UnGovr Transcript
iHow this transcript is madeUnGovr transcribes the official recording with automated speech-to-text, separates speakers by voice, and matches voices to the seated roster. Names and attributions are AI estimates and may contain errors.Verify any quote yourself: click anywhere in the transcript and the official video jumps to that exact moment, so you can check any quote against the recording.0:00 – 0:038 turns
¶¶ Good morning, everybody. I'd like to bring this regular meeting of the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors to order. Mr. Allen, would you call the roll please?
Mr. Lavinino? Here. Mr Carbajal? Here Ms Wolfe?
Here.
Ms Gray? Present. Ms Farr?
Here Would you
Thank you. All right and we'll go ahead and take up the minutes of our March 20th 2012 meeting any changes to those if not I'll entertain a motion to approve The motion, second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries thank you very much all right we're going to go to our administrative agenda first and see which items we need to pull and then we'll go ahead and vote on the rest of the administrative agenda I'm sorry Mr. Allen, I think we have some changes to the agenda first.
Madam Chair and members of the board, I just have two items to note on item A1 which is a resolution from Supervisor Carbajal. We wanted to note that this is a resolution recognizing the I will not be silent campaign and then on item A11 This is from the Planning and Development Department. This has to do with the Outpost Trading Boutique in Santa Ynez for a Type 42 on-sale wine license. This item is going to be continued to your meeting on April 11th, and you can make that a part of the motion on the administrative agenda at that point.
Okay, so I have items. We have public comments slips on A8, A21 and I think Supervisor Carbajal you wanted to pull A12? Any other items on the admin agenda from the rest of the board to be pulled? Okay, so then we will go ahead and have a motion on the rest of the admin agenda as amended by Mr. Allen. Second. Motion in a second all those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? The motion carries. All right let's go ahead and go back to the administrative agenda then and we'll do our resolutions. Supervisor Carbajal I think you have the first one.
0:03 – 0:077 turns
Thank You Madam Chair If Cecilia Rodriguez could come forward from COM, I believe somebody else is coming out with her. I'll let her introduce herself as well. Again, I'm very honored to present this resolution regarding April 2012 as National Child Abuse Prevention Month and to recognize the I Will Not Be Silent campaign. You know, many years ago I worked for Head Start and I remember working with Cecilia way before she was Executive Director and I ever got involved with county government but I know the good work that CALM does day in and day out to prevent and to deal with the survivors of child abuse and all the work that goes into that effort So I think this is an important day to recognize the good work of everyone in our community that is trying to eradicate this problem in our communities.
Mr. Allen, if you could read it please?
Madam Chair, members of the Board. This is a resolution in honor of the I Will Not Be Silent campaign throughout Santa Barbara County. Whereas Child Abuse Listening Mediation Calm is dedicated to assessing treating and preventing child abuse and works to ensure the health and safety of all Santa Barbara County children And whereas everyone in our community can help prevent child abuse, in private as well in public.
And whereas CALM has launched its I Will Not Be Silent campaign to ensure that no one is silent in the face of child abuse and that all instances of alleged child abuse are properly reported. And whereas, CALM staff and volunteers help survivors of abuse and neglect heal emotionally and psychologically and provides them with a path to a happier future. By addressing root causes of abuse and neglect and preventing abuse before it happens, CALM works to ensure that all children and families in Santa Barbara County are healthy and safe. Now therefore be it ordered and resolved that the Board of Supervisors commence CALM for its I Will Not Be Silent campaign and its good work and encourage us all to participate in this important effort passed and adopted today.
Thank you so much. I was almost late here to this meeting because I got a phone call this morning from the police department that a 10-year-old was wandering around the streets of Santa Barbara at 2 AM and that she needed to be interviewed immediately, so I decided that's what I needed to do. So at quarter to 8 this morning, that's where I was but I'm telling you that because you need to know how vital the services are and how children are at risk in our community I want to thank you, especially Supervisor Carbajal for your support of the children of our community and your decision not to be silent about abuse in creating a community here. where we will speak up for kids just like I did today. And I know that many of you have signed the pledge, our I Will Not Be Silent Pledge and I want to thank you for helping to create that kind of community and I hope that we can continue to have people sign our pledge on our website this is our bag that I'm going to leave here for you More back there so that you can take to the farmers market.
You can carry this as a sign that we will not be silent in this community and that we will stand with calm in supporting the children of this community, maybe my board president Bridget Foreman will say just a quick
word.
Thank you.
Good morning. So I'm Bridget Forman. I am the current president of the Board of Trustees of Calm, and I just want to thank all of you for your continued support and hopefully ending child abuse in our community. It's very important that our county and our Board of Supervisors has supported us throughout the years to continue to support us in this vital work so that we can have a safe community for our families. Thank you.
Thank you, thank you for the work that you do day-in and day-out to protect our children. All right, we will go on now to our second resolution to be presented both by Supervisor Carbajal and Supervisor Wolf. I'm not sure which one of you wants to go first on this. Supervisor Carbajal?
0:07 – 0:145 turns
Thank you Madam Chair. This resolution, Supervisor Wolf and I are co-sponsoring it recognizing April as National County Government Month. And this year's theme is healthy communities. And we're also recognizing that April 8th, April 2nd through the 8th. It's National Public Health Week in Santa Barbara County. So Supervisor Wolf, if you could make some comments?
Thank you Supervisor Carbajal. I think this is an important resolution to kind of highlight what the county does and that is that we really do focus on health and safety for folks who are most vulnerable. We do a lot of planning issues. We have our county fire, our sheriff's department, our probation department. We are an arm of the state and the state provides us with funding to do the job that we all know is so important. As Supervisor Carbajal said this month we're focusing on healthy communities And I just read in the LA Times today that Marin County was number one out of all California counties. And so, I went to our public health folks and I said where are we listed on that? Because it wasn't in the newspaper article. Well, we're not number one but I think it was about 15th or 17th.
You know, we are a very diverse county. I think with the work that our public health division has done, I think being at that level is pretty darn good. We can always strive for more but I'm very proud of our Public Health Department. I'm very proud of our community and I think the folks who work for County Government deserve a lot of credit for making us what we are so it's a pleasure to present this with Supervisor Carbajal
All right, so we need Dr. Wada and Dr. McCann to come forward. Mr. Allen, you go ahead and read the resolution then.
Madam Chair, members of the board, this is item A2. It's a resolution proclaiming the month of April 2012 as National County Government Week Month rather in the week of April 2 through 8 2012 as National Public Health Week whereas April is national county government month with the theme of healthy counties healthy families and whereas Santa Barbara County takes seriously its responsibility to protect and enhance the health welfare and safety of residents Children and children's health are priorities in Santa Barbara County with key programs and services in public health, social services, first five, alcohol drug and mental health services, child support services, probation and other departments.
And whereas, county departments work closely with municipalities, non-profit agencies, schools, medical providers and other organizations to coordinate and provide safety net services. And whereas the first week of April is celebrated as National Public Health Week throughout the United States. And whereas the public health department's mission is to improve the health of our communities by preventing disease, promoting wellness and ensuring access to needed healthcare.
And whereas, hundreds of thousands of area residents benefit from public health programs and services including communicable disease control, environmental health, animal services, tobacco prevention, maternal, child and adolescent health, and disaster preparedness. And whereas the Santa Barbara County Public Health Department provides medical care at healthcare centers throughout the county serving over 33,000 uninsured and under-insured residents and providing more than 127,000 patient visits each year.
And whereas in honor of Public Health Week and National County Government Month, a variety of health promotion activities and services such as the Best Practices in Health Promotion Conference are being offered by the Public Health Department and other organizations throughout the county. Now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved That the Board of Supervisors of Santa Barbara County does hereby observe the month of April 2012 as National County Government Month and the week of April 2nd through April 8th, 2012 as National Public Health Week in recognition of the role of county government in promoting health and contributions of the public health department and other organizations and individuals working in prevention and healthcare settings in the County of Santa Barbara.
Passed and adopted today.
Madam Chair, members of the Board of Supervisors. Thank you for recognizing the month of April as National County Government Month with a theme of healthy counties, healthy families and the week of April 2nd through 8th as National Public Health Week. Each and every county department program and service plays a key role in improving the health wellness safety and quality of life here in Santa Barbara County. The health and human services most directly through departments like alcohol drug mental health Department of Social Services, Child Support, First 5, Housing Community Development, Probation and the Public Health Department. But also through public safety that keeps our streets safe through land use economic development that works on climate change in the built environment to the parks and recreational activities through transportation And all the support departments that make it happen on a daily basis, as well as the leadership of the Board of Supervisors in supporting these departments and programs.
And programs also like the Santa Barbara Health Initiative and the Healthy Kids Program that gives health insurance to a number of residents and children here in Santa Barbara County. The first week of April is also National Public Health Week, where we recognize the efforts of public health and its workers. When people think of the Public Health Department they often think of our clinics where we see and provide patient visits over 130 patient visits annually but the work of public health touches each and every one of us through programs like communicable disease where we control outbreaks and provide immunizations to maternal and child health where we work with at-risk families Through the animal program, through our tobacco control efforts.
Through disaster preparedness and our emergency medical services. Through environmental health that inspects our restaurants and keeps our beach water clean. And through nutrition programs like WIC and our county obesity program. It's a great department and a great staff, and I'm very proud to be here as the Director of the Public Health. The theme for this year's Public Health Week is A Healthier America Begins Today with a focus on prevention and health promotion. And to talk a little bit more about some of our activities, I'll bring forward Dr. Scott McCann. Thank you.
0:14 – 0:226 turns
I just wanted to highlight a couple of the activities we'll be doing during the month. Go to our website, the Public Health County website. There's a whole list of fun and games things like rating your own health behavior, coming up with a plan on how to improve it, the new Healthy for Life TV show focusing on our healthcare centers. We've got How to Find Your Perfect Pet through our animal shelters so definitely pick one up.
Let's see what else. Oh, check on your favorite restaurant and see if it has had any major health violations. You might want to know that before you go there again. Hopefully not. These are all services connected with the Public Health Department. Last I'd like to mention the public health conference we're doing in a couple of weeks. We're focusing on obesity prevention and fitness promotion because with one of the lowest smoking rates in the country actually Obesity is really the biggest health threat these days, so thank you for this recognition.
Thank you very much for being here and what you and your staffs do all the time to keep us safe. All right, our next resolution jointly presented by myself and Supervisor Wolf. A resolution proclaiming the month of April 2012 as National Poetry Month in Santa Barbara County. And I see Ginny Brush here from the Santa Barbara County Arts Commission. I don't know if there's somebody else that wants to come forward too? Oh yes, okay. Our poetry award winner, Supervisor Wolf.
Thank you, Supervisor Farr. I'd like to call up Jenny Brush and also Madeline Cintrella. She's our sophomore from Dos Pueblos High School and I'll say a little bit more about Madeline in a moment. This is an opportunity for us to acknowledge the Arts Commission in Santa Barbara County for all that you do I would say in so many areas that folks may not be aware of, but in particular for this day it's to talk about the cultural activities and promotions that you do. And especially in highlighting Poetry Month. We had a poetry competition and the winner of that competition was Madeline Centrella. I mentioned she is a sophomore at Dos Pueblos High School I had an opportunity to just meet with Madeline. Her mom and brother are here with us today.
She, after we present the resolution, Madeline's going to read one of her poems. I also think it's many of you may have read in the newspaper that Dos Pueblos High School was also in the state championships for mock trial which Dos Pueblos came in second and Madeline was a prosecutor on that team so she's a very accomplished young woman We look forward to hearing you read your poem and we thank you very much for everything that you do for our community.
Mr. Allen?
Thank you, Madam Chair. This is item A3. It's a resolution proclaiming April 2012 as National Poetry Month in Santa Barbara County whereas the Board of Supervisors formed the County Arts Commission in 1977 to serve as the regional cultural development agency as a state and local partner of the California Arts Council to support and encourage access to the arts for all county residents.
And whereas, the Board of Supervisors acknowledges the vibrant role artists play in enriching our local quality of life and expression of our regional culture. And whereas since 1996, The Academy of American Poets has designated April as National Poetry Month to highlight the extraordinary achievements and ongoing legacy of American poets and increase the visibility Presence and accessibility of poetry in our communities and culture.
And whereas the Arts Commission, in partnership with Paul J Willis City Poet Laureate and other presenters have organized free public poetry events throughout the month including First Thursday downtown cultural nights that include poetry readings by Santa Barbara poets throughout the city. And whereas, Santa Barbara County recognizes the value of the Arts Commission's six years of participation in the Poetry Out Loud National Recitation Competition through a partnership with the California Arts Council, the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Poetry Foundation. This program helps high school students master public speaking, build self-confidence and learn about their literary heritage. And whereas Santa Barbara County was represented at the Poetry Out Loud state competition in Sacramento March 25th and 26th by Dos Pueblos sophomore Madeline Santrella.
Now therefore be it resolved that this Board of Supervisors proclaims April 2012 as National Poetry Month in Santa Barbara County pass and adopted today.
Welcome and thank you for being here with us this morning, Madeline.
Thank you for having me here as an honor. Hello my name is Madeline Centrella and I will be reciting The Death of Allegory by Billy Collins I am wondering what became of all those tall abstractions that used to pose, robed and statuesque in paintings and parade about on the pages of the Renaissance displaying their capital letters like license plates. Truth cantering on a powerful horse, chastity eyes downcast fluttering with veils Each one was marble come to life, a thought in a coat.
Courtesy bound with one hand always extended. Villainy sharpening an instrument behind a wall. Reason with her crown and constancy alert behind a helm. They are all retired now consigned to a Florida for tropes. Justice is there standing by an open refrigerator Valor lies in bed listening to the rain. Even death has nothing to do but mend his cloak and hood, And all their props are locked away in a warehouse— Hourglasses, globes, blindfolds and shackles.
Even if you called them back there are no places left for them to go— No garden of mirth or bower of bliss The Valley of Forgiveness is lined with condominiums and chainsaws are howling in the forest of despair. Here, on the table near the window is a vase of peonies and next to it black binoculars and a money clip. Exactly the kind of thing we now prefer. Objects that sit quietly on a line in lower case Themselves and nothing more.
A wheelbarrow, an empty mailbox, a razor blade resting in a glass ashtray. As for the others, the great ideas on horseback and the long-haired virtues in embroidered gowns? It looks as though they've traveled down that road you see on the final page of storybooks The one that winds up a green hillside and disappears into an unseen valley where everyone must be fast asleep.
Thank you.
0:22 – 0:273 turns
Well that was really beautiful. Thank you so much for coming and sharing that with us, and I know that we follow the wonderful things that our students do in our high schools here in Santa Barbara County, and we've been particularly proud to follow your work and that of the mock trial as well team at Dos Pueblos High School. So thank you again. Supervisor Carbajal says we want you to come back every week.
Okay, and our last resolution that we're going to be presenting today is a resolution of combination honoring the 100th anniversary and centennial celebration of Bethania Lutheran Church. And Ruth Jackson? No? I'm sorry, Crystal. Come on up to the mic. Crystal is the church secretary and I'm so glad that you could be here to receive this. The church had a celebration a couple of months ago, and of course it's no coincidence that Athenian Lutheran Church celebrates its centennial at the same time that the city of Solvang celebrated its centennial last year being the first church that was built in that community And as I said at the celebration then, you know long before there was county government to provide these services. Churches and other houses of worship were providing preschool, child care, cemeteries, counseling of all kinds in community events and Bethania is still doing that and more so thank you so much and we're looking forward to another wonderful hundred years of Bethania and I'm also very proud to be a member there Mr.
Allen, would you read the resolution please? Mr. Allen.
Madam Chair and members of the Board, this is item A-4 and it's a resolution honoring and celebrating the 100th anniversary of the Bethania Lutheran Church. Whereas the establishment of the Bethania Lutheran Church is closely tied to the founding of Solvang when a small group of Danish settlers came from the Midwest with the intent of establishing a Danish American folk school and church.
And whereas Those founders were greatly influenced by the Danish Lutheran bishop and hymn writer, N.F.S. Grundtvig who led a theological movement that revitalized the Danish Lutheran Church and who also originated the folk school concept as a culturally oriented program that would help people lead richer more meaningful lives and thereby give them a love of life, people, country, and God. And whereas, in that tradition, Bethania Lutheran Church continues that legacy of lifelong learning through its lecture series, educational events and has served and continues to serve as the spiritual home for many individuals throughout the St. Ann's Valley and beyond.
Whereas the church building built in 1928 was the first Danish style building in Solvang and to this day remains the most authentic Danish architectural replica in Solvang. Built in the style of the 12th to 14th century Danish rural churches, its quirby steep gables were a visual beacon to newly arriving Danes and continues to be an architectural landmark attracting visitors from around the world. The beautiful church interior features fixtures rich in symbolism in which the congregation takes deep pride. And whereas through the church's affiliation with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the congregation is actively involved In service to the community and throughout the world, thereby upholding its commitment to making the world a more just and peaceful place to live.
Now therefore be it ordered and resolved that the Board of Supervisors of Santa Barbara County hereby honors and celebrates the 100th anniversary and centennial celebration of the Bethania Lutheran Church passed and adopted today by the Board.
I'd like to thank everyone for this honor of Bethania's 100th anniversary. I cannot offer a poem, I cannot proclaim the great example and service of calm, and I cannot even match the efforts of Santa Barbara County. But I would like to emphasize Bethania's tradition of education with the Farr Strip Mortensen Lecture Series and Bethania Preschool and Afterschool Program, which those two specific programs that Bethania offers service a great many people. And protect as stewards of one of Bethania's greatest assets the children in the program of the Bethania preschool and afterschool.
I would also like to emphasize that for 100 years Bethania has operated its own cemetery, which is one of the only Lutheran Church-run cemeteries in Southern California. And I must correct Supervisor Farr because Old Mission San Ynez was there before Bethania and we have had a mutual cooperation with the old mission. And again, I emphasize that Athena has been involved in World Hunger and supporting many other charitable events including Food Bank of Santa Barbara and Iglesia Luterana of Santa Maria. Again, I thank you for this honor and look forward to the next 100 years. I probably won't be secretary by then but that's how it goes. Thank you.
0:27 – 0:325 turns
All right, let's go now to the rest of the A agenda that was pulled. I think we have a speaker for item A8?
Yes, Madam Chair. I request to speak from Susan Petrovich on items A8 and A21, and I can read those into the record, and Ms. Petrovich would have five minutes on both of those items. Okay,
thank
you. A8 is from fire and the request of the board authorized the Fire Department to accept a donation of one physio-controlled life pack unit worth $30,000. And eight rapid intervention crew packs worth $21,000 from the Santa Barbara Firefighters Alliance. And then item A21 is a set hearing request that's from the Planning and Development Department in the request that the board set a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the Las Vargas Ranch Project and that's for your meeting on April 17th.
Ms. Petrovich?
Thank you Madam Chair, members of the board. My name is Susan Petrovich. I'm here as the Vice President of the Santa Barbara Firefighters Alliance. I'd like to speak briefly about the alliance with your indulgence. It is a non-profit with an all volunteer board The mission is to support Santa Barbara City and County firefighters by providing equipment that keeps them safe and allows them to provide better service to the community.
We raise money within Santa Barbara County solely to purchase life-saving equipment So far our success kind of speaks for itself. We've been able to raise 1.2 million dollars and to purchase that equipment, to donate to both the City of Santa Barbara's Fire Department and the County of Santa Barbara's Fire Department. Our website is sbfirefightersalliance.org If you saw on KUIT the other night the rescue team doing its drill of hauling a Injured hiker up the side of a cliff. The equipment that you saw in action was for the most part donated by the Firefighters Alliance. The same is true for the city and county water rescue teams' equipment.
For wildland firefighters, we bought cargo pants that are lightweight fire resistant yet tough enough to withstand heavy brush. Plus special safety goggles that blocked out the smoke and the soot This is state-of-the-art equipment. We wish that the city and county could afford to buy it for their firefighters, but it's just not in the departmental budgets, but it is necessary to save lives and provide to our community probably at a highest level of service for any comparable community. So we want to thank the community for their continuing support and thank you, the county, for allowing us to contribute.
So if I could speak briefly to item A-21. I wrote a letter to you about the noticing because we wanted to ensure, I'm here on behalf of the applicants, the Doheny family and we wanted to ensure that you with board would have the maximum possible latitude procedurally in dealing with this project at your April 17 hearing so we request that the agenda notice for Before a full hearing on all aspects of the project. This is to avoid the ping pong effect that I'm afraid the Planning Commission inadvertently set up.
Essentially, they are asking a very limited question of you But that requires you to prepare for two hearings months apart. We've already had two hearings at the Planning Commission, and we really don't think it's appropriate this project be bounced back and forth between the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. That's not economic for the county or for the applicant. In fact, it's extremely costly. And from your perspective You probably saw that packet, it's huge. Plus you've got an EIR.
That would force your board members to review materials twice because you can't possibly remember months from now what you heard on April 17 and that's just not right to ask of you. And it just makes no sense for public participants either they would have to attend sequential hearings on the same project as I say they've already attended two Planning Commission hearings The Planning Commission request would mean at least three more hearings. It'd be yours on April 17, followed by another one at the Planning Commission or maybe two I don't know then another one back to you so I would ask why not at least allow yourselves the leeway to wrap it up on April 17? The trails were the major unresolved issue at the Planning Commission The other issues were limited, they were very simple.
And so I would ask at the bottom of the agenda where the noticing is for today B says provide other directions to staff and or the planning commission concerning the project. I would ask that you include a C that says take any further action regarding the project. That way you have leeway if you deem it appropriate to act on the project rather than forcing you to send it back to the planning commission. Does anyone have any questions?
0:33 – 0:355 turns
Thank you very much. All right, and then I think Supervisor Carbajal, you pulled A12.
Madam Chair, can I go back to that what was just discussed?
Is anybody else concerned about that or is that... I saw the packet that's involved with this project and I understand it's not in my district, but I still read all of that. And so my question is are we interested or is there a reason why we would go back and forth?
Supervisor Levin, you know it is in my district I think it is very unusual that the Planning Commission would do this. I'm not sure that I have seen this before and so they've asked for some direction on this particular issue. I think that you know as much as the rest of the board wants to give comments I think that was why that other item was added as far as any other direction But the Planning Commission is not done with it, and I would not want this board to not have their full evaluation of it before we would be making a final decision on it.
All right Supervisor Carpol.
Thank you Madam Chair. I'm wondering if I see a representative from Edison if Patricia Bertoli could come up and also our planning development staff? I just want some clarification on this Mr. Sciutillo submitted a letter on behalf of his client Regarding Southern California Edison's emergency permit for some distribution line work that they recently did under an emergency permit that I believe was issued by planning and development based on emergency findings.
So, I'd like to understand that a little bit better in brief but also understand how that is similar or different from the general broader distribution project and pole replacement that Edison has been working on for a number of years. It came to Santa Barbara County and like the Planning Commission punted to us in the previous item, we punted to the Coastal Commission and the State PUC Southern California Edison and the Coastal Commission are dealing with that very project so I want to understand the nexus between that project and this emergency permit and the work that was done if you could help me understand that would be great
0:35 – 0:3915 turns
Madam Chair, Supervisor Carbajal.
And the findings that were reached for the emergency permit for this?
Yes. The emergency permit was issued for a length of approximately 2,000 feet of replacing cable wire that had actually failed and caused a small brush fire. So that was the nature of the emergency. We made we issued we made the appropriate findings for based upon that emergency We issued the emergency permit and I should emphasize that does not excuse Southern California Edison from going through a permit process for that emergency permit. They have already submitted the application for that, and there will be a hearing for the actual 2,000 feet of replacement line. They put up a slightly thicker more reliable wire.
In addition you have referenced the larger project which be fully considered by the CPUC and also the Coastal Commission as you indicated. So this was a small emergency that needed to be dealt with prior to the full consideration of that larger project, but the point I would like to leave you with is the smaller project goes through a full permit process with a hearing and the larger project will go through a full permit process with hearings as appropriate.
Madam Chair, just one last question. Is this the same distribution lines or different distribution lines? Ms. Bertoli, I don't know
if... The project is on the distribution level which is... We need
to have you in the mic. Okay sorry.
The project is on the distribution level which is a lower end of the 16 kV that the reconductoring project is one the 66 kV line which is the higher level of power and the wire spans that were replaced were replaced exactly at the same location where they were originated. So if they were on a wood pole, they stayed on a wood pole. If they were on a steel pole, they were on the steel pole. So there was nothing that changed other than their size of reconductoring and it was a condition which is called a choker which means on both sides of those eight spans were this ACSR wire so then because the project stopped at some point Eight spans of copper wire, which you can see the significant difference was badly deteriorated, kneeled and it was falling apart basically.
And there was a temporary fix on it and we knew that it was going to be a fire hazard exposed to the elements of wind and rain So it was kind of waiting to happen kind of situation. So we know we needed to take care of it immediately and we went through the county process of, you know, application permits maps everything discussions, you know did our due diligence to bring this to attention and try to Get it resolved before there was another incident. So that's really where our project has originated and come to this point.
Last question, Madam Chair. And I guess the 66KB distribution lines are the ones that are subject to the broader project that was of great concern by some of the community members in my district?
Absolutely.
Yes, it's
a higher level.
Thank you. I'm just trying to clarify for myself and the public that they're two different items. Thank you very much.
Thank you. All right, with that I'll entertain a motion to approve the balance of the administrative agenda.
Thank you Madam Chair. I'll make a motion that we approve the remaining items to the administrative agenda.
Motion and a second all those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? The motion carries. Alright now we're going to go into public comment and I'm going to turn to Supervisor Wolf first.
0:39 – 0:4611 turns
Thank You madam chair. I'd like to call Mr. Gary Emilio to the podium Thank you, Mr. Emilio. As you know I'm the board's representative on the Retirement Board and one of the first duties that we did upon the commencement of my term was to interview and select an executive director to our retirement board And I thought it was only fitting that I bring to you Mr. Emilio as our choice, and I wanted to tell you a little bit about Gary.
I hope that's okay to call you Gary. He is an amazing man and we welcome him to our community. As I said, Gary is our Chief Executive Officer to the County Employees Retirement System. Gary joined the organization on February 17th and I'm happy that he's here with us today so that he can formally meet the board members, the public and his county colleagues. And I might add, it was nice for you to be sitting here and see a little bit about what goes on in county government at least at the initial stage of our meeting.
Gary comes to us most recently from the San Francisco Employees Retirement System where he served since November 2009 as its Chief Executive Officer. While there, he was responsible for a $15.5 billion defined benefit pension plan and a $2 billion 457 plan. Prior to that, he served as Executive Director at the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board which administers the Thrift Savings Plan, the largest individual account benefit plan in the world and largest retirement plan in the United States now valued at $280 billion and serving 4 million participants.
His work there was highly acclaimed for minimizing plant costs while improving technology services Gary has also worked as a consultant on a number of international government projects, has served as an executive manager with major United States banking organizations, is an attorney who served as legal counsel on tax and fiduciary matters, has testified before congressional committees as an expert in benefits and investments over a dozen times. And since 2003 has been the recipient of four national awards recognizing his expertise and management skills.
A graduate of the University of Pittsburgh and its law school, Gary was named alumnus of distinction by the University of Pittsburgh at Greensburg in 2005. The only recipient in the school's 50-year history and subsequently appointed to that university's Board of Trustees. He was also bestowed as a University Legacy Laureate in 2007. Please help me welcome Mr. Gary Emilio to the County of Santa Barbara.
Gary, if you have a few comments to make?
I just want to say that it really is an honor and a privilege to be here. I certainly appreciate Supervisor Wolf's remarks, I would rather have the threshold bar coming in a little lower than the expectations might be now but if I can assist in any way please don't hesitate to contact our office. I'm glad to come down and meet with you provide information and I just want to let you know that Six weeks since I've been here, I've come to have great appreciation for the staff that we have at the retirement system. They do a tremendous job. I've been very impressed with the board and I know also I guess Supervisor Gray you served on that board prior to my arrival and the way the board comports itself in its meetings it should be a model for any system.
I worked for boards of both types and it's truly a pleasure to be able to serve a board like that So I thank you and look forward to a very long and successful relationship here. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Thanks for being here.
All right, and then before we turn to some of our other public speakers, I do want to go ahead and honor our volunteer for the week which is something that we do just about every week. And this week I'd like to showcase volunteer Alice Ola. Is she here? Alice? Not able to make it this time. If you're looking for Alice on Thursday mornings, check the Adderdag Village Retirement Home Exercise Room. Each week Alice who is a long time San Ynez Valley resident offers a free exercise class to residents of the non-profit retirement home in Solvang.
Alice's class helps seniors become more limber and better able to deal with the painful effects of arthritis. Equally important, her class brings people together to socialize. Alice says that getting to know the individuals in her class is one of the high points of her week. She has learned the life history of some including two women who grew up exercising under Hitler's reign and others who remember closing blackout drapes on the windows of their family homes in the valley.
One of her favorite participants regularly exercised until she was 101 years old. There's an example for all of us. Balancing on a three-pronged cane, but doing everything that Alice asked of her with good humor. Alice says the participants teach her far more than she does for them. This isn't Alice's only volunteer experience if you want to find her on any other day of the week look for places where seniors congregate people sing or act or ride horses she'll be there volunteering to make things better for her community so thank you Alice for what you do to make Santa Barbara County a better place for all of us Supervisor Carbajal.
Thank you Madam Chair, I wanted to ask if with your discretion and approval if we could have some of the youth in our audience that I think are here to speak on item number five due to the school responsibilities if we might be able Allow them to speak during public comment and reference the item that they're speaking on, which is Item 5. I think we only have a couple two or three children that might be speaking but it might allow them to get back to school instead of sitting here for awhile. And I know we usually allow public speakers to not just speak on anything other than what's on the agenda. All I'm saying is if we could allow him to speak on something that isn't on the agenda.
Okay. Mr. Allen, do we have a speaker slips for them? Because I know that we have speakers for the regular public comment
time. Yeah, we have five requests to speak on item five and we also have five requests to speak on public comment.
Okay. All right. Well, do we have speaker slips for the young people? Did you put in a speaker slip?
Yes, I can. I can call the slips. We have five if you'd like to proceed. Okay. Diana Vandervoort.
Okay. I think just the youth.
Okay how about Anise Crespo-Pena?
0:46 – 0:5223 turns
Good
morning, my name is Marissa Haro. I am the reigning spirit of FIESTA 2011 and I'm accompanied by my junior spirit Anais. We would like to express how important the courthouse events are to us. I've been dancing since I was three years old watching many of my role models dance on stage dreaming that I can dance and this year well previous years I have danced with many dance studios And they all have a commonality, which is the courthouse and the mission.
And this year I didn't choose to dance with The Dance Studio and the courthouse was one of my main events. It's very important to me because it is a public event and the audience Is not limited to any numbers. Does that make sense? So it was very important to me to be able to dance for my community and I really want to express how important it is to me.
Thank you.
Yeah, I'm Anais Crespo-Pena and I am the reigning junior spirit of Fiesta 2012 or 11. It was a great experience to dance at the courthouse it was my first time and it was really fun that the audience was amazing and it connects all of the studios together when you get to dance at the courthouse and it was just really fun Thank
you.
Thank you,
Madam Chair. We're going to be considering item five later but I couldn't help but to comment now on we had a great poet earlier, young lady that I think reflected the wonderful people we have in our community and here we have two of our fine dancers that are the spirit and junior spirit of Fiesta for Santa Barbara County, a longstanding tradition And I just want to recognize their courage for coming up here and their wonderful work and great talent as dancers. So thank you.
Always one of the highlights, if not the highlight of Fiesta every year. All right Mr. Allen why don't you go ahead and we'll start then with the regular public speakers.
Madam Chair members of the board will start with Dr. Robert Johns followed by Matthew Margulies.
I
just want
to remind those young ladies just remember it was a supervisor Carbajal that's getting you back to school early.
I want to wait till the children leave Supervisor Carbajal because I don't want to hear them. I don' t want them to hear what I'm going to say. They'll find out soon enough. Now, I visited Cesar Chavez March Festival and my observations will be quite critical I viewed you as an African dictator in a small country, fearful of walking among his own people. Treats here.
Madam Chairman, yes, I think it would be appropriate to instruct the witness to address the entire board and to conduct himself with the appropriate non disruptive communications.
Oh, I'm threatening at my super OK well
so please address the entire boards.
I would like to address the entire board attorney. But we all know who I'm talking about, okay? So let me continue on my journey here. Would you say to Rick Caruso, Rick Caruso, figure this Miramar project out on its own. You just do this on your own. I'm not going to help you. I'm not going to give you millions of dollars in T.O.T., money that hotelers here would like to get, discrimination against Santa Barbara Ranch last week.
They want some of that. They want some of that T. O.T. They want some of that and would you say to your own people, Cassidy LaRosa? Would you help them figure it out on your own? Figure out your tax problem on your own, and you give millions of dollars to Rick Caruso? You're an African dictator. Cannot walk among your own people.
Dr. Johns, you have to address all of us.
Okay. I don't know how to say that only to the whole board because I don't feel like the whole board is responsible I think the responsibility lies in only one direction. Okay, I see you're watching the clock so am I. I have 11 more seconds because that was discrimination against Santa Barbara Ranch last week. All other developers would like to get TOT the same as Rick Caruso did.
Thank You Dr.
Johns.
Thank you attorney for the board.
Our next speaker is Matthew Margulies to be followed by Marina Reed.
0:53 – 1:009 turns
Good morning. My name is Dr. Matthew Margulies, I'm a retired pulmonologist. I'm sure you all know what a pulmonologist is and I was delighted to see this morning's recognition of public health Healthy families. Tuberculosis is where I started, an epidemic and it has been greatly reduced. Problems still exist. Problem in the family still exists. We have a new national epidemic That epidemic is the foreclosure and eviction that are going on, having affected 4 million families already in this nation in the past few years.
Can you imagine the stress that occurs in these families that are facing that situation? Do you understand what that does to children and these families that are in this situation? The behavior problems that occur in the children. I understand that over 90% of the evictions that have been looked at are flawed. And over 80% have serious, one serious single flaw and over 60% have four or more serious flaws These are illegal foreclosures, perhaps land grabs perhaps by the financial institutions that are considered to be at fault for all of this.
Halt and stop Greedy, land grab, foreclosures. That would be preventive medicine that would reduce the stress that these families are facing and have in front of them. Thank you very much.
Thank you doctor.
Our next speaker is Marina Reed to be followed by Dr. Michael Weissman.
Good morning. We're going to switch the order a little bit so that it makes sense, so we're going to put Mr. Michael first and then Amanda and then myself.
Mr. Allen do you have a speaker slip for this individual?
Good morning. I am Dr. Michael Weissman. I'm a scientist, engineer and entrepreneur and a 14-year resident of Santa Barbara County. I've been working with the Occupy Santa Barbara Foreclosure Working Group and local citizens to draw attention to the fraud that is being perpetrated upon the people in government Of Santa Barbara County by the Wall Street banks and other financial institutions.
On March 12th, we presented a petition to the county recorder, the district attorney and the sheriff. I've come here today to present that same petition to you which is now being distributed. And to report to you on our progress working with county staff on these matters. We have met with two of the three subject officials, and we have a meeting set for the third tomorrow.
The conclusion from these meetings at both the DA's and Sheriff's Office is that they need clear direction from the Board of Supervisors in order to take action against the banks. That is why we are here today. We are meeting with accounting recorder tomorrow, the fourth. We will bring to his attention the mess that has been created in Santa Barbara County's property records by the Wall Street banks.
As you know, maintaining open public records in real estate is essential in ensuring our fundamental American right to own real property. By filing fraudulent forged documents and by creating the marriage system, the banks have caused one, individuals to lose their homes by probable illegal means. Two, the state and county to lose potentially millions of dollars in tax revenues.
And three, the clouding of title of possibly millions of homes in California. The county recorder and even the Board of Supervisors could be legally liable for this lapse. We believe that the first step in cleaning up this mess is a full audit of the mortgage loan recordings in Santa Barbara County as they have done in San Francisco, and you'll hear some more about that.
At our meeting tomorrow with the county recorder we will request that he take that first step We're calling upon you, the Board of Supervisors of Santa Barbara County to do all that you can under your authority to stop the injustice and mismanagement taking place with foreclosures in Santa Barbara County. We respectfully request that you, one, ask the recorder to do a full audit and to pass on evidence of possible violations of law to the DA's office. Two, charge the district attorney to investigate these potential violations of law.
Three, and most importantly for it affects the common citizens of this county who cannot fight the Wall Street banks on their own The man that the sheriff put a hold on foreclosure sales and evictions until a full investigation has taken place.
Thank you, Mr. Weissman. Your time is up.
Thank you very much.
Our final two speakers are Amanda Martin and Marina Reed.
1:00 – 1:056 turns
Good morning. I'm honored to be here. My name is Amanda Martin, and I'm a longtime resident of Santa Barbara. Recently it came to my attention that a report was commissioned by the Assessor Recorder of San Francisco City and County. 382 residential mortgage loan transactions were audited. Clear violations of law were found in 84% of these loans. Then a group of concerned citizens in Santa Barbara did some investigating and found strong evidence of many illegalities in our foreclosure process here.
They examined 350 sales and found that in every single one of the sales, auction companies and trustees were in violation of the California Civil Code 1812.600. This is a consumer protection statute that requires a $20,000 bond for every auctioneer, their employing auction company, and the trustee for the foreclosure sale. It was also discovered that our county recorder's office is recording assignments of home loans on the same day as those same homes are being auctioned off.
And known robo-signers, which is to say illegitimate signers producing illegal assignments are being accepted by our county recorder's office as legitimate. This is in direct violation of the Declaration of Compliance Law, SP 1137. This law was passed by the California State Legislature in 2008. You were presented with a copy of these two reports at your last meeting two weeks ago.
I respectfully request a very careful examination of all of the illegalities that are being exposed and that you take the appropriate actions. You are our elected representatives, we all count on you to uphold the law. I've always been proud of my city and I want to continue to be proud. Respectfully and thank you for your time Amanda. Thank you.
Final speaker is Marina Reed
Good morning. I am a homeowner who is going through this process. I had four properties and they were all taken by the banks. I have been in the court system for the last two years representing myself both in state, federal, appellate and now in my fourth lawsuit regarding these banks. I'm savvy as to the issues. I was one of the people who wrote the report that went about the trustee sales.
I would like to know did you folks read the materials we provided you two weeks ago?
This is public comment. You just go ahead and address the board.
Okay, well then I would like to know because then I know which direction to go and what I speak to next. Then I will call up each of your offices and find out whether or not you folks read the material. It is a very complicated issue. The trustee sale issue though is very simple. It's whether or not these people have complied with 18-12-600. Are they bonded? They are not bonded. As a result all of the sales they are conducting are illegal.
There are some other provisions in there that send people for a loop in confusion as to whether or not regarding real estate. I will give you an amendment to my report to explain that so that you folks don't collapse those and throw us under the bus is basically my statement to the matter. We come to you because the court process is very, very, very long. As I said, I've already been in two years. I anticipate being in there for at least another three to five years if I can keep navigating So, I have presented my complaint and my notice to the board here. I have done it to the grand jury. I have had direct conversation with the sheriff and his second-in-command and his investigator.
The Sheriff's Department position is they look to you for direction. They will follow court orders even when there is proof put in front of them that it was fraud upon the court that created that order. So, the sheriff is still looking to the orders to follow even if there's fraud there and they are looking to you for direction. I am speaking to you as a citizen because you represent us and I am giving you some direction for you to be able to educate yourselves on the matter so that then you can instruct the people who need to be instructed so that they protect the people.
That is why we are presenting ourselves here.
Is there anything else I want to say?
1:05 – 1:089 turns
I think it is important to, the greatest challenge for a homeowner is that there are very few of us who will take these banks on. I am up against as a pro se because they dwindle our finances to zero. I'm up against the federal government, I'm up against Deutsche Bank who's the 28th largest conglomerate on the planet. I have now filed a suit against the judge in this town and against the bailiff and a number of other parties because the system that has been pushed through is railroading the citizens, is railroading the homeowners, and is railroading our budgets. Thank you but your budget, I have three seconds, your budget is being cut.
My mind says that you're over time, but thank you so much. Okay? So we'll be speaking.
Thank you
very much. All right. That concludes our public comment, I think. Mr. Allen do we have any other public speakers besides those?
No Madam Chair.
All right. Supervisor Wolf.
Thank you Madam Chair. Just wanted to address County Council because some comments have been made about the Board of Supervisors need to be involved And the actions that have been discussed and I know I've received letters and emails about that. Can you clarify because, you know we're talking a lot of these folks have talked to other elected officials I don't know if they're saying that we in order for them to move forward, we need to give direction. I'd like you to clarify that Mr. Counsel.
Madam Chair, Supervisor Wolff, the Sheriff and the District Attorney are as constitutional officers retain the discretion to investigate And prosecute crimes that in their discretion are in the best interest of the community. But the Board of Supervisors generally has no power to direct how the DA or the Sheriff conduct their investigations or prosecutions.
All right, thank you for that Mr Marshall All right, thank you. We're going to go ahead and go right into item number two because item number one has been withdrawn and then hopefully we'll have time for a very short break before we go into item number three.
1:08 – 1:1313 turns
Madam Chair if we could just have a quick motion to withdraw item number one from the agenda?
So moved. Motion in a second all those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Alright let's go into departmental item number two
Madam Chair, members of the Board. Item 2 is from the County Executive Office. It's a hearing to consider the recommendations of the Ad Hoc Board of Supervisors Subcommittee regarding the appointment of member of the public positions on the Redevelopment Oversight Boards for each of the seven successor agencies within Santa Barbara County.
Good morning, Madam Chair. I'm Renee Ball, the Assistant County Executive Officer. I am speaking on item D2 today. Today I'm here to provide an update on appointments to all oversight boards to the successor agencies of former Redevelopment Agencies, or RDAs. Appointments were made by various cities, community colleges, special districts and your board. I will also report on your subcommittee's recommendation to fill the member-of-the-public seats on all seven oversight boards.
Most of the oversight boards, including the counties have their first meeting set. Oversight boards only need a quorum or four members to conduct business. Oversight boards have considerable authority over the former RDA's financial affairs. The top priority for all boards is to pass the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule, or ROPS, which is the central document that identifies the financial obligations that the successor agency may pay.
As you can see from this matrix, each of the cities, schools and special districts have made their appointments to oversight boards. The member of the public seats are appointed by your board and the RDA employee representative seat for Isla Vista is appointed by your chair. The county recruited interested parties for the member of the public seats through placing newspaper ads, links on the county's website, ads on local government television channels and a press release. This resulted in 11 applications.
On February 21st of this year your board created a subcommittee comprised of Chair Farr and Supervisor Gray to make recommendations to the full board on the member of the public appointments. The subcommittee met three times and interviewed all 11 applicants in person. The subcommittee recommends appointing Dan Secord to the Buelton and Lompoc Oversight Boards, Dan Idelson to the Goleta and Isla Vista Oversight Boards, Nicholas Gonzalez to the Guadalupe and Santa Maria Oversight Boards and Carol Van Sand to the Santa Barbara City Oversight Board.
Recommendation number one, A through G are the recommendations from the subcommittee I just discussed. Recommendation number two is a report from Chair Farr. I'm happy to answer any questions.
All right, thank you. Any questions from the board at this time? Any public speakers? I have no request to speak. Supervisor Carbajal?
Madam Chair, I think you guys did a great job. I just want to move this item forward. I think we have some great individuals that you guys selected and ready to make a motion to move this item.
Okay, actually all of the people that are on this list I believe are in the audience right now. So maybe they could stand? Mr. Idelson, Mr. Secord and Mr. Gonzales and Ms. Van Zandt. So thank you all for being here. Thank you all for being willing to serve in this important capacity. And I guess go ahead and sit down now if the board has any questions for you or not.
If not we'll just bring it back to the board. Supervisor Carbajal? Motion? Second from Supervisor Lavagnino. All those in favor... I think we need a roll call vote.
Mr. Lavagnino? Aye. Mr. Carbajal? Aye. Ms. Wolff?
Abstain.
Ms Gray? Aye Ms Farr? Aye
Thank
you. That calls for ayes, one abstention
Thank you very much. And then if you may notice on our draft matrix, all of the squares are filled in now except for the one for the Isla Vista Redevelopment Agency Oversight Board and the RDA employee representative. The people appointed in that column were appointed either by the mayors of those cities or, in the case of Isla Vista and the county, by myself as chair.
And I'm very proud to announce that Alex Tuttle who is here. Alex stand up. I think all of us remember Alex because he works on our planning development department And is very familiar with Isla Vista and the projects, and actually was a graduate student there at the Bren School at UCSB. So he's familiar with the area as well. And so he best fits in my opinion that particular spot, and I'm very pleased that he's agreed to do that and take on that responsibility. So thank you Alex.
And with that, I think we have completed this. Thank you everybody. The board is going to take a break until 1030 when we have our time certain for departmental item number three.
1:13 – 1:251 turns
Yeah. ♪ ♪ Yeah. ♪ This is a test. ♪ ♪ You. Hi. ♪ Yeah. Music ¶. ♪ ¶. Yeah. ¶. ¶. ¶. ¶. Yeah. FCSp4 3.200,170.00 StSq3 3.300,0.00 Yeah. ♪♪
1:26 – 1:4122 turns
All right, the Board of Supervisors will come back into session. We're going to take up departmental agenda item number three. Mr. Allen would you read that into the record please?
Madam Chair and members of the board, item number three is from the Agricultural Commissioner. It's a hearing to consider recommendations regarding a revision to the County Weights and Measures Chapter 34C, Weights and Measures and Adoption of the Agricultural Commissioner's Revised Fee Schedule.
Good morning, Ms. Fisher. Good morning, Madam Chair. My name is Kathy Fisher and I'm the Agricultural Commissioner Director of Weights & Measures. I'm here this morning to talk to you about item number three. On February 7th, the Agricultural Department presented two proposals to the Board of Supervisors. The first proposal was to create a sustainable device inspection program by aligning device registration fees with current costs in state law.
The second proposal was to create a sustainable price scanner accuracy program During the February 7th board meeting, The Board of Supervisors directed staff to explore the possibility of creating a reduced device registration fee for water vending machines. It is important to remember that state law through Business and Profession Code 12210 mandates the inspection of all commercial devices each year.
The Director of Weights and Measures shall inspect all commercial devices, including water vending machines. The Agriculture Department contacted other County Agricultural Commissioner offices, the Department of Measurement Standards and the California Agriculture Commissioners Association to gather information for a reduced fee proposal for water vending machines.
The department also contacted the San Luis Obispo County Agriculture Department to inquire about their water vending machine fees in 2012 San Luis Obispo's water vending device fees will consist of an $80 business location fee and a $20 device fee. In 2013, their water vending device fees will consist of a hundred dollar business location fee and at $20 device which is the maximum fee that state law allows.
There are 213 commercial water vending machines in Santa Barbara County. In 2010 18% of water vending machines failed the initial inspection And in 2011. 14% of water vending machines failed the initial inspection. For comparison, gas pumps had an average failure rate of 2.4% in 2011. Water vending machines have one of the highest failure rates of all commercial devices in Santa Barbara County.
Staff recommends the adoption of the device registration fee schedule as proposed by the department and not create a fee reduction for water vending machines or any other device. Based on testimony during the February 7th Board of Supervisors hearing about disproportionate impacts on small businesses, the Board of Supervisors directed staff to draft a small business exemption for the scanner inspection program.
The department consulted with the Chamber of Commerce the Economic Development Center, other County Agricultural Commissioners' offices and the State Department of Measurement Standards to collect information for identifying what criteria would be used for small businesses to qualify for the Price Scanner Small Business Allowance and develop a reasonable and fair option while maintaining the program's integrity and cost recovery.
The information that was gathered from consulting with the different resources, was used to develop the department's small business allowance proposal with the following conditions. A single location in the county with one to three scanning stations have a $200,000 or less gross retail sales and provide the previous year's copy of their IRS tax statement for verification Qualifying businesses will have a reduced scanner location fee of 50% or $40.
It is estimated that 793 businesses will qualify for the small business allowance. The Agriculture Department is recommending that the Board of Supervisors adopt the revision to Chapter 34C, Weights and Measures. and adopt the amendment to the Agricultural Commissioner's fee schedule that includes the device registration fee amendment and price scanner inspection fee program with a small business allowance.
Department staff are available to provide any additional information and answer any questions, thank you
Thank you, Ms. Fisher. Any questions or comments from the Board at this time? Supervisor Wolk?
I just wanted to make a quick comment. Ms. Fisher, I want to thank you for hearing the Board's concern and coming back to us with your recommendations after investigating those concerns. I really do appreciate that. I think what you have proposed for us is well-reasoned and, you know, for me personally, I feel very comfortable in supporting this. To not support it would basically mean to knowingly allow folks charge our consumers more than they should. And I think this is one of the jobs of county government, is to make sure that it is to protect our consumers and I think what you proposed is very reasonable so I thank you for that.
Thank You Supervisor Wolf. Supervisor Carbajal?
Ms. Fisher, thank you for coming back with us. I think you heard the board direction at least four supervisors last time asking you to go work with our business community and see if we could find a little bit more common ground to come up maybe with the win-win. And you certainly heard the board and went out, and I appreciate that you met with all the stakeholders. I appreciate that you found a solution that at least for myself lay some of the concerns I had about giving a little bit of relief to small businesses And especially considering the economy, the way it is. And I think we basically are having our cake and reading it because we are doing what we have to do to protect the public health but we're also being mindful of the relief that small businesses need in this economy, in this bad economy.
So I really appreciate your leadership and your good work, especially touching base with all the stakeholders.
Thank you. Supervisor Labanino?
Thank you, Madam Chair. I've got a little bit different take on it but because I don't think we took the direction of what the board voted on last time. We voted on last time we looked for an exemption for small business and we did not get any exemption for small business. We came back with an allowance for small business. And what that actually does now is By even our own standards, you know and it's very difficult now to figure out well what's a small business.
Now we've got to go in and start looking at what the businesses records are. We're going to have to start asking them for their tax returns. We're gonna have to have somebody on staff that's gonna be able to look at these tax returns find out if this person qualifies or doesn't qualify. And we get to the whole thing of cost recovery at this point. There's not an exemption. You still have to go to that business, and now you still have to do the scanner check on a small business. But now you're not getting even the recovery of what we had originally talked about.
So I mean it almost kind of reminds me of the Cuyama Pool situation. I wouldn't have supported the Cuyama Pool but if you're going to put the pool in, you have to let people swim in it. I mean you have to make it reasonable for people to swim in it. So I look at this whole thing almost for me as a solution in search of a problem. And I understand what Supervisor Wolf said, but I've had zero constituent calls regarding the situation.
I really don't think it's the time, personally. I feel it's not the time to go out and hire another four or five individuals that are going to be county employees, create another bureaucracy. We might be overcharged a little bit somewhere along the line in our life. We might be undercharged a little bit somewhere along the line in life. It might happen inside the city of Santa Barbara.
You know, it might happen when you're inside the city or out in the unincorporated area. It just seems to me that you're asking to create something that I won't really see the need for at this point. And when we talk about the fiscal impact inside the report, I don't see the long term impact of what hiring a whole new group of individuals is going to cost us.
I'm interested to hear from the public. I'm glad that you did and I do appreciate, I want to make this distinction. I really appreciate the time and energy you put into this and I think you did it the right way. Now you come to the board and I might agree with it or not agree with it. The majority of the board looks like they are going a different way and that's fine but I don't want my reticence to support this Negatively shadow what you did. I think you did an outstanding job. You came to me, you did go to the stakeholders that I put you in touch with.
We just disagree on this matter
Thank you. Supervisor Gray?
Thanks, I'm not making a statement. I just have a question. Ms. Fisher what happens like it seems if the scan if you walk in and you check the scanner on Tuesday and make whatever adjustments need to be made then like Saturday how do we know that they have remained consistent with the corrections that were made
Madam Chair, part of the proposal we have here is an outreach component and it will be an ongoing proactive program. We recognize that our businesses here are not used to a program such as this so we plan to go out and work with each of the business owners and train them And inform them of what is required of them as far as their accuracy of advertised prices and what they actually are charged the consumers. We will allow them to assess their pricing accuracy and make the necessary changes, and then we'll have a continual ongoing inspection program throughout the year Be available to them to help them reach and maintain that level of compliance that's needed. But as far as answering your question, you know if we are there one day and then three days later we have a problem We're also going to be able to have an outreach component to our public to let them know That if they experience an overcharge, that they can contact our office and we will follow up with an investigation.
So just to follow-up a bit, we don't necessarily know if a change is made? I mean it's your knowledge of the inspector is at the time they're standing there checking the device. Is that correct? I mean they aren't going to know what's going to happen day after tomorrow.
Madam Chair, Supervisor Gray. Our inspectors again will be there to make sure that they have addressed any problems with the inaccuracies and then do follow-up inspections throughout the year. These will be unannounced undercover inspections so they won't know but as far as having an everyday person on site to be able to ensure that that store location is keeping their pricing accuracy up is something we just don't have the resources for
And in your budgeting for this particular matter, how often do you expect that you'll go back and recheck? Because we know that you're in one day. You check it. You get it right. You leave the next day. If you're not there, you don't know what's going to happen. So now how often will you go back and check?
Madam Chair, Supervisor Gray, we have a large volume of stores that we would first have to initially go in and do that initial inspection first. And if we do have a compliance issue, we do plan on going back and re-inspecting it. And we will continue to go back and re-inspect the store until we get the compliance level that we need. But we need to at first go throughout our business community and inspect them at least initially once.
Okay one more time back to my question. We're having a problem here. I'm not clear. You go in, you inspect, you leave and you've educated the person. You've told all the consumers that they have a place to call and you're helping everybody understand this. We all thought you leave now the next day or the day after The scanner gets jammed some way or another. Nobody reports it, nobody says anything, life just goes on and I go in and I buy my $85.95 jacket and it says on my ticket 85.95 like it was there everything's working how do you know that?
That's what I'm concerned about is that Myopic time and place connection, correction. And it doesn't continue without having somebody overseeing this the whole time.
Madam Chair, Supervisor Gray. With the initial inspection if we do find compliance issues then we will point that out to that individual and then we will come back with a follow-up inspection and we will continue to come back until we reach that level of compliance that the store is required. Once that level of compliance is met then we will divert our attention to other stores and initial inspections. And with
no reports how many times would you go back and check the person that's in compliance?
Madam Chair, Supervisor Gray, it would depend on the compliance. If they're getting reaching that compliance level then we would be fine in that store where then we would go on and go to other stores but if there's still a problem with compliance will continue to return to the store. So if
they've complied I hate to beat this horse but yeah I mean you're they've complied. You've left. They're fine nobody calls Do you go back six months later and check again or does it just stay there until somebody calls?
It depends Madam Chair, Supervisor Gray on whether or not we're able to go through all of our stores and conduct an initial inspection. Once that is done then we can go back and re-inspect stores on an ongoing basis.
1:41 – 1:4932 turns
And how long do you think that would take from time to time? Just an estimate.
Madam Chair, Supervisor Gray, it'd be very hard to estimate that or hopefully depending on the resources that we're able to acquire with this program will at least be able to inspect them at least once a year. Once a year. Thank you. Supervisor Lovins.
Madam Chair, two other questions I forgot about was talking about the water machines and it looked like you had a high failure what was called a failure rate. What does that entail? Are you not getting the gallon of water or is it some other aspect of the water that is failing?
Madam Chair, Supervisor Lavagnino. First of all when a water machine fails it's because they did not dispense an accurate amount of water the other problems that we find with machines is say you go a consumer goes up and wants to purchase five gallons they put their two dollars in They push the 5-gallon button, it's $1.75 and the machine will not make change. So right there the machine will fail. The other problem we're having with them is a consumer comes up to the machine puts their coin into the machine and the machine will not accept the coin and simply will run through the machine and drop into the coin return so therefore the consumer cannot purchase any water at all. So those are examples of how we do
that. And the last thing was have Any idea of I
think we're here in
Santa Maria. Yeah, have we did we give any consideration to possibly because I understand what Supervisor Wolf is saying as far as that we need to protect the consumer? Was there any consideration and maybe putting stickers on the machines that say so we don't have to go out and hire a bunch If you feel you've been overcharged, call this number and then we could do it on a response basis where we're still taking care of the people that feel like something's gone wrong.
Which
would seem
to be much cheaper.
Supervisor Levin, you know, we certainly can consider that but currently right now the program that we have is a complaint basis program and we're finding that still with our surveys we're conducting we have a tremendous problem with overcharging with our existing program.
So people are getting overcharged or under charged but not complaining about it?
Well, with our surveys that we've conducted, we're finding the problem. But what I fear is that the public doesn't know that the Ag Department is the go-to agency to help with consumer complaints such as this.
I totally agree with that. That's why I was thinking if there's a sticker on there that said if you've been under or overcharged, you could call the Ag Department. To me, that would clear up 95 percent of this.
Kathy, can you clarify for me? I was under the understanding that this device must be inspected per State requirements. The water device.
Water vending machines? Madam Chair, yes it is you know BMP co-business and profession code 12210 requires Ag Commissioners and Directors of Waste Measures to inspect water vending machines every year as far as referencing to stickering them this is something we could do but at least we have to go by law inspect the device
My sticker comment was not about the water machines, my sticker comment was about scanners. Why wouldn't we just put a sticker on the scanner? Because I understand what you're saying that I wouldn't know who to call if I got under or overcharged but if there's a sticker on there that might cost two cents We'd be able to call in and say, yes Kathy I've got a problem here. I hate to put in anybody's name but I just got undercharged or overcharged if I wouldn't get any undercharge calls but if we got overcharged Here's the number to call it just seems like he would be complaint driven. We wouldn't be going out and creating a whole new mini department
Thank you Supervisor Lavenino. Supervisor Carbajal and then I think we'll go to the public.
Just piggybacking on what Supervisor Lavenino says, we obviously differ in our approach and our perspective on this but Certainly I think in addition to the work you are doing and will be doing as part of this effort, I do think that Supervisor Lavinino's comment is worth considering. In addition to what we do sort of a public education campaign whether it's a sticker or little something you put up at every place you go to call the Ag Commissioner's office if you feel you're overcharged that's you know here's a number That might be something worth doing. You may want to consider doing something with our public access TV, reminding people that you are the agency. So beefing up the awareness that might help and it might actually help lessen our utilization of those resources that we're going to be collecting.
Thank you. Why don't we go ahead and go to the public, Ms. Jarlan?
Madam Chair, we're going to start in Santa Maria with John Lopez to be followed by Gilbert Carranza.
I'm John Lopez. You need to go to Santa Maria? Can we have John
Lopez there in Santa Maria? Thank you. Mr. Lopez. Good morning, Mr. Lopez.
Good morning, madam
chair.
Go
ahead and start.
Supervisors. Oh, we can't hear him. My name is John Lopez and I represent the Stole Merchants Association. Do you hear me?
Yes, now we can. Thank you, sir.
Okay, thank you. I'm speaking against the scanner issue for several reasons. Number one, the Ag Commissioner says that a small business is one that is $200,000 in gross sales. If you're at $200,000 in gross sales, you're not in business. You're going broke. If you have $200,000 in gross sales, you have $100,000 just for merchandise replacement. You have $30,000, $35,000 in rent.
You're going to have $10,000 and adjust in advertising and utilities and about $25,000 dollars in labor. That's gonna leave you about $30 thousand dollars in income of which your own home rent or house payment is gonna be about 15 to 20 thousand. So what does that gonna leave the person to live on? The Small Business Administration says that a small business is a $2 million gross business, is a small business.
That's from the Small Business Administration. She's asking for three to four positions to go out and do this inspection But from her conversation today and how difficult this is going to be, I can see next year coming back for more positions because I can't do my job. I don't have enough people to fulfill what I've mandated or what I've asked you to let me do. Because she's talking about going back and re-inspecting and re-inspecting this and re-inspecting that.
And I just can't see how you're gonna do it with the number of people that she's asking for And in the way she's explaining it. Plus, you're adding three more positions to an already failing retirement system. You're also going to have vehicles and maintenance and all that for these three people to get around. They're not gonna be on bicycles. It's gonna take cars. Look at the price of gas today to get these people around, to move them around to different situations.
Asking for a small business to present their 1040s, I think is outrageous. It's the most ludicrous request that I've heard in years. Do you as a Board of Supervisors have to present your 1040 to sit on that board? That's ridiculous! That's outrageous! And she was requested or instructed not requested, instructed to come back with an exemption not a discount And the exemption, there's a big difference.
Is your board going to stick to what it requested or is it just going to allow things to be slipped by just because, you know, hey she can do it? Another thing that really
grabs
my ranker is that she's going to allow me to address my pricing.
Our next speaker is Gilbert Carranza to be followed by Mr. Caldwell who's our final speaker in Santa Maria.
1:50 – 1:5911 turns
Yes, my name is Gilbert Carranza owner of Water for Less and I'm appealing the thing that the price going up on the water machines. And this $1.50, $1 75 a gallon when they talk about for five gallons our maximum's one dollar we are here to To have something for the community, not for everybody else. My maximum is five for a dollar and if it refunds the money and stuff paper racks do that all the time. If there's a problem with the water machine it's supposed to refund the money. That should be part of weights and measures.
I mean, the paper machines do it all the time. Gum machines do it. This machine does it but you know what? If there's a problem that the health department thing inside will not work or if something is gummed up, it's supposed to return the money. That is something that NEMA which is the head of the whole thing with the water machines and any type of a water vending machine or Coke machine or anything You know, the quarter thing is slipping back out. Well they get their money and they can come back later or they could call my number which is a great big number on the top which is a requirement from the state of California. They could call me I come down here I usually give them their money back and I give them the water. I mean this thing of raising our prices the same as a gas station is ridiculous it takes a matter of time to get there about three to ten minutes to do the water machine.
They're there for hours at a gas station We're paying $100 per location. If I have three machines in Guadalupe, that's $300 just in the administration fees and then $20 for each bin or you know whatever and water machines be treated like a gas station? I mean we are here to supply water at a decent price to our community. I do not want to raise my prices and I think that with the thing that we're in right now, we need something like this.
And I refuse to raise my prices above a dollar for five gallons. The name of our company is Water For Less, and I'm doing this for the community. And I think it's a great thing that somebody should do instead of raising prices. And you know, I just am totally against. I think that weights and measures is a great thing. We need weights and measures. I'm not saying we don't but in a water machine, I mean, I don't really like one shell station at $4 a gallon than the one down the street at 439.
I mean it just doesn't make sense. We need more control on the prices And I just don't understand of a small business like mine, where we're real small business. I'm the owner operator everything. And I'm just trying to keep my prices down and stuff. And with San Luis Obispo County, they slid this thing through on me without even knowing about it. I talked to a couple of their guys that do the weights and measures. They're supposed to be redoing that according what I've talked to them. I'm going to go up there and talk to them about it. I just don't understand where $120 a machine, $140 a machine, $160 a location. That's really bad.
Thank
you.
Your time is up now, sir. Thank you.
Thank you.
Our next speaker is Andy Caldwell to be followed by Dr. Robert Johns here in Santa Barbara.
Madam Chair, members of the board. We support the Ag Commissioner on the weights and measures side of this although as was just indicated we're not sure that water should be thrown in in the same way we think a sticker would do however for the price scanners you know do the math we really truly don't believe that you can have three people cover the entire county Including the cost of the vehicle, vacation, pensions, salaries and benefits for $184,000 a year covering nearly 2,000 scanners.
We just think that would be hard to accomplish, especially if there's going to be re-inspections. Ken you know your board needs to show some leadership. If there is an easier way to accomplish this goal without ramping up staff and increasing fees why wouldn't you pursue that? If you can still protect the consumer without incurring debt and increasing the cost of doing business, why wouldn't you do that?
Why wouldn't a sticker in a phone number. We have stickers on gas stations right now on the gas pumps. If you have a problem with this nozzle please call this phone number. You know, and as Supervisor Gray mentioned this is an issue of not the scanner being broken or the scanner malfunctioning. It's an issue with somebody putting the wrong price either on the shelf or into the computer. It's human error, it's not a mechanical error and human errors occur every single day so unless you go and re-inspect everyday and unless you inspect the entire inventory all what you have is a snapshot We think a consumer complaint driven program is cheaper for the county, it's cheaper for the consumer and it would probably work better because consumers would have the opportunity of reporting every day not once a year when your inspector comes through.
The IRS issue we think is completely intrusive. It would take a CPA to actually read these things and figure out what net is and what gross is, you know if anything you should go by number of employees and or perhaps square footage based on different categories But again, you know, demonstrate that you truly realize what kind of a crisis you're in with regard to salary benefits and pensions. And realize what crises the private sector is in this recession and take a different path. Give it a year. Try the sticker program for a year and see what happens. Thank you.
Our next speaker is Dr. Robert Johns. We have a slip from Maria Ross but I believe Ms. Ross may have left.
Well, I'm all for this program. I think we ought to call in the Marines on this. Hurrah! Hurrah! Now because it's... This program is going to be affecting... It's going to be affecting everybody in the county but think about all the people who purchase the water. It's ethnic people. It' poor people. You know, I mean and then supermarkets. What about the senior citizens?
Senior citizens who actually read their slips or some don't even read it. And then there's that angry person who does read it and finds out that they're being scammed. I would like to see this program go in effect. And I think the board is missing the point here. It's the people See, I mean your average ethnic person is not going to go out and purchase 15 bottles of water.
It's just too expensive. And I'm hearing a defense from the small businesses but I think this is just the beginning of a countywide program because I think we're being scammed even by the gas operators, even by the guys with the small business Guys are screaming like crazy, but once you implement this program they know they're being watched. They know they're being listened to and it's going to cut down on their profits to have defective machines. A lot of those machines are defective. People just walk away.
It's giving away... You don't get the proper amount of weight or measurement for the price that you put in. A lot of these machines are broken, or half. This is just a beginning of something that's going to be very, very effective. It's going to help a lot of poor people and senior citizens. And I think a lot of these businessmen, and you have to pardon me businessmen it's not all businesses but if there is no inspection Some of these guys are just scamming. They're allowed to just do what they want to do, so I think we need to call in the Marines on this.
I understand the need to be careful about hiring people but I think overall you're going to get a hurrah from all the people when they find out they're getting that better service when there's inspection. Thank you.
Thank you.
Sure for yes, could I just ask Miss Fisher one quick more? Yes on the scanners how many can your inspectors do in a day?
1:59 – 2:0724 turns
Madam Chair, it would depend where they were. If they were in say a strip mall they could do quite a few in a day. A location that has one to three scanners we did actually time our inspectors. It takes an hour to do just the inspection that doesn't include if there's a problem and going over the problems with the business owner doing a location that's larger that has four or nine scanners takes about two hours each Location to do just the inspection and then a location has 10 or more.
Because of the procedures outlined in the law that we have to follow, it can take a substantial amount of time to do a much larger retail establishment.
Assuming that they're all in this and the ten or more. Does that assume they're all in the same building?
Madam Chair, Supervisor Gray, some stores like a very large department store can have more than 10 scanners per location. That could take at least three hours or if not more to do one location.
OK, thank you.
All right. Any other questions from staff or... One last one. Yes, Supervisor Larimer.
Mr. Lopez, I thought brought up a good point about the $200,000. It seems like a $200,000 business that's grossing 200,000 is not going to be in business for long. But and I noticed that you had 793 that you identified in that segment. Did we do anything where so many are under half a million? Was there...I mean did you look at different cutoffs or did we just take 200,00 Kind of go with that number because I'm curious is if we moved it to half a million, how many would fall under that? If it would be not a huge significance.
But we'd have a lot of smaller businesses that would fall under that and I'm still concerned with having to show their tax return as well but
Ms. Fisher? Madam Chair, Supervisor Lavinino, we consulted with the Chamber of Commerce to come up with that figure and other counties that possibly have a small business allowance which there are and according to the Chamber of Commerce who is quite the authority on small businesses in Santa Barbara he indicated that the $200,000 cap would indeed include businesses that would be struggling and either that or it would be an entrepreneurial start-up company and that would take advantage of and benefit from this small business allowance I did consult with another county that did have a small, very similar small business allowance that we are proposing today. And their cap is only $50,000 and they still have businesses that qualify for that. And as far as the verification, that county does have a verification component and I asked them to send me a copy of the Form 1040 and I have that right here And actually, what line that they just simply look to is line number 12 on the front page.
And it simply says business income and that's the figure that they use and that's what we would use as well. It's right there on the front page of Form 1040. And then after we've identified that the business would qualify, we would mark that in their file and then we would take the verification form and we would shred it.
All
right,
thank you. Supervisor Carbajal?
Thank you Madam Chair I'll move this item forward with staff's recommendation
Any discussion on the motion?
I'd like to make a comment. I'd like to be able to vote on this in two parts, because I'm satisfied with the weights and measure thing. However, the scanner does not make sense to me. And that's why I was asking Ms. Fisher why it would take so long. Because if they can do three scanners in a day and I'm giving them time to move from place to place For $31,720 it's going to take us 264 days to get them checked out. So it doesn't make economic sense to me is where I'm going so I am voting no on the scanners but I'm happy to support in fact I like the weight and measure one and really hope that sticker goes on obviously in both English and Spanish call if you didn't get a gallon of water I mean that ought to be the message. Call this number if you don't get your money's
worth.
Madam
Chair, as a maker of the motion, if council can help us bifurcate the two items great. If not we'll just move forward. So I'm looking at council and staff. to help us either come up with a motion that is acceptable, a legal motion within the staff report before us. And if not, that's fine too.
Give us just a moment to make sure we...
Madam Chair, as they're reviewing this I just wanted to make a couple of comments. First of all when we went through and did the interview process for the Ag Commissioner I think we learned from many of the applicants that one of the county's responsibilities was to indeed inspect the weights and measures in our community. That was new information, for me at least. And then when this issue came up and I had an opportunity to review section 12210 it does say each sealer shall within his or her county inspect Try and test all weights, scales, beams, measures etc. So I think that the implication of this or the statement of this law is that we shall do it with the understanding that we are likely not going to be able to do every one in the county So I get that.
And I think when this law was written, it was written with that understanding. What I think is important is also to look at the statistics that you point out and that is that our county without this ordinance or without the statement that we shall inspect, we have a much higher percentage of businesses that are not in compliance Not because they want to be out of compliance, but because perhaps they're just not being inspected.
It was at 7% is what you stated in here. You also stated that that was far above the state average of 2.6%. You also stated that when there is an ordinance in place, that number goes down to 1.92. So I think just by having this ordinance in place notwithstanding the fact that we may not be able to inspect all of them it incorporates the educational components and puts people on notice that they can inspect their own devices. I think this is a very important Item for our board to take up. I suggest that we take it in total, we do the entire ordinance as has been recommended to us with the understanding that we are not going to be able to do, as Supervisor Gray pointed out, we are not going to be able to do everything but I think when the public is aware And you do what you can do, we will start to see a benefit.
Thank you Madam
Chair. Thank you Supervisor Wolff. Council did we have a way to split this into two motions?
I think we do. It would involve basically four motions as to recommendation number one It would be to approve the ordinance as to devices. Recommendation two would be a similar one for approving as to devices, and then the next set of motions would be approved recommendation one as to scanners. I think that gives us specific direction that we can make through other changes depending on how the vote comes out.
Mr. Marshall, I understood you said number one was devices. What was number two?
Scanners.
And what was number 3?
There is no number three.
2:07 – 2:0922 turns
I thought you
said... Actually, I thought you said there were four.
Let me. OK, but I think probably the easiest thing to do unless I hear some further feedback would be reducing it from four to two and make recommendation approved recommendations or consider recommendations one and two as to devices. And then a second motion for wanting to ask to the scanners. I think that would give sufficient direction.
I understand.
Sorry for the confusion.
Thank you for clarifying.
We could take one motion at a time. We'll take the first one dealing with devices.
I'll second that Okay Do we need to roll call vote on this? Go ahead, Mr. Allen.
Mr. Lavagnino?
Question quick do water machines fall under devices or scanners? Water machines
Madam Chair, Supervisor Lavagnino yes water vending machines fall under commercial devices. No
Mr. Carbajal? Aye. Ms. Wolk? Aye. Ms Gray? Aye Ms Farr?
Aye
Passes 4-1
All right, and so then now we need to have a motion on the scanners I'll move
the scanners Madam Chair and also to include the sticker that we talked about in English and Spanish
I'll second that All right, we have a motion and a second. We'll have a roll call vote on this as well.
Ms. Lavinino? No. Mr. Carbajal? Aye. Ms. Wolk?
Aye
Ms. Gray? No Ms. Farr? Aye Passes 3-2
Alright thank you very much. We're just going to move right along and go into our next departmental item number four from community services
Madam Chair, members of the Board. Item 4 from Community Services is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding amendments to Chapter 26 of the County Code.
2:09 – 2:1624 turns
All right. Good morning Mr Parker and Mr Roney
Madam Chair, members of the board, Brian Roney, Deputy Director Parks Division Community Services Department. The item before you Board is a recommendation to make minor changes to Chapter 26 of the County Code. This code provides the rules and regulations under which our parks operate. It also gains grants enforcement authority to Parks Division staff. Among the recommended revisions are update new staff titles, update off-leash dog rules, provide boating safety regulations that are consistent with state boating laws such as life jackets and fire extinguishers.
It also makes the fines consistent with state law. These changes reflect title and name changes with the new Community Services Department. They also eliminate an outdated marketing report that was required to be submitted annually. The recommended action is to consider the introduction of the first reading of amending Chapter 26 of the County Code, also set hearing for April 10th on the administrative agenda to consider the adoption of a second reading of the amending Chapter 26, and finally upon adoption find that the ordinance is not subject to CEQA. I'd be happy to answer any questions.
All right, questions from the board on this? Supervisor Wolf.
Thank you Mr. Rooney I don't have a question with a substance of the changes but just in reading this I guess it's a consistency question so if I could have you look at section 26-7 which is an ejection of violators So it says the county director community services comma any of his assistants employees or deputies and any park ranger Shall have the authority to eject etc. Etc. So what that section does is it identifies certain employees?
so then if you look at Section 26205, which has to do with lake boat standards vessel inspection. Okay, so that one says the community services director, deputy director or any park operations manager. Any Park Ranger 1, any Park Ranger 2, any Park Ranger 3, any Park Ranger 4, any person designated by the director may order the operator etc., etc. So my question is in one section it's really specific you know you really do delineate who are the people who can enforce these Rules and regulations, but in the other one it's much more general. So I'm wondering if there is a reason for that?
If it's just an oversight, I think it would be good to be consistent. Just a question.
Supervisor Wilk, Madam Chair also in section 26-2 I'm sorry 26-3 that's what actually started this whole process of revising the ordinance because we wanted to include as many folks as possible.
That's right that's another one.
To include also part time folks because we have a lot of those folks out in our parks and we didn't want to restrict the ability to do enforcement in the park so that's actually what started it but item noted thank you.
So what is the answer to my question? Does that mean that on Section 26-7 you would incorporate all of the other people that you have in 26-3? I'm just asking for consistency on who can implement these rules.
As far as consistency, it would be up to the Community Services Director because of the caveat in section 26.3 that says or designees so actually could be anybody. So this would not be an all-inclusive list. Supervisor Wolf?
But in 26-7, it doesn't say designee's. It says any of his assistants. I think we're saying the same thing. I'm just trying to make sure that the ordinance is consistent and the language is the same, Mr Parker.
Thank you, Chair and Supervisor Wolf. Our reason for doing this was we wanted to make sure that we had as plenty of room as we could in terms of enforcement at the park based on our resources that we currently have but we can make this consistent so that we have the appropriate designated person there to enforce it.
All right thank you very much All right, any other questions from the board at this time? I don't know. Mr. Allen do we have any public speakers? No request to
speak. Move to approve the item Madam Chair.
Excuse
me, Madam Chair? Yes. You have before you an ordinance that I don' think has sufficient clarity for your board to move through the first hearing unless staff can specifically point to in each instance under discussion who's going to be included. We can trail it and come back this afternoon. Okay,
why don't we go ahead and trail this item to give staff time to go through each of these different sections and make the required language changes so that they're consistent throughout? And then we'll go ahead I'm wondering, because
the next item is yours as well. So I wonder if we want to skip ahead to the item after that? Would that be helpful? That
would be fine. Supervisor.
Yeah. Are there people here that have been waiting to speak on this item? Okay. Well, we want to go ahead and hear from them first. Yeah. Well, actually there's no public speakers for this item?
No request to speak on Item 4.
Okay. So if we go on to Item 5 which is also community services, is that going to be a problem for you? Yes ma'am. We can go ahead and do that now?
Madam Chair yes.
All right so we're gonna trail Item Number 4 and we'll come back to that. So let's have, start item number five.
Madam Chair and members of the board, item five is for community services. It's a hearing to consider recommendations regarding proposed fee adjustments for Santa Barbara County Courthouse grounds special use.
2:16 – 2:2212 turns
All right, Mr. Parker.
Thank you Madam Chair and members of the Board. My name is Herman Parker, Director of Community Services. This item before you is requesting your adoption of a resolution establishing special use fees for the Santa Barbara County Courthouse grounds. It also requests your approval of a notice of exemption pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines.
The courthouse grounds attract a variety of public and private uses as a National Historic Landmark. It's a unique facility that hosts both private events, such as corporate dinners and private ceremonies, and also public events that provide benefit to the public such as fairs, festivals, movie nights, and a variety of other community events. Last year the site hosted 104 events total, 88 were private, 16 were public events.
The courthouse grounds provides six separate areas that accommodate a limited number of visitors in each one of those areas. After reviewing our current fees for use of courthouse grounds, the current fee structure includes a separate fee or specific fee for specific areas of the courthouse grounds in three-hour increments for private events. It also includes the ability to request a security deposit of up to $1,500 for your larger user groups In addition, it provides a range for all-day use of the entire courthouse grounds which ranges from $1,000 to $15,000 per day for events.
This range leaves a great deal of ambiguity. The current fee structure also does not clearly define a private use from a public use. The new proposed fee structure addresses these issues and provides clarity of the fees and also allows staff to offset costs associated with maintenance. The new fee structure maintains the specific fees for specific areas. It also gives staff the ability to charge an additional $80 per hour for private events that need more than the minimum three-hour rental.
It also modifies the cost of rentals for the Bird of Paradise area, which is currently at $425 to $300. This is because this area can only accommodate 50 people and the impact of 50 people on that area is very minimal. The proposed fee structure also establishes a $2,500 fee for rental of the entire courthouse grounds. It provides a 35% discount of the daily rate for setup and takedown before and after an event It allows the Director of Community Services to charge for additional staffing at the hourly billable rate if additional staffing is needed.
It also provides a discount of 10% for 501c3 non-profit organizations conducting public events that are open to the general public to attend, which is consistent with the City of Santa Barbara and the City of Santa Maria also provides discounts for non-profit organizations. It would be staff's recommendation that the board adopt the resolution establishing special use fees for the Santa Barbara County Courthouse grounds and also upon adoption approve the notice of exemption pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
And that concludes staff report, staff will be happy to answer any questions the board may have.
Thank you Mr. Parker. Does the Board have any questions at this time? Supervisor Wolf, thank you. Mr. Parker did I
hear, did you say that there's a minimum, a three-hour minimum for rental?
Chair Farr, Supervisor Wolf yes there is a minimum three hour rental right now for private events at courthouse grounds and designated areas
So just so I understand, if you could go to the fee schedule. So down at the bottom there's that little asterisk and it says three hour rental for private events? Yes. So does that mean like for the fiesta stage group would get it for three hours at $500 or does it mean they have to rent But that's per hour, so it has to be $1,500. Chair
Farr, Supervisor Wolff, if it is a private event they're in three-hour increments and then they'd be charged an additional $80 if they want an additional hour over that three-hour limit for public events that have a benefit of the public. They get that area for that set fee for the day.
Okay I understand thank you. Thank you.
Anything else on the board at this time? We'll go ahead and Supervisor Carbajal.
Yes, Mr. Parker I'm trying to understand how we deal. I appreciate the 10% that we afford to nonprofits just for being a nonprofit you get the 10%. But there is a difference that I see with a nonprofit doing a dinner where they charge and raise the fundraiser for themselves or a nonprofit who puts on a concert for the community And I guess, how do we define public benefit? Is it when there's no charge and it's...I'm just wondering if you have a definition or not for public benefit.
Chair Farr, Supervisor Carvajal. The benefit would be the event is open to the public and if the event is open to the public, the public can come and partake in it. We consider that an open event and they'd be charged the rate for a public event.
So potentially you could have an event where anybody from the public could attend It's open to the public, but they have to pay a certain amount. So they have to pay a certain amount to go into the function. It's a public event, but do you differentiate between that and an event where the public doesn't have to pay?
2:22 – 2:3325 turns
Chair Farr, Supervisor Carbor-Hall, we're not differentiating between the payment of going in. It is whether there is a public can come or attend the event.
Okay. And I'm going to come back to this issue in a while because it's, see there's a big difference when you're charging for a purpose it is open to the public and But the benefit is still not quite the public benefit that you would if you just had an event that was just open to the public without no charge. So I see it, I see the definition being further delineated but I'll come back to that in a while because I think we're going to have some public speakers but I just wanted to ask you if you differentiate it so I really appreciate it thank you very much.
Thank you all right why don't we go to the public then Mr. Allen?
Madam Chair, we have five requests to speak. Is Mr. Goodwin still here? Okay then we're going to start with... That's fine. We'll start with Diana Vandervoort to be followed by Linda Vega
Good morning, almost afternoon ladies and gentlemen. I'm Diana Vandervoort. I am the 2012 chairman of Noches de Ronda. I've worked with Noches for since 1979. How many years is that? I'm a third generation chairman of Noches de Ronda. First thing I think I need to tell you is that it's been An event in the courthouse, Sunken Gardens ever since the year 1930 when the new courthouse was finished. The party was actually a private party that turned public as a result of invitation from Supervisor Sam Stanwood. The party began as an early family fiesta with Participation from the audience, where they taught the dances and songs of early California.
This proceeded into a performance show in 1934. The county actually built the stage for Fiesta. We are still using that same stage. It's that good. We are here today actually to let you know that our biggest challenge this year is our government fees. We have come to realize that our fees have just about doubled this year. We are a non-profit organization, one of the oldest in Santa Barbara and we do all of our own fundraising. We're all volunteers.
I am on the Fundraising Committee as well as Noche Cedronda committee. I write grants for Old Spanish Days as well We are finding ourselves with dwindling sponsorships and dwindling donations as a result of the economy. So we are continually looking to, what should I say? Help ourselves to keep the integrity of Old Spanish Days as we know it. Exhibit 350 performers per day at Noches de Ronda. I'm sorry, per evening I should say.
All of them county residents most of them amateurs on our Saturday afternoon children's show we have 400 children under the age of 13 The Noches de Ronda shows charge no admission to the public and they charge no fees to the performers. We're very, very proud of our kids. We have grown up with a lot of them and watched them proceed into professional careers.
We pride ourselves at Noches in our ability to be flexible.
I'm sorry ma'am your time is up. Time? Thank you very much. But thank you for being here and thank you for waiting.
Next speaker is Linda Vega. Go
ahead, Supervisor
Wolff? I'm going to ask staff this question and you know I have been contacted by these folks before and so I appreciate that you're here discussing this issue what I'd like to understand and I think you've made it looks like from what you're presenting to us you're making a move Reduce the fees from the potential of up to $15,000. What I'd like to know is specifically maybe as Miss Vega is talking or others if you can tell us exactly what the cost would be for someone for a group to do what they're doing for an entire day because it looks like in the letter that we received from them Then in 2011, the facility fee plus new add-on fees were $6,592. And then in 2012 the fees are estimated by county staff to be between $11,200 and $16,000.
So those seem way out of line with what I'm seeing and I'm trying to better understand what this fee schedule is actually going to do for old Spanish days.
Chair Farr, Supervisor Wolf and the board. The current fee structure that is in place for an event such as Fiesta Days would have a cost of about $16,000 for them for that entire length of their program based on the current fee structure that's in place. That fee structure came forward to the board I believe it was March of last year It provides in that fee structure a range that is very difficult to interpret. What is a minor event? What is a major event? What constitutes a major from a minor event, and there's no clarity in that fee structure as it currently is.
What we are trying to do with this particular fee structure is to provide clarity in terms of a specific fee for a large group that wants to use the entire courthouse grounds. We've established that fee at $2,500 for the day and that's based on the market information we've gotten from the City of Santa Barbara what their fees are also private entities here in the community that have parks and they rent them too for various special events. And so we've come up with a fee structure that we think is a marketable rate for an all-day use of those courthouse grounds and provides us the cost we need to recover and offset some of our costs in terms of the maintenance of the facility.
If these fees were adopted, their fees would be for the dates that they have in mind approximately $12,000. With the current fee structure that's in place now, it would be about $16,100. And so we're trying to provide a little bit more clarity of the fees so that it's easier to be understood by the public and also be marketable in the community.
Thank
you
very much Mr. Parker Actually, I just would like to ask a follow-up question to that. So if these other fees were in place last March, that means that for last year's Fiesta and 2011 they're saying that they paid about $6600 but you're saying that they would have paid $16,000. So why is their amount so much lower than what you're saying that they would have paid?
Madam Chair and members of the board, the fee structure, the fees were changed after they were quoted I believe is what the case is, so they were quoted based on a fee structure that was prior to when those fees were adopted. I believe that was the case. Okay, so
we honored a previous commitment even though the new fees were in place.
I believe that's what occurred yes.
Okay. So this, so they never really felt the effect of the current fee structure?
I believe that's correct, yes ma'am.
All right. Thank you. All right. Our next public speaker then.
Ms. Vahiga to be followed by Ricardo Castellanos.
Good
morning to
everyone, thank you. I'm Linda Vega, owner and director of the Linda Vega Dance Studio for 25 years and the courthouse in particular is very very important. I am not just representing myself, I am representing all of the dance studios in Santa Barbara who perform at the courthouse every year, every fiesta It is such an important event to all of the children of Santa Barbara. You heard the numbers of how many performed there during Fiesta Week and being a non-profit organization as old Spanish days, to come up with double the amount of fees that they had to pay last year would just be exorbitant for them. As Diana mentioned it's a free event to the public It's an event that brings not only the entire community of Santa Barbara together and visitors who come in and bring income to Santa Barbara during that week, also for all of the dance studios and all of the performers to get together under one – in one venue.
It is such an amazing community event. And so important to all of the children who perform in it. I just can't imagine not being able to have that event at Fiesta because the fees have grown so high. So I'm here in support of Old Spanish Days, I'm here to represent the children and all of the dance studios of Santa Barbara just to tell you how important that event is for all of us and to plead If there's any way to reduce those fees so that we can continue this wonderful tradition in our city. Thank you very much for your time.
Thank you, thank you for being here
Our next speaker is Ricardo Castellanos be followed by Phil Seymour who's our final speaker?
2:33 – 2:4613 turns
Good afternoon Madam Chair and members of the Board. My name is Ricardo Castellanos, I am the President of All Spanish Days Fiesta this year and I'm here regarding our new fee structure being proposed for the courthouse. I just want to take out a couple bullet points from the letters you've all received. We provide venues for over 60 non-profits to raise their funds for their year at various other venues we have throughout the city. We provide a safe environment for families to enjoy Excuse me, free performances for three consecutive days at the Sunken Gardens.
We not only reach out to city residents but to the unincorporated areas of Santa Barbara. We fully expect to pay fees to use the facility however we are also a non-profit who is committed to providing free performances for the entire community, free to spectators and free to the performers. We ask that the county work with us and meet us halfway to come to a fair assessment of what we are charged.
We also ask that Old Spanish Days is exempted and looked at differently from the proposed fee schedule for users of the facility as we are longtime partners from the beginning. We have provided you with really detailed information of fees from the last 10 years that we paid to the county. I'd also like to add that we also pay fees the County Health Department for the food booths. And just as an aside, we are subsidized by the city however in the fees that they charge, we essentially give that money back and I do have a quick question regarding the courthouse fee structure or something to bring up where it says Fiesta Stage. To me it reads that you're going to rent our stage while we have it up there so I don't know if it's the wording or if you mean the stairway, the platform at the top of those steps back there so that's just an aside.
Anyway thank you very much for your time
Thank you. Thank you for being here and waiting.
Our final speaker is Phil Seymour.
Good morning, my name is Phil Seymour. I'm one of the directors of the nonprofit organization known as Bunnies Urgently Needing Shelter or BUNS for short. On a personal level, I'd like to say I support 100% discount for all nonprofit organizations that are doing public events. You're forced to do less because you have less resources every year, and you're a non-profit organization in the county. You can share some of the responsibility for preserving the quality of life in Santa Barbara by at least assisting the nonprofit community to go on doing things.
But what I'm actually here to propose concretely today is a somewhat narrower exemption that goes to that. I apologize for not getting it to you sooner, but I prepared a written handout which I gave the staff earlier and we're proposing one amendment to the Schedule A fee schedule that goes with this fee resolution. And it would provide an exemption for public events that are co-sponsored by county departments Typically these events would fall into one or two categories, or maybe both. They could be fundraiser events. For example, if the Sheriff's Council wanted to do a barbecue in Sunken Gardens to raise money to buy new infrared sensory equipment for the Sheriff's Department and the sheriff said yeah we'd like to join in sponsoring that, that event would be exempt.
It could be educational events. If some non-profit art group wants to do show and the County Arts Commission wanted to co-sponsor it, it would be exempt. Or there could be events like our annual Bunny Festival, which is a little bit of both. We do this, it'll be our 12th Annual Bunny Festival this year if we're able to afford it. We raise about five or $8000 in funds all of which goes to provide medical care for impounded animals at the county animal shelter and pounded rabbits specifically And it's also an educational event. We're trying to promote awareness, promote adoptions at the county animal shelter and everything.
By way of background our group has been in existence for about 20 years. We provide literally 100% of the labor for all care for rabbits at the Santa Barbara County Animal Shelter and over time we've Helped out in Lompoc and Santa Maria when we could. We also provide about 95% of our expenses, so our particular event which is now closely associated with the Sunken Gardens is absolutely dependent on both for our publicity efforts and our fundraising for this.
And $700 would be a huge chunk out of our proceeds I think as a matter of policy This is a net winner for the county. You're not taking money from the Parks Department, all the money's going to wind up going to the county one way or another if it's a fundraiser for the county. On the other hand if you are charging the non-profit groups fees to do it that's a strong disincentive to go to the extra effort to get these labor intensive events involved so I think The win-win is to exempt, if you can't exempt all nonprofits at least exempt those that are directly benefiting
the county. Thank you Mr. Seymour your time is up. Supervisor Carball?
Thank You Madam Chair. You know this I first of all I really appreciate staff's good work. I think you guys did an extraordinarily good job of tightening this up And so I'm pretty supportive of the entire fee structure you put before us with some minor exceptions. I do think that we do need to look at better delineation of not nonprofits, because nonprofits that just have a fundraiser and want to use it, they should pay the fees and let's give them the 10% that you're recommending. I think that's a good thing.
But I think that nonprofits who put on events for the public's benefit, we should be able to subsidize that a little bit. I would say at least 50%. We just did that on an item earlier for business. I think we need to do that for nonprofits. I think there has to be criteria so when they have to be a nonprofit Two, they can't be charging the public. And if they do, the proceeds would... If the proceeds are going to the county we're shooting our foot. I mean it doesn't make sense.
So I'm very interested in exploring how we could exempt or charge 50% to those nonprofits Who whose resources raised are coming to the county one as Mr. Seymour said or two are providing a benefit to the public at no charge? The two items come to mind, one is old Spanish days This is a cultural, artistic performance event. Earlier we were talking about how great it is for our poets and well if we believe in the arts and that we believe in our cultural heritage that's something we ought to be looking at. We're not charging the public.
It's like we're double-charging if we do charge so I think we need to look at that. And the other one is the Veterans Day Sunken Garden Concert Here we're doing a concert free to the public, and yet we're charging the non-profit who's bringing all our veterans together to put on this ceremony and to put on this concert. Now as a veteran that rubs me really really the wrong way so I am really looking at not nonprofits in general But events that don't charge and do provide a public benefit and or are raising funds for the County of Santa Barbara, there should be some exemption. So whether it's an exemption or 50%, I think we need to look at that for that real tight window of events that take place at the courthouse.
Notwithstanding that, I'm okay with the rest of the fee structure. But I really think we need to look at that and give it some thought and bring those items back because I am not willing to vote on this the way it is. Not either exempting or reducing the fees by 50% for those type of events that I just outlined.
Thank you Supervisor Carbajal. Supervisor Wolfe? Thank you Madam Chair,
I would tend to agree with that assessment because as I was listening to the speakers I also I was thinking of the Veterans of Andra it was I think it's put on by this Santa Barbara Symphony although I can't be sure of that but it is open to the public there is no cost so I do think that if we can differentiate The 501c3 is just as Supervisor Carbajal mentioned because I think that the events that are open to the public, that are free really. I think the 50% is something that is reasonable.
I'm also interested in the comments made by Mr. Seymour about events that are either sponsored or co-sponsored by the county So I'd like to hear from you about that. That also reminded me that sometimes we have events that are put on by other governmental agencies, like there was a service from the Highway Patrol when there was someone who had passed away. So just trying to figure out how you deal with those types of things and maybe governmental agencies should be exempt.
So that's another thought.
Supervisor
Craig. I am a Fiesta lover, I mean the first buckle I ever won in my life was at the Fiesta so I'm a Fiesta. I want to have us all think about this path we're going down because if we choose...I don't know, I mean if we say then the Sunken Gardens if it's a non-profit and it's with the public then you get it for free or half price what about the ones that want to have something at Waller Park?
The Little League that decides they're non-profit, and they don't want to pay fees. Or NAHWE, the 4H Exhibit Day. 4H is connected to us through the extension service so that means... And it isn't that we don't want them to do it. I mean, I'm just going to go on with the Veterans Memorial Building because that's part of my charge is to manage the Veterans Memorial Building and people that have events, they get a discount if their Non-profits, but we have to be sure that we can clean the place. That we can keep the water on and keep the heat going and so on.
So I'd like to give it to them totally free, but we have to say is it just the Sunken Gardens that gets to do it for free if it's the Fiesta or Waller Park if the Elks want to have their part. So that's where I want us to really be careful before we go down this
route.
Supervisor
Cronin. Supervisor Gray, I appreciate you putting that other consideration forward. You know certainly I think that Old Spanish Days in this particular event is somewhat unique But because we did throw out other possibilities, I think it would be worthwhile looking at again what are truly public events that aren't. And what are the implications of our policy? Maybe this could come back so we could look at those implications in other facilities if that's what you're suggesting. But I believe non-profits are getting the 10% discount that is already stipulated in But if they're providing, again, a public benefit where they're not charging anyone.
That I would be interested in exploring what the implications are throughout the county as well. But again, public benefit is not a non-profit having a dinner to raise funds. Public benefit is not a nonprofit doing some event that isn't open to the public. You have to have some kind of special admission. I see those as very different and there's got to be a public benefit.
So, I think we can look at this further but I know for the old Spanish days I think it's really unique circumstances.
2:46 – 2:518 turns
I think that the Elks Rodeo is just as, you know. And that's why we've got a lot of work to do on this before we, I believe, we just say okay if it's Old Spanish Days and believe me that's one of my very favorite events so you know where I'm coming here. It's just how do we know which raises to the elevation of the favorite so its exempt? or the most needed to not. I mean, favorite's the wrong word but you know what I'm trying to say is what truly is exempt because of whatever reason and we have the findings and what isn't? Because I know we've got several in North County that would be asking the same questions.
Roberts Council, if you could help us get there. Maybe we're not ready to adopt this now but if we are I'm willing to adopt it all with the exception of the incidents that the issues that we're going to look at. Nonprofit public events bring that back to us later so we can really look at the implications of our actions. Bring back the implication a public nonprofit events and the events that were raised in terms of relating To government and county government.
The rest I think we're ready to approve. I'm not hearing anything from any of my colleagues, and if we can approve that council great and bring those other items back or if you prefer, we bring it all back.
I would defer on the latter question too. To the Department as to what operational difficulties that might happen if you might occur if you simply excise the existing proposal for 10% discount. If there's an existing discount applicable to the non-profits, then you preserve the status quo. But if there is not and I'm not clear if the existing authority does have that discount but...
Then you would have any non-profit before staff got back subject to the fees set forth here So if the department is okay that they would have the authority. There is, okay I just was advised that there is no existing 10%. So absent, if you moved this resolution forward then there would be no between now and when the staff came back you would have no authority to or
Yeah, thank you council. You know I'm not really comfortable going forward today Supervisor Carbajal. I think it's too complicated to try to carve this thing up and the resolution that goes along with it and I concur with the comments that have already been made by the rest of the board as far as looking at non-profit events where they are not charging the public at all as opposed to charging for a fundraising event And also to look at what Mr. Seymour talked about, because I do think that gets rather convoluted in that we're charging people in their own county departments and it's entirely for the benefit of the county or a county department. So, I think it's probably better that staff look at all of this. And I take Supervisor Gray's comments to heart as well as far as the fact that you know fees may be different throughout the county for different parks that we have but I think that we do have to have some consistency in the rules that we are applying and then perhaps in the discounts that were applying So it seems to me that it would be easier to get to this chart if we had better definitions of a lot of these things.
CEO Wally, did you
want to make a comment? Thank you Chairwoman. I just wanted to note that if the board takes no action today The fees will remain at their current rates without any discount and that may be where your board chooses to be. I just wanted to make sure that you are aware that what we're proposing here are actually reductions in fees. Certainly, we would not be prepared to respond very quickly to your additional requests for information. I think that we probably need at least 16 to 90 days to come back to you with that, but again, I just wanted to make sure that you are aware that no action means the fees stay as they are.
Right, well I do think that you know we've had testimony at least as it has to do with those Spanish days that you know their fees for whatever reason would be doubling so that is a big deal. Madam Chair? Supervisor Levin did you want to make?
I was going to say let's keep the status quo and that means whatever we charged on Spanish Days last year we should charge them again this year.
I think we'd need some sort of an ordinance adjustment for that.
2:51 – 2:5721 turns
You're adopting by statute, you'd be adopting these fees by resolution so we don't have the normal formalities associated with an ordinance. If your board before staff completed the analysis, if your board moved forward with the ordinance as it is now, your board would have the authority to waive fees on a case-by-case basis pending the resolution of these specific issues you have set forth.
Can we waive those fees? Not waive but ask that the same fees that were charged last year to all Spanish Bays occur right now?
I believe you can if you simply direct. That's included in the fees for Old Spanish Day be added to the resolution even though it is not specifically on the agenda, nonetheless it's within the scope of the item that is agendized so I believe you could take that
action. Let me just ask a procedural question when does Old Spanish Days have to lock-in their fees for this year?
Madam Chair, members of the Board. We would like to get those fees locked in as soon as possible. Their dates begin in July through the first part of August so our hope was to get those fees locked in very soon if possible.
Okay but if we didn't take any action today and we just continued this item with the direction that we have given how soon do you think you could be back before us?
Madam Chair, maybe 60 days.
Two months? So that's the middle of June so that's too late for them to wait and for you to wait to lock them in. Supervisor Wolf.
What if the motion was to accept what is proposed but add another line item as was suggested A 50% discount for 501c3s that are open to the public where there is no charge. Do we have to wait 60 days for that? I mean, if we take a vote today and give direction for that, how's...
Chair, Supervisor, I would recommend that we be able to provide you the financial impacts of that decision and we haven't had an opportunity to review that consideration. So perhaps what your board may want to do if you're looking to address the Fiesta issue specifically today is adopt a staff recommendation and include specific direction on Fiesta and then we can bring the other information back to your board. Well,
I think the Fiesta is one. But then we were talking about, I think it's the Fourth of July where the symphony has their big event as well, where they're honoring of the veterans and so forth. So I guess what I'd really like to do is try... However we have to do it to get there, I guess I would feel more comfortable if we were able to just give direction and get this done.
Madam Chair? I'm sensing that we're kind of conflicted, but is Mr. Counsel? Is there any way we could have this item come back as to address the issue Supervisor Gray, Supervisor Farr that sort of have come up, Supervisor Wolfe myself like, but yet provide an exemption or not an exemption, but direct that staff charge OSD the same amount that was charged last year
Yes, I think you can because you would be amending only part of the resolution.
Until we resolve this issue that's something I'd like
to do. And everything else would remain as the CEO said status quo as to We have an existing resolution.
Why don't we do that? I'd like to make a motion to that effect because it's coming back with much fuller report analysis and the information re-requested, but for the time being Old Spanish Days is in a few months and I think they would need that direction so they could pencil out Their activities, and I think we win by it comes back. It's more thorough. We look at the veterans issue that would be when is it? I think it's in October November so that will be able to deal with that.
4th of
July
concert
there's no July. The one I'm referring to is the veterans which is an October November I think Yeah, but we could deal with all those issues comprehensively. But right now we're not exempting old Spanish days. We're saying let's just charge them what was charged last year. That's all we're saying.
Well, if we didn't take any action on this that means that the issue that Mr. Seymour brought up is not an issue yet because right now they're not charged. Is that correct?
2:57 – 3:0323 turns
Madam Chair, right now they are a county-sponsored event. The county co-sponsors that and they are not charged for
that. Okay so if we took no action on this and directed you to bring it back because then still the issue is what to do with those Spanish Jews?
Will they be charged the same?
Okay, and so then that could be done as a specific addition to this motion to continue in that Old Spanish Days fees would remain the same for this year as what they were charged last year. Now that's not the fees that are in the current schedule because as we understand they were charged on the previous. So we're not charging them.
But Madam Chair, staff used their discretion to charge them less. And all we're saying is use that same discretion to charge them the same amount as was charged last year. Charge everybody the same including no Spanish-based. I don't
think it's their discretion. I would think it would be our direction. No but last year they did. This is really
not clear. You guys come... We're just walking down a quicksand.
Supervisor
Gray?
And it's not agendized. So, you know, I don't know whether in a case like this where we talk about fee reductions that that's something that has to come back separate.
Madam Chair, may I ask one question? Yes, Supervisor Gray. Why, in my opinion, counsel, we could pass the fees as set forth today And then one of the supervisors could come back with it agendized in a week, two weeks whatever and ask that the Old Spanish Days get a fee waiver just like we do all the time. You come back in and say, I would like to ask for a fee. Yeah, I've done it for different things. I'd like to ask for fee waiver for the Old Spanish Days so that they get... So then everything is really clear. We pass the fees as they are very clearly put together.
Then you come back in next week and ask that the Old Spanish Days get their exemption or whatever you want to ask for.
Madam Chair, I think that's fine on some level Supervisor Gray but I think for this year we're just trying to address this issue until we really consider this item more fully. That would be caught discussing up here and being a little challenged in terms of how to proceed.
And what I'm trying to say, and I don't mean to interrupt. We don't usually do it this way but if we could just set aside the old Spanish Days thing for just a moment so that we can all really look at this. The fees are good. They've done a good job of redoing the schedule and they thought it all out and it's very carefully thought. So let's pass these fees today because we all are okay with them with the exception of our concern about non-profits that do events that benefit the public for free So then we can come back in and.
Step one would be to ask for a special amount for the old Spanish days that you'd asked for, just like I did for Little League. Then you come back in and do an amendment to the fees based on your theory which I agree with that non-profits that don't charge should get some kind of special. And that will give them time
to come back and make corrections. Okay. That makes sense so let me make sure I understand it. One is about the fees.
Yes.
Come back with the issue so we could consider it further.
Yes,
and three which is my motion today is going to be to also create that waiver of 50% fees for all Spanish days until we consider it further. So it'll be those three items.
The only thing that I can't do today is to do the 50% for all Spanish days because it wasn't noticed and we haven't talked about it you know I mean if that's the only reason
Well, what if it was 50% not focusing on old Spanish days? Because I think when you do a fee schedule everything has to be the same for all organizations. So I think from a policy standpoint we just say what I have said before is this and then we just add another line That says 50% for nonprofits that are open to the public. All nonprofits that are open to the public.
But Supervisor, don't you think we need to know first what that's going to cost us? You know, that's the only reason I'm not ready to go there. Yeah.
Okay so let me just ask. So if we don't... Let me ask another question. I'm gonna ask a different way. So Old Spanish Days as this fee is written it looks like they rent it three days
Chair Farr, Supervisor Wolf, it's several days. It's actually over a two-week period that includes their setup and the event days themselves. If the board might I'd like to share with you a slide that I have here that will kind of clarify what their fees were, what they would be if we stayed with the same fee structure we currently have. Their current fees for this year would be about $16,100 If we adopted the fees that are proposed, their fees would be approximately $12,000 and that includes a thousand dollar security deposit. And you can compare that to what they're paying for use at some facilities in the city of Santa Barbara. I'd like to also just clarify that the fees that we are discussing today are specifically for the courthouse grounds.
They're specifically for that particular facility.
3:03 – 3:1032 turns
So, thank you. I think this is really a good chart to see. So what did they pay last year?
Last year they paid approximately $6300 roughly and that was, that fee was based on their previous fee
structure. 6300 so it was half of what we're going to charge now I'm getting really confused. I thought this fee schedule was to give them a break, but it's not. It's actually doubling the fee. Is that right?
Chairwoman and Supervisor, the 6300 was charged last year simply because we had already quoted them that number prior to your board adopting the current fee.
Okay so now it's going to be double. Right?
Madam Chair, Supervisor Wilk,
yes. That is
correct.
Madam Chair I'm a little frustrated now so I'm going to try and get us somewhere. Supervisor Gray, I appreciate your comments about bringing all the other parts and everything but the fact of the matter is we're dealing with the courthouse. We should look at all these other issues in the future in a more strategic fashion but now we're bringing all these other strings that I think are really getting us into a more complicated circumstance The fees that are before us, like I said, I appreciate it. I would appreciate it if the two items could come back to us and that's the ones we talked about.
The exemption for government co-sponsored events with organizations that obviously are going to provide a public benefit to the county or other government entities The non-profits that are doing non-profit events, that are open for not profit to the public. That item come back to us in terms of either an exemption or a reduction in fees at 50% so we could consider what that looks like.
And thirdly again council said I'm looking at council for some guidance We could today ask that Old Spanish Days be charged the same amount of money that they were charged last year.
That would constitute a revision to the Resolution and I believe your board could do that on this item. If you if that's your direction it would appear as a And then we're
still going to visit the broader issue, we deal with this issue It's right before us and it doesn't take away from our ability to deal with the broader issue So that's my motion. I'm just trying to get us out of here We're still gonna look at the broader issue will deal with this issue which is before us and I think We're still leaving the door open to consider the rest of the issues
Supervisor Wolf. You know, I hate to belabor the point but I still want to go back if and now the 50% makes more sense to me than before that is what we what we charged So why don't we instead of looking, I worry about us doing this on a case-by-case basis. I think we should do it at the policy level so everyone understands it takes care of the issue with Old Spanish Days but it also takes care of other groups and it's fair. So I think we adopt this if This would be my motion if I had my druthers. I think we adopt this, but include the 50% reduction for nonprofits that are open to the public and then that takes care of it. That takes care of everybody and it gets us back to where we were with old Spanish days. So it takes care of that whole issue, but it's done in a broader policy way.
Supervisor Wolf, I'm willing to second that.
Okay. And then are we also then adding This language about events co-sponsored by county departments being exempt? Yes. Okay, so the two changes are the addition that was presented to us which exempts events co-sponsored by county departments and changing on the table the 501c3 nonprofit organization discount from 10% to 50%. Is that correct? The 10% is
for I'm sorry.
Oh, I see 50% is just for non-profits with events that are open to the public. Exactly. So there's actually two additions?
Yeah, for free.
For free. All right. Supervisor Labagnino and then we'll go to the CBO. Thank you Madam Chair and I can
support that provided We come back and we look at, I think we're causing ourselves a problem if Sunken Gardens is different than everything else in the county. I appreciate what you said is when we have a fee schedule it should be and we have rules that should be all the way throughout the county. So I can support this now for this so we can get through this but I want to make sure that we come back and we take a look so that we're not having different rules in different places.
Supervisor, I am fine with that. I think that's a good thing to do. That is a modification that we bring this back to look at the entire county parks you know all of our which we've done before so just bring it back to us again so we can relook at the fee structure
Okay. So this is a motion by you? Yes. And this is a second by you, and the clerk is clear on what it is and counsel is clear.
But how many events are there? I want to know how many events are there that are going to get this 50 percent discount?
I
don't think we can answer that
question. Chairwoman, I honestly don't think we can even give you a wild guess without really looking at the individual organizations that utilize these particular facilities and whether they charge or not. That's not information we've typically gathered in the past because it hasn't been information that was important.
So wild guess is we don't know how many are going to qualify. We don't know what we've done in the past, and we don' t know what this is going to cost. I'm not trying to be an obstacle here. No, but
I think you're asking a good thing. But we do know that what we charged last year was 50 percent, so... Well, the Fiesta folks,
but
what
about everybody else where we were throwing
this in? I'm not going to give a definitive answer, but I think there's maybe half a dozen of these larger events that take place over the entire Sunken Gardens.
Well as part of the direction we've asked this to come back Looking at it countywide, and I think as part of that direction we can also include You know how many events are we roughly looking at now? And you're going to come back in 60 to 90 days Then you would probably have time to kind of gather that information If you can't all right. We have a motion. We have a second all those in favor say aye Aye opposed no no one no all right Thank you everybody What's the will of the board?
Break for lunch. All right, we will break for lunch and we need to hear from council as to our closed session agenda.
3:10 – 3:112 turns
Thank you Madam Chair. Following your lunch break, you will adjourn the closed session for existing litigation State Department of Mental Health v. ADMHS and the County Santa Barbara v. Department of Mental Health You also have conference with Real Property Negotiator, APN 107-250-0111 et al. You also have conference with Labor Negotiator, Employer Relations and you have Public Employee Performance Evaluation.
Thank you. The Board will return about 1.30. ¶.
3:18 – 4:421 turns
Music Hi. ¶¶ 2A 3.30 x (-0.00?) ¶¶ ¶ Thank you. ¶. ¶. Yeah. ¶. ¶. ¶¶ ♪ ♪ ¶¶ ♪ ♪ Hi. Yeah. ♪ ¶. ¶. Hi. ¶. Thank you. ¶. Hi, everyone. Yeah. Thank you for joining us. Thank you. ¶. Thank you. ¶. ¶. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. ¶. Yeah. ¶. ¶. ¶ Yeah. Yeah. ¶. ¶¶ ¶¶ ¶. ¶. ¶ Yeah. Yeah. ¶¶ Music playing You. ¶. ¶. ¶. ¶. Yeah. Yeah. ¶. ¶. ♪ Thank you. ¶. Yeah. ¶. ¶¶ Yeah.
2A 3.30 (-0.00), ¶. ♪ Hi, everyone. ♪ 2A 3.30 x (-0.50') ¶. ♪ ¶¶ Yeah. Oh, no. ♪ ♪ Hi. ♪ Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. ¶. Thank you. ♪ Hi. ¶. Hi. Hello. Thank you. ♪ ¶. ¶. ¶. ¶. ♪ ♪ Yeah. ♪ ♪ Yeah. ♪ Thank you. You. Thank you. ¶. Music playing Yeah. ¶. ♪♪ ♫ StSq2 2.60 (-0.00), ¶¶ ¶ ♪ ¶. 3F 5.30 x (-1.00)(2A 3.30x ). ¶. ¶¶ ¶. ¶. You. You. You. you Music. Hello.
You. you ¶. ¶. ¶¶ ♪ ♪ ¶. ¶. Yeah. Thank you. ¶¶ ¶. Hi.
4:43 – 4:452 turns
2A 3.30 x (-0.00?) 3F 5.83 x (?) 2A 3.30 (-1.00), Yeah. 3Lz ! 5.90 (-0.00), Yeah. Please help me get the language.
All right, Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors will come back into session. I apologize that we're getting back late from closed session. Mr. Marshall would you give us a report from closed session please?
4:45 – 4:486 turns
Thank you Madam Chair. Each of the noticed closed session items were held. Reportable items come from existing litigation in the matter of State Department of Mental Health v. ADMHS and County of Santa Barbara v. Department of Mental Health. Out of that litigation came Two full releases with county providers, FSA and PathPoint. And also a culmination of a four-year settlement agreement with ADMHS that will return to the county approximately $4.8 million with an additional $500,000 to be determined based on accounting reconciliation. Thank you Madam Chair. Oh, in each of those cases the board voted unanimously for the settlement.
Okay very good thank you all right with that we're going to go back to our trail departmental item number four and bring that back to Community Services Department Mr. Parker Mr. Roney
Madam Chair, members of the board, directed staff to clarify a certain language throughout the document. And up on the screen you have a summary of the language change that we made throughout the document and I'll read that. The community services director, any deputy director, any park operations manager, any park ranger, any agent employed or contracted to provide lifeguard services, or any other person designated by the community services director.
And above that you see the sections that were changed to reflect that and county council has already approved the language changes.
Supervisor Wolf.
Very good, Ms. Doroney thank you and Mr. Parker thank you for that and I'm going to go ahead and move this item.
All right motion second discussion on the motion all those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries thank you very much All right, now we'll go on to item number... Supervisor Lavinino said five was so much fun. Let's do that one again but I'm going to use my progativist chair and have us go forward to departmental item number six from the treasure tax collector.
4:48 – 4:5524 turns
Madam Chair, members of the Board. Item 6, when the Treasurer Tax Clickers a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the sale of tax defaulted property subject to the power of sale.
Good afternoon Mr. Hagan thank you for being here
Good afternoon Madam Chair, members of the Board. I am Harry Hagan, Treasurer Tax Collector for the County and with me today is Clinton Donati my Assistant Treasurer Tax Collector The item before you today is coming before you asking for approval to go forward with a sealed bid sale for tax defaulted property two parcels that went tax defaulted in June 1998 These two specific parcels were not redeemed, nor were they initiating a payment plan within the five-year redemption period. And so when we started going forward with the tax sale process on these parcels it was discovered that the two parcels in question had not been properly probated And so the owner had passed away in April of 1999 in the county of San Luis Obispo. Unprobated property stops any kind of auction process per state code, so we referred these parcels to San Luis Obispo County Public Administrator to investigate and to open up probate proceedings if they deemed it necessary They came back last year in June and notified us in writing that the value of the properties do not warrant an administration, a state administration.
And so that allowed us to go forward with our auction process. In the code it is explained that you can go forward with a sealed bid sale if the property in question It's considered unusable by virtue of its size location or other conditions. And if that is the case, then it would be offered to the contiguous owners these 2 parcels in this sealed bid sale. Are both landlocked with no known easements.
And so we would propose going forward within the statutory guidelines set forth in the code to do a sealed bid sale and that date would be June 27th. These parcels can be redeemed up till 5 p.m.. The night before the sale and so We're here to ask for your approval of this and here to answer any questions.
Thank you, Mr. Hagan. Supervisor Gray?
I should have asked sooner. I apologize, but I don't understand how they can acquire the landlocked. I thought every parcel in order to be a parcel had to have the ability to access the parcel. Is this a grandfather thing? How can they be landlocked?
You know, Sheriff our supervisor great. I'm not sure how these parcels came into being they look like they could have been pieces that were dropped off one map book and on it added onto another big really question for the assessor's office okay but they do exist and so there really isn't any usable value that we can determine and so if we offer them at a public auction what you would probably have is Someone purchasing it, not knowing what they are or possibly knowing what they are but encroaching on someone else's property to get to it. So we thought the best course of action would be a sealed bid.
Thank
you. Okay. Any other questions? Are there public speakers Mr. Allen on this side?
One request to speak from Dr. Robert Jones.
Sorry.
Madam Chair? Yes.
Dr. Johns is coming up, can I ask a quick question? Sure. Do we know the relative size? I mean, I see it's only like $2,500. He's got to be like really, really small pieces, aren't they or...
Chair Farrar, Supervisor Lagunino. You know, I think there are about three acres apiece somewhere in that nature, three to four
acres. That's correct. Okay. Thank you.
Go ahead. It has to be the landlockedness.
Go ahead, Dr. Johns.
All types of scenarios are floating around in my head here on this treasure tax collector. And we do know that Casa de la Raza is coming up very soon and I'm wondering, you know what's...I'm beginning to feel rather Stress concerning Casa de la Raza. And what theories, what plans do we have for De La Raza? I think not. I think there are plans in the well and I've heard of supervisors Tearing down old buildings in their community to build recreation centers.
First District Supervisor Carbajal-
Dr. Johns, we're talking about treasure tax collector items so are you speaking to that issue?
I certainly am very deeply, very conspiratorially, very deeply I'm speaking to that issue And I could visualize, and I'm not a soothsayer, you know? A First District Supervisor Carbajal sign above Casa de la Raza in about a year. Madam
Chair, the speaker is out of order he's not addressing the issue before your board which are the property specifically identified by the tax collector
You've been warned by me, and now you've been warned by counsel. So you need to talk about the tax defaulted property that's at issue now.
Yes. And this issue was outside of the county, was it not? Was it not outside the county? If
it was outside the county we wouldn't be talking about it.
That's what I thought I heard. Well, be that as may We do have a bit of a conspiratorial issue coming. And I don't know how well Casa de la Raza did in their fundraiser.
4:55 – 5:0122 turns
Dr. Johns, that's it. You need to leave the microphone now. You've been warned
twice. Casa de La Raza is a bad
word. Your time is up. Thank
you.
All right that was our only public speaker so we'll bring this item back to the
board. Madam Chair I'm not sure if we, I think we were considering both six and seven wasn't or no just six?
Just six.
I'll move to approve staff's recommendation
Motion and a second. Discussion on the motion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries, thank you we'll go right into your next item then Mr. Hagan and I will have Mr. Allen read it into the record.
Item 7 also from the treasurer tax collector is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the option of a tax-devaulted property subject to the power of sale
Good afternoon again. This item is a tax defaulted property that went tax defaulted in 2003. It was not redeemed, nor was a payment plan initiated within that five-year redemption period that state law mandates. At that point, I have a four-year window to take collection action on it. And so June 30 of 2012 will be the final day I have statutory authority to auction this property.
So we have scheduled a tax auction for June 26th, 2012 This property can be redeemed up to 5 p.m.. The night before the sale So it's not set in stone that it will be auctioned But we are moving in that course based upon state law and that is my mandate And we're here to answer any questions on this As far as what's next in the process or what would happen with the excess proceeds because this property will probably have excess proceeds
Okay. Supervisor Lavinino and then Supervisor Graham. Thank you,
Madam Chair. And I did talk to Mr. Hagan about this before and I thought it was really important to bring out Harry's... You know one of the concerns I had was well why would somebody do this? Why are they going to lose their property over $55,000? And you had also said that you have taken like adult protective services out there or had them out there because what I was worried about is you get somebody with a mental condition that doesn't understand what's going on and we end up foreclosing, I mean taking away their property. So just wanted to have you.
Mention that we've had we have had tried people have go out there and help these individuals.
Chair Farrar, Supervisor Labadino, that's correct. We've been out to their property at least 10 or 12 times myself at least once personally and I know Clint has gone out by four times. We have called Adult Protective Services twice referred them from our office over to social services to make an inquiry And so we've left numerous phone calls and you know it's tough to discuss options with someone who won't return your call or even answer the door.
But we have done everything we can think of, and we will continue up until 5 o'clock that day before the sale.
Okay. Supervisor Gray?
Thank you. Mr. Hagan, what is the legal requirements as far as floor and ceiling? If the county needs $55,000 plus, if the bid were to come in at 50, do you have to accept the bid or what is your... And then what happens to the remainder if it's more? So two-fold question.
Okay. Chair Farr, Supervisor Gray. If we can't get a minimum bid then we're asking for the authority to re-offer at a lower price and if we don't get something that we feel is substantial, we have the... We're also asking for the authority to come back 90 days later within 90 days and to reoffer the parcel. I feel pretty confident in saying that I think a property in this location will gather more than the $50,000 tax burden If there are excess proceeds, they will be held in trust for up to a year.
People can put claims against it. Parties of interest will be contacted. Obviously the owner of record is a party of interest. Taxing authorities like the Franchise Tax Board or the IRS can also put liens on it and put claims in. Staff time will be reimbursed out of the excess proceeds also. And that's...will be determined if those within a year's time as it has to be done then.
It says leftovers would go to the parties of interest and the owner of record would be the residual recipient of those excess proceeds after all claims have been satisfied.
And Mr. Hagan, what is the process if this goes to auction and somebody pays or gets it? And it's not obviously that the current property owner that redeems it then there is an eviction process at some point?
Chair Farr, there is. The property's sold as-is. People need to do their due diligence before bidding and it would be incumbent upon them to go through the eviction process.
Okay so we're not involved in that? No. It's the new owner that's involved with it? Yes. Okay thank you. Mr. Allen any requests to speak on this item?
One request from Dr. Jones. I was prosecuted last time
All right, Dr. Johns is not going to speak on this item so bring it back to the board if there's no other discussion I'll have a motion entertained. Motion second all those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries thank you Mr. Hagan for being here and then we will go right on to our departmental item number eight. Mr. Allen would you read that into the record
5:01 – 5:117 turns
Madam Chair, members of the Board. Item 8 is from General Services and Public Works. It's a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the Union Valley Parkway Extension Phase 3 acquisition. This is in the 4th District but I'd like to note for the record that this action requires the fourth-fifths vote by the Board.
Okay so who's going to lead off the presentation here? Mr. Nisbet? Madam Chair I'm gonna kick
it off. Today we are recommending the board adopt a resolution of necessity to acquire property for the Union Valley Parkway Extension Project Phase 3. And if someone can flip the PowerPoint presentation, that would be great. The resolution of necessity is the first required step in eminent domain proceedings. This project, the UVP project, is an extremely important transportation corridor that has been envisioned since the 1960's.
There are multiple agencies and funding sources involved, and there is simply too much at stake for the community if the inability to acquire the necessary right-of-way caused the project to be delayed. By adopting the Resolution of Necessity, the Board is making a finding that the public interest in necessity require this project, a project which is to complete a roadway connection between Blosser Road and Highway 101 in the Santa Maria area.
And two, the board is making a finding that said project is planned and located in the manner that will be the most compatible with the greatest public good and least private injury. And both of these findings are included in the attached resolution. The property is owned by Walmart Stores Incorporated, and representatives of Walmart and county staff have diligently and in good faith discussed and negotiated this transaction over the past 16 months.
Unfortunately, and by no fault of either party, an agreement has not been reached yet. At this point, the schedule for completion of the project would be jeopardized if acquisition of the right-of-way is not completed in the very near future. Caltrans is simultaneously designing and constructing an interchange of the new Union Valley Parkway with Highway 101 that will connect with the Phase 3 segment.
Caltrans is scheduled to complete the interchange by December 2013, and it is imperative that the county complete the Phase 3 extension by November 2013 so the roadway can be opened sooner than the interchange. In the fall of 2010, the county made its first offer to purchase the necessary road right-of-way from Walmart required for the UVP project. Walmart did not respond directly to this offer but negotiations did continue.
The county's most recent offer to Walmart was sent on February 22nd 2012 And Walmart did not respond to this offer either. So a second and final written offer of just compensation was sent to Walmart on March 5th, 2012 with the deadline to respond of March 19th, 2012. On March 19th 2012, Walmart did send the county a counteroffer that is somewhat promising.
Staff will review the offer And every attempt will be made to acquire the right-of-way prior to proceeding with the next step in the eminent domain process. Staff is therefore recommending a parallel path. Staff will continue to negotiate with Walmart to complete the acquisition and avoid eminent domain. However, staff is also recommending this first step in the process to ensure that the project is delivered to the community as promised.
Next, Mr. McGaughlin will go over the scope of the project.
Thank you Mr. Nisbet and good afternoon Madam Chair and Board Members. The purpose of the next few slides is to present the general location in the extent of the proposed property to be acquired with sufficient detail for reasonable identification. Before getting into the actual details of the proposed acquisitions we want to take this opportunity to re-familiarize your board with Union Valley Parkway Corridor by doing this we hope to provide a clearer Understanding of the UVP Phase 3 project and how it fits within the overall Union Valley Parkway.
The Corridor and Phase 3 project are located in the Santa Maria Orchid area approximately one mile north of Clark Avenue This slide will show the various jurisdictions, the projects and clearly show how the Phase 3 alignment was selected. First let's take a look at the jurisdictions. Out on the east in purple is Caltrans or State Right-of-Way that's Highway 101.
On the west and north of UVP is the City of Santa Maria specifically the airport. Bisecting Union Valley Parkway, State Route 135, again Caltrans right of way. And then the balance of the slide is Unincorporated County. Taking a look at the specific projects along the corridor, the first one again out on the east is Union Valley Parkway Interchange Project, Caltrans project and as Mr. Nisbett mentioned it is currently scheduled for completion in December 2013.
Next shown in red is the existing piece of Union Valley Parkway in the county running from Boardwalk Lane to Humboldt Drive, a two-lane section of road. In the middle of that red segment you'll see a white bubble. We recently completed the Union Valley Parkway Bradley Intersection Improvement Project built to full width and then moving to the west is UVP Extension Phase 3, the subject of today's discussion between Humboldt Drive and State Route 135 Again, this project is currently scheduled to be completed in November 2013.
And west of 135 are the two phases of UVP phase 1 and 2 completed by the City of Santa Maria in January 2011. We also show green lines in there, which is the future four lane widening for Union Valley Parkway. But that's 15 plus years into the future. So as your board can see the selection for the proposed UVP phase three alignment is simply a straight line between the phases one and two on the west to the existing UVP on these, which minimizes the impacts to private property.
As far as the existing frontage road is concerned, it'll sweep to the east and that will give us the appropriate separation for Orchard Frontage Road and UBP. The goal here is to avoid similar intersections like we have today at SR 135 Foster as well as SR 135 Lakeview. And as I mentioned earlier, phase three of this project is currently scheduled to be completed in November 2013. That's one month prior to the Caltrans interchange.
This schedule will be preserved if all recommendations today are approved by your board and as your board knows from our previous discussions when we came and spoke on the environmental document When completed, Union Valley Parkway will have two very significant positive impacts for traffic circulation in the Orchard community. First the local roads of Lakeview, Foster and Clark will see a dramatic drop in traffic volumes and based on 2005 traffic counts for both Lakeview and Clark Avenue it's likely that the new interchange can see up to 10,000 vehicles a day coming off that interchange once its opened.
In 2025, from our traffic report and in our environmental document the corridor is projected to carry anywhere from 16,000 to 19,000 vehicles per day between State Route 135 and Highway 101. And certainly another significant positive impact is the additional interchange for the Orchard community. Today we only have two interchanges Clark Avenue and Santa Maria Way they're about 2 miles apart And Union Valley Parkway is essentially planned to be about halfway between those.
This next slide shows the actual affected parcels. The dark blue lines represent the borders of all affected parcels, you can see from the green areas or the green balloons those are the parcels that the county has previously acquired. The yellow balloons represent the subject parcels that are being discussed today. And finally, the dashed lines represent the easements that the county is looking to acquire for the City of Santa Maria to construct in Phase 3 and I'll explain that in a minute.
As we already mentioned these particular easements are being acquired to not only complete UDP Phase 3 roadway project but ultimately create a direct line for the traveling public from Blosser Road on the west to US Highway 101 once the entire corridor is complete. And before I turn it back to Mr. Nisbet, I wanted to introduce Public Works Director Dave Whitehead from the City of Santa Maria and their project manager Bruce Nybo.
The City of Santa Maria is the lead agency on this project. We are a responsible agency and they have done the design work and they'll do the construction work for Phase 3. It was the county's responsibility on this particular piece of the project to deliver the right-of-way. And at this point, I'll turn it over to Ms. Nunez-Smith. Thank you.
Thanks Scott. Madam Chair and members of the board in conclusion we are recommending that your board take three actions 1. Adopt the attached resolution of necessity 2. Accept the Planning Commission's conclusion that the project is consistent with the County General Plan 3. Find that the project is still consistent with the Environmental Impact Report considered by the Board in October 2009 I believe a representative from Walmart is present today and so the purpose of this hearing is to provide an opportunity for them to be heard prior to proceeding with the recommended actions.
We would be happy to answer any questions before you open up the hearing.
Alright, thank you Mr. Nisbett. Mr. McAulpin? Any questions or comments from the board at this time? Alright let's go ahead and go to the public then.
We have one request to speak from Marlene Allen.
5:11 – 5:179 turns
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members of the Board. My name is Marlene Allen. I'm an attorney with the firm of Grusham Savage. I am here today on behalf of Walmart Stores. We delivered a letter to the board which I hope you all got an opportunity to review stating our objections to the proposed resolution of necessity. However, I want to make it clear that Walmart does not oppose this project and believes it will benefit the community.
Walmart wants to cooperate to the fullest extent, to make sure the county gets what is needed for this project. But it must be done in a way that results in the least private injury. Our letter sets forth Walmart's objections to the way in which the county is proceeding with this resolution. First, the project as proposed was not planned in a manner that will be most compatible with the least private injury to Walmart, as required by Code of Civil Procedures Section 1245.230.
Specifically, there will be four non-legal parcel remnants created. This creates a serious problem for Walmart. The resolution also states that only an easement is being taken but the stated purpose is to create a public roadway which should be taken as a fee interest. Secondly, the county did not present Walmart with an offer that satisfies requirements of Government Code section 7267.2 Specifically, the county has not offered compensation that will cover the impact of the taking with regard to the non-legal parcels that are being created.
Walmart has proposed four terms that are reasonable and easily achievable to address these problems. Those terms are contained in a letter dated March 16th 2012 that was sent to Ron Carlantine, the real estate manager for the county. Got letters included in the letter that was delivered to you yesterday. Walmart continues to want to work with the county to resolve these issues, however at this point Walmart urges the board not to adopt a resolution of necessity as currently presented because it does not meet the statutory requirements of being compatible with the least private injury and because Walmart did not receive an offer to compensate it for the taking being proposed. Thank you for your cooperation.
Okay. Any other comments that staff wants to make?
No. Madam Chair, we have no comments. We'd be happy to answer any questions and address anything you heard.
Okay. Very good. Supervisor Gray I think this is in your district so I'll let you lead off here. Is Dr. Jones... Did we have a speaker set for him? Dr. Jones why don't you just stay there then.
Well, I would hate to see the county use its eminent domain. Hate to see them use that. That's a very dominant issue here. I'd like to see the county and Walmart come together on this and it looks like Walmart is the stumbling block. Now it looks like it may be traffic. Walmart is fearful that if these lanes are built The traffic to the store will decrease. That's not even a realistic view. They're not saying that, but as you look through the project here you can see that it's the traffic decrease or diminish of traffic. So they're stumbling on it because of that fact and that's not even a realistic point of view Now, I shop at Walmart and I see people come in there from the time it opens to the time it closed.
And you could put a tank truck or whatever you want to put into it. People are going to come to the store regardless of this. So I think that's an unrealistic point of view. And you poll people and people will tell you they're going to get their walking, hiking, camping, whatever they do, they're going to get to Walmart Thank you.
Thank you.
All right, Supervisor Gray. Yes, thank you. I'd like to move staff's recommendation that we approach this in a two-pronged method, two ways to get there and hopefully we will be able to achieve agreement with Walmart but it is a project that tremendously benefits both Santa Maria and Orcutt and even folks going to Vandenberg so even Lompoc benefits from this project. So I'll move staff approval or staff recommendation.
I have a motion from Supervisor Gray, second from Supervisor Lavagnino. Any discussion on the motion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. We will move on now to our last item of the day which is number nine from social services Mr. Allen would you read that into the record please
5:17 – 5:243 turns
Madam Chair, members of the Board. Item 9 from Social Services is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding an adjustment to the Department of Social Services fiscal year 2011 and 2012 budget. And this item also requires a four-fifths vote of the Board.
Does social services need a few minutes here to set up? All right. Board will take a five minute break. Yeah.
¶. ¶¶ ¶¶ ¶¶ ¶. ¶¶ ¶¶ ¶¶ Thank you. Thank you. ¶¶ Thank you.
5:24 – 5:3010 turns
All right, the Board of Supervisors will come back into order. We're going to take up our last item of the day, agenda item number nine from Social Services. Mr. Allen?
Madam Chair this item has previously been read into the record.
Okay thank you Good afternoon, Ms. Gallagher.
Thank you Madam Chair. Kathy Gallagher, Director of the Department of Social Services. Thank you for taking the time to hear us today. I'm here today to present the social services adjusted budget for fiscal year 11-12 and that's our current budget year. As your board knows DSS provides an array of federal and state mandated services which are funded annually through the state budget A full 90% of our funds come from this source, 6% comes from county general funds and 5% comes from other financing sources.
The adopted budget submitted by the department in February of each year is based on our best projections of revenue from the state and does not include changes proposed in the January governor's budget. Once the state budget passes in June or July, or whenever it passes The state has a minimum of 30 days to develop and send individual county allocations of funds for our nine major programs and our many sub-programs.
At that point, our budget staff developed the adjusted budget to reflect our actual revenue from the state. As we have reported over the past few years this department's operations are counter cyclical in that our business workload and caseloads increase during times of recessions and economic downturns As you can see on this chart, since fiscal year 08-09 our caseloads have increased as much as 64% in the CalFresh or food stamp program.
We have seen double-digit increases in most of our other programs as well. However, the department has not added any new positions during these difficult years. Because federal state and county revenue decreased from year to year we included in our adopted budget many unfunded vacant positions in the hope that revenues would in fact materialize to allow us to fund and fill some of these vacancies That's been the case in most years since the recession began.
This year, due to a slightly improving economy, revenues have actually increased such that we are able to fill our many vacant unfunded positions. Again no new legal positions are being added these are currently vacant unfunded positions Other positive impacts reflected in this budget include funding the AB 98 subsidized employment program for welfare to work clients, funding an innovative distance learning system which will minimize travel by employees and improve productivity.
And this budget allows us to fund drug treatment for parents in the Child Welfare Services cases who are involved with the Family and Drug Court thus facilitating possible reunification of the family. And please know that our department is always vigilant in our budget management and budget monitoring, and takes seriously our fiduciary responsibility to all of our funders, federal state and county, and to the public.
And that completes my comments. Now I'll entertain any questions that your board may have.
Thank you Ms. Gallagher. Any questions for Ms. Gallagher? Madam Chair? Yes, Supervisor Levin.
Thank
you. And I don't know if this is a yearly thing because it's my first time through this, but it was very confusing to me and I was very happy that I leaned over to my counterpart here and I said this was confusing to me. He says well it was confusing to me too a little bit so... But I think after reading this couple times I want to make sure I've got this right that first off this is kind of a timing budget timing issue that we're just on a different path than the state and then we have to marry up the two as we go along We correct there?
Yes,
Supervisor Lavallino through the chair. Yes that's absolutely
correct. But then the other side of it is that the positions that we're filling are already existing vacant unfunded positions.
Supervisor Covino through the chair. Yes, that's absolutely true in fact we were just talking earlier that and recollecting we have not added any new positions in the Department of Social Services in the eight years that I've been the director so we are still living with the positions that we have always had Those positions vary from year to year based on the revenue and our ability to fill them. But because of the volatility of our workload and the unpredictability, we carry those unfunded positions from year to year so that we have them available when the revenue materializes to reflect the increased caseloads that we have.
5:30 – 5:3414 turns
All right, Supervisor Wolk?
Well, Kathy I think this is so how many how many new positions are you adding and in what departments exactly are these folks being placed into?
Supervisor Wolf through the chair, we're not adding any new positions. We are filling vacant unfunded positions. The majority of those will be in the client services and benefits area that's reflective our increased allocations in the CalWORKs and food stamp programs and Medi-Cal programs so the majority of those positions that were filling are in those areas And the number is?
Do you know the number, Victor?
I don't have the specific numbers but we can certainly get that to you.
You know, this is particularly good news because you know during the budget that was one of the issues that I had raised about caseloads. Although I was looking more at the social workers and child protective services but anything where we can see a decrease in caseload makes the work more efficient and the ability to reach the folks who are entitled to some of these benefits and services Is much better and it not to mention assisting those.
Caseworkers who already have so many people that they're dealing with. So this is really a good news story, so I appreciate you bringing this
information forward. Thank you very much as we're very pleased finally after so many years
always nice to have good news. Supervisor Lavinino?
And one other thing I know Kathy brought into my office and shared with me also that one thing that I think I hope that this helps rectify is it on our CalFresh Applications that we have to take a look at them within 30 days and make it a determination by federal law. And because of the fact that we didn't have enough workers, that we were kind of stretching that out a little bit. So will this help alleviate that situation?
Yes, Supervisor Lavagnino through the Chair. This is going to assist us in meeting our mandated compliance and we do have a lot of challenges in the CalFresh program because of that large caseload increase that we've had. It's particularly striking in the Santa Maria area.
I think this is great news Kathy. I just want to make sure to caution us that we're not getting too excited in doing this and then in three months We're cutting or doing a different thing. So what kind of an assurance can you give me that we're not doing this exercise and then we're going to do 180 degree turn in two to three months? I mean, I just want to understand either the nexus with our upcoming budget discussions and deliberations and where we're at right now.
Are those two meshed together?
Thank you Supervisor Carvajal, through the Chair. That's a very good question. In anticipating what may come down from the state budget we are always very conservative in our estimates and projections. We do caseload projections every year that try to mirror what the state is projecting in those caseloads and because we cannot project layoffs of volatility of the economy sometimes those vary In this particular situation, we are seeing a slight uptick in the slightly improving economy and that's what generated the revenue that we realized this year.
Within our department as part of our internal structure and budget management, we do monthly detailed budget monitoring that our fiscal staff produce for us And we monitor, to use a phrase, down to the gnat's eyelash. We do hiring approvals every week which all have to come through our executive team so no position is filled within our department without our executive team reviewing that position knowing whether its workload justified or not and whether there is adequate funding for it or So I do feel confident that I can assure you that we will not find ourselves in a situation where we're going to be overstaffed and unable to support those positions.
Other questions?
Madam Chair, there's no public speakers.
All right, we have one public speaker. Dr. John.
5:35 – 5:3911 turns
Not to personalize this, but my Aunt Daisy, bless her heart, who educated me very, very well in the themes of education for black people. And she said don't start getting overjoyed and too happy and flapping your wings. That's what's going on here. I want to know why you're being so happy Flapping your wings and talking about this budget joy. What happened to 721? Local 721. Anybody know?
Nobody knows. The board, the board refused to negotiate with Local 721. So where are they? Madam
Chairman, the
speaker is off topic again this is about the Department of Social Services budget and not about labor relations issues.
Boy you think I was like... Okay well the question was what happened to Local 721?
That's our only public speaker. All right, we'll bring it back to the board then. A motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Alright thank you very much Miss Gallagher and your team for being here. Before we end today's agenda does anybody have anybody they want to remember? During in memory of I have somebody we may have the same one
out. I was going to talk about Peter Douglas.
Yeah, thank you. Go
ahead supervisor far.
I wanted to have us go ahead and close an honor of Peter Douglas today Peter Douglas was the third executive director of the California Coastal Commission. He was appointed to his position in mid-1985 after having served as the commission's chief deputy director for seven years. Before coming into the commission, he worked as a legislative aide to Assemblymember Alan Siroti of Beverly Hills. In that capacity, he coauthored Proposition 20 in 1972 which created the Coastal Commission. He also helped to organize the grassroots campaign that secured its overwhelming passage by the voters on November 7, 1972.
After the November election he went to work as a consultant for the Assembly Natural Resource Committee and the Select Committee on Coastal Protection. In that capacity he co-drafted the California Coastal Act which in 1976 was made permanent by the legislature. The following year, Peter left the legislature and was hired as the Coastal Commission's Chief Deputy, a position he held until he was appointed Executive Director in 1985. His 26-year tenure at the commission is the second longest of any executive director in state history.
He retired from his position as Executive Director in November 2011 for health reasons and he passed away last Sunday evening. Peter was a devoted believer in Joseph Campbell's advice that the way to live one's life is to follow your bliss. His bliss as well as his passion and advocation was environmental stewardship, and we certainly honor all of his years of service and admire the work that he did for all of coastal California including, of course, Santa Barbara County.
Our condolences go out to his family, his friends And to his staff and we know that he's going to be greatly missed. Supervisor Wolfe, did you want to make comments as
well? Yes, I thank you for that supervisor. For I also wanted to close this meeting in honor of Babatunde Folami. He was a past city councilman for the City of Santa Barbara and a great hero to many of us who knew him. warm gentle soul with a huge heart and he did so much for the community particularly as it relates to children, to youth. He was such a personable man.
He died suddenly and I know that community in his family mourns his passing and so As do I thank you
Thank you. And with that, we are adjourned until next week when we will meet in Santa Maria.
5:40 – 5:411 turns
♪ you