BodyBoard of Supervisors
MeetingRegular Meeting
Date📅 May 7, 2013

UnGovr Transcript

iHow this transcript is madeUnGovr transcribes the official recording with automated speech-to-text, separates speakers by voice, and matches voices to the seated roster. Names and attributions are AI estimates and may contain errors.Verify any quote yourself: click anywhere in the transcript and the official video jumps to that exact moment, so you can check any quote against the recording.
  1. PendingQueued for transcription.
  2. AIYou are hereAuto-transcribed and summarized; not yet human-verified.
  3. VerifiedReviewed and corrected by a person.

0:02 – 0:076 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:15 · ≈ 9:02 AM

I would like to convene our Board of Supervisors meeting. Mr. Clark, can you do roll call please?

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated2:22 · ≈ 9:02 AM

Mr. Adam? Aye. Mr. Lavinino? Here. Ms. Wolfe? Ms. Farr? I'm

Pledge of Allegianceceremonial · click to expand
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:29 · ≈ 9:02 AM

here. And Supervisor Farr is here too. She's right outside. Here. We did the Pledge of Allegiance already this morning. We convened at 815 so we're just going to proceed. Is there a motion to approve the minutes? Motion has been made and seconded. All those in favor? Aye. Passage unanimously, we will now move on to public comment. Do we have any public speakers?

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated2:53 · ≈ 9:02 AM

Chairman Carvalho, members of the board, we have three requests to speak. We'll start with Darla Kaiser to be followed by Set Pellett.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:03 · ≈ 9:03 AM

Good morning. Sequestration has affected programs since it instigated in the past two months. Obama has warned that sequester could imperil the nation's economic recovery. In addition, sequestration is reducing funds to the most marginalized people. Among the vulnerable population, automatic cuts affect. Eventually ill will be among the hardest hit. Mental Health America reports that over the past three years, states across the country have had to cut approximately $4 billion in mental health budgets. Yet there are more cuts on the way with secret station.

Budget cuts to mental health mean that nearly 9000 homeless people with mental illness across the nation will lose social services and outreach programs that put them on the path To transitional and permanent housing. A federal survey conducted in 2005 estimates that approximately 500,000 people are homeless in the US at any given time and one third of the individuals, 33%, have a serious mental illness. The percentage of people at large who have a serious mental illness is 6%.

Under this sequester, 375 children and adults with serious mental illness will lose services that help prevent hospitalizations and homelessness. All flat cuts by sequestration are not created equal. A furlough for a rest in Virginia Defense Department worker does not have the same consequences as it does for a young man with severe bipolar disorder waiting an extra month to see a psychiatrist. Failures in the mental health system due to sequestration can bring about the worst outcomes everyone fears. Suicide, jailing or encounters with the police Where the untreated mentally ill will end up as victims of violence. It also makes the more vulnerable to the last resort highly controversial measure of involuntary commitment.

There's a quote by Hubert Humphrey that states, it was once said that the moral test of government is how the government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children, those who are on the twilight of life, the elderly and those who are in the shadow of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped. In conclusion, the effects of secret station we felt across a wide array of programs. And in the long run, we were spending more than we saved. Please contact the Senators and Congress people before it has cataclysmic effects on those who are most vulnerable in our society. Thank you.

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated5:22 · ≈ 9:05 AM

Thank you. Our next speaker is Sam Palin to be followed by Bob Field who's our final public comment speaker.

CommentSant PalinProposedself-stated5:32 · ≈ 9:05 AM

Good morning. My name is Sant Palin. I'm over 70 years old now, and I own three properties in Santa Barbara and I bought those toward my retirement. Unfortunately we've been plagued with problems On these properties and I'm sorry for any problems we cause, but my son and I have worked for the past three years to resolve all the issues. With the building department and the zoning department, and we've got much better tenants. It's very carefully managed now.

And it has been very difficult for us to do this and I probably couldn't have done it without my son's help. He should be in graduate school but he's stayed to help me, and we hope that you've had some feedback from your staff as to what we've done with the properties. And I'd just like to apologize for any problems that I've caused and that This whole episode can be resolved amicably and that's all I have to say. Thank you.

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated7:25 · ≈ 9:07 AM

Thank you. Our final public comment speaker this morning is Bob Pio.

0:07 – 0:1111 turns

CommentBob FieldProposed7:34 · ≈ 9:07 AM

Uh, good morning. My name is Bob field. I live in Sandy Ness. This is actually a part two of the comments. I started what is now almost a month ago. Um, basic subject, I guess his county finances and in part one of this, my comments, I made the point that there's a very dangerous mantra circulating bumper sticker size that says the County needs revenue when in fact the County does not need revenue. It needs revenue that exceeds the associated expenses And the example of the Neanderthal selling apples for more than it cost him, thinking he needed to sell more apples was the answer. So there's a modern day and more local example of this problem and this might get a touch uncomfortable but a few months ago you were sold on a tax break ordinance with the fundamental premise that the county needs revenue and what was presented to you was the income or the tax Proceeds from the project, but they were presented to you as a benefit.

It was presented as though it was the bottom line effect of the deal at the time supervisor Wolf asked if the associated expenses Had been considered and then one of my all time favorite quotes from government. The answer was no, but we could so let's do it now 200 hospitality jobs while the hospitality industry is 75% very low income jobs. The average hotel pay in Santa Barbara County is 1250 an hour average hours worked as 30.

So this means the county is going to incur The support social services for about 150 very low income families. That includes health care, significant subsidies for housing, transportation, food etc., not to mention the demands of a hotel this size on the public safety resources of the county and the demands on the roads. Very unlikely this project will pencil out. Look at the schools, it's presented as almost a million dollars worth of benefit to the schools.

But 200 hotel employees are likely to put two to 300 kids into the school system at a very conservative estimate of 10,000 per student. That's a $2-$3 million expense being passed to the school system in return for $1 million. This isn't $1 million positive, it's one or $2 million negative to the schools. So I encourage you to going forward Please request from staff applicants, maybe demand is the verb.

That the analysis be done of what are the costs that are associated with what you're being asked to do? Because clearly doing more of what the county is doing now will only result in continued deficits. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed10:31 · ≈ 9:10 AM

Thank you very much. I had a comment. Supervisor item? Do you have a gardener, Mr. Fields? Yeah, I do. Okay, thank you.

CommentBob FieldProposed10:39 · ≈ 9:10 AM

And I pay him $25 an hour.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed10:42 · ≈ 9:10 AM

Thank you very much. We will now... That concludes our public comment period so we will now proceed to our administrative agenda. Do any of my colleagues have any items to be pulled? Supervisor Farr?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed10:58 · ≈ 9:10 AM

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to pull A13, A14, A29 and A31.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed11:08 · ≈ 9:11 AM

Thank you. Supervisor Adam? Oh wait. I don't know which one of you went first. Supervisor Adam? 18,

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction11:15 · ≈ 9:11 AM

A20, A31 Anybody else?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed11:26 · ≈ 9:11 AM

Mr. Chair, my items have been pulled. Mine were A13 and A14.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed11:34 · ≈ 9:11 AM

How many public speakers do we have?

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated11:37 · ≈ 9:11 AM

We have two requests to speak, Chairman Carball. Item 829 and 832.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed11:45 · ≈ 9:11 AM

Since we only have two why don't we go to the public speakers? and if you could read 829 and 32 is a new one that none of my colleagues pulled so that might be good too.

0:11 – 0:154 turns

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated11:54 · ≈ 9:11 AM

Okay Chairman Carball, members of the board If I might I do have a couple of announcements on the administrative agenda if I could go through those just really quickly First off on item A18 Those are the budget revisions, and this is from the county executive office. And there's a request to pull budget revision number 0002833. I believe it's regarding the TRAN. It was from the Treasurer Tax Collector's Office. And that budget revision is no longer necessary so that would be withdrawn from the agenda.

Further on item 820, this is from General Services. This was regarding the Happy Trails Pony Ride concession agreement at Waller Park. This is in Santa Maria and the 4th District. That item has been withdrawn from the agenda and staff will bring that back as appropriate. And then on Item A41, this is a set hearing From the public works department regarding recommendations prohibiting the use of portion of Ballard Canyon Road by certain vehicles in the third district and staff is also withdrawing this item and this will also return to the board as appropriate.

Those are my only announcements so I'll go ahead and read. Mr. Allen

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed13:07 · ≈ 9:13 AM

before you do that, I think I'm going to do it a slightly different way that Organize our day a little better. If I could get the board's motion to approve resolution A1 through A7, including the items that have not been pulled then we could proceed with the resolutions and then public comment in our discussion on those items.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed13:30 · ≈ 9:13 AM

So moved, Mr. Chair.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed13:31 · ≈ 9:13 AM

Seconded. Motion's been made and seconded. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Passage unanimously. We will now proceed with our resolutions before we have public comment. There's a lot of people here. We want to make sure that we help everybody get on with their day. The first resolution is one that I am sponsoring. It's a resolution accommodation honoring Tony Baratoran Somebody please help me with the name because I may not, my name is difficult now so I know how challenging it is sometimes. Tim Martin and Dunn Larson of the General Services Department for being recognized as employees May 2013 Employees of the Month for Santa Barbara County. If you could come up Tony Berateran.

If I said in Spanish it's easier. I could roll it better. Tim Martin and Dan Larson if you'd come forward. Mr. Allen, if you could read the resolutions but before you go I just want to say that this is when we recognize our employees it's one of the highlights for our board in terms of the business we conduct every Tuesday because it just reminds us that at the end of the day county government excellence, county government and the services we provide are all done in the professional manner and the competent manner because of you And you're being recognized because you epitomize our county employees throughout the organization, and today we are recognizing you for your extraordinary good work. So thank you. Mr. Allen if you could read

0:15 – 0:2314 turns

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated15:17 · ≈ 9:15 AM

that. Chairman Carpall, members of the board this is a resolution of commendation for Tony Barodoran, Tim Martin and Dan Larson employees of the month for Santa Barbara County from May 2013. Whereas Tony Barodoran, Tim Martin and Dan Larson are the heating ventilation air conditioning specialists for the facility support services division of the General Services Department providing daily repairs and performing preventative maintenance to keep the numerous and complex systems running efficiency All with a can-do attitude to respond to all HVAC issues given to them. Whether it's a complete system failure or as simple, it's too hot in the conference room. And whereas Tony, Tim and Dan are always ready when willing to help to jump from one emergency to another throughout the day to keep our customers comfortable in whatever location they may be.

All while continually monitoring the HVAC systems using Trend 963 software which alerts staff of any mechanical failures which they can then make corrections to each building prior to the building occupants even knowing there was an issue. And whereas, Tony arrives every day and gives 110% to help the building occupants with HVAC needs and makes sure his South County systems are operating properly and efficiently. Tim maintains the entire North County HVAC systems as part of the general services after-hour emergency response team in response to all types of emergencies. And Dan maintains the South County's 24 hour facilities and without hesitation Works after hours to maintain, repair the jails, main and Los Prietos boys camp refrigerators, freezers and other complex HVAC equipment.

Now therefore it is hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors recognizes Tony, Tim and Dan for their exceptional and continuous support of the HVAC systems as employees of the month May 2013. Passed and adopted today.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed17:18 · ≈ 9:17 AM

Fellow board members and public, I neglected to also introduce our new General Services Director Mr. Matt Ponce who's going to start off by saying a few words

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 6Proposed17:30 · ≈ 9:17 AM

Thank you Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Matt Pontus, General Services Director here happily today to recognize our HVAC technicians. Obviously coming from Kern County, HVAC is very important and it is here as well. We've got a great staff in general services and I'm pleased to be up here today recognizing the efforts of these three gentlemen. And I'm actually going to turn it over to Bob their supervisor to paint a little bigger picture of why we're here today.

CommentBob ClarkProposedself-stated18:03 · ≈ 9:18 AM

Hi, good morning. My name is Bob Clark and I supervise North and South staff. And I just want to compliment these three gentlemen on the fine job they do. HVAC and heating and air conditioning is a big part of our life system to work in buildings so I do appreciate their efforts and they work tirelessly to make sure that the buildings keep running and we're efficient and staying on target. So thank you guys very much.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed18:39 · ≈ 9:18 AM

I just want to thank my fellow

CommentSant PalinProposedself-stated18:40 · ≈ 9:18 AM

co-workers.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 8Proposed18:46 · ≈ 9:18 AM

I'd like to thank my supervisors Bob Clark and Lou Anne Sullivan for allowing and encouraging us to excel and grow in our jobs I'd just like to thank all the people that work with me and giving me a helping hand at any time.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed19:04 · ≈ 9:19 AM

Thank you, thank you very much. Mr. Chairman? Mr. Lavinino?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8119:11 · ≈ 9:19 AM

I'm just curious how many years total we have with those three folks there that look like... A bunch of years.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed19:25 · ≈ 9:19 AM

We're not going to let you retire so don't even think about it. That's why we gave you this resolution today though, to keep you here long. We will now

move on to our next resolution. If I could have Gwen Stouffer, Executive Director of the Ghana-Wallaska Lotusland and Santos Escobar Parks Manager for the City of Santa Barbara, I believe if I still have that right. Supervisor Wolfe and I are co-sponsors of this resolution. It's a resolution proclaiming May 2013 Public Garden Appreciation Month in Santa Barbara County Even though Supervisor Wolf and I are the co-sponsors, I think this could be co-sponsored by our entire board because we all throughout our districts in the county have these extraordinary gems and treasures of parks. A park system that really I think add to the quality of life, our open space, extraordinary environment just all that Make a community special. And I think that many of you that are here before us represent many networks of extraordinary facilities and parks throughout the county, that really bring and add to quality of life that we all enjoy here at home.

So thank you so much for your great work, and thank you for helping us recognize these extraordinary places that make our lives full. Supervisor Wolf?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed20:56 · ≈ 9:20 AM

Thank you Mr. Chair, just quickly I appreciate your comments and this is a time to celebrate our public gardens and I know that you're going to be talking a little bit about your partnership in the program for people to get out this month and recognize the beauty that we have in our community so I think it's great that all of you have come together in a partnership Known to all of us and to make sure that we as they say get out and smell the roses Thank you,

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

and I kept saying parts and it should have been gardens as well. So They're all in it Great. Mr. Allen

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated21:36 · ≈ 9:21 AM

Chairman carpal members of the board this item a two. It's a resolution proclaiming May 2013 is public Gardens Appreciation Month in Santa Barbara County Whereas, Santa Barbara County's public gardens inspire us with their beauty and serenity. They play an important role in our cultural landscape and encourage an appreciation and connection to nature while promoting the need for the preservation and enhancement of our environment.

And whereas, Friday May 10 is National Public Gardens Day which is an annual celebration to bring attention to America's public gardens and their important role in promoting environmental stewardship and awareness, plant and water conservation, and education in communities nationwide. It's presented by the American Public Gardens Association and Rain Bird. It's sponsored locally by the Santa Barbara Foundation, Santa Barbara Beautiful Park Foundation, Key TV, and Casa Magazine. And whereas Santa Barbara is home to such diverse horticultural treasures as the Santa Barbara Botanic Garden, the Guanahuasca Lotus Land, Old Mission Santa Barbara Huerta Garden, Alice Keck Memorial Gardens, Rancho La Paterra and Stowe House, and Casa Del Herrero, each with its own unique gardens.

And whereas the Santa Barbara County manages 65 parks, coastal beaches, trails, open spaces and campgrounds encompassing over 8000 acres with 114 linear miles of trails that offer a wide variety of native plants, trees, wildflowers, birds and wildlife which are enjoyed by an average of 6.2 million visitors each year. And whereas, Santa Barbara's May celebration of Public Gardens Appreciation Month includes special events and activities listed on sbpublicgardens.org which you can check out on the internet. This encourages the community to explore and discover their local public gardens and marks the first countywide collaboration like it in the county.

And whereas, locally more than 20 non-profit public sector hospitality industry community founders and university members have collaborated to form the Santa Barbara Public Gardens Partnership whose mission is to promote awareness of our unique and inspiring public gardens, celebrate their beauty and benefits, and encourage their year round enjoyment by visitors and residents of the Santa Barbara Community. Now therefore it's hereby ordered and resolved that the board proclaims May as Public Gardens Appreciation Month in Santa Barbara County Encourages all residents to participate in planned events throughout the month. Pass and adopt today.

0:24 – 0:328 turns

CommentJoni KellyProposedself-stated24:00 · ≈ 9:24 AM

Well, I'm Joni Kelly from the Santa Barbara Botanic Garden. First, I would like to thank Supervisors Wolf and Carbajal for honoring us with this resolution. And I would also like to thank the rest of the supervisors for their support because truly this is as you can see from the people behind me, this is only half of our partnership And I'd like to introduce them, if you don't mind. This is Robert Adams from Santa Barbara Beautiful, one of our key sponsors who for the last two years has donated time and money to allow this to happen.

Molly Barker from Casa Del Herrero, a very beautiful historic building from 1926 23, sorry. Gwen Stauffer, Kahnawalska's Lotusland. Santos Escobar, City of Santa Barbara Parks and Rec. And the lovely and talented Daisha Harwood from Rancho La Patera and Stow House. One of our newest partners which has expanded us to Goleta so we truly are a county wide collaboration. People who aren't here, and I'll just rattle these off. City of Goleta Parks and Recreation, the Biltmore Santa Barbara, Old Mission Santa Barbara, Chamber of Commerce and Visitor Center, Santa Barbara City College, Santa Barbara County Parks, the Santa Barbara Zoological Gardens, the Conference and Visitors Bureau, The Simpson House, Master Gardeners of Santa Barbara County, and more.

And we really Felt strongly that this should be a collaboration because it really benefits our community. And we hope to expand to North County, so I'm hoping to work with our new supervisor Adam and Mr. Lavinino as well. And I'm going to turn it over to Gwen Stauffer who will tell you a little bit more about the collaboration. Thank

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 9Proposed26:14 · ≈ 9:26 AM

you, Joni. And thank you Supervisors Carvajal and Wolf for the resolution and all the supervisors for supporting us in this. We were here a year ago in front of you to present the very first part of this collaboration in which we came together to celebrate one day, National Public Garden Day. And we had so much community support behind that, that we actually had many partners come to us saying they want to join in and we were happy to have them. We've more than doubled our partnership and we've got non-profits, we have municipal and county organizations, we even have businesses involved. and also granting agencies helping to support this. And so we've come back to you, uh, to tell you that we have formalized our partnership. We now call ourselves the Santa Barbara Public Gardens Partnership.

We've created our own logo, our own website if anyone wants to find out about what our activities are and what our collaboration is about they can find us on our website at santabarbapublicgardens.org We wanted to share with you that we have expanded from one day to a month-long celebration, May being the Santa Barbara Public Gardens Appreciation Month. That will include National Public Gardens Day which is this Friday.

We are having a countywide celebration and we are doing this to celebrate our gardens and to help people understand that all life on earth depends on plants. And we need plants to survive. And more than that, we need plants to thrive and we need our gardens to thrive and our gardens to find places where we can recreate and play, enjoy our families, enjoy our community. What we want to do this month is help our community become aware of all that our gardens and our parks and our greenways have to offer. We want to invite our community to participate And to enjoy these gardens and to understand and appreciate, and join in with them as they are valuable community resources. And hopefully they will become, as our tagline urges them, to get inspired.

So thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed28:32 · ≈ 9:28 AM

Thank you.

CommentJoni KellyProposedself-stated28:36 · ≈ 9:28 AM

And just really quickly, I'm going to let you know some of the things we have going on this month. Free things these are all free no cost to the community. The city of Santa Barbara is putting on 10 garden talks For free, all of them can be listed on the website. The Santa Barbara Botanic Garden and Rancho La Patera Stow House has a free coupon that you can download on the website sbpublicgardens.org There are docent-led tours at the garden at Mission Square to Garden, Rancho La Patera Stow House. The Biltmore never offers these free tours You just make a reservation via the website. They have an amazing garden. They're also having a garden tea on Friday, May 10th National Public Gardens Day there are free carousel rides at Chase Palm Park every Sunday this month sponsored by the Park Foundation.

City College one of our brand new partners is offering free tours of their life scape garden The county courthouse right across the street is offering special garden tours and also a tour of the clock house mural room. In addition, this Friday we have a very special once-a-year Garden Lovers Tour which is only $50 and features Lotusland, Casa Del Herrero And a special docent-led tour with the designer of Alice Keck Park Memorial Gardens, Grant Castleberg. He actually designed this beautiful public space and I did want to point out that this collaboration is the very first of its kind in country and three of us standing here are flying to Arizona to present this to the nation for the American Public Gardens Association conference in about 10 days.

So thank you for your time, we hope everybody will go out there and explore their public spaces in their public gardens and get inspired. Thank you!

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed31:05 · ≈ 9:31 AM

Thank you. That's amazing, all the great work you're doing. Thank you very much. Supervisor Farr?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed31:11 · ≈ 9:31 AM

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, I really would encourage everybody if you haven't been to the Botanic Garden or to Alice Keck Park or to Lotusland ever or in a while please go they're just really phenomenal but I also want to make a plug for North County areas which were mentioned. Buelton, the city of Buelton and the people in the San Ynez Valley are creating a botanic Garden Park area up there along the Santa Ana's River. You might want to speak to Supervisor Adam I think that there are some nice things there in Waller Park that are going on so Please reach out to the rest of the county as well Thank You mr. Chair

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed31:54 · ≈ 9:31 AM

Thank you, you know Yeah, it just we have some amazing treasures All right, we will now proceed with our agenda and

the next item is sponsored by Supervisor Wolf. Item A3.

0:32 – 0:365 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed32:12 · ≈ 9:32 AM

Thank you Mr. Chair. This is a resolution that proclaims May as Perinatal Depression Awareness Month in Santa Barbara County. And as I present this, I'd like to call forward Sanda Copley from... She's our Maternal Child and Adolescent Health Director. Deborah Holmes, Associate Director of CALM. Dr. Susan Welsh from CAC. Carol Ingraham, Psychotherapist at Cottage Hospital. and Chris Seria, a board member from the Postpartum Education for Parents.

And I wanted to welcome all of you to our board chambers and to thank you for being here to highlight a very important and unfortunately prevalent issue that we see among our pregnant moms, and that is postnatal depression. And I'm particularly moved by the honor of presenting this. I have a 33-year-old daughter who is pregnant and she's due the end of July. And I think for all of us who are in that position or pregnant, of course, which I'm not...

I'm glad it's not me. But you know, it's good to bring up these issues. It's important for people who may be listening to this at home or may have friends who are listening to become aware of the issues in our community and to make sure that they I just want to thank all of you for everything that you do. And we'll let Mr Allen go forward and read the resolution.

not transcribed≈12s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated34:07 · ≈ 9:34 AM

Chairman Carvalho, members of the board. This is a resolution proclaiming the month of May 2013 as Perinatal Depression Awareness Month whereas approximately 6,000 babies are born in Santa Barbara County each year and between 10% and 20% of expectant new mothers are affected by perinatal depression and mood disorders These new mothers often experience symptoms which can be overlooked and or heavily stigmatized such as feelings of confusion shame and isolation And whereas, heightened awareness and increased education of perinatal depression is critical due to its negative impact on the family and its adverse developmental and behavioral outcomes including attachment disorders in the young children of the affected women.

And whereas, perinatal mental health issues can be effectively screened and are highly treatable with therapeutic intervention. And whereas the Public Health Department's Maternal Child and Adolescent Health Program found that 31% of women screened were at risk for perinatal depression. In response, a maternal child perinatal mental health and substance use coalition was formed in collaboration with CALM to raise community awareness and continue support services. Now, therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that the Board of Supervisors does hereby observe the month of May 2013 as Perinatal Depression Awareness Month to facilitate increased awareness education intervention for perinatal depression and mood disorders. Passed and adopted today by the board.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed35:36 · ≈ 9:35 AM

Mr. Chair, members of the board on behalf of the Public Health Department Maternal Child and Adolescent Health Program and the Maternal Child Perinatal Mental Health and Substance Use Coalition of which we have here I thank you for this recognition We appreciate the spotlight on increasing awareness of both the need and the availability of resources for new mothers and fathers. We encourage mothers to speak up or speak out, and get the help they need. We value the physical and emotional health of all families and hope to foster a community where support for healthcare, mental health, and substance abuse issues for new parents exists, and the availability of this support is made available to our community. Thank you.

PresenterJim LaLogiaRice Ranch ProjectProposedself-stated36:19 · ≈ 9:36 AM

Thank

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed36:19 · ≈ 9:36 AM

you. The next resolution item A4 is also sponsored by Supervisor Wolf.

0:36 – 0:435 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed36:30 · ≈ 9:36 AM

Oh, thank you Mr. Chair. I see Ted Myers and Delphine O'Neera and I think we have Lillian Pipersburg our foster parent. Thank you for coming forward, this is a resolution that proclaims the month of May as National Foster Care Month in Santa Barbara County. And really to thank all of those folks who stepped forward as foster care parents in the most difficult and sometimes challenging times of a child's life.

So to all of you out there, thank you and Lillian. Thank you for being here And I'm sorry don't when when you folks introduce yourself. I'm sorry. I don't know your name but Please introduce yourself when we're done reading the resolution Mr.. Allen

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated37:24 · ≈ 9:37 AM

Chairman Carbajal, members of the board, this is a resolution recognizing May 2013 as National Foster Care Month. Whereas every year over 450 children and youth in Santa Barbara County need to live in foster care placement due to abuse and neglect in their homes. And whereas every child deserves a home where they are loved and nurtured in a safe environment, and every child deserves to belong to a family. And whereas, foster kinship and adoptive families who open their homes and hearts and support children whose families are in crisis play a vital role in helping children and families heal and reconnect. And whereas young people in foster care need the guidance stability and love that are essential for becoming successful adults from the significant people in their lives while they're in care.

And whereas the ongoing efforts of foster parents, relative caregivers, mentors, advocates, social workers and volunteers help many children face life's challenges without feeling all alone. And whereas thanks to these heroes, many formerly abused or neglected children and teens will safely unite with their parents, be cared for by relatives, be adopted by families or supported into independent adulthood. Now therefore, it be hereby ordered and resolved that the Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Barbara recognizes May 2013 as National Foster Care Month in recognition of our county's foster children and foster parents. And all county employees involved in the juvenile independency system who care for the children and families that watch over them passed and adopted today.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 11Proposed39:00 · ≈ 9:39 AM

Well thank you very much Chair Carbajal, members of the board and especially Supervisor Wolf for recognizing May as Foster Parent Month among other months. As you know this is When a child is abused or neglected, that's a major crisis in their lives. But the second crisis adds actually when they're removed from the family home and we find that the best place for them to be is in another family home. One that's willing to open their hearts and provide the structure and support that they need through that secondary crisis. We have today with us Lillian Pittsburgh who Piper's Berg who is our foster parent, a wonderful person that Delfino Nara is about to introduce. As well as Annie Rodriguez who is our foster parent recruiter so I will turn it over right now to Delfina Nara, our Deputy Director for Social Services.

CommentSet PellettProposed · by introduction39:58 · ≈ 9:39 AM

Chairman, members of the board. Thank you for being here again and this is just another privilege that we get to have at the department celebrating foster parents, the caregivers that step in for the parents when the parents aren't able to care for their children. And I'd just like to say a couple things about Lillian. She's been a foster parent for a very long time She's fostered over 120 children in her home. She is currently one of our emergency shelter parents, so she takes children at all hours of the night whenever the needs are there but more importantly in our organization She is a mentor to foster parents. She's a mentor to our new staff, she's a mentor to some of our administrators because she has that vast knowledge of experience that she can draw on her and her husband Phillip and they've just been true servants to our community, true servants to the needs of our children.

Foster parents are the people that if they don't just foster, they substitute their love for the parent's love. They step into that breach When the parent isn't there and without them, I don't know how our system would work. It's really their work that helps the healing in the children. It is their work that prepares a child for the next phase of their life whether they get to go back home with their parents, to be adopted by a family or to live with a relative or to be out on their own It's the foster parents that are the key component in that. And we are so fortunate to have a group, a cadre, they're very dedicated and exemplified by Lillian. I'm just so happy to be working with her. And I think if you ask any of our social workers, they would all testify or talk about what a wonderful person her and her husband are.

So I'd just like to introduce her. If you want to say anything off of the podium?

CommentLillian PipersburgProposedself-stated41:41 · ≈ 9:41 AM

Good morning, Chairman Calderhall and members of the board. My name is Lillian Pipersburg. My husband Phillip and I have been foster parents for over 27 years. And it's with joy and honor that we can serve children and families in our community. We have adopted them not legally but just in our hearts. It's certainly a privilege to work with families who are in need during a crisis. It was never our desire to adopt but to strengthen families so they can carry on their family affairs.

It is with honor that I receive this resolution on behalf of all foster parents in Santa Barbara County, whether they be relative care providers, non-relative providers, individuals who are licensed through the county Department of Social Services or individuals who are certified through family care agencies. I certainly appreciate this. My husband and I are honored that he's not here with me today because he is working with a child who is receiving in-home counseling services, but I enjoy social services. I was a member of the probation department for 25 years. My husband and I both retired from probation, and this is the frosting of the cake to work with foster children. This is truly my heart's desire.

I work currently in the shelter and we get to see children, as they indicated, in their hardest times. Some of them come crying, they're frustrated, they're traumatized and we are able to give those hugs and embrace them and cherish not only them but even their family values and their cultural values I just had a little boy out at a Cinco de Mayo celebration at Gersh Park on Saturday and he enjoyed picking up a soccer game, dancing to the mariachi music. It's always a privilege and how fitting for me to be receiving this resolution after the gardening project because I truly see my children as flowers ready to bloom in a garden of life. We get children from all racial and ethnic backgrounds, and it does make for a wonderful garden. Thank you very much for this resolution.

0:44 – 0:528 turns

CommentSet PellettProposed · by introduction44:00 · ≈ 9:44 AM

Chairman, may I say one other thing? I'd be remiss if I was asked to say something witty. But I couldn't think of anything witty. But I just want to take this opportunity to thank our interim director, Ted Myers. I believe this would be his last official board meeting and he's been a great support to us, a great leader during this transition period and I think that he, I would like to give him some public recognition for that to being just you know not we haven't missed the step. You know we miss Kathy but we haven't missed a step with Ted there. We'd just like to thank him for being there for us. Thank

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed44:39 · ≈ 9:44 AM

Mr. Myers, you want to say a few words since it is your last meeting on such a positive note?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 11Proposed44:47 · ≈ 9:44 AM

Oh wow! That was a surprise but it's been a pleasure serving the county in this capacity for five months with the Department of Social Services as you know they're a dedicated group of people who are out there on the front lines every day trying to serve and strengthen our community so it's just an honor and a privilege and thank you for that

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed45:09 · ≈ 9:45 AM

Thank you for your service. Okay, we will move on now to three resolutions by Supervisor Lavinino, A5, A6 and A7. A4? Did we do a four? No. A5? Hey, you're vice chairman. Well next year you'll be chairman there. When man is sleeping! A5.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8145:35 · ≈ 9:45 AM

Supervisor Lavinino is sponsoring this resolution. Thank you Mr. Chair, well you know it's my honor to bring forth this resolution proclaiming May 2013 as Military Appreciation Month in Santa Barbara County. It seems that we should have every month celebrating our veterans but this actual month we are Focusing on providing employment opportunities for those veterans that are returning. So receiving this resolution will be Frank Campo, Frank's our local veteran's employment representative. He's also the commander for the Santa Maria American Legion as well as the commander for the Lompoc Disabled American Veterans. He has got his finger on the pulse of what our veterans are looking for and what their needs are so Mr. Allen if you could read the resolution please?

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated46:24 · ≈ 9:46 AM

Chairman Carbajal, members of the board. This is a resolution proclaiming May 2013 as Military Appreciation Month in Santa Barbara County. Whereas the people of our community have great appreciation and admiration for the many local men and women who served the country in the armed forces to protect and preserve the freedoms enjoyed by our community and by all Americans. And whereas in war, international conflicts, and peacekeeping missions, men and women have been wounded, taken as prisoners, and died in the line of duty.

And whereas, veterans possess a wide variety of valuable job qualifications and skills including experience, maturity, leadership and loyalty that make them ideal candidates for employment. And whereas local veterans employment representatives, disabled veteran outreach program representatives and other employment development department staff are committed to ensuring that veterans receive the services and programs to which they're entitled into promoting employer interest in hiring veterans. Now therefore, be it resorted and resolved that this Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Barbara proclaim May 2013 as Military Appreciation Month in Santa Barbara County. And urges all local employers, organized labor, veteran organizations and other government leaders to support this worthy campaign to increase employment opportunities for the men and women who have faithfully served our nation in the military.

Passed and adopted today.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed47:47 · ≈ 9:47 AM

Thank you Mr. Chair and Board, I would like to thank you first of all for recognizing the hard work that the Disabled Veteran Outreach Program specialists, local veterans employment representatives and all the EDD staff do for our veterans. Currently the veteran unit at the State of California EDD office for Santa Maria, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo consists of one person. That's myself.

We are federally funded even though we are state employees and with sequestration our funding comes from Department of Labor and we've had two vacancies within the last six months So those folks have retired and that's left me doing the line chair of the work. And as I said, I cover from Carpinteria to Paso Robles from Lompoc to Nukuyama so I have a large territory. So I would like to thank all the board for their support in addition to working for the state. I also represent Supervisor Adam on the County Veteran Services Advisory Committee. So that's very exciting to get some stuff done with veterans here in the county But just to give you some statistics, California has the highest population of veterans in the country. Over 2.2 million veterans reside in California.

With that almost 200,000 are leaving active duty every year. The Department of Defense speculates that about 15% or 30,000 are coming back to California. That means these young men and women are going to be needing jobs. Currently we have one war that basically ended, another war that's winding down with a reduction of about 25% to 30% mandated with our armed forces. That's estimated at an additional 15,000 to 20,000 folks will be coming back to California. So we're looking at about 40,000-45,000 veterans returning looking for work.

It's very difficult. As stated earlier, the average earning job here in the county is probably between a minimum wage of $8 to maybe $12 or $13. A lot of these men and women coming back are married, have children. It's very difficult to earn a living and live in the communities on those types of wages. We're fortunate here in Santa Barbara County where the current unemployment rate is 7.2%, whereas statewide it's 9.4%. Now that might sound good if you look at it initially, 7.3% in the county but if you break that down between the cities North County is probably suffering about a 15% unemployment rate whereas South County probably has about 4-5%.

So the need is probably more up in North County with getting folks hired It's been very exciting for myself this past year. I've been working on two very exciting programs. The first was our first annual stand down that Supervisor Lavinino hosted last year in Santa Maria. I know he'll touch on that later on this morning, but I'd like to bring just one success story out of that.

I had approached an employer and invited the employer to attend the event. This employer came to the event who was a veteran. He also brought an employee of his who happened to be a veteran Now this employee had some back child support issues, so therefore his driver's license was taken away or was suspended. So the employer brought his employee they took him to Child Support Services at the table he was able to work through a payment arrangement That satisfied the county and the court, and from there he was directed over to the DMV table where he was issued a provisional license. And from there you know he was able to drive a vehicle for his employer because currently that employer had to drive him around all his job locations. So now with him getting services that he required, he was able to be productive member for that employer.

Another exciting opportunity I've had the opportunity to work on is the Veterans Treatment Court that we started in Santa Maria almost two years ago. We had our second graduation last Monday, we graduated 10 veterans. Prior to that the previous graduation was in October, we graduated eight veterans. I know Santa Barbara City itself started a Veterans Treatment Court down here about three or four months ago so currently we have about 40 veterans countywide there Seeking services, alternatives to incarceration.

So thank you.

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

Thank you very much. Moving on item A6, Supervisor Lavenino?

0:52 – 0:575 turns

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8152:09 · ≈ 9:52 AM

Thank you Mr. Chair. Item 6 is a resolution proclaiming May 6th as National Nurses Day and May 6 through the 12th 2013 is National Nurses Week in Santa Barbara County And in reading the resolution, it said that nurses were voted the most trusted profession in 13 of the last 14 years. I'm not sure where politician came in on that list but we all know that we all tip our hat to our nurses. So what we're having today or receiving is Paige Batson, Director of Public Health Nursing, Sandra Copley, Maternal Child and Adolescent Health Director, Yvette Calhoun, Director of Nurses for Primary Care Family Health and Linda Penny, Regional Clinic Manager at Santa Maria. Mr. Allen, if you could read the resolution please?

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated52:57 · ≈ 9:52 AM

Chairman Carpall and members of the board, this is a resolution proclaiming the day of May 6th 2013 as National Nurses Day and the week of May sixth through twelfth 2013 as National Nurses Week whereas the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 2010 grants nurses the ability to take on leadership roles in health care implement strategies to improve the quality of care and play a key role in innovative patient-centered care delivery models And whereas in 2012, for the 13th time in 14 years, America's voted nurses the most trusted professionals in America by the annual Gallup Poll which ranks professions for their honesty and ethical standards.

And whereas the public's high regard for the nursing profession coupled with nurses' education and skills enables nurses to transform the healthcare system into one that places more emphasis on prevention, wellness, and coordination of care. And whereas the county's public health nurses continue to play a critical role in improving patient health outcomes, increasing access to healthcare and reducing healthcare costs in the community. Healthcare centers at home and in shelter settings. And whereas the theme for National Nurses Week in 2013 is delivering quality and innovation in patient care highlights the commitment professionalism and expertise of nearly 3.1 million registered nurses nationwide. Now therefore, be it hereby ordered and resolved that the Board of Supervisors proclaims the 6th day of May 2013 as National Nurses Day and the week of May 6-12 as National Nurses Week in recognition of the contributions of all nurses working in health care and educational settings in the County of Santa Barbara.

Passed and adopted today.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed54:37 · ≈ 9:54 AM

Chair Carbajal, members of the board. Thank you for this recognition of Nurses Week. Nurses play an integral part of our county and lead many of our most important programs and initiatives. We of course have them in our primary care and specialty clinics also in public health clinics California Children's Services, Children's Health and Disability Program Maternal Child and Adolescent Health, Disease Control, Healthcare for the Homeless, Emergency Preparation, Utilization Management. And in ADMHS we of course have nurses in the PUF inpatient units, in our clinics, in our residential units and field programs, and even in our jails. So as you can see, we have nurses throughout our county system. And I'm now very proud to turn it over to three extraordinary nurses in public health.

We have Yvette Calhoun, Sandra Copley and Paige Batson for a few words. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed55:30 · ≈ 9:55 AM

Good morning. On behalf of the Public Health Nurse Leadership Committee, standing here with me. Are you standing behind me or with me? Standing here before you Supervisor Lavanino and board members we would like to thank you for recognizing Nurses Week and the nurses working in our health care centers as well as our public health community health programs. We are delighted with this acknowledgement to the nurses in our department. Our nurses are a valuable part of the healthcare continuum.

Even despite our current economy where public health and nursing resources are diminishing, nurses working in our healthcare centers and community health programs continue to play a critical role in improving patient outcomes, increasing access to care, and reducing healthcare costs in our communities. Nursing recognition is especially important and timely this year as the advent of healthcare reform is going to greatly expand the nurse's role in our communities nationwide.

The Public Health Department Nurse Leadership Team's mission is to build innovative, strong nursing leaders in our organization who shape quality and safety throughout our organization. And thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed56:51 · ≈ 9:56 AM

Thank you very much and thank you for all the good work you do. We should note that our very own Caitlin Esquire, who's with the Clerk of the Board is about to finish her nursing program. So kidding around I told her she would be the fourth floor nurse for a while. We need a lot attending too. We will now move on to our last resolution item A7.

0:57 – 1:039 turns

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8157:21 · ≈ 9:57 AM

Thank you Mr. Chair. It's one we all look forward to up here on the board May 6th through 12th, we'll have a resolution proclaiming May 6th through 12th as Compost Awareness Week in Santa Barbara County. I think we heard from public gardens folks earlier that we need plants to survive and if you've got yard envy and you're looking at somebody else's yard in your neighborhood and you see their plants growing at a spectacular rate it's probably because they're using compost so we've got Mr. Bob Engel here from England Gray These are all legal plants, I want to point out.

And they're very beautiful Bob.

GuestAdamsProposed · by introduction58:07 · ≈ 9:58 AM

Mr. Chair can I ask something? Yes. Bob did you grow these things? Did you grow this? You have such a good green thumb. Thank

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8158:20 · ≈ 9:58 AM

you very much. Mr Allen would you like to read the resolution please?

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated58:25 · ≈ 9:58 AM

Chairman Carball, members of the board. This is item A-7. It's a resolution proclaiming May 6 through 12, 2013 as Compost Awareness Week whereas the composting councils of Canada, Ireland, Australia, United Kingdom and the United States have declared the first week of May to be the annual international composting awareness week And whereas organic materials suitable for composting represent up to 70% of materials that could be landfilled each year, and composting is an effective form of waste reduction, reuse, and recycling. And whereas home composting and mulching is a way householders can reduce the volume of waste generated at home by taking individual responsibility for keeping waste reduction costs down. Whereas using sustainable soil enriching compost help prevent erosion of valuable topsoil without depleting valuable wildlife habits.

And whereas community sustainability is enhanced by composting green waste, biosolids and other organic materials. And promoting the use of renewable resources in landscaping, horticulture and agriculture. Whereas returning compost to organic resources to the soil is a method of decreasing the dependence on chemical fertilizers, decreasing erosion, reducing water consumption and non-point pollution. And whereas the County of Santa Barbara has initiated Green Waste Collection Programs with its franchise haulers to aid in the efforts of environmental sustainability.

And whereas, England Gray Inc. Regional Composting Facility in Santa Maria has been successfully composting organic materials for sustainable agricultural processes. Now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that the Board of Supervisors proclaims the week of May 6-12 2013 as Compost Awareness Week in Santa Barbara County. Passed and adopted today.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed1:00:06 · ≈ 10:00 AM

Chair, fellow supervisors as you color coordinate there. I'm sorry we should have gotten all one color. I'd like to thank you on behalf of the United States Composting Council that sponsors this International Compost Awareness Week and us locally that are trying to promote compost and the benefits of it and how appropriate to be with the community garden Earlier because they know the value of healthy soil, and that's what compost is all about You know a lot of people know it as a curbside green waste cart out in front of their house That they throw a bunch of leaves in or trimmings But when we take it and we compost it and we return it back to the soil It's it's a valuable soil amendment makes healthy soil And you can't have healthy plants without healthy soil you might if you go by Winchester the new off-ramp They're at Winchester Canyon.

I think there's 4,000 yards of our local growing compost put along that whole overpass to revegetate and it's doing a fantastic job and that's just one of the projects. Also inside I put your little seed packet of tomatoes The Composting Council is also having a million tomato compost campaign to grow a million tomatoes in compost and to give to food banks across the United States. And so we're working with that, we are working with Peabody School here in St. Vincent's. They have little community gardens they're gonna grow tomatoes with us. I think Harding's gonna come on board. We've been a school garden program with them for a few years. And we're working with Vocational Training Center in Santa Maria and the Senior Center Garden in Santa Maria where we're going to be growing the tomatoes and donating them to the food bank.

We're soon going to be announcing the Boys & Girls Club, but we're starting a whole community garden next to their facility in Santa Maria. So we're utilizing compost and making healthy soil and healthy plants so thank you for recognizing us.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:02:16 · ≈ 10:02 AM

Thank you Bob, especially for you. You brighten up our day every year we do this and this is really special so thank you. Alright we will now move on to finish our administrative agenda. We have pulled a number of items some were duplicative Supervisor Farr pulled A13, 14, 29 and 31. Supervisor Adam pulled A18, A20 and A31. Supervisor Wolk pulled A 13, 14 and 32 I believe. No, 32 was public speaker that also pulled that one.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:02:56 · ≈ 10:02 AM

Chair just to remind you 20 got pulled by the department earlier.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:03:00 · ≈ 10:03 AM

Yes. So the ones we've already read, we won't reread again. So how many public speakers do we have? We have two requests to speak. Why don't we do those two and then we'll bring them back to the board.

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated1:03:13 · ≈ 10:03 AM

We're going to, actually the one speaker Michael LeBron is here on A29. And so he wanted to speak if this was being polled or if there were questions. So we may want to wait until the board considers A29 and so we'll go ahead and go to Senator for Andy Caldwell. He's on item 832 and I'll read that into the record. Thank you. Item 832 is from the Sheriff. It's to consider recommendations regarding the execution of agreement with the State of California to reimburse the state for the costs of an employee working at the Santa Barbara Regional Narcotics Enforcement Team, for a total of $110,000 funded by SBR and NET asset forfeiture funds.

1:03 – 1:087 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:03:53 · ≈ 10:03 AM

Mr. Caldwell?

PresenterAndy CaldwellCOLABProposedself-stated1:03:53 · ≈ 10:03 AM

Chairman Carbajal, members of the Board, I'm Andy Caldwell representing COLAB. It's pretty hard for me, as you know I do 40 hours of radio a month and write up to 15 op-eds a month. It's been pretty hard for me to watch some of these proceedings and items like this and then hear that Governor Jerry Brown travels throughout the United States touting California as a model.

The bottom line here is that Crime and narcotics enforcement is both a local and state problem, and it's a national problem. And the State of California up and decides that they can't afford to manage oversight on a county-wide law enforcement issue. And they're basically telling the county and or the jurisdictions within the county you either pay up or we're not gonna help.

And it makes you wonder, would this person have been laid off? If they weren't working here and if the county didn't spend $110,000 on their salary. Including contributing $65 for this person's physical fitness. Did this person work here full-time? Was that a one year salary or a half year salary, were they down here, did they stay in Sacramento? Do we pay for everything? Did any of the other jurisdictions cough up money when you know this is a multi-jurisdictional effort.

I wish that this is the kind of thing that you would talk to Senator Jackson and Assemblyman Williams on, and ask him well if we're not doing narcotics enforcement just what are we spending our money on? And how is it that we do our best here to arrest people. We prosecute people. And then the state says, A, we can't help you arrest them. We can't help prosecute them and we can't even help imprison them. The Sacramento is failing, fundamentally failing in their duties and yet they tout that California's a model example. This particular item again, we'd like to know was $110,000 for a full year worth of work and if we had said no, we can afford it?

Would this person have lost their job, or did the state of California just have other priorities in mind? We'd like to know. Thank

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:06:41 · ≈ 10:06 AM

you. I guess we're going to go back to the other item, Item 829 after the board deliberates. Mr. Allen, you had suggested that?

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated1:06:56 · ≈ 10:06 AM

Mr. LeBron from the Napolo Community Services District indicated that he's here just to answer questions in case

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:07:01 · ≈ 10:07 AM

he's not really here, okay great thank you very much all right well we'll bring it back to the board why don't we start out with Supervisor Farr first item a 13 14 29 and 31

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:07:16 · ≈ 10:07 AM

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think Supervisor Wolf also had pulled 13 and 14. But I pulled a 13 because... Do you need to go ahead and read it? Yes.

not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated1:07:29 · ≈ 10:07 AM

Chairman Cardwell, members of the board. I'll just go ahead and read all four of those into the record at this point. Item 813 is from the auditor controller. It's to receive and follow the Santa Barbara County Independent Special Districts Compliance Report for the completion of annual audits ending fiscal year 10-11 and annual budgets for fiscal year 11 and 12. Item A14 also from the auditor controller. Let's consider recommendations regarding a franchise agreement, compliance reports for franchise fees for Cox Communications and Comcast Cable Communications LLC, Comcast of Santa Maria LLC and their affiliates and subsidiaries.

Item A-29 is brought to the board from Public Works Department as the Board of Directors Flood Control and Water Conservation District The request that the board consider recommendations for writing a license agreement with the Napomo Community Services District for a waterline in Turee project. That's in the 5th district, and item A31 is from the Sheriff. I request that the board authorize the purchasing agent to procure aviation parts and services for the Sheriff's Office from Seegers Aero Corporation for an amount not to exceed $100,000 as a sole source procurement without being required to conduct a formal bid process for the period ending July 1, 2013.

1:08 – 1:157 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:08:45 · ≈ 10:08 AM

Thank you, Supervisor Farr.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:08:46 · ≈ 10:08 AM

Thank you Mr. Chair. Well I pulled A13 because I wanted to compliment Mr. Geis and his staff again for a wonderful document that's very very useful to us particularly I think to me because I have so many small independent special districts and it's beautifully done and it's very readable. So thank you for that. The other comment I have is that clearly there are some of the districts that are struggling and have struggled quite a bit, don't seem to be getting better. So I think that CEO Waller that this is something that we may need to bring back to the board for fuller discussion To see whether there's a better way to provide these services, whether there is any possibility of some consolidation or the assistance that we can give them. Because I think in some cases it's even hard to find people to serve because the districts are so small.

And chronic financial difficulties. I think that the board members, the people that volunteered to do this do an outstanding job with few to any resources they provide valuable service to the community but I'm just wondering whether we can't help them or find a better way to provide these services so I think it's a bigger issue but a lot of the really good information is here so thank you again for this document.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:10:17 · ≈ 10:10 AM

Thank you, Supervisor Farr. Supervisor Wolff also had to comment on this issue?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed1:10:21 · ≈ 10:10 AM

Thank you Mr. Chair. My comments are very similar to Supervisor Farr's. I wanted to compliment Mr. Geis' office for pulling this together. It looks like Mr. Levin, you had a part to play in this and definitely I appreciate it. You know, sometimes we get reports and they're not always as clear as we may like. This was exceptionally clear and very well done with some really good information. And I think what Supervisor far touched on Is the fact that, you know while many of the districts are doing exceptionally well we definitely have some. I think there's maybe eight that are having some issues financial or otherwise.

Or governance issues and I, I think and maybe Mr. Geist or Mr. Levin can speak to this before getting to the issues that Supervisor Farr raised. Do we send a formal letter to the districts that outline the recommendations of the issues that you found and then a follow-up asking them to say within 120 days respond? What is the following?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed1:11:39 · ≈ 10:11 AM

Chairman Carbajal, Supervisor Wolf. What we do with our report is it's not a required report. The only requirements are for the auditor to receive their annual budgets and the auditor to receive their financial statements. It was an interesting thing. The grand jury said well what do you do with them when we receive them that's all the law says so we came up with this Report that we thought might help the districts compare themselves and you know, do some research and analysis. And so we do share the draft of the report with the districts prior to its publication get their feedback see if we're fairly accurate We don't want to be criticizing a district in any adverse way unless it's warranted And then once it's done, we feed the report back out to the district.

We do not have a process to get a little bit more formal than that about solutions to some of their problems and Supervisor Farr brings up a lot of those problems. Small district staffs, loss of district staff, changing boards of directors, You know, those are all governance problems that are difficult. And the ones that come to mind are, you know, the small rec district out in Quiama. We know like their current administrator has retired but she's working back. We called her today and said well who's your replacement? She goes I got three temporary people to do my job.

I'm here to talk about the community services district has been a long struggle. Very small community put in a big new water tank there with The cemetery districts. They periodically cycle with difficulties, the mosquito abatement district occasionally they're really stable right now though. And so what we're hoping it is our report points out those vulnerabilities to the districts and then hopefully the district's You know, their directors take some actions to to really seek maybe your assistance or the county's assistance. A good exit. Another good example is Guadalupe Cemetery District. They were getting a $30,000 contribution from The city of Guadalupe as a voluntary pass-through payment. Well, when the RDA went away they lost the $30,000 voluntary pass through but what they did get on the other hand is a return to some of their property taxes so what their new financial position is we're not quite sure yet because we haven't got I hear Supervisor Wolf, how much more effort we make other than the report.

I'm willing to listen and see how we can follow that up.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:14:41 · ≈ 10:14 AM

Mr. Geist, we're going to go Mr. Adam next but just to add to that I would say at least a formal letter from you or the board to the elected officials or appointed of that body I think would be outstanding so then they're kind of put on notice formally and then after that I think I'd like Supervisor Farr's idea of having some kind of discussion because we may have some authority we may not have some authority And what happens to those districts, unfortunately.

So it would be good to learn all that insight as to what our options are. Mr. Adam?

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:15:15 · ≈ 10:15 AM

Yeah you kind of hit on some of my stuff there. One of the things I was going to ask you is do we have metrics like this for the county? I'm just referring to page 13. There's some accumulated depreciation of capital assets, and you compared the 10-11 year to the 6-7 year. Do we ever do that with county?

1:15 – 1:2932 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed1:15:43 · ≈ 10:15 AM

We probably do that in the cap for as part of the MD and a maybe a little bit not not exactly like this. You know something to consider would we want to do this for all the county small special districts. Recently, the CEO working with some of the board members has done a really nice presentation of data like this for the county service areas. And so whether we want Embark that way for the rest of the county. That's a very good observation and a good point about how would we do that, and how would we present it?

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:16:18 · ≈ 10:16 AM

Well, you can get some general are you doing the right direction or wrong direction type of a deal in here. So I thought that was helpful. Also what is our touching on Chairman Carbajal's point? What's our authority or role in doing some financial planning with these different community services districts? Do we have any

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed1:16:46 · ≈ 10:16 AM

Chairman Kerbal and Supervisor Adam, it really is dependent on the various types of districts. So for instance in the cemetery districts your board appoints the board members to those districts. Other districts are elected by the taxpayers And if there's money in the county treasury and their monies in the county treasury, I have some different authorities over their finances. But if there's money outside the county treasury, I don't have the authority to go investigate their finances other than this code about putting this together. So it's really dependent on the type of district they are and they can have different authorities.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:17:27 · ≈ 10:17 AM

And those are the types of things that if we have a hearing in the future, it'll be really insightful for all of us as a board. Please proceed Mr.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:17:34 · ≈ 10:17 AM

Well, the only thing I was going to say is if we have some struggling districts maybe we need to take some proactive steps to do some financial planning and see if we can stop the struggling or at least help them get on to a sustainable path. And for one reason or another they're not on a sustainable path then we should all know it and then try to make a rational plan for the future.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed1:18:02 · ≈ 10:18 AM

And Supervisor Carbajal and Supervisor Adam, you know our report has done that in the past. It has spurred districts on to changing their service charges, improving their capital plans, depreciating their assets and started collecting in those fees. The more difficult ones are where their allocation of property taxes is kind of low and especially in the last couple of years where they didn't get a growth in property tax Then that creates more pressure within the district. So you know, the cemetery districts are based on people passing away and that goes up and down so I think our report helps them make progress and I think it is a positive thing to do but we could think about some more stuff to do.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:18:54 · ≈ 10:18 AM

And the question is, how do we use this and do we come back with a small item on each one of these over time? Just spread it out over time and just talk about them or pick the ones that seem to be struggling and have another item on it. Or do we do this through the various offices where they reside?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:19:18 · ≈ 10:19 AM

I think all the board has raised some really good points. CEO Waller and Mr. Geis if you guys could just look at this issue and see in what format it should come to address, I think all the issues that have been raised by my colleagues. I'm going to try to move us along we have quite a bit of items on our agenda. Next we have item A14 by Supervisor Farr and Supervisor Wolf.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:19:44 · ≈ 10:19 AM

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes I have a number of questions about this. First of all, I'm wondering what pot of money these franchise fees go into?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed1:20:00 · ≈ 10:20 AM

Chairman Carbajal, Supervisor Farr. These particular revenues are deposited to the general revenues account I think it's line item 3260 franchises and there are actually four franchise fees deposited into that line item. It's the two cable franchises and it's the franchises for the utilities both Pacific Gas and Electric in Southern California Edison.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:20:25 · ≈ 10:20 AM

Okay.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed1:20:26 · ≈ 10:20 AM

There's about $2 million a year

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:20:29 · ≈ 10:20 AM

OK, and so then does that then just fold into general fund revenues?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed1:20:35 · ≈ 10:20 AM

Correct. That is a portion of the general fund revenues just like the property taxes, the sales tax, transient occupancy

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:20:44 · ≈ 10:20 AM

tax. And we didn't have a copy of the actual agreement but I'm assuming based on page four of the report That it's based on a certain percentage of ad revenues or something because they're talking about. We got a lot more money in 2008 because it was an election year, so I'm assuming that we were going to get a lot more money in 2012 because that was also an election year

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed1:21:14 · ≈ 10:21 AM

Thank you. And then my last question for now is I think our current agreements. One is 10 years, and I think it was in... I just read it. Go ahead. I'll let Ms. Fletcher answer that question.

not transcribed≈26s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:22:01 · ≈ 10:22 AM

Thank you.

CommentHeather FletcherProposedself-stated1:22:02 · ≈ 10:22 AM

Good morning. My name's Heather Fletcher. I'm the audit manager for the county. Chair Carbajal, Supervisor Farr. It's my understanding that these contracts are moving over to state franchises through DIVCA So I don't have the time frame that the last one was renegotiated. They've been going on for quite a period of time, so...

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:22:25 · ≈ 10:22 AM

So are you saying that we're gonna lose the ability to negotiate with them and the state is gonna do that? Is that what you're saying?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:22:32 · ≈ 10:22 AM

State legislation perhaps.

CommentHeather FletcherProposedself-stated1:22:34 · ≈ 10:22 AM

Chair Carbajal, Supervisor Farr, they will be managed through the state under DIVCA through legislation. However, we will still continue to receive the 5%.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:22:48 · ≈ 10:22 AM

Okay, well you know actually this item has to do with your audit of course and the fact that there was really a significant amount of money that was owed us between the two different franchises. And I guess the thing that I'm concerned about is when I look on page five of the report it appears It's been a little bit of a football as far as which department is responsible. And that's why somehow the football got dropped and somebody wasn't following up, and then when the audit happened we realized that they owed us some more money. So this is perhaps more of a question for CEO Waller.

It says here that it was in general services, and then it's gone to the treasurer's office. It's been in the CEO's office. I'm just wondering who's Whose ball is it now and who's going to be responsible?

PresenterGwen StaufferProposed · by introduction1:23:43 · ≈ 10:23 AM

Chair, Supervisor, Auditor Geist and I had this discussion yesterday. This particular agreement it's my understanding is in the Treasurer Tax Collector right now but what our discussion was is that each of the four agreements we believe we should review to determine what the most appropriate department is and it was my intent over the next two to three weeks to have that discussion with auditor controller and some of my staff and department heads to figure out where they really should reside In perpetuity or at least maybe not perpetuity, but at least for the next several years.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:24:18 · ≈ 10:24 AM

Can we get an item in the future codifying what we've done on this so that it's set in policy as to where that That responsibility will be please.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed1:24:29 · ≈ 10:24 AM

Certainly. Chairman Carbajal and Supervisor Farr, if I could add to that. You know what happens sometimes is the collection of the check just kind of went down to the treasurer and that's where it gravitated but I think what we really want to assign to a department is the manage of the franchise agreement itself.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 17Proposed1:24:48 · ≈ 10:24 AM

Absolutely.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed1:24:49 · ≈ 10:24 AM

And it was in the CEO's office because they led And then it moved down to general services and then it was general services had a change and we moved it over to the treasurer just for collection of the check. And what really, really want to do is it's I want to put a little plug in here about the role of internal audit in this process. And I want to go to those two to 300 expenditures where we said, well what isn't auditor audit all 200 to 300 contracts? That really can't be our role. It really needs to go out to the responsible departments on the contract side. Same with these franchise agreements or the revenue side. The departments can manage those but then As a resource and we can do these comp more complex audits were now we have a a set of audit programs and guidelines for a department to pick up and go replicate what we did on an annual or periodic basis.

And so You know, these findings were really about the process between Cox and the county. You know, Cox has imperfect processes about how to do jurisdictional changes and who they're giving our money to. And we find this all the time on sales tax allocations too so I don't think...we're not trying to lay fault or blame or anything it's just improve the process and we can probably collect some more money for ourselves.

not transcribed≈19s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:26:30 · ≈ 10:26 AM

And I think that's the bottom line here. I mean, something that generates over $2 million a year now and I'm assuming is going to go up, I think we should have a department really tracking closely so that we make sure we're getting every dollar that's owed to us every year. Thank you Mr.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed1:26:44 · ≈ 10:26 AM

Chairman. And CEO Waller picked up a good thing when you get down to the PG&E in Southern Cal? franchises. Those are franchises for them running their utility lines underneath county roads, and they have to pay that franchise based on where they're opening up those roads and putting their utility line. So maybe you think well is that a better function for where the activity's happening in public works as opposed to, you know, the auditor's office? And so that's what we should consider in assigning the franchises out.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:27:16 · ≈ 10:27 AM

I think even expanding that, I think it's pretty much a given but I think you touched on something Mr. Geis and even though these are revenue Franchise contracts agreement. We have a bunch of contracts that we recently got a report on, the board did. But I can't recall if they were segregated by department but they should be segregated by department to remind that department head that's their responsibility to manage the performance of those contracts so whether we get that annually it kind of reminds the department heads that they need to, that's part of their management So I think that's just an excellent idea to remind department heads that it's their responsibility to manage all of their contracts, in this case franchise agreements and not depend on you to go in there and look at every single one.

It's up to them. Supervisor Wolf also had this item pulled?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed1:28:11 · ≈ 10:28 AM

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We had exchanged some emails yesterday and I appreciate the input. And Ms. Fletcher, thank you for your excellent work on this. Again, your department puts out very excellent reports. And this report I found just eye opening the fact that we were owed, the county was owed over $200,000. And I know that there were some adjustments made to that and Based upon what Cox appears to have said, and what I'd like to know from county council or from Mr. Geis is that am I to make the assumption then that we agree with the adjustments that were made by Cox?

not transcribed≈10s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed1:29:06 · ≈ 10:29 AM

Chairman Carbell, Supervisor Farr. Yes in our audit process we were working with Cox about hey these addresses were miscoded to the city and oh by the way they came back and said well we have city addresses miscoded to the counties and so you know in that reconciliation process they owed us money and then we owe them money because they're going to have to pay that back to the city And that's another key point to this. We're going to get ongoing revenue out of this deal on the miscorrection of those, you know where things were being paid and making sure that they get all our our revenue in there into

not transcribed≈17s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

1:30 – 1:3621 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed1:30:00 · ≈ 10:30 AM

Well, thank you Mr. Geis. You know regarding the whole issue of overseeing and management of this process I don't know if the departments and when we have this discussion they can tell us if they have the capabilities to do as an extensive audit as was done here. And would it be worthwhile to have Mr. Geis' office take over that responsibility for some departments that may not have that capability And that during budget time, we ensure that Mr. Geis has the personnel available to do that.

It's just a thought because it seems like you've got the processes in place and definitely a benefit. to the county. So thank you again for all of your work on this and I look forward to the much larger discussion on

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:30:54 · ≈ 10:30 AM

it. Mr. Geis is smiling because he sees the cost allocation formula for his department going up and all the other departments paying a little bit more than that. Chairman Carvalho,

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed1:31:03 · ≈ 10:31 AM

Supervisor Farr... You know we have to look at how effective rather than giving A task to a department that may not be as equipped as your department, we may need to shift resources. I'm not saying we have to, it's just something to look

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed1:31:20 · ≈ 10:31 AM

at. We do chase sales tax all the time as an ongoing program so we're misidentifying those all the time. We've accumulated over probably $5 million in misdirected sales tax because It's a deal we doesn't have a very good reporting process and so we're always change chasing those misdirections. I just want to put one more compliment out to Heather and her staff.

We started this process two years ago it took us that long Not to get the cooperation of Cox, but to get to the right people at Cox to give us the records that we could compare to our database to get these results. And so we really worked hard and I just want to say Heather and her staff were very persistent to start this audit and finish it. And we did have to contact county council a couple of times about access to records in helping us out. And sometimes those processes take a little bit longer but we got good results.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:32:20 · ≈ 10:32 AM

Great work, Heather. Way to be diligent. We will now move on. Thank you very much Mr. Geis. We will now move on to Supervisor Farhad item A-29.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair. You know this item was continued from several weeks ago and I indicated at that time my reasons for not being able to support it and asked the board to take a separate vote on it so that I could not support it. I still feel that way. I can't support a pipeline that is going to carry more water than what the court ordered out of our county. I think that the CEQA document doesn't match what the change in the project is, and the people of Nipomo don't seem to be supporting it in that they have voted down the bonds to support it now I understand are actually suing the district over the project so I would appreciate it Mr. Chair if we could take a separate vote on this item.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:33:22 · ≈ 10:33 AM

We'll do that

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.811:33:22 · ≈ 10:33 AM

shortly. Supervisor Lavanino? Well, I was just going to make the motion to move the item so we can take a vote on

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:33:30 · ≈ 10:33 AM

it. OK. You know, I wasn't too clear on this, on this item. It seems like something that despite some of the concerns at Supervisor Farr Outlined which caught my attention as well. It seemed like for the most part there were enough folks that coalesced around moving this forward and But yet I still have the same concern supervisor far has outlined I'm not really sure if If I feel comfortable voting on this in light of those issues, in terms of how I'm voting for it affirmatively. But-

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.811:34:19 · ≈ 10:34 AM

Can we get Mr. Faram to address any questions? Sure,

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:34:22 · ≈ 10:34 AM

but before we do that Supervisor Adam?

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:34:24 · ≈ 10:34 AM

Well, I've just been warned by my staff that I should at least say something to County Council. But I think we went through this last time and I am a party to an action that this issue doesn't affect so I think we got, we went through this last time Mr. Guzzone did we not?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 18Proposed1:34:51 · ≈ 10:34 AM

Chairman Carbajal, Supervisor Adam. I think you're referring to the question of whether you have a financial interest that would require you to recuse yourself. I believe you had already done that analysis and are familiar with the provisions of the Political Reform Act. Government Code section 1090 is not implicated here and really it's a question of whether you have a financial interest in the matter? Yeah.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:35:16 · ≈ 10:35 AM

Thank you. Mr. Fairman, could you help us out? Could you help me understand the water issue more than anything in terms of what Supervisor Farr touched on?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 19Proposed1:35:26 · ≈ 10:35 AM

Yes, Mr. Chair, members of the board, first of all for point of clarification, the action is a license agreement to allow Nopomo to cross our property had we not been a property owner in the way of the pipeline this issue wouldn't be in front of you. As for the other issues regarding Nopomo, Mr Lebrun is here may ask him to come up and better answer The questions that you might have. However, the City of Santa Maria and Napomo have agreed to this transfer and was monumented in a stipulation agreement that council would be better And so therefore we're simply had the request from the Pomo Community Services District to execute this license to do their project and that's what's before you today.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:36:12 · ≈ 10:36 AM

Thank you, you clarified something for me. The only thing that's of interest to me then having addressed the issue that Supervisor Farr raised that I'm okay with now Is the integrity of the levy that we worked so hard on to build. It seems that this is an engineering solution that we feel comfortable with, is that correct Mr. Payne? Mr.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 19Proposed1:36:32 · ≈ 10:36 AM

Chair, we would not be here if that were not the

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:36:34 · ≈ 10:36 AM

case. Thank you very much for reassuring me. I guess we're ready for a vote. Mr., roll call Mr.

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated1:36:45 · ≈ 10:36 AM

Allen. I had a motion but I didn't get the second.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:36:50 · ≈ 10:36 AM

Motion's been made. Is

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated1:36:51 · ≈ 10:36 AM

there a second?

1:36 – 1:5025 turns

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.811:36:55 · ≈ 10:36 AM

Can I second my own motion? I'll second

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:36:58 · ≈ 10:36 AM

Mr. Lavinino's motion, thank

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.811:37:01 · ≈ 10:37 AM

you.

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated1:37:02 · ≈ 10:37 AM

Mr. Adam? Abstain. Mr. Lavinino? Aye. Ms. Wolk? Aye. Ms Farr? No. Mr Carbajal? Aye Passes three with one abstention and one no vote

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:37:16 · ≈ 10:37 AM

Thank you. We will now

move on to item... Did we do 831 already, Mr. Ohm? I know but we're going to come back. We're going to come back to your items. We were just following Supervisor Farr as the... Did we do 830 one? No. Why don't we do 831 then we're gonna go back to Mr. Ohm. I have you as a next. Just trying to work off the first person named all of them. Then we're going to go. Okay, 831 from Supervisor Adam.

Still can you read it Mr. Clerk? Or what you think it is?

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated1:38:13 · ≈ 10:38 AM

No, this is item 8 if you would like. I've already read this into the record previously.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:38:17 · ≈ 10:38 AM

Okay so Supervisor Funn and Supervisor Adam.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:38:21 · ≈ 10:38 AM

Thank You Mr. Chair. I see Mr. Martin here and under Sheriff Peterson. I have to say when I saw this item it was kind of deja vu because we had a very similar item I don't know how many weeks ago not that long ago And I want to particularly hone in on page two where it talks about the fiscal impacts and the fiscal analysis. So, I don't know which one of you wants to come to the podium but Usually we're given some idea where the money is going to come from, and it's clear that this budget has already been quite exceeded by other unexpected repairs for other equipment.

And this is even that much more money and It may exceed it. It seems to me, it clearly does exceed your budget that's available and we're gonna find out sometime in the future whenever that is where the money's gonna come from. It says that an adjustment to the ASU budget with choices for funding will be considered by your board when we get closer to the end of the fiscal year.

Well, we are at the end of the fiscal year so where's the money gonna come from?

PresenterGwen StaufferProposed · by introduction1:39:44 · ≈ 10:39 AM

Chair Supervisor, the reason that it reads as it does. Every year the Sheriff's budget does have some funds or at least since I've been here has had a fund balance and what I requested was that they utilize completely their fund balance before they come forward and ask for additional funds so that's why it's sort of loose in the funding source we're hopeful The sheriff's budget will have adequate funds at year-end and if so, it will be utilized If not, I'll be coming to your board asking for funds very likely from contingency

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:40:18 · ≈ 10:40 AM

Well, I guess that I mean it seems fairly Unusual that we wouldn't have a better idea. But I think it also kind of makes the bigger question of the fact that the size of the air support unit and The condition of the equipment that you have seems to be needing a whole lot of work, and it's extremely expensive. And I know from the last time we talked about this type of an item that the sheriff said he would be coming forward with a budget expansion request to cover it.

I mean, are we doing a real critical assessment of all that? Maybe we just simply can't afford to have this many helicopters and a fixed wing. Not that we can't use them but...

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed1:41:10 · ≈ 10:41 AM

Good morning, Chair Carbajal, Supervisor Farr. You're correct. The aviation program is a very, very expensive program. The inventory that we have now is really the minimum requirements that we need for the program to be efficient as it's been recommended through the subcommittee and your board. We have two observation helicopters. We have three type 2 or heavy lift helicopters. And all of those helicopters are in various states of inservice, out-of-service inspections, what have you. So we can have the available assets available during any type of fire or law rescue mission.

Lately, we've certainly had some bad luck on some of the helicopters. Copter 3, our newest helicopter is in service. But that's the only Type 2 helicopter that we actually have in service right now. Copter 308, the helicopter that belongs to the Fire Department I did have some serious maintenance issues that we're in the middle of fixing right now. It's almost ready to be put back into service, probably within the next three or four weeks. We anticipate that to be back in service, especially during this time of year is when we really need it back in service during the fire season. And then Copter 4, we had an unusual engine issue with an overspeed. And that's what we're dealing with today in the board letter is to get that fixed. And that's really our number two helicopter in our fleet, with 308 kind of being the backup helicopter for firefighting and law enforcement and search-and-rescue missions.

So it really takes three of these type 2 helicopters to have two in service Any one time and that's really what the program calls for is two of those helicopters at any time. So if one copter is fighting a fire, then another search rescue call comes in the same time then we have that flexibility and that redundancy. And we certainly understand that it is a very expensive endeavor that we undertake here. And that was one of the reasons why we're looking at a budget expansion to possibly fund a maintenance type of fund that will take care of those unanticipated expenses when those come. Hopefully they don't, but if they do, at least we have a plan to fund it when those expenses come in.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:43:29 · ≈ 10:43 AM

Okay, so we're going to be having a much bigger discussion about this during budget.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed1:43:33 · ≈ 10:43 AM

Absolutely.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:43:34 · ≈ 10:43 AM

Yeah. Thank you. Thank

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed1:43:35 · ≈ 10:43 AM

you.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:43:36 · ≈ 10:43 AM

Supervisor Abboud? Yeah, Supervisor Farr your fears that this thing's gonna expand are correct. Lieutenant, I'm sorry. Under Sheriff Peterson and I had a conversation yesterday. You know, I totally support the program and I totally support all the people in it. I just think that we all need to understand A, the cost, the true cost and B, the safety factor in this.

I have a list of questions here that I could ask but I think I want to just try and cut to the chase. Are we operating under the rules that civilians operate under or are we operating on lesser standard?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed1:44:37 · ≈ 10:44 AM

Well, we certainly don't operate under lesser standards. You're talking about maintenance for our aircraft if I understand correctly? That's correct. We actually follow what's called the NATOPS standard that's the Naval Air Training and Operating Procedure Standardization for military, naval-military aircraft and that's what we have. The NAVAIR guidelines that deal with maintenance are under NATOPS And so that's the standard that we use for all the maintenance that we do. I share your concern and your principle, that safety is of paramount importance. We will not fly anything unless it's signed off correctly and has done all the correct maintenance and checklists and guidelines that are part of these standardizations.

We would never want to put anybody in any danger.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:45:26 · ≈ 10:45 AM

So this document that I sent you yesterday from Bell Helicopter That's got the list of maintenance items that you have to go through, which is very exhaustive. And see what my problem is I read your board letter here and what you're saying is the engine's going to get fixed and then we're gonna stick it back in the aircraft and fly it away. Is that my understanding that correct?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed1:45:59 · ≈ 10:45 AM

Chair Carbajal, Supervisor Adam. I would say the board letter is just the authorization to repair the engine After the engine gets repaired and sent back, it does get installed into Copter 4. We follow the guidelines to do the checklist for that overspeed issue. What you sent me was a lot of the guidelines that are similar to the aircraft that we have. What you sent me was a Bell 212 helicopter. We have a UH-1N which is a different type of checklist but a lot of the checklist tests are absolutely the

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:46:31 · ≈ 10:46 AM

same. So let's not trip over the little stuff. You've got to do a whole bunch more work. You're not just going to stick it in there and then fly it away. It's not like a car where if we blow an engine in our car, we just get a new engine or we fix that one and then we drive away. It is no big deal. We didn't implicate the transmission or the rear end or any of that stuff.

What we've done here to this helicopter, it is my understanding, is that we've implicated the entire drive train by over speeding and over torquing All that stuff. We could have stretched bolts, we could have overstressed the rotors, we could have done any number of things from the engine bolt directions to the rotors and back to the tail rotor and the whole drivetrain bolt directions And so what I'm saying about the true costs is it's not $89,000 to get the engine and put it back in.

You've got to disassemble the helicopter and then respec all the parts. And there may even become hour issues? That's correct right?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed1:47:51 · ≈ 10:47 AM

Chair Caldwell, Supervisor Adam. This was an overspeed issue in Copter 4 we don't believe it was an overtorque issue whatsoever that's a different much more critical issue the overspeed issue has certain guidelines and checklists after the engine gets put in that are checked out and actually some of those things are available to be checked out prior to the engine being installed Once the engine gets installed and our certified mechanic looks at it, or if we want to have a second mechanic from either down in Van Nuys or back from Alabama to assist with the engine install. All of those things get checked. It gets run up on the ground to make sure everything is within standards and safe before it goes up in the air.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:48:40 · ≈ 10:48 AM

Well, go ahead. If you could conclude Mr. Adam because Supervisor Wolf has one more item then I want us to move forward so... Well, okay. You know

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:48:50 · ≈ 10:48 AM

this is pretty critical stuff so towards that end A do we know there was not a torquing issue? And B, how much is the rest of it going to cost? Because really you've got to tell us what it's all going to cost. When you come back in a couple of weeks or two months with another request for funding to do the rest of the job, you're going to hear the same thing out of Supervisor Farr. You were just here and we just gave you some money to do something and now you're back again and now you're back again.

You know, what do we have to say to that?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed1:49:32 · ≈ 10:49 AM

Chair Carl Wallace, Supervisor Adam. Everything that happened on the issue was suggested it was an overspeed. It certainly wasn't overtorque. There was no collective pitch involved which would have obviously been much more stress on the airframe and the airship and all those parts. So everything we show is that it was an overspeed so we followed the guidelines for fixing the overspeed issue.

As it pertains to cost, the action for you today is to get the engine repaired. It gets installed. It will be another less than $15,000 to install the engine into the bird. And then we run up everything. Hopefully there aren't any other issues, but will certainly check on those issues and if it if there's going to be an added expense on any type of issue like your car or helicopter returning going

1:50 – 1:5518 turns

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:50:29 · ≈ 10:50 AM

We don't have to disassemble, under the standard that we use for that helicopter. We do not have to disassemble that thing and check all the parts and put it back together.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed1:50:42 · ≈ 10:50 AM

Chair Carvalho, Supervisor Adams. As you well know I'm not a helicopter mechanic from what I understand a lot of these inspections can be visual if there is something on the checklist that calls for a more thorough inspection we would certainly do that too and if that requires more financing to get that done we will certainly look at that and make that determination

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:51:07 · ≈ 10:51 AM

Thank You supervisor Wolf

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed1:51:10 · ≈ 10:51 AM

Thank you, Mr. Chair. You know I certainly understand the issues of the financial costs for the helicopters but I can't state enough the importance of having as you call them the birds ready and available and if they're not they need to be repaired, they need to be safe For our sheriffs or fighter fighters, and we need to have that redundancy That was part of what we were looking at in in combining the units You know it's it. It's apparent that we had some problems on both you know with some of the helicopters from from both sides The way I look at it right now is that we're Yes, we're spending the money, but we're getting our helicopters in top shape So that they're ready to fly and they're safe to fly.

We've had enough experiences in our own county, let alone looking at what was just going on in Ventura County when those copters were flying through the big plumes of smoke. I mean it's dangerous enough and if we're gonna have our folks flying on those, we wanna make sure that they're safe. And yes there might be this cost up front. But the cost of not having them available and up in the air when we need it, that's a bigger cost to us.

So I think we need to move forward. But since we're on the issue of helicopters and this topic, I just want to make the statement and maybe you can talk about it back with the air operations. And that is that we're still waiting for the, I wrote it down and I know this isn't the right term, the Operation Flight Manual When you folks came to talk to us a few months ago, I understood that it was going to be done, signed in three weeks. So it's been past that date and so it would be important that we get an update on how that's moving because we need to make sure that everyone is on the same page, so to speak, on the operations side. Thank you Mr. Chair.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:53:20 · ≈ 10:53 AM

Thank you. Unless there's something pressing, are we going to move on? You guys have really raised some really good points, appreciate that. We have Supervisor Adam now, A18 and A20 and that'll conclude our admin items. If I could just remind my colleagues and I include myself in what I'm going to tell you is that we took a lot of items out of the admin and really got into a lot of meat.

That luckily we have a lighter agenda today, so we're able to make up for that in the afternoon. But in future meetings obviously a day like today would really put us over. So to the extent that you can just ask some of your questions in advance including myself It helps us, but I'm not discouraging you from doing what we did today. Just a reminder that it's harder to manage the day.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:54:14 · ≈ 10:54 AM

Supervisor Allen? Well, I have a feeling that some of these things probably shouldn't have been on the admin calendar and so maybe that would help to put some of these bigger items that might draw some fire on the agenda and then we don't have to worry about it so much. Thank you, Mr. Adam. I

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:54:33 · ≈ 10:54 AM

think some of these are

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:54:34 · ≈ 10:54 AM

pretty

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:54:34 · ≈ 10:54 AM

similar- I've got

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:54:34 · ≈ 10:54 AM

three years until I'm chairman.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:54:36 · ≈ 10:54 AM

No, you do have three years to be chairman and you'll see that a lot of the items that we put on the admin are substantive nonetheless but it's a challenge trying to balance admin and departmental items so you do have three years, four years till your chair. You're getting ahead of yourself. But you'll have an opportunity to do this. Next item A18 and then A20.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:54:59 · ≈ 10:54 AM

That's

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:54:59 · ≈ 10:54 AM

me.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:55:01 · ≈ 10:55 AM

Thank

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:55:01 · ≈ 10:55 AM

you. Have we read a 18 to the record?

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated1:55:05 · ≈ 10:55 AM

Yeah, just for the record all the remaining items have been read into the record. Just a reminder also that there is a request to withdraw A-20 from the

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:55:13 · ≈ 10:55 AM

agenda. Okay Supervisor

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:55:14 · ≈ 10:55 AM

Adam, A-18? Okay I just had a couple of questions. CEO Waller maybe you can tell us unanticipated coastal resource enhancement fund. Is there such a thing? I thought CREF funds were pretty well known what they were going to be.

1:55 – 1:5810 turns

PresenterGwen StaufferProposed · by introduction1:55:37 · ≈ 10:55 AM

Chair, Supervisor, I apologize. I'm not sure which budget revision request you're referring to. I

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:55:43 · ≈ 10:55 AM

am on page 2 of 17, third item down. Parks?

PresenterGwen StaufferProposed · by introduction1:55:57 · ≈ 10:55 AM

Mr. Parker, if you can help us please? Chair

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 21Proposed1:55:58 · ≈ 10:55 AM

Carver, all members of the board, Supervisor Adam, these funds were appropriated for or these CREF funds are specifically for the Walter Capps Park site so we're using about $10,000 to install that fence or pay for the installation of a fence out at that area.

PresenterGwen StaufferProposed · by introduction1:56:16 · ≈ 10:56 AM

And it's my understanding that those funds had already been appropriated. However, they fell to fund balance last year and so you're simply asking to utilize those now?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 21Proposed1:56:26 · ≈ 10:56 AM

Utilize those funds. Okay, thank you

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:56:31 · ≈ 10:56 AM

And item 820, are you done with A18? Well no I've got one more here and I don't know how to do this. I really want to vote against this thing it makes me mad because we're asking for $40,000 to do a study to put A bike path on the Santa Maria levee. And as far as I know, the bike path on the Santa Maria levee is already at the top of the levee so I don't know why we would have to spend $40,000 bucks on this to create a study.

PresenterGwen StaufferProposed · by introduction1:57:06 · ≈ 10:57 AM

Mr. McAulpin, I believe that was your item?

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:57:11 · ≈ 10:57 AM

I would like $40k spent on pavement please.

CommentTony Baratoran SomebodyProposed · by introduction1:57:17 · ≈ 10:57 AM

Mr. Chair and Supervisor Adam, the $40,000 is for essentially a feasibility study in its alternative transportation funding that is earmarked for that specific purpose. This facility is one that has come to us from various bike groups in the Santa Maria Valley and the report itself will give us preliminary base maps and layout sheets and typical sections of what this bike path would look like It's approximately seven miles long.

It'll investigate potential right-of-way takes, access points to the path itself along the seven miles because certainly there could be potential emergencies out there with recreation users and commuters so we're going to have to figure out how to get I think he's talking about the

not transcribed≈23s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

1:58 – 2:0914 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:58:31 · ≈ 10:58 AM

Number 2768.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:58:32 · ≈ 10:58 AM

Yeah, 2768.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:58:34 · ≈ 10:58 AM

Do you want to take this separate to vote on it?

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:58:36 · ≈ 10:58 AM

Can we take a second?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:58:38 · ≈ 10:58 AM

Sure. Is there a motion to approve A18? Motion's been made.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:58:44 · ≈ 10:58 AM

Second.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:58:45 · ≈ 10:58 AM

Second. Roll call.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:58:53 · ≈ 10:58 AM

Motion's

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated1:58:53 · ≈ 10:58 AM

been made and seconded. Mr.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction1:58:55 · ≈ 10:58 AM

Adam? No.

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated1:58:56 · ≈ 10:58 AM

Mr Lavinino? Yes. As far as Mr. Carbajal,

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:59:02 · ≈ 10:59 AM

I 820 has been pulled so unless there's a dying comment to be made about that we are done with our administrative calendar and we are going to take a five minute not 10-5 guys because we got to come back and take on the rest of these issues long morning I'd like to reconvene our board meeting. And Mr. Clerk, I understand we need a motion or two are in order?

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated2:08:32 · ≈ 11:08 AM

Chairman Carbajal, we took action on items A-29 and A-18. We need a motion to approve the remainder of the admin items that were pulled that would include item A-13, 14, 20, 31, and 32. So again, a motion to approve that.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:08:48 · ≈ 11:08 AM

Is there a motion to do so? So moved. Motion's been made. Seconded. All those in favor? Aye. Passage unanimously. We will now move on to our departmental agenda. I voted aye. She voted aye. And we'll go on to item number one and that is, if you could read into the record Mr. Clerk and then Supervisor Lavinino will take it from there.

2:09 – 2:242 turns

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated2:09:15 · ≈ 11:09 AM

Chairman Carvajal, members of the board, Item A1 is from Supervisor Lavinino It's a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the contract with Santa Maria Fair Park.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.812:09:30 · ≈ 11:09 AM

Good afternoon, good morning. I'm here today to update the board on our veteran stand down that happened last October. What I need to do is recap what we were able to accomplish last year and I will seek your approval to move forward this year as we incorporate a few changes for 2013. There's no direct costs associated with this for the county but there is some employee time and some indirect costs so that's why I'm bringing this forward.

As a reminder, Stand Down is a national program established to provide a hand up to our veterans in need. By all accounts, our first attempt in Santa Barbara County was a success. We had to do some serious outreach. You see these beautiful signs? You probably saw them around the county. Steve Labard, an Orchid resident, strategically placed these around the county letting our homeless vets know about this event. This one here is at the Santa Maria Transit Center.

So we want to know who attended stand down. We had almost 230 vets were involved, almost 100 homeless vets attended. It's a great baseline for us. We hope to improve on those numbers this year. Two reasons why is one, we feel that the veterans that attended this year, you know, ran into a lot of cynicism among the veterans. And so one of the things that we wanted to do is, we're pretty sure that those left that attended this year will be going out into their community and letting folks know that it was a pretty cool event. And the other thing is, we're going to be partnering with Jeff Schaefer from C3H and hope that he's able to help us interface with some of those folks that are a little bit tougher to reach.

One of the things I thought was really interesting was who the ages of those that attended I think no surprise was the largest age group was our 51 to 60 year olds. A lot of that is a Vietnam era, but we had vets as young as 23 years old and unfortunately we had folks as old as 84 looking for services. So what happened at stand down? Well just about everything you can imagine.

We're going to be seeing some pictures of things that are coming up, but showers, haircuts, dental exams. All types of medical services were provided. Had access to over 60 service providers. The vets were given three meals and one of the things I think was really important is we just didn't give them things. We set up follow-up appointments, gave them bus tokens to be able to get to those appointments.

Clothing, shampoos, conditioners, deodorant, all types of things, DOD surplus property. And access to and from the facility. So one of the things that we tried to do, and I think this is one of the things that we did best was after probably 10 or 12 meetings leading up to this, we tried to anticipate every possible veteran need. Like I said, I think this was, this is here our opening ceremonies but this is probably the item where we did best.

The vets could shower at the facility. We had on-site showers. Here you see a veteran getting a haircut, these are all volunteer. We had different hairstylists and salons participating. This is one of the coolest areas to go out because you can really see a transformation. People came in looking a little Little scruffy. Yeah, and as they got cleaned up we saw some smiles start popping up. We had mobile units this one here is from CHC that provided health screenings. We also had Veteran Affairs were there doing PTSD counseling And we also had another CHC van that provided mobile dental care. Those that needed emergency dental care were then provided a shuttle and we had off-site dentists that were ready to accept any veterans that had emergency care.

We also provided a lot of clothing, New socks, new underwear. And we also had a lot of used clothing that was provided. Some of this is the used. One of the changes we're going to make next year is although we had a lot of hands and a lot of volunteers that were helping organize all this which is logistical nightmare. One of the things we're going to try to do next year is install racks as you'll see in a store where a veteran could just go immediately to the size and sex that they're looking for and be able to pick out their clothing that way.

We had just tons of folks, individuals that brought their own toiletries, shampoos, soaps, deodorants. We also had Direct Relief International participating in this area. One of my favorite stories is we had kids, teenagers that were spending their weekends going out and standing in front of local stores and asking folks as they went in could you buy a blanket or could you buy a towel? Or could you buy some toiletries to support our local veterans?

One of the areas that The county participated in, that was a big help to us, was Heather Gardner from Department of Social Services. Applied for a federal grant from the Department of Labor that we received for $7000. It specifically had to be spent on homeless veterans. The event was open to all veterans but we had to cordon off a special area. This is the area for homeless veterans. We spent the $7,000 on buying new shoes and And these are backpacks that were full of new toiletries and supplies.

We provided well animal checkups, microchipping and licensing for the pets. We had a lot of furry friends running around Santa Maria Fair Park. I think all of their messes were cleaned up afterwards. I didn't hear anything bad about that so but This was another area where folks that are homeless, the last thing they're going to spend money on is taking care of their animals. And so these dogs came in looking a little haggard and they left with smiles as well. We also made sure everybody was well fed. We started off with a pancake breakfast, had a sack lunch, provided three square meals and we ended the day with a Santa Maria style barbecue.

We also had over 60 service providers. And I know the printings a little bit small there, but I've got to give a shout out to another county employee from Department of Social Services, Frank Mejia. He organized all of these folks so that they knew exactly where they were going, where their unit was going to be established, what they were going to be providing and who is going to be helping them throughout the day.

So thanks to Frank on that. Another part of the county involvement was Alcohol Drug Mental Health Services. We see Amy Lopez there, she was instrumental in really helping us throughout the day. We had Department of Social Services there and we also had Child Support Services and I think we heard from Frank earlier, Frank Campo describing how instrumental that wasn't just getting somebody back on the job.

Our service providers, we've been meeting with them trying to figure out what we can do different. One of the things that they commented on was a lot of these folks have been in their own silo and they've been providing services and they really didn't connect with other people that maybe did the same thing or an ancillary item. And so during our meetings it was nice to see the collaboration and people working together. And I think at the end of the day it's really going to benefit The veteran were gonna be doing things a little bit smarter more efficient The community support obviously it would have been this could never happen without the volunteers that we saw.

These are you know, just people that showed up they didn't show up and take them back. It wasn't just where people showed up on the day of the event. We actually had volunteer training that people had to go through and this is another area we're going to approve a little bit next year. Just making sure we just don't do all of our volunteers with I also want to point out we had a 100 airmen and women from Vandenberg Air Force Base.

They were there all day long, and as a veteran would come through the gates, we would match them up with a guardian angel from Vandenberg. And that individual would then walk the homeless vet through The system making sure that they received every benefit that they were looking for. We had 50 kids from the Grizzly Academy that helped us along with the Conservation Corps set up and tear down the event, and that was a lot of help because those kids are big and strong and really helped out. So we had about 900 people who were instrumental in the whole event from start to finish.

We had everything from the medical teams from the greater Los Angeles area here they are from the VA. To the men and women of Vandenberg who spent their day assisting our vets. Now, I also have to say that as the veterans came through there were some veterans that you could see that we're going to be fun to hang out with the entire day. And there were others that eight hours would have been a little bit rough. It was just amazing to see our folks They kept the same attitude. I mean, they were positive throughout the whole time.

They were always engaged in conversation with them and it really made a big difference for our veterans. Also want to point out you know our donors. Here's Kathy Siemens from the Santa Barbara Foundation and they played a huge role in this we couldn't have done it without our private funds out there. We also had Entertainment, you recognize that's Judge Rogelio Flores and his band Class Action. I think Jim Voice is in there somewhere back on the base and it wouldn't happen without everybody that was involved.

Some of the suggestions we took away for changing 2013 was I got a little bit anxious and started a little bit early in the morning and it was freezing And I forgot that people were going to have to go out and pick up all of our veterans and bring them in. So the buses started almost, I think at 530 in the morning that morning. So we're going to move the start time a little bit back. The other thing is we had a lot of veterans show up at 9 o'clock, and they didn't really want to stay all the way through till 4. They basically got done what they needed to get, and they were ready to move on. So we're going to move the barbecue up to 1 o'clock and basically just do a pancake breakfast and a barbecue. We're going to have more than one bus run We're going to do two runs so we can get an afternoon squad as well.

And like I said, we're going to work with C3H to make sure we get out under the bridges and into the alleyways and find out where folks really are. There's a few other organizations that people have talked about that we need to get connected in. So our planning for 2013, we've already reconvened our executive committee. Director of the Santa Maria Fair Park. We've got a contract signed, well we've got a number established of the dollar amount that it's going to take this year. We are applying again for our federal state and community grants. Our federal grant is Department of Labor.

The federal representative was actually at our stand down event that granted us the $7000 and he was very surprised how organized it was and I think we're in pretty good shape for that next year, this The state, we received a thousand dollars from them. I'm counting on that again and again we're out organizing our service providers. We've also come up with a date already. We're going to be Saturday October 19th and as I said our rental fee has already been negotiated.

The cool thing about all of this was at the end we started receiving some letters and we put out some comment cards Some of them were very touching, especially the ones that brought families. I think that second bullet point where the mom said the kids and I were able to forget the not so great things happening in our lives and enjoy ourselves for the day. I didn't have to worry or want for anything for a whole day. That's priceless to me. It was pretty cool. And we followed up with a number of these folks. And like I said this just wasn't a one-day event. We've tied some of them into employment, housing.

Financial assistance and also got them involved with other nonprofits that they were unaware of that would be able to assist them in taking care of some of their biggest needs. Greatest satisfaction was here we've got a young veteran recently returned, and just to see the smiles on everybody's faces as they walked out. My screensaver for my computer is this.

It's two Vietnam era veterans, and I don't really think they could have carried much more out of there. As you can see they're pretty well loaded down those little bags we filled with supplies from Direct Relief International, the backpacks. We're Department of Labor surplus property as where those tote bags and they were completely full. And giving me the thumbs up there and the photographer, so we had a great time.

I also want to point out Sandy Agalos, who's in my office. She basically has headed this up and been the steamroller on any time we run into any problems along the way, which have been few and far between, I have to say. And so I want to congratulate her on the great job she did. And basically what I'm looking for is just our buy-in again this year. Art Relaford's here, great job Art thank you for being part of this and also Frank Campo as well.

Also want to give a big shout out to Heather Gardner without the $7000 Department of Labor grant which I don't know how to write she completely took it over And wrote a great package, and like I said they were very pleased with the results. That's it.

not transcribed≈13s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

2:24 – 2:2816 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:24:17 · ≈ 11:24 AM

Thank you. Supervisor Wolfe, and I believe we have a couple of... How many speakers do we have Mr. Allen? No request to speak on this item.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed2:24:26 · ≈ 11:24 AM

Supervisor Lavagnino, you have my buy-in and more. You and Sandy and your whole team have done an amazing job. And the fact that you're doing it again this year, I salute you Appreciate everything that you're doing for our vets. Thank you, and I look forward to being there again. August 18th is the day, huh? October 19th.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:24:56 · ≈ 11:24 AM

Supervisor Farley and Supervisor Adam.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:24:59 · ≈ 11:24 AM

Thank you, Mr Chair. And I'd like to echo Supervisor Wolf's comments. Supervisor Lavin, you know, I think that you and your team have done a sterling job with this very necessary but extremely complicated operation as we can see with so many different people involved. And I think as we'll see in the next item, when we get the statistics on the homeless death review that you may not only be changing people's lives for a day or for a few days but you may be literally saving their lives because when we look at the statistics for the greatest number of the age bracket that attended this it's also I think the same age bracket where we see the highest deaths so thank you again. I look forward to attending And onward and upward to really help our veterans in all the ways that we can.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:25:49 · ≈ 11:25 AM

Supervisor

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction2:25:49 · ≈ 11:25 AM

Adam? Well, I just wanted to say that you're so lucky that you have such a good staff because I know you couldn't have done that by yourself. Because I saw that office and it was chock full of stuff and there was no way that you could've moved it let alone kept track of all of it. So congratulations to the staff at Agalos.

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

Sandy, congratulations because we know Steve didn't do all the work. I think you did 90% of it but- 95. As elected officials we always get the credit so thank you so much for your good work. Supervisor Labadino? One last thing. Go ahead. I was just going to say as a vet, I'm very grateful for you going out of your way to do such a great event to serve those individuals that have put their lives in harm's way for our country.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.812:26:40 · ≈ 11:26 AM

Thank you. I also wanted to say we have contact my office because if you're interested in volunteering, our volunteer coordinator last year was Stephen DeRose. It was an intern for us. He was awesome and he's going to be coming back again this year There were so many county employees that participated. I don't want to start naming everybody because I'll forget some folks, but the whole county family really joined in and we really do appreciate everybody's support.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:27:12 · ≈ 11:27 AM

Great. Is there a motion to accept this report and affirm the items on the staff report? Motion's been

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:27:21 · ≈ 11:27 AM

made.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:27:22 · ≈ 11:27 AM

Seconded for discussion. Not having any, all those in favor?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:27:27 · ≈ 11:27 AM

And Mr. Chair I just wanted to clarify it's not just to receive the report but it is to approve this contract and the actions that are listed.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:27:35 · ≈ 11:27 AM

Yes.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.812:27:36 · ≈ 11:27 AM

Supervisor Laviniel? And we are paying for rent this year. I said that in the thing, but I just want the folks out there to know is the county is not paying for the rent it is all through private donations so it is costing us something this year but we're in fine financial shape. We've been fiscally responsible and were able to throw it again this year All

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:27:55 · ≈ 11:27 AM

those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Passes unanimously, congratulations on a job well done. A little bit of agenda management realistically we're only going to be able to take on number two next and we're gonna come back after lunch No sooner than 1.30 to deal with item number three, which is our Mental Health Services Act plan. So for those of you that are smiling for mental health here continue smiling it's the nature of our hearings but you can go to lunch early how's that?

If

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated2:28:28 · ≈ 11:28 AM

you could read item number two Mr. Allen. Chairman Carbajal members of the board Item 2 is from Public Health it's a hearing to consider recommendations regarding a report from the Homeless Death Review Team

2:28 – 2:453 turns

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

Thank you and Dr. Wada.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed2:28:42 · ≈ 11:28 AM

Chair Carbajal, members of the board. This item is on the agenda to provide your board with an update on homeless deaths in Santa Barbara County. The multidisciplinary Homeless Death Review Team was created in 2008 to review homeless deaths and their causes, explore means to avert similar deaths, and where available compile statistical data to identify trends. The report before you today will be looking at the years 2009 through 2011.

The issue of homelessness is extremely complex, but we believe there's been progress in the coordination of care and services. Targeting of resources and with the new county-wide C3H effort to provide leadership and structure as we work collectively to decrease the number of individuals experiencing homelessness. I want to publicly thank Dr. Lennon, Director of the Healthcare for the Homeless program and the primary author of the report. And I will now turn it over to him to present the findings. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed2:29:37 · ≈ 11:29 AM

Thank you, Dr. Wada. Chairman Carbajal, members of the board, thank you for allowing me to present this most important data on deaths among homeless persons in Santa Barbara County. As Dr. Wada stated, this report is the third that I've given since becoming the Director of Healthcare for the Homeless and it adds Deaths from calendar year 2011 from January 1st to December 31st, 2011. Most of the graphs and tables that you see in the report do have individual years as well as most of them also have the total for all three years.

So the Homeless Death Review Team meets quarterly and we discuss the deaths that we are able to collect from the various sources. We use the same techniques that we've used in the past, I refer you to report for specifics on that. These statistics are not only used to report on the deaths in Santa Barbara County, but also to make specific changes throughout the county.

Some of those changes that we've seen so far over the last three years is we're collaborating more and more, multi-agency collaboration to secure benefits. The new C3H initiative is in full force and they have a meeting coming up May 9th where people can participate in three locations throughout the county. We're seeing more facilitated referrals across county agencies, the multi-agency work group that we have bi-monthly is still going full force and we're trying to improve processes. We're expecting an awful lot from our patients. In very complex processes sometimes in order to obtain services. And we're trying to look at those processes and try to simplify them as much as possible, to enhance services and to allow more access to those services.

The Common Ground Santa Barbara group, we are still running identification of those at highest risks with a vulnerability index survey. And I'll talk more about that in a few minutes. But we're maintaining a comprehensive database over the last three years, we've collected a lot of information on the number of homeless in Santa Barbara County and specifically looking at those most vulnerable in order to get them housed as rapidly as we can. And I'm happy to report to you that over the last three years, we now have over 190. We just had another meeting Friday and two more folks were housed. So now we have over 190 people have been housed over the last three years due to this initiative of Common Ground Santa Barbara and this multidisciplinary agency work group that comes from families, over 40 families with individuals within those families, and then also chronically homeless individuals.

Next slide please. So the demographics, again I'll refer you to the tables within the report. Table one for specifics on the case selection for 2011 36 cases were reviewed and 30 were included that includes four decedents that actually died out of county Now the reason we included them in this particular calendar year was that as a group, we collectively decided that those four decedents were long-time Santa Barbara County residents. In the past, the decedents were unsure whether or not they really were residing in Santa Barbara County for a long time but these four were. So that's why you'll see sometimes when the graphs and tables refer to an end number, the total number For the death certificate or statistics that we take from the death certificates, we can't include those numbers because we don't have the death certificate.

So N would be 26 for those stats but for the other statistics, because most of those people did access county agencies all of them were public health department patients, we can include their statistics in that data so the end would be 30. So you can see here on the table, and there was a slight change in this table. And I think we handed you hard copies of this and we updated it where it says ethnicity.

That's Hispanic, the number of Hispanic ethnicity that was shown on the death certificates. That turns out to be about 23%. And then also the age at death was a slight change. For some reason, originally the age of death only reflected the female totals and we wanted to reflect all male and female totals so you can see there the average age for all three years is 53%. We're still seeing the majority of decedents Caucasian males 82.5% were Caucasian males 83% males 17% females And one of the things that we were looking at and very hopeful about is in all, we saw a 25% decrease in the death rate between when we started this in 2009 to now 2011. So that was, we were very excited about those and I'll talk to you more about that as well.

Manner of death, those statistics showed that the 39% were listed from natural causes. 31% were listed due to accidents including all types of accidents 2% undetermined 1% was suicide now this is all data for all three years so that suicide occurred in 2009 we have not seen any suicides for cause of death since 2009 But again, the death certificates are completed by the coroner's office and a lot of times the manner of death is not listed. For 2011 actually 42% of the death certificates did not list any manner of death which is the highest that we've seen for any year.

Cause of death, again substance abuse when you take combined alcohol and drug use For all three years, 41.5% as the main cause of death and again this includes illicit drug use and or alcohol. Cardiovascular related deaths 28.5%, leading cause in any single category is cardiovascular and all other causes were 30%. Again you can refer to the graphs and tables for more specifics on the different types of causes.

We're still seeing more deaths occurring indoors than outdoors, even taking into account that some of those deaths were reported as hospital deaths. Meaning that the patient was transported probably from a different location to the hospital but listed as being deceased indoors in a hospital. If you subtract out those percentages, still we're seeing more deaths indoors than outdoors.

Deaths are occurring fairly equally throughout the seasons except fall. For some reason, fall is only 16% where the others are ranging between 25 and 30%. Anecdotally I can tell you that fall is when we switch over from summer to winter shelters and perhaps just opening up those winter shelters and opening up more beds is helping reduce some of the deaths that we're seeing in the fall.

Health conditions, again here we're looking at all 30 for 2011 because they did receive services. The numbers here reflect all data for all three years. Burden of disease is still quite high, eight diseases per person which is quite high. Alcohol, again identified 71.3%. Cardiovascular disease 47.7%, illicit substance use 46%. We're still seeing high prevalence of mental health disease, over 40%. And of those diagnosed with a mental health condition, 37% of them are diagnosed with a serious mental health condition which would include PTSD, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder or bipolar disorder.

Alarmingly, we see again a very high incidence of dual diagnosis where 90% of those with mental health conditions are also being identified as using some form of substance abuse. Comorbidity remains high as well. We're still seeing a very high prevalence of violence and trauma when you have an additional diagnosis of either substance abuse or mental health.

So in summary, again we're seeing an overwhelming use of drugs and or alcohol as our primary cause of death taken collectively. Mental health conditions still present a large portion of the population. We're seeing those with alcohol and substance abuse still challenged in order to receive treatment services We desperately still need to look at how can we increase the number of resources, not only for acute treatment but also for recovery placement services. It's one thing that someone would volunteer or want to be into some form of acute treatment recovery, but there is nowhere for them to go. Very few places for them to go afterwards that they can Can work on the recovery in facilities where there's still monitored and they're still getting the help that they need.

So we need to look at those type of facilities especially, we need to look at more street outreach specifically for alcohol and drug type programs. One of the things that we found when we looked closely at the medical records was that two of the decedents in 2011 died within two weeks after being discharged from an inpatient psychiatric facility. So, within two weeks after they had been 30 days or more in a psychiatric facility, they were dead on the streets. We need more outreach. We need better outreach to follow up for these folks to continue helping them after they've been inpatients or receiving treatment already.

This year for the first time, we're publishing an estimate of the total number of homeless. We believe a reasonable estimate that are in Santa Barbara County. There are three agencies that are actually geared to be able to present statistics on the total number of homeless. HUD does the point-in-time count biannually and they've had two counts now since I've been here The most recent one in January of 2012.

Point-in time counts are great for a quick snapshot statistic, but the general thinking is that they grossly underestimate the number of homeless in their community. Obviously they do this over a period of one to two days, it's time constraint And also, you're basically going on the streets very early in the morning. You're not really knocking on people's doors where you find a lot of people that are doubled up or living in single room occupancy type situations like in hotel rooms or other situations that you won't necessarily find people without really looking for them. So the point in time count for this last year was pretty much, I think they're publishing figures for about 1800 people that they counted. That I think grossly underestimates the number of homeless in the county.

Common Ground Santa Barbara with their database because it's more of a long-term commitment we've been doing this over three years not only do we partner with HUD to do the point in time counts but we also Do additional projects like Project Healthy Neighbors. We do surveys there, and they also do street outreach to provide surveys to people that have never been surveyed previously. But even accounting for taking out the exclusions because this database includes people that have been housed, people that are deceased, people that have moved out of the area. If you exclude all of those people, it still only comes up with about 3100 people. Again we don't think that this counts very well the people that are in doubled up or in SRO type situations.

So public health, because we're the federal grant holder for healthcare for the homeless. We can collect data on specific unique encounters with a homeless population and so looking at the last three years or 2009 to 2011 data We took an average number of those visits, and the reasonable estimate we're giving is 5200. About 5200, we believe homeless in Santa Barbara County. Now you're never going to be 100% accurate. You're never going to find everybody that's experiencing homelessness. Some people don't.

You know not everyone that is homeless in a double up situation accesses health care so we are going to miss a few but this is our reasonable reasonable us effort. Publish a standardized mortality rate and using. Numbers from our epidemiology department and from health care for the homeless we find the SMR is one point one seven which gives a 17 percent higher mortality rate for homeless persons than experience in the general population but the exciting news again is that for 2011 we saw a 25 percent decrease over the last two years After alcohol, cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death. We're seeing people that have serious medical conditions not just cardiovascular conditions throughout the gamut just like you see in the general population.

These people need extra help as well. We still need to look at better outreach. Again refer to Table 8 for more statistics on the type of conditions. We're trying to expand the role of Doctors Without Walls. Wonderful organization, they go out on the streets into the parks. They're serving the community's homeless population probably doing outreach better than any other organization in the county. We need to expand their role and we are now talking Through them, with Indian Health Services trying to desperately get this clinic on wheels in operation. I know I keep saying this every single year but we are desperately trying to get this clinic on wheels with Indian Health Services. Now Doctors Without Wall is going to take the lead and help try to get this throughout the county to provide extra outreach services.

We're still seeing homeless persons being discharged on the streets after hospitalization, acute hospitalization. This is not conducive to recovery. They basically give them their pills, give them a bandage and send them out on the street. There's not enough beds, respite care beds or facilities that will accept homeless patients. We need to look at this and really try and improve on the number of respite care facilities in beds.

And of course, in conclusion access to housing is paramount to promoting health and preventing deaths. Again the multi-agency work group C3H we are making progress more than 190 persons are now housed. I can't give you specific statistics on that yes, we made the difference over the last three years in decreasing the death rate. The veterans stand down, organizations like the VA and events like that all working together multi-agency. We have to all work together in order to improve not only services but get people housed. I think if we continue on doing what we're doing only do it better. We'll see the death rate drop further. We'll see services improve and we'll see Santa Barbara County a better place to live for all of us. Thank you.

not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

2:45 – 2:519 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:45:53 · ≈ 11:45 AM

We have how many speakers, Mr. Allen? Three? Three requests to speak. We're going to go to the public and

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated2:45:58 · ≈ 11:45 AM

then

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:45:58 · ≈ 11:45 AM

we're going to bring it back to the

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated2:45:59 · ≈ 11:45 AM

board. We'll start in Santa Maria with Mr. Caldwell and come back to Santa Barbara for Mauna Leone.

PresenterAndy CaldwellCOLABProposedself-stated2:46:09 · ≈ 11:46 AM

Chairman Carbajal, members of the Board, I'm Andy Caldwell representing COLAB. I find it interesting that this item came right after the veteran program, the stand down that Supervisor Lavinino and his staff facilitated which we applaud. The bottom line here is that you could read this report and say well you have a bunch of people out there who are alcoholics They're drug addicts, they're suffering from mental illness and refuse to take their meds.

And you could ask yourself, well how many other people in our society have some of those same problems. But they're still functioning in society and an issue here the issue that nobody ever wants to talk about is to what degree is homelessness a choice? To what degree is it a choice? How many of these people would have a home if they would quit drinking, quit doing drugs and would be willing to take their meds.

And can the County of Santa Barbara really fix this problem? Do you really have the staff and the resources and the miracle touch to solve this problem? And or should we be focusing on people that want to be helped, are willing to be helped and can be helped because they're willing. There's an age old maxim in our society that you can't help people who are not willing to help themselves.

And God knows in this economy, there are a lot of people out there through absolutely no fault of their own. Through no fault of poor choices or poor life decisions are in desperate need of help. But we don't have reports on them. We don't have committees. We don't have task forces on those people. Those people don't get any attention. They fall through the cracks, and once a year we'll have a program like Stand Down that might help some of them.

But there's a lot of people that are shacking up with relatives or friends who are living in basements because they can't find a job and they're willing to work. They don't take drugs. They're not alcoholics. And if they're suffering from mental illness, they take their meds. And the point here is year after year we're spending millions of dollars on the same population of people, some of whom are choosing their lifestyle.

And I think you need to take a step back and look at our priorities. Thank you.

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated2:49:26 · ≈ 11:49 AM

Is

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:49:26 · ≈ 11:49 AM

there

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated2:49:27 · ≈ 11:49 AM

anybody else? Then Debbie McCoy.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 22Proposed2:49:42 · ≈ 11:49 AM

Good morning, everyone. I'll make this brief because I suspect you all are hungry. Anyway, I am here on behalf of Families Act and our executive director Suzanne Riordan. I cannot say enough about our position on needing more beds for treatment and for residential treatment. If you look at the article that was in The Independent just a few weeks ago, it talks about how there is no vacancy for treatment. And when there's no vacancy for treatment they stay on the street or they go to the de facto treatment center, the jail.

And right now, that's where we're treating most of the people with mental illness. Unfortunate? Very much so. Also I would say that as soon as they're finished with being in treatment if they were lucky enough to get a bed then they're right there is no bed. There's no bed to be had for recovery from mental illness. There's no recovery from Mental illness because there's no place, no place to help them. And with the majority of them being dual diagnosed in our homeless population as we just saw, the majority need dual diagnosis treatment and right now, as we stand here today, there are six, six beds for dual diagnosis treatment in our county And I know, I've looked. My daughter needs one. She had it for a while but it wasn't enough support because mostly that model was a social model and not really emphasizing much help for her mental illness.

I can only beg you to provide support when Families Act comes forward. We are currently working on a collaborative Thank you. Dr. Lennon and Dr. Wada, does that conclude our public comment?

not transcribed≈13s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

2:52 – 2:5911 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:52:08 · ≈ 11:52 AM

Thank you very much for this report. Obviously when this issue came up years ago, you've taken it on and with Dr. Lennon have really I think done a very good job of staying on top of this issue and moving it forward and making sure we're providing a better understanding of why we were having certain debts and why we're having And continue to have certain deaths amongst the homeless.

Before I go, my colleagues, I don't see any lights on so I'm gonna go ahead and jump in on four things that are of interest on this issue. One is, I know we're gonna have our mental health restructuring report, a consultant report in the future but it would really be great to understand the whole issue that has come up year and year again about This bed issue. How many beds do we have? Why don't we have more? Can we have more? Irrespective of what the consultant has to say, that issue I think has to be addressed so that we all understand it better. It's a never ending issue that comes up.

Why don't we have more? Could we have more? What are the challenges? Another issue is...it seems that Santa Barbara County does not have any inpatient substance abuse beds, and yet we have a drug and alcohol division. And I once when I was less gray and a lot younger used to work in the drug and alcohol division, and this issue has been around for 20-30 years, and I for the life of me cannot understand why we can't handle that challenge?

Other areas have it, don't have it. What is it with Santa Barbara County that we can't get more substance abuse inpatient beds? So at some point I want to understand that whether it's part of that report or today and the other two issues that have come up that again I just want to understand Dr. Lennon you mentioned that we had two deaths after they checked out of cottage or our carriage unit Don't we already have outreach? Don't we already have some case managers?

Where did the system that we have now, let alone whether we need more. Where does the system that we have now fail those two individuals? Did we not track them, follow up? Did we but they didn't want anything to do with us? What happened with those individuals? Did you identify how maybe we failed, the system failed them?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed2:54:46 · ≈ 11:54 AM

I can tell you one of the individuals was my patient, so it really affected me. Severely, when this happened. And I can tell you that my public health nurse, Iva Larkin and I were actively trying to locate this patient after she was discharged, trying to outreach to her. You have a very short window, brief window of having these people access care. This lady was schizophrenic bipolar on the streets and in contrast to what the speaker said She didn't refuse to take her meds. Once she received treatment, she took her meds and she was getting better and she was looking forward to being housed after she had been released from the hospital. However, she also had substance abuse problems and that was not specifically addressed when she was in a patient for her psychiatric illness.

They can address both at the same time so she disappeared. We couldn't find her and the same thing happened with the other gentlemen. You just simply can't find them once you release them And you tell them they have follow-up, they don't show up anymore. So Dr.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:55:54 · ≈ 11:55 AM

Levin do

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed2:55:54 · ≈ 11:55 AM

you think

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:55:55 · ≈ 11:55 AM

we might be able to develop a better discharge point of contact system with Cottage where we're in the loop? We can at least take that half hour to interface where are you going to go and maybe it might help us in the future. I'm just kind of playing common

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed2:56:10 · ≈ 11:56 AM

sense. We definitely are recommending that at least through the psychiatric inpatient units they look at the whole process of discharges and then the follow-up care That they're trying to provide. You can't just hand somebody a slip say you got your appointment in two weeks, come back. So

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:56:25 · ≈ 11:56 AM

next time this report comes to us could we have an update as to what discussions took place and how we address that issue? And protocols put in place or what have you?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed2:56:33 · ≈ 11:56 AM

Absolutely.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:56:33 · ≈ 11:56 AM

In the last issue before we go to my colleague who just turned on his light dual diagnosis for the life of me as well having worked for drug and alcohol for a long time ago should I say One of the reasons drug and alcohol division is now where it's at in the mental health department was for a number of reasons. But one of the main reasons was that we were going to have a better, um, a better outcome hopefully as a result of integrating substance abuse with mental health treatment to deal with dual diagnosis and co-occurring diseases. And again, At some point, I want to understand what our dual diagnosis services are. How does drug and alcohol division in our mental health services interface? Are they working well, not working well?

Because I hear so much from our constituents, individuals that are being served by our system. And what I've gathered from what they've said is that it's not even anywhere near a satisfactory level of integration and service. By those two arms, mental health and the drug and alcohol division. So again what are our dual diagnosis services? How are we integrating drug and alcohol because it seems that we really have not maximized our effectiveness. So again whether you address it today or in the future I would like those addressed. And then we'll go to Supervisor Adams. Yes Dr. Water.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed2:58:08 · ≈ 11:58 AM

Chair Carbajal, members of the board. The issues that you raised are certainly important. I believe many of them will be answered with the consultant reports that will be coming forward on May 21st. I can say with the bed issue and inpatient substance abuse There have been a number of efforts recently trying to address these issues. I know Supervisor Lavagnino has been participating with Marion Hospital and ADMHS on a partnership using their old facility, Lompoc Hospital also has some plans for their old facility.

We've had some preliminary discussions with San Luis Obispo about partnerships so there are a number of activities ongoing to try to look at this bed issue. And on the issue of dual diagnosis and integration with mental health and substance abuse, and I should also add primary care. This is something that will be discussed as part of the consultant reports. It's an area that we do certainly feel we need to improve on and I think there are great opportunities with the Affordable Care Act for us to better integrate these services as we go forward.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:59:14 · ≈ 11:59 AM

Thank you, Supervisor Adam and then Supervisor Farr.

2:59 – 3:0713 turns

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction2:59:22 · ≈ 11:59 AM

I'm listening to this whole thing and we do have limited resources. You know, maybe the Affordable Care Act is just going to open the floodgates of money and it'll just be wonderful. I just can't hardly believe that. And so you know there's...I think there's gonna be people that we can't help much as we want to. There's gonna be people that we can't help and I think that we have to take a realistic view of that because you know there's certain individuals as sad as they are They're going to perish.

You know, they don't have the capacity to take care of themselves and we don't have the capacity to take care of them either and try as we might you know that's just a fact You know, we had a speaker earlier today that said we don't need a revenue stream. I guess that was his point. He's very concerned about the new bumper sticker that somebody is putting out apparently that says revenue stream is all important. Well, I think it is all important. Here's the deal right here. Do you have enough money to help an extra person?

Where does the money come from? comes from revenue stream, I think. There's a lot of this that state and federal mandated money that we get but is... For instance did this report come from general fund or did this report come from state and federal revenues?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed3:01:07 · ≈ 12:01 PM

Chair Carbajal, Supervisor Adam. The report is generated by staff and with partner entities that donate their time to participate on the report and the analysis of the data.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction3:01:19 · ≈ 12:01 PM

Okay so is that likely to have come from I mean I'm realizing you might not have the answer to that exactly but is that more likely to have come from state and federal money or more likely to have come from general fund?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed3:01:35 · ≈ 12:01 PM

Chair Carbajal, Supervisor Adam. It's state and federal funding that supports those positions so there is no general fund.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction3:01:42 · ≈ 12:01 PM

Okay so in any case it doesn't make any difference where the money came from it didn't just fall out of the sky on your office doorstep it came from some revenue somewhere and so you got to go I'm going to sound like a broken record You've got to let somebody create some wealth from which to tax them. And when the taxes come into either the local, state or federal government it gets pushed back into something that people care about. So I see you guys care a lot about your people that you're supposed to be helping and you don't have the resources to do all you want to do.

And so we're either going to have to adjust our expectations at some point, or we're gonna have to create some more revenue. And that involves unfortunately some wealth creation. So with that I'll turn it

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:02:38 · ≈ 12:02 PM

back. Thank you Mr. Adam. Supervisor Farr?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed3:02:42 · ≈ 12:02 PM

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Well thank you Dr. Wah and Dr. Lennon for another excellent report. Certainly our thanks to the whole team which is this wonderful collaboration between various county departments and our community collaborators. Supervisor Carbajal I really appreciate your comments and your questions. I think one of my frustrations is that we get a lot of data from time to time And a lot of concerns about issues and gaps in the system. But at some point, I'm hoping this can all coalesce into how many respite beds do we need? How many more puff beds do we need? What is the cost of that versus the cost of sending people out of county for mental health treatment?

What are our options? How do we quantify this and then bring that back to whatever county resources we have in the way of buildings, locations, staffing, funding. And just kind of get to the heart of trying to really find answers for a lot of these questions. Chronic problems that we've had. I think that county government can't do it all, and I think that's why this multi-agency collaboration C3H which is bringing together the faith community, philanthropic community, everybody that's concerned about the homeless is really, really important. And I do think that we're starting to see some positive effects already.

Housing 190 people may not seem like that much if we're talking about 3 to 5,000 homeless. On the other hand, if you were one of those 190 people, you would be really, really happy and certainly will have extended their life. You know, showing a 25% decrease. I think that's huge and I think that I would like to credit the fact that it's not a coincidence that this effort has started several years ago and everybody is working together and we have wonderful programs like Stand Down that we haven't had in the past and all of these other collaborative efforts. So I know that we have a lot more And whether we're talking again about quantifying the need for a mobile clinic to assist Doctors Without Walls. We saw pictures earlier of the community health centers that come down, they have a mobile medical clinic, a mobile dental clinic that came to the veteran stand-down.

We need to explore these kinds of options either working with them or partners in our county to do that. So thank you again, a particular thanks to Dr. Lennon. Dr. Lennon and I hear over and over again about how your passion to help the homeless leads you to volunteer so much of your own time and effort outside of work. So thank you for that. Thank you Mr. Chair.

not transcribed≈7s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:05:47 · ≈ 12:05 PM

Supervisor Wolf.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed3:05:49 · ≈ 12:05 PM

Thank you, Mr Chair and thank you for your excellent report. I as always appreciate your work. A supervisor far noted. A 25% decrease in death rate is very positive. One thing I want, when we get these reports it's good for me to try and relate it to our policies and our budget decisions. And some of that was brought up as far as beds go and so forth but I think I recall, and I don't have it with me that there was a recommendation that we might eliminate the funding for warming shelters. Am I correct in that? CEO Waller?

PresenterGwen StaufferProposed · by introduction3:06:40 · ≈ 12:06 PM

Chair, Supervisor, if I recall correctly your board approved $45,000 for warming shelters with one-time funds last year and that'll be coming before your board as part of the budget this year with the same request.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed3:06:56 · ≈ 12:06 PM

To keep it a status quo not to eliminate it.

PresenterGwen StaufferProposed · by introduction3:07:02 · ≈ 12:07 PM

Because your board funded it with one time. It'll be a policy decision for your board It'll come as a budget expansion for your consideration

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed3:07:09 · ≈ 12:07 PM

Okay, so thank you CEO Waller So as that as a policy budget decision Can you tell me the I am going to make the assumption? That the warming shelters have been an asset and For the entire for the homeless population and And perhaps contributed to the reduction of the homeless deaths. Because actually, one of the reasons we started that was because there was that time when we were seeing folks during inclement weather who were dying on the streets.

But can you just address that as it relates to a policy decision or budget decision?

3:07 – 3:157 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed3:07:58 · ≈ 12:07 PM

Mister chair members of the board as I said, I can't give you any statistics because we haven't studied that. But I can tell you anecdotally that anytime they provide shelter for someone in an inclement weather it certainly is going to enhance their ability to survive and I'm also thinking that the warming shelters are Probably providing that necessary shelter during our periods of extreme weather. We did have two deaths overall from hypothermia over the last three years, so although it's a low statistic, it is happening. So to be able to get people off the streets into shelters whether it's warming shelter, an emergency shelter or transitional shelter At least some type of shelter is going to provide them at least that benefit to be able to survive during that period of time.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed3:08:50 · ≈ 12:08 PM

Okay, well thank you for that. You know as I said we're seeing us move in a positive direction and so I think as we make our policy decisions we don't want to go backwards. What you know I had asked public health to provide me because I was just to provide me with numbers as it relates to the general population, the number of deaths versus the homeless population. And there was some interesting information that came from that so for over the same period of time there was 2,836 deaths to the population and over the same period of time there was an average of 35.

The death rates, the percentage of death rates between the homeless population and I will say the regular population is pretty much the same except when you get to the deaths due to accidents which for the normal population is 5% and the homeless population is 33%. And you touched on accidents in your PowerPoint, but can you elaborate on that? What does that mean? Just give me some examples of what accidents refers to because it's so significant.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed3:10:20 · ≈ 12:10 PM

Mr. Chair, members of the board, if you look at the tables in the various death reports it does give you the specific causes of death and some of them are specifically listed as accidents. Now accident is a broad category. It could mean someone was hit by a car, by a train, they fell down steps and died due to that type of an accident With the accidental overdoses, most of the time those are listed as illicit drug or substance abuse type deaths. So accidents I think refers more to trauma than it does specifically alcohol intoxication or illicit drug use. But yes you're right there seems to be a higher prevalence of cause of death being from accidents in the homeless population.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed3:11:11 · ≈ 12:11 PM

Okay, well thanks for that explanation. And then just my final point that I thought this was interesting to note and that is the deaths due to suicide were greater. The percentage was greater in the normal population as opposed to the homeless population. Just as a sidebar to some of the issues that we've been talking about with beds and so forth. What it seems at least anecdotally, and then I see it here is that the amount of suicide is rising.

And it would I'm not going to burden anybody with a request to do any more studies. And maybe this is all related to other issues, but it certainly seems to me that you know the adolescent age from like 18 Or maybe young adult from 18 to 24 that and in males in particular, that there's a higher rate of suicide. And it just seems to be so prevalent in our community and I'm not sure how Relates to any of these other co-occurring disorders, mental illness. I mean obviously there is something going on but it just seems like it's going up and it's one of those areas that is higher, that looks like it's a lot in the regular population.

And at some point Dr. Wada And maybe it's going to come out through some of these other reports, is to get a handle on that and what we can do in mental health services to help prevent that. To make sure that we get the services out to that potential population. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

not transcribed≈7s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:13:07 · ≈ 12:13 PM

Thank you. Just the last observation I have is Dr. Landau, you mentioned that mobile unit. Dr. Wada will remember since the first day he's come here and many years before that a number of constituents brought that concept to my attention and I did...I have brought it to our executives healthcare public health and mental health as to How could we use that vehicle? And for a long time I was told it's really not conducive, cost effective regulation wise.

I'm pleasantly surprised that again we're going back to that possibility. And is it because we're exploring new funding, a new paradigm? Why is it that back then it wasn't viable and now we're enlightened and it is more viable? If you could explain that to me, that would be great.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed3:14:05 · ≈ 12:14 PM

Chair Carbajal, members of the board. There have been some changes related to our thinking about how we would operationalize a clinic on wheels. So in the past we were thinking of it as a county operation that we would bill off of it and then we would be licensed through the county with county staff. In exploring whether or not this was feasible they created a number of challenges that made it very difficult for this to be a county led operation which is why We've turned to instead partner with American Indian and Doctors Without Walls as the lead agencies. And we've explored philanthropic funding as a startup for such an operation, and then with the Affordable Care Act coming in 2014 there could be opportunities because a lot of the individuals that would be served through this effort Would then have at least Medi-Cal and that would be an opportunity for us to revisit whether or not it would be cost effective to bill and sustain this effort.

So there are a number of different reasons why the landscape has changed a little bit, but make it a little more feasible now.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:15:07 · ≈ 12:15 PM

Great. The gentleman that brought this to my attention really pressed us a lot was Mr Rick Feldman. I would appreciate if somebody could get back to him and bring him into the fold And perhaps give him an update as to what we're doing now because he was instrumental in absolutely pushing this concept. So I'm glad to hear that maybe things have ripened now where we are able to take advantage of that resource.

Having one more public speaker, is there a motion to accept this report? Motion has been made. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Abstentions? Passes unanimously, we will be back at two o'clock We will recess to our closed session Mr. Marshall do you have anything else to report other than what you reported earlier?

3:15 – 5:112 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 23Proposed3:15:52 · ≈ 12:15 PM

No nothing else to report

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:15:53 · ≈ 12:15 PM

Great! We're going to close session right now and we will be back at two o'clock to continue with the rest of our agenda th

5:12 – 5:145 turns

GuestAdamsProposed · by introduction5:12:04 · ≈ 2:12 PM

th th th

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:12:32 · ≈ 2:12 PM

I hear her. She's coming. And we're on item... Welcome back everyone. I want to reconvene our board meeting and we're going to item number three. Mr. Clerk, if you could read the item please? Supervisor Carbajal, maybe a report from closed session? Yes. Mr Marshall could you report please?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 23Proposed5:13:28 · ≈ 2:13 PM

Thank you Mr. Chairman, today's closed session you had you completed all your noticed items you have one item to report and your board unanimously directed County Council to initiate litigation against performance bond company Arch A RCH to compel performance of the landscaping and grading conditions in the Mesa Verde subdivision. And there's another item to report that's a follow-up On April 2nd, 2013 we reported from closed session that by a vote of 5-0 the Board of Supervisors authorized the Chair to execute negotiated settlement agreements with all cities in the county to resolve the property tax administration fee Dispute decided in the California Supreme Court in the city of Alhambra v. County of Los Angeles.

At that time, we indicated that the settlement agreements would not be final until formally executed by the city. Each city has now formally executed the agreement and the county paid a toll of $3.192 million to settle this dispute. Thank you Mr. Chairman

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:14:40 · ≈ 2:14 PM

Thank you, Mr. Marshall. We will now go to item number three. Mr. Clerk if you could read the item

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated5:14:44 · ≈ 2:14 PM

please? Chairman Carball and members of the board, Item 3 is from Alcohol Drug and Mental Health Services. It's a hearing to approve the Mental Health Services Act plan update for fiscal year 2012-13. Thank

5:14 – 5:208 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:14:56 · ≈ 2:14 PM

you very much. Dr. Wada?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed5:14:58 · ≈ 2:14 PM

Thank you Chair Carbajal, members of the board. This next item is from the Department of Alcohol, Drug and Mental Health Services and is an update on our mental health services plan activities for fiscal year 12-13. With me today are Refugio Cuco Rodriguez and Michael Evans. This is my first D item as interim director of ADMHS, and I wanted to say publicly that I really enjoy working with the staff and the partner agencies learning about the programs. There are certainly challenges in areas for improvement, and you'll hear about these when the consultants present their findings in two weeks. But there are many incredible programs, passionate staff working with some of the most vulnerable populations advancing our mission to prevent and treat behavioral health issues.

And you'll hear a little bit about these programs today.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:15:46 · ≈ 2:15 PM

Dr. Wada, before you go it's no surprise why you are the interim director of ADMHS. Obviously our entire board feels that you are a very able and competent executive and somebody who has demonstrated and distinguished himself in public health and now are shepherding this transition and restructuring of this department so thank you for doing that and appreciate your service.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed5:16:13 · ≈ 2:16 PM

Thank you for the opportunity. So what is MHSA? In November of 2004, the voters of California approved Proposition 63 which became known as a Mental Health Services Act. Revenues from a 1% tax on incomes exceeding $1 million are used to expand mental health care for children, youth, adults and seniors throughout the county. The amount the county receives each year fluctuates from a low of about $4 million in the first few years of the program for planning and pre-implementation to a high of almost $18 million. Because this amount is based on incomes, it can often fluctuate and vary depending on the economy.

Sometimes the state releases one time funds into reserves or changes the tax codes. All these things can influence the amount the county actually receives in a given year. So the recommended action before you today is approval of the MHSA fiscal year 12-13 plan update. The plan has been approved by the Mental Health Commission and has undergone an extensive stakeholder process in 30 day public comment period. There are no major changes made to the plan except for a recommendation to extend innovation funding for one more year, which will be discussed a little bit later in our presentation.

So prior to 2011, the California Department of Mental Health required that counties receiving MHSA funding submit an annual MHSA three-year program and expenditure plan. Last year AB 1467 further amended the process for the plan and annual update adoption by adding new Board of Supervisors certification requirements. And this is a change in an attempt to shift the process locally. Again, the plan has been reviewed by stakeholders and approved by the Mental Health Commission.

With that I'm going to turn it now over to the lead on our MSHA program to Kuko who will talk a little bit about the guiding principles and some of the actual programs funded through MHSA.

CommentSam PalinProposed · by introduction5:18:17 · ≈ 2:18 PM

Thank you, Dr. Water. Chairman Carbajal, members of the board, thank you for this opportunity. I'm going to share with you a little bit about the uniqueness of the Mental Health Services Act funding. Essentially it provides an opportunity for counties to develop diverse programs that also target populations and develop services that otherwise may not be supported by existing revenue streams.

Other components that make the Mental Health Service Act quite unique is its standardized process of involving stakeholders and then some of the guiding principles that exist. What you have in front of you are some of the key principles, which include community collaboration, a focus on cultural competence. A focus on involvement of families and clients in the process as well as in their care.

A focus on program development that involves wellness, recovery and resilience. And finally trying to develop programs that provide an integrated experience for consumers and family members. Yes.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:19:30 · ≈ 2:19 PM

It's my understanding that a plan has been developed to address many cultural competence issues, but that was never adopted by the department. I'm wondering where we're at with that and I know that it's taken years to develop. I just wonder if you could touch on why that hasn't been adopted as part of the protocol policies and procedures of the county?

CommentSam PalinProposed · by introduction5:19:50 · ≈ 2:19 PM

Chairman Carbajal, members of the board. You are correct. I think the consultants have touched on that. The plan was approved, I believe internally. I think with the transition at the state level of Department of Mental Health Services into the Office of Healthcare Services That is only recently come back in terms as a requirement or actually being adopted by the state. So, in fact last week they requested basically an update from us in terms of where our plan is. It was never really approved by the state it was approved internally by the director.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:20:27 · ≈ 2:20 PM

Was it being implemented across the culture of the MHSA funding programs? No. At some point, I'd like to know how that gets implemented in the future. Thank you.

5:20 – 5:334 turns

CommentSam PalinProposed · by introduction5:20:44 · ≈ 2:20 PM

So the first of the Mental Health Services Act components is the community services and supports. It's important to keep in mind that these components, some are one time and some are ongoing. This is an ongoing component Also, it is important to keep in mind that 50% of these funds have to be utilized for what are termed full service partnerships. And within our county plan that includes primarily our ACT programs, assertive community treatment programs in Santa Barbara which is operated by ADMHS.

In addition, it also includes our supportive housing programs in Santa Maria and Santa Barbara as well as our spirit program which is our full service partnership for children. Also included in this component is CARES Mobile Crisis, New Heights which is a transition age youth component. Our Partners In Hope program which is peer focus program. Bridge to Care which is a project that is based in Lompoc which is treatment for dual diagnosed clients.

Justice Alliance, which is again our mental health practitioners based at each Court in throughout Santa Barbara County and then finally the final component is our housing component Which has allowed us to create units in Santa Barbara Lompoc and Santa Maria for our mental health clients Next, we have the workforce education training component. And this consists of two primary programs. One is the crisis intervention training for law enforcement and that is a four day training that we provide in partnership with law enforcement from throughout the county.

And then the final component of workforce education training is our peer support specialist training, which is again entry level preparation for consumers and family members who are wanting to go into the mental health field. The next component is the prevention early intervention, and again this is an ongoing component with an additional requirement that 50% of these resources must be utilized for services for children and transition age youth.

and again, some of the multiple components that we have within this particular project are we have a Project which is our promoter as component Which is basically support to culturally on the server communities and that is mental health education resource and referral programs throughout the county We have the integrated primary and mental healthcare Component which is a partnership with community health clinics of the Central Coast based in Santa Maria and in Lompoc And then we have our early childhood mental health components which support services for calm, for County Office of Education and people helping people in Santa Ynez.

We also have the school-based prevention early intervention services which are based in Carpinteria and are operated by Fighting Back and Family Service Agency. Internally within the department we have the prevention early intervention and detection teams that target transition age youth And that's countywide County wide run program and then the final two component are our crisis services for children and Transition age youth which is operated by casa pacifica, and then the crisis and recovery emergency services Which is operated by the department or it is also known as cares. I The other two components within the Mental Health Services Act are innovations, which is again an ongoing component. However every three or four years each county is required to develop a different component and again the essential elements of the innovation component require That counties develop programs that are new and innovative in our county.

I know that there has been some controversy about this particular component, and I think on our particular part what we probably didn't Illustrate appropriately is that this component is not only a benefits acquisition program It also consists of extensive ongoing treatment and services for our uninsured populations the in the final component is our capital facilities and technical technological needs component and And again, this consists of three primary areas. One is client family access to resources and computers which are basically resources and computers that are recovery learning centers throughout the county.

And the other, the final two are enhancements of electronic health records and again upgrades in security and confidentiality. This next slide simply illustrates the timeline and a little bit of the process that we have to follow within the Mental Health Services Act components, beginning with September 12th of 2012 in terms of meeting and providing a timeline to the Mental Health Commission. And again ending in December with the approval of the plan and the commission and then moving it forward to the Board of Supervisors.

And what you see in front of you now is basically a summary of our budget for the Mental Health Services Act program, and this is broken out by component. What's important to note is basically if you go to the center of this table, This is a summary of the MHSA revenues, non-MHSA revenues which would be MediCal and other resources. And then any fund balances from prior years.

So that gives you the total, the white row beneath that, the fiscal year 12-13 gives you our projected expenditures which gives us at the very bottom a estimated fund balance by component. And as we kind of end in that last one, I think I will pass it on to Dr. Wada and he can give you kind of some of the projections in terms or outlook for the future.

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed5:28:07 · ≈ 2:28 PM

Great. Chair Carbajal, members of the board so as we saw from the last slide We are looking forward to fiscal year 13-14. We'll be coming before your board as part of budget hearings, and at this point the revenues and reserves in the MHSA program can support the same level of fiscal year 12-13 budgeted expenditures and programs but Looking forward to fiscal year 14-15, we have a concern that the revenues and reserves may not support the programs and expenditures as currently structured. So we will be looking at changes to MHSA over the next year. There are a number of challenges and opportunities First, we have the recommendations from the consultant report that will be coming forward soon. And we'll be looking to better integrate MHSA planning so it's incorporated into the department's overall programmatic and budget development process.

In addition there is always some variation in a level of future MHSA reserves as we discussed prior that level of funding can be uncertain. We also have increase in Medi-Cal revenues due to the Affordable Care Act That amount of new revenue is uncertain. There's also a concern that the state may react by pulling back some of the realignment dollars that come to the county, so at this point there are still a lot of unknowns and uncertainties as we go forward.

This next slide is a graphic representation of what we just discussed. And for the viewers that may not be able to see, I'm going to just describe it a little bit. Each bar represents the total amount of funding available for a given year and this is the trend line. The red line is the expenditures in the program. So within each bar, the white area is non-MHSA revenue so for example this can be MediCal revenue that's brought into the department. This Through MHSA programs, this sort of gray color. I'm sorry, excuse me. The white area is the reserves that are available in each component area combined. The gray area is the non-MHSA revenue area that could represent MediCal revenue generated by MHSA programs and this blue part of each bar is the MHSA revenue that comes in annually.

So as you look one thing that you notice is that the amount of reserves, though again the white portion decreases year to year and projected out into 14-15. Now part of this drawdown of reserves is deliberate because as Kuko mentioned there's some component areas that are time limited or have a sunset date and so we are essentially intentionally running down those reserves as we phase out those programs but they're still An issue that we have in terms of drawing down reserves for some of the other ongoing funding areas.

This amount here, in terms of non-MHSA revenue, you'll actually see it growing a little bit in the upcoming years and that's because we project some additional funding related to the Affordable Care Act and being able to get reimbursement through MediCal. And then in the bottom part of these bars, you'll see the MHSA revenue. So in some years like our current year there was actually a one-time increase as the state released some reserves down to the local level to shift the process locally as part of the realignment of the Department of Mental Health into the Department of Healthcare Services so they released some additional one time reserves for us. And then that goes down into future years. So as you can see, we do have an issue with the expenditures and the revenues crossing in fiscal year 14-15 if there are no changes.

And so that's something that we'll be looking at over the next year or two, and also as we try to incorporate the consultant recommendations. So again, the recommended action today is approval of the MHSA fiscal year 12-13 plan update. As we discussed it's been approved by the Mental Health Commission. It's undergone an extensive stakeholder process and 30 day public comment period. And again there are no major changes to the plan except for recommendation to extend the innovation program funding for one additional year.

It is important to note That the structure and process for certifying the MHSA plan update with the state is sort of in a transition year due to AB 1467. And the move from the Department of Mental Health Services into the Department of Healthcare Services, so some things that you may have expected in the report such as more detail on outcomes are actually not included in this format. It's anticipated that the next year, fiscal year 13-14 MHSA plan update will not only be coming to you earlier in the year likely in July or August time frame but the actual format of the report to the state may be restructured to include more information on outcomes. And so this concludes our presentation and we'll be happy to answer any questions.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:33:19 · ≈ 2:33 PM

Thank you very much Supervisor Farr.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed5:33:21 · ≈ 2:33 PM

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Actually I do have a number of questions. First of all this is a three year plan. Is it a rolling three year plan? Or if not which year are we of the three years?

5:33 – 5:3916 turns

CommentSam PalinProposed · by introduction5:33:36 · ≈ 2:33 PM

Chair Carbajal, Supervisor Farr. It's intended to be a rolling three-year plan but every year we actually have to redo it again. I think originally when we first started this process we developed three-year components but ever since then we have to do an annual update in case anything changes within the plan so although we gave you projections next year's plan would be updated and probably far more accurate than our projections that were given to the state

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed5:34:05 · ≈ 2:34 PM

Okay, so in effect it's a rolling three-year plan because of the need to update every year. What's the deadline for the board's approval now that that is required in the new legislation for this?

CommentSam PalinProposed · by introduction5:34:18 · ≈ 2:34 PM

Chair Carbajal, Supervisor Farr there really is no given deadline right now because of the transition that Dr. Wada pointed out

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed5:34:27 · ≈ 2:34 PM

OK well I guess I'm just wondering. I mean the consultants report has been expected and anticipated is coming in a couple of weeks and it seems like certainly for me it would have been helpful to have that consultant report before this and understand the recommendations that might inform this discussion. And I realize you've been going through a very long process of approval through the stakeholders and the Mental Health Commission and so on but I think from my perspective it had been helpful To have that report first and then be able to look at this.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed5:35:04 · ≈ 2:35 PM

Chair Carbajal, Supervisor Farr. Again this is approval of the current year 12-13 and so we're already sort of at the end of that year as you described in terms of incorporating MHSA into the department budget and our program strategy going forward. We will be bringing that early in the next fiscal year in the July August time frame and it will be taking into account all those consultant recommendations. So we're planning actually the next plan update To be better incorporated into the departmental budget.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed5:35:37 · ≈ 2:35 PM

Okay, so the next time we'll be getting it earlier in the year rather than at the end of the year?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed5:35:42 · ≈ 2:35 PM

Correct.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed5:35:42 · ≈ 2:35 PM

Okay that would be great thank you and then looking at the various elements that are in the plan that you've gone through I think probably the one that I hear the most about from the community is cares and issues to do with cares and going through here I noticed We've kind of divided up the adult cares, which is listed under community services and support. And then it looks like the children or anybody under 18 and their families under the prevention and early intervention section. Is there a particular reason why they're not all together?

CommentSam PalinProposed · by introduction5:36:25 · ≈ 2:36 PM

Chair Carbajal, Supervisor Farr. I believe that when our children's system of care was kind of designed as well as our CARES components for adults, I think that they wanted to keep the two separate. Casa Pacifica is currently our provider. for children's crisis services and is also funded major component through our core system. This small augmentation under MHSA funds actually just a component for folks who are uninsured or have My understanding, who are uninsured or also may have other private insurance or folks in the community that might be not currently covered with our existing services. But that's really just a program that's operated for children and transitioning youth by our provider, Casa Pacifica.

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed5:37:21 · ≈ 2:37 PM

Okay. So when we get the consultant report, we're going to have all of this stuff kind of side by side so we can look at all the children's programming no matter who is responsible for it or what pot of money it's coming out of?

not transcribed≈7s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
CommentSam PalinProposed · by introduction5:37:35 · ≈ 2:37 PM

You

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed5:37:36 · ≈ 2:37 PM

hope so? So do I! Okay. And also just another question, some of these things give a capacity for the program and then the number of clients served which tends to be pretty close to the capacity. How are you ascertaining capacity numbers for these programs?

CommentSam PalinProposed · by introduction5:37:56 · ≈ 2:37 PM

Chair Carbajal, Supervisor Farr. The capacity is really based on our original plans that were submitted and we have adjusted them over time but really this is the capacity numbers that are there are based on our last year plan that was submitted

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed5:38:14 · ≈ 2:38 PM

Okay, but I mean the capacity is the number of people that are served. So is there some formula based on the number of staff that are involved and then the number of hours that each client might need? And then you do a calculation of how many people you might be able to serve in here?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed5:38:33 · ≈ 2:38 PM

Yes, Chair Carbajal, Supervisor Farr. Yes the capacity is based on different analysis and formulas based on staffing and caseload however I should say that one of the things that consultants have analyzed and reviewed is the capacity at least within our internal programs and they will be bringing those observations and recommendations when they present in two weeks

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed5:38:58 · ≈ 2:38 PM

OK, thank you. And then Mr. Chair just a couple more quick questions one about the funding there was some fund balances and all of those is that is that a requirement that a certain amount is kept in reserve for those different or it's just not spent? And if it's not spent when the need is so great why isn't it spent?

5:39 – 5:4617 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed5:39:22 · ≈ 2:39 PM

Chair, Supervisors. So prior to fiscal year 10-11 each county was required to establish a prudent reserve specifically for when the amount of current year MHSA revenues went down because of a bad economic term. So when we experienced that in 10-11, all of the counties were allowed to start using their prudent reserves. So part of our fund balance is prudent reserve and then part of it is prior year allocated revenues that have not been spent. Each year's revenues has a three-year lifespan in which it has to be spent. And we started receiving these funds, I believe it was, in 8-9 and some of our programs didn't really get up and running until 9-10, 10-11.

And so we had a fund balance as high as $18 million that has been spent down now. And so going forward in 13, 14 and 14-15, we expect to draw down on all of our prior year allocations and to also start using our prudent reserves. Once our current year allocation rises above what it was, I believe in 9-10 then we'll be required again to establish a prudent reserve.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed5:40:47 · ≈ 2:40 PM

Okay thank you and Mr. Chair my last question is I know that when this MHSA came into being one of the big frustrations was that it had to be for new programs even though we had so many wonderful existing programs that were needing more money that this had to be new programs and I'm looking at Page three of three, where again calls out specifically that directly related to non-supplanting of Mental Health Services Act funds has not been amended and must be adhered to by counties. So I just want some extra assurance from you that we're being really careful here.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed5:41:24 · ≈ 2:41 PM

Chair Carbajal, Supervisor Farr, we certainly are when we make changes. We do run it by the state to ensure that we are adhering to the regulations.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed5:41:36 · ≈ 2:41 PM

Okay thank you very much. Thank You Mr. Chair

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:41:41 · ≈ 2:41 PM

Supervisor Adam and Supervisor Wolf.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction5:41:46 · ≈ 2:41 PM

Maybe I wasn't paying attention but I think Supervisor Farr was asking you how many people do we serve in the program? Did you ever get an answer to that question?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed5:42:00 · ≈ 2:42 PM

Mr. Chair, Supervisor Adam, in these different programs they talked about capacity and then clients served for each of those individual programs so I was just asking how they came up with their capacity

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction5:42:14 · ≈ 2:42 PM

numbers? Okay okay okay well see my question was is how many people do we serve in the program I mean, and I'm not holding you down. I don't want it down to the man. I just like within a hundred or so. Is there a pretty accurate figure? Not down to the individual.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed5:42:36 · ≈ 2:42 PM

So Chair, Supervisors. Across all of our MHSA programs we serve several thousand clients and so we have some of our full service partnerships for example, we have three ACT teams which serve approximately 100 clients each in each region. For supported housing we have a capacity Is it 130? Of 130, of which we currently have anywhere from 115 to 120. The majority of our clients right now in our MHSA programs are served through our CARES program. So between our CARES clinics in the north and south, as well as our CARES mobile crisis response teams, those serve the majority of our clients through MHSA. It's really dealing with those who are in crisis as far as our mobile crisis teams and then...

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction5:43:38 · ≈ 2:43 PM

And how many of those are there?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed5:43:43 · ≈ 2:43 PM

Between it's about seven to eight hundred. I'm sorry set seventeen hundred countywide within on any given year

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction5:43:51 · ≈ 2:43 PM

okay see that's that's what I'm looking for and just give me a run nice round figure okay so it's like two thousand more or less people okay so we're spending twenty eight million dollars

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:44:10 · ≈ 2:44 PM

You raise a good point. I think in the near future if you guys could send us a memo that outlines how many people we're serving and it's part of the MHSA, different programs and what have you. It's just good to understand all that. Healthcare is expensive.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction5:44:23 · ≈ 2:44 PM

Well, maybe we could do something better for them with $28 million dollars. There's probably some different options with that much money. All right, so we beat that horse. Are there indirect costs on this thing? This is something that I'm discovering as we go along with not just you guys. In fact, I've never talked to you guys Dr. Wada. But regarding this, but are there indirect costs that come out of general fund money when we take this state and federal money?

Or is it 100% of the administrative costs are actually funded by the

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed5:45:11 · ≈ 2:45 PM

state and federal money. Chair, Supervisors for the MHSA programs and the MHSA fund. There are no general fund dollars used to cover any of those costs so the costs are either covered 100% by the MHSA state revenues or by federal funds or by other grants both state and federal.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction5:45:33 · ≈ 2:45 PM

Okay thank you yeah okay that'll do thank you Supervisor Wolf.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed5:45:42 · ≈ 2:45 PM

Thank you Mr. Chair, thank you for your presentation. So I just have a question about the plan. I know that's really not what we're talking about today but I am interested in this section about the workforce education and training section and The crisis intervention training with law enforcement, I understand why you would do that and I think it's a good thing.

But when the plan was developed, it almost seems like when you read that heading, the workforce education and training, it seems as if that is for the consumers. And yet there's only one piece of that which is the peer specialist training and internship program. So I'm wondering when this plan was developed, was there any discussion or do you ever foresee any discussion about more formalized training for within MHSA to provide more specific vocational skills to consumers? Because what I see here other than the one for law enforcement it seems a little fuzzy to me. It's providing internships, and I'm not sure about the actual specific skills.

5:47 – 5:5315 turns

CommentSam PalinProposed · by introduction5:47:00 · ≈ 2:47 PM

Chair Carbajal, Supervisor Wolf. That particular component, and I think it, I should say for all of these different components one of the things that I try to highlight was the process which is a little bit different than what we're accustomed to. We had to bring in CBOs and a variety of different providers, consumers and family members And they're the ones that kind of helped us design this process. For the workforce education and training component, that was actually primarily driven by our consumer and family members. We really didn't have a solid component that was particularly designed for consumers and family members.

The crisis intervention training is only probably about maybe 5 to 10% of the total budget. The remainder really is in developing training and And that was probably the very beginning of our basically career ladder for consumers and family members. To date, we probably have over 100 consumers and family members that have been trained. We have placed probably close to 30 or 40 within our department as well as others who are working with some of our providers. And we are now kind of trying, as you pointed out, to formalize more of a career ladder maybe not a full or different type of training but certainly trying to develop other career opportunities for those folks that have been trained. Unfortunately, I do have to point out that this is one of those components that has a sunset date.

So we are trying to extend those resources as far out as we can so that we can support our consumers and family members.

not transcribed≈17s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed5:48:48 · ≈ 2:48 PM

Okay thank you for that.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:48:51 · ≈ 2:48 PM

Any further discussion? We have no public speakers. No request to speak. In addition to the numbers that Supervisor Adam requested, I would appreciate an implementation timeline and a copy of the action plan for the cultural competence within the MHSA programs and the protocols of how it's going to be implemented. I think if you look at other counties they have those protocols, they have those plans, and I really would like to see that done as soon as possible.

Yes. Wait

CommentSam PalinProposed · by introduction5:49:23 · ≈ 2:49 PM

one second sir. Chair Carbajal, members of the board I want to point out that the cultural competency plan applies to the whole department it's not just for MHSA when it was submitted it was actually a Medi-Cal requirement so it is a plan that applies to the whole department not just MHSA. I

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:49:44 · ≈ 2:49 PM

understand but I know that MHSA that was a major thrust Of that specific funding. So if it's even better, if it's for the whole department, great. So thank you very much supervisor Adam.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction5:49:54 · ≈ 2:49 PM

So are there any metrics that we keep about how many people that actually become less dependent out of these programs?

CommentSam PalinProposed · by introduction5:50:11 · ≈ 2:50 PM

I don't know if we, sorry Chair Carbajal, members of the board and Supervisor Adams. I don't know if we keep metrics on dependency. We do keep some metrics on hospitalization rates in some programs, crisis those are types of things that we try to track certainly our long term costs as Michael was mentioning some of these programs have different capacities because the models dictated certain things The consultants, for example, have looked at our act programs. We had a prediction that these projects were going to serve 100 clients in each component which is the ratio of one staff person to about 10 clients.

These are again obviously our higher end components. That's also a requirement of the act that 50 plus percent have to be used on those particular programs and models. The consultants are feeling like perhaps that number can be increased, so we've been looking at some of those things. So within each program there's different metrics that we do try to keep track

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction5:51:17 · ≈ 2:51 PM

of. Do we have any way to measure success if there is any?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed5:51:25 · ≈ 2:51 PM

Chair, Supervisors. One of the ways that the MHSA does have, the different programs do have outcomes and one of the most significant measures of success is The the avoidance of hospitalizations so our full service partnerships are for those clients that are the most needy in our community and so they require what we call wraparound services which is basically.

24-hour services and access to clinical staff in order to keep them from going into crisis and being hospitalized. So when we look at the cost, for example of one client in an ACT program, for example, the costs may be $30,000 to $40,000 versus the costs of a client spending one day in the hospital Being upwards of $1,500 to $2,000 per day. Those are the ways that we look at how successful our programs are of keeping people out of the hospital.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction5:52:34 · ≈ 2:52 PM

OK so maybe when you come back next time, we can figure out how many hospital days we've saved and tell us what kind of success we're having. Define success and then demonstrate how we achieved it? Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:52:54 · ≈ 2:52 PM

Thank you looks like we are done with discussion is there a motion to accept this item

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed5:52:59 · ≈ 2:52 PM

so moved.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:53:01 · ≈ 2:53 PM

Motion has been made and seconded to accept the staff report recommendations. Not having further discussion, all those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Abstentions? Passes unanimously thank you very much. And we do hope to get that information from you guys in the near future. We will now

move on to our next item which is item number four. If you could

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated5:53:26 · ≈ 2:53 PM

read the item Mr. Allen. Chairman Carbajal, members of the board. Item four is on planning and development. It's a hearing to consider recommendations of the county and Montecito Planning Commissions to approve case number 12-GPA3 which would amend the housing element of the county comprehensive plan finding a new goal in eight policies chapter five revising program 1.2 and deleting appendix A inclusionary housing program and two case number 12-ORD15 which would adopt the proposed inclusionary housing ordinance as chapter 46A of the County Code Great.

5:54 – 6:054 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:54:00 · ≈ 2:54 PM

Thank you Mr.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed5:54:04 · ≈ 2:54 PM

Russell. Yes, good afternoon Chair Carver Hall members of the board. Today we are bringing before you the taking our inclusionary housing program a proposal to take our inclusionary housing program out of the housing element where it currently exists and to place it in a standalone ordinance which the benefits of which I believe and I hope that you will see shortly staff presentation will be made by supervising planner Alan

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 26Proposed5:54:35 · ≈ 2:54 PM

Bell Mr. Chair before Mr. Bill gives a presentation I want to let you know we also have staff from community services department here to help answer any questions they actually administer the ordinance or the funds once the funds come in with that I'll turn it over to Mr. Bill

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 27Proposed5:54:57 · ≈ 2:54 PM

good afternoon thank you for your time today and the opportunity to present the proposed inclusionary housing ordinance And accompanying housing element amendment. Staff recommends that your board conduct a hearing today on the proposed inclusionary housing ordinance and housing element amendments, and then continue the items to May 14th. On May 14 staff recommends that your board adopt the proposed inclusion inclusionary housing ordinance and housing element amendment as part of the administrative agenda.

Affordable housing is a concern throughout Santa Barbara County, especially in the South Coast and Santa Ynez housing market areas. These statistics provide some insight to the concerns. A large percent of the population has a relatively modest income compared to high housing prices. To this end only 19% of the housing stock for sale in 2010 was affordable to lower-income households.

Households that could afford a median price home varied in 2010 from 27% in the South Coast to approximately 77% in the North County. Santa Barbara County has maintained an inclusionary housing program since the early 1980's. The Board of Supervisors adopted the current inclusionary housing program in 2004 as part of Appendix A of the Housing Element. The goal of the current program is to promote new housing in all segments of the community including extremely low income.

The current inclusionary housing program Is a policy based land use regulation that is intended to address this goal by providing affordable housing opportunities for lower, moderate and workforce income households. It also furthers integration and other fair housing objectives. The county's program is not a type of exaction or development impact fee. Rather the county recognizes the provision of affordable housing as a legitimate government purpose within its police power.

The current Inclusionary Housing Program applies to residential projects creating five or more lots or units. Twenty percent of the new units must be affordable in the Santa Maria and Lompoc housing market areas. Thirty percent must be affordable in the Santa Ynez and South Coast housing market areas. Kiyama is exempt from the program. Developers may construct these units on site.

Alternatively, they may pay a fee or donate land in lieu of constructing the units. The inclusionary housing program includes two types of in lieu fees. The subsidy fee is for very low and low income units, it represents the amount of money the county typically contributes to leverage the construction of low and very low income units. The cost of construction fee applies to moderate and workforce units.

It approximates the cost to build a housing unit minus developer profit. Both fees vary by housing market area and are updated annually. This slide shows the current in-lieu fees as broken down for each housing unit, and you can see that they range from approximately $55,000 to approximately $405,000. Program 1.2 of the housing element is intended to increase the effectiveness of the current inclusionary housing program by moving it from Appendix A to the zoning ordinance.

This modification provides greater flexibility by eliminating the need for a general plan amendment for future changes to the program. It also provides greater staff and public understanding by allowing additional details to be added to the program. Staff took several key steps to implement Program 1.2. We deleted Appendix A and opted to create a separate ordinance. This increases the effectiveness of the program without complicating existing zoning ordinances.

Staff added a goal and several policies to the housing element to provide a stronger and clearer explanation of the policy basis for the proposed Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. We also reduced the housing requirements and added formulas to clarify how the county calculates housing requirements in lieu fees. The proposed inclusionary housing ordinance reduces the overall housing requirements to 15% for projects with 20 lots or units or more.

It also includes an annual adjustment that may eliminate the housing requirements for moderate and workforce units, The Inclusionary Housing Ordinance adds a density increase of one additional unit for each very low and low income unit constructed in the coastal zone, and it strengthens the provisions allowing zoning modifications necessary to accompany all density increases.

Housing requirements that result in a fractional requirement of less than .5 would be rounded down to the next whole number for purposes of construction. Developers could choose to construct a residential second unit to satisfy the housing requirements for workforce units. Rental projects would be exempt to comply with recent case law. This chart shows the current housing requirements which range from 20 to 30 percent distributed among various income categories.

Please note that table 1 on page 4 of the board agenda letter contains a typographical error. The housing requirements for Santa Maria and Lompoc currently total 20 percent as shown in table one however, the housing requirement for Santa Maria and Lompoc is 10 percent for moderate and zero for workforce. The proposed inclusionary housing ordinance reduces these requirements to 15 percent for all housing market areas, consisting of 2.5 percent for the very low and low income categories and 5 percent for the moderate and workforce income categories.

The proposed inclusionary housing ordinance Includes an annual adjustment that reduces the housing requirements in the moderate and workforce categories to zero when the real estate market is providing affordable housing to those income categories. This slide shows the effect of this adjustment in 2012-13. Specifically, the workforce requirement is reduced to zero in all income categories.

The moderate requirement is reduced to zero in Santa Maria and Lompoc. We prepared two examples to compare the current inclusionary housing program to the proposed inclusionary housing ordinance based on a 20-unit project. The first example shown on this slide is for in the South Coast. The left hand column is for the current inclusionary housing program, the middle column is for the proposed inclusionary housing ordinance without an annual adjustment And the right hand column is for the proposed inclusionary housing ordinance with an annual adjustment.

The housing requirements are reduced from 30 percent to 10 percent and from six units to three units. The total in lieu fees are reduced from approximately $101.8 million dollars to approximately five hundred and fourteen thousand dollars. The chart shows several alternatives. A developer could choose to construct the units, to pay the in-lieu fees or choose a combination of both.

The in-lieu fees for very low and low income categories are considerably less than the fees for moderate and workforce. As a result, the expected scenario is to pay the in-lieu fees for the very low and low and construct the moderate units as shown in the bottom row. This slide presents a similar example for the Santa Maria housing market area. Here, the annual adjustment eliminates the housing requirements for both workforce and moderate income categories which in turn reduces the requirements from 20 percent to 5 percent. The expected scenario is to pay a total in lieu fee of approximately $55,000 and construct zero units.

Staff based many of the revisions on public input. We held individual and joint meetings with developers and housing advocates in 2011 and 2012. Staff also presented the proposed Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and Housing Element Amendment to both the Montecito and County Planning Commissions. The County Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend that your board approve the ordinance and amendment.

The State Housing and Community Development Department found that the amendment does not impact the compliance of the county's housing element. HCD did not identify any issues or recommend any changes to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Again, staff recommended actions are on pages one and two of your board agenda letter. We're recommending that your board conduct a hearing today on the proposed Inclusionary Housing Ordinance And housing element amendments and continue the matter to May 14th for action.

Thank you.

6:05 – 6:119 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:05:33 · ≈ 3:05 PM

We have four public speakers, Mr. Allen?

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated6:05:36 · ≈ 3:05 PM

That's correct. Why don't

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:05:37 · ≈ 3:05 PM

we go to the

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated6:05:37 · ≈ 3:05 PM

public and then bring it back to the board? We'll start in Santa Mara with Lori Tamura and come back to Santa Barbara for Jim Aloja.

CommentLori TamoraProposedself-stated6:05:52 · ≈ 3:05 PM

Good afternoon. My name is Lori Tamora with Urban Planning Concepts, and I've worked with Rice Ranch and the Home Builders Association for a number of years on this issue. We are very pleased to see this recommended housing element and ordinance change come before you today. We've worked hard with the county staff over several years And we believe that the changes being brought before you will do two things, encourage those projects that have been sitting through this recession to move forward. And secondly, will provide funding for those that are experts in providing low and very low housing for this county.

So we ask you today to please move forward with this ordinance amendment and the changes to the housing element And we can go forward and implement this. I'm available for any questions, again worked very hard with staff over the years and want to also extend our appreciation to staff for bringing this forward to you. Thank you.

PresenterJim LaLogiaRice Ranch ProjectProposedself-stated6:07:15 · ≈ 3:07 PM

Mr. Chair, Supervisors, good afternoon. I'm Jim LaLogia and I represent the Rice Ranch Project. First of all, I would like to thank staff for all their efforts in listening to the development community and also the staff for bringing this forward. Also like to thank the planning commission for their approval. This new policy if approved by your board will make the difference of whether Rice Ranch can continue If this policy is not adopted, we would have some extreme difficulty in being able to move forward under the present conditions.

We are pleased to pay our fair share and would leave the professionals the ability to go ahead and build affordable housing. At the present time, our project has a few more units that we're capable of building under the approval granted to us last year. But if this policy were not to go forward, we would be stopped. So I thank you for your support and hope that we are able to get approval today. Thank you.

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated6:08:24 · ≈ 3:08 PM

Thank you. John Campanella to be followed by Jeff Nelson who's our final speaker.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 28Proposed6:08:31 · ≈ 3:08 PM

Good afternoon, Chair Carbajal and Supervisors. I too am thankful for having the opportunity to have met with staff over probably a couple of years with the Home Builders Association going through the current policy and mechanics if you will of the now inclusionary ordinance and looking from a practitioner standpoint how it would work and perhaps how it might be improved.

And I was very appreciative of staff listening, participating in the discourse, getting involved in the numbers and listening to our considerations. And I think the list of changes that you saw are all very positive and are all needed as far to make projects both viable at the same time that they're providing a certain percentage of affordable housing for the community.

My perspective is really from the South Coast and the current policies I'll stand corrected if I am and staff can make a comment. But according to the current policies, if you have a 10-unit project on the South Coast your affordable requirement could be 40% because of rounding in the various categories. So you'd have four units and the very low and the low are not replaced by bonus density So in effect, you start with 10 units. You have to do four affordable and you take away two market. So needless to say when you put the numbers together either the project is not viable or the market price units are pushed up so high in price that compensate that it just doesn't work. So that's where we started from and I think we've come a long way through trying to accomplish both getting the affordable units on the ground as well as keeping things economical to build.

The other item is as an ordinance, if as we go forward we start to see that maybe there should be some further modifications made either because of product types or because of the economy. I think this allows you a little more flexibility to make those changes if you have a concern now and not have to go through a more exhaustive procedure in CEQA analysis let's say in order to get this done so I'm hopeful that you support the recommendations that originated with staff, came to you from both the County Planning Commission and the Montecito Planning Commission. And I think this will be a very good project to move forward.

One last comment people say as a builder why do you like inclusionary? If it's reasonable, one thing inclusionary does is guarantee you your base density. That's both the county as well as the state. So knowing going into a project that you can keep your base density is like a credit card commercial that says priceless. I think that really works towards certainty and investing in a project to know that your density is not gonna be taken away during the process due to some type of discretionary issues. So let's try to put things in perspective for you. Thank you very much.

Our final

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated6:11:32 · ≈ 3:11 PM

speaker is Jeff Nelson.

6:11 – 6:174 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed6:11:38 · ≈ 3:11 PM

Good afternoon, Chair Carbajal and Supervisors. Jeff Nelson, I've been an advocate for many housing projects mostly in Eastern Goleta. All have had an inclusive element of one fashion or another. And just stepping back and looking at the whole picture and the totality that's working on these for 25 years, I would say In some context, it works because neighbors accept that that's part of the political reality. In some context, it doesn't and because neighbors say wait a second not a single one of us has ever paid any in lieu fees or had an affordable requirement why should we have it in our neighborhood? We experienced that in spades in the Park Hill Estates Project and they never bought into That as a political reality, whereas Tree Farm another project with it was much denser.

The neighbors ultimately accepted that that was a part of the planning reality. Stepping back even further I went to real estate section of the state bar section on class on affordable housing and they said that these inclusionary requirements may not ultimately pass muster and they may not survive long-term If you're outside the planning bubble, it's really more like someone saying, okay, Gelsons we like your food and not everyone can afford it. So we want 15 to 30 percent of it sold to certain people that we select at below cost. And so you're saying that to housing providers and most of them are saying, oh this is good because it's a lot better than it was a year ago. But the reality is that you're exacting a charge on just a few people and the county isn't stepping up really even to support those projects fully that run into problems that are inclusive.

I guess be thankful for small favors, but also the reality is that it's more complicated and I think long-term the issues are going to endure here as to does this last? Does it endure or not. One other very small point that I put in the letter to you is that the Planning Commission, they said that the in lieu fees on all projects could be paid lot by lot or home by home. The staff report at least at the planning commission level said that if it was a track map, it had to be all paid up front when the map is recorded and that's a big difference because If you could pay it off lot by lot as parks now allows a development to pay off their fees, lot by lot as it is developed. That's a much less substantial economic hit on the project. Anyway, I suppose I'm thankful for small favors but it really doesn't work in all contexts that I have to tell you.

Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:14:40 · ≈ 3:14 PM

Is that it, Mr. Allen? Mr. Nielsen is our final speaker. Thank you very much. Back to the Board of Supervisors. Any discussion? Any motions? Supervisor Wolf?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed6:14:53 · ≈ 3:14 PM

Thank you, Mr Chair. I'd like to just ask staff a question. It's on page nine and it's under the zoning modifications And it's not specifically dealing with the Inlew issue, but there is a sentence that's added about... It says in addition to common and or public open space requirement may be reduced from 40% to a minimum of 25% of gross acreage for projects in the DR zone district.

So my question is why was Included here. What was the reasoning behind it? And then, if you could give me some kind of on-the-ground implications of this change and also understanding that the word may is in here so I see that there is some discretion but I just like a better understanding of that.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 27Proposed6:15:55 · ≈ 3:15 PM

Mr. Chair, Supervisor what we were told is that with some projects they qualify for a density increase but given the design standards we have and some of the provisions for open space they're not able to actually fit those units on site. So what they asked us for is to be more explicit about those particular circumstances and allowing a reduced amount of open space In those particular zones, and particularly in the DR zone. So it's really to give more flexibility to accommodate the higher density that comes about as a result of the density increase.

What we did with this section is we did try to strengthen it a bit from what currently exists in the inclusionary housing program. And we used the term may because we knew we couldn't usurp really the authority of the decision makers. That is the planning commission or your board. So it's a strong encouragement to allow these as incentives and means to accommodate higher density. But falls short of saying that staff can actually make that happen absent decision makers actions.

6:17 – 6:2210 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:17:10 · ≈ 3:17 PM

Supervisor Adam, then Supervisor Lavallino?

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction6:17:17 · ≈ 3:17 PM

Well, Mr. Bell I'm just wondering how you can say that this is not an exaction? Is it voluntary?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 27Proposed6:17:32 · ≈ 3:17 PM

Mr. Chair, Supervisor the program is set up in such a way that there are really two options when we have these types of projects coming in One option is to participate in the inclusionary housing program and go through and either construct the units, pay the fees or do a combination of both. The alternative is that you can go through the State Density Bonus Law Program. If you do that and qualify for it then you're exempt from this program. So first the developers have those options before them and they can work the numbers and decide what's Best for them.

We do have several provisions, including the density bonus which then also provides a one-for-one or an in kind increase in the housing for the actual results from the inclusion and providing affordable housing units so that is seen as a means of helping to offset any requirements of this program.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction6:18:36 · ≈ 3:18 PM

Well, maybe we need to ask one of the developers who's in the house how you make that calculation because most of them seem to have gotten caught up in this program. Through their own choice. Anybody want to tell me anything back there or no?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed6:19:00 · ≈ 3:19 PM

Mr. Chair, Supervisor Adam just to put this in perspective it has I'm not sure if I would call it an exaction. It's certainly a requirement and has been for quite some time in the county based upon the policy direction provided by the board So in terms of this program, we were instructed to take the program and put it into an ordinance so that it was easier to use. We've also made a number of recommendations Rounding down, lowering the percentages and so based upon the direction that we have from the board and consistent with the existing policy of the board this is what we thought was the best thing that we could bring forward to you today.

not transcribed≈19s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction6:19:53 · ≈ 3:19 PM

That's kind of how I view it. If you're if You can build your project if you give us a quarter, or you can build your project if you give us two bits. And it's smaller. That's not the right analogy. It's certainly smaller but you're sort of telling them the same thing. So in that way I'm philosophically obviously opposed to this thing. On another level, of course it's much better than it was. I'll admit that and it's probably much more palatable to these guys.

And I'll probably end up having to support it. You know in another way then you were talking about a residential second unit Qualifying and you know that kind of thing, you know We've had this discussion before and supervisor far as talked since I've been on the board about having integrity of zoning And so if you have a subdivision of single family dwellings, but you're just going to let somebody build a second unit in there to qualify.

You know it kind of destroys the integrity of the zoning and you know as far LHCDC get any in-lieu fees? Was that some of their source of funds? Mr. Parker's back there.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 21Proposed6:21:49 · ≈ 3:21 PM

Supervisor Carver Hall, Supervisor Adam, members of the board. To my knowledge, LHCDC did not receive any of these funds.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction6:21:56 · ≈ 3:21 PM

Okay, because you know I mean what do we do with those funds then? Do they sit in an account until they're sufficient to go purchase a piece of real estate and then hand it off to somebody at a reduced price or how did we do that?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 21Proposed6:22:12 · ≈ 3:22 PM

Chair, members of the board, Supervisor Adam. Yes, they are funds that sit in an account specifically for the development of affordable housing units that can be used by developers in the community to develop other affordable housing units. They can use some of these funds to leverage other funds to build their projects and provide affordable housing units for the community.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction6:22:34 · ≈ 3:22 PM

Okay, thank you Mr. Parker. And then finally where do we get these numbers? When we decided to cut them down how did we get from there to there?

6:22 – 6:4315 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 27Proposed6:22:53 · ≈ 3:22 PM

Mr. Chairman, Supervisor, a lot of the input we received was from the development community in terms of what they felt was appropriate and what we didn't mention in great detail is when we went to the Planning Commission, we actually had slightly higher levels and there was additional public comment at that point. We actually, the Planning Commission actually voted to reduce the levels a bit lower to find kind of that medium point but there's no specific calculation it's really based on the input we received And what we felt was reasonable given the current market conditions.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction6:23:27 · ≈ 3:23 PM

So it's basically arbitrary and capricious, and is just the result of a negotiation?

PresenterGwen StaufferProposed · by introduction6:23:37 · ≈ 3:23 PM

Supervisor, I think that's why it comes to your board as policy decision makers. You get to make that decision. Well, I'm

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction6:23:43 · ≈ 3:23 PM

laying the foundation here.

PresenterGwen StaufferProposed · by introduction6:23:45 · ≈ 3:23 PM

Staff certainly believes that what they have done is in accordance with what the Board's direction is. Obviously you all will make that determination. So

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction6:23:56 · ≈ 3:23 PM

do you have an answer to the question?

PresenterGwen StaufferProposed · by introduction6:24:01 · ≈ 3:24 PM

I think I answered to the best of staff's ability that staff believes that we are doing the board's direction and you will tell us whether or not you agree with this.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction6:24:13 · ≈ 3:24 PM

All right, well then I'll make the conclusory statement that it's arbitrary and capricious in the result of a negotiation. And I will suggest that we do all of these things. We adopt the proposals put forward by staff except that we cut the numbers in half And then we also part of the motion is we revisit this affordable housing ordinance after one year to receive a cost benefit analysis from staff and to consider possible revisions to the program at that time.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:24:59 · ≈ 3:24 PM

I understand that was a motion. I don't know if there's a second or not, but I would say that Mr. Lavallino is next.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.816:25:07 · ≈ 3:25 PM

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Well, I understand Mr. Nelson's position and I also understand what Supervisor Adam is saying. And philosophically does this rub me the wrong way? Yes it does and it's been county policy for now for over 30 years, I believe. I think it was implemented in 1981 so And so. Philosophically, yes, I could sit on the fence and let's wait and go back and study it. But philosophically does not get homes built at Rice Ranch or other places throughout the county.

So I. Have had to make this decision times many times up here already Personally, I think this is one of the first times. Our county has been, especially our planning department has been accused of being blind and deaf to the surrounding economic conditions around us and I applaud our staff. I think Dr. Russell and Diane Black and Jeff Hunt and Mr. Bell have done a good job of bringing this forward to us in meeting with all I think it's important for us to be able to work with stakeholders and coming to an agreement that folks can live with that are actually out there doing this.

And I understand. Yeah, they they're being bit beat with a smaller stick. I get that. But when the folks that are actually doing or saying this is something I can live Roofers getting jobs and cement folks out there working. So is that a motion, Mr. Lavinio? I'll wait to see what everybody else has to say but eventually there will be a motion but let's hear what Supervisor Farr has

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:26:52 · ≈ 3:26 PM

to say.

not transcribed≈6s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed6:26:58 · ≈ 3:26 PM

Thank you Mr. Chair well you know the county has had a long standing policy that we want to promote as it says here promote housing for all income levels throughout the county and of course that's a real challenge and I see I can tell you how many times the rubber has met You know, I think that we have a duty to the people that we serve in the county to have this as a goal. It's certainly a requirement put on us by the state of California Housing Element State HCD and so I think that this is moving in the right direction and In the hope of getting more affordable housing, we may have had the unintended consequence of getting less because some projects either didn't go forward at all or as we've heard today in Rice Ranch would have been severely hampered in continuing to go forward.

So sometimes it's better to get less and for sure get it than to ask for more and not get anything. And so with that, actually I would make a substitute motion that we go ahead and we approve this introduction and first reading of the ordinance to create the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. And continue this to our hearing next week.

not transcribed≈25s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:28:37 · ≈ 3:28 PM

Actually making a motion there was no other motion that was seconded. So it would be motions been made seconded? Mr. Supervisor Adam.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction6:28:47 · ≈ 3:28 PM

Well, I'm just going to make the observation that it's so contentious just because it's so wrong and everybody knows it. And it's just a flat-out extortion of... It's just like... I'm lost with your name at the moment sir but a person that came up and told us a little while ago You telling the restaurant they have to feed 15% of the people that walk through the door for free. It's crazy.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:29:19 · ≈ 3:29 PM

Thank you for your discussion. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? No. One no. We're going to take a 10 minute break and come back and deal with the last item. I'd like to reconvene our board meeting and we are going to our final item of the day. Mr. Clerk, if you could read the item?

6:43 – 6:487 turns

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated6:43:40 · ≈ 3:43 PM

Chairman Carpall, members of the Board, Item 5 is from Supervisor Adam. It's a hearing to consider recommendations regarding adjustment of petroleum enforcement to eliminate duplication.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:43:49 · ≈ 3:43 PM

Thank you.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction6:43:49 · ≈ 3:43 PM

Supervisor Adam this is your item. Thank you very much. My staff, Stewart Johnson and Bob Nelson are going to put on a little presentation for us to warm up.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 17Proposed6:44:03 · ≈ 3:44 PM

Good afternoon Chairman Carbajal, members of the board. This proposal put forward by Supervisor Adams is intended Eliminate or reduce duplication in regulation of our oil industry. And I think this proposal is best understood in terms of its historical context and how our oil industry has been regulated by a state-level agency, the Division of Oil and Gas for almost 100 years.

County regulation began back in 1937 And was strengthened in the 90s to deal with oil field abandonment issues. And was further modified and strengthened in later years, to deal with problem or high risk oil operators. It may be a bit of an oversimplification, but for the most part the state level regulatory program focused on downhole operations while the county's program had an emphasis on what went on on the surface. On the machinery, the pipelines and the tanks.

There was a substantial change that occurred when our state legislature passed a bill, AB 1960 which passed in 2008. And that bill greatly expanded the role of the state regulatory program as to surface facilities. The result was considerable duplication of regulatory effort between county level and state level. This proposed board action directs the director of P&D to address this situation.

Now, attachment A to the board letter gives some idea of some of the duplication that exists. It's not intended to be complete and exhaustive and this proposal doesn't bind your director of P&D to Attachment A. It's illustrative. Under the proposal before you, the final power Alter regulation to eliminate duplication rests with your Director of Planning and Development. His decision, not what's in Attachment A will be what happens.

And I want to be clear also about the limited scope of this proposal. It makes no change in any law. It makes no change in the level of enforcement. It merely acts to eliminate duplication We view this as kind of a housekeeping kind of activity to make things simpler and clearer. And again, to emphasize there's no change in any of the permitting that's done under the land use code under Chapter 25. Nothing there is altered. None of the procedures are contemplated to be altered.

Equally true is that the enforcement under the building code, the electric code, the plumbing code, pressure vessel code, fire code. None of that will be altered. None of the environmental protections that have been written into county law such as the Oak Creek Protection Ordinance and the Grading Ordinance. None of that will be altered. Enforcement of all of those regulations will continue.

Also, there's no contemplated change here under Chapter 25A which concerns marine terminal operations and no changes envisioned here under 25B the financial responsibility provisions covering oil operators. This concludes my presentation we have Pat Abel from the Department of the Division of Oil and Gas is also in the audience and we would be happy to respond any questions that you might have

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:48:23 · ≈ 3:48 PM

Thank you. You said her was here from

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 17Proposed6:48:27 · ≈ 3:48 PM

Pat Abel? Ms. Pat Abel from the Division of Oil and Gas, now called the Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:48:36 · ≈ 3:48 PM

Great. I'm going to turn it over to Mr. Adam. And since she did point out to Ms. Abel, I did want to ask her if she's done an exhaustive search of what redundancy exists between Dogger and Santa Barbara County Okay, thank you.

6:49 – 6:557 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 30Proposed6:49:05 · ≈ 3:49 PM

No, I've not. Chairman Carbajal and members of the board, I have not made any observations with regards to your ordinance other than when I see duplication of our field engineers on your staff in the field. But I am here today to discuss if you'd like any of the roles or responsibilities of this state, our laws and regulations if you wish to discuss that.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:49:27 · ≈ 3:49 PM

Thank you very much. How many speakers do we have Mr? Two requests to speak. Why don't we go to the two speakers, then we'll come back to Mr. Adam and the

CommentChairman CarvalhoProposedself-stated6:49:34 · ≈ 3:49 PM

board? We'll start with Joe Armendariz and our second and final speaker is Nathan Alley.

PresenterJoe Armandarizcoalition of energy industry advocates including the Technology Association in CProposedself-stated6:49:42 · ≈ 3:49 PM

Supervisor Carbajal, members of the board. I'm Joe Armandariz representing a coalition of energy industry advocates including the Technology Association in California Independent Petroleum Association. Extremely difficult for any politician with all due respect to be against looking at duplication of regulation. Even a statist wants an efficient state, so to the extent that we're duplicating regulation and we can avoid that, of course I think we have to be in favor of that. So I think the real discussion isn't necessarily today it's what comes back to you in a month or whatever. Let me just suggest something. And I've had an opportunity for the last couple weeks Participate in some hearings with your county planning commission, and I shared some information with them including with the Community Environmental Council as it relates to the relationship between regulation.

And CO2 emissions and what's happening really in the world of energy development as it relates to the environment? An interesting study came out from the EPA, this is the Obama Administration's EPA just last week that talked about fugitive methane leaks as a result of producing natural gas is now according to the EPA 20% lower than they thought it was even a year ago. Some have suggested that it might be 50% lower. The EPA's own document which I shared with the CEC says that it's 20% lower than it even was a year ago.

CO2 emissions in the United States are today now at 1986 levels. Why? Because as we produce more natural gas, we substitute that natural gas for coal. Coal has twice as much CO2 as natural gas and so not because of AB 32 are we at 1986 levels of CO2 it's because of technology this is a very exciting story it's an energy revolution it's an environmental renaissance The EPA and the Energy Information Agency suggested that if current trends continue, meaning if technology continues to improve, and who here doesn't think technology will always continue to improve? We will be at CO2 emissions in the United States at 1949 levels within the next 20 years.

This is very good stuff. So the question is, to what extent does regulation impede energy production and why does that matter? I would submit to you as policy makers the reason it matters is because of your last two items whether it's mental health programs whether it's Affordable housing, whether it's fully funding our brave firefighters who are putting their lives on the line every day to keep property and people safe. It's about revenue.

Santa Barbara County has an opportunity to take advantage of our energy supplies that will generate revenue, generate royalties, generate profits, generate jobs, generate economic wealth. This is a good thing. It is a good thing for the private sector. It is a good thing for the public sector And so I would encourage you to be at least very open minded to what Supervisor Adam is suggesting you do. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:52:51 · ≈ 3:52 PM

Thank you, Mr. Herman. There's Mr. Alley. Is Mr. Alley our last speaker? He is our second and final speaker.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 31Proposed6:52:58 · ≈ 3:52 PM

Good afternoon Mr. Chair, Supervisors Nathan Alley from the Environmental Defense Center if you will the flip side of the coin I'm here today to ask you to essentially leave the petroleum code alone it's working and I don't believe that your hearing from the state or any other entity that works with our county that anything is broken so I don' necessarily see a reason to fix it just a little bit historical background I don't always agree with your staff and with the energy division. However, I do appreciate that they are on the front lines in terms of protecting the health and safety of our community from oil and gas development which while a common industry in our county and one that has been here for a very long time Is inherently risky.

I think we can all agree with that, and so some regulation is necessary. I believe that the state and the county have had a very positive working relationship for a number of years if not decades when it comes to local enforcement of these regulations. And really the Petroleum Code complements state and federal regulations to point The purpose of AB 1960 back in 2008 was actually in response to things that were going on here in Santa Barbara County. You all might remember the Greca Corporation, they were spilling right and left and local efforts, state efforts, federal efforts were not entirely effective in getting them to clean their act up. And so 1960 was in part a response to that. It gave the state additional abilities to respond to so-called surface activities.

The petroleum code interestingly enough was updated at the very same time, as 1960 was coming into effect. And essentially they were meant to operate in concert. So I actually kind of went through the list of so-called duplicative items and while I do see some similarities it's at least my opinion that those provisions are not in fact duplicative but rather local rules enhance add to or otherwise fill in the cracks where those state rules are not as effective.

Finally, I'd just like to say that again so far we haven't seen a program here that is broken. Everything seems to be working fine. I have not heard a hue and outcry from industry or state regulators that we're doing the wrong thing here. We've been doing it for decades and we've been doing a pretty good job of it and let's continue to do so. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:55:16 · ≈ 3:55 PM

Thank You Supervisor Adam

6:55 – 7:033 turns

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction6:55:22 · ≈ 3:55 PM

Well you know the state's not going to complain about us being duplicative. They don't care if we spend a bunch of money and do the exact same thing they do, do they? So for me this is a, as Stuart said an administrative house cleaning deal. I don't think we need to be doing something that the state or the feds is doing and although Mr. Alley characterized there to be some difference it's sort of a distinction without a difference as I understand it. And I think that we should be husbanding our resources a little bit better And 1960 by Pedro Nava was something that gave the state control over what we were doing. They were not previously reviewing that material and so that's what gave the duplicative I'm not getting any heads nodding.

Budgets being what they are and all the problems that we deal with all the rest of the time, I think we need to just take this step. We're not changing a word. We're not proposing to change a word. And if the state pulls back, you just go right back to doing whatever it was you were doing or we can backfill. We have the flexibility to backfill whatever the state declines to do And whatever they do, we don't have to recreate.

So to me it's just common sense. We take a look at what we're doing and where we're duplicative. There may be areas that we're not even telling them what to do. We're giving them 100% control. Mr. Anthony can review and Mr. Alley and Mr. Arvandirez can get with him and make sure that he's not over-interpreting. That's all we're suggesting is that we ask our Petroleum Division to review what they're doing and make sure that it's reasonable.

Supervisor Wolf?

not transcribed≈10s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed6:57:48 · ≈ 3:57 PM

Thank you, Mr. Chair. You know, Chapter 25 had special significance to me after the Greco oil spill. And I went back over the records and we had as many of you know, we had extensive and lengthy board hearings on revisions to chapter 25. Those were in enforcement high risk operations multiple violators and we clarified definitions After careful review, we had a unanimous vote finally in August of 2011 to revise Chapter 25. That didn't happen overnight. It took a lot of meetings, it took a lot of input and careful consideration by this board.

That the health and safety of our community, of our environment has to be balanced with industry needs. And in fact we had, and we were told many times that we had one bad actor out of many. And I don't doubt that there is new technology out there as Mr. Armendariz stated. But the fact of the matter is that this is an industry and we're talking about, as you stated, onshore oil that is and can be very risky. And can have a very deleterious effect on the environment and to people's health.

And I believe that it's our responsibility to make sure that we have very strong enforcement. If the state moves forward and does their enforcement or has laws, which Mr. Nava saw that they didn't have when he moved forward with 1960, so be it. I remember during one of the spills that EPA came out and actually had More rigorous standards than our county did at the time.

I think that we leave, we leave well enough alone. This is not broken if our county staff at some point down the road wants to look at this they can but this is an ordinance that has been well looked at before and I think we just, we move on. We have a lot of other things that we need to be working on and our staff, our planning staff right now is tremendously overburdened as we saw actually in the newspaper article today.

And I don't think that this is something that we need to move forward with again it's not broken.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.817:00:51 · ≈ 4:00 PM

Supervisor Lavinino? Thank you Mr. Chair. I worked on some of those Chapter 25 revisions as well, and we did reach consensus. And we had stakeholder input at the time. And I just think that anytime that we can improve a system, we ought to at least take a look at it. Now, I'm not saying that we go and I'm not personally. I think the timing of this is. I mean, I said I support the idea of eliminating duplication obviously.

I'd rather see us we've got we've got projects in the pipeline right now that I'm okay with that. I think this does need to be looked at just like if We need to root it out. So I could see us putting this on, you know, the work plan for the planning department. Of course like Supervisor Wolf said there's 45 items on there and we can fund two. Actually I don't think we can fund any of them but so everything becomes a priority.

You got me for two. If I get to pick the two then it's gonna be two. You know, but I think and I totally understand why Supervisor Adam brought this because the worst thing that you feel like when you come in here is it. Why are we doing things number one? We can't afford to do a number 2. Why are we duplicating effort? I guess learn to live with. And when the stakeholders aren't coming out and filling this room up, it tells me that like you said they've probably been beaten with a stick enough times that they're starting to get the message but I just feel like we spent a lot of time on Chapter 25 revising it getting it to the point where folks could live with it if we could put this on a future work plan at some point I would support it So I hope they could come back, maybe bring something back to us from staff that tells us and maybe that's what you were looking for.

Bring something back from staff that says here's the areas where we feel there might be some duplication and I'd definitely like to take a look at some of those items.

not transcribed≈21s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈6s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

7:03 – 7:146 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed7:03:52 · ≈ 4:03 PM

Supervisor Farr?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed7:03:54 · ≈ 4:03 PM

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Well thank you Supervisor Adam for bringing this to us but unfortunately I can't support your actions. But I think that as has been said, I haven't heard from industry or anybody that the state comes out and does some kind of compliance look and then the county comes out the next week and does the same thing and there's complaint about it So whether or not there may be some, technically some duplication. I don't see that playing out in reality and I also think that giving this kind of direction would potentially have a CEQA impact. I don't think we could say that this wouldn't necessarily have an impact on the environment. So even something like the Nava bill where there may the expansion of state regulation, does it translate into more money, more staff, more resources to go ahead and implement and enforce that?

And we actually just heard we had a representative from DOGGR at that meeting in Buelton a few weeks ago about oil saying that they're hiring. I mean they don't have enough people now to do the work that they're supposed You know, we talk a lot about local control and I think that this is an area where I feel strongly about that. And some of you know that a couple months ago I was asked to give testimony up at a state senate hearing in Sacramento. And on the panel with me representing local government was Supervisor Steve Bennett from Ventura and the Planning Development Director from Kern County which certainly has a lot of oil But at the end of the day, we all agreed that we wanted local control. That we did not want the state to preempt anything that we felt we needed to do in the area of oil.

So I think that sometimes redundancy if it is there is a good thing and important. And I guess the example I would give is that I paid my $115 to Cal Fire for my State Responsibility Area fee. But if I have a fire on my property, I'm not going to rely on Cal Fire to come. I'm going to want County Fire to come as well. So I think redundancy in some cases is a good thing and when it comes to protecting the public's health and safety and protecting the environment, I am willing to utilize our resources and our funding to do that. Thank you Mr. Chair.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed7:06:31 · ≈ 4:06 PM

Thank you. Before you go, Mr Adam, if I could just give you some of my thoughts. Oh, I was just going to ask you to complete the process. Mr Chair? Thank you. Mr Adam, I think you know me by now and I think our colleagues when at all possible Strive to find common ground. But just as passionate as you are about some of the issues you have brought and continue to bring, I'm going to give you a little bit of that passion back today.

And I will tell you that today I think with this item, as much as I appreciate your bringing it forward, I think it's a solution in search of a problem that doesn't exist. I also think that oftentimes this term is used by a few folks who sometimes we disagree on some issues, but I see this as the camel's nose under the tent to undo a framework of sound regulations that really protect one the environment and two the public health and safety.

I just pause and think about some recent major disasters. I think of BP in the Gulf Coast, I think of the recent fertilizer plant that had little to no regulation in Texas. I think of the refinery in Concord up by San Francisco. That's what you get when you have minimal regulation or you have individuals that are negligent period. I asked staff to provide me with a few facts.

In the last two years alone we've had 62 releases onshore in, let me take off my glasses because I don't have my bifocals with me. The number of incidents previously between 2003 and 2007 equated to an estimated 10,276 barrels of liquid spilled. 41,306 barrels from 23 oil fields releases occurred between January 1, 2008 and May 2009. Although, because of the regulations that we did put in place a few years ago unanimously by this Board of Supervisors or a previous board of supervisors. These bills have decreased considerably to an estimated 1,276 barrels from 41,000 barrels to 1,276 barrels.

As you all remember, and this was a few years obviously before you came on the board Mr. Adam, we had a spill almost daily if not every other day. And what we found that rather than redundancy, we didn't have the most sound framework of ordinances in place. We overlapped federal state dogger and our local ordinances to get a quick review Of the picture, the lay of the land as to why we couldn't get our hands around this very perilous industry that was constantly spilling into the environment and putting people at risk as well.

So we embarked on a very long review and at the end of the day we asked staff to do five things. Develop a multiple response ordinance which was completed Develop a high risk offender ordinance, which was completed. Develop a centralized database to compile violation history of various providers. It was completed. Increase inspection and permitting fees for those facilities requiring extraordinary time for inspection was completed.

And lastly Implement operational efficiencies which today have been completed by staff on an ongoing basis. I guess I kind of want to Go over all these spills and that kind of illustrate my point. Again I appreciate your bringing this forward but just as passionately with the passion you bring it forward I must passionately tell you that I think it's going to cost us money.

It's really a solution in search of a problem that doesn't exist and really will not be supporting today Mr. Adam.

not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction7:11:39 · ≈ 4:11 PM

Well and that's fine, and I didn't really expect you to. Maybe this was a rhetorical exercise but what it does demonstrate is that the elected official that told me you can't change anything don't even try maybe he was right maybe we can't dig out from under our own weight maybe he was right You know, maybe we won't help ourselves. Maybe we can't even do something as simple You know, you said that the planning department was overburdened already. Well if they're overburdened maybe they can utilize some of their people a little bit better in a different way.

Supervisor Lavinino mentioned that we were trying to change the ordinance. That wasn't part of the deal at all. It didn't change a word of the ordinance. Supervisor Farr said we have She made me write down the comment that we have to give up something. This year, we're $10.8 million in the hole and what are we going to give up? If we can't cut anything anytime anywhere Then I don't know what, I don't know how we get out of the morass that we're in. And we'll never fix any of our deferred maintenance. We're never gonna apply a greater payment to the pension deficit that we have.

If you guys won't help yourselves then that's fine. I'll just sit here and be quiet.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed7:13:28 · ≈ 4:13 PM

Mr. Amar, just reporting, I will say that we've been cutting if you looked at Our past four years, we've been cutting. We've had deficits of $72 million because this economy affected both the private sector and the public sector as well. And we've been cutting dramatically but what I will not do is cut and put the public's safety and health in jeopardy. This is not a good enough trade-off for me to put the public's health in jeopardy and the environment so that we can say that we're doing something good to increase revenues.

I just don't understand the trade off.

CommentJeff NelsonProposed · by introduction7:14:09 · ≈ 4:14 PM

Okay, well just the same let's just for fun Let's let's say that I make the motion That we adopt this as presented And we'll see if I get a second All right.

7:14 – 7:143 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed7:14:32 · ≈ 4:14 PM

All right, that concludes our meeting today. I see no further discussion. Thank you all very much. You know,

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.817:14:44 · ≈ 4:14 PM

can I say something? Well, I'll save it.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed7:14:48 · ≈ 4:14 PM

Well, I'll say something. Are we adjourned? Yeah.