carbajal for bringing this forward and to you and our staff for making what I'm hoping that this will move forward and become a reality. It's very important that this county we can talk a lot about poverty But we also have to stand behind our words, and it was disappointing that we didn't fund this.

And I think there's other issues that we don't necessarily fund when we know it can help with people who are experiencing poverty such as Allocating more money for healthy kids, providing more funding for our social service workers, cutting salaries. I mean we kind of have to walk the walk too and I think Supervisor Farr brought up the issue of the warming centers which was, which I think just hits on that point that we were willing to put up a small amount of money to help those folks who are most in need So I look forward to the results of this. Um, I think it will be informative for the entire board and I hope so informative that we will have some direct steps to take as policymakers. So I want to thank you again and to your board.

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:18:19 · ≈ 10:18 AM

Thank

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:18:20 · ≈ 10:18 AM

You Supervisor Wolf.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:18:21 · ≈ 10:18 AM

Supervisor Carbajal?

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction1:18:22 · ≈ 10:18 AM

Thank you. You know from the last hearing we had my initial reaction was Great disappointment, but I will say that sometimes dissent allows us to better craft something and I'm hoping what's before us addresses some of the concerns that were raised previously. And amplifies the objectives that I think we were trying to get across when we brought this item in December so I always take dissent As an opportunity to build on and to enhance our partnership. And I'm hoping today the concerns that were addressed by a couple of our colleagues have been greatly addressed, and I'm hopeful today we could hopefully get a unanimous vote. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:19:15 · ≈ 10:19 AM

All right, thank you. We do have a couple members of the public that want to speak. Mr. Allen?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:19:22 · ≈ 10:19 AM

Madam Chair and Members of the Board we'll start in Santa Maria with Mr. Caldwell and we'll come back to Santa Barbara for our final speaker Dr. Robert Jones.

PresenterAndy CaldwellCoLabProposedself-stated1:19:29 · ≈ 10:19 AM

Mr

CommentBarbara Linda MinnProposedself-stated1:19:30 · ≈ 10:19 AM

Caldwell.

PresenterAndy CaldwellCoLabProposedself-stated1:19:32 · ≈ 10:19 AM

Madam Chair, Members of the Board I'm Andy Caldwell. I still find this item, to tell you the truth, to be somewhat insulting in a lot of different ways on a lot of different levels First of all, it's like Santa Barbara County thinks of itself as an island with respect to this recession. This recession is hitting the entire every other county in the state of California, the State of California and every other state in the nation. Do you don't think anybody else has studied this?

You don't think there's information out there already? Right now between alcohol drug and mental health child support public health and social services You're spending $334 million a year addressing various aspects of poverty. We're not suffering from a lack of information, we're suffering from lack of economic opportunity and that lack of opportunity, we can lay that at your feet as well as that of the folks in Sacramento As the items I brought up in the admin calendar and the ones I'm going to bring up in your ledge platform, you're doing nothing. Absolutely nothing to roll back the regulatory climate and the cost of doing business and the cost of creating jobs.

And in fact, you're going the opposite direction. You're exceeding on the state mandates for what small counties have to do with regard to AB 32. Because you want to be green. It's really easy to pretend to be doing something by studying something, but you've got enough facts already. You're spending enough money already on the poor What you need to do is spend less time and spend less money of belonging to other people, i.e., the business community and property owners, and allow people to invest in this community in order to create jobs.

You need to have as your priority the rollback of regulations at the local, state, and national level. But instead, you've got your pedal to the metal on your green agenda and then you wonder why the economy's suffering. And think oh well let's throw more money whether it's public money or private money, let's throw more money at it and study it. We have over a billion dollars of government in this county.

Over a billion dollars. More government is not the answer Another study is not the answer. This issue has been studied to death already. There's a number of think tanks in California that have been studying this for years. Don't try to fool yourself or the public, please.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:22:46 · ≈ 10:22 AM

Mr. Allen, next speaker?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:22:47 · ≈ 10:22 AM

Our final speaker will be Dr. Jones

1:23 – 1:284 turns

CommentDr. Robert JohnsProposed · by introduction1:23:04 · ≈ 10:23 AM

Thank you, Madam Chair. Andy if you keep this up I'm just going to go home and get in a bed. You know, I don't have to be here. I mean, I can't say it the way you can say it. And I could just go back home and get into bed and then take a drive out to Guadalupe in the afternoon but I've commented on this issue before, and I said something like this that I remember.

It's a waste of money. And boys, what did you do? Partnership with the Santa Barbara Foundation? Are you kidding me? What's going on here? You're spending measly $30,000 when it all takes is a pencil and a paper. And you got the information. So now Santa Barbara Foundation wants to sew up some of their grant funding, and you discussed that. So hey come over here with us and help us do this, and we'll come... This is ridiculous! Totally ridiculous.

You're wasting money. What about those people in Local 721 who need money? Who you won't You won't even renegotiate with them. And you're spending $30,000. We already have the information. We know what it is. We don't need to study this thing again. While you're studying this issue, people are in poverty. You've got this issue already. You know what's going on. You know where poverty is.

I'm talking to you. Carbohall, you know what poverty. You don't need to study it. You don't need to join with these people over here So maybe next Tuesday I might be in the bed I Might be in the bed. I may not even come in here You hope Carvajal

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:25:18 · ≈ 10:25 AM

That was our final speaker all right supervisor loving, you know

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.721:25:22 · ≈ 10:25 AM

Thank You madam sir I was one of the ones that opposed this last time and for a lot of the reasons of what we just heard is that, you know, we do a lot of studying in government. And on an issue like this from what I saw in the last report and some of this I feel we can lay at the feet of the Brown Act is that we're not able to discuss these items before they come before the board. And so what I read in the staff report for me was something that was Going out and collecting data on information that to me is already readily available.

I also didn't like the fact that we were going to be spending $30,000 out of the general fund. Both those items for me have been rectified. First off, I want to thank Martha from the Santa Barbara Foundation for coming into my office and explaining exactly what they were looking to get out of the study and why the reason why they were going to step up with a $30,000 contribution.

What I feel was lacking originally which is now in there is accountability. There is an expectation that there will be some results out of this. We're not just going to be gathering data. I think the point was raised and well-raised by Mr. Caldwell that we do spend 300 plus million dollars a year on social services in Santa Barbara County So I want to make sure that we're not duplicating efforts, that there are areas out there where we can strategize and get you a better place than we are right now.

And for us to be able to accept something from the Santa Barbara Foundation, I don't think it's unfortunate that we had, that we got rid of a public-public agreement and we went more with a public-private because to me inside that private part of it is where the expectation of results lie. The Santa Barbara Foundation donors are not going to accept a report It just compiles a bunch of data we already have and put it in a binder and put it on my shelf.

That's not going to be acceptable to them, and that's where I feel that I have come to the place where that I can support joining with the Santa Barbara Foundation studying this, and not just studying it. I don't want to study it. What I would really like to see And I think Ms. Gallagher brought this up, is that I'd really like to see this information brought to us before our next budget so that it does play a role, a significant role in where we do place those 300 plus million dollars next year.

So I do want to thank also Supervisor Carbajal who brought this forward and was willing to make the changes necessary to make it palatable That I could support it. It's not something that I'm not going to be looking at down the road to make sure that there is that expectation of results. The reason why I am supporting it, because I do feel that there is accountability now attached with the Santa Barbara Foundation and there are zero general fund dollars attached to it so I will be in support.

not transcribed≈6s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:28:29 · ≈ 10:28 AM

Thank you Supervisor Levin. Any other comments? Thank you. I just wanted to state

1:28 – 1:455 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:28:39 · ≈ 10:28 AM

I. had and have a lot of confidence in our staff and Kathy Gallagher. And I felt very confident at our last meeting that we were going to have an accountability index, that it's up to our board to make sure that these reports don't just sit on the shelf. And I'm pleased that we have the Santa Barbara Foundation who has stepped up. But I just think it's important that we also acknowledge that our own staff is quite capable to do some of the work that's before us. Thank you, Madam Chair.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:29:24 · ≈ 10:29 AM

Thank you, Supervisor Wolff. There are no other comments. I'll entertain a motion.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed1:29:28 · ≈ 10:29 AM

I'd like to make that motion, Supervisor Carpenter-Hall if I might because I was so adamantly against what I perceived as it being before and I now see it as excellent solution to something that we needed to do. And Ms. Gallagher defined how poverty is changing and then Santa Barbara Foundation said we need this information. So based on that, I'd like to make that motion if I could.

Roll-call vote Passed Moved by Joni Gray · Seconded by Salud Carbajal
Show transcript
Okay, so motion by Supervisor Gray and a second by Supervisor Carbajal. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries unanimously the board is going to take a break we will be back at 1045 for item number two.
GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction1:30:08 · ≈ 10:30 AM

I just want to thank our entire board for I think coming together on something that's gonna benefit county and everyone in our County So thank you all very much Yeah.

CommentRobert ShullProposed1:30:47 · ≈ 10:30 AM

¶. ¶¶ Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. You. ♪ The. You. ¶¶ ¶¶ ¶. Thank you for joining us. ¶. ♪ ¶. ¶. ¶. You. ¶. ¶. ¶. ¶. ¶. You. You. ♪ ¶¶ ♪

1:46 – 1:486 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:46:01 · ≈ 10:46 AM

♪ Let's bring the board back into session here right before we pick up where we left off to begin departmental item number two. Ms. Waller, I'm wondering whether you Mr. Parker can give us an update on the Bridge House Shelter?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed1:46:33 · ≈ 10:46 AM

Certainly, Chairwoman. As I know you're aware sort of unexpectedly we heard from the Lompoc Housing and Development Corporation that they intended to close the bridge house today and since that time we've been working with them and working with the city of Lompoc to make sure that we don't have anyone fall through the cracks and I know Mr. Parker has a report that he could share with us if you may. Thank You. Mr. Parker thank you

CommentSherry FisherProposed · by introduction1:46:59 · ≈ 10:46 AM

Thank you CEO Waller, Madam Chair Farr, members of the board. We have been working with LHCDC in order to try to find a location for those members that are using the shelter up at Bridge House and What we have done is we've worked to secure a warming shelter up in the Lompoc area. It is New Life Christian Center, it's located at 816 North C Street in Lompoc and they will be providing some services there on an interim basis for this week to provide some services for those in need in the area.

We will continue to work in the area to try and find alternatives as the days progress, see what other services we need to provide, what other accommodations we need to provide.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:47:52 · ≈ 10:47 AM

Okay, so everybody that didn't have another place to go that was a Bridge House shelter will at least be able to go to the warming center in Lompoc in the interim until our staff can continue to work with them. That is correct. To find another place to live?

CommentSherry FisherProposed · by introduction1:48:07 · ≈ 10:48 AM

Yes, that's correct we do have some shelter for them.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:48:09 · ≈ 10:48 AM

Thank you. And I want to give my special thanks to Ms. Waller and our department heads because we had heard earlier in the week that everybody had found alternative housing, then over the weekend we got some information to the contrary and so I know that our staff got involved right away to make sure that nobody was going to go unsheltered. So thank you for that and for your responsiveness even on a holiday weekend.

All right. With that, we'll go ahead and move on to departmental item number two. And this is our 2012 legislative platform. Mr. Allen, read that into the record please.

1:48 – 1:5912 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:48:47 · ≈ 10:48 AM

Madam Chair, members of the board, Item 2 is from the County Executive Office. It's a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the 2012 legislative platform.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:48:58 · ≈ 10:48 AM

All right. Ms. Nissage?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed1:49:01 · ≈ 10:49 AM

Yes, good morning Madam Chair and members of the Board. This item is on your agenda today for presentation of the 2012 Legislative Platform for your consideration as well as to receive a report from Tom Walters and Associates on his federal advocacy efforts over the course of the 2011 legislative year. I'd like to begin the report with Mr. Walters and then we'll conclude with the actual platform itself so go ahead turn it over to Tom.

CommentTom WaltersProposed1:49:28 · ≈ 10:49 AM

Thank you, Terry. Chairwoman Farr, members of the board, CEO Waller. As always it's a pleasure to start off the year here in Santa Barbara County. If I occasionally win some pain during my presentation it's because Terry is jabbing me in the ribs to be brief so I'll keep my comments as unlong-winded as possible. Looking back at 2001, which was the first session of the 112th Congress, I think I would not be alone in saying it was probably one of the most contentious years in the nation's capital in a long, long time.

From the beginning, congressional action was dominated by the fiscal crises facing the federal government. The new Congress was forced to complete work on the fiscal year 2011 appropriation process after its predecessors failed to agreement on any of the spending from the previous year. This turned out to be a bare-knuckled, highly partisan debate that was not resolved until six months into the new fiscal year making it difficult both for federal agencies and for local agencies such as the county to plan in terms of federal resources that would be available to them.

A moratorium was placed on congressionally directed spending, what we all know as earmarks. And that moratorium was then extended into the fiscal year 2012 process as well. Almost immediately after the 2011 issues were resolved negotiations over an agreement to raise the federal debt limit and simultaneously address deficit reduction took center stage. Now the federal debt limit has been raised many, many times by many different presidents from both political parties.

And for the most part it is usually non-controversial. But this year devolved into a highly divisive partisan political battle and led as everyone knows to the brink of default by the U.S. government. The final compromise included the establishment of a joint House-Senate Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, which was charged with negotiating $1.2 trillion in savings over 10 years.

The subsequent highly publicized failure of that committee to negotiate an agreement raises the implementation of a sequestration process to achieve those budget savings through government-wide automatic cuts in spending over nine years beginning in January 2013. It's going to be up to the administration to propose how those cuts will be implemented With the emphasis on budget deficit reduction, it was indeed a tough year for local governments in Washington and much of our advocacy was defensive. That is working to oppose cuts or at least deeper cuts and programs that impact the county.

Nevertheless there were some positive accomplishments to report. With the moratorium on earmarks, we made sure that the county had every opportunity to compete for competitive funding through the various federal agencies. And several successful efforts are highlighted in both the introduction and the body of our report. In addition, several policy actions of significance to the county were completed including enactment of legislation to repeal the unfunded mandate that all local governments such as the county withhold 3% of payments to vendors and contractors for income tax purposes.

Reauthorization of the Child Welfare Services Program and reauthorization of the Promoting Safe and Stable Families program. Looking to the coming year Unfortunately, many of the same budgetary circumstances that made 2011 a difficult year will continue and partisanship will be exacerbated by the upcoming elections. The economy will be on everyone's mind and there will be the issue of how the across-the-board cuts set for January 2013 will be implemented.

In this context, we will also see congressional attempts to authorize or reauthorize a variety of programs of significance to the county. These include Safety Loo, TANF, Workforce Investment Act, the Older Americans Act, the Payment in Lieu of Taxes or PILT program and the Farm Bill. The prognosis for success on any of these efforts will be somewhat a matter of timing.

The deeper into the year and the closer to the elections that we get, the less likely Congress will be to tackle big ticket items and to make hard decisions. That said there is a likelihood of a lame duck session after the elections particularly if there are any shifts in power And if so, Congress may and I emphasize may take the opportunity to take tough votes that would not take before the elections. Thank you for the time and I look forward to again working with your board and county staff throughout the year.

If there are no questions then I'll turn it back over to Terri.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:54:53 · ≈ 10:54 AM

Thank You Mr. Walters any questions for Mr. Walters at this time? All right, Ms. Nusich?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed1:55:01 · ≈ 10:55 AM

Thank you again. I'd like to begin the presentation on the platform by of course thanking the members of the legislative committee for all of their work in preparing the presentation and the document before you today. As you're aware, the legislative committee consists of Chairwoman Farr, Supervisor Carbajal, Auditor-Controller Bob Geis, CEO Waller and County Counsel Dennis Marshall.

The development of the legislative platform typically begins in August with outreach to our legislative delegation, our advocates and our department heads. With a goal of identifying key policy items or operational issues which can be addressed typically with some type of legislative fix. In identifying items we also consult with CSAC and NACO to make sure that we're working in partnership with them in addressing their priority platform items as well.

The Legislative Committee held four meetings to develop legislative principles as well as the legislative policy items you have before you today. Following your review of the platform, we will again be working with our delegation and advocates and other partners in implementation of the platform. In terms of the principles, the legislative principles provide general policy guidance to staff and our legislative advocates as we review legislation and take on various projects throughout the year.

For 2012, the committee is recommending that in recognition of the continued struggling economy at all levels of government The committee is proposing revising the legislative principles to break out and spotlight job growth and economic vitality. And that's highlighted at the top of the slide here. Specifically, it notes support development and employment opportunities, promote local businesses and job growth, foster community and economic vitality, enhance interaction and dialogue with public, private, and nonprofit partners.

This component was previously included under the Community Sustainability Principle, but again the committee is recommending to the board to consider spotlighting this as the number one principle for discussion this year. We have maintained the other principles which include local control, which is very important this year. Giving other threats to processes and funding for local programs.

Interagency collaboration. Preserving health and human services programs. And of course as I mentioned community sustainability. Ms. Misich, Supervisor Wolf

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:57:43 · ≈ 10:57 AM

has a question? Yes ma'am.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:57:46 · ≈ 10:57 AM

Thank you Madam Chair. On the principles, it's a second bullet efficient service delivery slash operations Yes, and I have a question for you and would like you to clarify the last part of that where it says oppose legislation that creates undue fiscal and operational burdens on departments. And I understand that that makes complete sense to me but I'm also wondering if it takes into account the balance of the opportunities The county may get in additional resources and while there may be a burden to a department, the benefit may outweigh the burden.

So I just want to make that point clear if you have a comment.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed1:58:47 · ≈ 10:58 AM

Yes Madam Chair, Supervisor Wolf. Each time we review any form of legislation we do have a very systematic process that we go through with any type of proposed legislation where we do look at as you're indicating how those factors balance out. We look at potential positive and negative impacts to the county overall And in fact, this year we've developed a new system specifically to be used by departments to have a more thorough analysis of all legislation to make sure we're doing just that. Not just looking at one side of the equation. Is

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:59:20 · ≈ 10:59 AM

there a way to include some type of language in that section to reflect what we're doing?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed1:59:29 · ≈ 10:59 AM

Yes absolutely I can adjust that.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:59:32 · ≈ 10:59 AM

Thank you very much.

1:59 – 2:0617 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed1:59:39 · ≈ 10:59 AM

I will include language to basically reflect a more balanced approach. In terms of the actual components of the 2012 platform, these will be very familiar to the Board. We look at three critical areas. One being federal funding. We used to refer to these as earmarks but we now refer to them as federal funding. Proposed legislation and targeted advocacy. In the area of federal funding, in order to be responsive to our federal delegation and have a greater opportunity to gain funding this year key projects have been prioritized. We break out transportation requests separately because frankly there are various processes programs and funding pots typically available for transportation programs which aren't typically available for other types of funding.

Safety loo is One of these various pots of monies that, as Mr. Walters mentioned, we are continuing to advocate for the reauthorization of that funding source. The committee did take the opportunity to prioritize our key transportation items. Highway 101 widening is a regional priority and has been suggested as the number one priority. Excuse me Ms. Nesich, I'm

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.722:00:54 · ≈ 11:00 AM

going

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed2:00:54 · ≈ 11:00 AM

to interrupt you. Supervisor Labagnino?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.722:00:56 · ≈ 11:00 AM

I'm sorry. Thank you Madam Chair. I guess this question for Mr. Walters, when we get into these funding requests and I'm glad we're prioritizing so that you know we've got a menu to pull from how is the changing of the California delegation going to affect us with a lot of these retirements as funding requests come through?

CommentTom WaltersProposed2:01:20 · ≈ 11:01 AM

Supervisor Leveninio, for 2012 there should not be an overwhelming impact. I think that we have good delegation members in California and they particularly on areas such as transportation work together. They support projects, local projects, local good projects such as your board has proposed We'll see how things change after the elections going into 2013, but I anticipate no changes this year.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:01:54 · ≈ 11:01 AM

Go ahead, thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed2:01:55 · ≈ 11:01 AM

Thank you. Again in the area of transportation Highway 101 as a regional project has been prioritized at the top. A sub-regional project was discussed by the committee and that is the Hollister Avenue widening and also as number three roadway treatment and drainage improvements we've been very successful over the course of the last several years in obtaining Funding for improvement pavement and overall pavement preservation of our roadways through the safety loo program We have listed all of the other projects that we have typically considered. They are just not prioritized But we continue to work on these as staff and with mr. Walters when funding becomes available, we will certainly look to these priorities to be responsive to our federal delegation But oftentimes other types of opportunities become available to the county where they will ask for a certain type of roadway project or a certain type of maintenance project and we want to be ready to respond immediately with the board's priorities.

The next area, again under federal funding request non-transportation are those items that the committee referenced as a top priority which address public safety issues. And of course in that area the Santa Maria levy we prioritized or the committee prioritizes number one to get the upper reach accomplished. Second, Lower Mission Creek and then I will jump to number four but explain why. The safety improvements in public beach access at Santa Claus Lane.

There are continued safety issues there with the crossing of the roadway or of the railway I should say and this has been in your platform in the past. The committee did prioritize Lake Kachuma as number three. This has been before you before we are continuing to work and we have been doing so over the last several years To again get funding for the necessary capital improvements for that particular project. We have been successful, we have about four million more dollars to go in that area and so that was prioritized as number three given that it was an ongoing need.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.722:04:01 · ≈ 11:04 AM

Madam Chair?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed2:04:02 · ≈ 11:04 AM

Yes.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.722:04:03 · ≈ 11:04 AM

And I do want to thank you madam chair. I want to thank the members of the alleged committee. We don't have representation from the North County on the committee And I know some people have a concern with that, but I'm very grateful that the river levy, Santa Maria River Levee was placed as the number one priority. That was, appreciate the work that was done by the committee.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:04:25 · ≈ 11:04 AM

And actually Supervisor Lavagnino, North County does have representation on the legislature.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.722:04:30 · ≈ 11:04 AM

I'm sorry about that Supervisor Farr. I keep forgetting that this third district is North

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction2:04:34 · ≈ 11:04 AM

County.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:04:35 · ≈ 11:04 AM

All right, Supervisor Carbajal.

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction2:04:36 · ≈ 11:04 AM

You know I just wanted to add to I guess what Supervisor Lavagnino just referenced you know I think our LEDS committee really transcends at least we make every effort to transcend our parochial perspectives and we really try to look at what's what have been our priorities I'm going You know, one year I was there and I think most of the issues I was advocating for weren't even in my district. And we were doing a full press on those. And it's – I take my responsibility when I go back to D.C. seriously in making sure that I'm not peddling or pushing priorities that are my priorities. I may take an opportunity aside from our platform to do a little bit of that but The main focus and what I'm there for is to advocate for our county platform and be assured that it's exactly the approach we take.

not transcribed≈22s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:05:52 · ≈ 11:05 AM

Thank you, Supervisor. Supervisor Grant?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed2:05:54 · ≈ 11:05 AM

Supervisor Carbajal, I so solidly agree with you on that but it wasn't always the case and so many people have such long memories. You know they only follow the board now and again and for so many years that wasn't But about, you know, I know over the last five years it just hasn't been a problem if you're north or south or wherever. It's worked quite well so it's the long memory syndrome.

2:06 – 2:1818 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:06:26 · ≈ 11:06 AM

Well that's why we're making progress and moving past all of those old memories. All right, Ms. Nisic?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed2:06:32 · ≈ 11:06 AM

Thank you just to follow up on the funding priorities again we listed other key priorities for federal funding again not prioritized. Again my comments here apply as well oftentimes Mr. Walters will call and say he has information about a certain type of grant being available immediately If we can't turn something around in less than three days, what is your priority? That's why these are before you so that we can be nimble and be very flexible in our pursuit of federal funding.

The next area is proposed legislation. We were very successful at the state level in proposed legislation this year, as you recall we were able to again secure MATI funding for two more years. We'll need to discuss a strategy to pursue that long into the future but again as a result of your placement of MATI on the platform last year And our advocacy and your advocacy of getting that through, we were able to sustain that funding. This year again we do have several proposed items specifically at the state level. One is from the District Attorney's Office in terms of legislative enhancements specifically as a result of a horrific crime that occurred in our community regarding a child. Our district attorney is proposing that we enhance penalties for child abusers And that would entail amending the code to provide for sticker penalties for any form of child abuse.

In the area of social services, there is a proposal to work to amend state code to allow for the donation of surplus equipment to social service clients those within CalWorks that receive CalWork's CalFresh that are actually participants in our program, it's often hard to get them to participate if they don't have computer access. This would allow through the state the ability to actually surplus that equipment to our clients.

Again Highway 154 safety is again proposed for your platform this has been an effort this year as well we propose that it continues so that we can continue to look at all legislative and administrative remedies To enhance safety on 154. We would like to continue to push both at a state and federal level for Lake Kachuma mussel, quagga mussel prevention and research dollars and prevention dollars to go to that type of program And then lastly in legislative priorities, Lake Kachuma Boater Safety. This is a proposal in which there are several million dollars available at the state level for boater safety. Unfortunately Santa Barbara County is not able to fully enjoy those monies. The vast amount or the majority of that money goes to Los Angeles County through a formulaic distribution we are hoping to work with our various partners and CSAC To change that formula and potentially gain additional dollars for Santa Barbara County.

Supervisor Gray.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed2:09:38 · ≈ 11:09 AM

Thank you, I have a question about the Boeing safety. How long has that funding been available?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed2:09:46 · ≈ 11:09 AM

It's been available for quite some time over a decade. I don't know the exact amount but this has been available.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed2:09:51 · ≈ 11:09 AM

And over this decade we've applied for it not been granted an award or

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed2:09:58 · ≈ 11:09 AM

Chair Farr, Supervisor Gray. We have not been able to apply for the monies because the fund is distributed to the larger counties and then exhausted and what so we were never able to actually get the money by adjusting the formula and redistributing the money it would then allow us to apply for this funding.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed2:10:18 · ≈ 11:10 AM

So the issue is

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed2:10:19 · ≈ 11:10 AM

to freeze up the money?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed2:10:20 · ≈ 11:10 AM

Is to redefine the formula.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed2:10:23 · ≈ 11:10 AM

Exactly. That's the issue. Exactly.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed2:10:25 · ≈ 11:10 AM

Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed2:10:26 · ≈ 11:10 AM

And we would need to do that legislatively. The next area and final area is targeted advocacy. This pertains to those specific items where the county wishes to have a voice, and it typically pertains to those areas in which we are again seeking funding or relief of mandates. As noted in the prior presentation regarding the poverty initiative And the focus on safety net services. We're again looking at potential ways to enhance our funding of TANF, the Older Americans Act. I mentioned Safety Loop previously.

We again wish to work to enhance our funding for the Agriculture and Williamson Act subvention as you know in prior years that has been reduced by the state Child care funding, disaster preparedness funding. We've also have on our platform economic enhancement and revenue diversification Funding for the homeless homelessness issues Preservation of mobile homes and affordable housing and we've added to this year for your consideration more More flexibility in pursuing and reaching our housing element goals and Rena process Streamlining to recognize the unique nature of Santa Barbara County as we pursue our housing element And also in order to be in sync with NACO and CSAC's platform, we've added tribal gaming and land use to ensure that the county continues to enjoy the state distribution fund that offsets and mitigates tribal gaming.

And also that counties have a voice in local control and review of land use issues as it pertains Tribal activities. Supervisor Wolk?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:12:12 · ≈ 11:12 AM

Thank you, Madam Chair. Miss Nisic in the board letter and we had talked via email about this there is in the targeted advocacy privatization of public assistance programs and in our last ledge platform there was a specific request There was a state law that had been passed in the county. At that time, we were opposing implementation of a centralized privatized statewide eligibility determination and case management system.

So I So that was in last year's. I don't think it's relevant for this year and when I looked through this year's book, I didn't see that anywhere but it was in the board letter so I just wanted to confirm that it is not part of this year's platform

not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed2:13:13 · ≈ 11:13 AM

Yes, Chair Farr and Supervisor Wolf. No it is not part of this year's platform. It is no longer an issue necessarily that the county needs to address. What we did this year is try to synthesize a number of the Health and Human Services types of programs into a safety net preservation brief which is found in the platform on page 40. So no, to answer your question, no specifically that is not referenced nor does it need to be. Thank you very much.

Just to sum things up again, I'd like to acknowledge the work of the Legislative Committee and I certainly welcome any comments you may have on the proposed platform. And once complete we will finalize and then begin our work in implementing the 2012 platform. Thank you very much. Thank You Ms. Nessitz. Supervisor Carbajal?

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction2:14:05 · ≈ 11:14 AM

Yes, I want to thank Ms. Nisic, Moss Nisich, I don't know, I'm trying to keep track. There was a changing of the name. Ms. Nisic for really just doing an extraordinary good job on this. This is just a really well put together document. Everybody who plays a role are Washington and Sacramento lobbyists all our other staff The committee and also those that come and address us, I think they really raise to our attention issues that we need to keep into consideration or keep in mind. And so I just want to thank everybody who's gotten us to this point. This is just a great document with all our great priorities in it.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:14:51 · ≈ 11:14 AM

Thank you Supervisor Carbajal. Mr. Allen, we have public speakers.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:14:54 · ≈ 11:14 AM

Yes Madam Chair, we have four requests to speak. We'll start in Santa Maria with Mr. Caldwell to be followed by Kathy Staples in Santa Maria.

PresenterAndy CaldwellCoLabProposedself-stated2:15:06 · ≈ 11:15 AM

Madam Chair, members of the board, I'm Andy Caldwell representing COLAB. You know we're greatly heartened to see the words job growth and economic vitality on the list however again There's no mention, for instance of lifting the moratorium on offshore oil whether it's a de jure or de facto moratorium. There's no mention of reforming the Endangered Species Act which is not just hurting building and construction but agriculture and even existing land uses and of course you saw Example of that when the county was threatened with prosecution for one dead salamander on their own project. There's no mention of rolling back or suspending even temporarily AB 32 or SB 375.

Which is hurting all sorts of companies, the diesel engine role. There's no mention of reforming the California Environmental Quality Act. There's no mention of cutting back the power and authority of the California Coastal Commission which you know too well has way overreaching as we had to fight that issue here recently. I'm not a spokesman in any way, shape or form for the tribe nor did I talk to them about this issue.

But you know, I look at the end of your report and it seems to me that the solution, the solution to the dilemma of the Sandy Nez Band of Chumash Indians and the Chumash Casino Resort investing in the community and wanting to pursue development in the community Is it subject to them to more regulations and fees? That seems to be your solution. Subject them to CEQA, and let's charge fees for each and everything they do in every which way shape or form we can You know, I've read all these op-eds about the tribe taking the property off the tax rolls if and when they go to feed a trust in the San Dines Valley. But isn't it funny that not one of you responded to the Tognazzini property being taken off the tax rolls this morning when I raised it?

Didn't seem to be a concern. When the land trust buys land on the Gaviota Coast and takes that off the tax rolls, none of you seem to be concerned. Why is that? There's a lot of people that would invest and create jobs whether in ag Hotels, golf courses, wineries that are now subject to EIRs for a single winery. We're going to make a single winery do an EIR?

Actually I think California's time is up.

2:18 – 2:2825 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:18:20 · ≈ 11:18 AM

Next speaker.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:18:21 · ≈ 11:18 AM

Our next speaker is Kathy Staples in Santa Maria to be followed by Dr. Robert Johns here in Santa Barbara.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed2:18:29 · ≈ 11:18 AM

Good morning Ms. Staples. Madam Chair, Kathy Staples, Santa Barbara County Energy and Economic Development Coalition coming before you today to thank the legislative committee for the hard work that you have done. And to tell you of North County's great appreciation to make job growth and economic vitality as a number one priority when we talk about Mr. Walters glad to see you there Mr. Walters and the kinds of things that you need to have in place if in fact you're going to have three days to effectuate Getting some kind of funding towards Santa Barbara County. Isn't this a great opportunity that we have in our legislative committee developing that?

And I'd like to thank Salute Carver Hall, our supervisor for the first district and Doreen Farr as our supervisor for the third district and all up the central coast of all of Santa Barbara County on the coastline into North County Thank you for your response in making job growth and economic vitality important and a top priority. I'd like to ask if, in fact, Supervisor Carbajal you might reconsider establishing that Economic Development Committee that you had in times past. This is the time, this is the opportunity and we are all asking from North County in particular that that might be able to be put into effect again.

Referencing the need for children and looking at poverty as you know California Policy Committee indicates that outside of Los Angeles County Fresno County The Central Coast is the highest rate of children in poverty across this state. So thank you so very much. Let's start forward, New Year and working together. You certainly have my support. Thank you so very much.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:20:18 · ≈ 11:20 AM

Thank you Ms. Staples.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:20:20 · ≈ 11:20 AM

Our next speaker is Dr. Robert Shull. This will be followed by Sam Cohen who is our final speaker.

CommentDr. Robert JohnsProposed · by introduction2:20:44 · ≈ 11:20 AM

Gee whiz, I think we're talking about racism here. And I think we're talking about discrimination. And Supervisor Lavalina you put it so well. You know I can't remember are we having any representative? On that, let's just say anyway you know what I'm talking about. And of course, Carver Hall, you covered that up beautifully tried to make it, you know your sort of cover-up statements, you know?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:21:18 · ≈ 11:21 AM

Dr. Johnson stay on the topic.

CommentDr. Robert JohnsProposed · by introduction2:21:20 · ≈ 11:21 AM

Yes, certainly Madam Chair. So something like we're talking about racism and that always gets in the way you see We know that racism and discrimination gets in the way of completing the project. I said that like six years ago when I was discriminated against, and the alcohol drug, hey there's something wrong with this alcohol drug, you know it gets in the way of hiring me! You see what happens here? The county is totally divided and then you try to cover it up You try to cover it up, the two, you know, central whatever. You guys cover that all up and say

CommentRobert ShullProposed2:22:01 · ≈ 11:22 AM

ha-ha-ha.

CommentDr. Robert JohnsProposed · by introduction2:22:03 · ≈ 11:22 AM

But racism and discrimination is a thing that gets, and you can't really move forward without that if that's in your system. And hey I studied that in my graduate class but I didn't really have to. I can't do that. I've got to just come right here to Santa Barbara County, come right here and get my internship. You see? Racism and discrimination if you've got it in the system, you can't move forward. And that's what's the problem right now in that alcohol drug and mental health. And that's the problem right now in this county, racism and discrimination. And there are many counties that function very well without it.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:22:59 · ≈ 11:22 AM

Our final speaker is Mr. Cohen.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:23:03 · ≈ 11:23 AM

Welcome, Mr. Cohen

CommentSam CohenProposed2:23:06 · ≈ 11:23 AM

Madam Chair, congratulations being chairwoman this fine year. Members of the Board of Supervisors I'm here just to speak on page 50 and 51 of the document Tribal Gaming Compacts and Land Use. First of all, I have to compliment the CEO and the Assistant CEO. This is a really nicely done document. Really put together very nicely and it will be an excellent document for the county to use for the upcoming year.

The only thing that's missing from this document in the Tribal Gaming Compacts and Land Use section is the only issue we agree on. which is we would like to continue getting funding for the SDF, the Special Distribution Fund from the state of California. I'm not going to speak to your desires to revise the Tribal State Compacts and the CSAC language here. We don't agree with it, all right? Plain and simple some people might even consider it offensive but what we do agree on or have agreed consistently for the last couple of years Is that the county will continue to support annual SDF funding?

Right, you've done annual letters. And so I'd like that to be if at all possible added maybe as a new number six on page 51. I wrote some language that you might consider. I know it's a little last minute and I apologize but you might consider number six. The county will continue to support Annual Special Distribution Fund funding, including without limitation county letters of support and the appearance and testimony of county lobbyists because We have a new legislative cycle in the state of California, and we're going to be coming back to you here in the next couple of weeks for a letter of support. And there's going to be hearings, and you're going to need to send your lobbyists. So if you had such language in your legislative platform, then your legislative committee could more expeditiously assist us in getting this money from the state of California.

Thank you very much.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:25:20 · ≈ 11:25 AM

Thank you Mr. Cohn. Supervisor Lavigny?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.722:25:23 · ≈ 11:25 AM

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to look to Ms. Misich. That sounded reasonable and I sit on the EMEA Gaming Benefit Committee. Is that something that we need to vote on or how do we go about doing that?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed2:25:38 · ≈ 11:25 AM

Yes, Chairman Farr and Supervisor Labadino. In practice we just to follow up on the speaker's comments we have consistently supported the efforts to gain funding for the SDF it is referenced within the larger brief itself but it is not specifically called out as a bullet point. It would be certainly acceptable if you'd like me to make that change to the platform to add in number six it is consistent with your prior practice

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.722:26:05 · ≈ 11:26 AM

Without exception, I'd like to have that change made.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:26:09 · ≈ 11:26 AM

Supervisor Lavinino? Supervisor Wolf? Ms. Nesich, what section specifically are you referring

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:26:15 · ≈ 11:26 AM

to?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:26:16 · ≈ 11:26 AM

What page? Page 51.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:26:19 · ≈ 11:26 AM

Yes, Chair. No, the one that you're referring to.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed2:26:22 · ≈ 11:26 AM

Yes, Chair Farr and Supervisor Wolfe. I reference it under cost to the government. It states the County of Santa Barbara previously enjoyed a... What page are you on? Page 50. Excuse me. Okay. It states that we previously enjoyed distribution from the SDF of approximately $1.4 million but the state budget reduced that amount And so we reference that as a topic, but it would perhaps be helpful to specifically note it as a bulleted action and strategy.

Thank you

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:26:56 · ≈ 11:26 AM

All right, we have no more public speakers so I'll bring it back to the board. If we want to go ahead and approve this with the amendment that was just proposed, item number six. Supervisor Carbajal?

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction2:27:09 · ≈ 11:27 AM

I'll make a motion to approve the legislative platform as presented with the modifications that were made by my colleagues, I think Supervisor Wolf Put some forward and Supervisor Lavagnino put some suggestions forward. So with that in mind, I'll move to approve the legislative platform and again great job.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:27:28 · ≈ 11:27 AM

I have a motion of the second. Second from Supervisor Lavagnino all those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you everybody and thank you again Ms. Nesich and Mr. Walters for being here. All right, we're going to move right on to item number three which should only take a few minutes. And actually for agenda management since we have already continued item four and five and I think we already have people here for item number six is the board going to want to go ahead and move into that one or do we want to tell people to come back after lunch?

Okay, all right. So if you're here for item number six we are going to try to get to you in just a few minutes and yeah seven definitely after lunch seven and eight okay Mr. Allen would you read into the record item number three please?

2:28 – 2:3610 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:28:25 · ≈ 11:28 AM

Madam Chair, members of the Board. Item 3 is from the County Executive Office. It's a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the recruitment process for filling a vacancy on the Retirement Board of the Santa Barbara County Employees' Retirement System. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:28:38 · ≈ 11:28 AM

The situation with this is that I guess the last time there was an opening on the Retirement Board A subcommittee of Supervisor Wolf and Supervisor Gray who have served on the SB CSRS Board, Supervisor Gray in the immediate past and now Supervisor Wolf went ahead and reviewed the applications and brought forward a recommendation to the full board. We now, we had three applications come in and then a fourth come in after the deadline. And so I just wanted to ask the board this is just kind of a process issue whether they want to go ahead and have a subcommittee whether it's the same subcommittee or different subcommittee to do that same process or whether we wanted to just go ahead and agendize this for full board discussion on the 7th and pick somebody without the use of a subcommittee.

Supervisor Carbajal?

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction2:29:28 · ≈ 11:29 AM

Thank you, Madam Chair. I know our practice on this has sort of evolved and been a little fluid over the past few years. To my recollection for awhile there was this rotation, informal rotation of supervisors putting forward nominations. I remember I did that once. I think Supervisor Wilk did it. Maybe my colleagues from North County did as well. Then it became the subcommittee. Anyways, my point being is it's been very fluid This is such an important appointment that I wanted to ask our board to give some thoughts, and not a subcommittee but really give our consideration for a protocol that we can codify and really develop for future consideration of retirement candidate appointments.

The City of Santa Barbara has a unique process which they literally will have people apply and literally, I'm not suggesting that it be just like theirs come before the council and then based on nominations whoever gets the majority votes. Sometimes it's easy sometimes it's not. But to really avoid a parochial approach, it might just be good for all the candidates that apply. We all individually meet with them and then we put forth a nomination and see where we wind up with until we get three votes for one individual.

The reason being is that there are so many, this is such of an important appointment And I think people come to us with various qualifications and what I don't want is to us inadvertently, not that we will purposely do this but inadvertently go back Either getting into a north or south, one of my constituents I feel obligated to endorse them versus someone else or a north-south thing. So I want us to find a process that will allow us to interview the best people who came forward and to really put forth the nominations we think will do the best job on the retirement board. Personally I haven't been too pleased with all the appointments that have been made in the past and I just...I think we've all Have really developed a.

a larger appreciation of what the Retirement Board does and the type of individuals that we need to appoint. So I, for one, want to be more involved and I'm trying to think of a process that might allow us to be more engaged but certainly despite the good work of this subcommittee which I appreciate greatly, this is one that I personally want to be involved in and I don't know how my colleagues feel in the nominations that are put forward

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:32:31 · ≈ 11:32 AM

Supervisor Gray and then Supervisor Lavinino.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed2:32:33 · ≈ 11:32 AM

Thank you. I have lobbied long and hard on this issue, and that is that the most qualified person...I mean they could be next door neighbors as far as I'm concerned, as long as they know finance, they care about finance, and they study and they spend time This is a $2 billion fund, and it was... We had appointees that were well-meaning and came to the meetings every now and again. I mean, it was abominable. So the last couple of times where we have... Supervisor Wolfe and I interviewed, and it can be any way that we want it to be but the key element is that person as you said supervisor should be Ultimately qualified and we haven't done that in the past.

I don't have a strong feeling, I don't think it's necessary for all of us to interview everybody but I don't care as long as that person that we pick is the single most qualified and I did think it worked really well when Supervisor Wolfe and I interviewed them because we've got the basis of being on that board but just as long as they're finance-based and will stay on the board longer than two years. That is the most tremendous waste, as if they go on They stay on for two years and say, well I'm really tired of this. We have invested thousands of dollars and thousands of hours in their education and then we lose it. So it's A, are you qualified? And B, will you stay on?

So I continue to lobby for that.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:34:23 · ≈ 11:34 AM

Thank you Supervisor Gray. Supervisor Levenson. Thank

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.722:34:25 · ≈ 11:34 AM

you Madam Chair. I also feel that just, you know, in this last year seeing how important that appointment is I would prefer that it come before the entire board rather than just a subcommittee so that we all have a chance to make sure that it's somebody that we're all comfortable with, or at least whoever gets the majority of votes. And so that's my lean.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:34:52 · ≈ 11:34 AM

Council, I'm going to turn to you Mr. Marshall. If we were not to go with the subcommittee practice as we've done in the past what would be the process then for all of the board making an appointment? Because I'm not really sure whether we would all be interviewing people together or Supervisor Carbajal said something about interviewing people individually.

CommentKathy StaplesProposed · by introduction2:35:16 · ≈ 11:35 AM

Thank You Madam Chair Yes, you touched on a limitation in this process. We could not under the Brown Act set up a process that would have candidates individually contact and be interviewed by board members. The alternative to a full board appointment would be for the candidates to come before your board and respond to questions that the board members may have.

And then whatever process of elimination occurs through either a nomination process. If you have 10 or 20 people, you might narrow it down for more extensive on a follow-up meeting, more extensive interviews. Or you could simply take the entire candidate group receive the applications interview or allow them a period of time to make comments and then make your selections.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:36:07 · ≈ 11:36 AM

Okay so one of the ways that we might move forward would be when we agendize this, because right now we have just four applications. Would be to notify all of them to be present to have an opportunity to make a short presentation. We will have already looked at their resumes and then the board would go ahead and have a public discussion on it and a vote here. That's one process. Supervisor Lavagnino did you?

2:36 – 2:5034 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:36:35 · ≈ 11:36 AM

Thank you Madam Chair. As the new board representative, I do have a few comments. I certainly understand the Board's desire to hear from all of the applicants. This is an important appointment. But as part of the subcommittee, when Supervisor Gray and I met with the applicants it was more than just a pro forma having someone come up and talk about their experience. I think we spent maybe an hour with each individual And you know something could be said for Supervisor Gray and I not maybe having the same philosophical bent, but amazingly we were able to come together and make a recommendation to the board. And it's not that our recommendation is final, of course.

It's just a recommendation to the board. But I think that what Supervisor Gray said is right on and the two The two folks that we have appointed thus far are exceptional representatives, I believe from this board as far as being knowledgeable in finances and retirement. They are extremely committed to the county, to the Retirement Board. They have done a lot of educational processes. They bring a lot to the board meetings. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I feel like You know, I feel like the process has worked. It gives us an opportunity to really delve into their background rather than having them come here. But the flip side is I understand that you want to hear from them.

One might be a hybrid and that is that we Well, you know that we continue the subcommittee and then of course the recommendation. The person comes to the board and then you can I suppose that makes it more difficult. I just think that we will not get a good, the process really needs to be in depth and I just don't think unless we allocate a couple hours which I really think we're going to need because we all agree it's important so if we agree it's important Let's make sure that we allocate the time to hear from the individuals when they come here or have a special meeting, something that sets it apart from our normal process.

Thank you Supervisor Wolf. Supervisor Labomino?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.722:39:28 · ≈ 11:39 AM

Madam Chair I agree with that. I think that even a special meeting might be in order so that we don't clog up an entire day but that we just, we have plenty of days where we're not having meetings on Tuesdays that maybe we could schedule something that even if it takes a couple of hours, just let's make sure we get it right.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:39:46 · ≈ 11:39 AM

And I would say thank you Supervisor Lavagnino and If we move in that direction, I think if it's not a Tuesday another day because We have a vacancy right now that started January 1st supervisor Carbajal

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction2:40:01 · ≈ 11:40 AM

Thank you. You know this is, as Supervisor Gray said of so much importance that I I just think it's important for the whole board to do this. It's not to in any way take away from my appreciation of the subcommittee, but like I said, I respectfully although I ended up voting with to make the appointment last time, I'm not sure that I agreed. For the record, I will state that there were individuals who had a prominent investment experience and the person that was selected while very well qualified in the banking experience for me wasn't Quite what I was looking for and you know banking and investment are two different things. And that's what I'll be looking for.

And again this is so important that I would like us to as a board find a way of looking at how other jurisdictions do it City of Santa Barbara, others and just have a process that I think allows us to be fully engaged and make a selection. Two billion dollars in the sustainability of that fund is so important.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:41:25 · ≈ 11:41 AM

Supervisor Wolf. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'd like to try and make a motion after hearing from my colleagues and just crafting something that hopefully we can all agree to. And that is that we direct our clerk of the board to work with the Board of Supervisors To schedule a meeting. I don't know if we can legally be called a special meeting, but a meeting where the only agenda item is the selection of this position and we allocate We have four people I would say Three hours that's at least a half hour a person and then and then providing us with time to deliberate And to do that during the month of January.

Supervisor Gray.

not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed2:42:20 · ≈ 11:42 AM

That certainly works for me and I'm feeling incredibly successful right now because I think this board finally understands how incredibly important this is. And it's not this board, it's just the Board. I mean, it used to be just put old so-and-so on and do it doesn't really matter. But as we do this and going to second the motion, I hope that we'll realize that some people interview better than others and especially when they're out in public So not only do we want to be sure that we do it, but we want to be aware of the worst football coach we ever hired was the best interview I've ever gone on. Yeah? I know.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:43:00 · ≈ 11:43 AM

Supervisor Carbonell.

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction2:43:01 · ≈ 11:43 AM

I just wanted to add that our council and the clerk should look at other processes to see what they would recommend to us with our CEO's office. Just to make sure that it's a process that works, clearly the simple application that they fill out right now is absolutely not adequate for this very important role. And a flimsy one-pager of I do this, I do this, I do this? Absolutely not. This is something where individuals that apply for starters we need a new application.

It's not good enough and two, they should have an opportunity to really tell us why they're qualified On face value, you could usually see those that are qualified and those that aren't. And for me it's very easy if you can narrow it down to the few that are and then get into their substantial experience in the areas that they need to have expertise in and experience because that's what they're going to be doing.

I hate to say this but this is not a time for amateur hour. When you're dealing with a $2 billion fund for our retirees and future employees that are going to retire. I don't want amateurs, I want people who know what they're doing.

CommentKathy StaplesProposed · by introduction2:44:21 · ≈ 11:44 AM

Madam Chair, I'm hearing a sense of urgency to move forward with this round of appointments. But I think your board does have the authority to direct staff to develop a process that could either be memorialized through a resolution or even through an ordinance that would specify what types of qualifications and a more detailed process that would give the board perhaps a more structured interview process when they're looking at candidates down the road on those kinds of issues Particularly the board members who have served on the Retirement Board have noticed that are particularly critical to the successful performance as a Retirement Board member.

We could come back, I've done this before and I won't speak for the CEO. We have

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:45:04 · ≈ 11:45 AM

a motion and a second let's call the

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:45:05 · ≈ 11:45 AM

question. Actually, I'd like to comment on the motion. First of all, I think I really appreciate the work of the subcommittee. I think with four applications, I always see the work of a subcommittee as a way to kind of screen it down. So in this case, I think with four, it's probably less necessary than it might be that has been in the past or in the future.

So, I'm supportive of the full board being involved with it. I think memorializing a better process is really a good idea. I'm not sure whether that can happen now since we have this immediate vacancy in front of us but clearly I agree with Supervisor Carbajal That the materials that we get for applicants, for this particular position anyway are just not adequate. And so the applicants that have already submitted applications and some resume I think should be asked if they want to provide supplemental material specifically dealing with why they want this, how long they're going to be interested in serving and whatever specific background that they think that they bring to it.

So because we do have a current opening Supervisor Wolf your motion included having it come this month? It did. Okay, so right now we have a regular meeting that's been called for next week here in Santa Barbara that has a short agenda on it right now primarily to do with redevelopment. So we could calendar it for that otherwise we would be calling a special meeting for the 31st or else we're into February

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed2:46:52 · ≈ 11:46 AM

7th. Chairwoman, just as a reminder and something that possibly we could do if your board would like to add it to that meeting. We can actually do those individual interviews time certain to assist those folks in being able to schedule their day and then do the RDA discussion after if you so choose.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:47:12 · ≈ 11:47 AM

I think that's great. That's good, I think that's a perfect day to move forward. Madam

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction2:47:19 · ≈ 11:47 AM

Chair?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:47:20 · ≈ 11:47 AM

It would be next week January 24th here in Santa Barbara time certain in the morning and we would take up the rest of the items, the redevelopment agency items after that. Supervisor Carbone?

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction2:47:33 · ≈ 11:47 AM

Madam Chair and I would hope that somebody could put together a better requirement of data that they need to fill out and get back to us Again, not just the flimsy stuff we have that.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:47:43 · ≈ 11:47 AM

Well, I think at this point in time for noticing, I just think that the applicants should be contacted to say that whatever supplementary material that they can provide us in addition to what they've already given us that discusses why they want this position, how long they're committed to doing it and specifically out of their background what they feel is applicable that makes them the best candidate for it would be at least a place

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:48:10 · ≈ 11:48 AM

to

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:48:10 · ≈ 11:48 AM

start.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:48:10 · ≈ 11:48 AM

And, you know, Lila Deeds is here from the Retirement Board and I know she's got her plate full but it might be also good to have some information about the meetings, the requirements. Just a one-page informational form that can go to the applicants before Tuesday.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:48:36 · ≈ 11:48 AM

Okay. Supervisor Wolf, so your motion will it incorporate some of these comments that have been made then as far as what we just talked about? Supplemental material more information that you just mentioned and a time certain for the meeting next week.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:48:52 · ≈ 11:48 AM

Correct. And allocating I guess half hour per person is that enough time?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:49:01 · ≈ 11:49 AM

So so figure two hours. OK the second is good with that

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:49:06 · ≈ 11:49 AM

I would actually allocate maybe because we're going to need to deliberate All right, well at least two hours. And I think the agenda should read that we will make the appointment isn't it? I think that's

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:49:20 · ≈ 11:49 AM

what we're going to do. Notice to make an appointment. All right there is a motion and a second. Wait

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed2:49:25 · ≈ 11:49 AM

just a minute if we will make the appointment what if upon interview we decide they are not qualified?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:49:32 · ≈ 11:49 AM

So

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:49:33 · ≈ 11:49 AM

why don't we, we

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:49:34 · ≈ 11:49 AM

don't

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:49:34 · ≈ 11:49 AM

have

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:49:34 · ≈ 11:49 AM

to. Why don't you just phrase it that at least we have the option to make the appointment?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:49:40 · ≈ 11:49 AM

But we're not

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:49:40 · ≈ 11:49 AM

required. We're not required.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:49:42 · ≈ 11:49 AM

If we want to continue. Okay, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? All right motion carries thank you very much. All right why don't we go ahead since we said we would go ahead and get uh go into item number six because we have continued item number four and five.

2:50 – 2:5818 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:50:03 · ≈ 11:50 AM

Madam Chair members of the board item six is from the office of emergency services it's a hearing to consider recommendations regarding public parking in higher fire danger areas

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:50:13 · ≈ 11:50 AM

Good morning Mister Harris.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed2:50:15 · ≈ 11:50 AM

Madam Chair, members of the Board.

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction2:50:19 · ≈ 11:50 AM

Madam Chair?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:50:20 · ≈ 11:50 AM

Yes, Supervisor Carbajal.

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction2:50:22 · ≈ 11:50 AM

Mr. Harris and I spoke in advance since this is something my office has been working on for a while. I just wanted to put it in context. As you're all aware, Mission Canyon is one of those unique communities. It's a high fire hazard area. We have been working on fire prevention and other policy measures over the years for many years. And we initially took the approach that we would try to get the multi-jurisdictional task force on trails to address this issue. And quite frankly, they weren't able to get it on their agenda for the past year and a half.

So I worked with our staff, our CHP, our sheriffs, our fire personnel, various other stakeholders To see what we could do in light of the concern that the community has had regarding red flag days and the dangers that parking and use of the trails during those red flag days, which on average is about three a year for the Mission Canyon area. The real threat that poses For fire hazard and the threat that the health and public safety issue that it poses to the community. So what you have before you is a very unique and surgical approach to deal with this community that is uniquely situated in a high fired hazard area It's a box canyon.

One road in, one road out and we've tried many measures over the years to make this area safer but the one thing that has eluded us has been what is before us today finally a comprehensive strategy multifaceted Thank you. And there's no better way of characterizing this than the fact that this is a public safety issue and may serve as a model to see how we might be able to duplicate similar areas, similar approaches in other areas as well. And I want to thank Mr. Harris because he really picked up the ball on this Brought everyone together.

We worked through things slowly, council was involved, everybody was involved to make sure that we got it right. That we came out with something that would work and I'm happy to turn it over to Mr. Harris.

not transcribed≈14s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:53:22 · ≈ 11:53 AM

Thank you Supervisor Carbajal. Mr. Harris?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed2:53:25 · ≈ 11:53 AM

Madam Chair, members of the Board. Just a very brief orientation for people in the audience who are watching and hopefully they can see this. It's just an aerial view showing the area that we're talking about which is represented up here, Mission Canyon. To orient everyone, we're looking at Foothill Road as Foothill Road comes off of 154. Here's the three-way stop sign.

As you progress past the three-way stop sign, you move into the Mission Canyon area and you get off Foothill. There's a county fire station right here and then Mission Canyon Road turns up this way just as Supervisor Carbajal spoke to tunnel road continues up there's a little jog right here very unique in that if you notice all the houses And all the population that's normally there, it can be exacerbated with a large number of visitors when many of us go up to hike this and other trails.

But this is unique and this is a situation that we find ourselves in and this is the reason for the attention to this area. In the board packet we talk about where we want to put some flip down signs if the Board adopts a no parking on red flag days type of approach. People would come in, there would be a flip down sign right here across from the fire station. As you continue up Mission Canyon Road if you jog up to the left here, here's Tunnel Road another flip down sign here finally a third flip down sign advising of the no parking restrictions again Tunnel Road goes all the way up in here and this is where the main trailhead is

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:55:03 · ≈ 11:55 AM

Thank you, Madam Chair. Sorry to interrupt Mr. Harris but I just wanted some and Mr. Hahn is here from the fire department. The flip down signs that you're referring to they're the ones that say high fire danger and then when it's flipped down that's when it says that it's a red flag warning or

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed2:55:26 · ≈ 11:55 AM

Madam Chair, Supervisor Wolf. The signs that we're speaking with at this point would be a red flag warning and it would also state that no parking on Tunnel Road is in effect. The signs I believe you're referring to are already stationed throughout the Mission Canyon area when there is some heightened state of awareness around flags excuse me around fires they flip down the signs and it advises people to exercise more caution

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:55:52 · ≈ 11:55 AM

Because there's actually a flip-down sign on my street, and I fortunately it hasn't been flipped too often. But I thought that it says that there is no parking. So we don't have any regulation or anything that says in a high fire zone when there's a red flag alert that there's no parking.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed2:56:16 · ≈ 11:56 AM

Madam Chair, Supervisor Wolf. That's the current signs that I believe exist and Chief Hahn can correct me are these ones that they flip down that just simply state for example a red flag is in effect parking restrictions enforced so for example if you're going to double park or something like that you're more likely to get... Well that's what I

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:56:36 · ≈ 11:56 AM

was okay so it says parking restrictions enforced.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed2:56:39 · ≈ 11:56 AM

I think it does. Yeah that's that's correct.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:56:43 · ≈ 11:56 AM

Okay. So for instance, on my street, if someone sees that parking restrictions enforced, does that mean no parking?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed2:56:53 · ≈ 11:56 AM

Supervisor Wolf, Madam Chair it does not necessarily mean no parking. It simply puts people on notice that the issue around parking has taken a heightened sense of awareness and if I'll use you as an example if you're used to double parking or just parking any way you want. Thank you. Well I don't want to pick on your constituents and get a nasty phone call.

But what it sort of puts you on notice is that the parking and the traffic issues are really being taken seriously because a red flag warning exists. I'm certainly familiar with the ones that are in the Mission Canyon area, that fold down and say that because of obviously the constraints around parking in that whole area of the county.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:57:36 · ≈ 11:57 AM

So I'm going back to what Supervisor Carbajal said about the impact in other areas. Could one assume that where these signs are already, and there is a sentence in the sign that says parking is restricted, that there would be some continuity between these signs? If you go in one area it's saying no parking but in another area it says parking restricted Did you talk about that at all?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed2:58:10 · ≈ 11:58 AM

Madam Chair, Supervisor Wolf. I think the main thing that we spoke about was making it abundantly clear as people enter this area the reason for the three signs at the corners there and as you go by Montrose Place is to make it very clear and to be matter of fact that there's no parking for example on Tunnel Road. Our issue is to one be fair to people and two to be very clear if people are cited or there's some type of enforcement action taken In your area, for example and other areas including Mission Canyon in general.

Like I said there may be people who are a little sloppy and it's simply putting them on notice that they might not get away with it because of the fire conditions and the need to really evacuate people properly and be clear that you just can't park any willy-nilly way you want right now.

2:59 – 3:0719 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:59:02 · ≈ 11:59 AM

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Harris. Thank you, Supervisor Wolk. Mr. Harris?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed2:59:08 · ≈ 11:59 AM

Okay, thank you ma'am. Yeah, Chief Hodge just said it's red flag fire alert parking laws strictly enforced is what those signs say.

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction2:59:16 · ≈ 11:59 AM

Madam Chair, Mr Harris I'm going to help you out okay? Thank you. These signs will prohibit parking and put people on notice when there's a red flag day Notice period and it puts everybody on notice. And the reason you need these signs is so that we are compliant with the law, so that CHP and law enforcement personnel can come ticket. It does not apply on non red flag days. It's just telling everybody once that triggers been done and there's added education and on the fact that it's a red flag day, we will be able to enforce tow and get people out of there.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:59:59 · ≈ 11:59 AM

But what I'm trying to say is, and I'm not discounting the issue at Tunnel Road. I'm trying to understand that we are just talking about red flag days and why in our county we would have different signs? Why in one area if there's a red flag day parking is restricted which still is very fuzzy to me. And in another area it's no parking. And I'm certainly not discounting the issue on Tunnel Road. I'm just trying to understand countywide how the impact of this or just to reconcile these differences.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed3:00:38 · ≈ 12:00 PM

Madam Chair, Supervisor Wolff, to be sort of brief about it is the conditions in Tunnel Road are so significant in the narrowness of the road and some of the drainage areas on the side of the road we've got pictures obviously in your board packet That the most appropriate, the recommendation exists to make it no parking simply because of the conditions and the volume of traffic that's there day-to-day. Whereas your neighborhood may not one have the volume of traffic nor may it have the width of road involved, the drainage areas where people are more likely to have problems evacuating. So in this area very specific to this area, very specific to Tunnel Road, the recommendation before your board is to have no parking on red flag days.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed3:01:22 · ≈ 12:01 PM

Okay. And I'm not being argumentative, but so there must be some objective reason that there is no parking on Tunnel Road and I'm suspecting it's coming from planning or the fire department. And so what I'm trying to understand is what is the objective data that would suggest that in another area where there is a sign that says restricted parking on high fire days, why is that road different? Has it been analyzed? Maybe they all need to be looked at.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed3:02:01 · ≈ 12:02 PM

And I'll let Mr. Smart answer some questions too as the Road Commissioner but let me just point you down to our map here. If you look at the signs that we did talk about where laws are strictly enforced, for example. You have multiple paths where you can get out of this area. You've got exits back out on to Foothill where you can exit either east or west. On Tunnel Road which goes up here by the way this is all burn areas so it shows you how far up this road goes there's only one way out of here and on those days when we had 80 plus vehicles there's a public safety concern between the Public Safety Agencies And the group of us that really raised this as an issue of our ability to get people out there on red flag days alone, which we're averaging a little bit more than one year.

And only on those days do we want to heighten our ability to get people evacuated out of there. Our concern is on this one road in this area where there's no other path to get out of there. We're going to have trouble getting people out if we need to evacuate people and the line in the sand is a red flag warning day. In your neighborhood, for example, Supervisor, there may be different paths or wider roads and things like that.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:03:10 · ≈ 12:03 PM

Thank

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed3:03:10 · ≈ 12:03 PM

you. Mr. Harris, I appreciate that. Actually, that made sense to me what you just said about the access. One access versus multiple access. So if that's the rationale, I get it. Thank you for that.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:03:27 · ≈ 12:03 PM

Mr Smart, did you want to go ahead and comment?

CommentMr SmartProposed3:03:30 · ≈ 12:03 PM

If it pleases the board, I'll add the signs that you're referring to Supervisor Wolf was installed a few years ago. They are in areas of high fire danger like in San Marcos or Mission Canyon, Tepeskaya, several areas in the county we've installed those signs during heightened fire days, red flag days. The Fire Department will go out to those areas And look for violations of existing parking regulations. So, for example, if somebody is blocking a driveway with the vehicle or like Mr. Harris mentioned somebody's double parking there will be no tolerance to those and the CHP or the Sheriff's Department will respond to those parking violations immediately on red flag days. And so that was our first stage that we've done to try to accommodate the high fire areas and now we're looking at this next step here Mr.

Harris is presenting today.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed3:04:24 · ≈ 12:04 PM

Thank you, Mr. Smart. I appreciate that.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed3:04:26 · ≈ 12:04 PM

All

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed3:04:27 · ≈ 12:04 PM

right,

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed3:04:27 · ≈ 12:04 PM

Mr.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:04:27 · ≈ 12:04 PM

Harris go

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed3:04:27 · ≈ 12:04 PM

ahead and continue. I'll go on record real quick to say that I don't know that Supervisor Wolf has ever double parked so I don't want to imply that. So again the burn areas up there. The issues that we looked at were the public safety concerns over the ability to rapidly evacuate an area with limited access one way in one way out many more vehicles than the residents only Rapid evacuation abilities severely impacts when the large number of vehicles are back there.

We had to make a decision point on where do you sort of draw the line to say on these type of days, so our recommendation is only this area and thus far unless there's other areas identified that have that same type of issue and only on red flag warning days which are about 1.3 days per year. The recommendations that we're asking the board to consider is the no parking on only red flag morning days.

Public education signs, again reiterating to people the threat of the area. We found areas where there's been pit fires, there's cigarette butts on the trail, things that are really not a good idea in this area. We wanted to seek the board direction to continue, although Supervisor Carbajal mentioned it earlier. Continue our efforts with all the jurisdictions and the multi-jurisdictional committees to try to get a more uniform approach based on the idea that this area if... This is not a matter about people just don't want cars parked and there's three or four ways out of an area. This has one road in, one road out.

We're asking the board to adopt the CEQA exemption Within your packet, there's the operational guidelines that explain how we're going to try to do it. How we're going to try to affect this. There's the educational outreach. We've even established a new text messaging that we can notify the citizens when red flag warnings are issued by simply texting Red Flag to 888-777. You text Red Flag to 888777 and when one is issued our officer, our duty officer will be issuing a notice to that effect.

The recommendations do not include parking downhill, which was discussed before because of the need to move the road essentially. No parking on days other than red flag days. This is only red flag days. It's worthwhile to note to the community and for all of us that daily enforcement of the parking, which you see in your board attachment is continuing to going to be a problem. There lacks the significant and the needed law enforcement resources between the CHP who's down 25% of their staff to really do the day-to-day stuff it's in a priority but it's a list of priorities The priority increases on red flag days and the CHP and the Sheriff have worked together to look at operationally how they can utilize both staffed on red flag days to try to best affect parking enforcement.

So with those I'm certainly available for any other questions, and I'll turn it back to your yourselves and any members of the public I know that wish to speak.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:07:34 · ≈ 12:07 PM

Thank you Mr. Harris. I know that we have members of the public that are waiting to speak so why don't we go ahead and hear from the public now?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:07:42 · ≈ 12:07 PM

Our first speaker is Marianne Muntz to be followed by Lynn McEwen-Cohen.

3:07 – 3:137 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:07:51 · ≈ 12:07 PM

Good afternoon.

CommentMarianne MuntzProposed3:07:51 · ≈ 12:07 PM

Thank you, and it's nice to be here. Thank you Supervisor Carbajal for your interest in our area and thank you for the rest of the board for trying to understand our area. And I would encourage you if you have never driven up Mission Canyon and seen the Box Canyon and the narrowness of the road and the windiness of the road to take a drive. It's five minutes from here and it would really be worth your while to see what we're talking about and how narrow it is, and it is a safety issue for the fire vehicles that need to come up there. I live at the very top right across from the entrance to the area where the people park and go on their hikes.

And the day that the T-fire or the Jesusito Fire started

CommentLynn McEwen-CohenProposed3:08:35 · ≈ 12:08 PM

When

CommentMarianne MuntzProposed3:08:35 · ≈ 12:08 PM

I walked out my front door, I saw the curl of smoke just right over the edge of the ridge and knew immediately that I needed to evacuate. And thank goodness I was one of the first ones to evacuate because the congestion that occurs in that canyon when an evacuation is needed With all of the vehicles trying to come up to suppress the fire and the firefighters running in, and all of us residents trying to get out is very congested. And when you have parking alongside of the road in these areas where there really isn't room for parking Where the cars are partway onto the roadway where they're parked right beside of a fire hydrant within a few feet of a fire hydrant. It's a very dangerous area and I thank you for considering this proposal, I encourage you to vote to support this proposal and I would also Thank the staff for the time that they've spent looking into this and I think that they have on earth a number of issues that perhaps need to be addressed besides just the red flag day.

When you look at 60, 70, 80 cars parked alongside of a road that is barely wide enough for your car to get down much less have a fire emergency vehicle coming up That the need for some enforcement beyond perhaps just the red flag days really needs to be an option to consider by the staff and the things that they've unearthed in just this first stage of this proposal. Thank you. Thank you.

Our

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:10:07 · ≈ 12:10 PM

next speaker is Lynn McEwen-Cohen, followed by Raymond Smith

CommentLynn McEwen-CohenProposed3:10:18 · ≈ 12:10 PM

Good morning, Madam Chair and Supervisors. It's a pleasure to be here before you this morning. I've owned property up on Mission Canyon for 20 years and this is the first time I've been here to be with you so I really appreciate that this morning. I wanted just to say a couple things in support of what's before you today. Our little cottage is a moody cottage, so the fact that it did not burn down was especially important to us and I speak to you today not just as a property owner in that area but also as a member of the Mission Canyon Association for the whole time we've been there and how important they are.

My husband and I also are very supportive of fire service in Los Angeles. We run a foundation called First In Fire Foundation, Friends of the Fire Department and Fire Service so we really understand just how important this is and really appreciate your full attention to it. I do want to take this opportunity to thank you Supervisor Carper-Hall I spoke to your staff the day of the fire and you were kind enough to call us the day after the fire. It was most comforting, it was most helpful and I've never had a chance to really thank you and I want to do so today. I also wanted to compliment the staff Michael Harris with the Office of Emergency Services. It is extremely wonderful to have such competent staff look at this 360.

I also want to thank Fire Station 15, who helps us with everything. The Mission Canyon Association has been such an active part of all of this and I really applaud your willingness to work with them on this. This concept of fire department public-private partnership working with citizens on fire safety emergency preparedness It really couldn't come at a better time post 9-11, I think all of our awarenesses. And then on top of that we had the sandwich of the three different fires so I think awareness you know couldn't be at a higher time. This solution really has forged a bond of fire among all of us I think and I think this allows us to have this middle-of-the-road solution that the Office of Emergency Services has come up with and we support that We also support the unified command of really working closely with the Sheriff's Department.

And I think this particular collaboration encouraging citizens to focus on self-reliance is also very important at this time. Thank you for keeping us safe and sound. And thank you, too, for allowing us to be such an integral part in working with you as a team. We feel that unique situations may come up for different ones of us. Those will have creative solutions. We appreciate that. We appreciate the energy that you're putting toward this.

Very much would like to be part of any solution and put all of our heads together To keep us as safe as we've been able to be so far. Thanks so much for your attention today Thank you. Thank you for being here.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:13:18 · ≈ 12:13 PM

Our next speaker is Raymond Smith to be followed by Barbara Lindeman

3:13 – 3:3316 turns

CommentRaymond SmithProposed3:13:24 · ≈ 12:13 PM

Madam Chair and members of the board, thank you for continuing this past noon today. The last time I was in front of you we were arguing for and presenting to you the community wildlife protection plan which the Mission Canyon Association put together and has served as a blueprint for the rest of the county. I can report to you that because you approved that plan and we got it in on time, we have received a $67,000 grant from the Fire Safe Council to continue the work of NR Canyon to try to prevent fires. So thank you very much.

On to today's subject. A brief background. In the early 90s, the Mission Canyon Association had an evacuation study. I won't go into the details of that but very briefly it said that in short if we had, if everybody used just one car, if that car was pointed out of the canyon then in theory we could evacuate the canyon in 20 to 30 minutes and many of the recommendations that came out of that you'll find in your document that you find right outside here on Are You Ready for a Wildfire Evacuation?

Having said that, in the 20-some years since that study was done, there are now weekends where over 100 more cars are in the canyon. And as Mr. Harris has pointed out, they're pointed uphill. Many of them are parked over the white stripe. They're parked illegally. They're in the wrong direction. I would also further note that 95% of the wildfires are caused by people, so that's one of our concerns is the number of people that erupt into the front country during high fire situations.

To the multi-jurisdictional task force, the Front Country Trails Multi-Jurisdictional Task Force. On several occasions, the presentation that you're seeing today, unfortunately they seem to be more interested in keeping the hikers, the bikers and the equestrians at peace rather than to be concerned about the health and safety of the community and people who are in the front country.

I'll end by just saying that we very much appreciate Supervisor Carpajal and Mike Harris, and the first responders in putting together this proposal that's before you. And we hope that you will take their recommendations. Thank you very much.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:16:06 · ≈ 12:16 PM

Thank you. Our next speaker is Barbara Lindemann to be followed by Jenny Cushney.

CommentBarbara Linda MinnProposedself-stated3:16:15 · ≈ 12:16 PM

Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members of the board. I'm Barbara Linda Minn. I've lived at the top of Tunnel Road for 44 years. I hike several times a week the hiking trail. I have two major concerns. that others have already expressed. One is the problems of emergency vehicles getting through and evacuating the residents, but also the safety of the hikers themselves.

Picture a two-lane road as other people have with a white stripe on the right hand side. Parking supposed to be on the...to the right of that white stripe. Most people do that. A few are jutted out into the road. No place to turn around. So every one of those 80 to 100 cars that are parked on the right-hand side of the road have to turn around somewhere in order to evacuate. They pull across the road, which blocks the traffic in both directions when they do that.

Obviously, they have to wait for safe times. But imagine people are trying to emergency vehicles are trying to go up the road at the same time and people are trying to leave the canyon at the same time and cars all along anywhere they can find a driveway, or they drive up to where the water tank is and turn around there which creates further congestion because more cars are going up and then more cars are coming down.

Furthermore, I've noticed this as the number of hikers has increased over the last several years, there's no place for the hikers to walk when they're coming back to their car so hikers are walking in the roadway and the cars going up have to wait for them to either get over Wait for them to pass by, creating further congestion. So it's a very dangerous situation in this Box Canyon.

The second thing I've noticed when I'm hiking there is that there are many newcomers hiking. I mean some wonderful trails and wonderful opportunity for people for recreation but there are tourists from Europe, tourists from out of town. They don't know the trails. They didn't know nothing about the fire situation in Santa Barbara And they have no idea what they're getting into. If they're hiking, they're on a very hot and windy day.

So they're in danger also. And I think this kind of halfway measure of at least preventing parking on the days of Red Flag Days serves as a kind of caution to people who may be walking into dangers that they're entirely unaware of. Thank you very much. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:18:33 · ≈ 12:18 PM

Our next speaker is Jenny Cushney to be followed by our final speaker Richard Axelrod.

CommentJenny CushneyProposed3:18:39 · ≈ 12:18 PM

Good afternoon Madam Chair and members of the Board. I just can't agree more with what everybody has said so far and the presentation that Michael Harris has given this morning, I am really excited about this development about no parking on Tunnel Road on red flag alert days I've been involved in fire issues in the canyon for many years, going back to even before Supervisor Schwartz started the evacuation task force in the year 2000.

As a result of many of us in the canyon having been concerned about evacuation issues and all the numerous things that go along with fire in the canyon. But in the years since then, traffic has increased enormously. Vehicles have got bigger. They park wherever. And I think just having a blanket no parking on the Red Flag Alert days is really what's necessary.

I can tell you some stories about me, what I have done personally in that canyon. I've spent many hours on days where people really shouldn't be up the trails At the trailhead, just talking to people risking my public image because they thought this mad woman from Tunnel Road trying to tell people have you considered what you're risking going into these trails? If a fire should start and being looked at, like people just have no clue about what they are heading into or what they might not get out of. I have put up whiteboard signs Every time there's been a red flag alert because of the whole issues of the multi-jurisdictional area that we live in, nobody would put up a sign. So I would just write on a whiteboard and post the red flag alert notice from the fire department saying warning today is Red Flag Alert Day Please reconsider your decision to hike here.

It might be a better decision to go to the beach and having the notice just take to the board let people realize that this is not just somebody who's off a rocker, this is actually from the fire department but public education aspect really had not been addressed and it's the hikers as well as the residents I mean people have talked about We all know about the problem of getting the residents out. But I was also concerned about just having people in there and if something happened, what would that be like? Anyway, thank you very much for your time. Thank you. Thank you for waiting.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:21:38 · ≈ 12:21 PM

Our final speaker is Richard Axelrod.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:21:42 · ≈ 12:21 PM

Welcome Mr. Axelrod.

CommentEric FreedmanProposed · by introduction3:21:44 · ≈ 12:21 PM

Madam Chairman, members of the board, I can't tell you how ecstatic I am with this resolution brought before you My supervisor Carbajal worked very with great deal of concern for our community, not on this just more than on just this issue. I am over a 40 year resident of Mission Canyon. I've experienced two major fires up there. I'm a frequent hiker of the Tunnel Trail And over the years, easy parking access to the holidays and weekends has disappeared.

I'm just reiterating mostly what my neighbors have done. I'll keep it very short for you. The cars trucks buses increased by 50 times in my opinion during this period the parking concern Has created a dangerous and irresponsible ingress egress situation problems. Particularly during emergency high fire red flag conditions for the gravity of the situation, the safety of our Mission Canyon residents.

Please approve this resolution before you. Thank you very much.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:23:06 · ≈ 12:23 PM

Thank you. All right, bring it back to the board. Supervisor Carbajal?

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction3:23:13 · ≈ 12:23 PM

Move to approve the staff recommendations before the staff report.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:23:18 · ≈ 12:23 PM

Do I have a second? Second. Supervisor Wolfe? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. We will be going into closed session. Mr. Marshall would you read the items we're gonna be considering?

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction3:23:30 · ≈ 12:23 PM

Madam Chair, before he does that I just wanted to thank all the residents from Mission Canyon who came here today. Thank you so much.

CommentKathy StaplesProposed · by introduction3:23:38 · ≈ 12:23 PM

Thank you, Madam Chair. In today's closed session agenda you have one case existing litigation. You have one case of anticipated litigation significant exposure to litigation. You have two cases of anticipated litigation deciding to initiate and public employee performance evaluation.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:23:54 · ≈ 12:23 PM

And how much time do you think we're going to need for that?

CommentKathy StaplesProposed · by introduction3:23:57 · ≈ 12:23 PM

I would say there are a number variables but an hour and a half.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:24:01 · ≈ 12:24 PM

An hour and a half okay so the board will go into closed session and we will come back at 2 o'clock For items number seven and eight. Yeah. ¶¶ ¶. ¶. ♪ Thank you. Yeah. ¶¶ ¶. ¶. Thank you. ¶¶ ♪ ¶. ¶. Thank you. Good

3:33 – 5:041 turns

CommentRobert ShullProposed3:33:21 · ≈ 12:33 PM

morning. ¶. ♪ Thank you. Hi. Hi. You. ♪ Hi. ♪ ♪ ¶. Thank you. Hi. ¶. ♪ Yeah. ¶. Hello. Hi, everyone. ¶¶ ¶. Thank you. ♪ ¶¶ ♪ Yeah. ¶¶ ♪ Yeah. ♪ ♪ The. ¶. Hi. Music Yeah. Hi. You. You. ♪ ♪ ¶¶ Hi. ¶¶ Music playing ¶¶ ¶. ¶. ♪ ¶. ¶. ♪ ¶¶ Thank you. ¶. ¶. 3Lz ! 5.90 (-0.77") ¶. ¶. ¶¶ ¶. ♪ ¶. Thank you. ¶. ¶. ¶. ¶. ¶. ¶. ¶. ¶. ¶. ♪ Yeah. ¶. ¶. Yeah. ¶¶ Yeah. Yeah.

♪ ¶¶ 3F 5.30 x (-0.00?) Yeah. Yeah. ♪ Yeah. 2A 3.30 (-0.00), You. Hmm. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Good evening. Hi. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. ¶¶ ♪ Yeah. ♪ ♪ ¶. ♪♪ ¶¶ ¶. ♪ ¶. ♪ ¶. Music ♪ ¶. ¶. ¶. Thank you. ¶. ¶. You. ¶¶ ¶¶ ¶¶ ¶. Hello. Hi. ♪ Thank you. ♪ You. ¶. ¶¶ . . Yeah. ¶. You. ¶. Yeah. ¶. ♪ ¶. ♪ ¶. Yeah. ¶. ¶. ¶. ¶. ♪ Thank you. ♪ Thank you.

¶¶ Thank you. ¶¶ ¶. ¶¶ Yeah. ¶¶

5:04 – 5:0925 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:04:39 · ≈ 2:04 PM

Let's bring this meeting back to order again. Council, we'll take a report from closed session.

CommentKathy StaplesProposed · by introduction5:04:45 · ≈ 2:04 PM

Thank you Madam Chair. As indicated you had five items for your closed session. You conducted each agendized item and there were no reportable actions in any of the five items. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:05:00 · ≈ 2:05 PM

Thank you Mr. Marshall Okay, we have two items left on our departmental agenda. Number seven and number eight and I've had an indication that the parties in number eight would like a one week continuance so Supervisor Carbajal I'll turn it over to you for a moment.

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction5:05:19 · ≈ 2:05 PM

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm hoping the parties are in this room but I think they're being called in. Yes, I think the good news is it would seem that we have reached a good place with county staff and the applicant with an agreement that pretty much mitigates Most, if not all the issues. And I think a number of people in the community have requested that we continue this so that they could become fully acquainted with the agreement that's been reached.

I spoke to Mr. Bagdasarian. Mr. Bagdasarian, if you could come up here please? It's my understanding that Mr. Bagdasarian is comfortable kicking this out to next week.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 11Proposed5:06:03 · ≈ 2:06 PM

Yes, I am and obviously want people to have a chance to take a look at this and hopefully they'll feel as good about it as we do.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:06:11 · ≈ 2:06 PM

Okay, thank you Mr. Bagdasarian and staff Ms. Black

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction5:06:17 · ≈ 2:06 PM

Council what do we need to do to continue this item a

CommentKathy StaplesProposed · by introduction5:06:19 · ≈ 2:06 PM

week? Just a motion and continue the item at the time certain

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:06:29 · ≈ 2:06 PM

Miss Black, this was estimated for an hour. Are you still thinking it will need an hour next week?

CommentLynn McEwen-CohenProposed5:06:37 · ≈ 2:06 PM

Madam Chair and members of the board I don't think we'll need anywhere near an hour We estimated an hour when we hadn't resolved all the issues And I think we have resolved them so a half-hour at the most

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:06:49 · ≈ 2:06 PM

Okay So the motion would be to move this item to the hearing of the 24th for about 30 minutes

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction5:06:57 · ≈ 2:06 PM

So moved, Madam Chair. Unless there's a public speaker?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed5:07:01 · ≈ 2:07 PM

We have one request to speak from Dr. Jones.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:07:22 · ≈ 2:07 PM

Dr. Johnston, since this is going to be continued to next week, did you want to speak to it today?

CommentDr. Robert JohnsProposed · by introduction5:07:28 · ≈ 2:07 PM

Yes I would. There are certain items as I read the documents on D8 and I'm hoping that this decision will be made in favor of Mr. Bagdasarian. I'm hoping that will be made because of the item I found here I see discrimination and racism. This is a conflict of interest, and next week I don't want you in the decision.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:08:01 · ≈ 2:08 PM

Dr. Johns, are you speaking to the continuance?

CommentDr. Robert JohnsProposed · by introduction5:08:04 · ≈ 2:08 PM

Yes, but he is the conflict of interest person that I want off this board next week when they make the decision, and let me tell you why. Now, I have a document here. Madam Chair? Yes,

CommentKathy StaplesProposed · by introduction5:08:18 · ≈ 2:08 PM

counsel. My advice is that the only action before your board right now is the action on the continuance. Any other comments at this point pending your board's decision on the continuance are extraneous and out of order.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:08:32 · ≈ 2:08 PM

Dr. Johnso, you just speak to the continuance or hold your comments for next week.

CommentDr. Robert JohnsProposed · by introduction5:08:37 · ≈ 2:08 PM

Well okay then The applicant should read Richard Norland, President And this document here, which shows that of course Carver Hall you're the...

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:08:48 · ≈ 2:08 PM

Dr. Jones we're speaking to the continuance or you need to step down.

CommentDr. Robert JohnsProposed · by introduction5:08:52 · ≈ 2:08 PM

But there's conflict of interest here because you're the mayor of Montecito? You can speak to that next week Dr. Jones. And she is an ex-she is an ex supervisor. That's conflict of

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:09:05 · ≈ 2:09 PM

interest. You need to sit down now thank you. All right, so we have a motion. Do we have a second?

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction5:09:13 · ≈ 2:09 PM

So moved Madam Chair.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:09:14 · ≈ 2:09 PM

Alright all those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries thank you will hear this item next week instead. So we'll go to item number seven Mr. Allen, if you could read that into the record please?

5:09 – 5:267 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed5:09:26 · ≈ 2:09 PM

Madam Chair and members of the Board, Item 7 is from Public Works. It's a hearing to consider recommendations regarding initiation of the California Environmental Quality Act review of recommended resource recovery project process waste currently buried at the Tejiguas Landfill.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:09:42 · ≈ 2:09 PM

All right good afternoon Mr. Schleich

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated5:09:44 · ≈ 2:09 PM

Good afternoon, board members. I'm Mark Schleich. I'll be doing the presentation today. I am also joined by John Dewey from Mustang Renewable Power. The item before you today is an update and a request for direction on an extremely important and beneficial regional waste management project for the South Coast in the San Ynez Valley. This also affects the cities of Buellton, Goleta, Santa Barbara, and Salt Lane.

Since the board's directive of 2002, staff has worked diligently identifying opportunities to reduce landfilling and capture more of the resources that are currently being buried. Throughout this work we have included our regional partners either by participation in a multi-jurisdictional solid waste task group, the conversion technology subgroup, elected official forums or the countless staff meetings evaluating information regarding conversion technology and how it might become part of the solid waste management system It should be noted that we have a very successful diversion program. Our state diversion rate is one of the highest, exceeding 70%. An achievement we should all be proud of.

And while we are considered one of the leaders in this state there's still a significant amount of waste in this landfill. Until recently waste generation has increased. This trend is common throughout the state and it's not unique to Santa Barbara County. Since 2005-06, landfill tonnage began trending downward which is a reflection of the current economic situation that's affecting all of us.

That decrease is between about 20 to 25% from the peak of 2005. Regardless, the amount of waste that is landfilled still is significant. We are looking for a way to manage nearly 200,000 tons of waste currently being landfilled without affecting existing and planned recycling programs on the South Coast We also found that this project supports the regional recycling goals, helps meet state mandates, reduces environmental impacts and provides for a 20-year cost effective solution.

The key components of the project are a material recovery facility to collect the bottles cans and other recyclables that remain in the trash can about 25%. An anaerobic digester to process food waste, green waste and other organics that are also in the trash can. To create energy while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. That's about 30% of what is in our waste stream.

The remainder will be landfilled and this will expand or continue the current life at the Tahigas Landfill permitted...that's permitted Additionally, the proposed project creates flexibilities and opportunities to process commingled recyclables and food waste locally or further tailor or enhance our existing programs. As I previously mentioned this project addresses many existing state mandates.

We are required to demonstrate 15 years of disposal capacity. This project provides for 20. AB 341 has set a goal of 75% waste diversion, this project will move us to 80% plus. AB 32 directs the reduction in greenhouse gases. This project has the ability to eliminate the equivalent of 22,000 vehicles per year. And SB 20 encourages greater use of renewable energy. This project will provide one megawatt towards that goal. Interestingly enough, all of these mandates come due in 2020.

This project is also cost effective when compared to landfilling alternatives while addressing the mandates I just touched upon. As you can see from the pie chart, disposal fees are a small part but important piece when calculating trash rates. They represent about 21 to 33 percent of the total bill and therefore any increase to the tip fee will be proportionally increased to the rate payer.

This procurement process started in 2007, and that's when we started developing the RFP. And the proposers started responding. All jurisdictions were invited to participate. Our efforts were supported by a consultant, ARI, who is extremely knowledgeable on conversion technologies and projects of this nature. In 2008 your board adopted goals for the project and received a feasibility report prepared by ARI.

In 2009, all participating jurisdictions adopted letters of support based upon achieving the project's goals. In October of 2009, the RFP was released. Here are the primary goals of the project. Increased diversion of post-recycled waste, that being what's in the trash can. Reduce environmental impacts of landfilling. Provide financial feasibility and long term sustainability. Production of green energy and other marketable products provide a humane work environment and result in a long term waste management plan, 20 years. And again we're trying not to impact existing programs this is about what's currently being landfilled Four companies submitted responsible proposals, and with the help of the CT subgroup and staff from participating cities we have narrowed this list to today's recommendation.

Throughout the past four years we've engaged the community In total, we have done about 90 presentations to a cross-section of the community from environmental groups to business groups to interested parties. Pretty much anybody that would care to listen to us. In some cases, we've talked to the same groups more than twice. In early December, a presentation similar to this one was made to the city managers of affected agencies as well as the elected officials forum.

The community at large has told us they're interested in increasing recycling, generating additional energy and decreasing the environmental impacts as long as the cost is reasonable. They have also expressed concerns with thermal gasification technologies which has ultimately been dropped from this project because it's no longer being considered. The community's input is reflected in the proposal before you today.

Briefly, while gasification does eliminate the need for landfilling and does generate additional energy it is still an emerging technology. It comes in at a higher cost I think it's less reliable is kind of the sense I was getting with it. In addition to the lack of data regarding air quality and community support which is pretty strong out there The state permitting process is very unclear on gasification technology So in summary, we have landed on the recommended project that will reduce landfilling by more than 50% and has strong broad-based community support.

At this time I'd like to turn the presentation to John Dewey of Mustang Renewable Power to briefly talk about his proposal and the team he has assembled. John?

CommentKathy StaplesProposed · by introduction5:16:52 · ≈ 2:16 PM

Madam Chair, Supervisors, The project in order to fulfill the requirements of the very detailed RFP issued by the county in a subgroup We anticipate engaging two primary subcontractors that have the technology that's been proven commercially reliable throughout the United States in the category of the Material Recovery Facility, or MRF. Our vendor partner is one of the world leaders in integrating, designing, implementing the MRF technology equipment. Effectively a MRF takes your mixed municipal solid waste and sorts it using a series of Trommel screens, conveyors and magnets, optical sorting devices. And the goal of the MRF equipment is to recover from the mixed waste whatever is valuable. And what is valuable would be any of the recyclables that are still winding up in the solid waste, metal, glass, paper, plastic.

Those are very valuable commodities and there's a market for that. And also to recover the organic material, the food waste and green waste. Because the food waste and green waste when it is buried in the landfill that material decomposes over time and produces landfill gas which is 60% methane. Today, the Tahecus Landfill does have a landfill gas collection system. However, the EPA estimates that these landfill gas collection systems may at best be 50 or 60 percent effective at capturing the landfill gas that escapes to the atmosphere.

And methane, as the major component of landfill gas has been characterized as being 21 times more detrimental to the atmosphere than CO2. So methane coming from the organic waste decomposition is something that can be effectively captured using the technology of anaerobic digestion. There are different kinds of anaerobic digestion. The kind that we think works best for the South Coast is a technology called dry fermentation. It does not use water in the process on a regular basis, it does spray material on this material a couple times a day that's made up of bacteria Consumes the organic waste and produces methane which is then captured and piped to a combined heat and power unit or an engine that converts the gas into electricity similar to what is being done with the landfill gas out at the landfill today.

In addition to our technology subcontractors, we also have a number of other partners. Our contractor is a very experienced local firm. We'll ask the principal to stand up in a second. Agents and subcontractors that are standing ready, willing and able to move forward on this project once we complete the environmental review process. Once we've effectively worked through all of the due diligence issues and concerns that not only the county has but the other cities that are participating in the project.

Again, the MRF facility has the goal of removing the valuable material, the recyclables and the organics which is estimated to be 50-55% of the waste stream. Some operating MRF facilities in California and U.S. today are effective at removing as much as 70 or even 80 percent of the material in the waste stream so significantly reducing the amount of waste that actually has to be buried in the landfill extending the life of the landfill.

The recyclables, once they're removed, they're bailed. They're compacted and they're sold into the commodities market. Our technology subcontractor, Van Dyke Baylor's one of the largest in the world. They have a number of identical facilities most of which are in Europe. Europe may be 15 to 20 years ahead of the United States in dealing with its waste problems. They're very effective at recovering every conceivable pound of value material out of their waste stream because they ran out of landfilling space Many years ago, California and the U.S. has had a surplus of landfill capacity in many jurisdictions but Santa Barbara is not one of those so thus this technology very effective extending your life. The anaerobic digester process There are probably over 250 of these facilities up and operating over in work in Europe and Asia.

Most of these facilities deal with source separated organic waste, however 10% of them plus or minus are dealing with organics that are coming from the municipal solid waste identical to what we're proposing here. Up the road in the City of San Jose, they recently approved virtually identical technology for anaerobic digestion of their organic waste. That project received approval in June from their city council and they're actually breaking ground and it should be up and operating early next year.

Our subcontractor on the anaerobic digestion component is a firm based in Germany. They have over 16 of these facilities up and operating, they have another 10 either in planning or under construction. They're in Germany, Italy, Switzerland and France at the moment. And again dry fermentation does not use a lot of water. You fill up a processed tank once and you never have to fill it again because the water that comes out of food waste is recirculated on a perpetual basis.

Our subcontractor to do the actual construction of the project is with us here today. Mike?

not transcribed≈13s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:22:58 · ≈ 2:22 PM

Excuse me, Mr. Dewey. Supervisor Gray?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed5:23:00 · ≈ 2:23 PM

Yes. I'd like for you to make it very clear the difference in anaerobic digestion and incinerating because mainly because Supervisor Marshall when she was on the board went to Germany and they came back and they talked about It sounds like this is completely different.

CommentKathy StaplesProposed · by introduction5:23:23 · ≈ 2:23 PM

This does not involve any thermal process technology. Gasification, which was included as part of the RFP issued by the county and the subgroup a number years ago did contemplate technologies that would have the maximum possible diversion rate, which could include the thermal process of gasification. At this time, the staff and the other participants have concluded that type of technology is not ready for implementation in California. There's some permitting obstacles to that technology's adoption at the state level. There is another project moving forward using that technology up in the Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority.

The emissions data does exist in Europe and Asia for that technology, but it has not been localized for wide-scale deployment in the U.S.. In the state of California there are three older generation waste incineration facilities, but you could not permit one of those older facilities today. The newer technology gasification is much cleaner It is located in urban locations in Europe and Asia, but there are questions about the amount of data that exists in terms of air emissions and what the long-term effects. So we're going to continue to study that as a possibility for implementation, but I think realistically that is not part of anaerobic digestion. Anaerobic digestion is a passive biological process Where the material, the organic material is stored in an airtight concrete building for a period of 30 days.

And because of the lack of oxygen and the introduction of bacteria almost identical to what occurs at a wastewater treatment plant. The biologic bacteria consumes the organic waste and converts it into biogas, which is rich in methane. So it's a completely biological process that occurs in nature today whenever you find agricultural manure. Same exact process.

The main benefit of anaerobic digestion is anaerobic means without oxygen. So it is an enclosed vessel and we capture 99% of the methane gas that's produced through the decomposition of the waste, which is unlike composting where you're In an open air facility, the same process occurs when you're doing aerobic composting of organic material. It is producing a methane type of gas but anaerobic digestion there's no heating of trash Our project would still have roughly 40 to 50 percent of the residual waste, what's left over being buried in the landfill. If you had gasification that material could be converted to energy using the gasification technology but for now the environmentally optimal solution appears to continue to bury the residual.

5:26 – 5:4024 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed5:26:31 · ≈ 2:26 PM

And just a follow-up I don't want to become a Harrisburg and And where would that have fit in? For those of you that didn't know, they started out and they were going to spend $68 million to have a process. And now they're at 288 million and it isn't working yet. So that's Is that what you're... This is a

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated5:26:54 · ≈ 2:26 PM

public-private structure. Maybe Mark can... I was just going to say, Chair Gray, Board of Supervisors, the problem with that particular project was they entered into an agreement with this vendor without the guarantee of flow and we'll talk a little bit about the importance of flow The importance of material going to this. Also, that's an incinerator not what we're talking about today. Our projects are more additional components to recycling. This is a incineration as a complete option competing option to landfilling and what they did is I think they assumed that they were gonna get waste from other areas that did not come. They had bonds to pay With no revenue to pay them. And since the jurisdiction was co-signee to those bonds, they also became responsible for their payment and that's what caused their problem.

We understand that issue. That's the issue with any major project and it's a very key component and I'll get into that a little bit later for this project as well.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed5:27:58 · ≈ 2:27 PM

Thank you because you folks that are on the committee get it but Some of us haven't studied it enough to get the difference and I appreciate the help with

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:28:06 · ≈ 2:28 PM

that. That was a good question, Supervisor Gray. All right Mr. Dewey you want to finish up by the presentation then we'll go back to Mr.

CommentKathy StaplesProposed · by introduction5:28:15 · ≈ 2:28 PM

Schleich. Continuing in the last slide we had a representative from the Dionne Company who is our contractor. Mike if he could save 10 seconds about Dionne.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:28:25 · ≈ 2:28 PM

Mr. Dionne? Yes

PresenterMike DianiDiani Building Corp and we're proud to be part of Mustang's teamProposedself-stated5:28:26 · ≈ 2:28 PM

ma'am. Good afternoon, I'm Mike Diani. I'm president of Diani Building Corp and we're proud to be part of Mustang's team. We will be responsible for all the construction on that project and it will all well 80-90% will remain local and that's in materials, that's in all labor We'll be averaging upwards of 30 manpower, 30 people a day. And the project could last up to about a year and a half so we'll have a lot of local involvement, a lot of local money.

So we're just again proud to be part of this and looking forward to it.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:29:04 · ≈ 2:29 PM

Thank you Mr. Gianni. Actually Supervisor Lavagnino, you might want to stay-

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.725:29:08 · ≈ 2:29 PM

Maybe Mark can answer this. What's the construction cost? What are we looking at? Mr. Dewey?

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated5:29:14 · ≈ 2:29 PM

Within the proposal, we're looking at anywhere between capital costs of anywhere between $48 to $60 million.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:29:21 · ≈ 2:29 PM

And I think it's important to remember that a contract is not in front of us today. That's not one of the actions that we're...

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated5:29:28 · ≈ 2:29 PM

Absolutely

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:29:29 · ≈ 2:29 PM

correct. We're looking at. Supervisor Wolf.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed5:29:34 · ≈ 2:29 PM

Thank you. I'm a little bit like Supervisor Gray in trying to understand how this all works. Luckily, this isn't the first time we've heard about this anaerobic system but it is the first time that I've heard about the bacteria and really how it all works. And hearing Mr. Dionne talk about construction, it seems to me that this is a very specialized project in that the container has to be built to certain specifications. You know when I went to see Cottage Hospital's opening? I mean there are certain capital projects that are just a little bit different than others so in this instance Would you agree that there are some unusual or specific design specifications for this type of building? And if so, I guess I would ask and I'm sure you've already checked but I want to make sure that we have someone on board who is able to do that.

Or is there a subcontractor that will be stepping in to help with that?

CommentKathy StaplesProposed · by introduction5:30:55 · ≈ 2:30 PM

And one

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed5:30:56 · ≈ 2:30 PM

other thing, you know when you hear bacteria, you start thinking oh my God. But I also understand that there's good bacteria and that's part of the process is that you need the bacteria to get this process in motion. So I get that but I just want to make sure that it's well thought out. Mr. Dionne?

PresenterMike DianiDiani Building Corp and we're proud to be part of Mustang's teamProposedself-stated5:31:16 · ≈ 2:31 PM

Yes it is well thought out but our company has been in business in Santa Barbara County since 1949 We do a tremendous amount of work for the County of Santa Barbara, but also Vandenberg Air Force Base. We do heavy concrete structures. We do a tremendous amount of process piping and that's what this job basically is, is a heavy concrete vault and it will be gas tight.

It is critical in how you build it. You have to make sure your concrete doesn't leak. But we are very familiar with this type of stuff because we do in St. Louis County for PG&E, we have done airtight and reactive-type concrete work. This is not really new to us. We do a lot of stuff that is even more high tech.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed5:32:03 · ≈ 2:32 PM

Thank you, Mr.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:32:04 · ≈ 2:32 PM

Dan. Actually, Supervisor

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed5:32:08 · ≈ 2:32 PM

Gray? So we build all this and it works for a year or two and then all of the sudden there's something new. Is there any other use for the building that Mike is going to build? The D&E construction folks are going to build. I mean, or is it a building? At first it was a tank and then it became a building and I'm getting lost.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:32:30 · ≈ 2:32 PM

Actually Supervisor Gray, I think if they can finish the presentation probably would answer that question because it looks to me here that's a 20 year project we're talking about so.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed5:32:40 · ≈ 2:32 PM

Okay, I got that but after its built in, is there any other use for it is the question.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:32:47 · ≈ 2:32 PM

Okay well staff can address that then in the rest of the presentation.

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated5:32:52 · ≈ 2:32 PM

Regarding, I guess how is the technology moving forward in Europe? They have been developing facilities similar to this for about 20 years. And if you looked at the size and the number of facilities they developed in the early years, they were small and very few. When we started this process, we were looking at a scale up You know, could a vendor prove he could do it at one-tenth of what we needed and then we could scale up to that. What we now see is that the proposals and the technologies that we are conceding not only are on par with what we're asking for in some cases exceed the scale of what were asking for so actually we're asking for smaller.

Regarding the what are we going to do in a couple years? Following this issue as I have for quite a few and reading as much as I can on the subject. I would say when we started this process, the type of money that was looking at projects like this was more venture capitalist. This is an opportunity to put my capital into something new. I think the industry trend is now this is where waste management companies are putting their money.

Several of the facilities that are referenced or listed as to be developed, I think about seven or eight of them are actually going to be built by waste management at various locations throughout the United States and California. So I think what we're going through, this is the next step in waste management and it will be there for the next 20 years. The next, next step of waste management might be in the area of gasification.

Again we are this project takes what's in your trash can and makes really what I call three different piles that have recyclables that are returned to market organics that are wet that can be anaerobically digested and we've talked about that and then what's left? The what's left is going to be stuff that we might want to look at as manufacturer responsibility and change the way people do things. You know, you look at a carton of milk, it's paper, it's this but it's also wax so it can't be truly recycled and there are lots of products that we get that are constituted of recyclable materials but are too much effort and energy to recycle.

So one way to deal with that would be to go to the manufacturers And there's product stewardship, and that's a very big issue at the state level and national level to force people to modify the way they make products. The amount of organics that occur in Santa Barbara County, you know, that's food scraps. The population is relatively constant. It's our environment so the amount of vegetation that grows is relatively constant. Yes grouts will have an effect The economy may have an effect, but for the most part vegetation is based on our climate here.

So those are the types of things that we see. One of the exciting things that we saw with this and one of the things we want to look at as part of the environmental process is the co-location of some of the other things we currently do elsewhere. That gives us the opportunity through policies and changes to migrate what's currently in the trash can into The correct can, either the blue can, the recyclable can or the green waste can.

And by having all of these things at a single campus it gives us that opportunity and flexibility to work with our system to tweak it to make it much more efficient. So this is the future I don't think we're going out on a limb stretching it to the limit where we were gonna do something that's gonna become obsolete in a few years. This will be a 20 year solution.

All right. But we do still have some left, and I talked about the future of what that left might be. Until that occurs, we're going to have to continue to landfill it. And this is a picture of our most recent landfill liner construction project. This is the type area we put that remaining waste over. There's a lot of components to this. You know when we talk about landfill liners you need to understand they're about four feet thick in various materials and sizes. They're very expensive to build And so anytime we can make that capital cost last a longer period of time, which this project will help us do. We're getting better utility and more efficiency out of it.

Stubble a little bit on financing. So I'll go through that again. We're looking for a privately financed built and operated facility. It costs between $48 to $60 million dollars to construct. This will be privately financed. It will not be county financing. 60% of that funding will come from a state agency called the California Pollution Control Financing Authority. They issue bonds for projects like that.

How does the vendor pay his bills? Through the tip fees and this gets to your Harrisburg question, we will be bringing our trash here for the next 20 years and that cost will help pay not only construction and amortized costs but operating costs By the way, this is very comparable to what we've seen as what the cost would be for other landfills when you include the cost of transportation to those facilities. They're typically 60-90 miles away.

There's a built-in CPI adjustment with this proposal. The revenue from the sale of energy and recyclables is used to reduce or offset the tip fee, and then there are provisions in there for sharing revenues if we see an extremely high source of revenue. One of the thoughts was maybe the recyclable market value goes way up. Well, if they go above a certain described amount, then we will share on those revenues If there's new legislation that brings energy credits for these types of projects, we will share in those types of revenues.

Again, this is a 20-year project and will require a detailed contract. You've seen the franchise agreement contracts are about an inch and a half thick. This is probably going to be on par with that. Within that there are very a lot of components that we identified in the RFP. Our RFP was extremely detailed for an RFP it was Again, several volumes are several inches thick and the vendors needed to respond with about three or four volumes of information.

They were also spent a fair amount of money, I would say maybe six digits in preparing these RFPs and were required to deposit $100,000 with us as part of their proposal. We talked about tonnage, you know these projects are successful based on the delivery of tonnage and that's very key. There's been some concern about what happens if we don't meet it and how will that impact not only us but the rate payers? And we've talked Between the jurisdictions about ways to limiting that risk to not only ourselves but our rate payers as we move forward. And these are some of the ideas, you know, we can share tonnage and one of us might be over one year and one might be below.

We have potential for resets throughout the contract but that probably may increase the initial cost of the project. And then again we talked about the ability to migrate from one to the other

5:40 – 5:4922 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:40:44 · ≈ 2:40 PM

Supervisor Gray.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed5:40:45 · ≈ 2:40 PM

I need just a bit more explanation on that, Mark. So as we're planning, we plan how much we're going to get but as you said Harrisburg didn't get what they planned, and so then they ended up in bankruptcy. So what are you going to do if you don't get what you planned? You'll get it somewhere else on the floor?

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated5:41:11 · ≈ 2:41 PM

Well there's several ways we can meet the minimum. I think the first thing you need to understand is that the cost of a project is based on the maximum throughput or the maximum volume we need. He's got to build it big enough for what we ask for. But he finances it on that lower number So as that gap spreads, then the cost will probably increase to our rate payers. So we've got to find that delivery number.

So if we have this number here and we have resets which protect us for not bringing the volume, we've increased the gaps so the initial costs will go higher. But perhaps you know there might be a shortfall in one jurisdiction, Buellton for example. Well maybe the County of Santa Barbara this year exceeds so we can transfer loan give figure out a way to allocate our time because the aggregate tonnage is met, Buellton just didn't meet their tonnage. So there's ways we can do that within ourselves.

There's also ways we could set the rate structure such that it's based on that minimum. So if we don't use it, the rate payer won't be impacted because they're already assuming to do so. It's similar to the bundle of stations you get on Cox Cable or cable systems. Do you really need all those stations? No. Do you use all those stations? No, do you use them when you're on vacation? No but you still pay that monthly bill so it's built into your base rate.

You use it whether you're in town or not whether you meet it or not and so that's one of the other ways there are lots of different ways we can do that math to minimize those risks and minimize those limitations. I think, I don't have the answer that we and the partners have agreed to yet but I think we all have the ideas that it can, we can do that, manage that or limit that exposure.

I'm not answering your question Emily.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed5:43:19 · ≈ 2:43 PM

Well, it was going okay until you gave me the Cox example which I thought I don't want to pay for that stuff. I'm not going to get and maybe so then I got lost in the arguing with Cox and I think

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated5:43:34 · ≈ 2:43 PM

I think the big issue because you're

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed5:43:35 · ≈ 2:43 PM

giving me a lot of maybes and what's and kind of and sort of. So

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated5:43:40 · ≈ 2:43 PM

that

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed5:43:40 · ≈ 2:43 PM

may be where it is we don't know for sure yet but we're working on it. Maybe that's the answer

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated5:43:44 · ≈ 2:43 PM

I think, again going back to the Harrisburg example and also I think it happened in San Diego about 20 years ago. They built these facilities without contract agreements to bring material to them. And one of the contractual agreements would be how to deal with shortfalls. So Harrisburg didn't work because there wasn't contracts to bring flow to the facility so now they had debt bills to pay but no revenue to pay them.

In the case of San Diego, they did a similar thing. And that's the biggest point is and we'll talk a little bit more about that. This requires contractual agreements between the participating partners in the project that we're proposing.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:44:29 · ≈ 2:44 PM

Thank you,

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.725:44:30 · ≈ 2:44 PM

Madam Chair. So but the question mark I guess is worst case scenario so we have a guarantee of flow going to the landfill or contractually obligated? But what happens if For whatever reason, through advances in technology that people don't have to recycle as much because the products aren't there or whatever. What happens to the rate payer? Where's the protection in there for them if for whatever reason we don't... And I'm not saying just like the city of Buelton doesn't make it and we can make it up because Solvang is doing a better job at the county. It's what if as a whole we don't make it then what happens?

If we don't meet that

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated5:45:11 · ≈ 2:45 PM

tonnage? Our cost would be based on that minimum delivery. So, we would pay that whether we met it or not.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.725:45:21 · ≈ 2:45 PM

Okay, so we're guaranteed locked in on that price which is already covered by the tipping fees and everything. Okay. All

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:45:30 · ≈ 2:45 PM

right. Very good.

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated5:45:31 · ≈ 2:45 PM

Okay? Great question. CEQA, we want to initiate a CEQa review We're proposing that the county act as the lead agency in that review. This project again is to further process the material that is being currently disposed at the landfill through a material recovery facility and anaerobic digestion with landfilling of the remainder. Additionally, we'd like to consider what if we put our co-mingled recycling line at the same location?

What if we also did what's called source separated Processing of organics, bypassing the MRF line and going directly to the anaerobic digester. It's beneficial for the process because you don't have to put it over that line. You don't have to touch it for that purpose. It also goes into this anaerobic digester in a purer sense and therefore the ability to sell it as compost after it has been digested is a higher opportunity.

That kind of got to the point, well you know how do we change potentially other parts of our system going forward? We will look at alternatives. Alternatives analysis is required in every EIR. We'll look at alternative locations. We have received already one letter from Marburg Industries asking that their site be considered or a site they have be considered as part of this process We expect to get additional comments throughout the process.

Where that usually comes into play is what's called the Notice of Preparation and the Scoping Hearing, and so we'll aggregate all of those comments at that time, and if there's a need to modify our project description based on the comments we receive, that's when we would do it. That probably won't be for late spring, February or March. We will do an RFP to identify consultants to prepare the environmental document and just as a reminder that we will be hiring, we'll be identifying the EIR consultant for this project.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:47:45 · ≈ 2:47 PM

Supervisor Carbajal.

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction5:47:46 · ≈ 2:47 PM

Thank you, Madam Chair. You know I've been meeting with a number of stakeholders throughout this entire process and one suggestion that was made as a matter of fact Mr. Lunsford's here he's and I forwarded the staff is they brought up the issue of allowing some of the public to participate in that process that we have for selection of EIR consultants or what-have-you So I just want to reiterate that. I think the more transparent we can make this process, the more open, the more inclusive, the better because at the end of the day, the more transparency and the more people have an opportunity to give input, be part of the process, the better. So I just want to reiterate that. I know he's here and he probably was going to mention it himself but I just want to make sure we give that consideration.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:48:35 · ≈ 2:48 PM

Thank you. All right.

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated5:48:38 · ≈ 2:48 PM

Again, I said we were going to hire the consultant to prepare the IR. Mustang Power Ventures has agreed to pay the cost of the environmental document as well as all the technical studies associated with preparing that environmental document.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.725:48:55 · ≈ 2:48 PM

Madam Chair?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:48:55 · ≈ 2:48 PM

Yes, Supervisor Levin.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.725:48:56 · ≈ 2:48 PM

Mr. Schleich, does that also include any legal challenges that are going to arise out of this? a facility along the Gaviota Coast there. I mean, I remember us here not even a year ago when we were discussing if a cow had a calf whether that would need a coastal development permit and now we're going to drop an industrial facility on there. I'm imagining there's going to be some people that are pretty interested in challenging whatever view we have so who would pick up the cost of that?

Or has that been discussed?

5:49 – 6:0526 turns

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated5:49:37 · ≈ 2:49 PM

It has not been discussed as yet.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.725:49:41 · ≈ 2:49 PM

I would like Mustang to pick that up at all.

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated5:49:47 · ≈ 2:49 PM

The genius landfill is actually bifurcated by the coastal mine, so a majority of the property that the county owns up there where the landfills operate in fact all of our operations are outside the coastal zone as we speak today. Because of that coastal development issue. We talked about the payment for the EIR and then necessarily studies you raised a great question for us to resolve regarding legal challenges.

In turn, the county in the jurisdictions will need to prepare and execute what's referred to as a term sheet MOU that will define our roles and responsibilities as we go through CEQA review. You should note this is a non-binding term sheet in order to comply with CEQA concerns and counsels here if you need any other clarification on that.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:50:40 · ≈ 2:50 PM

Supervisor Carbone?

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction5:50:43 · ≈ 2:50 PM

Obviously it would be great to get Mustang to pick up the tab, but this is a partnership so whatever that ends up being. But I certainly second Supervisor Lavinino's push that we explore that possibility. But if you will read between the lines letting stakeholders be part of the process kind of helps address them being critical of an outcome of an EIR down the road, because they participated in the selection of a EIR consultant that they might feel is in keeping with higher standards of scrutiny and reviews. So just keep that in mind.

not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:51:26 · ≈ 2:51 PM

All right. Thank you, Supervisor Carbajal. Mr.

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated5:51:29 · ≈ 2:51 PM

Schleich? Also the partners, the cities and the county will need to develop a management structure for working with the vendor during facility development as well as management over the 20 years. This may likely take the form of a joint powers authority. Some of the key issues would be forum to evaluate contract provisions modifications what have you Ensuring fair representation based on the participating membership, you know equal weight based on equal tonnage or a minimum. You know those types of issues and then it's envisioned that the county would provide the administrative oversight for this management of this project As previously stated, this is an extremely important regional waste management project with many regional benefits and has broad-based community support.

Other than some concerns on the Gaviota Coast everybody is excited about and even the Gaviota Coast is excited about reducing the amount of waste we land. There's a lot of steps that are in front of us. Here's some of them, and I've talked about the particular components of the project and this is kind of the calendar that we're looking at as far as moving forward on these and when we might be coming back Some of the longer term issues with probably finalizing some of these agreements and then after the CEQA review or approval, CEQAs would be then obtaining permits and getting on into construction operations. So all told and said we still have a long ways to go.

Ideally this facility will be operational in 2016 or sooner Here's the recommendations that are in your staff report, and I won't reread those for you as a matter of time. Before we go on to your motion, I'd personally like to thank Carlisle Johnston and Leslie Wells who have actually done all the heavy lifting for this project over the last four years. They've done an astounding job, and couldn't have done it without them. I just want to thank them personally. With that being said, we're available for any questions. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:53:37 · ≈ 2:53 PM

Thank you, Mr. Schleich and thank you to your team. You always do an excellent job. The presentation was very thorough. Supervisor Lavagnino did you have a

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.725:53:47 · ≈ 2:53 PM

question? I'm going to give my questions now. Thank you Madam Chair. And no disrespect, I had never heard of Mustang Renewable Power Ventures before. So I'm just curious first off of how long you've been in the business and then if you could just give us like if you've built any of these before or what your history is?

CommentKathy StaplesProposed · by introduction5:54:08 · ≈ 2:54 PM

Sure. Mustang Renewable Power Ventures is a joint venture between two real estate development companies, my firm the Dewey Group and another firm also based in San Luis Obispo Rossi Enterprises. My partner Rob Rossi was also the owner of the Granada Our experience and background is primarily in dealing with complex projects with a complex entitlement process and complex financing issues.

Around Southern California, we actually own four properties that were constructed on former landfills. So we have never built one of these facilities before because frankly there hasn't been one of these facilities built in the United States before. We decided to compete in the RFP process two and a half years ago because of the South Coast venue in which this project is located. We have done projects in the community previously, we understand the environmental sensitivity that exists in this community and we understand complex entitlements And when we looked at most of the other proposers that had already been pursuing this project, most of them were involving the thermal combustion type of technologies.

So when we went through the RFP, we were the only proposer that included the anaerobic digestion component and the MRF technology. So we felt we came up with a better technology solution to the RFP, what the county and other cities were looking for. So our experience is looking at a complex challenge that a community faces and try to come up with the best solution for it.

We feel that we have identified and engaged subcontractors that have 20 to 30 years experience in the business. So like any complex project, if you have a solid team, we have no doubt that we can execute the project when it comes to the entitlements and the financing and ultimately the construction.

not transcribed≈10s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.725:56:26 · ≈ 2:56 PM

Okay thank you. And I guess this other one's for staff or Mark is So we're currently diverting about 70%, and our goal is to get to 80%. And what's 80%? So the tonnage of that is, but anyway it's a finite amount. And I guess without seeing the math equation up there for $60 million construction, 40, 50, 60 million, and then the rest will be financed through the consumer Have we done the cost-benefit analysis? I mean, where is the sweet spot where we say okay at 81% it pays off or 80%. You know what I'm trying to say.

I'm sure we've looked at this

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated5:57:13 · ≈ 2:57 PM

but... Chair Farr and board members, the way I tried to look at this project from the beginning is there are certain benefits to this project Those benefits have value. There's a cost to that value added. When we looked at our current tip fee, or we looked at expanding our current landfill and what that might cost, or we looked at other landfills and what it would cost plus transport to it This project is on par and competitive with that. And that was one of the criteria we set up from the beginning. We realize there's other benefits, and I mentioned them as state mandates.

This does a lot more than reduce the amount that gets landfilled. It deals with a lot of other mandates whether you agree with them or not, mandates are mandates. And so from a value perspective, A lot more for our dollar than just landfilling.

CommentTom WaltersProposed5:58:22 · ≈ 2:58 PM

Okay,

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.725:58:24 · ≈ 2:58 PM

and then I guess the bottom of it that the last question I have is And it's not going to be affecting my district so I'm not that worried about it But what would it mean to the average person? Where do we see their bill going

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated5:58:39 · ≈ 2:58 PM

When we did When we look at the South Coast and their bill is roughly in the low 30s right now, it would add if it was implemented today or if the comparisons of implementation were unchanged from the current situation apples to apples. Their bill would go from about $32, $33 up by $2.29. So it's like seven a month. It was like 7% to 8% per month increase so it's very competitive compared to those alternatives.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:59:17 · ≈ 2:59 PM

Thank you. Supervisor Wolf. Thank you,

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed5:59:20 · ≈ 2:59 PM

Madam Chair. Mr. Schleich when I was looking at the recommendations for today, you're asking for us to receive and endorse basically this project. And then further down you would like us to authorize the chair to send a letter to each mayor of the participating cities to adopt a resolution indicating their continuing interest in the project. It seems that we should be a little bit more strident in our request, rather than asking the cities to pass resolution telling us that they're interested. That they should pass a resolution also endorsing the process because it seems to me that having that support and having That stream of trash is vital to this project.

So I'm wondering what you think about that, if you've talked about it, if you think it's too much? But to me it just seems like a little bit of a guarantee that we've got those folks really on board to move forward.

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated6:00:25 · ≈ 3:00 PM

Supervisor Wolf, your point's well taken. The document that actually achieves that is called the term sheet It will be signed by Mustang and his company as well as the county, as well as the participating jurisdictions. So that's going to get us at least have the project proponent comfortable with spending his money on this environmental document and having some assurances that those materials, the waste that we're talking about that needs to go to this project to guarantee its success will occur.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed6:01:00 · ≈ 3:01 PM

So do you have a problem in changing the resolution?

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated6:01:03 · ≈ 3:01 PM

No, no. I think we're going actually a little bit further. We could do that. We talked about the resolution initially because I think there was a it was a bit stronger than the letter of interest but in further discussions with Mustang as well as listening to the intent of the City of Santa Barbara I think they want us co-sign or sign on the term sheet as well

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed6:01:28 · ≈ 3:01 PM

Well, I think that's good to know about the term sheet. But if we can also make the resolution stronger, that would be good. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:01:35 · ≈ 3:01 PM

Supervisor Gray?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed6:01:36 · ≈ 3:01 PM

Thank you. There are no dumb questions but they're small ones and this one is small because all of it... You guys did a... This was so interesting. It was really... But I read that there's 40 tons of Let me start again. 40,000 tons of food scraps every year and right now they're diverting 2,500 tons per year. If there's 40,000 and we're only getting 2,500 Why? I mean, maybe I misread this. I've been reading everything I could find.

That's just the way it is? Is that right? Did I read

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated6:02:30 · ≈ 3:02 PM

the... The source of food scraps, food waste is not just residential, it's commercial. I get, yes. Okay, institutional. There are some institutions that have food scrap programs. In fact, the city has developed a food scrap program where they actually transfer the material through our South Coast Transfer Station and then it ends up in Santa Maria. Part of developing a food scrap program is not only the tipping fee but it's the collection part of it so you add a new truck to your neighborhood Exactly. And if we wanted to pull that out, would add another route?

Yeah. There might be some advantage to doing that on large institutions. I think where it makes a lot of sense is in public schools, you have a controlled environment they can do, you know, a lot of education and have some control over how things are done. It's done in hospitals, it's done in some of the larger hotels on the South Coast. The county jail has actually approached us on the possibility of doing it. So there are opportunities to do that. I don't want to say there isn't.

And that's one of the opportunities that we see with this project is that by creating that source separation and that direct input to the anaerobic digester, then we get a much more marketable compost that farmers, agricultural industries could use.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:04:02 · ≈ 3:04 PM

Okay, Supervisor Carbajal, and then I think we'll go to the public.

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction6:04:06 · ≈ 3:04 PM

Thank you. It's important to point out with food scraps that commercial is the easy part. Residential is the difficult part. That's why you haven't seen more programs developed because of the expense associated with them. And if you followed budgetary discussions with certain cities, you would know how upside down you can get with some programs that aren't done a certain way.

You know, the only one question I have with Mustang is that we're sort of taking baby steps in realizing this very important, significant project. But the one thing I'm most concerned with and I want to make sure gets addressed at some point is the financial assurances, bonding, performance bonds. We do not want to go down the road When somebody can just go belly up or not fulfill the responsibility.

So, the one thing that I really want to stress And I'm most emphatic about is performance bonds. So as long as there's somebody willing to step up to the plate, to make whole the partnership that we are realizing in terms of the facility, that to me is the ultimate and the most important concern out of this whole process. You have a strong real estate development background and I certainly understand You don't have a lot of these facilities for anybody to get up and brag about how they've done 20, and 3, and 2. So I certainly understand that but what I will hold you to the fire on is your ability to perform and that I hope we address.

6:05 – 6:1738 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:05:50 · ≈ 3:05 PM

Thank you Supervisor. All right Mr. Allen we have some public speakers.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed6:05:56 · ≈ 3:05 PM

I have six requests to speak start in Santa Maria with Mr. Caldwell

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:06:03 · ≈ 3:06 PM

Mr. Caldwell, are you still there in Santa Maria?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed6:06:11 · ≈ 3:06 PM

It does not look like he's still there.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:06:13 · ≈ 3:06 PM

Anybody else in Santa Maria?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed6:06:14 · ≈ 3:06 PM

No that was the only speaker up north so Mr. Giani had a slip-in but he's already addressed the board I don't know if he has any further comments

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:06:22 · ≈ 3:06 PM

no

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed6:06:23 · ≈ 3:06 PM

then we'll go to Dr. Robert Johns to be followed by Steve Cushman

CommentMarianne MuntzProposed6:06:35 · ≈ 3:06 PM

Yeah, he was here earlier.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed6:06:39 · ≈ 3:06 PM

If Mr. Fishman is no longer here then we will go to Beth Pitten and I will mispronounce the last part. I'll let her clarify that when she comes up.

CommentDr. Robert JohnsProposed · by introduction6:07:09 · ≈ 3:07 PM

Well, I know there are none. But what scientific study or studies that you can quote that this is a safe viable project? And I said before there are none. You are conjecturing when you're making this proposal all assertions, conjectures. Yeah, I mean it's another bamboozle Now if an environmentalist comes up here, he or she's going to say well this is a great project blah blah blah blah.

I don't think an environmentalist is going to support this project and since we've got the mayor of Montecito here who usually run these environmental projects through the Montecito Planning Commission like the solar project He usually runs those through the Montecito planning, and then he set it up there. And then they tell us- Dr. Johns,

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:08:09 · ≈ 3:08 PM

you need to stay on the subject at hand.

CommentDr. Robert JohnsProposed · by introduction6:08:11 · ≈ 3:08 PM

Hey, this is a solar project. This is energy. And this is energy that we're talking here. I'm right on the subject. Dead on. So we say hey, if it's good enough for Montecito, it's good enough for the rest of the county. So Mayor of Montecito, why don't we do a small scale project? Build one of those recycling towers. Put it in Montecito and let's see how well it goes.

And we'll just drag that trash right through the community of Montecito. We'll see how far it goes. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed6:08:47 · ≈ 3:08 PM

Our next speaker is Beth Pitton August to be followed by Mike Lunsford our final speaker.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:08:53 · ≈ 3:08 PM

Is Beth here?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed6:08:57 · ≈ 3:08 PM

So let's try Mike Lunsford.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:08:59 · ≈ 3:08 PM

Mr. Lunsford, good afternoon.

PresenterMike LunsfordGaviota Coast Conservancy and bringing a testimony on their behalfProposedself-stated6:09:02 · ≈ 3:09 PM

Thank you Madam Chair and members of the board I'm Mike Lunsford with the Gaviota Coast Conservancy and bringing a testimony on their behalf. You may have noticed my speakership is white that means we support this project with some points to be made Now, first of all I need to compliment the county on moving towards this very necessary and beneficial development of alternatives to landfilling. This is huge. According to the U.S. EPA, landfills constitute a major source of greenhouse gas emissions and largely due to the amount of organics buried in the landfill.

Yet food waste, as was pointed out, continues to be the largest part of the waste stream into the landfill and is a major source of methane as a potent greenhouse gas. Now in this process that we go through you notice in the briefing that the next step is looking at the project description for an EIR. So this may be your last opportunity to guide staff on what needs to be in that project description.

So I'm going to make some remarks that I hope will help give you something to think about. It's timely For us, there was an article published in the industry news thing, Waste and Recycling about the extent to which food waste diversion is going to be a big thing in the near future. It's growing leaps and bounds. It is sort of low-hanging fruit for diverting the volume from landfills.

And it can be turned into energy, right? So, it's something that we want to look very seriously at. So this project should anticipate a phased expansion and it hasn't yet but a phased expansion in that food diversion and how this is scaled to handle that additional volume. Now, the resource recovery project summary that was in your packet from staff lists the benefits of this project.

But let's not lose sight of the risks and potential liabilities of continuing to use Tejiguas landfill. You know I have to say this stuff. Locating a large anaerobic digestion facility and a MRF on an unstable fill material at the landfill produces the risk of damage from ground settling. Large cracks have been witnessed on the proposed building pad. Settlement is a common thing due to digestion of the buried materials, which is under this pad. So we need to think about that.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:12:09 · ≈ 3:12 PM

You know Mr. Lunsford actually your time is up so can I get you to quickly wrap up?

PresenterMike LunsfordGaviota Coast Conservancy and bringing a testimony on their behalfProposedself-stated6:12:14 · ≈ 3:12 PM

Okay well I've got a lot to say here

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:12:17 · ≈ 3:12 PM

Well, do you have

PresenterMike LunsfordGaviota Coast Conservancy and bringing a testimony on their behalfProposedself-stated6:12:17 · ≈ 3:12 PM

it

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:12:19 · ≈ 3:12 PM

written out that you could also submit to

PresenterMike LunsfordGaviota Coast Conservancy and bringing a testimony on their behalfProposedself-stated6:12:21 · ≈ 3:12 PM

staff? I mean, I've scribbled it up pretty badly since I've been here. But Madam,

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction6:12:30 · ≈ 3:12 PM

I guess I was going to suggest that it's your prerogative. You're our chair, of course. But in light of the importance of this issue, if I would ask if you wouldn't mind extending him an extra minute

CommentRobert ShullProposed6:12:43 · ≈ 3:12 PM

And I would also

PresenterMike LunsfordGaviota Coast Conservancy and bringing a testimony on their behalfProposedself-stated6:12:44 · ≈ 3:12 PM

point out that there's not too many other speakers and I only got another minute or

CommentRobert ShullProposed6:12:48 · ≈ 3:12 PM

so. Okay,

PresenterMike LunsfordGaviota Coast Conservancy and bringing a testimony on their behalfProposedself-stated6:12:49 · ≈ 3:12 PM

all right. We'll take it away from here. All right, so there are other issues out there that staff is handling at the Higuas but nonetheless they're a risk with this groundwater saturation of the waste pile it requires ongoing pumping of leachate to prevent it from migrating off site. With the Teguas waste pile a half-a-mile from the ocean, there is little room to mitigate impacts in the marine environment from stormwater runoffs down Pila Creek. So siting at Teguas misses the opportunity to reduce carbon emissions by siting the MRF in town. If we plant one out there, then we're going to continue this packer truck running up and down. So these are some of the reasons why it is essential for the EIR to consider alternative locations.

It would be most helpful if the EIR were to view the project in the context of the entire waste disposal system and evaluate the pros and cons of the various elements in the system as to their environmental pros and cons. This is customary, but it's important that we include the alternative locations. The 20-year commitment called for in this project ignores the Board's 1999 commitment to look for an alternative landfill site and close Tejiguas by 2014.

The Gaviota Planning Advisory Committee has expressed the community's belief that the impact at Tejiguas should be reduced, not increased with additional industrialization. However...

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:14:23 · ≈ 3:14 PM

I'm sorry Mr. Lunsford.

PresenterMike LunsfordGaviota Coast Conservancy and bringing a testimony on their behalfProposedself-stated6:14:24 · ≈ 3:14 PM

One last phrase please. My point is, if the community must accept more industrialization of the Gaviota Coast with the extended risk that Tejiguas presents. It needs to know there was a competent analysis of alternative landfills and using Tejiguas was indeed the environmentally preferred alternative.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:14:47 · ≈ 3:14 PM

Thank you, and I think that you know again this was one of the points was just to initiate the review so there is going to be the scoping hearing the notice of preparation and so I would encourage you to go ahead and write a letter from the Conservancy with all of your points that could be part of that record.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.726:15:04 · ≈ 3:15 PM

Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:15:06 · ≈ 3:15 PM

I'm sorry, I think Supervisor Gray had her light

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed6:15:08 · ≈ 3:15 PM

on. I want to go on record as this is not a new record but I want to go on record as saying I think this is well thought out and really just an excellent idea first time I've heard it. But I just think putting it Tejiguas is a bad idea It's too close to the ocean. It's on 101, it's in a beautiful area and maybe right now we can live with that but 100 years from now it's just the wrong place to put it so on my tombstone it's going to say don't put it at Tejicos.

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction6:15:49 · ≈ 3:15 PM

Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:15:50 · ≈ 3:15 PM

Supervisor? Okay, Supervisor Carbonell.

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction6:15:53 · ≈ 3:15 PM

Well all right, Supervisor Gray I like to be informed with environmental impact reports and all those reports that give us sort of the answers we're seeking for so I am seeking for a very well thought out Diligent EIR that gives us all the options. Gives us all the feasibilities of different, of the project that's being considered, the alternatives that have been raised. Certainly we have a letter from a vendor that you mentioned earlier Mr. Schleich about proposing this dirty MRF to be on a site here in Santa Barbara that might lend itself to minimizing that footprint in Tahequas.

I think we need to look at everything And I think that this is an exciting, extraordinary opportunity provided we do all our due diligence, dot all i's, cross all our t's. And just continue to move forward to make sure that we pursue the most feasible and best project that's in the interest of our taxpayers and in the interest of protecting our environment I see this as a potential win-win and I am really, really looking forward to a robust good EIR that will be instructive to the next steps that we take. So thank you.

6:17 – 6:209 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed6:17:23 · ≈ 3:17 PM

Thank you. Mr. Schliek and your team, I think you folks, I talked to you yesterday and complimented your team in putting together an excellent report. Yes, I had questions. I had questions today but you really laid it all out in a way that was easy to understand for the novice who's really new to this technology So, and I also think that you did a good job in going through and detailing the number of meetings who you spoke to, the stakeholders that were involved to get us to this point. This isn't the first time we've had a meeting on this project. I think you're taking baby steps to move us forward. I think that's the right thing That's the right thing to do.

I think as I mentioned to you yesterday, I was concerned about who is going to be doing the environmental report even though it's being paid by Mustang. I wanted to make sure that the county or the partners are involved in the process and other stakeholders as appropriate. That environmental report is going to be key to us moving forward. And anyway, I want to thank you all for being here and giving us a little bit more information. I look forward to moving on this project.

Is that a motion? It's a motion.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:18:57 · ≈ 3:18 PM

All right. I have a motion and a second, and this is for the five recommended actions in our staff report.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed6:19:02 · ≈ 3:19 PM

Right. And just that minor tweak on the resolution. Madam

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated6:19:07 · ≈ 3:19 PM

Chair, if I may add, the hiring of the EIR consultant will be a board contract so we will have to be back with you for the consultant that's going to prepare the EIR. That's also when we'll bring back the term sheet and all the other to-do things that we talked about today. I hope, want to have the notice of preparation and the scoping hearing conducted prior to coming back to your board. So all of that community input will be encompassed in the project description that we'll, the EIR consultant will evaluate.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed6:19:42 · ≈ 3:19 PM

And I thank you for that. It's the point that who selects the consultant. That was one piece of clarification.

CommentMark SchleichProposedself-stated6:19:53 · ≈ 3:19 PM

One of the commenters mentioned this would be your last time to see this project description. I say we'll be back

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed6:19:58 · ≈ 3:19 PM

again.

GuestLavininoProposed · by introduction6:20:03 · ≈ 3:20 PM

As we get ready to vote, I just want to reemphasize the importance Providing a robust analysis of the alternatives. Like I said, it's really important we don't just do little two sentence comment on what's been submitted but really robust.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:20:24 · ≈ 3:20 PM

All right, and I'm supportive. You know this is baby steps it's the actions are just to move this down the line so that we can get more information and answers on the questions that have been raised today. So we have a motion in a second all those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries unanimously thank you very much thanks again to all the staff and all the public that was here and the people who spoke All right. And with that, we've come to the end of our regular agenda. Do we have anybody that we want to close in memory of?

not transcribed≈7s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

6:20 – 6:243 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed6:20:56 · ≈ 3:20 PM

Yes, Supervisor Wolff. Thank you. I'm very saddened Close this meeting in honor of a deep friend, a truly remarkable community member. Richard Lee, Rick Lee died peacefully at the age of 60 on January 9th. After living bravely and valiantly with frontotemporal degeneration in ALS, for those of us who knew Rick for either a long period of time or as I learned at his memorial service, for a short period of time.

He touched people's lives in immeasurable ways. Rick was a highly respected member of the legal community in Santa Barbara He also was an avid volunteer in the community and he was very involved in AA. And he spoke about that and worked with, he was very proud and I think we're all proud of the fact that he maintained his sobriety for 29 years And raised with his first wife, Barbara.

And then he remarried Diana Jessup and raised three wonderful children, Allison, Andrea and Adam. So it's a tremendous loss for our community. It's a heartfelt loss for those of us who know him Just such a sad loss for his family, but his memory will live on in all of the lives that he touched.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:22:48 · ≈ 3:22 PM

Thank you Supervisor Wilk. Supervisor Gregg?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed6:22:50 · ≈ 3:22 PM

Thank you Chair. I have three folks that I'd like to adjourn in honor of and you're going to see a very huge diversity here. The first is Mike Peplinski known as Peppy the Clown. He worked for Vannevar. He was an engineer and he started Operation Big Brother, where each one time at Christmastime the servicemen sponsored a child and they came out to Vandenberg and they Followed them around and had gifts, and really learned a lot. And were treated beautifully. And he was also a clown. I mean, he dressed like a clown and went around as a clown, and made everybody very happy. So we lost Mike.

Secondly, we lost Greg Cox. Very young man. He graduated from Cabrillo High School in 82. As president of the student body, went on to Stanford. Became a law graduate at Stanford. Went on to Oxford. Ended up in venture capital kinds of work and then died at very young age, Greg Cox. And then last but not least, Toppy Reese who is known as Cowboy Toppy. And Cowboy Toppy Reese ran cattle out on Rice Ranch and in addition to that he was an excellent athlete from Santa Barbara.

So we lost intellect, a clown and a cowboy so great people thank you.

6:24 – 6:252 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:24:30 · ≈ 3:24 PM

Thank you very much and now we will be adjourned until we meet again next week here in Santa Barbara. 2A 3.30 (-0.00),

CommentRobert ShullProposed6:25:21 · ≈ 3:25 PM

Hello. The End