Board of Supervisors — 2017-06-06

you Welcome and good morning. It's the June 6th Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors meeting here in the Santa Barbara County hearing room Mr. Allen will you call the roll please?

Mr. Lavinino, here. Mr. Williams, here Ms. Wolfe, here Mr. Adam, here Ms. Hartman,

I will make a motion to do that and as I do that, I want to congratulate our audience. That was the best audience participation in four-and-a-half years

on the pledge. Thank you.

So that they will also clap I will second that motion.

Any discussion of the minutes? All in favor say aye. Any opposed? The minutes pass. Do we have a CEO's report today Ms. Niasato? No report this morning chair. OK we have three honorary resolutions 847, 48 and 49 may I have a motion to approve?

So moved.

All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? The honorary resolutions pass and the first would you read a 49 into the record please Mr. Allen.

Chair Hartman, members of the board item 849 sponsored by the chair Supervisor Hartman this is a resolution of commendation honoring Alicia Lopez of the Public Defender's Office as our June 2017 employee of the month for Santa Barbara County and if Alicia could come on up Thank you and I will read the resolution into the record. Whereas Alicia Lopez, legal office professional expert is awarded the County Employee of the Month Award for her commitment to dedication with many responsibilities in the Lompoc Public Defender's Office and does with a positive attitude and attention to detail. And whereas Alicia worked at Carrows as a bookkeeper and Legal Aid Foundation as a paralegal before coming to the public defender's office in 1993 She has been the cornerstone of the Lompoc office for more than 24 years, assisting and training countless attorneys and support staff who have been assigned to that office taking great pride in the work she does for the residents of Santa Barbara County.

And whereas Alicia has consistently demonstrated her abilities as a legal office professional expert, going above and beyond for each client due to her wealth of knowledge and experience regarding the legal system. And is dependable team player who uses innovation and creativity in improving office work conditions as a keen ability to train and find projects for any staff member or intern.

Whereas Alicia was born in Mexico and grew up in Lompoc, has been married to her husband Wayne, and between the two of them raised five children and now enjoy two grandsons. And whereas, Alicia spends her Sundays as a religious education teacher for children and adults at her church. In her spare time and for relaxation she loves to go camping, enjoys going out to eat, likes going to the movies and spending time with her family and friends. Now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors recognizes Alicia Lopez for exceptional and continuous contributions to the work of Santa Barbara County by naming her as Santa Barbara County Employee of the Month for June 2017. Passed and adopted today.

Good morning Madam Chair, members of the board. I want to thank you for acknowledging Ms. Lopez as the employee of the month for June 2017 Ms. Lopez approaches her work with 100% dedication and devotion, she truly is a public servant and she gives constant guidance to our office on what people should do and she is a community leader, she spends time with her church, she touches the community in many facets and we are very proud and grateful to have Ms. Lopez as one of the members of the Public Defender staff. Thank you.

I just want to say thank you very much for the acknowledgement. Sometimes some of the employees of the county have been working here for 24 years and sometimes we feel like we're being ignored, so thank you very much. Thank you very much.

And next resolution A48, Mr. Allen.

Chair Hartman and members of the board item A48 this is sponsored by the entire board today. This is a resolution of commendation honoring William J. Cerrone upon his retirement as Santa Barbara County Superintendent of Schools after over 34 years of faithful and distinguished service in leadership to students educators and citizens of Santa Barbara County.

Bill if you'll come on up to the podium I'll read the resolution into the record Whereas, William Cerrone having worked continuously as the longest serving county superintendent in the state of California was elected to the position in 1982 and has been re-elected every four years since. And whereas, William Cerrone having begun his career in public education in 1960 as a teacher in Harlem and New York City thus establishing a long track record of leadership in education business civic affairs and success clearly tied to his passionate belief in partnerships with a wide array of institutions Nor as William Cerrone having earned numerous honors including the Anti-Defamation League's Distinguished Community Service Award, California PTAs Honorary Service Award, The Santa Barbara Foundation's Man of the Year, The Santa Barbara News Press Lifetime Achievement Award, The Association of California School Administrators Awards as Regional Superintendent of the Year and as the State Ferd Kessel Memorial Distinguished Service Award.

And whereas Bill will be concluding 34 years as county superintendent when he retires on June 30, 2017. Allowing him to spend more time with his best friend and wife of 54 years Barbara as well as his son and daughter-in-law and two granddaughters. Now therefore it is hereby ordered and resolved that the Board of Supervisors commends William Cerrone for his faithful and distinguished service in leadership with the students educators and citizens of Santa Barbara County congratulates him on his retirement and wishing him and his family many years of continued good health and happiness

I want to thank you and everyone, not for the recognition as much as for your support through the years because to me public education is really the cornerstone of our great democracy. It's the great equalizer, it's the melting pot, it's where the social escalator that makes the American dream possible. And certainly the support of the board, participation and sponsorship of so many things like First Five and a zillion others which I won't mention.

really truly make a difference for children and families. So it's, for me, it's been an honor and a privilege to serve the children, the families, the community, all of the citizens in Santa Barbara County. And it's been a privilege to work with all you and everyone here as well. So thank you.

Thank you Mr. Cerrone Before I ask which administrative items supervisors or the public would like to pull, I'd just like to say that if you have not yet filled out a speaker slip and you're here to speak about item number one please if you are willing to speak for just one moment instead of two minutes circle a 1 on this side above Board of Supervisors and turn that in to Mr. Allen and you'll have an opportunity to go first.

So with that I have for pulled items A30 and A34. Are there any others? Do we have any public speaker slips?

Chair Hartman, members of the board. I have one request to speak on item 828.

OK. And no others so let's go forward with 828

Chair Hartman, members of the board. Item A-28 is from Public Works. It's to consider recommendations regarding the memorandum of understanding for the Olive Mill Road and San Ysidro intersection improvements projects in the First District. Tom Becker is here to speak on this.

And Chair Hartman on A- 28, this is an item where we have outside counsel available if there's a need for discussion by the Board on that item they'll be participating by telephone today.

Thank you. Is Mr. Becker here?

Thank you Tom Becker cars are basic. Sorry about the I gave it to the lady back here very very short notice we're waiting for more information from the Federal Highway Administration this is a 28. You should have received something from us just a few minutes ago. You folks need to take this very very seriously. Cars are basic. This is the second time cars were basic in our history 19 year history It's the second time that we've challenged federal funding of any county project. The last time we challenged a federal funding The funding was pulled by the Federal Transit Administration from SB CAG and people lost their jobs over that. That project went down in flames because we discovered bid rigging This issue that's before you now, you need to take it very seriously.

We only did it once. We have a 100% success rate in getting federal funding pulled from county projects. You need to be very, very concerned about what's going on here. I'm the one that led that effort against MTD and the one who prepared all the documents. Some of you may have remembered that This is far, far worse than the South Coast Transit Plan project.

Far worse. The implications for you and the county and the board are many, many times greater than that project which we succeeded at getting federal funding pulled from. And people fired from their jobs including the executive director of MTD Gary Gleason Right now the Federal Highway Administration is conducting an internal review of SBK's application for the MOU.

Right now as we speak, we have been in contact with the Federal Highway Administration and they're taking this seriously and so should you because this isn't going to end today. Now this is the last time that the public will have a chance to speak at the county level On this issue. Why the S. B. K. board decided to submit the M. O. U.. To the federal highway administration before the public review process was finished in this county is a serious question that we have to S. P. K.. And to the federal highway administration my time's almost up folks you need Thank you very much. Thank you.

Chair and members of the board, item A30 is from social services. This is a recommendation regarding the first amendments to the agreement with Casa Pacifica Centers for Children and Families for Child Welfare Services wraparound services and safety watch services programs.

Supervisor Adam.

Yeah Mr. Nielsen? Yes. Is this program going to survive over the next three to five years?

I believe it will not only survive, but I believe it's going to become more and more essential as we're doing continuum of care reform and needing to have more resources to support kids in residential placements as opposed to group homes.

Okay, well you know I'm not sure that's the case. I'm interested in your opinion and I'm glad that you gave it to me. You know this in contrast to our normal custom and practice We usually put general fund money into federal programs like this to leverage our money and get more out of it. In this case, it's the opposite we are putting 60% of the money up so that the federal government is leveraging their money by getting us to put up 60%.

Supervisor Adam through the chair. One of the fundamental aspects of the structure of this program and the mindset behind the program is that if we weren't spending this money in this program, the general fund money to support kids in residential placements bringing them down from group home levels of care to lower levels of care that we would be spending that money and more on the general fund level to support All right. Thank you. You changed my mind.

I don't think that's going to happen again today. An

agile,

flexible mind.

Okay turning to item A34 Mr. Allen would you read that into the record?

Chair Hartman and members of the board also from social services item A34 is regarding the community action commission of Santa Barbara this is an agreement for enhanced family reunification support services.

And Supervisor

Atom. Somebody should go check my staff because I'm sure they are in the office and they probably need CPR or something. Okay 34, I just want a roll call vote on because that's $54,000 of general fund money that you're not going to change my mind on. Thank you. We're going to roll call.

All right, Madam Chair I'll move on A34. Thank you second?

Second.

Okay Mr. Allen.

Mr. Lavinino. Aye. Mr. Williams. Aye Ms. Wolfe. Aye Mr. Adam. No. Ms. Hartman. Aye Passes 4-1

And yes, Mr.

Allen? As we move on to finalize the admin agenda I did have a couple of announcements. We do have a memo to withdraw item A5 from the agenda today. And this item comes to the board from behavioral wellness. This is regarding the fiscal year 16-17 transfer of California Health Facilities Financing Authority funds for Centromere Crisis Residential Treatment Center, and they'd like to have that withdrawn from the agenda today.

We also posted an addendum, we added Item A50 onto the administrative agenda. This was a resolution of commendation for Karen Steinwax. I just wanted to note those changes to the admin.

Thank you.

Move the balance of the admin agenda.

Okay, taking out A5 and adding A50. May I have a second? All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay one last reminder if you want to speak on agenda item number one please get your speaker slips in after that's read into the record we will not accept any more speaker slips. Now is the time on our agenda when anyone who wants to talk about an item that is not on the agenda may have a speaker slip submitted and have three minutes of time to talk about those issues and alert us to it.

Chair Hartman members of the board, we have two requests to speak today. We're going to start with Ed Kolaski to be followed by Denise Spangler Adams. Mr. Kolasky?

Good morning everyone. This is the third anniversary of having been kicked out The Bar, oh boy. The Board of Architectural Review back in June of 2014 we came in for our fifth meeting to get approved. We had a five-to-two vote prior to this in our favor. We come in and sit down they vote seven to zero against us and they kick us out of the meeting. They had Dylan jump up and start screaming. We could not even ask a single question. We never got to say a single word We were rejected because they claim that our second story is located solely over the garage.

And in their 64-page report, they point out that our second story is located solely over the garage. Now when I first presented this it was not in red and Supervisor Peter Adam here within two seconds said that's not solely over the garage Here it's fairly clearly outlined that it's over the garage, the kitchen, the dining room and part of the living room plus the laundry room.

Three years later there have been changes to the board and two members are new members since January so they missed out on half of this discussion. What does it take? I mean you know you go through your life with all kinds of crap you have to go through and you have to do. You've got to spend here three years dealing with a corrupt government, a corrupt local government.

Is there anyone that can say that's solely over the garage? You know it's illegal to kick someone out of a public meeting and certainly illegal to kick someone out without good cause if they paid for the meeting You know what it's like to be kicked out of a meeting that you paid for? Did you want to get approval to do your design because you retired and you would like them have a nice house.

You'd like to improve the neighborhood from our little shack more or less, three bedroom very tight. And we have someone here in our district rep number two That won't even see me to talk about our problem. How disgusting is that? It's just like, you know, you might as well be living in a communist country. You can't do this. You can't do that. No, you can't improve your house. No we'll say that solely over the garage and therefore you're in violation of 4.7.

Which says do not locate your second story solely over the garage or any single entity of This is the United States of America here? I've never seen such corruption.

You know you hear about it. That is your time, Mr. Kolaski.

Thank you. Our final speaker under public comment.

I would ask people in the audience, this is a dignified proceeding. This isn't a sports event so I would ask you please not to clap, not to yay, not to boo. This is democracy in action we can do it here. We can show each other respect and honor each other thank you. Supervisor Wolk.

Thank you Madam Chair, just to correct a statement I did meet with Mr. Pulaski and also referred him to our planning and development staff where there were meetings held with Mr. Pulaski along with SBAR representatives thank you madam

chair.

Our final speaker under public comment is Denise Spangler Adams

Good morning, thank you. I came today because I wanted to call to your attention some pending Sacramento legislation that's a concern to me and to request your proactive participation or your greater participation on what is going on in Sacramento. I know Doss Williams you are already familiar with this because I have been in contact with Anyway, I got involved in this because I was originally involved with the Granny Flat Ordinance in 1983 with Kathy Wright, the Republican from Simi Valley who was a former mayor and an assemblywoman to develop Granny Flat Ordinances. So with the changes that came into effect in January of 2017, I started to follow those more closely with the passage of Assembly Bill 1069 which we're implementing now. But in the process of doing that, other legislation pops up which it's California is going too far and it's becoming very dictatorial.

And it's taking away all of our local control and I think we need to put Sacramento actively on our radar. Specifically Assembly Bill 352 by Assembly Member San Diego will further amend the accessory dwelling units. Any parcel can have 150 square foot efficiency unit occupied by two persons with a partial bath and a partial kitchen. I'd like to ask you, would you please consider each of our communities? Santa Maria, Orchid, Montecito, Summerlin, Carpinteria, San Ines. Consider if everybody like one house in my neighborhood has 150 square foot trailer parked right in front And no bathroom facilities. It rents for about $1,700 a month I'm told and that is what we see as we drive up and down our streets. I think with the prohibitions that Sacramento was setting that you cannot prohibit these whether you're a county city or special district that you have to allow them in this bill specifically if you're within a half mile of public transport or if you're near a UC which we have one here in Santa Barbara or at Cal State University We need to be concerned.

And so I'm just asking, I know you have staff that monitor Sacramento and perhaps we could be proactive. I talked to housing and community development. Paul McDougal is working on a lot of these issues. There's no opposition on file. So if we're concerned about the infrastructure, the uniqueness of our communities, if we're concerned about safety or what we're going to even be 10 years from now, I hope that we could look at some long range Thank you for your time.

Thank you. So turning now to our departmental agenda item number one, last call for speaker slips on this item. Mr. Allen would you read that into the record please?

Chair Hartman and members of the board, Item 1 is from planning and development. It's a hearing to consider recommendations regarding short term rental ordinances.

Good morning chair Hartman and supervisors. This presentation on short term rentals follows the last hearing on December 6th with specific answers to a variety of questions posed by your board. We are here today seeking your direction on the use of short term rentals in the county The short-term rental project has been through an extensive public outreach process as shown by this graphic.

Currently, short-term rentals are allowed in the county. This is due to the fact that zoning ordinances do not address the use and do not place restrictions on the use. The Board of Supervisors added the review of short-term rentals to the Long Range Planning Work Program for the fiscal year of 2015-2016. In review of this timeline, you will see that we have held five County Planning Commission meetings and two Montecito Planning Commission meetings.

The planning commissions made recommendations to the board that were presented at the last hearing and included defining the use of short-term rentals, prohibiting the use in residential, agriculture one, resource protection, industrial and certain purpose districts. Also the Planning Commission recommendation allowed the use of short-term rentals in commercial and mixed use as well as allowing it in agriculture too with regulations.

These next slides are on the main points from your board letter To begin with, I will give you some background on transient occupancy tax or TOT. Short-term rental operators are required to collect TOT from transients who stay for a period of 30 consecutive days or less. The amounts on these slides are just for the TOT that was collected on short term rentals and do not include other TOT from other lodging sources.

The recommendation of the Planning Commission would have a fiscal impact on the TOT collected. As shown here, only 8% of the current TOT certificates would be in zones where the use would still be allowed. 92% would be rendered illegal by the Planning Commission's recommendation. If that revenue was no longer collected, the known losses could be upwards of $1.5 million.

Another important piece of information on the TOT certificate is that it does not constitute a land use permit for a short-term rental. The last piece of information requested on the TOT was in regards to the application. The TOT application does not currently require operators to provide information on housing type, if the rental unit is a primary or secondary dwelling unit, or if the owner occupies the home at the same time as the transient.

But the application could be modified to include this information with your direction. Staff use these locations of the existing TOT certificates to create graphics and maps that illustrate where TOTs are in the county. And this information is included in attachment 3 of your board letter. To briefly summarize some of the findings, looking at the community plan areas 26% of the TOT certificates fall into the Montecito Community Plan. 24% fall into the Santa Ynez Community Plan and 14% into the Eastern Goleta Valley Community Plan When we reviewed zoning, 73% of the TOT certificates are in residential zoning. 24% are in agricultural zoning. Of that 24% in ag, 73 percent of those are in Agricultural 1 zoning.

As you know, here at the county we have three different zoning ordinances. 56% of the TOTs fall in the inland area or the Land Use Development Code. 14% fall into the Montecito LUDC and 30% into the coastal zone or Article 2. Of those 30% in the coastal zone 12% are also in the Montecito Community Plan boundary Another question that staff answered in our board letter is in regards to short-term rentals and the housing element.

The housing element inventories vacant and underutilized sites zoned and suitable for new development. It estimates what can be built in the future to meet regional needs, housing allocation or RENA requirements. In review of our housing element, it specifically states the South County has the lowest rental vacancy rates in years at 1% and the rental costs are rising.

A countywide survey of available rental housing indicated a lack of affordable rental housing particularly in the South County, Santa Anaz Valley and Lompoc Valleys. For example, in the housing element 3.6% of the housing stocks surveyed in the 2010 census was being converted to seasonal recreational or occasional use which could include short-term rentals or other vacation housing types such as second or third homes Staff also contacted the California Department of Housing and Community Development, and they have no current position on short-term rentals.

Our current housing element will not be re-evaluated until 2023, so any action taken here today on short term rentals and their future impact on RHNA is unknown but would not change the certification of our current housing element. Additional information requested included owner occupied short term rentals 535 TOT certificates were issued in the last fiscal year.

185 are claiming a homeowner's exemption in their taxes, which means that it is their primary residence. The remaining 350 TOT certificates renting as short-term rentals could be second or third homes long term rentals or commercial short-term rentals Staff searched for vacancy rate data for the county that did not include the cities. Unfortunately, the census does not update vacancy rate datasets for our area and only updates that information for larger population areas like the city of Santa Barbara.

The housing element data from the 2010 census does state that the vacancy rate for the South Coast including the cities was 1%. The current numbers collected for the City of Santa Barbara that have been recently updated also show this low vacancy rate. Staff also included the Coastal Commission comments on the previous Planning Commission's recommendation in your board letter.

The Coastal Commission states that short-term rentals in the coastal zone provide for low cost accommodations The Planning Commission's recommendation did not provide for many short-term rentals in the coastal areas. If new direction, different from the Planning Commission's recommendation is given today, staff will solicit new comments on that direction from the Coastal Commission.

We have also provided additional information on new state policies in regards to accessory dwelling units. State policies on ADUs generally intend to reduce permitting barriers and increase the availability to develop ADUs to grow long-term housing stock. The state leaves the allowance of short term rentals in ADUs up to local jurisdictions to decide. The ADU ordinance that is currently working its way through the Planning Commission's process does not allow for an ADU to be used as a short-term rental at this time.

Also requested were other regulatory approaches. Jurisdictions addressing short-term rentals have a variety of ways of doing it, including an outright prohibition like the City of Ojai Allowing certain zones to have short-term rentals in them, like Sonoma County which only allows short-term rentals in single family and commercial zones. Allowing short-term rentals only in certain geographic areas like the city of Carpinteria or allowing them through different processes like a land use permit or through a business license like the city of Toledo They also only allow them in owner-occupied units like the City of San Francisco.

And finally, some jurisdictions only allow homestays like the City of Santa Monica. For the purpose here today, the definition of homestay is a dwelling where an owner or long term tenant of the property inhabits the same parcel at the same time as the transient occupant. A definition that is rather unique to Santa Barbara County that we introduced in the Gaviota Coast Plan is a farmstay, which is a farm that provides guest accommodations and interactive activities where guests participate in basic operations.

Currently in our code, farmstays are allowed in the inland area of the Gaviota plan on Agricultural 2 zoning. Regardless of what type of short-term rental or homestay is allowed in other jurisdictions, one thing they all have in common is some sort of development standards and some examples are shown here which can include prohibiting certain structures to be used as short term rentals like cabanas or ADUs.

Creating nuisance response plans that notify neighbors of a 24-hour contact they can call if issues arise. Or having revocation standards in place for the permit. Current planning and development enforcement is primarily complaint driven. Possible new enforcement measures could include added public outreach and education, Limited proactive enforcement or actively enforcing the ordinance.

Planning and development intends to address enforcement in the next fiscal year budget based on the direction given today. Any enhanced enforcement would have budget and staffing implications until specific direction is given, enforcement costs and measures are difficult to predict. We also spoke with the tax collector on their enforcement measures and their staff is also available for any questions that you have through this hearing.

Currently, the tax collector conducts internet searches for violators and once their addresses are identified they send a letter to the violator about the TOT requirements. This slide includes the various recommendations that can be given to staff today to move this project forward. In addition, we worked with Chair Hartman to develop this deliberation outline to assist in the decision-making process as well as another matrix on the development standards included in the memo that you received yesterday.

That concludes my presentation and we are happy to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Supervisor Williams I know you had a question on slide number four I believe?

I think that was answered, the relative number of owner occupied units based on the ones who have come in is about a third if that's representative of the whole. So that question was answered but I'm curious of what the tax collector feels is the genuine Is the general amount of people who are actually paying T. O. T.. Versus not paying T.O.T.. How many folks is now in there in their experience of enforcement how many people are getting away with not paying TOT and how many people are paying to you I'm not looking for an exact number because obviously if we knew that we would be able to catch them all. But what do you feel like is the general amount that were catching versus not?

Supervisor Williams through the chair, there's no empirical data on that so that's my best guess

And of course if there was a permit requirement you would be able to catch more because that would be a requirement of permit right?

Supervisor Williams through the Chair. You're talking about licensing. And so if you're talking administratively or if you're talking enforcement there are two different things and so if you're talking about having enforcement responsibilities too, then that's a whole different conversation but I would think that number as far as catching as you say would go up.

Well we could always make as

a part of a permit that you have to show your TOT paid from previous years right? So All right thanks.

Are there any other questions? Okay we are going to turn to public comment, I think we have over 50 speaker slips here but some people who agreed to speak for a minute or less will be called first. I would ask you to get on deck so that we don't waste a lot of time as people come up to the mic. And I'd remind everyone once again that there are very important interests at stake today, people's homes or people's livelihoods. And so I would ask that everybody respect what others have to say whether you agree with it or not and ask that you listen respectfully. Thank you.

Chair Hartman, members of the board. We're going to start with a one minute speakers and we're going to go to Santa Maria or Layla Williams to be followed by Mr Caldwell.

Good morning can you hear me?

Yes we can hear you so please go ahead. We could hear you now we can't hold just a second.

Good morning, my name is Layla Williams. I don't think there's anything as personal as your home and I thank you for your comments to remember that this is really striking at the nerve ending of something very personal for people My family, we moved here to be close to the grandparents and we do live on an Ag-1 property. We are owner occupied. We are farmers as well. We have taken a lot of risk and we are very very thankful for the grassroots economy to help supplement Our livelihood here with two young kids and economy that we really believe in, but it has a lot of risks. And this really helps us supplement our life here. And all I ask is that you're open to reason.

It is such a wonderful thing to host these families that come. It's intimate and since we're not there, it doesn't have any impact. Okay thank you. Is that my minute?

The next speaker is Mr. Caldwell in Santa Maria

Madam Chair, members of the Board. I'm Andy Caldwell representing CoLab. I think it's incredible that we would even talk about the impact to affordable housing from short-term rentals when we've had a lack of affordable housing in the South County for decades due to a jobs housing imbalance not short term rentals. Housing was not affordable before anybody even thought of the idea of short-term rentals, so I don't think that should be part of your conversation. You know the bottom line here is government should have a compelling need to create a new regulation And we understand there can be a compelling need to regulate noise, traffic and nuisance. But there is no justification whatsoever in our minds that you should ban these things entirely in any of the zone districts.

Thank you.

We're back to Santa Barbara for Barry Chersky, followed by Michael Bade. And if the person who's on deck to speak could make their way to the podium we can keep the testimony flowing. Thank you, Barry.

Good morning Chair Hartman and Board of Supervisors. For nearly 17 years I have co-owned a home in Los Olivos when I entered into retirement. I began to rent two of the guest rooms in my home. I registered with the county and a faithfully paid I'm a member of the board of Supervisors and I receive my pension expansion occupancy tax every month. As a homeowner who is attracted to the quiet and serenity of my town, I share the concern about potential nuisance issues which short-term rentals can and at times have created. On the other hand as a community member, I am also aware of the many positive benefits that short-term rentals can and have brought to our communities such As well as the revenue generated to the benefit of the county.

Of the two proposed solutions, complete ban or regulation of short-term rentals there is truly only one fair solution when viewed through a community values perspective and that is to create reasonable and fair regulations I invite you to consider community values perspective in making your decision thank you

Michael Baird to be followed by Sharon Puckley.

Good morning Chairman Hartman. Good morning and thank you for hearing me. My name is Michael Bayard, I've been a homeowner in Los Olivos for nearly 17 years. During the past three years we have hosted guests in our home. The two rooms that we rent are part of our home in which we are present. Our rentals fall under the county definition of homestays. When we rent our bedrooms guests are provided house rules which address quiet time as well as sensitivity not only to our home and property but to the neighborhood as well. There has never ever been a violation. We provide off-street parking for our guests, we understand that there can be nuisance issues related to short term rentals when the owner is not present While we totally respect and encourage the development of regulations dealing with noise traffic and disruptions to the neighborhood.

We believe that the homestay situation is an entirely different category. We're asking the Board of Supervisors to consider homestays as part of a fair of fair regulations. Thank you for your consideration.

Sharon Buckley followed by James Solis

Thank you, Supervisors. My husband and I have lived in our home in Los Olivos for 28 years. For four years we have rented out a single bedroom as hosts through Airbnb. Each month we pay our TOT tax and have maintained the highest standards As you can read in our many reviews, we are referred to as homestays present when we have guests to manage and handle any situation that may arise. We really love what we do and are very conscientious and respectful of our neighbors. We began hosting in order to be able to remain in our home. In the last decade, we faced many challenges such as bankruptcy and almost losing our home to foreclosure. This is a matter of record. We do not line our pockets as some have claimed. We do it simply to make ends meet and to be able to stay in our home for years to come.

I am hoping you will make it possible for homestays such as us to operate with fair and reasonable restrictions. Please help us to continue. Thank you very much.

Thank you

Supervisors for taking the time and effort to consider this agenda item and for the direction given to the Planning Department at the December meeting. On the face of it, the original planning proposal to ban short-term rentals in residential and Ag 1 zones was overreaching government to impose the will of a few local citizens on many who do not share their views. A blanket ban on B&Bs flies in the face of the American virtues of ingenuity, personal freedom and entrepreneurship. I would hope the supervisors perused the B&b websites on the internet and looked at the rentals in the county. You will see that there are not many in the small towns of Los Olivos and Los Alamos, and the ones that do exist are clean and tidy and owner-occupied. I've been operating one bedroom two occupant B&B since December.

It is an amazing grassroots experience. I've had six guests from France five from Britain one from Iran three from China a father son from Germany and two from Netherlands. Please allow owner occupied short term rentals in the residential zone. Don't put another nail in the little guy's coffin. Thank you.

Vicki Connor to be followed by Steve Pepe

Good morning. Vicki Connor, Econ Alliance. We just wanted to encourage you to consider the positive impact on small family farms of the ability to have short-term rentals partly to provide some secondary income that stabilizes incomes in drought years or flood years Thank you, Mr. President.