Meeting Summary
This summary was AI-generated to save you time. It may miss or misstate details, so verify against the official recording and the transcript.
At a glance
Budget Recap and Updates
- CEO presented the "Steps to Stability" budget, highlighting improved financial conditions but limited capacity for expansion.
- Staff adjusted maintenance funding to an 18% option targeting a $100 million contribution over ten years.
- General County Program costs were modified to reflect additional contributions from the City of Santa Barbara.
Maintenance Funding Options
- Staff presented funding options ranging from 10% to 25% of undesignated discretionary general fund revenues.
- Supervisors debated the balance between addressing the maintenance backlog and preserving funds for social services and mental health.
- The board adopted the 18% funding option as a guiding principle, with staff to determine the specific allocation mix between roads and buildings.
CEO Expansion Requests
- A supervisor requested a swap in Planning and Development items, which was withdrawn in favor of a one-time expansion.
- The board agreed to proceed with a $30,000 expansion request for the Montecito Design Guidelines as an add-on.
- Staff clarified that fulfilling the request would require additional staffing resources not included in the initial budget.
Board of Supervisors Expansion Requests
- Supervisors presented individual requests for one-time and ongoing funding across various departments and outside agencies.
- Specific requests included funding for 2-1-1 services, the Rental Housing Mediation Task Force, and Parks maintenance.
- Supervisors discussed potential allocations for Casa Esperanza, with some proposing one-time contributions pending further financial review.
FY 2014-15 Recommended Operating Plan and Budget
- The board reviewed and adjusted budget requests, securing support for items such as the Clerk of the Board Records Archive and Public Safety programs.
- Support was secured for community initiatives including the Rental Housing Mediation Task Force, Legal Aid, and the GHG study.
- The board agreed to reserve an additional $60,000 for Casa Esperanza, conditional on the CEO and Auditor-Controller providing assurance of a prudent strategic plan.
- The board passed the motion to adopt the FY 2014-15 budget, including CEO expansions and final adjustments.
Appropriation of $60,000
- The board clarified that the $60,000 allocation for Casa Esperanza falls under program restoration.
- The motion to appropriate the funds passed with four votes in favor and one abstention.
Successor Agency Budget
- The board considered the FY 2014-15 recommended budget for the successor agency to the former Redevelopment Agency.
- The motion to adopt the resolution for the successor agency budget passed unanimously.
Full summary
Agenda Item: Public Comment (Opening)
- The Board accepted testimony from three representatives of Casa Esperanza, a homeless shelter and service provider, regarding a funding request. Rob Pearson (Board of Directors) noted that the Gilday Foundation is reducing the organization’s debt by over $1 million and committing a $75,000 grant over ten years. He stated that Casa Esperanza ceased its day center and lunch programs due to financial shortfalls but continues to operate 24/7 winter and transitional shelters, requesting county support to remain operational. Bob Vogel (Volunteer Executive Director) stated that the organization revised its funding request to $200,000, payable in two installments of $100,000 in July and November, to allow the county to track performance. He emphasized that private donations are insufficient. Mark Asman (Board Chair) stated that the organization has trimmed programs, reduced staff, restructured debt, and brought administration in-house, requesting additional county support. The Chair allowed the testimony to proceed. No formal motion or vote was taken.
Agenda Item: Public Comment (Continued)
- Two additional speakers addressed the board regarding budget priorities. David Brummond (Engineers and Technicians Association) opposed the proposed elimination of positions in the County Surveyor’s Office, arguing that road maintenance and infrastructure improvements require survey work to preserve property boundaries and that eliminating these positions would likely result in the need to hire temporary help later in the fiscal year. Andy Caldwell (COLAB) commented on the recent failure of Measure M (maintenance measure), stating that the board should follow through on commitments to address maintenance backlogs, referencing previous statements by supervisors about allocating increased general fund revenue to maintenance. No formal motion or vote was taken.
Agenda Item: Budget Recap and Updates
- The Chair commented on the budget process, noting it was more comprehensive than in prior years due to early public workshops and the inclusion of many public requests in the initial budget by the CEO. CEO Miyasako presented the budget titled "Steps to Stability," noting improved financial conditions but limited capacity for expansion. She highlighted ongoing challenges including health care costs, employee compensation, the North Branch Jail funding obligation ($17 million), and maintenance needs. Staff provided updates since the previous hearing:
- Maintenance funding was adjusted to an 18% option, targeting a $100 million contribution over a 10-year period.
- General County Programs costs were adjusted: one item increased to $130,000 (including extra help costs) and another reduced from $53,700 to $49,700 (reflecting an additional $20,000 contribution from the City of Santa Barbara).
- Letters of support for outside agency requests were updated.
- No formal motion or vote was taken.
Agenda Item: Maintenance Funding Options
- Staff presented funding options based on percentages of undesignated discretionary general fund (10%, 15%, 18%, 20%, and 25%). Supervisor Wolf inquired about the source of the $7.1 million allocated for 2014-2015, which staff explained is a combination of general fund, federal funds, and one-time contributions. She further inquired about the $10.4 million for corrective maintenance, which staff identified as a combination of Measure A funds, gas tax, and general fund maintenance of effort. Supervisor Wolf questioned the methodology for estimating future growth and one-time contributions in the projections. Staff clarified that the $3 million baseline for maintenance is maintained, and the projections represent the incremental gap identified in the Jorgensen report.
- Supervisor Adams proposed shifting the focus from allocating a specific annual amount to establishing a goal-based plan to fully fund maintenance needs within a reasonable timeframe (e.g., stopping deferral of current year maintenance within five years and eliminating the backlog within 15 years). Supervisor Wolf expressed concern about prioritizing maintenance over other needs such as social services and mental health, stating that cutting into general reserves is undesirable. Supervisor Carbajal responded to Supervisor Adams, emphasizing a balanced approach to budgeting and noting that while maintenance is important, it cannot be the sole focus.
- The Chair discussed the historical context of road funding, noting that the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) was last at 70 in 2003-2004. Staff explained that rising oil and asphalt prices have reduced the effectiveness of funding, and that the loss of access to certain state and federal funding streams (RSTP, STIP) under Measure A compared to Measure D has increased the county's burden. Supervisor Adams reiterated that even the 20% funding option leaves a significant backlog ($243 million) at year 10, arguing that a rational multi-year plan is needed to solve the problem. Supervisor Carbajal used an analogy regarding tractor maintenance to argue for the necessity of ongoing maintenance rather than just replacement. No formal motion or vote was taken. The board continued deliberation.
Agenda Item: Public Comment (Maintenance Funding)
- Andy Caldwell requested to speak after the board made a motion, as he wanted to know the board's direction before commenting. The Chair agreed to allow public comment after the motion. Joe Armendariz (Santa Barbara County Taxpayers Association) argued that the board has a responsibility to maintain county assets (roads, buildings, parks) using available resources. He noted that the county spends approximately $1.6 billion annually on government programs and that Measure M reflected a public desire for maintenance, even if voters were hesitant about tax increases. He suggested that the board should find the necessary funds within the current budget context. Lupe Montano (CIU 721) and Amy (Adult Protective Services Social Worker) spoke on behalf of social workers. They highlighted high caseloads, staff turnover, and difficulty retaining qualified candidates. They noted that Santa Barbara County social workers earn 20.2% less than the mean salary in comparable counties and that the county invests only 4% of its general fund in social services, compared to 11.9% in other counties. They requested increased investment in child welfare services. No formal motion or vote was taken.
Agenda Item: Maintenance Funding Options and Directions to Staff
- Public comment was received regarding the importance of infrastructure maintenance for social services and transportation, urging the Board to prioritize road, bridge, and culvert maintenance alongside other county obligations. Supervisors discussed the proposed funding options for infrastructure maintenance, ranging from 10% to 20% of unallocated general fund revenues over a ten-year period. One Supervisor expressed support for the 18% option, noting it represents a significant investment while maintaining flexibility for future emergencies and economic changes. Another Supervisor preferred the 10% option, arguing that when combined with existing annual allocations, it provides sufficient funding without overcommitting resources needed for other essential services such as child welfare and mental health. A third Supervisor indicated a preference for the 15% option, citing existing commitments to fire department tax transfers and jail operations funding, and requested further information on how the new funding would interact with current budget assumptions and potential capital financing. The Chair supported the 18% option, emphasizing the need for a clear, multi-year plan to address the backlog and noting that the funding mechanism would be similar to the jail operations funding plan. The Chair also suggested that the specific allocation mix between roads and buildings should be determined by staff on a year-to-year basis rather than fixed in the motion. Another Supervisor initially favored higher percentages but agreed to compromise at the 18% level to secure board support. A final Supervisor expressed concern about rushing the decision without fully understanding the long-term financial impacts and deferred maintenance backlog figures, suggesting that staff should provide more detailed analysis before a final direction is given.
- A motion was made to adopt the 18% funding option as a guiding principle for future budgets, with the specific mix of funds for roads versus buildings to be determined by staff. The motion was seconded. The Board voted on the motion. The motion passed with four votes in favor and one abstention.
Agenda Item: CEO Expansion Requests
- The CEO presented recommended expansion requests, including items for Planning and Development (P&D). A Supervisor requested a swap in the P&D long-range planning items, proposing to replace the "Montecito Design Guidelines" project with the "Circulation Element Update" to address specific concerns in the Santa Maria area. Staff explained that the P&D list was based on current staffing capacity. Adding a new project without removing another would require additional staff, which was not budgeted. Staff indicated that the Circulation Element Update was a lower priority compared to other items on the list and that the Montecito Design Guidelines were a staff-driven project requiring specific expertise. The Supervisor withdrew the request for a swap and instead requested a one-time expansion of $30,000 for the Montecito Design Guidelines, acknowledging that this might require additional staffing or contracting resources. Staff clarified that the project is primarily staff-driven and that adding it would require an additional staff position costing approximately $139,000, which was not included in the initial $30,000 request. The Supervisor maintained the request for the $30,000 expansion, noting that if it could not be fulfilled with existing resources, the funds would not be allocated. The Board decided to proceed with the expansion request as an add-on rather than a swap, allowing the item to be funded if resources permitted.
Agenda Item: Board of Supervisors Expansion Requests
- Supervisors presented their individual expansion requests for one-time and ongoing funding.
- Supervisor Wolf: Requested funding for various items including software for board commissions, a PIO function, a probation field training officer, IT support for Parks, cabin maintenance, park maintenance improvements, LED lighting financing, a GHG study, and 2-1-1 services. The Supervisor also requested guidance on an allocation for Casa Esperanza, noting that the request had been reduced from $380,000 to $200,000. Staff suggested that if an allocation is made, it should be done in two parts to allow for continued review of the organization's financial condition. The Supervisor held off on committing to a specific amount for Casa Esperanza pending further discussion.
- Supervisor Carbajal: Requested funding for 2-1-1, the Rental Housing Mediation Task Force, the Sustainability Action Plan, a Victim Witness Supervisor, a Public Defender legal office professional, the P&D GHG Thresholds study, the Montecito Design Guidelines (as a one-time expansion of $30,000), the Legal Aid Foundation, UC Cooperative Extension, and Casa Esperanza. For Casa Esperanza, the Supervisor proposed a one-time allocation of $60,000, mirroring the City of Santa Barbara’s approach, with continued discussions for future allocations. The Supervisor also requested $70,000 for the County Council and $12,600 for the Coastal Housing Partnership.
- Supervisor Adam: Requested $938,000 for Parks (Item 3), $143,198 for General Services (Item 1), $106,000 for General Services (Item 2), and $100,000 for General Services (Item 3).
- Supervisor Farr: Began to present requests but was interrupted by a break in the meeting.
- No vote was taken on the individual expansion requests in this section; the items were listed for staff to record and for further board deliberation.
Agenda Item: FY 2014-15 Recommended Operating Plan and Budget (Board Adjustments and Final Deliberations)
- Supervisors reviewed and adjusted the list of budget requests, categorized into one-time and ongoing expenses. The board addressed visibility issues with the financial charts, taking a break to allow staff to consolidate the list into a readable format separating one-time and ongoing allocations. Key items discussed and adjusted during the deliberation included:
- CEO Office: Support was secured for the Clerk of the Board Records Archive Project (digitization), the Public Information Officer position, and software for board and commission management.
- Parks and Recreation (CSD): The board secured support for the Lake Cachuma cabins software (revenue-generating) and maintenance funding. A request for an IT support position was discussed; after clarification that the position would allow CSD to have its own IT staff rather than sharing with the Agriculture Department, one supervisor withdrew their vote, leaving the item without the required three votes.
- Public Safety and Legal: Support was secured for the District Attorney’s victim witness program, the Public Defender’s legal office professional, and Probation’s field training officer.
- General Services: Support was secured for on-bill financing, the purchasing manager position, and software upgrades.
- Community and Outside Agencies: Support was secured for the Rental Housing Mediation Task Force, Cooperative Extension, Jail Ride Program, Coastal Housing Partnership, Center for Entrepreneurship, Legal Aid, 211 service, and the GHG study.
- Isla Vista Streetlights: Support was secured for the $85,000 request, with clarification that the funds would go to Public Works.
- Los Alamos Cemetery District: Support was secured for the $26,000 property swap assistance.
- Gaviota Plan EIR: The board discussed the funding source, noting that $150,000 could be drawn from the Planning and Development Department’s committed fund balance, freeing up other funds. Support was secured for this item.
- Casa Esperanza: The board discussed the $60,000 request. Following public comment and further deliberation, the board agreed to reserve an additional $60,000 (totaling $120,000) but with the condition that no funds be released until the CEO and Auditor-Controller provide assurance of a prudent strategic plan and the board receives a full D-item agenda for further discussion.
Public Comment
- Five members of the public addressed the board: 1. Andy Caldwell (CoLab): Expressed concerns about the lack of a consolidated list for public review. Criticized the hiring of PIOs and the 211 service, suggesting the Air Pollution Control District should handle GHG studies. Commented on the Gaviota Plan’s impact on agricultural legacy planning. 2. Bob Vogel (Casa Esperanza): Requested county support to match the City of Santa Barbara’s $125,000 contribution to maintain a balanced budget. 3. Emily Allen: Thanked the board for addressing homelessness concerns and requested consideration of ongoing funding for the Jail Ride Program. 4. Angela Antonori: Clarified the strategic nature of the City’s allocation to Casa Esperanza and requested county support to match the city’s contribution. 5. Victoria Green (Montecito Association): Thanked the board for supporting the Montecito design guideline update.
Motion and Vote
- A motion was made and seconded to adopt the fiscal year 2014-15 recommended budget, including the CEO recommended budget expansions and restorations (Attachment A1) and the final budget adjustments (Attachment E). The motion included delegating authority to the County Executive Officer to execute renewals of single-year grants and contracts and approve cost changes up to 10% without returning to the board. It also included adopting the resolution entitled "In The Matter Of Adopting The Budget For Fiscal Year 2014-15" and approving the work objective for the CEO office to coordinate an interdepartmental countywide Isla Vista initiative. The board noted the specific condition regarding Casa Esperanza: funds are to be held and not released until the CEO and Auditor-Controller provide assurance and the board receives a D-item agenda. The motion to adopt the FY 2014-15 budget and related resolutions was passed.
Agenda Item 1 (Continuation): Appropriation of $60,000
- A board member asked whether the motion needed to specify if the $60,000 should be directed to the contingency fund or the restoration fund. The CEO stated that the funds currently fall under program restoration. Another board member clarified that the funds are currently in program restoration and will be released from that account as needed for appropriation next year. A motion was made and seconded. A roll call vote was requested. The motion passed 4 to 1.
Agenda Item 2: FY 2014-15 Recommended Budget for the County of Santa Barbara (Successor Agency to the Former Redevelopment Agency)
- The item was read from the County Executive Office, requesting the board to consider recommendations regarding the fiscal year 2014-15 recommended budget as the successor agency to the former Santa Barbara County Redevelopment Agency and to adopt the resolution. The Chair asked for requests to speak; none were received. A motion was made and seconded to pass Item 2. The Chair asked for a show of hands. All in favor voted "aye," and no one opposed. The motion passed unanimously.
Adjournment
- The Chair announced that the 2014-15 Santa Barbara County budget agenda was finished. The board adjourned until Friday the 13th for a special meeting in Santa Maria at 9:00 AM.