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
Honorary Resolutions (A27–A31)
- Staff read resolutions honoring Public Works Week, a Lacombra Junior High teacher, and the Community Action Commission’s 50th anniversary.
- Representatives from the Lacombra Foundation and Community Action Commission accepted the honors and expressed gratitude for the county partnership.
- The Board approved the batch of honorary resolutions following the readings.
State of California Emergency Solutions Grants Program (A8)
- Staff explained the county must contribute $46,000 from the General Fund to administer the state grant, which yields a $19,677 administrative fee.
- A public speaker highlighted the program's impact, noting it shelters over 150 individuals and housed 61 families in the last fiscal year.
- The Board approved the item as recommended by staff.
Cuyama Valley Resource Center Coordinator (A18)
- Staff presented recommendations for a contractor position with a salary of $91,600 and a General Fund cost of $40,000.
- One supervisor opposed the item citing the salary and cost, while others supported the recommendation.
- The Board approved the staff recommendation for the coordinator position.
MOU with United Domestic Workers of America (A19)
- Staff presented a Memorandum of Understanding raising in-home service worker wages from $12.00 to $12.10 per hour.
- Discussion focused on the over $1 million General Fund cost for raises versus the fiscal sustainability of the wage increase.
- The Board approved the MOU between the In Home Supportive Services Public Authority and the union.
No decision 0–0
County Park Fees and Camping Fees (A21)
- Staff requested a set hearing for June 6, 2017, to adjust special use and camping fees and establish new fees.
- Public speakers debated parking fees at Arroyo Burro and Goleta Beach, with staff noting Coastal Commission jurisdiction and existing free access points.
- The Board approved the administrative item to set the hearing date, clarifying that no fees were adopted at this time.
Commission for Women Report
- Staff presented findings from the "Women Speak Up" event, highlighting issues such as sexual assault, teen dating abuse, and lack of resources in schools.
- The Commission recommended additional fact-finding events and collaboration with the school board to address curriculum gaps.
- The Board received the report and determined it is not a project under CEQA.
2015 Refugio Oil Spill Status Report
- Staff and federal partners reported on the disestablishment of the Unified Command and ongoing pipeline remediation efforts.
- Discussion covered lessons learned from the Coast Guard, PHMSA updates on pipeline lines 901 and 903, and the status of the Natural Resource Damage Assessment.
- The Board received and filed the report, noting the multi-year timeline for settlement and restoration.
Behavioral Wellness – Assisted Outpatient Treatment (AOT) Program Update
- Staff presented data from the first four months of the AOT pilot, noting 44% of candidates were linked to voluntary services.
- Discussion focused on referral sources, eligibility criteria, and the budget options for continuing the pilot for six or twelve months.
- The Board adopted Option 2 to fund the AOT pilot for an additional twelve months.
Fiscal Year 2016-17 Third Quarter Budget Update
- Staff reported the General Fund was $750,000 above budget, while the Mental Health Services Fund showed a negative variance of $3.7 million.
- Discussion addressed the impact of the Governor’s May Revision, including the shift of In-Home Supportive Services funding back to counties.
- The Board accepted the Q3 report and approved a $3.7 million transfer from the General Fund to the Behavioral Wellness Mental Health Services Fund.
Five-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) 2017-2022
- Staff presented a five-year CIP including 179 projects totaling nearly $750 million, with 44.6% of funding identified.
- Significant funded projects for FY 2017-18 include the Northern Branch Jail and the Goleta Beach Access Bridge.
- The Board received and filed the CIP and approved the concept of new projects.
Fiscal Year 2017-18 Public Safety Realignment Plan
- Staff presented the realignment plan, which includes expanding pretrial release, jail treatment, and constructing a 15-bed Mental Health Rehabilitation Center.
- The plan addresses Post-Release Community Supervision and Post-Sentence Supervision populations with a total funding level over $12.3 million.
- The Board adopted the realignment plan and budget recommendations.
South Coast Task Force on Youth Safety Status Report
- The Coordinator reported an 80% decrease in youth with gang terms and conditions from 2009 to 2016.
- The report outlined six initiatives, including improved mental health coordination, job skills training, and service provider collaboration.
- The Board adopted the recommended actions for the task force.
Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) June 30, 2016 Valuation
- Staff presented the OPEB valuation, noting an unfunded liability of approximately $133 million and a 95% unfunded status.
- Discussion covered new accounting requirements, the county’s 4% funding policy, and the shift of retirees to the lower benefit option.
- The Board adopted the staff recommendation regarding the OPEB plan valuation.
Closed Session
- Staff reported that the Board considered seven items, including three existing litigation matters and two anticipated litigation matters.
- No reportable actions were taken during the closed session.
Full summary
Meeting Start and Roll Call
- The Board of Supervisors meeting began at 9:00 a.m. on May 16, 2017. The roll was called, and all members were present. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
Approval of Minutes
- A motion was made and seconded to approve the minutes of the May 9, 2017 meeting. No discussion occurred. The motion passed.
Administrative Agenda: Honorary Resolutions (A27–A31)
- A motion was made and seconded to approve honorary resolutions A27 through A31.
- Resolution A27 (Public Works Week): The Chair requested this resolution be pulled from the immediate vote to allow for a reading. Staff read a section highlighting the Public Works Department’s role in infrastructure, public health, and safety.
- Resolution A29 (Lacombra Junior High School Teacher of the Year): Staff read the resolution honoring Kathy Borden. A representative from the Lacombra Foundation accepted the honor on behalf of Ms. Borden, noting the foundation’s recent name change and its community work.
- Resolution A30 (Community Action Commission 50th Anniversary): Staff read the resolution commending the Community Action Commission (CAC) for its 50th anniversary. A CAC representative thanked the Board, clarifying that CAC is a private nonprofit formed in 1967 via a Board resolution, and expressed gratitude for the county partnership.
- Resolution A31: No specific details were provided in this segment beyond the initial motion covering A27–A31.
Business Agenda: Addenda and Public Requests
- Staff announced an addendum to the closed session agenda adding case Marquis et al v. Santa Barbara County et al (Case No. 15CV00856). Supervisor Adam requested that items A8, A18, and A19 be pulled for individual discussion. Public speakers were identified for items A8 and A21.
Item A8: State of California Emergency Solutions Grants Program
- Discussion: Staff explained that the county would receive a $19,677 administrative fee from the state but must contribute $46,000 from the General Fund to administer the grant. Supervisor Adam expressed concern over the General Fund expenditure. A public speaker from the New Beginnings Safe Parking Program thanked the Board for continued funding, noting the program shelters over 150 individuals and families and has housed 61 families in the last fiscal year.
- Motion: A motion was made and seconded to approve the item as recommended by staff.
- Vote: The motion passed 4-1.
Item A18: Cuyama Valley Resource Center Coordinator
- Discussion: Staff presented recommendations regarding a contractor on payroll as the Cuyama Valley Resource Center coordinator. Supervisor Adam opposed the item, citing the salary of $91,600 as excessive for the area and the $40,000 General Fund cost. No public speakers were present.
- Motion: A motion was made and seconded to approve staff’s recommendation.
- Vote: The motion passed 4-1.
Item A19: MOU with United Domestic Workers of America
- Discussion: Staff presented a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the In Home Supportive Services Public Authority and the United Domestic Workers of America. Supervisor Adam opposed the item, citing over $1 million in General Fund costs for raises and competing budget needs. Supervisor Wolfe supported the item, noting the wage increase from $12.00 to $12.10 per hour for workers providing in-home services to disabled individuals. Supervisor Williams supported the MOU as fiscally sustainable compared to the requested amount. Supervisor Lavagnino asked for clarification on the relationship to the minimum wage; staff explained the wage would reach $12.10 in one year, at which point the state minimum wage would be $11.00.
- Motion: A motion was made and seconded to approve the item.
- Vote: The motion passed 4-1.
No decision 0–0
Item A21: County Park Fees and Camping Fees (Set Hearing)
- Discussion: Staff presented a set hearing request for June 6, 2017, regarding adjustments to county park fees for special use and camping, and establishing new fees.
- A public speaker representing CoLab requested that the Board include information on potential revenue from parking fees at Arroyo Burro and Goleta Beach, arguing that these beaches cost taxpayers millions while charging no parking fees, unlike other county beaches.
- Supervisor Wolfe responded that the Coastal Commission requires Goleta Beach to remain open with free parking. She noted that Arroyo Burro and Goleta Beach are among the highest-generating county parks and that Goleta Beach predominantly serves low-income residents.
- Supervisor Lavagnino expressed disappointment in the parking fee study results and suggested reviewing previous reports on park revenue.
- Supervisor Williams noted that parking fees help maintain parks and that free access is not without cost to taxpayers or users.
- A public speaker from CLAWS (Committee for Land, Air, Water and Species) pointed out existing free beach access points on the Gaviota Coast and argued that the county should not impede public access to the coast.
- Staff indicated that a parking study exists and could be reviewed, and that the Coastal Commission has jurisdiction over parking conditions.
- Supervisor Adam argued for consistent policy, suggesting that if no parking fees are charged in the South County, they should not be charged in the North County.
- Supervisor Wolfe moved to approve the administrative item (setting the hearing). Supervisor Adam moved to not adopt the item and bring it back with no parking fees at any county facility. Supervisor Lavagnino clarified that the current motion was only to set the hearing date, not to adopt fees.
- Motion: A motion was made and seconded to approve Item A21 (setting the hearing for June 6, 2017).
- Vote: The motion passed 4-1.
Balance of Administrative Agenda
- Motion: A motion was made and seconded to approve the balance of the administrative agenda.
- Vote: The motion passed 5-0.
Public Comment (Non-Agenda Items)
- Mark Schatillo (CLAWS): Spoke regarding the Transportation Development Act and Transit Needs Assessment. He corrected the impression that the Board must find an "unmet transit need" to allocate $428,000 to transit, stating it is within the Board’s discretion. He cited public testimony regarding the need for better transit service between Santa Maria and Santa Barbara compared to Ventura County.
- Chris Lee and Dr. Dana Churchill (Shen Yun/Empress Circle): Represented the Shen Yun Performing Arts organization. They discussed the organization’s recent world tour and sold-out shows in Santa Barbara. They stated they are seeking a permanent site in Southern California for a dance academy and venue, and are looking for community advice on how to collaborate.
Departmental Agenda Item 1: Commission for Women Report
- Presentation: Susan Foley, staff for the Commission for Women, and Commissioner Victoria Juarez presented the report from the March 9, 2017 "Women Speak Up" event.
- Over 100 women and girls attended. Key issues raised included fear of deportation, teen dating abuse, sexual assault/rape culture, racism, mental health, and LGBTQ issues.
- Specific concerns included lack of feminine products in school restrooms, inadequate school counseling for non-college-track students, and discrimination in STEM programs.
- The Commission recommended holding additional fact-finding events, meeting with the school board to address curriculum gaps regarding dating abuse and drugs, and collaborating with other agencies.
- Commissioner Juarez highlighted statistics on sexual assault rates among college students and minors, urging the Board to raise awareness and support victims.
- Board Comments:
- Supervisor Williams discussed the role of campus adjudication processes in addressing sexual assault, noting that UCSB has become more responsive but that community colleges may not be adequately addressing the issue. He suggested asking local colleges for data on suspensions/expulsions for sexual assault.
- Supervisor Wolfe thanked the Commission for the forum, noting the emotional impact of hearing directly from young women and the importance of their voices in policymaking.
- The Chair noted that sexual assault is a primary focus of the IV Safe Group, which includes the District Attorney and City College representatives. She encouraged coordination between the Women’s Commission and other groups to avoid working in silos and to share resources.
- Public Comment:
- A speaker emphasized the responsibility of men to speak up against inappropriate conduct and support women. He also highlighted the importance of women in environmental leadership and mentioned an upcoming "Women and the Environment" conference.
- Motion: Supervisor Wolf moved to receive the report and determine that the item is not a project under CEQA.
- Vote: The motion passed.
Agenda Item 2: 2015 Refugio Oil Spill Status Report
- Context: The Board reconvened after a break to hear recommendations regarding the 2015 Refugio Oil Spill Status Report from the County Executive Office.
- Discussion:
- Supervisor Adams: Characterized the item as an "after action report 2.0," noting the spill volume (142,000 gallons) was significantly smaller than other major spills. Argued the item served as political theater to divert attention from the county’s financial and infrastructure challenges.
- Supervisor Williams: Agreed with the scale comparison but argued that the significant damage caused by a smaller spill highlights the need for lessons learned. Emphasized that federal pipeline regulation is less vigilant than state/county regulations, noting the lack of pre-spill safety data checks by federal agencies.
- County Staff (Ms. Nisic, Mr. Lewin, Lt. Corbo, Mr. Mulligan, Ms. Black): Presented a status report on actions taken and planned to enhance response and recovery.
- Unified Command: Officially disestablished on March 2, 2017, ending field cleanup and monitoring.
- Coast Guard (Cmdr. Matthews): Highlighted lessons learned, including the benefit of a local government on-scene coordinator within the unified command. Noted that Coast Guard headquarters is incorporating this as a best practice. Mentioned the establishment of a full-time response specialist in Santa Barbara (Paul Ricketson) to serve as a conduit for community events and consultation. Addressed concerns regarding messaging hierarchy, stating that federal doctrine has been strengthened to ensure regulators have influence over information flow, reducing reliance on the responsible party for messaging.
- California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Lt. Corbo): Reported on response equipment trailers received by the county and announced a joint boom deployment training for first responders scheduled for June 14. Noted ongoing discussions with local communities regarding Local On-Scene Coordinator (LOSC) issues.
- PHMSA (Mr. Mulligan): Provided an update on Pipeline Lines 901 and 903, which remain shut down and purged with inert gas. A small section in Kern County remains in operation under pressure restrictions. The final failure investigation report (released May 2016) identified external corrosion under insulation as the primary cause, with contributing factors including ineffective corrosion protection, failure to detect corrosion, and lack of timely leak detection. A remedial work plan is in progress. The pipeline status changed from interstate to intrastate in 2016, transferring regulatory authority to the California State Fire Marshal, though PHMSA will oversee repairs and the restart plan. New state legislation (SB 295, AB 864) imposes additional inspection and leak detection requirements.
- Work Groups: The Coast Guard and OSPR co-chair an Area Committee with work groups focused on applied response technology, information management, command and control, and operational needs (sampling guidance). These efforts aim to update the Local Oil Spill Contingency Plan by the end of the year.
- Natural Resource Damage Assessment (Ms. Black): The assessment process is ongoing, with trustees (including DFW, Parks, State Lands, UC, NOAA, DOI) in the data collection and analysis phase. Preliminary results have been presented to the responsible party for settlement negotiations. The county serves as a local advisor, having proposed mitigation projects such as coastal trail segments and beach improvements. The timeline for settlement and restoration is dependent on negotiations with the responsible party and is expected to be a multi-year process.
- Supervisor Wolf: Inquired about the timeline for the final contingency plan (targeted for end of year) and raised concerns about the lack of public follow-through on sampling results during the spill.
- Supervisor Williams: Asked about PHMSA’s ability to proactively review in-line inspection data to catch misinterpretations by vendors. PHMSA stated they do not currently have this capability, as interpreting raw data requires specific vendor software skills. Williams also raised the issue of Clean Seas vessels withdrawing at nightfall, limiting cleanup capacity. The Coast Guard explained that vessel capacity and the distance to the offloading site (Port Hueneme) were limiting factors, suggesting that floating bladders or additional vessels could have improved response times.
- Public Comment:
- Andy Caldwell (Colab): Agreed with Supervisor Adams’ points on the political nature of the item. Criticized the use of Coastal Resource Enhancement Fund (CREF) funds, suggesting they could have funded a 24/7 response barge. Requested a report on increased natural oil seepage since drilling began.
- Jenna Driscoll (Santa Barbara Channel Keeper): Expressed gratitude for the Coast Guard and OSPR’s openness to incorporating nonprofits into work groups. Highlighted the collaborative environment fostered by County OEM. Expressed hope for a move toward sustainable energy options.
- Tom Becker: Referenced a 2017 executive order reviewing federal oil and gas developments. Argued that federal investment in offshore oil facilities would bring royalty dollars and jobs to the county. Criticized opponents of federal offshore development for previously supporting the Ventico pipeline hookup despite known dangers of Line 901.
- Gaviota Coast Conservancy/Naples Coalition: A speaker raised concerns regarding the failure to immediately mobilize air quality sampling equipment after the spill, noting that first responders were exposed to high levels of toxic air pollutants. The speaker also emphasized the need for robust quantification of informal recreational use on the Gaviota Coast for the Natural Resources Damage Assessment (NRDA) process to accurately calculate economic damages for open space acquisition and recreational facilities.
- Environmental Defense Center (EDC): Two speakers addressed the board. One speaker thanked the board for the briefing and requested that the board schedule another briefing in six months to continue updating the public on the NRDA process and pipeline status. The second speaker, Chief Counsel for EDC, outlined priorities for prevention, response, and restoration. Key points included:
- Prevention: Concerns regarding state regulations implementing two bills related to pipeline safety; the need to monitor the repair or replacement of lines 901 and 903.
- Response: The need to elevate the county’s role as a first responder, update all oil spill contingency plans (federal, facility, and local), and improve public information and participation. The speaker noted that NGOs would be integrated through the liaison office and offered training in incident command.
- Restoration: Emphasis on the importance of the NRDA process.
- Congressional Office: A representative stated that the office would remain engaged with PHMSA regarding pipeline safety and the Coast Guard regarding response updates. Assistance was offered to county staff in interactions with federal agencies.
- Board Discussion:
- Air Quality Monitoring: Staff acknowledged the comment regarding worker safety and air sampling, stating that worker safety is a concern in local plans and that air sampling can be coordinated with the Air Pollution Control District. A supervisor noted that air quality monitoring did occur during the initial days of the response, with advisories issued in collaboration with the AQMD and Public Health.
- Economic and Environmental Impact: Board members discussed the long-term economic impact on the county, including potential effects on property tax revenue and offshore development. One supervisor noted that while environmental damage is significant, the economic impact may be more lasting, citing the potential for the spill to serve as a rallying cry against future oil development. Another supervisor highlighted the operator’s delay in notifying first responders and the reduction in service levels for oil spill response contractors as key issues.
- Responsibility and Planning: Board members discussed the allocation of responsibility between the operator, the county, and regulatory bodies. One supervisor emphasized that while the county must learn and improve, the responsible party (the operator) must also take responsibility for the incident. Another supervisor noted the importance of planning for unique disasters while acknowledging that not every contingency can be planned for.
- Acknowledgments: Board members expressed appreciation for the work of the Coast Guard, OSPR, PHMSA, and local NGOs. One supervisor specifically acknowledged a Santa Maria-based company for its role in the cleanup.
- Motion and Vote:
- A motion was made to receive and file the report and provide direction as necessary. The motion was seconded.
- Outcome: The motion passed (5-0).
Agenda Item 3: Behavioral Wellness – Assisted Outpatient Treatment (AOT) Program Update
- Presentation: Dr. Gleghardt from Behavioral Wellness presented an update on the Assisted Outpatient Treatment (AOT) pilot program, which was approved by the Board of Supervisors in May 2016 with one year of funding for a three-year feasibility study. The presentation covered the first four months of operations (January–April).
- Program Overview: The AOT program serves individuals with serious mental illness who are reluctant or resistant to treatment. Services include intensive outreach and Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) level care, including housing if needed. The program is funded by general funds and Medi-Cal revenue.
- Key Differences from Standard ACT: Dr. Gleghardt identified three key differences observed in the first four months:
- 1. Referral Source: A higher proportion of referrals came from family members and law enforcement compared to standard ACT referrals, which typically come from mental health professionals. 2. Persistence: The AOT program requires a higher level of documented persistence and follow-up by outreach staff, as mandated by law, compared to the more client-driven nature of standard ACT. 3. Funding Flexibility: The program’s funding structure allows for creative interventions (e.g., purchasing hotel rooms or business supplies) for clients who do not consent to services, which is difficult under a fee-for-service billing model.
- Data (First 4 Months):
- 32 calls received; 18 referrals generated.
- 16 referrals (89%) met criteria for AOT candidates.
- 88% of referrals were from South County; 12% from North County; 0% from West County.
- 50% of referrals were from family members; 25% from law enforcement; 25% from mental health professionals.
- 75% of candidates were homeless at the time of referral.
- 44% of candidates were successfully linked to voluntary mental health services.
- No candidates have yet entered the court-ordered treatment phase (settlement agreement).
- Budget and Options:
- Projected Medi-Cal revenue: ~$148,000.
- Total projected revenues: ~$755,496.
- Projected expenditures include staff, AOT services, legal fees, administrative overhead, housing, and contractual evaluation services.
- Option 1: Continue funding the AOT pilot (serving 10 people) for an additional six months by carrying forward unspent general funds into the 2017-18 fiscal year.
- Option 2: Continue funding the AOT pilot for 12 months, utilizing unspent funds plus new one-time funding of $275,030.
- Option 3: Do not continue funding; unspent funds return to the general fund.
- Evaluation: An external contractor (Harder & Company) is providing quarterly dashboards and a comprehensive annual report expected by the end of the year.
- Board Discussion:
- Referral Disparities: A supervisor asked why West County had no referrals despite equal training efforts. Staff noted that crisis team data follows a similar pattern and that the small sample size (N=10 pilot) limits conclusions. Staff stated they are working with law enforcement and hospitals in Lompoc to increase awareness.
- Eligibility Criteria: A supervisor asked for clarification on how individuals qualify for AOT versus other services. Staff explained the legal criteria, including age, mental illness diagnosis, clinical determination of inability to survive safely in the community, history of non-compliance, and recent hospitalizations or violent behavior. Staff clarified that the crisis team can refer to AOT if criteria are met.
- Residency: A supervisor asked if there is a residency requirement. Staff confirmed that individuals must reside in Santa Barbara County.
- Comparison to ACT: The Chair asked how AOT compares to the existing ACT program. Dr. Gleghardt explained that while both provide intensive services, AOT includes the legal option of court-ordered treatment (the "black robe effect") and has different referral sources and funding flexibility.
- Evaluation Timeline: A supervisor asked about the timing of the external evaluation report. Staff confirmed that the comprehensive annual report is expected by the end of the year, which aligns with the timeline for Option 1.
- Public Comment:
- One speaker, representing OLAB, expressed frustration with the current paradigm of allowing individuals with severe mental illness to remain untreated on the streets. The speaker argued that society should be able to force treatment and medication for those who are out of their mind, citing public safety and humane concerns. The speaker called for changes to the law to allow for forced treatment and abstinence from drugs and alcohol.
- Several members of the public, including representatives from NAMI, Families ACT, and the Downtown Organization of Santa Barbara, spoke in support of continuing the AOT pilot program. Speakers cited evidence from other counties showing reductions in hospitalizations and incarcerations, described specific cases where AOT engagement helped individuals stabilize, and distinguished AOT from the existing Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) model by noting AOT’s legal mandate to compel treatment. Speakers requested funding for a three-year pilot period (Option 2).
- Board Discussion (Continued):
- Supervisor Williams asked staff about the relationship between ACT and AOT, suggesting that AOT serves as an augmentation for clients who do not respond to ACT. He expressed support for the program, citing personal experience with the limitations of voluntary treatment.
- Supervisor Lavagnino asked for clarification on the budgetary process, noting that the board was providing input to the CEO for the recommended budget rather than directly committing funds. He expressed support for the intensive outreach model and the need to evaluate the program's effectiveness over time.
- Supervisor Adams stated she would not support the motion, citing concerns about reactive decision-making and the zero-sum nature of the budget, particularly after recent funding allocations for other services.
- Supervisor Wolk expressed initial concern but shifted to supporting Option 2 after hearing about the program's development and community support. She asked questions regarding the long-term stability of clients linked to mental health services and the sustainability of the program.
- Supervisor Hartman asked about long-term cost savings and the potential for the program to interrupt the "revolving door" of homelessness and incarceration. Staff responded that a national SAMHSA study is underway to collect broader data on AOT outcomes, and that the current pilot is too small to provide definitive long-term cost comparisons.
- Supervisor Williams suggested using clinician estimates to calculate potential cost savings based on avoided jail or hospital admissions.
- Motion and Vote:
- Supervisor Williams moved to adopt Option 2 (funding for a three-year pilot).
- Supervisor Lavagnino seconded the motion.
- Vote Outcome: The motion passed (4-1).
Agenda Item: Closed Session Report
- Discussion: Staff reported that the board considered seven items in closed session, including three existing litigation matters (Petrosi v. County of Santa Barbara, Stoyanova v. Burke, Marquis v. County of Santa Barbara), two anticipated litigation matters, one case of significant exposure to litigation, and a conference with labor negotiators.
- Decision: No reportable actions were taken.
Agenda Item 4: Fiscal Year 2016-17 Third Quarter Budget Update
- Presentation: Staff presented the financial status of the county’s operations.
- General Fund: Showed a positive performance of $750,000 above budget. Six reportable variances were noted, including a projected negative $1.4 million for the Sheriff’s Department and a negative $736,000 for General County Programs. Property tax revenues were underperforming by approximately $2.6 million.
- Special Revenue and Other Funds: Showed a positive performance of $1.8 million above budget. The Mental Health Services Fund showed a negative variance of $3.7 million, improved from the previous quarter, driven largely by administrative days and out-of-county facility utilization. The Fire Protection District showed a positive variance of $2.7 million due to unanticipated revenue and deferred capital expenses.
- Governor’s May Revision: Staff discussed the impact of the Governor’s May budget revision. Revenue expectations were revised up by $2.5 billion, though still below the current year’s budget. The shift of In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) funding back to counties was partially mitigated, with the estimated impact to counties reduced to approximately $600 million. The maintenance of effort (MOE) payment percentage for IHSS is expected to increase from 3.5% to 7% over the next few years. Transportation funding was increased through the passage of Senate Bill 1.
- Board Discussion:
- Supervisor Wolk asked for estimates on the specific financial impact of the IHSS funding shift to Santa Barbara County. Staff indicated that the county had budgeted approximately $2 million in one-time funds for the transition, which may not be fully needed, but noted that ongoing costs would increase due to the rising MOE percentage.
- Supervisor Lavagnino asked for clarification on the dollar amount of the MOE increase, with staff estimating the next year’s increase at approximately $450,000.
- Supervisor Williams asked about progress on designating specific judges for Involuntary Treatment (IST) cases in North and South County to improve efficiency. Staff reported that discussions were ongoing with the presiding judge.
- Motion and Vote:
- Supervisor Wolk moved to accept and file the Q3 budget report, approve the budget revision request to transfer $3.7 million from the General Fund to the Behavioral Wellness Mental Health Services Fund, and receive and file the staff report on the Governor’s May Revision.
- Vote Outcome: The motion passed (5-0).
Agenda Item 5: Five-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) 2017-2022
- Presentation: Staff presented the county’s five-year CIP, which includes 179 capital projects totaling nearly $750 million. Total identified funding is $333 million (44.6% funded). The program includes 18 new projects totaling $137 million, of which $10 million is funded. Significant funded projects for FY 2017-18 include the Northern Branch Jail ($73.9 million), Goleta Beach Access Bridge ($547,000), and North County Residential Crisis Center ($1.5 million). Staff noted that the CIP does not appropriate funds; appropriations will occur during the June budget hearings.
- Board Discussion:
- Supervisor Hartman asked for an estimate of the county’s local funding contribution versus outside grant funding. Staff indicated they did not have the number offhand but would provide it.
- Motion and Vote:
- Supervisor Adams moved to accept the staff recommendations: receive and file the five-year CIP, approve the concept of new projects, and determine the activities are not a project under CEQA.
- Vote Outcome: The motion passed (unanimous).
Agenda Item 6: Fiscal Year 2017-18 Public Safety Realignment Plan / Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) Plan and Budget
- Presentation: Staff presented the FY 2017-18 realignment plan, focusing on strategic planning and future goals following a gap analysis. The plan addresses two populations: Post-Release Community Supervision (PRCS) offenders and Post-Sentence Supervision (PSS) offenders. As of March 31, there were 266 PRCS clients under supervision. Tanya Heitmann presented an update on the realigned population, noting that as of March 31, the department is supervising 172 individuals under the Public Safety Realignment (PSS) program. She reported that the population demographics have remained stable over the past five and a half years, with 57% Hispanic, 33% white, and 8% black. The presentation highlighted that the JFA Institute conducted an independent study of the first five years of realignment in Santa Barbara County, identifying gaps in services, programming, and data integration.
- Initiatives: The CCP adopted several recommendations from the JFA report, resulting in the following initiatives for the fiscal year 17-18 plan:
- Pretrial Release Expansion: The Superior Court’s pretrial program will expand to include a supervision component, utilizing evidence-based risk assessments and funding two deputy probation officers. This is anticipated to commence in July.
- Jail Treatment Expansion: The Sheriff’s Treatment Program (STP) will expand to provide cognitive behavioral therapy and vocational training to higher-risk populations, including those with higher security classifications, using secure tablet technology.
- Mental Health Rehabilitation Center (MHRC): One-time resources were allocated to design and construct a 15-bed MHRC at the former Santa Barbara Juvenile Hall site, with two months of operational funding allocated for completion in April 2018.
- Community Engagement: A Community Engagement Committee will be established to conduct outreach and seek community input, potentially leading to a request for proposals for a community-led effort.
- Data Integration: The Criminal Justice Data Committee will continue focusing on data exchange infrastructure and governance.
- Program Reviews: The Alternative Sentencing Bureau and the Compliance Response Team (CRT) are under review. GPS usage has dropped by nearly 50% since 2012, prompting efforts to maximize its use. The CRT’s activities are being reviewed monthly to determine if funding should be reduced in fiscal year 18-19.
- Funding: The total 17-18 funding level is over $12.3 million, funded by a base allocation of approximately $11.6 million, growth funds, and rollover reserves. The presentation noted that reserves will be reduced by more than half to fund new initiatives, while maintaining a prudent reserve of at least one month’s operating costs.
- Board Discussion:
- Supervisor Lavagnino asked how the current numbers of supervised offenders correlated with projections made in 2011. Staff indicated they did not have the exact comparison figures available at that moment.
- Public Comment:
- Lynn Gibbs, representing NAMI and FamilySAC, expressed support for the feasibility study of the Mental Health Rehabilitation Center. She noted the importance of coordinating mental health services across the system and suggested considering forensic Assertive Outreach Treatment (AOT) in future funding discussions.
- Motion and Vote:
- Supervisor Wolf moved to adopt items A, B, and C of the agenda. The motion was seconded.
- Vote Outcome: The motion passed (unanimous).
Agenda Item 7: South Coast Task Force on Youth Safety Status Report
- Discussion: Saul Serrano, Coordinator of the South Coast Task Force on Youth Safety, provided a status report. He noted that the task force, originally established in 2007 following a fatal stabbing, changed its name from "Youth Gangs" to "Youth Safety" in 2016. Key statistics presented included an 80% decrease in youth with gang terms and conditions in the South Coast from 2009 to 2016.
- Initiatives: The report outlined six initiatives developed following a 2015 assessment:
- 1. Mental Health Services: Improved coordination between the school district and the Department of Behavioral Wellness. 2. Jobs and Job Skills: Assessment of available slots and a pilot mentoring program for five youth. 3. Service Provider Coordination: Bimonthly meetings among 23+ organizations to increase referrals and relationships. 4. Evaluation and Technical Support: Dr. Jill Sharkey is developing curricula to help community-based organizations track data and demonstrate outcomes. 5. Youth Services Inventory: Collaboration with 211 to maintain a comprehensive list of youth services. 6. Summits: Annual summits to connect agencies, including a recent event with 101 participants and 41 agencies.
- Board Comments: Supervisor Wolf and Supervisor Lavagnino commented on the collaboration between the task force, the Probation Department, and other agencies. Supervisor Lavagnino noted that a similar North County task force is being established.
- Motion and Vote:
- Supervisor Wolf moved to adopt recommended actions A and B. The motion was seconded.
- Vote Outcome: The motion passed (unanimous).
Agenda Item 8: Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) June 30, 2016 Valuation
- Discussion: Greg Levin, CEO of the Santa Barbara County Employees Retirement System, and Theo Falati, appointed auditor controller, presented the OPEB plan report. The plan provides health benefits to retired county employees, offering either a $15 monthly subsidy per year of service for those participating in the County Health Insurance Plan or a $4 monthly "in lieu" benefit for those who do not.
- Accounting Changes: New accounting requirements (GASB 74 and 75) will bring OPEB liabilities onto the county’s financial statements. The county’s proportionate share is currently 92-93% of the total plan.
- Funding Policy: The county adopted a funding policy in April to contribute 4% of covered payroll. This allowed the county to use a higher discount rate (6.14%) for this valuation, reducing the total liability by $39 million.
- Benefit Shift: The number of retirees taking the $15 benefit decreased by approximately 50% between 2015 and 2016, while those taking the $4 benefit increased by about 400 participants, resulting in a $6.2 million reduction in plan liability.
- Investments: The plan is invested in passive index funds (60% U.S. equity, 40% U.S. bonds). Returns were 8.22% for the last year and 9.88% since inception in 2012.
- Funded Position: As of June 30, 2016, the county’s actuarial liability was $140 million, with assets of $6.8 million, resulting in an unfunded liability of approximately $133 million (95% unfunded). The county’s financial position improved by $3 million last year due to increased contributions.
- Supervisor Questions: Supervisor Adams asked about the difference in discount rates compared to the core pension plan, which was explained as a result of the county’s contribution level relative to the annual required contribution under old accounting standards. Supervisor Lavagnino asked why the same investment strategy could not be applied to the core pension fund, to which it was explained that the smaller size of the OPEB fund makes low-cost passive indexing more prudent than the higher fees associated with diversified investments for larger funds.
- Future Actions: Wolf outlined the County’s future actions regarding the plan, which include adding liabilities to financial statements and working with County Council to amend planned documents to reflect changes in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and bargaining units. Wolf stated the intention to initiate a process with county staff, HR benefits, the CEO, and County Council to close the plan to new employees from other employers. It was noted that the County of Santa Barbara, SB tag, and APCD have already closed their plans to new employees to stop liability growth, while six other employers have not. Wolf explained that closing the plan to new employees is necessary to ensure the plan eventually ends, as continued enrollment would extend the plan indefinitely. Wolf also mentioned potential future changes to marginal administrative fees.
- Benefit Choice Factors: Supervisor Lavagnino asked what factors drive retirees to choose the $4 benefit over the $15 benefit. Greg Levin responded by providing cost data: for non-Medicare eligible retirees, premiums are approximately $1,200 per month for a single retiree and spouse, with an average benefit of $356 per month (including the $15 subsidy), resulting in roughly $900 in out-of-pocket expenses. For Medicare-eligible retirees, premiums drop to about $800 per month, with net out-of-pocket costs of $400 per month. Levin noted that the average core benefit load is approximately $2,000 per month, identifying this as a significant factor in retiree income security.
- Motion and Vote:
- A motion was made to adopt staff’s recommendation. The motion was seconded.
- Vote Outcome: The motion passed (unanimous).
Adjournment
- The meeting was adjourned. The next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, June 6th, in the Santa Barbara hearing room.