Board of Supervisors — 2018-01-30

♪ Hi.

I'll call this meeting to order. Can we get a roll call?

Ms. Wolfe? Here. Ms. Hartman?

Here

Can

I get

a motion on the minutes?

Roll call for everything. Please do a roll call.

Ms Wolfe? Aye. Ms Hartman? Aye Mr Adam? Aye Mr Lavinino? Aye, Mr Williams? Aye Passes 5-0

We are going to take first see if there's a COs report

No report this morning

And then we are going to do two of the items first. But if anyone has anything to pull, please let me know. In the meantime, let's do A11 and followed by A12.

Chair Williams, members of the board, would you like to consider a motion to approve the two resolutions to be presented today?

Is there a motion on it? So moved. Second. Roll call please. This is on A11 and A12.

This is a resolution of accommodation honoring Lou Anne Miller upon her retirement from the Isla Vista Youth Projects after over 33 years of extraordinary distinguished and consequential service to the children and families of the county of Santa Barbara. And Lou Anne could you come on up? Lou Anne? Okay well let's go on to A12 then. So we're going to go on to A12. This is sponsored by the Chair, Supervisor Williams. This is to adopt a resolution of commendation honoring Ruthie Page and Barbara Zamora of the Auditor-Controller's Department as the January 2018 Employees of the Month for Santa Barbara County. And if Ruthie and Barbara could come on up?

That'd be great along with Theo. And I will go ahead and read the resolution into the record. Whereas Ruthie Page and Barbara Zamora are recognized for their exceptional dedication to the county as team members in the auditor controllers payroll division. As the heart of the payroll team, they keep abreast of complex and changing parameters of 11 collective bargaining agreements, federal employment laws, income tax withholding regulations, for 24 various departments. And whereas Ruthie and Barbara advise and assist all department payroll administrators with all inquiries, adjustments, and anomalies they provide stellar customer service to all county departments and the county's 4,368 employees alike with an ever positive and measured delivery.

And whereas their positive attitudes and utmost integrity in delivering county employees livelihood on a bi-weekly basis is both timely accurately demonstrates their steadfast consistency of purpose Their equal respect and compassion for every single employee shines through their meticulous attention to detail on every calculation. And their fair and impartial application of all policies to each and every case. Therefore, be it hereby ordered and resolved that Ruthie and Barbara are hereby recognized as invaluable assets to the county as a whole and to each individual employee.

And is passed and adopted by the Board of Supervisors today recognizing them as our Santa Barbara County Employees of the Month.

Members of the board, it's really good to celebrate some positives especially during these trying times that we have. And these two individuals are really positives in our organization. They're actually shining examples of the positivity. They typically are unheralded. They are at their desks every day and they are doing their daily work behind the scenes to be sure that every county employee gets their paycheck every two weeks all the way.

Exactly from the- From the first responders out in the field to all of us desk jockeys in the room, not only do they get the paychecks out but they make sure they're correct. That's most important. They're truly stalwarts for our department and for the county and we're really proud of them. And not just today when we honor them with this well-deserved recognition but every day. Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have any other items that are being pulled? We're going to still wait a moment on A11.

It seems like Lou Anne will be here maybe within ten minutes is what we're hearing. Okay,

we'll trail

that. Mr Chair I would like to pull A14 please.

Can I get a motion on the balance of the agenda?

So moved.

Second. Roll call, please. Mr. Allen can you tell us if there is any changes on that list?

Chair Williams and members

eligible for FHA insured forward mortgages. So what this item is, is the City of Santa Barbara doing pays for their residents. And if they want to ignore those risks that's fine with me and our auditor is going to be forced to collect those payments on the taxes of the people of the city of Santa Barbara. And that's okay, but as far as turning it over and having that available to county residents I think it's a bad idea and I wouldn't be supporting that. But I'm fine with this item as it currently sits.

Thank you, and I don't see any other lights so I'll just- A question from Supervisor Wolf.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. What I understand and maybe Mr. Filotti can help with this that there is now in place CSCDA which administers PACE program for over 100 cities and counties. Can you explain how that organization interacts with what you do? Do they take any of the responsibility for any delinquencies?

Supervisor Wolf through the chair. The CSCDA is a joint powers authority, and they have the program themselves. And we, the auditor with the agreement that's here enter into an agreement with the CSCDA to collect the taxes. And basically they are the administrators of the program so they provide us with all the information and then there are And then it goes back to the CSCDA for collection.

Thank you for that, thank you Mr. Filotti.

Thank You Supervisor Wolfe for bringing that up because I do think that we do not have agendized what Very inspired by the fact that the city has gone forward and do you see some merit in it? And invite supervisors if they wish to agendize in the future, to make a request to agendize PACE in the county. Supervisor Lavagnino. I'd just be willing to move item A2. Is there a second?

I'll second.

There's a motion and a second. Roll call please. I see another light on. Supervisor Wolf?

Oh, I was just getting ready to vote.

And Supervisor

Hartman? Ms. Wolfe? Aye. Mr. Hartman. Ms. Hartman? Aye Mr. Adam? Aye Mr. Lavinino? Aye Mr. Williams? Aye Passes 5-0

And why don't we go back to A11

Chair Hartman, or Chair Williams. I'm going back a year and members of the board we're going to now consider item A11. This is a resolution recognizing Lou Anne Miller. And if Lou Anne could come on up To the podium and I'll go ahead and read the item into the record. Whereas Luann Miller began working at the Isla Vista Youth Projects in 1985, first as the preschool head teacher and then as the executive director of positions she has held since 1986. And whereas Lou is overseeing the expansion of the Isla Vista Youth Projects from a two classroom program to an integrated multi-programmatic agency serving hundreds of children including infants and toddlers and families annually at four facilities.

The Children's Center sits on Phillips Road in the UCSB's West Campus. The after school and summer enrichment program at Isla Vista Elementary School, and the Family Resource Center in downtown Isla Vista. And whereas under Lou's leadership, the Isla Vista Youth Projects has participated in Thrive Community Collaboratives in Santa Barbara County whose goal is readying the next generation of county residents for productive lives. And whereas Lou spearheaded the Youth Project's first capital campaign, which recently completed its initial phase. Enabling the organization to purchase its children-centered building on Phillips Road and ensuring the organization's long term sustainability. And whereas Lou has ensured that the I Live As A Youth project remains dedicated to the ideal that all children deserve the same opportunities to realize their potential.

That early childhood education is the key to unlocking that potential and that families need support and services to help their children thrive. Now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors recognize Lou Anne Miller's tremendous career in service to the children and families of our county upon her retirement from the Isla Vista Youth Projects, passed and adopted today.

Luann Miller has led the Ivy Youth Project and it is an amazing legacy to see those eager, engaged little faces. And what bringing organizations throughout a community together to serve children in their families It's one of the most inspiring things I've seen and it really is a model for what every child in this county, we ought to aspire for them. And Luanne, it's an amazing tribute and I just want to acknowledge while he's here Arthur Kennedy who has been a long time volunteer everyday at the youth project and you inspire people to do that.

It's not traditional for us to go around and make speeches, but I'll just add that I was one of those bright little faces or more likely surly and troubled little faces. But Loanne's program was really wonderful for me at a time when I otherwise would be in fourth grade wandering the streets of Isla Vista so thank you so much.

Well, thank you very much. It's been just a joy to spend 33 years at Isla Vista Youth Projects and it's not often that you get up every day and enjoy going to work and I'm very blessed to have that. And I also know that it's been the perfect intersection of skill set and passion and faith to be able to do this work. I've stood at this podium many, many years. As an advocate for children and families, especially for Isla Vista. And I appreciate your good work and your leadership and ask that you support our new executive director Lori Goodman who began her position yesterday. She has hit the ground running and is a very skilled and knowledgeable person and I have all the confidence in the world. About her leadership at the youth projects and taking it to the next level.

So thank you for your support, and this is a very nice recognition. And I'm off on retirement. Happy travels. We

have one more item pulled by the public.

Chair Williams, member of the board. Item number A14 is sponsored by Supervisors Williams and Hartman. This is to consider recommendations regarding a resolution opposing new offshore oil leases in federal waters off the California coast. And we have four requests to speak from the public on this. Start with Mr. Caldwell to be followed by Kristen Hislop.

Chair Williams, members of the board. I'm Andy Caldwell representing CoLab. We object to this item on a number of grounds. First of all you're criticizing the federal government for not having more than one hearing and you didn't schedule this for a hearing. You put it on the not only put it on the admin calendar you put it on the admin calendar late as an addendum even though the comment period doesn't close until March 9th So I really don't feel there's any reason for that. If you had until March 9th, you could have properly scheduled this to give people notice because there's more opinions on this item than just is reflected in it. So we would ask that you reschedule this so that more people can Now with regard to our opinion on this, I'm going to just use the word déjà vu all over again.

There was a time when we tankered oil by barge or what have you from offshore platforms and people thought that that was too dangerous even though we pretty much have calm waters out there and they don't have hidden reefs and things like that. They didn't want Oil tankered or barged. So what did we do? We encouraged the oil companies to put in pipelines. Now the Feds are interested in leasing again and you guys are saying, you and the Coastal Commission and others, not maybe officially but the message is loud and clear. We'll sue you, we'll drag our feet, we won't permit or do anything to enable the facilitation of this project which could just lead the FEDS and the oil companies to say well tanker it.

See, we haven't thought this thing through. The other thing is everybody still wants to hang their hat on 1969. The spill two years ago was relatively minor and the spill technically wasn't in the ocean it was on the land And yet we're treating it as an ocean spill when that wasn't what it was. It ended up contaminating the ocean, but you know we used to talk about the missing gap in Watergate tapes. We like to know about the missing gap between when county fire was alerted by the time somebody brought out a bulldozer or did other things. I think that warrants some review and reflection But the bottom line, have you ever thought of how much oil was safely produced between 1969 and 2015?

How much energy, how many tankers didn't have to come from the Middle East? How much drilling may not have been done in Alaska or other sensitive places. You're not looking at the big picture and finally, you'll fight the feds on oil And you'll fight them in reverse on marijuana. That doesn't make any sense to us. We'd ask you to schedule this departmental, it's the right thing to do.

Kristen Hislop to be followed by Alina Simon.

Good morning, supervisors. I'm Kristen Hislop, the Marine Conservation Program Director at the Environmental Defense Center. I thank you for your consideration of this important resolution and I urge you to adopt it in order to protect our channel and coastline from risky offshore oil practices. As you know many counties and cities along the California coast have adopted similar resolutions to support one a ban on new offshore drilling fracking and related techniques. Two, a ban on new onshore development that would support offshore oil and gas. Three, a phase out of gas and oil extraction. And four, a framework to develop new responsible renewable energy projects. So we applaud these efforts and we support the county as well to adopt a similar resolution.

As I'm sure you all know as well, EDC was founded after the 1969 oil spill which did have devastating impacts on our community and environment. And as we heard that spill was nearly 50 years ago which is a long time but we also know that the potential for such disasters remains just as strong today. We most recently felt the impacts of oil in our coastline with with the 2015 Plains American Pipeline rupture. And despite these real and ongoing threat that offshore oil and gas poses to our coastal communities, the federal government is pushing to open our coastline to new oil and gas development. This effort is in direct opposition of our state's and our community's overwhelming interest in moving away from fossil fuels. The West Coast governors have stated their opposition as have other elected officials, cities, counties, and thousands of individuals.

At the same time, the federal government is working to expand offshore oil and gas. It is also making efforts to roll back important safety regulations that were put in place after the disastrous Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill. So with increased drilling coupled with reduced regulations we're bound to have more disasters So we must continue to stand up against the threats from the federal government to expand oil drilling and approve dangerous techniques like fracking and acidizing. It is critical that the county demonstrate to the government by adopting this resolution, that we want to see an end to offshore oil and gas development, and that it is our top priority to prevent the next spill on our coast. And I submitted a letter with much of the same information last night but I'm going to give a hard copy now.

Thank you.

Alina Simon to be followed by Katie Davis

Supervisor Williams, board. Thank you. My name's Elena Simon, Santa Barbara County organizer with Food and Water Watch. I also submitted a letter this morning but I'm gonna give you a copy just in case and then I'm just gonna read a couple paragraphs and share the signers with you. So thank you for your leadership introducing this resolution. Offshore drilling is fundamentally at odds with our coastal economy and our way of life. Santa Barbara County has one of the most spectacular coastal areas in the nation. Californians and people from all over the world come here to fish, hike, surf, kayak and more.

The coastal environment supports nearly 15,000 jobs and contributes $656 million to Santa Barbara County's economy annually through tourism and recreation alone. Santa Barbara County knows all too well the devastation from oil spills. The 1969 spill in the 2015 refugio spill are reminders of the harms that oil development has on our beaches economy and environment New offshore oil leases would increase the likelihood of another devastating oil spill, which can shut down fisheries, shutter beachside businesses and deter campers and tourists from visiting our beautiful coastline.

New offshore oil leases would also deepen our dependence on fossil fuels, exacerbating climate change and threatening our communities with sea level rise, fires, droughts and floods. So thank you for introducing this. I'll share some of the supporters, so Food and Water Watch, Santa Barbara Sierra Club, 350 Santa Barbara, SBCAN, Center for Biological Diversity, Santa Barbara Standing Rock Coalition, Clergy and Laity United for Economic Justice, Ocean Conservation Research, Pacific Environment, California Coastal Protection Network, Student Activists UCSB, CalPERS Students UCSB and Indivisible Carpinteria.

Thank you. Katie Davis Thanks Rob and Katie's our final speaker on this item

Hi, thank you. I'm Katie Davis, Chair of the Santa Barbara Sierra Club and I want to echo the comments before thanking you for passing this resolution opposing offshore oil. This is not a controversial in California or indeed in most other coastal states. Goleta which experienced the brunt of that oil spill in 2015 in which our beaches were closed and hundreds of animals washed up dead passed a resolution unanimously on their consent calendar. Santa Barbara has reaffirmed opposition to offshore oil so many times over the years it's really hard to keep track Indeed, there have been no new leases in the Pacific in the past 35 years under both Republican and Democratic administrations including a moratorium issued by George H. Bush. This is standard.

The fact that Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke recently stated that there would be no drilling off Florida Because it's unique and has an important fishing and tourism industry. Shows that even the current administration understands the risks, and that some places need to be protected. California is the sixth largest economy in the world at 80% of our GDP is in coastal counties. A deep water horizon type spill here would bring down the US economy.

We'd lose the richest ecosystem in the world and affect millions of people. That's why, that's why the previous administration didn't even consider including the Pacific in their lease plan. And even without a spill in federal waters they're allowed to dump the polluted wastewater from fracking back into the ocean. We have enough issues with water quality and runoff without adding extra toxins we don't need to. That concludes public comment on this item. Is there board comment or questions?

Yes? Supervisor Adam, we were all waiting up here for you to say something. Everyone held back putting their light on. Just out of respect for you. Oh there's one more public comment. Then come on up Bob. He's under general public comment. Bob are you seeking to comment on this item or general public comment? Okay we're not getting there yet, but we will get there Bob.

Supervisor Adam.

Probably just didn't want to hear what I had

to say. No everyone

here

held back on their lights just for you.

Well I appreciate that, thank you. Well listen as predictable, I couldn't disagree more with all the comments or many of the comments. This production is critical to our economy and our own cash flow and that shouldn't be lost on those of us on the dais. This product can be safely produced with a minimum of risk. There is always a little bit of risk, you can't take all the risk out of anything but I think that it can be safely produced and these uses can peacefully coexist with other uses that we're concerned about here in this resolution. So I don't oppose new offshore leases and development, and I hope that the Trump administration goes ahead with these. And I won't be supporting this motion.

Other comments or questions from the supervisors? Supervisor Wolk.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and thank you and Supervisor Hartman for bringing this forward. I am in full support of this and I think it is very timely. I appreciate the speaker who talked about the relaxation of safety procedures that were enacted during the BP oil spill. And the Trump administration is looking to loosen those protections. So, which I just find appalling for an industry that actually seemed to have welcomed some of those protections to ensure and Give the public some reassurance that they were trying to protect the environment and now it appears that those protections will likely be taken away.

Aside from that, this board has in We've taken actions, I recall during the Drill Baby Drill action. Supervisor Carbajal and I brought an item to the board at that time opposing offshore oil leases. We have a new administration right now, and I think that we need to stand up for our environment. We need to stand up for alternative forms of energy. This is, and we just heard from our speaker the number of organizations who are also in support of this resolution.

And I think that this notion, you know I've always talked about the notion of monetizing land for money has to be considered very carefully with a balanced approach. And now it's monetizing our ocean waters that we take so seriously. And the impact, not just to our tourists as you point out in the resolution and wildlife. The amount of destruction is insurmountable in my opinion and again I'm going to vote in favor of this resolution and appreciate that you brought this.

Thank you, Supervisor Hartman.

Thank you Mr. Chair. The proposal to expand drilling in waters offshore in California is indefensible and inexcusable. It's indefensible because when Interior Secretary Zinke explained why he was exempting Florida's entire Atlantic coast, and a third of its Gulf Coast from any new oil and gas platforms it was because quote, Florida is unique and its coast is heavily reliant on tourism as an economic driver.

But according to NOAA studies, California's tourism and recreation economy accounts for 17.6 billion in Florida is less about 10 billion. Either the administration's objectives are personal. Mar-a-Lago is located on Florida's exempt Atlantic coast. or political, a desire to promote the senatorial candidacy of Florida's current governor. Both reasons are indefensible, arbitrary and capricious at best.

The OCS proposal is inexcusable because of the administration's recent actions to eliminate safeguards. On December 7th When we were focused on fires, the Interior Department ordered the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. This is the organization chartered by Congress to provide expert advice to stop work on a report focused on how to best avoid a repeat of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

Offshore Louisiana, the worst oil spill in US history. Killing 11 workers, spilling 200 million gallons of oil with environmental and public health damage that continues yet today. Can you even imagine if a local government were to cut off an after incident report post disaster? Closing off any possibility of discovering what could be learned to protect human health and safety going forward.

Then on December 29th, the administration rolled back rules for the OCS safety systems including safety and pollution prevention equipment under C safety devices and device testing. And a requirement that safety and pollution prevention equipment be inspected by certified independent auditors. So the proposal would greatly extend the expanse of drilling offshore while radically cutting back health and safety precautions.

In risk benefit language, these policies increase both the magnitude and the probability of risk when you want to do the exact opposite. It's a recipe for disaster, especially in Santa Barbara County where the vast majority of people live within 30 minutes of the coast which shapes our very identity as a community. That is why I join with Chairman Williams in putting forth this resolution.

Thank you Mr. Chair, I do want to thank Supervisor Hartman and Williams for bringing this forward so that we could discuss it. Maybe it should have been in a D agenda where more people got to hear about it but I'll give you my take on it. I thought it was interesting one of the speakers said that if we do drill there, it will deepen our dependence on oil. And I don't really see it that way. It's this country likes to say that we want to divorce ourselves from oil and petroleum products but we don't.

And the fact is, we're using 20 million barrels of oil a day in this country. That is 7.2 billion barrels every year. So even with all of our move towards renewables which I support, renewable still only account for less than 15% of our energy. So if we're not going to divorce ourselves from it, it leaves us two choices. We either develop it ourselves or we look at the countries that are developing this resource and I did a little homework and saw that from ca.gov the number one place that we import from California in 2016 34% of our oil came from Saudi Arabia.

So let's, then I went to Human Rights Watch. This is who we're supporting. A country who just jailed somebody for 15 years for peaceful protests for calling out the abuses of human rights in Saudi Arabia. A blogger, Raif Badawi was just flogged in 2015 and given 10 years for the same incident In March of last year, Alla Brindji got five years for tweeting support of allowing women the opportunity to drive.

Adult women must conform to male guardianship system they have to be chaperoned in public. I guess a move in the right direction was 38 women were just elected That's out of 3,200 members but they're only able to participate by video because they can't be in the same room as men. They still have public beheadings and they have the death penalty for homosexual activity.

So you know if we don't go to Saudi Arabia we have other countries in Latin America that we get our oil from as well but they are third world countries that generally have environmentally lax rules If you look at Brazil which is in our top 10, their government is overseeing the incredible deforestation of the Amazon. You know I think it gets back, for me it's that same sort of NIMBY mentality is we're going to continue using this product. And like I said, I applaud those and I know there are members on this board that drive electric vehicles and I applaud that and I will always be up here supporting our push for renewables but the fact of the matter is we're still using this product and for me it's either going to be done here under the most stringent environmental regulations that you could ever find, or we're going to continue to support either third world countries or those who abuse women.

And I just don't see a... It just seems like we're using the product and we're turning a blind eye to where we get it from. So I can't support the resolution.

Thank you. And I too believe that we should not be turning a blind eye from where we get it from. The energy independence argument almost gets me, and in fact it gets me, I guess from my perspective in a deeper fashion. There's no good place to get oil from. And I do believe that our task number one should be to live our values and reduce our own dependence as a county, both in government and as individuals.

So that we are leading by example, and I for one do not believe that all the fault in this whole thing lies at the feet of oil companies. I think that's just too easy of a thing for us to do is to say well It's just their fault, it's not my fault when we're using the stuff. But if we really are going to live our values, if we really are going to depart from fossil fuel addiction then The last thing we need to do is open up a lot more of it in our backyard. And I would also argue that with the exception of the Trankian Ridge, most of that is extremely viscous and difficult to refine so it's very high carbon content oil.

So to me the proposal of the administration either seems Ridiculous or dangerous, I'm not completely sure which. Ridiculous from the economic standpoint right now where the price of oil is so low and And because the quality of oil that we have on most of the coast is so poor, that most of our operations are going out of business right now. Not because of any actions of environmentalists but because of the failure of our pipeline operator to really meet the safety expectations of the community and perhaps with a lot that's for something We'll see in court later on.

And so it's either ridiculous, right? It's opening up leases when economically people are folding or it's dangerous. It's opening up leases in a manner where we would depart from the adequate health and safety needs of this community and I also Really appreciated Supervisor Hartman accentuating the sort of political double standard that this is being done under.

Florida, which apparently is Extremely important to some Republican political interests seems to be exempt from this while a state full of Democrats seem to be the focus of drilling. And so, to me that seems like a double standard that our community is going to pay the price for. I also believe that, oh and before I wrap up I want to say a mea culpa. I put it on the A agenda largely because of how full our And because I generally think that though it was important for us to make a stand, because the comment period is closing next month. Yeah, I didn't want to make this into a big acrimonious fight that takes away from the other things that we need to do.

So that's the reason why I put it on the agenda. Supervisor Hartman?

Thank you Mr. Chair, I just wanted to add that it takes at least five to seven years to complete the leasing process. Southern California Edison has come out with a new study that shows that by 2030 we can be 80% electric. We can really move this quickly so there's no reason not to focus on that rather than dirty dangerous oil.

I agree. I mean, I got to tell you the models that are out now are cheap, are affordable and have long range. And just in my personal experience as a person who barely makes it economically in this community is that they really work. Electric vehicles really work in this community and that's where we need to be going from this. Supervisor Wolf?