Meeting Summary
This summary was AI-generated to save you time. It may miss or misstate details, so verify against the official recording and the transcript.
At a glance
Volunteer of the Week
- The Board honored Yvonne Torres for her volunteer work with the Transition House Resource Center.
- The Board also recognized her recent graduation from Antioch University.
Administrative Agenda
- The Board approved the administrative agenda, excluding Item A-21 which was trailed for later discussion.
- Supervisor Carbajal noted a compromise was reached regarding disabled parking spaces on Lilly Avenue.
- Public comment addressed concerns about parking availability and accessibility signage in Summerland.
Resolutions
- The Board adopted resolutions commending Robert Stasinos and Brian Moore for their long-term service.
- The Board recognized National Foster Care Month and honored foster parents Cassandra and Robert Fildy.
- The Board recognized the Beta Sigma Phi Pacific California Council for their state convention.
- The Board proclaimed May 2012 as Mental Health Month in Santa Barbara County.
Commission for Women Service Awards
- The Board received and filed the Women’s History Month Service Awards presentation.
- Awardees from all five districts were recognized for their community contributions.
- The Board acknowledged the new EEO Manager and new Commissioner for the Commission for Women.
Retirement Benefits for General Employees
- The Board adopted a new reduced retirement tier for employees hired on or after June 25, 2012.
- The proposal includes reducing the retiree Cost of Living Adjustment from 3% to 2% for the future workforce.
- Staff estimated first-year savings of approximately $219,000 and potential ten-year savings of up to $24 million.
Tax and Revenue Anticipation Note (TRAN)
- The Board approved the issuance of an approximately $40 million note for fiscal year 2012-13.
- The note bridges the gap between uneven revenue collections and steady monthly expenditures.
- The estimated interest cost is approximately $160,000, expected to be offset by investing the proceeds.
No decision 0–0
Santa Barbara Ranch Inland Development Agreement
- The Board determined it cannot reasonably and presently consent to the proposed transfer agreement.
- The decision was based on the proposed transferee not providing adequate evidence of financial resources.
- Staff noted the board was at the edge of a 45-day deemed consent period.
- The transfer agreement is contingent on the closing of the property sale.
Disabled Persons Parking Zones on Lilly Avenue
- The Board approved the recommendation regarding two proposed handicapped spaces on Lilly Avenue.
- Staff indicated they would review best practices from other jurisdictions for future corridor improvements.
- The Board acknowledged concerns regarding the removal of existing spaces during street improvements.
Goleta Beach County Park Managed Beach Retreat Project 2.0
- The Board accepted $1.5 million in Coastal Impact Assistance Program funding for the project.
- The Board approved a contract with AMEC Environmental and Infrastructure Inc. to prepare an Environmental Impact Report.
- The project involves removing 150 parking spaces to restore one acre of sandy beach and relocating utilities.
- Staff noted the county is in a violator status regarding unpermitted rocks with potential fines.
Homeless Support Systems Merger
- The Board supported the concept of a new collaborative structure for homeless services in principle.
- The Board directed the CEO’s office to return with a detailed implementation plan including costs, savings, and goals.
- The proposed structure includes a central coordination role and a Policy Council with Board and city representatives.
- The agenda item was changed from "approve the merger" to "receive and file" to allow for further analysis.
Petitions for Review of Mobile Home Rent Control Arbitrator Award
- The Board affirmed the arbitrator’s decision that homeowners do not pay the additional 10% increase in ground rents.
- The Board found the arbitrator abused discretion regarding property taxes, amortization rates, and various fee pass-throughs.
- The Board directed staff to prepare a decision reflecting these findings and recalculating the final amount.
- The Board voted to continue the final two agenda items related to alcohol, drug, and mental health to the next meeting.
Arbitration Decision Review
- The Board voted to send the matter back to the arbitrator for further consideration.
- Counsel confirmed there is no financial liability to the county if the decision is reversed by the Superior Court.
- The Board considered the issue of property taxes as a potential temporary increase rather than a permanent one.
Closed Session
- The Board discussed existing litigation and conferences with real property and labor negotiators.
- Staff reported that the item regarding public employee performance evaluation was continued through May 22, 2022.
- No other reportable action was taken in closed session.
Full summary
Meeting Opening and Administrative Procedures
- The Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors convened a regular session. The roll call was taken, and the Pledge of Allegiance was recited. The Board approved the minutes of the May 8, 2012 meeting. A motion to approve the minutes was made, seconded, and passed.
Public Comment
- The Chair limited public comment to two minutes per speaker. Five individuals or representatives spoke:
- Dr. Robert Johns commented on allegations of election fraud and corruption, requesting election monitors for the 2012 election.
- Scott Wentz (Cars Are Basic) requested that the Santa Barbara Association of Governments (SBCAG) investigate the state’s formula for curve deflection speeds regarding a roundabout at La Purisima and 246.
- Flora West spoke regarding her conservatorship, alleging violations of civil rights and bias in court investigator reports.
- Sigmund Reed read additional statements on behalf of Flora West regarding conservatorship and estate management.
- John Polanski (Housing Authority) attempted to comment on the Homeless Support Systems merger item. The Chair and Council noted that agendized items are not appropriate for public comment; Polanski confirmed a letter urging support had been submitted.
Volunteer of the Week
- The Board honored Yvonne Torres for her volunteer work with the Transition House Resource Center and her recent graduation from Antioch University.
Administrative Agenda
- Item A-21 (Disabled Parking Zones on Lilly Avenue): Supervisor Carbajal requested this item be pulled from the immediate agenda to accommodate a disabled individual arriving later. The item was trailed to a later time.
- Public Comment on Administrative Items:
- Dr. Robert Johns spoke on Items A-1 (Retirement of Robert Stasinos), A-9 (Somar Health contract), and A-11 (Alcohol, Drug, and Mental Health Services). He raised concerns regarding the conservatorship program and the treatment practices at Sylmar Health and Rehabilitation Centers.
- Jeff Melnick (Summerland Citizens Association) spoke on Item A-21, expressing concern over the loss of general public parking spaces in Summerland due to disabled parking zones, bike lanes, and paid parking plans.
- Jo Black (Independent Living Resource Center) spoke on Item A-21, noting accessibility issues with some private disabled spaces and the importance of signage.
- Supervisor Carbajal responded to comments on Item A-21, stating that a compromise was reached to reinstate two public disabled spaces and allow public use of certain private business disabled spaces.
- Vote on Administrative Agenda: A motion was made and seconded to approve the administrative agenda, excluding Item A-21 which was held for later discussion. The motion passed.
Resolutions
- The Board considered and adopted the following resolutions: 1. Resolution of Commendation for Robert Stasinos: Presented by Supervisor Wolk. Recognized Stasinos for 27 years of service to the Office of Public Guardian and Public Administrator. The resolution was read into the record and adopted. 2. Resolution Recognizing National Foster Care Month: Presented by Supervisor Wolk. Recognized May 2012 as National Foster Care Month and honored foster parents Cassandra and Robert Fildy. The resolution was read into the record and adopted. 3. Resolution of Commendation for Brian Moore: Presented by Supervisor Gray. Recognized Moore, Deputy District Engineer for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, for 44 years of service, specifically highlighting his work on the Lower Mission Creek Flood Improvement Project and the Santa Maria River Levee. The resolution was read into the record and adopted. 4. Resolution Recognizing Beta Sigma Phi: Presented by Supervisor Gray. Recognized the Pacific California Council of Beta Sigma Phi for their 72nd California State Convention held May 18–20, 2012. The resolution was read into the record and adopted. 5. Resolution Proclaiming Mental Health Month: Presented by Supervisor Lavagnino. Proclaimed May 2012 as Mental Health Month in Santa Barbara County. The resolution was read into the record and adopted.
Agenda Item 1: Commission for Women Service Awards
- The Board received and filed a presentation on the County of Santa Barbara Commission for Women’s Women’s History Month Service Awards. Representatives from each district presented the awardees:
- District 1: Domestic Violence Solutions (DVS).
- District 2: Storyteller Children’s Center.
- District 3: Vandenberg Air Force Base Family Advocacy Outreach Program.
- District 4: Pennies for Playgrounds (City of Lompoc).
- District 5: Good Samaritan Services, Inc.
- Supervisors and Commissioners provided remarks acknowledging the contributions of the awardees. The Board acknowledged the new EEO Manager, Cassandra Larson, and new Commissioner Gail Pratt. A member of the public addressed the board, noting the diversity of the Commission for Women and suggesting the county has not conducted diversity training. The speaker commended the commission for its representation of ethnic minorities. The board completed the agenda item and took a break for a reception to honor honorees from the Commission for Women.
Agenda Item 2: Retirement Benefits for General Employees
- The County Executive Office presented a proposal to implement a new reduced retirement tier for employees hired on or after June 25, 2012. The presentation estimated first-year savings of approximately $219,000 and potential ten-year savings of up to $24 million. The proposal included adopting a resolution for the new tier, an ordinance reducing the retiree Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) from 3% to 2% for the future workforce, and adopting associated employee and employer rates. A supervisor expressed appreciation for the collaborative effort between employees and staff to reach this agreement. A motion was made and seconded to adopt the recommendations. The motion carried (passed).
Agenda Item 3: Tax and Revenue Anticipation Note (TRAN)
- The Treasurer-Tax Collector presented the annual TRAN issuance for fiscal year 2012-13. The purpose of the note is to bridge the gap between uneven revenue collections (primarily in December and April) and steady monthly expenditures. The proposed issuance is approximately $40 million, down from $60 million the previous year, based on cash flow analysis. The estimated interest cost is approximately $160,000, with the expectation that investing the proceeds will offset this cost. A motion was made by Supervisor Carbajal and seconded by Supervisor Lavagnino to approve the recommendations. The motion carried (passed).
No decision 0–0
Agenda Item 4: Santa Barbara Ranch Inland Development Agreement – Consent to Transfer
- Planning and Development staff presented a request for the county’s consent to a transfer agreement between Santa Barbara Ranch Holding Company (SBRHC) and CIP2BRSVRC. Staff noted that the quiet title litigation between the original developer and SBRHC had been resolved, allowing SBRHC to hold the developer's status. Staff recommended the board either authorize the chair to execute the consent or determine that the county cannot reasonably and presently consent because the proposed transferee had not provided adequate evidence of financial resources to perform the assumed obligations.
- Seventeen members of the public spoke. Several speakers supported the transfer, citing the transferee’s past performance in rehabilitating distressed assets and the need for development. Other speakers opposed the transfer, arguing that the development agreement was outdated, that the transferee lacked specific financial commitments beyond a $300,000 letter, and that the project threatened the rural character of the Gaviota Coast. Some speakers noted that the Agricultural Conservation Easement, a key component of the original approval, had not yet been recorded, meaning the agreement was not yet effective.
- Supervisors asked for clarification on the legal requirements for evidence of financial resources and the status of the transfer agreement. Staff clarified that the board is not legally required to have certified financial statements but must form a reasonable opinion based on the evidence provided. Staff noted that the board was at the edge of a 45-day deemed consent period; if the board did not take action, consent would be deemed granted unless the parties agreed to a further delay. Staff confirmed that the proposed transfer agreement is contingent on the closing of the property sale.
- Supervisor Farr moved that the county determine it cannot reasonably and presently consent to the proposed transfer because the proposed transferee has not provided adequate evidence of its own financial resources to perform the obligations. Supervisor Carbajal seconded the motion. The motion passed (3-2).
Trailing Item A-21: Disabled Persons Parking Zones on Lilly Avenue
- Public Works presented a request to establish disabled persons parking zones on Lilly Avenue in the Sunland area. A member of the public raised concerns that four handicapped parking spaces on Lilly Avenue were removed during street improvements and not replaced, noting a lack of an ordinance requiring such spaces on public streets. The Supervisor acknowledged the concern, stated that the issue of establishing an ordinance is under review, and indicated that staff would look into best practices from other jurisdictions to address this in future corridor improvements. A motion was made and seconded to approve the recommendation regarding the two proposed handicapped spaces. The motion carried (passed).
Agenda Item 5: Goleta Beach County Park Managed Beach Retreat Project 2.0 (EIR Contract)
- Staff presented a proposal to accept $1.5 million in Coastal Impact Assistance Program funding and award a contract to AMEC Environmental and Infrastructure Inc. to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Goleta Beach 2.0 project. The project involves removing 150 parking spaces (43,000 sq. ft. of asphalt) at the far west end to restore one acre of sandy beach, relocating at-risk utilities (gas, water, sewer) behind a compacted earthen berm, realigning the bike path, and installing protective geotextile dunes near the sewer outfall. Staff noted the county is in a violator status regarding unpermitted rocks placed in 2003 and 2005, with potential fines of $30,000 per occurrence and $6,000 per day for failure to remove them. The grant is reimbursable and does not require a match; costs for planning and design do not need to be repaid even if construction does not occur. Staff outlined the EIR process, including a 30-day scoping period, a 45-day public comment period, and an estimated 11-month timeline to the first Planning Commission hearing.
- Comments were mixed. Some speakers supported the project as a long-term solution consistent with Coastal Commission direction, highlighting environmental benefits and safety improvements. Others expressed concern over the $2.2 million funding shortfall for construction, the term "managed retreat," and potential impacts on Highway 217 and the airport due to storm events. One speaker requested that alternative plans be included in the initial scoping and that emergency protection measures be guaranteed for severe storms. Staff confirmed they are pursuing other grant funding for the capital portion and that the removed rocks will be stored at the Ben Page Youth Center for potential emergency reuse.
- A motion was made and seconded to accept the grant, approve the budget revision, and approve the contract with AMEC Environmental to begin the EIR process. The motion carried (passed) unanimously.
Closed Session
- The Board entered closed session to discuss existing litigation, conferences with real property negotiators, and conferences with labor negotiators regarding employer relations and public employee performance evaluation. Upon returning to open session, staff reported that the item regarding public employee performance evaluation was continued through May 22, 2022. No other reportable action was taken.
Agenda Item 6: Homeless Support Systems Merger
- The Chair presented a proposal to merge existing homeless support systems, including the "Bring Our Community Home" initiative and the County Homeless Advisory Committees, into a new coordinated model. The proposed structure includes a central coordination role (an "air traffic controller" position) supervised by an executive committee, a Coordination Committee with high-level county and city staff, and a Policy Council with Board of Supervisors and city representatives. The goal is to improve coordination, data sharing, and cost-effectiveness. The Chair noted that the agenda item was changed from "approve the merger" to "receive and file" to allow for further analysis and necessary board actions, such as potentially dissolving existing advisory committees.
- The County Executive Office presented a report on efforts to coordinate homelessness services, noting that the CEO’s office has taken on an increased role in internal coordination and community outreach. Department heads continue to be involved strategically, and homelessness has been designated a sentinel issue at monthly interagency policy council meetings. Weekly debriefs are being implemented to improve responsiveness. The county serves as the lead agency for HUD’s Continuum of Care, funds outreach programs, and manages the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS). An upgrade to the HMIS, approved two years ago, is intended to make the system more robust for data collection and decision-making.
- Supervisors discussed the need for focused resource allocation and effective coordination. Supervisor Lavagnino expressed support for streamlining efforts. Supervisor Wolff noted previous difficulties in understanding the new process but expressed confidence in moving forward with a detailed plan, emphasizing the need for a paid coordinator or "air traffic controller" to manage the system. Supervisor Gray suggested establishing specific, measurable goals, such as reducing the homeless population by a set number over the next year, to allow for performance evaluation. Chair Farr agreed on the importance of data collection and measurement, noting that the county’s role in advisory committees like Bring Our Community Home is limited compared to the proposed coordinated structure.
- Thirteen public speakers addressed the board. Speakers from Good Samaritan Shelter, the City of Santa Maria, and various non-profits (including Common Ground Santa Barbara, CLU, and People’s Self-Help Housing) generally supported the proposed merger and collective impact approach, citing the need for better coordination, cost-effectiveness, and streamlined service delivery. Some speakers highlighted the importance of volunteer involvement, the need for strategic plans to move mentally ill inmates from jail to supportive housing, and the necessity of setting measurable goals for reducing homelessness. One speaker raised concerns about the reliance on faith-based organizations and alleged attempts to instrumentalize homeless individuals for other agendas, urging the board to be cautious. Another speaker emphasized the need to consider the local impact of service placements on specific communities.
- Chair Farr moved to receive the report and direct the CEO’s office to continue work on the issue, returning to the board with specific actions, costs, savings, and goals. Supervisor Wolff seconded the motion but requested a modification to clarify that the board is supporting the concept in principle and requesting the CEO to return with a detailed implementation plan, rather than committing to specific support measures immediately. The motion was modified to reflect this clarification. The motion to support the concept of the new collaborative structure and direct the CEO’s office to return with a detailed plan, including costs, savings, and goals, was passed.
Agenda Item 7: Petitions for Review of Mobile Home Rent Control Arbitrator Award – Nomad Village
- The board considered petitions for review of an arbitrator’s award regarding rent control disputes at the Nomad Village mobile home park. Counsel advised that under Rule 23B of the Mobile Home Rent Control Rules, the board’s review is limited to the paper record (Attachments A through P) and should not consider new evidence. Public comment is to be treated as argument focused on the existing record. Supervisor Wolff moved to adopt the procedural framework limiting review to the record. The motion was seconded and passed.
- Supervisors disclosed ex parte communications. Supervisor Wolff reported meetings with homeowners and park owners, including Ann Anderson, Martha Hasenklug, Jim Richards, and Debra Hamrick. Other supervisors reported receiving emails and letters from the public but no formal meetings.
- Staff provided background on Nomad Village, a 150-unit park developed in 1950. In 2008, the owner signed a new 34-year ground lease. The current dispute involves a proposed rent increase of 75% of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) plus an additional $161 per space. Homeowners filed for arbitration, and an arbitrator issued 14 awards, 10 of which are under review. The board must determine whether the arbitrator abused their discretion. Options include affirming the award, reversing it in whole or in part, making a new decision, or remanding the case. The board must decide by June 19 to comply with the 30-day deadline.
- Staff outlined the 10 disputed awards, including: 1. Homeowners not paying an additional 10% increase in grounds rents. 2. Homeowners paying all real property taxes assessed by the county. 3. Amortization of temporary increases at 9% over seven years. 4. Homeowners paying $320,000 for capital improvements. 5. Homeowners paying $25,000 for professional fees. 6. Homeowners paying $40,000 for architectural/engineering fees. 7. Homeowners paying $130,531 for supplemental tax increases. 8. Homeowners not paying uncompensated increases with lease payments. 9. Homeowners paying $110,000 for legal fees. 10. Permanent increase set at $25.59 and temporary increases at $67.09.
- Debra Hamrick, representing the homeowners, stated that approximately 80% of residents live at or below the poverty level. She alleged that the park management, Waterhouse Management, purchased the park with knowledge of existing violations and used it as collateral for a loan without making required improvements. She claimed management attempted to force homeowners to remove the park from rent control and engaged in retaliatory actions, including threatening additional charges for appealing the arbitrator’s decision. She requested that penalties be assessed against management for non-compliance and retaliation, and asked the board to uphold the rent control ordinance.
- James Valentine, representing the park management, addressed the Board, characterizing the proceeding as a judicial review of an arbitration award rather than a legislative matter. He argued that the Board should rely solely on the arbitration record, which included a two-day hearing, exhibits, and a detailed award. Valentine explained the distinction between permanent rent increases (based on permanent operating cost increases like ground lease and property tax increases) and temporary increases (based on capital expenses amortized over time). He stated the park’s sole issue on appeal was the legal interpretation of whether the doubling of ground lease costs constituted an increased operating cost under the Rent Control Ordinance. He also noted that two documents filed by the park (a response to the homeowners’ petition and objections to the homeowners’ response) were missing from the Board’s packet and submitted copies to the clerk.
- Fourteen members of the public spoke in support of the homeowners’ petition. Speakers raised concerns regarding:
- Electric Utility Costs: Claims that the park was double-billing residents for electrical system maintenance, which they argued was already covered by a California Public Utilities Commission credit paid by SoCal Edison ratepayers.
- Legal Fees: Objections to the award of approximately $110,000 in legal and expert fees, arguing these were not permitted pass-throughs under the ordinance.
- Capital Improvements: Allegations that the park had not performed the capital improvements (roads, sewers, fences, pools) for which costs were passed through, and that the arbitrator lacked evidence of these works.
- Property Taxes: Disputes over the pass-through of property tax increases and supplemental taxes, with some speakers arguing the park had not exhausted appeal options or that the costs were not justified.
- Impact on Residents: Testimony regarding the financial hardship the proposed rent increase would cause low-income and senior residents.
- Ms. Hamrick, representing the homeowners, reiterated that the park has the lowest rents in the county and urged the Board to review the documents carefully. James Valentine, representing the park, responded to specific claims. He clarified that the $110,000 award included expert witness fees, not just legal fees, and that the homeowners had rejected the park’s proposal to appeal the property tax reassessment. He argued that the ordinance allows for pass-throughs of proposed costs that are challenged by homeowners, and that the arbitrator had sufficient evidence of incurred expenses.
- The Board discussed the two documents submitted by the park during the hearing. Counsel advised that the Board could either take a break to review the documents and proceed with a decision or continue the hearing to a later date. Supervisor Gray proposed continuing the item to June 19 to allow for further review. Supervisor Lavagnino opposed this, arguing it would be difficult for residents to return. The Board voted to take a 10-minute break to review the documents and then resume the item.
- Upon resuming, the Board reviewed the arbitrator’s award items individually. The Board determined the following:
- Item 2 (Ground Rent Increase): The Board affirmed the arbitrator’s decision that homeowners do not have to pay the additional 10% increase in ground rents.
- Item 3 (Property Taxes): The Board discussed the pass-through of property taxes. After hearing from counsel and the park’s representative regarding the timeline of the tax assessment and appeal options, the Board found that the arbitrator abused his discretion regarding this item.
- Item 4 (Amortization Rate): The Board found that the arbitrator abused his discretion regarding the 9% amortization rate over seven years, noting it was not specified in the ordinance and was discretionary.
- Item 5 ($320,000 Escrow): The Board found that the arbitrator abused his discretion regarding the $320,000 escrow for capital improvements, as the expenses were not itemized or clearly defined as eligible capital costs.
- Items 6, 7, and 11 (Professional, A&E, and Legal Fees): The Board found that the arbitrator abused his discretion regarding these fees, as they were not noted in the ordinance as pass-through costs.
- Item 8 (Supplemental Taxes): The Board found that the arbitrator abused his discretion regarding the supplemental tax pass-through.
- Item 9 (Uncompensated Lease Increases): The Board affirmed the arbitrator’s decision that homeowners do not need to pay for uncompensated increases associated with increased lease payments.
- Item 12 (Recalculation): The Board noted that the final amount would need to be recalculated based on the reversals of the other items.
- The Board directed staff to prepare a decision reflecting these findings. The Board also voted to continue the final two agenda items related to alcohol, drug, and mental health to the next meeting.
Arbitration Decision Review
- A speaker outlined twelve potential options for the board’s response to an arbitrator’s opinion, ranging from affirming the award to reversing the decision in whole or sending the matter back to the arbitrator for further consideration. A member requested that the issue of property taxes be reviewed as a potential temporary increase rather than a permanent one, citing the possibility of a reassessment. Counsel agreed that directing the matter back to the arbitrator was an appropriate course of action. Another member inquired about the county’s financial liability if the board’s decision were reversed by the Superior Court; counsel confirmed there is no financial liability to the county in such an event. A motion was made and seconded to send the matter back to the arbitrator. The motion carried (passed).
General Comments and Adjournment
- A member announced that the Rice Ranch Orchid Trails will open on May 21st at 3:00 PM. The board adjourned, with the next meeting scheduled for May 22nd in Santa Barbara.