BodyBoard of Supervisors
MeetingRegular Meeting
Date📅 December 11, 2018

UnGovr Transcript

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

0:00 – 0:042 turns

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role0:00 · ≈ 9:00 AM

Thank you. I'll call this meeting to order. There's still some seats down here so folks can sit down. Roll call, please. Ms. Hartman?

Pledge of Allegianceceremonial · click to expand · ≈19s recited, not transcribed
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:53 · ≈ 9:03 AM

Here. Mr. Adams? Here Mr. Lavinino? Here Mr. Williams? Here Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:11 · ≈ 9:04 AM

Ready, begin. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands one nation under God

CommentZone TwoProposed · by introduction4:23 · ≈ 9:04 AM

indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

If you're seeing the laughs up here, it's an inside joke. The two folks up here always wanted me to say ready begin and I never did as chair but I figured I might as well start on my last meeting as chair so thank you. Can I get a motion on approval of the minutes of December 4th?

0:04 – 0:0911 turns

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.834:57 · ≈ 9:04 AM

Second.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role4:58 · ≈ 9:04 AM

All those in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed? I have two items that we will pull at the request of supervisors. Items 23 and 68, and of course we have three resolutions A71 through A73. Can I get a motion on the balance of the agenda? All items besides 2368 and 71 through 73. So moved. Is there a second?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.835:29 · ≈ 9:05 AM

Second.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role5:30 · ≈ 9:05 AM

All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? It's unanimous. Let's do A71.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed5:40 · ≈ 9:05 AM

Chair Williams, members of the board, our first resolution today is sponsored by Supervisor Williams. It's a resolution of commendation honoring the recipients of the 2018 Congressional App Challenge for the 24th District and Santa Barbara County. And we have Santa Barbara High School's Computer Science Academy members out there. Come on up to the podium. And we have Gabriel, Madeline, Joy, Carly and anybody else you'd like to bring up is fine. And I'll read the resolution into the record.

Whereas the Congressional App Challenge is a great way to get students involved in computer science and teach them hands-on technical skills which promote STEM education early on. And whereas, after witnessing the recent natural disasters for Santa Barbara high school students Gabriel Inglise, Madeline Rogers, Joy Patterson and Carly Delson were inspired to create the Santa Barbara Highlights app which promotes Santa Barbara's local economy through support of local businesses. And whereas, according to research from Accenture and Girls Who Code the gender gap in computing jobs is steadily increasing with the percent of women in computer science majors decreasing from 37% in 1984 to 18% by 2014. And whereas it's critical we support young women in computer science due to the lack of women entering the computer science field despite the industry's rate of job creation being three times the national average.

And whereas the Santa Barbara Highlights app was created by four young women from the Santa Barbara High School Computer Science Academy, which provides coursework outside opportunities and experience in computer science to young women and students to prepare them for a field where women are historically underrepresented. Now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors honors Gabrielle Inglese, Madeline Rogers, Joy Patterson, and Carly Dilson for winning the 2018 Congressional App Challenge for California's 24th District and their dedication to the Santa Barbara community passed and adopted.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role7:43 · ≈ 9:07 AM

And Supervisor Wolf just wanted to add one thing.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed7:48 · ≈ 9:07 AM

I did?

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role7:49 · ≈ 9:07 AM

Your light's on.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed7:50 · ≈ 9:07 AM

Oh god, what a way to start the meeting! Yeah I had my light on because I was really focusing on your accomplishments but I wasn't planning to speak because my rule that I instituted on this Board of Supervisors was that we don't speak so that we can keep the meeting going. But I must have subconsciously, I think I subconsciously put this light on because It's very symbolic for me at my last Board of Supervisors meeting to see such incredible young women being honored for their intelligence, their spirit and their innovation.

And I'm very proud of you and what you represent so thank you so much for being here and congratulations.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed8:48 · ≈ 9:08 AM

Yeah, we just really appreciate you guys taking the time to thank us and we love our community so much. Thanks.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role8:55 · ≈ 9:08 AM

Just keep it up and get more young women into computer science. Thank you so much. Item A72.

0:09 – 0:145 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed9:10 · ≈ 9:09 AM

Chair Williams, members of the board, item A72 is sponsored by all five members of the board. This is a resolution of commendation honoring Theodore A Filotti upon his retirement from the auditor controller after 26 years of faithful and distinguished service to the citizens of Santa Barbara County. Theo if you could come on up or should I say Theodore? Whereas the Honorable Theodore A. Filotti, CPA will retire as the Auditor-Controller on January 7th 2019 having faithfully served the citizens of Santa Barbara County for 26 years. Theo started his career with the county as an Accountant Auditor 3 and progressed in the office to Auditor Controller Division Chief, Chief Accountant, Chief Deputy Controller, and Assistant Auditor Controller before being unanimously appointed by the board as Auditor Controller on March 1st 2016.

And whereas Theo has demonstrated departmental leadership through mentoring and engaging the property tax, financial reporting, financial accounting, payroll, internal audit and specially accounting divisions of the auditor controller's office. Theo is a seasoned expert at picking out new accountant auditors for the new Auditor Training and Development Program.

And whereas Theo is considered a strong, knowledgeable and experienced fiscal and technical advisor on numerous county committees and project teams including the Affordable Housing Committee, the Debt Advisory Committee, the Collegiate Revenue Neutrality Team, the Courts Transfer to State team, County Split Executive Team. Redevelopment Agency Dissolution Team, the Ledge Committee and others. And whereas Theo's been an active participant with his peers from across the state by serving on many of the State Association of County Auditors Executive Committees as well as being a trusted mentor to the SACA Accounting and Reporting Subcommittee. Theo is a certified public accountant, a certified public finance officer, and was recognized by Forbes Magazine in 2015 for his commitment to the Deming Management Philosophy.

And whereas Theo will enjoy his retirement with his lovely wife Patty by traveling, working on cars and looking forward to visits from his firefighter son Dante. He'll also get a game or two of golf in and appreciate lots of delicious family made Italian meals with many glasses of red wine. Now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors honors and commends the Honorable Auditor Controller Theodore A Filotti upon his retirement from the County of Santa Barbara pass and adopt it today.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role11:41 · ≈ 9:11 AM

Presenting the resolution today is George Lolas, Chief Operating Officer of the California State Controller's Office. And we will bring that down for him to present.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed12:17 · ≈ 9:12 AM

We got the rest of the crew here.

CommentZone TwoProposed · by introduction12:52 · ≈ 9:12 AM

It was already

GuestGeorge LowlessControllerProposedself-stated12:54 · ≈ 9:12 AM

read. Good morning, I'm George Lowless. I'm the State Controller's Chief Operating Officer and I'm here today to also present a resolution to Mr. Filotti from the state controller. Controller Yee is adamant and very interested in recognizing county auditor controllers that affect The work of the County Auditor's Office beyond the boundaries of their county. Theo has done an excellent job of working with other county auditor controllers and also the state controller's office in improving the way things are done statewide, so his contributions to the profession have gone way beyond the county lines of Santa Barbara. And that is why I'm here to present him with a resolution from the State Controller's Office.

And I'll read that. Whereas Theo has served the public interest in the County of Santa Barbara and the Auditor Controller's Office for 26 years, and whereas Theo monitored, interpreted, and directed the implementation of new laws and helped direct development and staffing a financial information systems to increase efficiency of county operations. And whereas Theo served on many county committees related to budget, debt management, financial reporting, property tax, affordable housing, and more. And was a leading advisor to cities, schools and special districts. Therefore be it resolved that the state controller thanks Theo Filotti for his dedicated service to the people of California and extends very best wishes for a well deserved retirement.

0:14 – 0:173 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed14:57 · ≈ 9:14 AM

My comments will be brief today since we're the star of the show. Janet, congratulations on your retirement. We'll get ready for that. I want to thank you members of the board for the resolution and for taking the time today to make the presentation. I'm truly honored, definitely. Serving the county of Santa Barbara as the audit controller and also for all my years in the office of the audit controller have been tremendously rewarding.

The projects and the committees I've been involved with, both at the local level and at the state level have provided me with countless opportunities to meet, work with, team up with. And befriend some truly quality dedicated individuals both inside and outside of county government. I want to especially thank Bob Geis and Jim McClure for hiring me all those years ago, and also for their tremendous mentoring and guidance along the way.

I'd like to thank the county audit controller, the managers, and the staff of the department. All of them are too many to name, but they're very talented individuals. They take pride in their work and enjoy serving the citizens of Santa Barbara. They've made the last 26 years here truly enjoyable. I'd like to just leave our younger staff, some of whom can't even imagine this day coming for them with just a thought. And that is enjoy the ride. Time passes all too quickly.

You will learn something new about the county of Santa Barbara each and every day. I know that I did. I also want to thank, I want the staff and the county to know that they will all be in good hands with our newly elected auditor controller Betsy Schaefer. Of course, I want to thank my beautiful wife Patty of 36 years for her steadfast support and encouragement that she's given me throughout the years.

I'm looking forward to joining her in retirement and all of those great experiences that are going to come with the next phase of our lives. While I'm very happy to start my retirement, also I will definitely miss coming into the office every day and working with the county family. And it truly is a family. Thanks again to all of you in the county and it's not goodbye but arrivederci.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role17:33 · ≈ 9:17 AM

Item

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed17:33 · ≈ 9:17 AM

A73. Chair Williams, members of the board. Item A73 also sponsored by all the members of the Board of Supervisors. This is a resolution of accommodation honoring Janet Wolfe upon her retirement after 12 years of faithful and distinguished service as second district county supervisor. And if Supervisor Wolfe you come down to the podium, I'll read the resolution into the record.

0:17 – 0:2213 turns

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role17:57 · ≈ 9:17 AM

And before you do that, we actually didn't take a motion on the resolution so we've got to do that real quick. Can I get a motion on A71 through A73?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed18:11 · ≈ 9:18 AM

The problem is I haven't seen it. So I don't know what's in it.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed18:16 · ≈ 9:18 AM

You might vote against your own retirement resolution. I think this might be an example of taking it on faith.

GuestSneddenProposed · by introduction18:25 · ≈ 9:18 AM

I think she should recuse herself. Honest to God, can you vote on your own motion?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed18:33 · ≈ 9:18 AM

Okay, I'll recuse myself. See this is how we get along so well. I will recuse myself or abstain. Because if I recuse myself I have to leave the room.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role18:48 · ≈ 9:18 AM

Can I get a motion?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8718:50 · ≈ 9:18 AM

I'll make the motion to accept this resolution.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role18:54 · ≈ 9:18 AM

All three resolutions. And second, all those in favor please say aye. Aye.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed19:01 · ≈ 9:19 AM

And I'll abstain.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role19:02 · ≈ 9:19 AM

And one abstention. Please proceed Mr Allen. I

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed19:18 · ≈ 9:19 AM

will read the resolution into the record. Whereas following her career in vocational rehabilitation, three terms on the Goleta School Board and extensive community work. Janet Wolf was elected to the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors in 2006, re-elected in 2010 and in 2014 elected to a third term serving as the second district supervisor for 12 years and also serving as chair three different times. Her service has always been committed to ensuring that our most vulnerable populations receive the care they need.

And whereas, Janet served as the board's representative on a variety of boards and commissions including among others, the Santa Barbara County Retirement Board. The Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council, the Air Pollution Control District, the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments and the Community Corrections Partnership. Janet has also been a tireless advocate and leader on issues of concern to women, children's health, public safety, environmental stewardship, criminal justice reform, education and animal welfare. And has actively advanced these issues by testifying before Congress on women's heart health, spearheading the construction and robust operation of the Emergency Operations Center, and championing the preservation of the Goleta Beach County Park and enhancing animal services countywide.

And whereas, Janice's leadership is also informed by a commitment to sustainable community planning as exemplified in the adoption of the Eastern Goleta Valley Plan which will shape the future of the area for decades by providing for environmental protection, measured growth and a focus on public safety and emergency preparedness when planning for the future. And whereas, Janet has exhibited an unparalleled dedication and commitment to the county of Santa Barbara and the people of the second district which is only surpassed by her deep love for her family especially her grandchildren Avi, Mika, Sofi, Talia who will be very excited to see their names in this resolution.

And of course, her husband of 41 years Harvey who will also always be a part of our county family. And whereas due to Janet's uncanny ability to seek and destroy typos in any document this resolution was meticulously reviewed by a team of scholars from the finest academic institutions to ensure grammatical perfection and is thereby certified typo free. Now therefore, it is hereby ordered and resolved that the Board of Supervisors honors, sincerely thanks and commends Janet Wolfe for her 12 years of exemplary and dedicated service as Second District Supervisor to Santa Barbara County. And wishes her many happy days ahead filled with laughter, adventure, friends and family passed and adopted today.

CommentJohnson J. MrProposed · by introduction22:30 · ≈ 9:22 AM

We have a

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8322:32 · ≈ 9:22 AM

little video presentation. Thank you.

0:23 – 0:292 turns

CommentZone TwoProposed · by introduction23:10 · ≈ 9:23 AM

♪ Yeah. ♪

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role27:53 · ≈ 9:27 AM

Yeah. We are so not done yet, Janet. So first we have a few guest presentations to have and we're going to be joined here by several of the Commission for Women's members including Anna Everett, Suzanne Peck and Sigrid Wright And after that we're going to go into some of our elected officials.

0:29 – 0:356 turns

PresenterAnna Everettentire commissionProposedself-stated29:09 · ≈ 9:29 AM

First of all, good morning everyone! Season's greetings. I would like to thank Chair Williams and all of the BOSS supervisors for having us here. First of all it is an absolute pleasure To be here on this bittersweet occasion, my name is Anna Everett and I'm the chair of the Santa Barbara County Commission for Women. And on behalf of the entire commission, Janet Wolfe, we just want to say thank you and just what an amazing experience it has been serving and representing the second district with you and for you.

And what we wanted to do was just share with the entire community publicly, just what a fantastic role model Janet Wolfe has been. Not only is she always present because as we know showing up is half of the job but she rolls up her sleeves and she gets in there and she shows up at all of the events and we've just had a wonderful, wonderful experience over the past few years because of her leadership undaunting And her pride and her sharing feelings of support for us, but not only that but just praise. One of the things we've enjoyed hosting our events is seeing how much the public loves seeing Janet at the events and being involved in speaking up and giving of herself. So I wanted to conclude our remarks of absolute gratitude by reading this card that we found to just kind of express something.

Now, we know Janet that you're going to be a rhino of a retirement in name only because once a public service it's difficult to give that up. So this card just seemed to articulate quite well some of the wishes that we have for you. So it spells out retirement and it says, R, relax. And E, enjoy the ride. T, try something new. I, imagine the possibilities. R, remind yourself to play.

E, expect adventures. M, make new plans. E entertain a few wild ideas. N, nap without guilt. And finally, take time just for you. So with that we wanted to just let the county know and everyone here know that this has been an absolute delight, an absolute pleasure, and a thrill to work for one of the most impressive and powerful women in the history of ever.

One of our commissioners is a veterinarian and this is her label, Sea Grape. And this is one of my favorites. Karen Steinwax has the Sea Grape. This is for you as well as... We wanted to find something that would really express how exquisite you are so we thought orchids would do the trick.

not transcribed≈10s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
CommentZone TwoProposed · by introduction32:34 · ≈ 9:32 AM

Our next presentation

PresenterAnna Everettentire commissionProposedself-stated32:37 · ≈ 9:32 AM

will be Mayor Paula Brody.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 6Proposed33:09 · ≈ 9:33 AM

Good morning, Chair Williams and Board of Supervisors. It's my honor to be here today. Janet and I go back a long ways. And we first met when our kids were in school, and then when she was on the school board, Goleta School Board of Trustees, and then later on the Board of Supervisors. And it's an honor to be able I present you with a proclamation from the city of Goleta, and I'd like to read it if that's okay. The proclamation of the City of Goleta California recognizing second district supervisor county of the County of Santa Barbara Janet Wolfe. Whereas, Janet Wolfe was elected to the County of Santa Barbara Board of Supervisors in 2006.

Re-elected in 2010 and again in 2014 to represent the second district. And whereas, in addition to her service as a supervisor, Janet Wolfe represented the second district and the county of Santa Barbara on air pollution control district, beach erosion authority for clean oceans and nourishment. Behavioral Wellness, Psychiatric Health Facility, Community Corrections Partnership Committee. Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council, Local Agency Formation Commission, National Association of Counties, Santa Barbara County Association of Governments, Santa Barbara County Child Care Planning Council, Santa Barbara County Employees Retirement Counsel System and the South Coast Task Force on Youth Safety. You are really very busy. Very busy lady, whereas Janet Wolfe is committed to enhancing public safety and was instrumental in the building of a permanent emergency operation center to serve Santa Barbara County.

Through her service on the Commission on Children and Foster Care, the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council, and the South Coast Task Force on Youth Safety, and her careful oversight of the county budget, Supervisor Wolfe ensures that our most vulnerable population receive the care they need. Now therefore it be resolved that the City Council of Goleta, California does hereby honor Second District Board of Supervisors Janet Wolfe for her dedication service as our second district supervisor and congratulate her on her retirement. And we're all anxious to see what adventures you pursue next.

So Janet I'd like to give this to you.

CommentZone TwoProposed · by introduction35:36 · ≈ 9:35 AM

Mayor Kathy

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed35:36 · ≈ 9:35 AM

Murillo of the City of Santa Barbara.

0:36 – 0:445 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 8Proposed36:09 · ≈ 9:36 AM

Thank you so much, Chair Williams and the board members. I guess it's happening, huh Janet? Supervisor Wolff, I've been in denial, I have to say. It's real, okay. On behalf of the city of Santa Barbara, I congratulate you on your retirement. Our proclamation has a whole bunch of things that we're congratulating you on. The Emergency Operations Center, of course, helps our residents feel safe. Thank you.

You served on SBCAG making sure our roads were maintained and also that we have alternative transportation opportunities so on behalf of the residents, we thank you for being a collaborative partner and as far as I know, we're not suing each other right now, the city and the county, right? So thanks for that collaborative spirit But the one thing I would highlight is your interest in juvenile justice. And sometimes our young people make mistakes, and they sure need a second chance. And you and Mary O'Gorman, your executive aide have worked really hard on services and programs that give those families a second chance.

Mayor Perotti talked about all the work you've done with children and youth, and of course your work on the Goleta School Board. So I'd like to be the voice of those families today thanking you for looking out for the vulnerable youth and teens and children in our community. Thank you for having me today.

not transcribed≈6s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role38:06 · ≈ 9:38 AM

From the office of Monique Limon, Assemblymember Monique Limon, Vianney Lopez.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 9Proposed38:20 · ≈ 9:38 AM

Good morning, supervisors. It's my honor to be here to help or join everyone else in recognizing Supervisor Wolfe. Assemblymember Limon has really enjoyed the past two years that she has shared in representing the residents of District 2 as well within the 37th assembly district. And I want to thank you for your leadership. I think there's been comments all around in different areas that you have impacted, and what I want to share in terms of what you leave behind is what Assemblymember Limon has taken from you and one of those is in the arts area. She has really embraced your focus in recognizing the arts in the district and what she has adopted in her own office to bring Art pieces from our local students, and so that's something that will remain in this area thanks to you and your leadership.

So on behalf of Assemblymember Limon want to thank you for your leadership and the legacy that you leave in the county of Santa Barbara.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role39:38 · ≈ 9:39 AM

And we have State Senator Hannah Beth Jackson. Beth, we let a couple people go before you because nobody wants to go after you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed39:52 · ≈ 9:39 AM

Thank you, thank you Doss. No pressure here and to the members of the board this is a very bittersweet moment for me. This is my sister from another mother. I first met Janet she was on the Goleta school board and I was at a meeting I can't remember what it was but this woman took no nonsense from anybody and the questions were straightforward they were pointed they were polite Just barely, because she wanted answers. And I thought wow this woman is someone I want to know and it has been my privilege to get to know Janet both professionally and personally and you know this a tough lady but if you want to see a tough lady turn into a cream puff talk about grandchildren.

And the pictures that we share. If you have seen us at meetings and we're exchanging iPhones, it's nothing disrespectful but those grandchildren are magnificent and we're just unabashed about sharing that marvelous experience. So I was asking Harvey just now, I said are you excited about getting your wife back? I have to tell you he didn't answer! But he did say that he thinks that Janet has done her best in his time for other opportunities to our disadvantage because the work that you have done and there are so many areas where you have been a leader And not just a role model, and again for women knowing that you can be tough but fair. You can be forceful but compassionate. These are qualities that you have brought to this organization. And I worry a little Joan, you're going to be the only woman left on this board.

But I want you to channel that tough kindness which I know you can do and have done. And you fellas, you're just gonna have to suck it up. But we know that you- I've gotten used to that. Yes, you have. You follow this young man's lead here. He's learned from the best of us has he not? But it's, I think so important that the legacy you have built and the values you have expressed and the work that you have accomplished whether its in the justice system Taking on some of the powers that be because you know we need to reform that system. As was pointed out by the Mayor, our youth need that second chance. We need to get in there as quickly as possible to turn them to the right path and you have been a leader in that. When it comes to the arts and the creativity, and finding the genius in each person and in each child.

When it comes to the Emergency Operations Center where Mona and I have become very good friends over the past year because of the Thomas fire which was burning one year ago this very day and headed in our direction. That EOC was a lifesaver and your hard work and insistence and persistence in making that happen is something that People don't necessarily appreciate because there weren't all of the tragedies that there could have been, certainly there were. But the fact that your work and your effort in helping put that together minimized what could have been an extraordinary circumstance which it still was but even more extraordinary. All the things you've done both the big things and the little things have made such a difference for this community.

So it is my privilege, my honor to present the proclamation on behalf of the California State Senate. I did tell Janet, I wasn't sure if I was going to admit to this but this isn't the real proclamation because I too like our mayor was hoping that this really wasn't gonna happen. So I was a little late to the game. The real proclamation will be coming, but on behalf of the California State Senate, on behalf of the people of this community, the people of the 19th District and I suspect on behalf of the Board of Supervisors your participation, your accomplishments have been extraordinary. Please enjoy your retirement but not too much because I'm very jealous because that means you're going to spend a lot of time with the grandkids.

But there is more work to be done. Your vision, your values, your perspective, your tenacity will all be missed but I hope we will see it in some iteration going forward until then Harvey she's coming home thank you for your great service

0:45 – 0:517 turns

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role45:09 · ≈ 9:45 AM

And next we have Becca Chenelle from the office of Senator Dianne Feinstein. Sorry, Becca, somebody had to go after Annabeth.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 11Proposed45:22 · ≈ 9:45 AM

Thank you Chair Williams, thank you Board of Supervisors. Supervisor Wolfe it is my pleasure to be here today to award you with this certificate of commendation from US Senator Dianne Feinstein. It is her message she wishes to send to you that it is with great pleasure that Thank you so much that we join your family, friends and colleagues in recognizing your years of unwavering service to the Santa Barbara Board of Supervisors. You have established a record of leadership which is truly commendable and there's no doubt your dedication to the community will continue to guide and inspire those who follow in your footsteps. As your United States Senator representing the state of California, it is my honor to commend you for your many achievements and wish you continued success in all of your future endeavors.

It's my pleasure to award you with this commendation and thank you so much for your service.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role46:34 · ≈ 9:46 AM

We'll now do some Comments from the board after the photographs Starting with supervisor Adam

GuestSneddenProposed · by introduction46:49 · ≈ 9:46 AM

Well, you know when I came here I was just scared as a as a long-tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs. That was the cleanest one I could think of, and Janet just made me comfortable and became my best friend, and I'm gonna miss you so much. Thank you for being my buddy here. Thanks Harvey.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role47:30 · ≈ 9:47 AM

And we're all doing a little bit longer comments tonight if folks are going to join us at her reception. I also would not want to let this opportunity, because we're kind of like moving Thank you Mr. Chair and members of the committee. This is closer to the county family in our order of speakers and it would be really leaving something out to leave out one of the most important factors in any elected official success which is the support that they get at home.

Harvey' He's behind the scenes, but all you have to do is see him in a room with Janet to know that she gets a sanctuary at home. That the support that you get at home as an elected official has everything to do with what you're able to give to the community and it's so obvious that Harvey gives Janet so that she can give to all of us. So let's acknowledge Harvey and his dedication.

Supervisor Lavenino. Well, thank

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8749:02 · ≈ 9:49 AM

you. Actually I'm saving most of mine for 530 because it's appropriate only for the 530 hour. Tonight's thing will not be broadcast on television. You know, Jen and I have had our disagreements. And a lot of people think that we disagree on a lot of issues but really when I went back and looked at it there's only two issues. It's land use and anything that's not land use.

But after I was going back and I was looking at meetings, and it was our...I think it was like my second meeting. And it got really...it got pretty hot. It was probably like four or five months in, we went to a party and I met Harvey. And Harvey came up to me and he shook my hand and gave me a big hug and said you are a breath of fresh air. And I thought what's going on? He said Janet used to be so stressed when she'd come home from meetings and now she takes it out all on you!

We have had our disagreements, but I will tell you this is the God's honest truth that when this board walks off this dais it all stays up here. And we've shared some really good times in closed session. We spend about the first 10 minutes of closed session as we're wolfing down our lunch before we get into all the legal matters catching up on our families and it's hard to compete with Janet's family.

She's got kids in Africa and Norway, mine is in Bakersfield and Fresno so I've got nothing to talk about. We disagreed but I went back and was looking at things and you You always had your district as your number one focus. And I never felt that you had any other motivation, but that you made sure that your constituents were taken care of and so I felt a lot better about that. So I'm going to miss you.

You are a great wife, mom and grandmother and you've served admirably so love ya. That doesn't mean that I will not take you to task at 530, so be

not transcribed≈10s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
CommentZone TwoProposed · by introduction51:46 · ≈ 9:51 AM

prepared.

0:51 – 1:066 turns

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role51:50 · ≈ 9:51 AM

Supervisor Hartman?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8351:53 · ≈ 9:51 AM

This is so painful. Janet, you helped me get onboarded here. You reached out to me and I remember you told me that you didn't like change and it was hard for you to let Doreen go and to be so open to me, and I appreciate it because You're a fierce advocate. You're a fighter. I think of those 12 years and the stamina, you just never ever stopped caring and working and standing up for your county and your community so I've learned tremendously from you and as Hannah Beth suggested, I now have a lot to live up too so I'm gonna do my best

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role52:51 · ≈ 9:52 AM

To me, Janet has fulfilled a role that's totally irreplaceable of a stalwart and the conscience of the board. Especially when we're talking about our most vulnerable of the community. Your work in social services, affordable housing, emergency operations have all and on oil issues have all been inspirational to me in terms of the dedication and the principles that you put forth.

Your work in terms of our criminal justice system and realignment is so important to me that for my first two years I pretty much just, my policy on that was just do whatever Janet does. Support whatever Janet does. So now I'm going to have to figure out something else.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed54:06 · ≈ 9:54 AM

Hey, we got this. Your love of places like

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role54:13 · ≈ 9:54 AM

Arroyo Borough Park, Moore Mesa, I'm going to say something that hasn't been touched on. I think people are very Janet is from a cultural and faith tradition that stretches back farther than just about any of our traditions. And it is a tradition that prizes justice, if you read any of the old prophets they say your prayers don't mean anything. It's what you do to the poor, the widow, I think that you uphold that tradition.

I think that women like Deborah, the judge of Israel, the first woman head of state in the Middle East or the prophetesses in Babylonian exile would have been proud of you and I am proud and look to We'll take a short break and then continue with the business. Oh yes, that's right. That's right, no,

not transcribed≈19s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed56:06 · ≈ 9:56 AM

no, no. And I knew when I was sitting there that there was some chatter up here like how long is this going to go on for? You know we have work to do today so I did time my speech so I think it's five minutes and then dusk we can go for bathroom break Thank you everyone for being here and thank you to those who presented the heartfelt resolutions, your personal comments and this incredibly beautiful video.

It's been an honor and a privilege to serve as Second District County Supervisor. I've often remarked that this is the best job in the world. It's hard to believe that 12 years have passed since I was first elected and seated as supervisor in 2007. I want to first thank my colleagues, my friends who served on the board with me. Beginning with Joe Centeno, Brooks Firestone, Joni Gray who regrettably recently passed away, Doreen Farr and Salud Carbajal.

And now to the four of you, Steve, Joan, Das and Peter. I've learned a lot from the four of you as you have all demonstrated your passion, patience and perseverance. It's remarkable that we can do this work and interact with each other in public for all to see in a respectful and responsible manner. In the end, I am proud of how we have moved our county forward and together made some very difficult decisions.

We were able to do this because that is what our constituents elected us to do. I want to say thank you to Mona the leader of this incredible organization who doesn' t demand because she so easily engenders respect. She does the unimaginable she is tireless she is passionate she is brilliant and she is at her best authentic. To every department head You really are the embodiment of what it means to be a public servant.

During the past 12 years I have witnessed countless acts of dedication outside of the public eye in response to constituent concerns, unexpected crises, unseen acts of heroism and just doing the routine course of your work. This past year has tested all of us but the strength of your character and willingness to do what no one asked you to do has been remarkable.

From providing mental health services, outreach to the community, attending to animals trapped in fire areas, making and remaking maps, rescuing and comforting those who lost their homes. And the most difficult and heroic, comforting those who lost a loved one, an unimaginable loss. I also want to acknowledge and thank my constituents of the 2nd District. I am grateful for your trust in me and electing me in four separate and tough elections.

The 2nd District is filled with passionate, intelligent, hardworking individuals who are not afraid to speak up. I treasure the relationships we have built, whether through the years-long development of the Eastern Goleta Valley Community Plan, the preservation of Goleta Beach Park, devoting resources to other parks in CSA 3 including San Marcos Park. We work together to enhance an already beautiful district filled with natural and human resources.

I also want to thank the advocates. Whether defending the environment, urging better mental health care or care for our most vulnerable children and reforming our criminal justice system, I listened to and learned from all of you. And I hope that the changes that were implemented have and will continue to make a difference. I also want to thank the residents of Santa Barbara County, many of whom I have come to know keenly from my work on the board.

I am a representative for all of Santa Barbara County, something that I take very seriously and a responsibility that I don't take lightly. When I worked as a rehabilitation consultant for over 20 years, I had one of my offices in Santa Maria. I worked with people from Santa Maria, New Quiama, Guadalupe and Lompoc. I love their stories, their concerns and their work ethic.

When I was elected supervisor, I wanted to do my best to ensure that they too received the services and attention that they needed. Of course, none of the work or accomplishments in my office could have been done without the dedication of my most resilient, patient, awesome, brilliant and community-centered staff. Hilda Lopez, Naomi Kovacs and Mary O'Gorman.

They're right here. Thank you. And my other staff who also worked with me over these past 12 years. Hilda, Naomi and Mary have been my rock and support during my time on the board whether it's doing the mundane tasks like finding my car keys or cell phone. Or the more important jobs such as meeting with community groups, attending events and working collaboratively with and as a bridge with my constituents to address their pressing concerns. They work tirelessly at the Emergency Operations Center not just during the Thomas Fire and debris flow But whenever the call went out for volunteers and bilingual volunteers to help at the call center.

Mary, as many of you know is in a class of her own. I have known and admired Mary since my days on the school board when we both advocated from different positions. See, I knew I was going to do this. When we advocated from different positions on discriminatory practices that were occurring within our county. Not only is Mary passionate, but she is uncanny in her ability to research and recall events. This skill has been called upon others by the county family.

Many of you may see the more serious side of Mary, because she takes her job and work seriously. I and some of her close friends have witnessed her thoughtfulness, caring wit and humor as well. She is the embodiment of a trusted ally and wonderful friend. Finally, I want to thank my family. My parents are no longer with us but many remember their remarkable presence in my life.

My parents lived in Santa Barbara after World War II where my dad attended the teacher's college at the Riviera Campus. After he graduated they moved to Los Angeles and my dad taught for over 35 years as an industrial arts high school teacher in Englewood. He served as their union president for a majority of his tenure. My mom was a stay-at-home mom who raised me and my older brothers with the attitude to work hard and live life to the fullest.

Together they were quite a team, and I do recall the pride they showed during my first swearing in ceremony. And now to Harvey who should get his own resolution today. Harvey who everyone loves, but no one more than me. Our life together has been a blessing. We have raised three amazing daughters. I'll send him the video. Yeah, they test me. Going to Africa, visiting the gorillas. We're going to go see the Northern Lights and my kids are awesome. And I have four precious grandchildren that was mentioned in the resolution, Micah, Avi, Sophie and Talia.

Harvey was the one who got me into this crazy political business back in the mid-1990s when I ran for school board. He was my partner. I had my business, my work on the school board and we were raising our kids. When the kids grew up and I said I wanted to run for supervisor he was right there with me. None of this would have been possible without your love, support and encouragement. And as many have said you are the best political spouse and to me you are the perfect spouse and my beloved husband.

You see life is full and all of you have made these past 12 years remarkable and for that I am tremendously grateful thank you all so much

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

1:06 – 1:162 turns

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role1:06:47 · ≈ 10:06 AM

We'll take a quick five-minute break and reconvene on the two AI items. Music

CommentZone TwoProposed · by introduction1:09:37 · ≈ 10:09 AM

You. you Hi. you Yeah. Hi.

1:17 – 1:195 turns

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role1:17:41 · ≈ 10:17 AM

We're reconvening. You guys can hang out and talk, just not in here. We have a couple of announcements and then we'll go on to item 23, A23.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:18:19 · ≈ 10:18 AM

Chair Williams, members of the board, just wanted to note that we posted an addendum to the agenda on Friday. And it added an item to our closed session today, Schlags versus County of Santa Barbara workers comp claim also made minor changes to the language in items A19, A20, and A21 from the district attorney. We added item A74 and 75 to the agenda. We also added appointment by Supervisor Adam, which was A75 and we amended item D4 adding a recommendation to that item. I also would like to know if I can get a motion to trail item A28 today to be heard after we do D5 and 6 because it's related to that item.

If we could get a motion to trail that, that would be great.

not transcribed≈10s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role1:19:13 · ≈ 10:19 AM

We'll make a motion to reconsider A28 and then trail it since we accidentally rolled it up in our big motion. Is there a motion to reconsider A28 and trail it?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.831:19:28 · ≈ 10:19 AM

So moved.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role1:19:30 · ≈ 10:19 AM

All those in favor please say aye. It's good, there is some music already rolling. That's good. After every vote we should have a song and it might work better. Okay,

1:19 – 1:294 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:19:47 · ≈ 10:19 AM

A23. Chair Williams, members of the board, item A23 is from the Fire Department. Is to consider recommendations regarding a request for waiver of competitive bid in the purchase of a used fire helicopter?

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role1:20:08 · ≈ 10:20 AM

Supervisor Hartman.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.831:20:10 · ≈ 10:20 AM

Thank you, I asked to pull this because I had the opportunity to have a really amazing presentation from Chief Dyer yesterday on this Black Hawk helicopter and how it's going to increase our capacity in a major way so I just wanted to have him talk about that for a few minutes

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed1:20:35 · ≈ 10:20 AM

Chair Williams, with your permission I'd like to show the presentation real quick if I could. Is that okay? Please proceed, Chief. I'll try to go really quickly. Well a year ago as everybody's been mentioning we had the Thomas Fire in this county and we now have the opportunity to acquire an aircraft that's not going to put out the fires by itself but it's gonna be part of an amazing fleet that we have in this county It's gonna be able to really, really help us not only in firefighting but rescue and SWAT operations. And that's why I also have the Sheriff's Department up here. Next slide.

So what we'd be acquiring is a 2002 aircraft with about 3196 flight hours. To give you an idea how young this aircraft is all of our current aircraft are older than... I wouldn't say older than myself But close to it, they're 60s era Vietnam aircraft. Copter one's 1969, copter two set in 1971, copter three 1965, copter four 1971, copter 308 1967. So this aircraft is very young and has got a low amount of flight hours on it.

Next. Some of the big advantages of the Firehawk, and this is the UH-60L Black Hawk that we would convert to the Firehawk. It's a twin engine type one firefighting aircraft. Only one of our current fleet has twin engine so it's gonna be a huge asset for us in flying over to the island, flying at night, flying during floods and such. I've witnessed one engine burning up in a Black Hawk and it's flying around like nothing's ever happened to it.

And you can still fly people High performance, proven performance in the military. It's been in the military over the last 50 years. Neighboring agencies fly this aircraft. In LA County they've been flying this aircraft since 2001. We converted two Blackhawks that we bought from the Sultan of Brunei in 2001 and converted them into Firehawks and we've been using them down there Since 2001, Ventura County recently purchased three of these aircraft through the same program we're going through. San Diego City has two aircraft and Cal Fire's recently purchased 12 of these aircraft at $20 to $25 million apiece.

It has an excellent safety record. As I said before, it'd be used in search and rescue and medical rescues as needed. And as I mentioned before, Cal Fire is choosing to replace their whole Huey fleet with these Black Hawk helicopters. Some weights and performance, those to get into the nuts and bolts. The one thing to pick out of this is the max, the speed on a Huey is about 120, I believe it's 120 knots, and the speed of a Blackhawk's 195 knots.

And again we would drop 1,000 gallons of water out of the Blackhawk versus the Huey drops about 300 to 360 gallons. So three times the amount of water in one drop Next. Pilots talk about the initial training, it'd be about $109,000 for three pilots and $68,000 for three mechanics we'd send them back to Florida that's where they do the Blackhawk training. The cost of the helicopter would be $1.7 million to start, and then we have to do some avionics maintenance to it and modifications, modify the external tank. And to put the tank on a Blackhawk, we have to raise or drop the gears or the wheels on it to put the 1,000-gallon tank on it.

Then you talk about the pilot training, the mechanic training. So getting back, you know it was about 4.9 million dollars. Blackhawk brand new is 20 to 25 million dollars and recently Ventura County has gone through this process and per the Conklin DeDecker which is an independent aircraft consultant They're telling us what the hourly cost would be, about $2,424 an hour. And that's exclusive of the pilot and the crew members on the aircraft.

Currently LA County in this, I want to say we've never used this to make money but currently LA County sends the machine out of county for $9,300 an hour. $9500 for a sky crane next. The annual cost estimate is about a half a million dollars, $508,295. And the difference between the Firehawk and the current Huey that we have there being an estimated annual extra cost of $260,914.

Now we're not saying it's not going to be more costly to maintain. While we say there is no guarantee of parts, there are going to be parts available in the future. The Blackhawk platform is currently being used in the military. There are three different models and there are a lot of Blackhawk parts and mechanics out there from the military. And this goes into saying about the Huey being less to maintain, the Huey's not out in production anymore. It was ceased production in 1987, a long time ago. So it's getting increasingly harder to maintain it and get parts.

And per fuel cycle, this is the difference in productivity. The Huey and one fuel tank worth of fuel you drop about 2,500 gallons of water. The Firehawk 15,000 gallons of water so roughly six times more the amount of water with one tank of fuel. The Huey carries about 200 gallons of fuel, the Black Hawk carries 360 gallons of fuel next. And as we said before, SWAT and SAR missions would be used for as well as firefighting.

Rescue aircraft as well, and we could have really used an aircraft like this during the recent floods. And speaking of the modifications, transition the aircraft in FAA approved maintenance schedule. Transition it to single pilot operations which LA County's been doing since 2001. Remove any military specific equipment. Upgrade the avionics, the water dropping tank, the thousand gallon tank and drop the wheels to be able to get the tank on there. And then by putting this external tank on you'll be able to get without having to pull a tank out of the inside you'll be able to put up to 12 people beside the crew inside the aircraft if we need it.

Next. And talking about the external tank, you notice the wheels are dropped. Get the tank underneath it allows... With a three-door tank, you can drop, you don't have to drop 1,000 gallons at a time. You can do what we call split drops where you can drop 1,00 gallons or 500 gallons at a time if you need it. You don't have to use the whole amount at the same time.

Next. So why now? Well, I think it's fitting after the Thomas fire but also this Blackhawk was made available to us through the state through National Guard and as I mentioned before Ventura County recently took advantage of this program to buy three of them. And because this will also mimic the state fleet in the future we're going to have some opportunities down the road to help defer the cost of the aircraft possibly through Cal Fire or donations.

And as I said, this Blackhawk will probably last us barring any major issues between 30 and 40 years if we take care of it. And at the bottom, as I said before, CAL FIRE's new FireHawks cost them $24 million and there is a privately owned Blackhawk similar make and without any of the modifications that's on sale for 6.5 million. Any questions?

1:29 – 1:3513 turns

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role1:29:26 · ≈ 10:29 AM

Supervisors? Supervisor Hartman. Is there public comment on this item?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:29:32 · ≈ 10:29 AM

No request to speak.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role1:29:35 · ≈ 10:29 AM

Supervisor Hartman.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.831:29:36 · ≈ 10:29 AM

Thank you. I have a really personal interest in this because I was evacuated with the windmill fire about a quarter mile from my home a few months ago, and the only reason that I think our home didn't burn down was because of the aircraft that were there within just minutes. And so I really perked up when Chief Dyer came in yesterday and talked about this helicopter that can fly in wind, can fly at night, that can carry so much more Water and he also talked about pumpkins. That is we can get people to create water reservoirs when we pre-stage so that it doesn't have to fly back, it can be right there ready to go. So it seems to me we're turning a corner Thank you.

Thank you Chief Dyer because I think it was your effort that identified this. We were on a different course and you got this and bringing it to us so thank

not transcribed≈16s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈16s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.871:31:04 · ≈ 10:31 AM

Supervisor Labadie, no. Thank you Mr. Chair well I think it's very important for us to modernize our fleet obviously we're flying aircraft right now that are old ancient well I'm sorry because you said they were about as old as you they're old for aircraft but So I totally support modernizing the fleet. As far as, you know, the reason why I had my light on is I just want to make sure we're talking about these are fire district funds and not general fund dollars so for me I made this decision whenever we did the fire tax shift years ago that Those dollars, I've put the faith in the fire department of how for them best to decide how to spend their dollars.

So if we're talking about a long-range plan for me funding that's something that the fire department has to prioritize and come with the idea of you know how best do we spend our money? And I think Really for me there's no better place to put it than in a game changer like this. So I'm totally supportive and do we need a motion to move this item? We will need a motion to move this item. I don't know if there are any other speakers, if not I'd make a

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role1:32:21 · ≈ 10:32 AM

motion.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:32:23 · ≈ 10:32 AM

I'll second

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role1:32:23 · ≈ 10:32 AM

that. So their motion

GuestSneddenProposed · by introduction1:32:25 · ≈ 10:32 AM

is seconded by Supervisor Adam. Yeah, I'd like to see the upgrade. The fact that we're dealing with 45 year old plus or minus airframes is... There is rebuild capability in these things there's no doubt about it but At some point everything reaches the end of the service life and I think that this is such a great upgrade in terms of firefighting capacity. You'll be able to stomp stuff much faster, much better than you can with 300 gallons.

And then the number of people, that would have really been handy to be able to load up that many people last year at this time or not actually at this time but in a month. So I'm really in favor of it but the funding deal, that's what the tax shift was all about right Chief? Since you were the guy that started that, and we get to get the chance. We don't have to wonder what Chief Dyer would say because if he were here because he's here and he can actually tell us.

You'll remember quickly.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed1:33:54 · ≈ 10:33 AM

Supervisor Adam to the chair, I have a tickle in my belly. I've been telling people about the opportunity to be here because I had one of these helicopters in my office eight nine years ago and I never thought we would have the capability To bring one of these helicopters to this county. And I hope when it's ready to come, I'll come back. I'd like to just see it. I don't need a ride in it. I've ridden in them before but I think as Supervisor Lavanina said, it is a game changer for the future and I think other firefighting departments in the state if they have the wherewithal will get this aircraft. Everybody's jumping on the bandwagon to get these Blackhawks.

GuestSneddenProposed · by introduction1:34:34 · ≈ 10:34 AM

I was really talking about the tax shift. That was your intent behind starting the tax shift, is that right?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed1:34:42 · ≈ 10:34 AM

Yes sir. For boots on the ground and operational effectiveness, that's what my intent was, is to give the women and men out there the tools that they need because they do such a great job.

GuestSneddenProposed · by introduction1:34:58 · ≈ 10:34 AM

Perfect, okay well thank you very much. And I support the purchase of this asset.

1:35 – 1:371 turns

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role1:35:06 · ≈ 10:35 AM

I learned a lot about these hues while I was in the state legislature looking at cal fire operations and it' s pretty amazing because you can' t even get the parts except that make the parts. It's pretty amazing their ability to keep these fairly old craft in the air working, but it's also and I would say that's an okay strategy except the fact that we need to fly at night.

Right, and we need to fly in pretty hairy mountainous conditions. The twin engine makes a big difference in that kind of situation. And obviously I believe the department's already purchased some night vision goggles so that combination is something that we need to improve our capability. So I support this and I do support the idea that we should be planning into the future But I do also want to remind folks, I think something that Chief Dyer probably knows better than anybody.

It's still generally men and women with shovels and hoses that wind fires. The public's imagination is just sometimes completely wrapped around air power but It's not the whole game, despite the fact that you can actually watch them and you can see them. It's usually hundreds and sometimes much less than that of people on the line putting themselves in a way that still wins those battles. So I think we can support this and support you but also remind That it's still there are firefighters that they see every day and not helicopters and big airplanes that overcome most fires. There's a motion in the second, all those who are in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed?

Item 68.

1:37 – 1:399 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:37:34 · ≈ 10:37 AM

Chair Williams, members of the board, item 68 from planning and development. This is to set a hearing for January 15th to consider an appeal. And this is the Matt Turrentine Appeal Project Applicant for the County Planning Commission's September 12, 2018 determination. The final mitigated negative deck prepared for the North Fork Ranch Frost Ponds project is located at 7400 Highway 166, about 9 miles west of Nukuyama.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role1:38:04 · ≈ 10:38 AM

Supervisor Adam and then we'll have discussion with Supervisor Labadino.

GuestSneddenProposed · by introduction1:38:10 · ≈ 10:38 AM

Okay, so I'm going to recuse this morning because I'm not sure whether I have to recuse or not because I own a piece of property that is adjacent to that one and we're gonna get that sorted out before the this comes back and So good luck

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.871:38:33 · ≈ 10:38 AM

Supervisor Labadino. All right, Mr. Chair. There was a scheduling problem for the 15th of January and I want to thank Ray Shady and Matt Turrentine both from Grapevine Capital for one side wasn't able to make it but I appreciate the fact that the other side has agreed to also reschedule so The date at this point is February 5th I just want to make sure that's okay on our long range. We show a three hour meeting so far, but we want to get to this item as soon as we could. So they're both okay with February 5th if that works?

I'd like to schedule it for then.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role1:39:18 · ≈ 10:39 AM

If that's a motion, I'll

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:39:20 · ≈ 10:39 AM

second.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role1:39:23 · ≈ 10:39 AM

Is there any public comment on this item?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:39:25 · ≈ 10:39 AM

No request to speak.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role1:39:28 · ≈ 10:39 AM

All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Thank you. And departmental item? Public comment for items not on the agenda. I'll make sure that he can hear us. Or Janet will make sure that you can hear.

1:39 – 1:458 turns

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.831:39:51 · ≈ 10:39 AM

Chair Williams, could I just make one quick comment on the administrative agenda? I noticed there were no less than five grants from the DA's office so I just wanted to give them a shout out. That's great work they're hustling for additional funding.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role1:40:05 · ≈ 10:40 AM

Yes, we should note that and note that there's several enforcement cases in the termination of Williamson Act contracts. So kudos to P&D as well so kudos to DA and P&E for looking out for all of us. Okay.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:40:23 · ≈ 10:40 AM

Public comment? We have nine requests to speak this morning. We're going to start with Ed Kolaski followed by Johnson J. Mr. Kolasky.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed1:40:38 · ≈ 10:40 AM

Thank you. This is rather hard to do. I know you have your rules, and we the people have our laws, and there's a direct conflict here. For five years I've been trying to remodel our house. They ruled that our second story is solely over the garage when it's over the garage, the dining room, the living room part of Part of the living room, the kitchen and I'm sorry, the laundry room.

Five years this has been going on. I've been going through hell for five years. This hasn't been an incredibly hell. I thought about leaving moving somewhere else just to get out of here. I've lived here most of my life. Where do I go? I got doctors friends and your general stuff Where do you move to when you're in your retirement years? When you spend five years before this board and the one downstairs, and you find out that the Board of Architectural Review didn't even review your project.

It was decided between Alex Pujo and our supervisor. And our supervisor only let me see her once before she came out here and bashed our project not knowing really what it was about. Five years of hell in my retirement years. I hope my supervisor has the same Whatever you want to call it. Living, if you want to call it living. Here I listed in the next page 15 items. If you believe that this second district is a democracy, you're sadly mistaken.

Time and time again they've violated the law. Time and time again it's just been ignored by the board. Time again my supervisor doesn't even want to hear about it. These are laws of the United States. Why can't I remodel my house? And don't tell me because it's solely over the garage, because it's not solely over the garage. Everyone has civil rights or at least they should except here you got to pay for your civil rights here.

It should be life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. It's life and well if you've got the extortionate payment. You're okay. My architect tried to negotiate an extortion payment down there, came up with $1,000. Why should I pay a thousand dollars as an extortion payment? And then you can't trust those people. What are they going to do turn around it's not those people it's Alex.

And I don't know who else would be involved, four of them never even saw our project. You pay them $1,000 and what? They're going to turn around and say you need another 1,000 or you need another 2,000, or 3,000. You're almost there. This is disgusting. Why hasn't anyone looked into this matter? Yeah, I basically said there are 15 reasons here why they should be- Alex and our supervisor should be prosecuted. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:43:52 · ≈ 10:43 AM

Next speaker is Johnson J to be followed by Jeff Jacobson.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed1:44:00 · ≈ 10:44 AM

Morning. I'd first like to start off by thanking you guys for having a warming center during the rain and things like that. However, I guess I'm a spokesperson for several individuals. I went to the warming center with several other individuals just to stay out of the rain however Once we got there, we felt we were in a brewery bar. Drug infested place and I know the employees are busy but And I tried talking to a few, but they're busy doing their job. And I was wondering and several other people maybe they can have somebody there to monitor. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to see A is drunk B is on drugs and don't allow them in there to disrupt them.

I have five females come up to me and say they will no longer stay there because they're not safe. They feel they're not safe and you know what a drunk will do. And somebody under the influence of heroin and meth, that speaks for itself. And I'm done. You guys have a blessed day. Thank you. If somebody can talk to somebody or person in charge about that. Thank

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:45:23 · ≈ 10:45 AM

you. Supervisors

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed1:45:23 · ≈ 10:45 AM

we'll have our staff contact them.

1:45 – 1:505 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:45:28 · ≈ 10:45 AM

Jeff Jacobson? And then we'll hear from Joni Costa.

PresenterJeff Jacobsonmore than 300 neighbors of mineProposedself-stated1:45:36 · ≈ 10:45 AM

Good morning supervisors and congratulations again, Supervisor Wolf. My name is Jeff Jacobson and I live at 1000 Freedons Board Canyon Road in Solvang. I'm speaking to you today and delivering a letter on behalf of more than 300 neighbors of mine. I am here today because my neighbor to the immediate east of the backyard where my three boys play is proposing to build a 15,648 square foot greenhouse for the purpose of cultivating cannabis.

This neighbor also sits on the first parcel to the north of the city of Solvang. While cannabis cultivation poses drawbacks not associated with most commercial ventures, I don't want to belabor all those points as to why cannabis cultivation is incompatible with residential areas. The county recognizes that in your ordinance with fencing and security plans, lighting plans, fire department requirements, lighting abatement for cultivation, odor abatement, noise abatement and transportation plans.

I'm here specifically because this application cuts against the intent of the county's cannabis ordinance. This facility would be located within a solely residential neighborhood with no commercial activity. Our neighborhood is centered on around a safe, unlit dead end country road where neighbors throughout the county and the city of Sullivan come to walk their dogs and exercise without traffic.

The county cannabis ordinance lays out as its intent to protect neighborhood character, minimize potential for negative impacts on people, communities and the environment. And the county sought to protect rural neighborhoods like ours by writing in specific provisions for EDRNs, parcel size cultivation type and property sitting on an urban-rural boundary. While the county sought to protect rural neighborhoods like ours from operations like this, we don't fall into these specific carve outs that the county recognized.

However, this site is within a more densely residential zone than any of the carve outs with half to one acre residential parcels in the immediately adjacent city of Solvang. Our group is respectfully asking the county to revisit the current cannabis ordinance in a timely manner. Applications are pending now that will forever negatively impact our neighborhood. I want to stress the urgency and timing as well, this isn't a scenario like vacation rentals where it can play out over some time. Once applications like this go through precedent will be set and Santa Barbara County will lose a piece of what makes the valley unique for tourists and residents.

And finally, I want to invite all members of this board or incoming to visit my home in our neighborhood to better understand the nature of this application. Make a day of it, do some wine tasting. My cell phone number's in the letter. I work in sales so if you call me, I'll answer. This will give you a good sense of how at odds this application is to the design of the county's ordinance. Our group fully intends to appeal if a land use permit is issued, but we're eager to provide our input now and early.

And also just as a final note last night both the outgoing and incoming city council of Solvang issued a resolution opposing this unanimously. Thank you for your time.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:48:43 · ≈ 10:48 AM

Joanie Costa to be followed by Bob McLeod.

CommentJoni CostaProposedself-stated1:48:49 · ≈ 10:48 AM

Hi, I've come with Jeff and my name is Joni Costa. My husband and I moved from Carpinteria a little over a year ago. We are building a home in Freidensburg Canyon on the property adjacent to the proposed cannabis growing. We love this area because of its beautiful peaceful country charm and because our kids and grandkids live just four doors down. I'm concerned about the proposal of cannabis production right next door and I'll tell you why.

We have a friend in Carpinteria who has shared her experience with us, her home is surrounded by five properties and in the last two years now three of those properties are producing cannabis. She said her landscape has changed to chain link fences, security screens, security cameras, security lights, security guards, higher traffic, burglaries in the area and the pungent odor of marijuana. She even has had to take her dog to the vet for irritated red eyes. She said these changes all happen so fast and I'm just wondering is this going to happen in our neighborhood?

I hate to get off on the wrong foot with our new neighbor, Mr. Decker, but for his sake, for all our sake and especially the sake of my grandchildren and Jeff's kids who just spoke next door, I ask if we could stop and at least study the effects of the cannabis production and the ordinances that are already happening in our neighborhoods and communities. For in the words of my friend in Carpinteria it's turned her world upside down. Thank you for your time.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:50:35 · ≈ 10:50 AM

Bob McLeod to be followed by David Diaz

1:50 – 1:568 turns

PresenterBob McLeodabout 4Proposedself-stated1:50:41 · ≈ 10:50 AM

Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Thanks for the opportunity to speak. I'm Bob McLeod. I work for SEIU Local 620 representing about 4,000 public employees up and down the central coast. Prior to that, I worked for the county in employee relations and I represented the county in dealings with its unions and employees. In that capacity, I had a unique opportunity to observe Mona and the board and the job that they did.

Most of that time, we were in very tough financial times and the board had to make very difficult decisions to represent the constituents and the voters of the county. At the same time I was so impressed how every one of you was concerned about the employees who work for the county and how you appreciated the work that they did. But far above the others, I must say with Supervisor Wolff We had to go through negotiating concessions from the county, and in those closed sessions you could see the anguish on her face and in her heart when she had to support employees making concessions to help the county get through some tough times.

I've never seen an advocate for employees as strong as Supervisor Wolfe. So on behalf of the executive board, the Executive Director of SEIU Local 620 and I'm sure all county employees. I want to express our appreciation to you Supervisor Wolf. You were awesome to work with and your heart was always in the right place. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:52:16 · ≈ 10:52 AM

David Diaz to be followed by Katie Davis.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed1:52:30 · ≈ 10:52 AM

Good morning, Santa Barbara County. Very quick, earlier they spoke about the helicopters. Why can't we work with the state and the federal military people in resource their bases and their equipment because it's tax payers money through federal and state anyhow? And have the facility set up there because they're so close regionally to our back country here that would save a lot of misery and a lot of taxpayers' money that could be redirected into other areas.

But I think if the military bases had access to three or four helicopters on their base, which they have. And put tanks on them and then could fly right into the zone and be right there and expediency in saving money is a good feasible issue. The pot thing does the county have? Thank you Mr. Chair and members of the committee. I would like to have more control on how many plants can be grown per parcel if not could that be created? That would downsize the amount being grown in that way we could have more Tax levied in Isla Vista, the 8% tax. I went to a meeting there, community meeting. Bob Geis was there on behalf of Community Services with the county and what happened was it was very quick. It was like almost two dozen, two-and-a-half dozen senior citizens there mostly from Friendship Manor.

Next door to Friendship Manor is a county apartment where they bring I'm here to talk about the issue of people who are homeless, alcoholics and drug addicts from theoretically just Isla Vista which is not really true and rehabilitate them there. Recipients are there too. They don't pay a tax, but next door at Friendship Manor and three or four other apartments in Isla Vista where they are 501c3s. They have to pay the 8% tax. So some people at Friendship Manor are preventing a legal brief to send it off to HUD and to the Justice Department to see if any civil rights violations are going on there because Of HUD money being used discriminatorily against some people who are even neighbors to the facility. So hopefully we can take a look at it and see what we can do to correct this problem because what's good for the goose is good for the gander, and it is a federal program so I don't believe discrimination is allowed with this 8% tax.

Have a good day San Barbara County, and you've done a great job. Thank you very much, bye-bye.

not transcribed≈7s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:55:02 · ≈ 10:55 AM

Then we'll go to Kyle Richards, also for two. Then Max Schulte. Max? And then we'll hear from Linda Kropp as our final speaker.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 17Proposed1:55:17 · ≈ 10:55 AM

Hello. I just had a question quickly on... Let me just pull it up really quick. Don't want to mess it up. My question is in regards to the new goals being set up by the county, and it's specifically in regards to our renewable energy generation. I was just wondering how we plan on going about Creating energy resilience, especially in lieu of the Thomas fires and things like that.

I was wondering if there are any plans of setting up a micro grid in our communities in order to do so? And that's pretty much all that I wanted to know. And because I have noticed we are very behind on at least half of our plans that we had in our ECAP programs regarding the climate change and everything, so yeah, that's it, thanks.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role1:56:25 · ≈ 10:56 AM

So we have no provision for answering questions under public comment for items not on the agenda. But if you stick around for item two, I think there will be some speakers and some answers to some of your questions.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 17Proposed1:56:36 · ≈ 10:56 AM

Awesome, thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:56:39 · ≈ 10:56 AM

Linda Krupp

1:56 – 1:593 turns

PresenterLinda KroppEnvironmental Defense Center and I wanted to congratulate and thank Supervisor WProposedself-stated1:56:44 · ≈ 10:56 AM

Thank you and good morning, Chair Williams, members of the board, Supervisor Wolff. I'm Linda Kropp, Chief Counsel with the Environmental Defense Center and I wanted to congratulate and thank Supervisor Wolff for her public service. And I wanted to share our experience when Supervisor Wolff was first elected we knew of her because of her work on the school board.

We hadn't seen her in the environmental or land use arena, so we requested a meeting and we had some issues pending before the board. And we were starting at square one and we're going to have enough time to bring up to speed and explain how general plans work and these particular issues. And we met with her and her staff and On the issues that we're going to be coming up before the board, they had read every staff report. They had watched every hearing. I think they read every comment letter.

They knew more than we did and they immediately were like well on November 5th 2010 so and so said this and we're thinking that and Blown away, and we ended up having many years of very thoughtful discourse. And great appreciation for how prepared you and your staff always were. It may surprise some people, we didn't always agree. And when we didn't the conversation was equally thoughtful and you and your staff were equally prepared and able to explain to us exactly what your concerns were, what your thoughts were. I know on the board Supervisor Wolf is known for asking a lot of questions, expressing her opinion.

And as a member of the public that represents our constituency and I found that very refreshing. It made our job more interesting, it made us work harder. It made us be more prepared as well and so I want to thank you for your service and for your legacy. And on a substantive note, for all the work you did to protect Goleta Valley, San Marcos Foothills, Goleta Beach, More Mesa, and so many other places. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:59:15 · ≈ 10:59 AM

That concludes public comment.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role1:59:18 · ≈ 10:59 AM

We will go straight to departmental item number one.

1:59 – 2:0414 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:59:21 · ≈ 10:59 AM

Chair Williams, members of the board, Item 1 is from Community Services. It's a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the approval of a substantial amendment to the 2018 action plan and execution of tenant-based rental assistance agreements with the City of Santa Maria and the County Housing Authority. This is in the fourth and fifth districts.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 18Proposed1:59:45 · ≈ 10:59 AM

Please proceed. Good morning, Chair Williams and members of the board. We're here today for consideration of the extending funding for the tenant-based rental assistance program. With me in presenting will be Senior Housing Program Specialist Matt Kromke and Dinah Lockhart who's our HCD division head.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 19Proposed2:00:07 · ≈ 11:00 AM

Good morning, Chair Williams and members of the board. We're here today for consideration of a substantial amendment. Today's approval of home funds for tenant-based rental assistance requires a public hearing to consider public comments and submission of an action plan substantial amendment to HUD. Today concludes the 30 day public comment period on the proposed amendment.

HCD has not received any public comments as of yet. HCD is recommending the approval of $250,000 grant and home funds to the Housing Authority of the County of Santa Barbara. As well as approval of a $100,000 grant in home funds to the City of Santa Maria. The city of Santa Maria and the county housing authority report that the lack of funds for security and utility deposits is a barrier for many low income households in attaining affordable rental housing.

The City of Santa Maria will use home TBRA funds to provide security deposit assistance to low income residents in the city of Santa Maria and the communities of Orcutt and Tanglewood, to help residents secure affordable housing. Santa Maria plans to serve an estimated 40 households. The Housing Authority of the County of Santa Barbara will use home TBRA funds to provide security and utility deposit assistance to low income residents participating in a housing choice voucher program, also known as Section 8.

Which provides monthly rental assistance. The housing authority plans to serve an estimated 156 households. The program will be offered throughout the county with the exception of the city of Santa Barbara which receives a direct home allocation from HUD. This slide briefly summarizes today's recommended actions. Thank you, this concludes our staff report. We're happy to answer any questions you might have. Representatives from the County Housing Authority and the City of Santa Maria are also available in the Santa Maria Hearing Room for any program-specific questions you may have. Thanks again.

Questions?

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role2:02:24 · ≈ 11:02 AM

Seeing none. Public comment? No request to speak. There is one. Supervisor Wolf.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:02:30 · ≈ 11:02 AM

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate you bringing this forward and I am in support of your recommendation. I'm just concerned about one of the applications that you're making, it's Exhibit A. In the budget it notes $225,000 to security deposits but there is no allocation for utility deposits. I know that' s part of what this money is going to go toward. Does that need to be spelled out in more detail?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 19Proposed2:03:06 · ≈ 11:03 AM

The agreement allows for the use of funds to be used for either security deposits or utility It should be in the expenditure type in the budget, it should probably spell out. I think that $225,000 was meant to be the first three line items totaled.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:03:33 · ≈ 11:03 AM

Okay so you will make that correction to reflect that then?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 19Proposed2:03:37 · ≈ 11:03 AM

Yes indeed.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:03:38 · ≈ 11:03 AM

So we can approve this with the understanding that you'll make that correction so that it will total 225,000. I'll make a motion Mr. Chair, there's no public comments?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 19Proposed2:03:53 · ≈ 11:03 AM

No public

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:03:53 · ≈ 11:03 AM

comment. I'll make a motion that we approve this item with the suggested changes to the formal budget.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role2:04:01 · ≈ 11:04 AM

There is a motion, is there a second?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:04:04 · ≈ 11:04 AM

Second

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role2:04:05 · ≈ 11:04 AM

All those in favor please say aye. Aye It's unanimous. D2

2:04 – 2:1010 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:04:12 · ≈ 11:04 AM

Chair Williams, members of the board. Item two is from Community Services. It's a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the Energy and Climate Action Plan 2017 Progress Report.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 18Proposed2:04:27 · ≈ 11:04 AM

Chair Williams, members of the board, I will turn this over to our sustainability staff, Jen Krieger, Ashley Watkins who are co-division leads and Frank Chen.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed2:05:04 · ≈ 11:05 AM

Good morning, Chair Williams and members of the board. Apologies for the delay just getting set up here. It's nice to see all of you again. We're here today to give you an update on the implementation of the county's Energy and Climate Action Plan, which was adopted in 2015. As Mr. Chapchin mentioned, I have Ashley Watkins to my left, your right. She is the co-division chief with me for the sustainability team. And Frank Chen who is the program specialist on our team who provides most of the day-to-day activities on overseeing and implementing our energy and climate action plan or ECAP for short.

I'm going to just remind you about our County Sustainability Committee and what the ECAP entails before diving into the most recent implementation progress on the ECAP. As well as give you a few highlights of where we're doing well, and some other areas where we might have some opportunities for improvement before diving into our recommendations for your consideration today.

So just briefly here on the screen, I am not here on my own obviously. This is what the report that we're presenting to you is the work of all the folks that you see here on the screen as well as many others that are supporting the folks on the screen who are members of our County Sustainability Committee which is an interdepartmental team that the CEO's office put together towards the end of 2015 beginning of 2016 to help us really proactively implement and keep tabs on our ECAP.

I will note that we do have a couple vacancies that we're working to fill, both in public health and in parks. And then although they're not formally listed here on the screen, we do work closely with human resources and have had their participation intermittently as well. So just as a reminder, the Energy and Climate Action Plan or ECAP was adopted by the board in 2015. An acknowledgement of the county's local contribution to climate change through the greenhouse gas emissions that are created from day-to-day activities taking place not only in our county municipal operations but also from the unincorporated community at large.

Implementation really began in earnest in 2016, and we are collectively with our community partners working towards a goal of driving down our greenhouse gas emissions to 15% below our 2007 emissions baseline by the year 2020. So what we're reporting on today is our implementation progress through the first two years, 2016 and 2017. That leaves us three reporting years to go to get to our 2020 target.

Just a quick reminder, greenhouse gas emissions is kind of the overarching term that we use when talking about carbon dioxide which is the primary greenhouse gas emissions. It's predominantly created when we combust fossil fuels. Methane which is the primary component of natural gas and nitrous oxide which happens to be laughing gas but it's a really potent greenhouse gas emission that's emitted primarily from the agricultural sector here in Santa Barbara County. There are also a few other pollutants, but the three main ones of concern for us are carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide.

They're measured in this funny little term you'll see in the slides, metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent. That's just the unit we use when talking about these types of emissions. And ECAP really goes into detail in outlining the different actions that the county as a governmental organization and the community as a whole can take to help us meet our 2020 emissions reduction goal. Just a little bit of terminology. When we're talking about these individual actions that the ECAP identified, we call them Emissions Reduction Measures or ERMs. There's 53 of those in total. Those 53 individual ERMs are then rolled up into similar categories called core strategies. There's 11 of those so bear with me if you hear me fall into those terms. That's what they mean.

I'm basically just talking about individual things that we can do to try to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions like Installing solar or encouraging people to carpool rather than drive alone. The focus is really on the unregulated emission sources in the county. So I'm not talking today about, for example, emissions from oil and gas operations in our county. Those are addressed through the permitting process at the state and local level.

So really the emission reduction measures that we're talking about in the ECAP are voluntary measures for the most part. And the-

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.872:09:34 · ≈ 11:09 AM

Question on that? I'm sorry. Supervisor Labadino. Thank you. Do we know what those numbers are?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed2:09:40 · ≈ 11:09 AM

For the oil and gas operations? Yeah. I don't have a rolled up tally of that, but it is something that's addressed at the project level for each permit application. Right.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.872:09:48 · ≈ 11:09 AM

I'm just curious. All these other ones we're reporting whether they're up or down, and I know this isn't in our wheelhouse, but it would be nice to know. I am assuming based on activity right now that those GHG levels will be significantly lower in Santa Barbara County than they have been in the past.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed2:10:07 · ≈ 11:10 AM

from the oil and gas

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.872:10:07 · ≈ 11:10 AM

activities.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed2:10:10 · ≈ 11:10 AM

I can't speak reliably to that at this time but we can come back to you with that.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role2:10:15 · ≈ 11:10 AM

Yeah, I think there's a couple different factors. There is obviously less new operations being permitted but there are a decent amount of operations under existing permits that are kept going and if The last stats I saw were still the second highest oil producer producing county in the state after Kern.

2:10 – 2:2729 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed2:10:40 · ≈ 11:10 AM

Thank you, and the last thing I wanted to point out is that one of the features of the ECAP is that because we have this county-wide document and policy that outlines specifically how we are planning to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions There's a streamlining feature under CEQA that allows us to do a more streamlined environmental review at the project level for individual development projects that align with the emission reduction measures outlined in the ECAP. And that streamlined, project-level environmental review is basically good through the current timeline of the ECAP which is 2020.

So, going into more of the setup for today's progress report. I'm going to be talking about our implementation progress in two different ways. This is a slightly different approach than what we used in the 2016 progress report. So I just wanted to cover the methodology that we're using this year. We do feel like it is a more accurate and more robust way of looking at our implementation progress. So the first thing is that we do something called a Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory. That is the standardized, internationally accepted way for how organizations of all types, not just local governments measure their greenhouse gas emissions contribution calendar year 2016.

The first way that we're looking at our ECAP implementation progress is the most recent year for which complete data was available. So we're reporting our emissions progress through calendar year 2016. Note that I am referring to calendar year, not fiscal year. That's just the standard protocol for measuring emissions. The second way that we are looking at our ECAP implementation progress is to keep tabs on each of those individual emissions reduction measures So in the 2017 ECAP Implementation Progress Report, we're tracking those ERMs in two different ways. One is that we're showing you a year over year change from 2016 implementation to 2017 implementation and then we're also showing you how far we are towards our 2020 target.

So to give you a concrete example of that, as I mentioned there are 53 of these different emissions reduction measures. One of the ones that I think is probably a little bit easier to visualize is that there's an emissions reduction measure that sets a goal to install 60 miles of bike lanes throughout the unincorporated parts of the county by 2020. Through calendar year 2017, which is the year for which we have the most complete data. There were 16 and a half bike lane miles installed.

So that was actually an increase from 2016. I believe it was a 3% increase from 2016 levels, and it gets us about 28% to our 2020 target. So if you were to go into the 2017 progress report, you would see measurements like that for each of the emissions reduction measures

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:13:51 · ≈ 11:13 AM

I'm sorry to interrupt your presentation. We recently got a letter from the Sierra Club talking about measurements and I don't know if you've had a chance to look at it, but Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions, an agency's GPC which provides a standard methodology that local jurisdictions may use to estimate their local emissions. And there are three different scopes, one two and three.

Can you tell me is that the procedure that we're following or are we following a different process and procedure when we do our measurements?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed2:14:38 · ≈ 11:14 AM

Yes, Supervisor Wolf through the chair. Thank you for the question I'm glad you pointed that out. I did see the letter from the Sierra Club and that is the methodology that we used for measuring both our 2007 emissions baseline which is what the ECAB's based on and our 2016 emissions inventory check-in. You will note that in last year's report, we also tried to report emissions for the years between 2007 and 2016. That was a really high level check-in analysis doing it year to year. That did not follow the ICLEI protocol that the Sierra Club referenced but what we did for 2016 absolutely does. That is the method that we use that's internationally accepted. Okay thank you very much for that.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role2:15:24 · ≈ 11:15 AM

And I guess I have a question about this inventory too. Is the, our target methodology is that comparable to the state emissions reduction? So that makes this even more depressing right? That the state is achieving its reduction goals and we are falling as a people not just at the government of the county but We are falling short, meaning all these folks in other counties are reducing emissions enough that even us lagging behind averages out to the state meeting targets. Is that correct?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed2:16:08 · ≈ 11:16 AM

I haven't even gotten to the depressing part yet, but yes you clearly read the reports. Chair Williams that is accurate. The state as well as local governments follow that same greenhouse gas emissions inventory protocol. Our methodologies align. The state, when they reported their 2016 emissions, they did report that they were on track for meeting their 2020 greenhouse gas emissions reduction target. That was mostly due to changes in the building energy use sector, in particular the renewable portfolio standard that's cleaning up our electricity grid. They did note that emissions were trending up in the transportation sector which is one of our big culprits as well.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role2:16:48 · ≈ 11:16 AM

And so if we were comparing us to other folks, the likely explanation of biggest reason why we're falling short is our VMTs are going up more than other communities.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed2:17:00 · ≈ 11:17 AM

I will get to that on the very next slide. That is one contributor, yes. Okay, so here's the depressing news. Sorry. So what this slide shows is just the first way we measure our progress, the emissions inventory approach. And so as called for by the ECAP, Long Range Planning hired a consulting firm called Ascent Environmental To update the unincorporated counties greenhouse gas emissions inventory for 2016. The intent was really to provide a snapshot of how the county and the community are doing, and lowering our emissions towards the county's 2020 emissions reduction target.

So as shown in the table here, you know, the bottom line in bold is showing that greenhouse gas emissions from the unincorporated parts of the county have in fact increased. By 14% between 2007 and 2016. That is unfortunately the wrong direction, and it does stand out a bit from what we're seeing from other local governments who many of whom are not necessarily on track to meet their 2020 emissions reduction target but by enlarge their emissions are trending down and not up.

We have tried to tease out with the help of the consultant assent what we think are the biggest drivers of our emissions increase here locally. One, as Chair Williams pointed out is that we are seeing an increase in driving. That's it's we refer to it as vehicle miles traveled or VMT. It just means that all of us collectively are driving more in 2016 than we did in 2007 and Improvements that have been made in part because of state and federal policies that are making all of our vehicles more fuel efficient, and they're encouraging the adoption of electric vehicles.

Also in the transportation front, it's broken out separately as off-road emissions are up 36%. That's predominantly from construction activity that is mostly happening in the unincorporated parts of the county around Santa Maria. So while that is a good thing that there is a growth in commercial activity in the parts of our county where there's affordable housing In the long run, that will cut down on some of this driving between housing and jobs. But in the short term all that construction activity from really high emitting construction equipment caused an uptick in our off road emissions.

We are also seeing a big increase-

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role2:19:30 · ≈ 11:19 AM

So I think it's interesting to review that. Okay. From your analysis, the construction because more of it was in South County where In this last bit, ultimately will help at least reduce the growth of VMT. So it might be a net improvement but in the short run it adds to our inventory.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed2:19:56 · ≈ 11:19 AM

Chair Williams with a slight clarification on that I think we're actually seeing the uptake and construction activity in North County.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role2:20:04 · ≈ 11:20 AM

Both sides of the

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed2:20:05 · ≈ 11:20 AM

county? Both sides but more so

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role2:20:09 · ≈ 11:20 AM

Because some of the stats I had seen was for the first time Goleta had more than the north, but that's probably just a short-lived blip of construction close to housing right?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 8Proposed2:20:23 · ≈ 11:20 AM

It could be. It could be. Okay.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role2:20:24 · ≈ 11:20 AM

It's

GuestSneddenProposed · by introduction2:20:25 · ≈ 11:20 AM

like a two week sample. Can I ask a couple of questions? Supervisor Atkins. I'm wondering how we arrive at these, are these empirical data that somebody's out there measuring or are these all estimates or what do we, how do we arrive at these?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed2:20:46 · ≈ 11:20 AM

Thank you Supervisor Adam through the Chair. That's a great question. We don't actually have air pollution monitoring equipment that is out there counting the units of carbon dioxide and other emissions in the atmosphere when we're talking about the ECAP, so we are estimating these are all calculated emissions based on things like fuel use, energy use, tons of waste sent to the landfill. So we're tallying up all this what's called activity level data and then we're applying a greenhouse gas emissions rate to that activity. For all the vehicle miles traveled there is an emissions rate so there is pounds of greenhouse gas emissions per mile traveled. We multiply that by the miles that are traveled And that gives us our estimated emissions that gets rolled into the inventory.

GuestSneddenProposed · by introduction2:21:38 · ≈ 11:21 AM

So how are they dealing with Janet's electric car?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed2:21:44 · ≈ 11:21 AM

So it does account for any emissions from the electricity consumed by the electric car, so instead of it being gasoline or diesel powering the car, it's electricity from the grid. So we account for the emissions from the grid but those are lower than what it would be if it were a gasoline vehicle.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role2:22:00 · ≈ 11:22 AM

And if you want to look at in detail the methodology for the transportation sector, it's on page 16 of the GIG inventory and forecast. Yeah. All right, thank you. Hello?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.872:22:16 · ≈ 11:22 AM

Supervisor Labineau. That was my question how do you measure it but How confident are you that It just boggles the mind that we in Santa Barbara County are having increased vehicles miles traveled when other surrounding counties aren't, or they're seeing a decrease. I just find it really kind of counter common sense that we're, especially in this area, increase construction activity compared to any other county.

We somehow are the bad guys. It just doesn't make sense to me really. And I find, to me it's gotta be something in the numbers.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role2:23:01 · ≈ 11:23 AM

Unfortunately VNT is going up everywhere. It's just some places it's going up more than others and generally places...I mean this is kind of to some of your talking points. Generally places that don't build any housing close to their jobs like we are infamous for, VMT rises faster than other places.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.872:23:24 · ≈ 11:23 AM

I would like to see at some point a list of other counties and how they're doing, like our comparable counties because I can't think of a place that is more environmentally conscious than Santa Barbara County. And if we are not meeting these goals And the rest of the state seems to be meeting the goals. My brain says, well maybe there's something wrong with the way that we're inputting the numbers or the calculations aren't correct. I just find it really hard to believe that this environmentally social conscious county is somehow like the ugly stepchild in the whole state for GHG emissions. But I guess that's the bad news you're here to tell us.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role2:24:09 · ≈ 11:24 AM

There's another explanation, a possible explanation is that we are posers. Right? That we talk about it, that we're an intellectual center of environmentalism but that we just don't execute. I mean anybody if they want to have some evidence that we're posers just take a look sit at the roundabout or sit off Milpas where you can see the incoming traffic from the south. Or I'm sure there's another overpass where you could look at it from the north and And just count vehicles.

And count how many are occupied by one person or multiple people and the times I've done it, it's like 96%. It's just off the charts and we have a problem. We have a vehicle traveling farther than... That's true

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.872:25:08 · ≈ 11:25 AM

everywhere

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role2:25:08 · ≈ 11:25 AM

in

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.872:25:09 · ≈ 11:25 AM

the state.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role2:25:09 · ≈ 11:25 AM

Anyway,

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.872:25:10 · ≈ 11:25 AM

I won't interrupt anymore, I'm sorry.

GuestSneddenProposed · by introduction2:25:13 · ≈ 11:25 AM

I just want to point out that agriculture number, I don't know how they could possibly be. We're sitting here spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on a tractor, one tractor that's got a tier four motor in it because we have to. Because that's what's out there now. They don't run worth a damn. They're constantly broken so by mandate gotten out ahead of the technology. They just don't really work, it works in theory but not in practice you know once you put it in the field they don't work very well and we're talking about increased fertilizer use there has never been a time since I came back in 1983 to the farm When the fertilizer was a greater percentage of the value of a crop.

So the incentive has never been better to use less than it is right now. So the fact that we're up 32% over 2007, it just doesn't make any sense. I mean that just doesn't... And you know, I don't know what you could possibly even move the needle offsetting by decreased livestock production, although there probably is a lot less actually animals in the universe of Santa Barbara County than there was in 2007 because so many acres have gone into grapes and other things than they were in 2007. But like I said, The incentive to be judicious with all inputs has never been better than right now. So if it's going up 32% right now over 2007, I think you're in deep, deep trouble because There's no way that we could have any greater incentive to use less, because I don't see how you sell products at a profit anymore.

At some point everybody will just stop farming. I don't know what's gonna happen.

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

2:27 – 2:339 turns

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role2:27:51 · ≈ 11:27 AM

Well I'll say that it would be great if the report was wrong on that regard, but it wouldn't change the overall trend because the overall trend is driven by transportation sector and vehicle miles traveled. I guess this is a question to you, isn't there more acres in cultivation range land that's been converted into other crops than there used to

GuestSneddenProposed · by introduction2:28:16 · ≈ 11:28 AM

be? Grapes, yeah there's quite a few acres of grapes. So

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role2:28:22 · ≈ 11:28 AM

that could partially explain it?

GuestSneddenProposed · by introduction2:28:24 · ≈ 11:28 AM

Well, pretty, you don't use much, is it nitrogen fertilizer? Okay. So you just don't use much nitrogen fertilizer. In fact the Regional Water Quality Control Board doesn't really care about grapes because it uses so little nitrogen. So they're after the veg crops. That's saying a lot considering their level of vigilance. Please proceed.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed2:28:50 · ≈ 11:28 AM

I would love to prove the numbers wrong and I would also love to take credit for the numbers on the screen, but they were actually prepared by our consultant Ascent Environmental specifically on the fertilizer. It was self-reported from the agricultural community so it is based on actual I'm going to tell you that water and fertilizer are not And then the last thing I wanted to point out is that we're also seeing an increase in natural gas use among commercial buildings.

Unfortunately, I also don't have a really solid explanation for why that is happening. We have reached out to the gas provider here in the county to try to better understand that. We haven't been able to pinpoint it at this point in time. I will point out that there is a nice, bright spot in the solid waste sector. So our Resource Recovery and Waste Management Division and other community partners are doing a great job trying to divert waste from the landfills. So it's especially important in keeping our food and yard waste out because it produces that really potent methane gas when it breaks down in the landfill. So those emissions are going down, and the water and wastewater sector Unfortunately, this is a false 28% reduction.

There probably was some water related emissions reduction between 2007 and 2016 but not nearly as large as what we're showing here. It was a data error in the original 2007 emissions calculations that couldn't be corrected so just wanted to point that out. So overall our emissions are up 14% when they're supposed to be 15% below 2007 levels. So taking a look at our ECAP implementation progress the second way, that's where we're trying to track our progress with the individual emission reduction measures. As I mentioned earlier there are 53 of those emission reduction measures.

Of those 53, we've developed reliable ways to quantitatively measure implementation progress for roughly two-thirds or 36 of those ERMs. Of those 36 measurable ERMs, we think that we are doing a pretty decent job. That we're on track for about half of those. So 18 of the 36 measurable ERMs are at least halfway to their 2020 implementation target as of the end of calendar year 2017.

So in short, from the previous slide looking at our progress from an emissions monitoring perspective we're off track. On this slide from an ERM implementation perspective we're doing okay but not great. The bottom line is that unfortunately we're not likely to hit our 2020 greenhouse gas emissions reduction goal without taking further action. So I keep referencing these 53 ERMs and 11 core strategies that are really used as an organizational tool in the ECAP, but I personally find the sheer number of ERMs and core strategies to be a bit daunting.

So for that reason, I like to boil them down into three big buckets. And those three big buckets represent the primary contributors to our local greenhouse gas emissions. So as Chair Williams pointed out, transportation is the biggest driver of emissions locally. Both our on-road cars and trucks as well as our off road construction and agricultural equipment together they make up 56% of our total emissions.

The next...

not transcribed≈26s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role2:32:38 · ≈ 11:32 AM

Just one moment. Another question from Supervisor Adam.

GuestSneddenProposed · by introduction2:32:41 · ≈ 11:32 AM

How do we, it seems like we should create another term for that ERMs because they're not really measured. They're estimated.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed2:32:53 · ≈ 11:32 AM

We are, they are estimated based on calculations using the best data available to us. Well I

GuestSneddenProposed · by introduction2:32:57 · ≈ 11:32 AM

can calculate anything you know who was it Mark Twain said I'll work on a replacement for you.

not transcribed≈14s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

2:33 – 2:395 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed2:33:25 · ≈ 11:33 AM

Transportation is the biggest emission source at 56%. The next biggest source is building energy use, which comprises 29% of our local emissions. So that's emissions attributed to both electricity use as well as natural gas and propane use in our buildings. And then there's everything else. And I don't mean that in a derogatory sense, I just mean that the emissions from our agricultural sector, from our solid waste sector and from water and wastewater treatment and use together they comprise about 15% of our total greenhouse gas emissions locally.

So while they are critically important if we are looking to make the biggest bang for our buck transportation and building energy use is where we should focus primarily. So over the next few slides, what I want to do is I want to share some of our ECAP implementation successes and identify further opportunities for improvement across these three broad categories.

So the first is transportation. Again, this is the biggest piece of the pie so I'm gonna spend a fair amount of time here. On the positive side we are seeing that rail ridership is up. So individuals choosing to take the train over driving by themselves. I will remind you that this is based on 2017 data. So this predates people being forced to commute or travel by train during the Thomas Fire and the debris flow in 2018 It also predates the new incentives that SBCAG put in place to try to encourage people to switch over to the Pacific Surfliner when some adjustments were made to the train schedule to accommodate work schedules. That just happened this past spring, in April 2018. So that means we think we'll continue to see an uptick in rail ridership and that's a good thing.

We're also seeing that students, our K through 12 students are pretty good at using active transportation. Meaning that they are walking, skateboarding, biking, scooting to and from school mind you rather than necessarily being dependent on their parents driving them to school. We're also seeing an uptick in infill development, so trying to encourage people to build in our denser urban areas rather than to continue to sprawl out into our undeveloped agricultural areas.

And then we are also continuing to see small but steady declines in our county fleet fuel usage. In terms of opportunities, there's quite a bit more that we can be doing. The most important thing is that we really do need to address our housing and jobs imbalance while we are starting to see some growth in commercial development in North County where the more affordable housing is.

We're not seeing similar growth in housing options in South County where there's a higher prevalence of jobs along the coast. Another area where we could improve in the transportation space is to continue to apply for and hopefully receive funding for active transportation and shared mobility projects. So through this last election cycle, because Proposition 6 did not pass that means that we will benefit locally from increased gas tax revenues that generate new funding for all types of transportation projects including active transportation.

So for example, the 101 widening project includes not only a new freeway lane but also funding for rail improvements and increased connectivity of the coastal bike route. And although controversial and I know will be an item later today, the availability of more transportation options like scooter and bike share programs provides alternatives that might entice people out of their cars for local trips. And I think importantly it builds lifelong habits for those students where the current bike and scooter share programs are concentrated around Isla Vista.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role2:37:20 · ≈ 11:37 AM

Supervisor Wolf.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:37:22 · ≈ 11:37 AM

Thank you Mr. Chair. One of the things that I think go along with transportation that we don't One of the things that we think about because I think we think of roads is the marine vessel emissions and I just went back to look at our which is coming up, our legislative platform. Because there is a platform in there that deals with air quality marine vessel emissions and what it says in there is that the marine vessels that go through our channel contribute almost 50% issues that we're seeing. So is there a reason why that's not included in the ECAP?

I'm just wondering.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed2:38:08 · ≈ 11:38 AM

I believe part of the reason, Supervisor Wolf through the Chair that marine vessel emissions are not included in the ECAP is because they have historically been addressed by the Air Pollution Control District rather than by the county directly. They are an important emission source. Bunker fuel that's used in marine ships is pretty nasty stuff but we don't always have jurisdictional purview over them.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:38:33 · ≈ 11:38 AM

So I guess what I've done just as a follow-up when we look at our numbers and our high percentages, there are certain things that we're doing in APCD to incentivize the vessels to go slower. Hence, to reduce their pollution emitting sources but It's not enough. So it almost seems that there are certain issues out of our control, I mean we can attempt to make inroads but it still seems like its counting against us if you're, I don't know just it seems odd to me that might be one of our larger sources and yet

2:39 – 3:012 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed2:39:22 · ≈ 11:39 AM

Yes, thank you Supervisor Wolf through the chair. That is accurate we don't capture some of the largest emission sources in the county in the current version of the ECAP it's something that we could look at for a future update of the ECAP and to your point there are things that will always remain outside of the county's control that's driven by individual choices and so that's also going to be one of our other recommendations If your board does provide direction to update the ECAP, that we take a really community-centric inclusive approach in developing the next iteration of the ECAP so that we come up with actions that not only the county can do and actively control and implement. But also things that individuals and other jurisdictions and other businesses are bought into and committed to and are willing to work towards with us.

So, also some opportunities in the transportation space. There's certainly room to improve our electric vehicle charging infrastructure and to try to encourage more individuals as well as our own county fleet to convert over to electric vehicles. I will point out there's some opportunities to strengthen our county fleet procurement goals. So right now, we currently require 5% of annual new vehicle purchases to be alternatively fueled which does include hybrid electric vehicles and that definition of alternatively fueled whereas state law is currently requiring 50% of light-duty vehicles in the state fleet to be zero emissions, which means they either have to be all electric or certain types of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. So 50% of light duty vehicles that have to be zero emissions by 2025.

And 15% of heavy duty vehicles have to be zero emission by 2025. The state is already seeing progress towards their goals, they've achieved 30% zero emission vehicle fleet as of last fiscal year. That's in part because the State Department of General Services defaults all light-duty vehicles to zero emissions vehicles and it requires the requesting departments to justify anything other than a zero emissions vehicle. And doesn't allow the use of internal combustion engines for sedans.

I will point out that one challenge with adopting that approach here locally for the county is that currently, the county looks at roughly 100,000 mile life cycle whereas the state uses a 60,000 mile life cycle so they're able to turn over their fleet more quickly. So that does help them cut down on emissions from the state vehicle fleet, but there are trade-offs in that you're sending more of those old vehicle parts to the landfill which is another source of emissions and just a consumption issue overall.

Lastly, I want to point out we do have some opportunities to support our employees in making greener commute habits and choices. So recently the county sustainability committee working with SB CAG did a survey of all of our employees trying to better understand their current commute patterns and preferences for ways that they might like to commute if that option were available to them.

We did get about a 25% participation rate in that survey which is really great. The vast majority of our employees, over 70%, reported that they drive to and from work alone. Carpooling is also a popular alternative whereas transit and walking and biking are less used at this point in time. We've also seen that the work home location of our employee workforce really exemplifies the job housing imbalance in our county with many of our employees commuting across county or out of county.

We're also finding through the survey that awareness of the green commute options we already provide to employees is very limited. So there's an opportunity for us, the Sustainability Committee, to work more closely with HR to do a better job getting the word out about existing choices as well as to improve our offerings. In terms of improving commute offerings, the top enhancements that were identified through this survey is to expand the existing vacation bonus. Currently employees who take a qualifying type of commute can earn up to two days of additional vacation per year.

There was a suggestion that maybe we increase that to three days per year as an additional enticement for employees. And then also there was a strong call for allowing more flexible work arrangements, both in terms of flex schedules and telecommuting.

Moving on to our next biggest emission source, which is building energy use. In terms of highlights we are doing a good job both at the county and at some of our community partners and neighboring county partners in reaching our residents with energy efficiency information in part through the Empower Central Coast program. And then we also are exceeding our renewable energy goals that were identified through the ECAP. So both the penetration of rooftop solar on individual homes and businesses, as well as the 40 megawatt Quiama Solar Project, they have already put us past our 2020 Renewable Energy Goal as identified in the ECAP.

In terms of opportunities, we have not fully built out the solar resource capacity in the Quiama Valley rural area. If we were to fully build out all the solar potential in that area, we could meet an additional 14% of our 2020 greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals. So this is a big discrete activity that we could do to chip away at that 2020 emissions reduction target.

Also within the sustainability division, we have quite a few projects in the work that are going to help address lowering greenhouse gas emissions from our building energy use. One is the strategic energy planning project that we're working on where we're working to identify parts of the county that are very well suited to renewable energy development and we look forward to bringing back the results of that study to you in spring of next year.

We've also been working with our partners in Ventura and San Luis Obispo counties to create a new regional energy network that will replace some of the ground that we built with the Empower Program. And expand energy efficiency services to multifamily and hard-to-reach communities, and we're also developing a commercial energy efficiency program as well. There could be opportunities to support the state's work trying to decarbonize the building sector. So there's been a lot of progress made at the state level, trying to drive out fossil fuels and greenhouse gas emissions from the electricity sector. And there is now move to try to convert buildings to run on all electric. And doing so by potentially not allowing the use of natural gas in new construction.

So that's an option that we could look at as well, it's just easier to decarbonize electricity fuel sources than it is natural gas. And then general services is also doing some great work with the county campus energy master plans. I know that they're currently doing some audits here in South County and have some work planned for North County campuses as well.

I also should point out, although it's not here on the slide. We are updating the financial feasibility assessment for community choice energy and should that continue to look like a viable option for our county? And we are able to invest in new renewable energy generation sources that also could make a sizable dent in our emissions goal for 2020 and beyond.

And lastly, the final grouping of areas in agriculture. We are seeing that growers predominantly for cost reasons are using more water efficient irrigation and meeting our ECAP goals in that area. In terms of solid waste as I reported earlier we really are seeing an uptick in keeping landfill sorry keeping waste out of the landfill. And then as it relates to water and wastewater use and treatment.

We did see a slight increase in water consumption between 2016 and 2017 But overall we are on track for meeting our 2020 water savings goals. There are plenty of opportunities in these three categories as well, and agriculture I know that the Kachuma Resource Conservation District and the Community Environmental Council they've been doing an excellent job trying to work with our agricultural community to implement low carbon practices including carbon farming and Supervisor Adam pointed out that there are opportunities to replace older, higher polluting agricultural equipment with newer cleaner burning models. And the Air Pollution Control District is seeing more and more funding coming down from the state to try to incent those turnovers.

In terms of waste, I've also bolded here the Tahecus Resource Recovery Project that I know you're all well aware of. Once that project is finally up and running, that's going to be a huge piece of our 2020 emissions reduction target. That represents over 60% of the total emissions reductions needed by 2020. We know that we won't have that online in 2020 but as soon as it does hit, that'll make a big dent.

We're also doing quite a bit, working with General Services and Resource Recovery to try to improve our landfill diversion practices here at the county. We're increasing our education and signage to try to improve sorting of recyclables. And we've also instituted a new program called Party Packs where any county employee can check out reusable dishes and utensils and serving ware for county meetings and events.

And as it relates to water, I also want to point out that the Water Agency is doing a really great job putting out some demonstration gardens including right here in the engineering building courtyard. The Parks Division and the Sustainability Division have brought on a new Civic Spark Fellow, Sean Burns who is working to develop a parks water management plan throughout our park system.

So this is a really dense slide, so bear with me as I walk all of us through it. But the gist of it is that the gap between the top of the colored bands and the solid black line. The gap that's represented between the delta between those two is the additional emissions reductions that we would need to achieve here locally to meet the state's future greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets.

So let me walk you through that piece by piece. The first part is that these stacked colored bands that you see here on the screen, they represent our consultants' expectations for how our greenhouse gas emissions will go down over time. So assuming that all we do is fully implement the ECAP, which we're behind on right now. But assuming we can make up ground, get back on track and hit our ECAP 2020 reduction goal.

We think that our emissions are going to start to slow down or start to decrease over time. And then the black line it represents the new state targets that have been adopted since the ECAP was adopted in 2015. So looking at the colored stacks, they are stacked in order of contribution to our total greenhouse gas emissions from the unincorporated parts of the county. With the largest contributor on the bottom and the smallest contributor on the top. So the bottom blue layer that represents emissions from the transportation sector as you've heard me say several times that is by far our biggest emission source.

The orange layer are emissions from building energy use. The green is agriculture, the yellow is off-road equipment, brown is solid waste and though it's not visible on the screen there's a dark blue band that represents our water and wastewater emissions. You'll notice that the blue band, again that's transportation. It starts to decline between 2016 and 2020 in part because we're forecasting a slight dip in the unincorporated population between those years and in part due to the increasing penetration of fuel efficient and electric vehicles.

The blue band continues to decline at a slower pace through 2030 as fuel economy requirements tighten and electric vehicle adoption continues to pick up steam. More notably, there are even steeper emissions declines that are expected in the building energy use category. That's the orange band due to the state tightening energy efficiency standards and solar energy requirements for new buildings as well as the renewable portfolio standard that's accelerating the transition to zero emitting renewable resources like solar and wind.

Emissions from the solid waste sector are similarly projected to decline, albeit at a smaller pace due to state mandates for landfill diversion especially as it relates to food waste. Emissions from off-road equipment and water are expected to stay roughly the same without any additional local action. So the black line again represents the state targets. So when the ECAP was adopted in 2015, we adopted a 2020 emissions reduction goal and that's because that's what was being recommended by the state at the time. Since then, the state has adopted three new greenhouse gas reduction targets. One for 2030.

One for 2045 and one for 2050. And I do want to point out that although the state measures its emissions reduction projects based off of a 1990 emissions baseline, the state provided guidance to local governments that they could use a different year because they recognized that not all of us had good record keeping that would have all of our utility and fuel receipts from 1990.

So instead, when we developed the ECAP, we chose 2007 as our baseline year. So to not confuse things too much, we converted the state 1990 goals to our 2007 emissions baseline. So you'll see that of the three options in 2030, the state would like all of us to collectively be 40% below 1990 levels which is similar to 31% below our 2007 levels. The 2045 goal is shown in this dashed gray line.

That is actually a new target that was adopted via executive order this past September. That takes all greenhouse gas emissions out of our economy and zeros them out entirely, and then there was an existing 2050 target that the state wanted us all to be 80% below 1990 levels. That equates to 74% below our local 2007 levels. So the main takeaway here is that again, the difference between the top of the brown stack and the solid black line or the dashed gray line. That's the emissions gap that we would need to make up through new local requirements and strategies in our ECAP.

And that gap gets bigger over time because the state hasn't yet identified all of the policies and actions that it's going to take to get to the post 2030 targets. They basically have policies in place through 2030, and haven't fully adopted things to help us out at the local level past that. So that leaves us with a few staff recommendations for your consideration.

In light of the fact that we are behind schedule in terms of implementing our current ECAP goal, I want to start by saying that we are updated from top to bottom and as part of that update to the ECAP, we not only look past our 2020 goal towards 2030. We do think that greenhouse gas emissions in order to lower them it really takes all of us choosing to individually make different decisions on a daily basis and Societal cultural shifts as we all know do not happen overnight. They do not happen over a matter of years, they happen over decades. So we're hoping that by setting a new 2030 target now and working to develop a new ECAP that we can have that in place by 2020 and we will have a solid ten years to help us work towards that cultural shift that's required.

As I mentioned, there were three different options that the states provided to us for a 2030, a 2045 or 2050 emissions reduction target. Staff is recommending that we go with the 2030 greenhouse gas reduction target. One because we have a tough road to hoe to get there and because it is the only state level target that is currently codified in statute. The other two are executive orders.

And we don't have a solid guidance on how to align with those just yet. Secondly, as I referred to earlier, we are recommending that we continue to try to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions to slow the pace of climate change but we also need to recognize that we're already seeing the effects of climate change locally including rising temperatures and more severe and prolonged droughts puctuated by more intense bouts of rain We can't just lower emissions. We also need to adapt our physical, social and economic systems to weather these changes we're already seeing. So to give you some examples when we're considering new emissions reduction measures to include in the updated version of the ECAP if we're thinking about trying to put more solar on our own county-owned facilities Any time we're putting in new solar panels, it might be a good idea to couple that with battery storage so that we can provide grid backup in the case of an event that takes out our electricity grid.

Similarly if we're trying to reduce emissions from the transportation sector by installing more and more bike lanes to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, we also should probably take a look at the materials that were using to pave those bike lanes. There are things now that are called cool pavements or sometimes cool asphalt that can provide higher reflectivity to adapt to the fact that we're anticipating seeing higher temperatures that are going to strain our infrastructure. Hotter temperatures means it shortens the life cycle of our current construction materials, so we should adapt to that.

And the third example is just from kind of the waste and agricultural sector that we could build upon the great work that the community's already doing to try to apply compost as a way to store carbon in the soil and reduce our greenhouse gas emissions, while also retaining soil moisture and building soil health so that we can have a more resilient agricultural sector in light of sustained drought and higher temperatures.

So for these reasons, staff is recommending that we also incorporate climate adaptation or resiliency measures along with greenhouse gas reduction measures into the next version of the ECAP. The third recommendation is that we're suggesting that we employ a regional approach, one that is really inclusive and multi-jurisdictional. That empowers the community and our neighboring jurisdictions to be part of the solution to addressing climate change. The accelerating place of climate change and the magnitude of the impacts that it causes really necessitates as I mentioned earlier individual behavior change but also that societal scale culture change We're seeing that one actor alone is insufficient. That achieving the ECAP's current goals and pursuing even deeper reductions targets called for by the state really requires an all-hands approach from the unincorporated community in our neighboring jurisdictions And then lastly, we're recommending a modification to the reporting cycle.

There is some confusion currently between the monitoring cycle that's outlined in the ECAP itself which calls for annual reporting and then the energy element of the general plan that calls for a five-year reporting cycle. And certainly annual reporting is ideal, but among local governments three to five years is more common simply due to resource constraints. It is time and energy and cost intensive to produce these reports. And also as I mentioned earlier the relatively longer pace of change when measuring greenhouse gas emissions doesn't necessarily call for annual tracking.

And the state uses a three year compliance cycle so for these reasons we're recommending we switch So that would mean that our last report on the current 2020 goal would be produced in 2021 based on 2020 emissions, and that our first report on the new post-2020 ECAP would happen in 2024 for 2023 emissions. And changing the reporting frequency does not affect the streamlined environmental review that I mentioned at the beginning of the presentation.

So here's a summary of the recommendations for your consideration. With that, I will take any questions that you have.

not transcribed≈11s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

3:01 – 3:0712 turns

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role3:01:06 · ≈ 12:01 PM

Supervisor Hartman?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.833:01:08 · ≈ 12:01 PM

Let's see, I have a couple just for clarification. So on recommendation number two, would that require a change in how we define our measures

not transcribed≈7s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed3:01:24 · ≈ 12:01 PM

Thank you Supervisor Hartman through the chair. It would mean that we would include a combination of measures, some that focus on reducing emissions which is what we have in the current ECAP and some that focus on adapting our physical and social infrastructure to respond to climate change so it would be a combination.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.833:01:45 · ≈ 12:01 PM

And then on the reporting cycle I support three to five years for the greenhouse gas emissions, but how about could we do something more frequent about the various measures that we have adopted and the progress that we're making on those? Not necessarily what the greenhouse gas emission results are, but just in terms of the process to get them underway.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed3:02:14 · ≈ 12:02 PM

Yes, that would be feasible. We could do something similar to what we did this year where we measured our year-over-year percent change for each emission reduction measure and the percent towards the future year target.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.833:02:26 · ≈ 12:02 PM

Just the nature of... I mean, we wouldn't even need the greenhouse gas emissions reductions although I guess you can calculate it but just You know, what are we doing? What kinds of programs are we putting in place to help us get to where we want to get in three or five years. The last question I have really I'd just like you to expand a little bit because you've already been doing a whole lot on number 3 and you kind of brushed over it but We do have partners. Your office has been very effective in bringing people together in South County, you're doing a lot of research now throughout the county so I'd just like you to expand on that a little bit.

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed3:03:08 · ≈ 12:03 PM

Thank you, Supervisor Hartman through the chair. Yes we I guess about six weeks ago we convened a community meeting here in South County although we invited folks from all over the county to participate and just have an initial kind of brainstorming discussion to get a sense for whether there was community appetite for participating in a broader climate action strategy and working together a little bit more holistically.

We had fantastic participation, I think we had 60 plus people in attendance including other local government staff, community members, we even had some folks from as far up as Sonoma County that were visiting with us as well as from Santa Cruz and some of our other jurisdictions that we've been looking to To try to understand the best practices for other local governments that have gone ahead of us and taken this regional climate approach.

It is definitely becoming more of the norm here in California, I think that folks are recognizing that the types of things that we would do to reduce our emissions locally and should try to respond to the impacts of climate change. They're not particularly unique from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. We're all working towards the same types of activities, towards common goals and so it really presents some economies of scales if we can work together and collaborate on that. So we are definitely hearing there's interest from community groups at least from our south county cities in joining us and we think that we can find opportunities on kind of project by project basis to work with everybody on this.

CommentJessie SteeleProposedself-stated3:04:47 · ≈ 12:04 PM

Thank you.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.873:04:49 · ≈ 12:04 PM

Other questions? Supervisor Lavinino. Can we help lower GHG emissions by turning off our air conditioning? I'm freezing to

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role3:04:57 · ≈ 12:04 PM

death. Yeah, this is a pet peeve of mine. One of the things that we'd like to do is have the ability to turn it off. We kind of ask for every six months for about two years so I'm hoping that someday we can We'll go to public comment.

not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈6s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
CommentKyle Richards I'mProposedself-stated3:05:41 · ≈ 12:05 PM

Hello, good morning or good afternoon Chair Williams and Board of Supervisors. My name is Kyle Richards I'm a resident of the second district of the city of Goleta also Goleta City Council member and I'm here to offer support for the staff's recommendations in particular I want to support their goal to or the recommendation to establish a new Thank you. I wanted to make sure you were aware that last year, the City of Goleta established a fossil free energy goal by 2030 and right now our staff is working on an action plan for how we will achieve that goal.

And I do want to mention that one of the recommendations was with regard to the fleet. And I'll let you know that Goleta's newest addition to our fleet is an all-electric parking enforcement vehicle, and we will be launching that next week so there will be a ribbon cutting for it a week from now. I'm excited about that. Last year, we gave direction to work with the county and with your staff in other jurisdictions to study the feasibility of a community choice energy program in the area. And we also authorized our staff to work regionally on a strategic energy plan. So I'm here to let you know that we are interested in working in collaboration with the county and I hope that you will support that recommendation of the staff. Thank you.

not transcribed≈14s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈18s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed3:07:41 · ≈ 12:07 PM

Katie Davis to be followed by Michael Chiacos.

3:07 – 3:144 turns

CommentKatie DavisProposedself-stated3:07:49 · ≈ 12:07 PM

Hello, good morning. I'm Katie Davis. I am chair of the Santa Barbara Sierra Club and on a record breaking hot night in July that was absolutely made worse by climate change. Flames came down my street and it was terrifying. I mean, I just ran out of my house and I had my electric car. I was trying to drive away without unplugging it. That's how panicked I was. And most of the houses on my street burned down that night.

With hot winds like that, fires can start anywhere. That was one of 8,000 fires this year burning nearly 2 million acres in California, billions of damages in California. If we aren't feeling the urgency of the climate crisis right now here in California and in Santa Barbara County, we aren't paying attention. Report after report issuing the alarm. The chair of the recent IPCC report which was by 91 scientists from 40 countries Warned that parts of the world will be uninhabitable by 2040 if we don't act. And concluded that the next few years are probably the most important in history.

So, we do have to do better with our climate action plan than we've done thus far and the good news is there are things we can do. There's more we can do. In Ventura County just starting up their community choice program they set 100% renewable energy default as a plan next year while protecting low income citizens from any price increases and giving everybody energy choice.

Santa Barbara County should match Santa Barbara and Goleta's goals of 100% renewable energy by 2030. And we can electrify buildings and transportation, which together are 85% of emissions. Natural gas is methane. It's a potent greenhouse gas that we mostly import to California from other states through long pipeline systems. And if you factor in the leakage and disasters like Aliso Canyon it's actually as bad as coal.

So we do need a plan for getting off of natural gas. We can electrify buildings, the Winslow Townhomes in Goleta are an example of an all-electric new development and actually cost less to operate efficient electric appliances than natural gas. And heat pumps can cool as well as heat which will be increasingly needed so it's a way to provide air conditioning. I'm And you're creative about encouraging more electric car adoption, reducing vehicle miles traveled. Californians are using 4 million gallons a day less of gasoline than we did a decade ago. So we are on the right trajectory and EV sales are many times higher than in the rest of the US so we can become national leaders.

We do need to factor in our fossil fuel production. I've heard good arguments for including end use emissions from oil and gas produced in the county as a scope three emission. So an out of boundary emission, but that we are responsible for and need to take account for. Certainly we need to track what's happening with emissions from oil and gas production, both stationary source emissions and in use emissions as part of climate action discussions to get a complete view of what is happening in the county as a whole. I think Supervisor Lovino's point about that, of just seeing what our emissions are doing as a whole is really a good one. And there should be an active group working on cap implementation. I like the regional idea, as long as it's we should try to avoid surprises like this emissions increase and avoid delays in implementing solutions by really working together continuously on an ongoing basis.

Thank you so much.

not transcribed≈16s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed3:11:24 · ≈ 12:11 PM

Michael Chiakos to be followed by Allegra Roth.

CommentMichael ChiacosProposedself-stated3:11:28 · ≈ 12:11 PM

Good afternoon, my name is Michael Chiacos with Community Environmental Council. And I'd first just like to thank Supervisor Wolf for her many years of service. We support staff recommendations for 2030 target for adding climate resiliency for working with other jurisdictions and switching to a three year reporting cycle. We believe that the county should put forward a goal that goes beyond the 40%, and in fact, 50% by 2030. Because we're not growing as fast as other regions, as well as we need to show our environmental leadership.

And this isn't that ambitious compared to other organizations. UCSB has a carbon neutrality goal. By 2025, the city of San Luis Obispo their whole community a carbon neutrality goal by 2035. So 50% by 2030 is something that we should be striving for. We think that you can get there with some big bold strategies and we've outlined many of them in our letter as well as appendices there with a lot of detail.

In the words of Supervisor Williams, let's not be posers. We need big bold strategies to get there. The first one being 100% renewable energy. Not by 2030 but by 2022. As you heard, Ventura County while we are busy being posers is showing that environmental leadership. And next year the county as well as the cities of Thousand Oaks, Ventura, Oxnard and Ojai will all be 100% renewable energy default next year so we need to really get moving on this.

We can also set a goal of 20% electric vehicles by 2030. This is more ambitious than the California goal of 5 million by 2030, which is about 12.5%. But we are a big early adopter region and also as pointed out, we have very large commutes. And people can have a huge amount of savings by driving 115 mile per gallon equivalent electric vehicle especially if they're commuting from Santa Maria.

The county needs to lead by example on EVs. We have 1,600 vehicles in the county fleet and just a few token electric vehicles. Staff has made it clear to me that they're not going to work on it unless they're directed to and if there's some policy to move forward. The State Department of General Services has a Green Fleet Policy of 25% purchases new vehicles by 2020 which they are exceeding right now. They are aiming for 50% by 2025. We can do the same.

Santa Monica has 130 electric vehicles in 30 different departments. This is true leadership and we need to set these policies. The county also has 4,000 employees. 1,000 of them commute 60 plus miles per day. All these people could save a huge amount of money by commuting in an electric vehicle. It's a big secret about how affordable and how much money they can save.

And then in your own facilities, you're doing great work up at BetterAvia. I'd like to see that moving faster though but please also put out to bid Foster Road and Calle Real. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed3:14:36 · ≈ 12:14 PM

Allegra Roth be followed by Robert Perry

3:14 – 3:204 turns

CommentAllegra RothProposedself-stated3:14:44 · ≈ 12:14 PM

Good afternoon supervisors and staff. My name is Allegra Roth, I'm also here from the Community Environmental Council. I would like to echo concerns and questions about the reported 14% increase in county GHG emissions. CEC urges further examination of those numbers and support setting an increased 2030 target of a 50% reduction from 1990 levels. We are pleased to see that compost application and soil health were recommended by staff as ongoing climate strategies for the county. And CEC would be very willing to work with staff to develop concrete programs for implementation.

As you all know, and as was discussed, the CEC has been extensively involved in local efforts to improve our region's agricultural soil health and sequester carbon and mitigate against climate change. So as discussed in our letter to the board, the CEC recommends that the county include a variety of carbon farming practices. Not just compost application, as preferred and voluntary best management practices in the ECAP. Listed practices include riparian restoration, cover cropping, reduced tillage, adaptive grazing, compost application and dozens of others.

The proposed agriculture practices included in our letter can aid in the county's capacity to reach its various strategic goals on climate and water management, and would build the economic vitality and climate resilience of our county's agricultural sector. And there are a variety of state funding opportunities that support adoption of these types of practices, including $15 million in this year's California Healthy Soils Program.

Santa Barbara County landowners are in a prime position to tap into this funding. There is also state funding available for food waste reduction and recovery programs that could help reduce emissions associated with our food system and could supplement the diversion through the Tohigo's Resource Recovery Project. So as a region that relies heavily on our agricultural economy and a region that will be tasked with adapting to climate change very dramatically, soil health and its co-benefits are palpable investment.

Again we're pleased to see the county embracing this strategy and would be happy to support and work with staff to identify projects that can create both agricultural and environmental solutions which are challenging to do. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed3:16:57 · ≈ 12:16 PM

Robert Perry? And then we'll hear from Max Schultz, who's our final speaker.

PresenterRobert PerryEnergy Research for the World Business AcademyProposedself-stated3:17:04 · ≈ 12:17 PM

Chair Williams, Supervisors of the Board, my name is Robert Perry. I am the Director of Energy Research for the World Business Academy. First, I would also like to thank Supervisor Wolfe for her years of stellar public service. This place would be very different without her and Glad that we have had the benefit of her service. I'd also like to commend Jen Krieger and the Sustainability Department for the work that they've done, me, Michael, Katie and others. We've been participants in the sessions that she and Ashley have overseen, and they're doing a stellar job of enrolling stakeholders to be part of the solution.

And I also endorse all the comments that have been made to date on this issue. I think we hear a common theme, we need to go bigger, we need to go faster. We need to swing for the fences a little bit more and World Business Academy has aligned with the Climate Mobilization or TCM. An organization formed in March 2014 to leverage organizing technologies and work on the ground with concerned communities, organizations and governments to initiate a World War II scale economic and societal climate mobilization effort that will quickly reduce all GHG emissions and restore safe climate within the shortest time frame possible.

After unprecedented wildfires devastated the area in December 2017, TCM worked with the office of LA Council Member Paul Koretz to research and develop a proposal for the legislative machinery that could begin coordinating a mobilization of Los Angeles. In January 2018, the motions were introduced with broad support from the council. And in early May, the council voted unanimously to explore the establishment of the country's first climate emergency mobilization department.

Local TCM members want to do the same here, to solidify Santa Barbara's legacy as the birthplace of the environmental movement. But first we have to acknowledge and strongly commit to reduce GHG emissions as quickly as possible. By declaring that we are in a climate emergency and committing to addressing it in time to avoid the worst outcomes, local governments can become leaders of the climate emergency movement and inspire others to do the same.

I would like to submit for your consideration a packet of materials consisting of a draft resolution and literature that explains the urgent circumstances surrounding climate change, how cities can lead by example to create a nationwide grassroots movement. And a victory plan that outlines in detail what has to be done and how to do it. Every year of business as usual guarantees more climate catastrophe, more wars, displacement, flooding and famine. We can't hide from the truth any longer. Global warming threatens to destroy our cities, our state and most life on Earth. Thank you for your consideration of this resolution and I hope to speak with all of you regarding this critically important issue.

So I have copies here, I don't know

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed3:20:15 · ≈ 12:20 PM

who- Max Schultz?

3:20 – 3:366 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 17Proposed3:20:31 · ≈ 12:20 PM

Hello, I first would like to acknowledge the last speaker. We do need to do bigger and we do need to do faster, better and we do need to be way more honest about what the numbers are actually in reality. You are right Peter Adams and you're right Mr. Levine Nino, sorry for butchering your name. The numbers are not correct, they're not good measurements. We're actually far worse off We are far worse off than what we need to be, and it's not really a laughing matter right now. So I just ask you to not treat it like a joke because it's not a joke. We're in a huge crisis right now.

Not only that, we're not taking responsibility for many of the emissions that we are putting out by simply being producers of the oil. There are at least 750 new oil wells being proposed in By three different oil companies, maybe four. I can't remember. But regardless of that, that's a huge number. It's not being fully represented in the action plan and because we don't have the right information there is no way that we can actually say that these goals are even correct. They're not, it's just simply not enough and we really do have to do a lot better than this.

But we can, there's plenty of things that we can do even on a local level including our infrastructure. We have to begin mitigating the effects that climate change are actually going to bring. It's gonna bring a lot of chaos and we can see it in the weather already beginning. And that includes like greening the roofs, greening our streets can be made out of porous materials in order to replenish our ground water and things like that. These are all technologies that are beginning to be more available and we do need to act now so if we can please make this A more serious issue, it's not just about how many grapes are growing or anything like that. We're talking about actual lives here. We're talking about all of us and nobody is safe from it even yourself.

So please I ask to have this issue be taken a little bit more seriously Because it's very scary and it's not being taken like that. But these numbers are a lot lower than what it actually is, so. And in order to meet the international standards I think that there does need to be a lot more done than what is included on here. It's crazy because we are That concludes public comment.

not transcribed≈19s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role3:23:56 · ≈ 12:23 PM

Thank you Mr. President. There was some talk of trying to create a mirrored goal to the states or some of the cities of 100% or 0% carbon goal, but the reality is we're failing the grade already. I think that we need to dig in deeper on concrete actions that the county can take. And so, I do agree with the speakers that we should put slightly more ambitious goal at 50% rather than 40%, as I understand it.

I think what's even more important is to take some stronger steps that the county itself can do, to lead by example. So that hopefully our employees and the public will see what can be done and that it might affect their decisions that they make too. You can see that. I think really in the transportation sector. We have a lot of employees, we have a lot of people who live in the north that come to jobs in the south. We even have a lot of people who live in the south that work in the north and one of the things that I'm hoping that we will tackle more and my office has been working with Supervisor Labadino's office on this is Is there places where it makes sense for us to change the location of positions we have in our own organization, both to allow those folks to have better qualities of life with less commuting?

But to save our environment and save our pavement index, which hopefully if you can't agree with the ECAP goals at least we could protect our pavement index by reducing vehicle miles traveled. And I think a glaring area that we could make an improvement on is our own vehicle fleet Our vehicle fleet has done a great job of reducing gasoline consumption, but the amount of zero emission vehicles we have is nothing more than symbolic.

I believe that It is a very rare case in which a light duty vehicle in a municipal fleet needs to be anything other than electric. I base this on my own experience, I serve the first district which means both myself and my staff have to go from here to Cuyama, which there's not a whole lot of places in the county that are farther away than Cuyama from our government center.

And if we can do it with an electric fleet, meaning our little electric fleet of my red bolt and Darcelle's blue bolt. So I guess you'd say the first district's fleet is 50% zero emission at this point. You know, if we can do it to Koyama I don't see why other county employees can't do it to Santa Maria or from Santa Maria down here. Or rolling around town seeing clients or doing other things like that.

Mr. Chair thank you. I strongly feel we should only be purchasing electric vehicles for our light duty fleet obviously that' s not possible in heavy-duty yet though there are exciting innovations in both natural gas engines and But I don't feel like there's progress being made. So, I would like us today hopefully to make a more clear signal and say we would like a policy that's similar to the states or Santa Monica where all light duty vehicle purchases are electric. Unless the department can somehow prove to you that they needed some other model that is not available.

I just would look at that with a very skeptical eye, because other jurisdictions are using electric for just about everything. Supervisor Adam?

not transcribed≈15s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈18s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
GuestSneddenProposed · by introduction3:29:18 · ≈ 12:29 PM

Well, I'd sure like to know what that would cost because that would have a cost and maybe it would save money. I don't know, maybe we should take a look at it. I'm all for it if it saves money but you know, what I'm seeing here is ultimately, you gotta tax the crap out of everything because you just have less stuff You know this is, you know it takes the exact same amount of GHG to create an electric power that moves a ton of stuff X distance as it does to, there's same BTUs that have to be displaced at the bottom of this thing and you're either creating it You know, with electricity which is generally in today's world generated by some kind of fossil fuel or you're going to do it with diesel. You're going to do it with gas so I think the whole thing is just When I look at slide 12, slide 12 if you want to put it back up there is sort of a...

It's a great wish list but I think that whole thing is just going to be an unworkable. At the bottom of this thing to me Just massive taxation on everything and if you ever get to the bottom of that slide, unless it's just technological advances. That may happen but that will happen regardless of what we want to occur or try to design because I'm telling you I've got these tractors out there that are tier four motors they don't work.

We have gotten beyond the technology already. We're beyond the technology already So waving the magic wand and telling everybody to put out less GHGs is a nice thing, but it just doesn't work. And if you ever get to the bottom of that slide by government edict rather than technological advancement, you're going to have decimated your economy. And this is why Paris is on fire every weekend, because they've gone beyond what people can stand.

The people in this room may be willing to put up with the decimation of that economy. But there's a whole bunch of people out there, and I represent a whole bunch of them who aren't willing to put up with that. And don't perceive this as the problem that some people perceive it as. So we just have a difference of opinion on that. You got the votes for sure.

You guys are gonna go do what you're gonna do but I'm not gonna be supporting it.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role3:32:40 · ≈ 12:32 PM

Well, what I'm suggesting is making a bold move that I also think hastens rational choices. It is irrational to continue to pursue strategies That put us on our road to ruin. I believe and agree with the speakers that climate change is the moral issue of our age, it's the issue that 100 years from now people are going to go what were they thinking? Why didn't they do more?

And it also makes long term financial sense. s. We have a $1 per gallon of electricity, obviously not of gas, of a dollar per gallon of fueling. I mean that is a smart investment if we have a lot of people that drive and on our dime. So I hope that we can move towards Our economy and good for our ongoing expenses, even if it means an investment in the short run.

But one that's also consistent with our values. Supervisor Wolk?

not transcribed≈10s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:34:16 · ≈ 12:34 PM

Thank you Mr. Chair and thank you for the presentation I agree that we need to make a statement about moving our fleet to the all-electric fleet and combine that with what General Services is looking at for solar installations I think the two have to go together. We should have a fleet that is adjacent to or part of a solar array so that we're not using fossil fuels to electrify our fleet, so I definitely think we need to move in that direction and this is more of an HR question for CEO Miyasato because I think maybe some of this is in your Renew 22 about what What opportunities are we giving to our employees for either flex time, opportunities to do work at home?

Do we as a county, I should know this but I don't, subsidize bus passes through our work with Ventura County. So can you just address some of those things?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed3:35:24 · ≈ 12:35 PM

Supervisors, as Ms. Krieger said before, what we do is we give some vacation days for those who commute and so we've been working with the department. The departments mentioned they'd like to work with HR on increasing that incentive. We do not currently subsidize the cost of some of these commutes. This has been brought up before with our labor groups. It hasn't been high on our labor group's priority list when we negotiate, so that's why it hasn't really made the top of the list. But it's something that we could look at. And then on flex time Ms. Krieger and her group and Mr. Chapton came to the department head meeting and again talked to them about flexible work schedules. They did that survey with SB CAG and then we also sent something out maybe about a week ago, George.

To our department heads again saying that George's group would like to do more in depth surveying and interviews of our departments to figure out what are some of the obstacles? And I think our department has said there is a willingness it's just not all employees can take advantage of it because of work schedules or because of the nature of their work if they have to go to court for example.

I recall the conversation about the vacation time, but I'm wondering if that's enough of an incentive.

not transcribed≈12s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

3:36 – 3:433 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:36:45 · ≈ 12:36 PM

And it might be worth looking at a pilot program and something that can happen easily next year to subsidize some bus passes or rail passes for our employees. I understand about the negotiations with unions and so forth, but this might be something that we offer as something that is supplementing what we value. As a board of supervisors and as a county to get people off of the roads and to help them financially if that's what they need. So I suggest maybe looking at a pilot program seeing how many people will take advantage of that.

And just finally I know this is coming in a little while but I can't resist not mentioning it right now because Ms. Krieger you mentioned the scooters and I think that the impetus for that was lofty, that it was going to be an alternative form of transportation that would help us with climate strategies. Knowing what I now know about the operation, the operational model of the scooter operations and that's the business model is that they are also using motorized vehicles to pick up the scooters. So the scooters in and of themselves might be good for climate action strategies but the business model does not appear to necessarily support Thank you Mr. Chair. Global warming is the most diabolical issue that

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role3:38:32 · ≈ 12:38 PM

has ever faced humanity and

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.833:38:45 · ≈ 12:38 PM

It really is something that if we don't address today, it's only going to get worse and worse. It's much easier if you've got something painful to do to take it in little doses rather than wait until the end. History will judge us. On what we do today, there was a lot of talk about grandchildren and you look at them and we're responsible. We can't just put all these costs, these environmental costs onto them.

There was some mention of the scientific study by the UN but our government in November came out with this study looking at the economic consequences of failing to address Global warming. Our job up here is to anticipate problems for the future and try to address them. Now this problem goes beyond any of our terms, but it's already begun. We can see it. We know it's here.

So we really need to take action. We can't just put our heads in the sand. Would you put this slide with your recommended actions, staff recommended actions so that we could begin moving towards a motion? I support a target of 50% below the 1990 levels by 2030. I'm most concerned, however, about the measures that we're using so this isn't just a lot of hot air. That we're not posers. So we really need to think about the measures that we are going to adopt.

Support your proposal to link greenhouse gas and resiliency, and I think that's very creative in trying to get the most out of what we're doing and seeing the relationships. So I support that in elaborating that. The regional approach is absolutely stellar in what your department has already been doing. I've attended, I think three or four of those meetings and this is too big for any one jurisdiction to take on so working together and using kind of dividing the labor and the expertise and pooling our resources is I think the best way to approach this.

On the three year, this is where I'm stumbling because I don't want you to have to spend all the time measuring. But what I really do want to look at on a more frequent basis is what are the actual measures and how are we prioritizing them? And I agree with the other speakers that we have to start with our own house. And so for the county, I mean, I'd like to hear in six months what we are doing and then think what are our next high priority ones? Starting with the county of course increasing our renewable generation in South County, Better Avia, Foster Road and other areas. And I know we're making some progress but for solar generation, but I'm eager to get the report back.

Then we really do need to improve our building efficiencies. The city of Santa Barbara is using some innovative financial incentives. They have on-bill financing revolving EE funds so perhaps we could look to the city of Santa Barbara and explore what more we can do to increase our building to reduce the demand for energy in our building. And then I think we have to lead by example, so I support what others have said about electrifying our fleet. I had the opportunity to attend the sustainability summit at UCSB. We heard the state fleet manager. We also learned about the Santa Monica program. I would like us to be far more aggressive and looking at those models and in a whole I have an electric car. I get it serviced once a year, so I think if you look at all the costs associated with it that it may be much more efficient to go with electric vehicles faster So ultimately I think these are what we can do now.

I think the next step, housing, jobs, housing and balance. If we want to be bold that's where we have to be bold but let's in the next six months, nine months do these things internally and then I'd like to think about what we do next but we need to be grander, we need to be more visionary and we need actually accomplish what we're setting out to do

3:43 – 3:499 turns

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.873:43:49 · ≈ 12:43 PM

Supervisor Lavanino. Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's just really frustrating because it's like it's a global problem and the way we're dealing with it is so fragmented and siloed. And when you think about the county's plan, it's not even the entire county, it' s just the unincorporated area, right? So we have cities that could be doing something completely different than what our plans are.

This is frustrating, so I want to take a look at what the costs are and how quick it gets to pay off of an electric fleet and those types of things. And I know our staff's been looking at that. Changing what the stated goal is one thing. I mean, we could have said 100% by 2020 and we're still where we were. So I don't know if that makes people feel better. You feel better but instead so many of these things we don't control marine vessels That's a huge one, and anybody that's been to an APCD meeting will know that marine vessel emissions are off the chart compared to anything else we do. So what I really get frustrated is, is we've got transportation going up and down the 101, we don't control. We have marine vessels offshore, we don't control.

So what we do is, to feel better, we go after what we do control. And we ratchet those people down to zero, way below zero, Just put all of our focus on what we can control when cars are just going up and down the 101, and vessels are coming in and belching out bunker fuel. And we can't control it. So it does feel like we're in this silo, and I know it's a global issue.

So I'm just really frustrated with the whole thing. And I know we need to do our part here at the county so I'd like to hear what a motion is.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role3:45:54 · ≈ 12:45 PM

Is there a motion? Supervisor Hartman.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.833:45:59 · ≈ 12:45 PM

So I would move staff's recommendation, but what I'd like to do is again for the reporting period come back in say six months with what we're doing countywide in terms of In terms of renewable generation, in terms of building efficiency, in terms of how we can electrify our vehicle fleet. How we can address flex time telecommuting, encouraging our own staff to use more energy efficiently.

I'd like to see something in six to nine months or whatever seems and then revisit what are our priority measures for the next period of time. Supervisor, if I can

not transcribed≈17s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed3:46:56 · ≈ 12:46 PM

add to that. I don't know where the board is going and there seems to be at least two of the board members and potentially three if supervisor Wolfer's still here to make momentum on our fleet And I'd want to do that within the context of the budget. So, I'm just saying we can come back earlier than six months so that we can give you full cost life cycle discussion. I think general services could come back in maybe two or three months. So either if we come back specially or do it at the budget workshop so that you have full information.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role3:47:30 · ≈ 12:47 PM

So Supervisor Hartman will amend her motion to include that. That's a great suggestion, CEO and is there a second for this motion? Supervisor Wolf seconds with the little cookies.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 18Proposed3:47:49 · ≈ 12:47 PM

Chair Williams just a clarification I think what I heard some discussion about was also an increase in the greenhouse gas reduction of 50%. Is that still something okay?

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role3:47:59 · ≈ 12:47 PM

s a pilot program? And by buildings you mean should we be you would ask staff to do what can we help with meaning if you are on this electrification path should we try a pilot program because it would be relevant if we started a cca to have an incentive to rebuild without gas for example or some Or just for county facilities?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.833:48:30 · ≈ 12:48 PM

I think we start with county facilities. Again, I'm just thinking about the first steps. We need to be revisiting this every six months, every nine months and so how can we do a full court press to make our own county buildings more efficient? As we freeze up here this might be a place to start. Then we can go on to consider other things like electrification of our buildings, encouraging it elsewhere et cetera.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed3:49:01 · ≈ 12:49 PM

And Supervisors just to let you know the Board has adopted a zero net energy policy. Mr Pontus was the General Services Director. We haven't done many new buildings and we're continuing just to look at the energy efficiency of our existing buildings.

3:49 – 3:557 turns

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role3:49:19 · ≈ 12:49 PM

I think this is important, and to Supervisor Lavenino's point. I think that obviously a huge amount of this is based on what our constituents choose to do and actions they choose to take but More important than preaching to folks is offering leadership from government that shows that it can be done. And that will have value and effect for our constituents, so I think the most important thing is the decisions we make as an institution to show that leadership.

Whether county employees embrace that is the second most important thing. Because if county employees are doing this in higher proportion to the public in general, I think that will also shift the public's habits and the public seeing that it can be done will have power. So I think there's a motion and a second. All those in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed?

It is 4-1 and we will go to D3 in an expedited fashion. We're going to see how fast we can do this item, Mr. Bozanich.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed3:50:49 · ≈ 12:50 PM

Chair Williams, members of the board. Item three is from Ledge Program Committee. It's a hearing to consider recommendations during-

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role3:50:55 · ≈ 12:50 PM

And then after that we are going to close session. I think I've told just about everyone so they weren't waiting around for our D4 item but we are going to close session before D4.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 21Proposed3:51:08 · ≈ 12:51 PM

Chair, members of the board. Dennis Buzanich from County Executive Office and we're here to have your board consider final adoption of the 2019 legislative platform. And with me today is Don Gilchrist from Walters & Associates, our Washington lobbyist and also Cliff Berg from Governmental Advocates. And so the very first part of the presentation I want to turn it over to them just to go over some of the accomplishments and we will be expedited.

CommentDon GilchristProposedself-stated3:51:39 · ≈ 12:51 PM

Chair Williams and members of the board, I'm Don Gilchrist with Thomas Walters & Associates. I appreciate the chance to talk with you about your federal program. The presentation does summarize some of the things that happened- And I

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role3:51:51 · ≈ 12:51 PM

just want to let you know that any supervisors that are not in the room can still hear your report because we have sound even in the bathroom back here so we will listen to all

CommentDon GilchristProposedself-stated3:52:04 · ≈ 12:52 PM

of your reports. Just a quick snapshot of the status is the new federal fiscal year started on October 1. It's been a pretty good year for appropriations, about 75% of the federal government is funded but that remaining 25% has hung up over a dispute over border wall funding. Which is going to be playing out over the next two weeks or so. There's been a short term continuing resolution enacted that provides funding through December 21st.

The things, it's been a bit chaotic in Washington DC this past year but the county has been successful on a number of fronts. The big accomplishment that was most important to the county I think was enactment Budget deal in February that prevented the federal government from shutting down. And it also provided the parameters for the 2018 and 2019 appropriations process. 2018 was enacted in March, and we saw significant increases in spending for a number of programs that are important to the county in areas of housing, homeless assistance.

Economic development and those types of programs. But the big issue now in the lame duck is getting the 2019 bills Sign into law and we'll be seeing how that plays out. I believe the President is meeting with Congress today, and we may see some reports but it will probably take until December 21st before we are able to resolve that if we're able to work out those larger issues.

I think the county is in a strong position in terms of the funding streams that you rely on from the federal government. The president did propose to reduce or eliminate many of those programs, but Congress has for the most part rejected those proposals and we expect to see funding at or above the current levels when it's all said and done. I do want to just mention about the coming year some of the things that we'll be focusing on.

First and foremost, I think we want to continue to push for a federal infrastructure initiative Supervisor Lavinino has been very active in pushing for direct funding to come to local governments for transportation. And we're going to continue to work with NACO and CSAC and other stakeholders to push for county funding. Public Works Director McGulpin is now in the leadership of the County Engineers Association, so we'll be folding them into our coordinated lobbying on this issue as well.

Look forward to continuing to work with you next year and I'd be happy to respond any questions.

3:55 – 4:057 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 21Proposed3:55:03 · ≈ 12:55 PM

Thanks a lot Don and if there aren't any questions, I wanted to move onto Clifford for our state report. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 22Proposed3:55:15 · ≈ 12:55 PM

I would be remiss and I want to take the opportunity to, oops she's gone. We did want to congratulate. Thank you. I did want to both echo the comments that were Thank you. I certainly hope I didn't bring you back from anything urgent, but I did want to take the opportunity to echo the comments earlier this morning to congratulate Supervisor Wolf on her retirement and to thank her for the 12 years that I've had the opportunity to work with her on the board. She has been both A tremendous public servant for our district and a tremendous asset to the board, and to our ledge program in terms of working with me over the years on our agenda in Sacramento. So I know you will be missed by everybody we heard from earlier. You'll also be missed by me and our folks in Sacramento so thank you for everything.

This year in Sacramento was clearly dominated by the devastating fires and mudslides That pretty much set our agenda and our priorities for the year. And we were scrambling in Sacramento to understand and figure out and working closely with your staff, with Mona and Dennis and Matt. And everybody else down here, Public Works. I'm just figuring out what the impact to the county was, what was happening and how we in Sacramento could be helpful in providing you the resources to respond to the short-term crisis and the long term needs of the county so I am pleased to report That you had a very successful year in Sacramento in terms of the major priorities that we established. One of them was the property tax backfill, the other was the debris removal cost share which basically brought to the county significant funding.

It's interesting but at the timing of the issue of the wildfires and the mudslides in terms of Santa Barbara versus Northern California Fires sort of set the table in some ways which made our job a little easier, but also created a lot more work. So we faced in January the governor came out with the state budget and just FYI right now that budget is probably being finalized for the next year. And you were not in the property tax backfill in the Governor's budget in January. That was because of an issue of timing and the fact that the Northern California fires had occurred earlier As I said, they sort of set the table by talking to the Governor's office and talking to the Department of Finance.

We however had to come in between January and the Governor's budget being released and the Governors may revise which in essence is the Governor's revision of the final budget numbers and convince the Governor and the Department of Finance to include Santa Barbara County. We were successful in doing that. Clearly we had major assistance from Senator Jackson, Assemblywoman Lamone who have been just great and their interest in both the wildfires, the debris issues, the mudslides The whole emergency wildfire issue has just been amazing, tremendous. Their participation both in every aspect of how the county was impacted.

There were immense assistance with us with the Governor's Office with the Department of Finance. I would like to thank Michael Cohen, the Director of Finance at the time, Diane Cummins Chief Deputy of Finance Keely Bosler and the Governor's Office who all stepped up, very interested in responding. And their teams of experts and analysts who all were very helpful. We got the property tax backfill in the May revise which was $2.62 million for 17-18 and 5.6 million for 18-19.

The next issue that came up was a match for debris removal. Again, the Northern California counties were ahead of us. They got in the May revise. We didn't have our numbers in time for the May revise so we had to sort of go in post-May revise and get Department of Finance, the Governor's Office and the Legislature to actually add it into the Budget Conference Committee in the final week. And we were able to do that and that was added into the budget conference committee, which we anticipate the numbers look around $3.2 million for the county. So most pleased with that. I mean unfortunately, the Sacramento agenda was very much a wildfire and natural disaster agenda not just because of Santa Barbara but because Northern California fires last year.

And of course now we have the campfire that just happened up in Butte County. So wildfires and their impact, I've heard the term they're here as part of global warming and we just need to get used to them. Obviously there's no way to get used to the impact of these kinds of natural disasters and their impact on your communities but I have a list of like 20 bills given the time I will not go through all of them but many, many of these bills were authored by Assemblyman Lamone. Senator Jackson dealt with various aspects of the impact of wildfires, mudslides and natural disasters from emergency warnings to establishing better contact systems to providing funding to dealing with Forestration and vegetation clearing to hardening and protecting communities and housing.

And I expect all of these issues to reemerge in the next legislative session, which they banged the gavel on December 3rd began the next legislative session two bills introduced already. The end of the legislation also saw a wildfire conference committee, SB 901. One of our successes on that was what was not in that bill which was changing the current law on inverse condemnation and liability which was a major success that we worked with CSAC. And again Senator Jackson was a member of the conference committee which is a great opportunity for Santa Barbara. She worked with us very closely on ensuring that a change in the inverse condemnation law did not take place.

So, I know all of you have talked to me and everybody is talking about we have a new governor coming in. The end of the Jerry Brown era, end of eight years of the Brown administration, we have a new governor sworn in January 7th. He's in the process of making his appointments, choosing his team, what issues we're going to face in Sacramento for the upcoming year.

We will be continuing monitoring all those issues for you certainly here that affordable Housing is a major issue. Last year, one of our successes was working with CSACs and other stakeholders to stop a wiener bill that would have dramatically eroded local government's ability to control their zoning and local control issues. We think affordable housing is an issue you can either spend or Control these developments to make it easier or harder for the creation of housing. We expect those issues to be revisited again next year and we'll continue working on them for you.

You have a brief list over the accomplishments up there, a lengthier written report in the interest Stop my presentation.

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 21Proposed4:02:52 · ≈ 1:02 PM

Great, thanks Cliff very much and we'll have time for questions at the end here. Just a quick note on the development of the platform this year. Recall most importantly, we've reviewed this one other time already but your board looked at this draft to this platform in October as your staff I went back and made the changes that you suggested or recommended That was brought then forward to the alleged program committee in November. And so today before you is that revised 2019 legislative platform. In the interest of time, I won't go through the whole structure of the platform. It's well known and we did go through this at the time in October.

And at this point, I would just turn your attention to the recommended actions to go ahead and adopt the county's 2019 ledge platform. And then receive the updates from your advocates here and then find that the project is not a project under CEQA. With that we're happy to take any questions.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role4:04:02 · ≈ 1:04 PM

Questions from the board?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.874:04:05 · ≈ 1:04 PM

Supervisor Labanino. Just one federal one for Don. I heard that there was a possibility that earmarks might come back at least for non-controversial things like infrastructure and that sort of thing with the new election cycle we just had. Is that now something higher probability of that or lower

CommentDon GilchristProposedself-stated4:04:27 · ≈ 1:04 PM

probability? It is a higher probability, it is probably not going to happen. Okay, we're moving in that direction. I think there's a growing realization that they're a helpful part of the process if they're properly vetted and earmarks from a county are the perfect example of a properly vetted earmark request. If it were a secret ballot, It would probably be reestablished immediately. But I do think that with the positioning between the parties, it's going to be difficult for this to emerge.

Supervisor Wolf?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed4:05:10 · ≈ 1:05 PM

Thank you Mr. Chair, Mr. Bozonich in the ledge platform under the county library services you only have three zones listed and I'm wondering if I assume you'll correct that to make it four zones?

4:05 – 4:089 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 21Proposed4:05:30 · ≈ 1:05 PM

Supervisor Wolf to the chair, absolutely.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed4:05:32 · ≈ 1:05 PM

Okay. Anyway I think all the corrections that you made in the ledge platform were consistent with our direction at the last meeting so thank you for all of that and just finally I want to thank Don and Cliff and Tom who's not here today for all of your work it's not just been from this board but it's also been from work on SB CAG I've had the opportunity to visit Washington in particular and working with all of you has just been such a pleasure and a learning experience. You are really pros at what you do, and you have made whatever lobbying experience we do an exceptional experience.

And it was mentioned today, and I actually had forgotten about it that I went to Washington and spoke as a witness to the one of the committees on women's heart disease. And Don, you folks really ushered me through that process to be able to sit there and give my testimony and you were very supportive and I had forgotten about that so thank you for that and really everything that you folks have done Thank you.

not transcribed≈7s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role4:06:58 · ≈ 1:06 PM

Supervisor Hartman?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.834:07:00 · ≈ 1:07 PM

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to add my thank you for hosting us particularly when we're in Washington and Sacramento and a shout out to Mr. Gilchrist's son. Last time we had a special meeting while I was in Washington for an SB CAG and I had to attend for a vote here so your son was the tech support and got me settled and I really appreciate that.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role4:07:24 · ≈ 1:07 PM

And since I'm the CSAC rep, I obviously follow Cliff's works more often than Don's and so I just want to call out the work done in the last year. We had a lot more requests than normal and you came through, you worked hard, and appreciate the help that you give us. Can I get a motion to receive and file the report?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.834:07:50 · ≈ 1:07 PM

So moved.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role4:07:51 · ≈ 1:07 PM

And adopt the platform. There's a motion and second.

GuestSneddenProposed · by introduction4:08:00 · ≈ 1:08 PM

Supervisor Adam? Yeah, I'm just going to cite my longstanding opposition to the way this goes down and that's the reason I'm not going to be supporting

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role4:08:08 · ≈ 1:08 PM

it. All those in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed? That is 4-1. We will go to closed session and return in about an hour and 15 minutes.

4:08 – 4:164 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 23Proposed4:08:22 · ≈ 1:08 PM

Chair and supervisors, today in closed session the board is agendized to consider four matters of existing litigation. Alcox versus City of Lompoc, Barbary versus County of Santa Barbara, Whitson versus County of Santa Barbara, and an item that was added to the agenda on Friday, Schlaggs versus County of Santa Barbara. There's also one matter of conference with legal counsel for anticipated litigation deciding whether to initiate litigation. As well as public employee appointment concerning human resources director. My estimate again is about one hour and 15 minutes

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 21Proposed4:08:54 · ≈ 1:08 PM

225

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role4:10:01 · ≈ 1:10 PM

Yeah. ♪ ♪

CommentZone TwoProposed · by introduction4:12:48 · ≈ 1:12 PM

Yeah. you Hello. Hello everyone.

4:16 – 4:452 turns

CommentJohnson J. MrProposed · by introduction4:16:57 · ≈ 1:16 PM

Music

CommentZone TwoProposed · by introduction4:17:26 · ≈ 1:17 PM

♪ The Hello. You. You. Good morning. Good morning, everyone. Good morning. You. you You. Music Music Yeah. ♪♪ Hi. ♪ you Hello. Hello everyone.

4:46 – 5:132 turns

CommentJohnson J. MrProposed · by introduction4:46:01 · ≈ 1:46 PM

Music

CommentZone TwoProposed · by introduction4:46:32 · ≈ 1:46 PM

♪ The . . . . . You. Good morning. Good morning. you You. You. Hi. Music you Yeah. Hi, everyone. ♪ Yeah. you Hello.

5:14 – 5:252 turns

CommentJohnson J. MrProposed · by introduction5:14:09 · ≈ 2:14 PM

Hello everyone. Hello.

CommentZone TwoProposed · by introduction5:15:36 · ≈ 2:15 PM

♪ The Hello. You. You. Good morning. Thank you. you

5:29 – 5:357 turns

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role5:29:59 · ≈ 2:29 PM

We're coming back from closed session. We can't report out yet, but we can move on to D4.

not transcribed≈7s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed5:30:18 · ≈ 2:30 PM

Chair Williams, members of the board. Departmental item number four is from Public Works. It's a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the adoption of fees for shared mobility devices and use of road right-of-ways for business purposes.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed5:30:36 · ≈ 2:30 PM

Please proceed, Road Commissioner. Yes good afternoon Mr. Chair and board members and as the clerk mentioned Public Works is before your board today to discuss fees to be charged by establishments that would like to use the right-of-way for outdoor dining and also discuss the fees to be charged for shared mobility device companies those would be shared bikes scooters and car sharing programs and really thanks to your boards proactive leadership which we talked about in November The county has a plan to address these devices versus doing a temporary ban like other agencies are doing now until they can develop a plan. And I wanted to thank the sheriff and the CHP for being here today as well, sitting here right behind Deputy Sneddon.

They're here to answer any enforcement questions that may come up. So our presentation today will essentially cover six areas. We'll go through background and next steps, we'll look at state law, we'll provide a report on implementing county enforcement options, we'll look at stakeholders roles, we're look at some example conditions that we are proposing for encroachment permits to be issued actually this coming Thursday And we'll go over proposed fees, which are the primary topic of today's presentation. And the presentation today will be a tag team between myself and Deputy Sneddon. So Mr. Chair,

we'll move on to the next slide, which does a quick snapshot look at background and next steps. And on this next slide, we discuss where we've come from in developing the county's plan and where we are proposing that we go. So if we look at the process itself, you can see here the arrow is a timeline and if we rewind about a month plus two days your board conducted the second reading of the ordinance in this area. That ordinance will go into effect this coming Thursday And we are here on the timeline, we're asking your board today to approve the proposed fees which will allow us to establish this permit program for these uses. So when they come in Thursday if the fees get approved today we can actually charge the companies for the permits.

Our hope is over the next couple weeks we'll work with the various companies that are interested in operating in the Publix right away and we'll get the permits issued With the fees that are approved today, we can enforce the conditions that we place on the permits. We'll gather data and this is gonna be kind of a learning process I think for us as well as we go through, as we establish this plan because we're gonna make program adjustments over the next three to six months.

through the permit process and through the program with the various companies that come in to get permits. And then we plan on being a strong participant with our regional partners, to look at how this plan works. I know SBK is scheduling, I think, a get together in the spring of 2019. We plan on being there to share our experiences but I think one of the best things about the plan that Deputy Sneddon and his team put together is it's completely adaptable And as you all know, this field's evolving pretty fast. You know it's a state of the art alternative transportation field blended with high tech so it can be adjusted and it can be adapted three different ways. We can make changes to the annual permit conditions. We could also make changes to the fee resolution that gets approved today and we can also change the ordinances.

So that's kind of in a nutshell where we came from and where we plan on going. Supervisor Wolf?

not transcribed≈6s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:34:35 · ≈ 2:34 PM

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So Mr. McAulpin, you know that there's, aside from the cities that have banned or are doing pilot programs, the unincorporated area and I can speak to Eastern Gleada Valley has been significantly impacted by the scooters. And I have a couple of questions. We adopted this ordinance back in November of 2018 but we did not issue any permits, correct?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed5:35:05 · ≈ 2:35 PM

Mr. Chair, Supervisor Wolk, that's correct?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:35:08 · ≈ 2:35 PM

Yet the companies operated their businesses in residential zones and commercial zones without a permit.

5:35 – 5:4016 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed5:35:19 · ≈ 2:35 PM

Mr. Chair, Supervisor Wolf correct they've placed their equipment in the counties right away?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:35:24 · ≈ 2:35 PM

Right and we didn't receive any fees from them we received a lot of complaints but we did not enforce anything or remove the scooters that they placed there even though they knew that they did not have a permit so I'm assuming that's correct they were operating without a permit

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed5:35:45 · ≈ 2:35 PM

That's correct

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:35:47 · ≈ 2:35 PM

s. We don't really know when that's going to happen because it could be that we need to set the conditions and or, it may be that this board wants to wait until meeting with regional partners. Until we have all of our conditions in place before we issue permits so my point is even though on December 13th our ordinance goes into effect doesn't necessarily mean that they have a permit to operate on December 13th.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed5:36:26 · ≈ 2:36 PM

Through the Chair, Supervisor Wolff with the way the ordinance reads my understanding and county council can correct me if I'm wrong is on Thursday They have to come in and get and apply for an encroachment permit with the County of Santa Barbara If they want to continue to operate within the county's road right away

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:36:43 · ≈ 2:36 PM

But until they get the permit, they can't operate. They can apply but they can't get a permit.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed5:36:50 · ≈ 2:36 PM

We're going to go through the process with them right? Once we're in the process then we'll start putting conditions on their businesses to operate on the road right away and it will hopefully help compared to what we see out there today.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:37:03 · ≈ 2:37 PM

Okay, so I think what it comes down to is first of all the conditions which we don't know what those conditions are going to be. So that's a little, it's almost a catch 22 because I don't know how you can issue a permit until we know what the conditions are. And I know you're going to be going through that later today, but as and I've talked to Mr. Gazzone about this we're not adopting those conditions which is really troubling to me so anyway I just I guess I want to go back to my original point or my question that is why didn't we enforce the fact that they were operating without a permit?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed5:37:47 · ≈ 2:37 PM

So through the Chair, Supervisor Wolf. There's a lot to unpackage there but maybe we can run through our presentation and-

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:37:54 · ≈ 2:37 PM

Well just that one piece why didn't we tell them to stop operating since they didn't have a permit?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed5:38:03 · ≈ 2:38 PM

Well like we said earlier we didn't so-

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:38:06 · ≈ 2:38 PM

I know. Why didn't we do any enforcement action?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed5:38:13 · ≈ 2:38 PM

One of the things I mentioned early on was we knew that the scooters were coming into IV and I think they arrived around September. The transportation division had started working on a proposed plan, I think at that point and that's how we were able to kind of come to the board with an ordinance And have your board do the first reading and then we did the second reading which was as I said November 13th.

Around the same time they started to drop scooters into the Eastern Goleta Valley in addition to Isla Vista. So, we've been kind of going through the process. We have one point of contact I think now with each of the scooter companies and as you'll hear when we go through the presentation when we put conditions in we're gonna be requiring that they actually have local people on the ground to administer the program which will make the program move or at least operate much better than it has today. Okay,

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:39:09 · ≈ 2:39 PM

I won't belabor the point thank you Mr. Chair

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed5:39:13 · ≈ 2:39 PM

So at this point Mr. Chair I'll turn it over to Deputy Snedden who will run through some of the facts on the different slides and then we'll come back to the end and be available for questions.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed5:39:26 · ≈ 2:39 PM

Good afternoon, Chris Snedden Public Works Transportation. I have Gary Smart our traffic engineer with us as well today. The operations for state law for shared mobility devices, but I'm going to drill down specifically into scooters because that's where a lot of these issues are contained. And what we'll talk about first is the framework for the operation of these which is in state law. It's framed in state law how they can and can't operate. And then we have a framework for permitting and conditioning and that's what the process were here Today to talk about is how we can work on that piece of the framework which is putting permits, a permit program together and conditions that will help make the operations orderly and as safe as possible.

So first we're going to look at the state law and what they already can and cannot do by state law, and that's in the California Vehicle Code. They're allowed to ride on the road. They're allowed to ride on Class 1 or Class 2 bike paths. In fact, they have to ride on a Class 2 bike path if one exists on the road they're operating on. And they're allowed to park in the road right-of-way which includes sidewalks and parkways as long as they're not blocking a pedestrian pathway.

There's also several things that are already not allowed by state law and some of the issues that have come up.

5:40 – 5:487 turns

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role5:40:54 · ≈ 2:40 PM

Supervisor Wolk.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:40:54 · ≈ 2:40 PM

Can you go back to the previous slide? And I mentioned to you about this issue when we met, about the motorized scooters on class one bike paths because at Turnpike going onto the bike path it says no motorized vehicle and I just wanted to know if that applies to scooters and then just following up on the vehicle code 21230, it does say that the governing body has the ultimate jurisdiction over the path. So even though it's allowed we as a local jurisdiction can also modify that.

So first just answer if you could about how does this fit with the signage that we already have about no motorized vehicles?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed5:41:45 · ≈ 2:41 PM

Supervisor Wolf through the chair, and thank you for pointing that out. That's something that will be updated as we go through this finalizing the process and the ordinances going to effect. The no motorized vehicle sign was specifically for like motor vehicles like cars and trucks because the bridge is on that path. Are not rated for vehicle loads, and also to keep things like golf carts for example off of them. But that signage would be updated as we go through this process.

And on your second thing that you raised, that's true as well yes the local agencies may put limitations on class one bike paths.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 21Proposed5:42:33 · ≈ 2:42 PM

Please proceed.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed5:42:35 · ≈ 2:42 PM

Okay, so as I said there are many things that are already not allowed by state law and this is a list of most of them. And as I said many of the things that people are concerned about are already not legal then it becomes more of a law enforcement issue. So making more laws or codes about this is just adding layers to something that already exists. That's the state law piece of it, so that's like the actual motor vehicle laws. Then there's what we can do as a county to create codes and then have conditions on the operations of these. And those are mostly contained in the streets and highway code. So there's three main codes that pertain to this. The first is the definitions in 1450 which sets Highways as the entire road right of way, so right of way to right of way.

And then encroachments which basically includes anything in that right away, any object placed in that right away. So using those two definitions and then going to 1460 it says the Road Commissioner has the authority to issue an encroachment permit for that and to set conditions for those permits. And then the 1461 gives some more language on conditions and some of the enforcement for those conditions. So that's the framework we're working under that allows the road commissioner to place conditions on their operation as long as, looking at California Vehicle Code 2125, you're not in conflict with something in the California Vehicle Code. And that's a paraphrasing but essentially that's what it says.

We can't come along and force people to wear, trying to make a code that says people have to wear helmets over 18 because that's already covered in the California Vehicle Code. You can't supersede that with your conditions.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:44:27 · ≈ 2:44 PM

So we started looking at- Mr. Sneddon, if I could. That 1460 permit provision is what I had talked about before that does give the county the authority that if someone is operating without a permit it's actually a misdemeanor. I didn't realize that until I had seen this so it is much more severe than just removing the scooters.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed5:44:51 · ≈ 2:44 PM

Supervisor Wolf through the chair one of the things Mr. McGulpin said, as we've been working with this highly quickly evolving process and why we're at the board now and why we came in November is to make a formalized framework for implementing We're doing this as a process so that we have it codified and so that's equally applied to everybody, and it's in conformance with the legal requirements of the permitting. So for example if we had just come If you put a bunch of permit conditions, the first week they came out without doing all the legal review and putting together a codified program then you would be subject to a lot of perhaps challenges and things like that. So that's why we're doing it as a formal process.

Okay, so as we looked at the conditions and trying to again create a successful program for these shared mobility devices in general. But again looking at scooters particularly. We set the goals for a good program would be a program that provides mobility right? These are recognized by the state as a good source of transportation portfolio for last mile connectivity for things like connecting to transit for the short trips to try and get people out of cars.

But also balancing that with as much safety as possible and quality of life as possible. So keeping the good sides to the quality of life impacts of this program while trying to minimize any kind of negative effects. And these are the five main stakeholders in a successful program. And these bubbles kind of represent the relative responsibility for a good program, so the idea is that the scooter companies or shared mobility companies and responsibility for making a successful program and for making sure that we're providing mobility or they're providing mobility but in a safe way that's having good quality of life impacts.

The other stakeholders, of course, are Public Works where we'll be enforcing the permit conditions and working with the community members. Working with the scooter companies, working with the users, working with law enforcement to try and make this program as successful as possible. And then law enforcement is another element of it. We're hoping that bubble doesn't need to be big and can actually be fairly small but they are there if they're needed.

And then the community members of course will be getting feedback and we'll also be reassessing the program periodically to see if any kind of changes are needed as we go through the process. This is kind of repeating some of the things I said, but it just shows like some of the responsibilities. And again, the key is that the scooter companies and the riders of the scooters have the ultimate responsibility for ensuring that the program works to the best they can.

Then other bubbles are calling out some of the things already said that different stakeholders would be doing in the process.

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

5:48 – 5:549 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:48:24 · ≈ 2:48 PM

Mr. Chair?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed5:48:25 · ≈ 2:48 PM

Supervisor Wolff?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:48:26 · ≈ 2:48 PM

Thank you, I happened to look at the Portland model, their pilot program and before the company gets a permit they have this whole issue of safety, the responsibility of the owner I have a question for Mr. McAuliffe and the board of supervisors or the company they have to provide documentation about all of these issues that you've talked about which is equipment is proper and safe and they're placed in the right locations, all of these things and more.

How will our road how will Mr. McAuliffe know that these things are being followed? Will

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed5:49:11 · ≈ 2:49 PM

Supervisor Wolf through the chair. Yes, those are some of the conditions that are included. We've looked at several models including your office sent over the one on San Francisco which had I think 42 or 44 conditions and so we pulled some of those out and they do include addressing things just like what you're mentioning.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:49:32 · ≈ 2:49 PM

So that will be something that your department will be looking at? And they will be held accountable? Correct.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed5:49:44 · ≈ 2:49 PM

So that feeds straight into this slide actually, which is the conditions fall under three kind of general categories. So first of all balancing mobility and avoiding over saturation so we're going to begin with relatively conservative fleet size limits. And as they demonstrate the ridership and good operations, then we might be increasing those as needed. We're looking into limits on deployment locations so Areas where they'd have the most use, like arterials and collectors where transit routes are and things like that.

And then looking at designated areas for deployment. So again in some of these areas where it's pretty tight with the sidewalk and the parkway and things like that if there's space created that's more out of the way that they would park there or deploy there versus putting them in places where it's a little tighter. The second category is safety. So there's already again a lot of state law requirements and many of the services before you start them have kind of a checklist you go through to make sure you're following the state law before you unlock their vehicles, but we do have We'll have monitoring of that included in the permit process. And then there's other safety things, insurance and indemnification requirements and educational components and things like that.

And then the last piece is the enforcement piece. So there's law enforcement, there's impounding, and there's moving violations but there's also permit condition enforcement so if they are demonstrating Vehicles are being used often in the wrong way, or if we have documentation for that they could be subject to either getting their permits suspended or getting their permits revoked.

The fee structure, and this is actually what the item before you today is for, is a set of resolutions so that we have the resources to implement this encroachment permit program. And you can see the various fees there and it's in your board package as well. Basically there's a per vehicle fee, and then there's also a per square foot fee for designated spaces. And the outdoor dining is included as well because it's part of the same ordinance that these are.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:52:15 · ≈ 2:52 PM

Mr Chair?

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role5:52:16 · ≈ 2:52 PM

Supervisor Wolk?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:52:17 · ≈ 2:52 PM

Thank you. So these photographs looks like they're probably taken in Isla Vista I'm not sure though. One of the things that I've heard from my constituents and things that I've talked to you and your staff about has to do with whether or not they can be deployed in a residential area, or commercial area. And my feeling is very strong that they should not be deployed in a residential area. And when I say deployed it means that they're being dropped off by either a van or a truck that comes in the morning or at night. And they're being parked on people's corners or in some cases in their driveways.

That's why it's important, in my opinion that they be placed if we're going to do this and as you said we can always change but I would hope that it doesn't change. That we could designate a zone by which this commercial entity could operate. It just doesn't seem right to me and again I've heard from my constituents It would be as if someone decided that they wanted to open up a food shop on the corner and decide that they could do that because that's, and set up an app where you can come and get a hamburger.

We don't allow commercial We don't allow commercial enterprises in residential zones. So it seems much, just as we're seeing on this photograph that these are in commercial zone which is where if we're going to have them I think it's an appropriate place for them to be deployed and I would also suggest that while we can get into where they're driven later if we get that far but at least the beginning they should be deployed in commercial zones We might even consider requiring that they have a, I'm trying to think of what it's called. It's like a framework where the scooters are actually placed rather than just being placed on the sidewalk kind of willy nilly which is what we've seen.

Who said Corral? Thank you. Hi there, yeah, Corral.

5:54 – 6:0211 turns

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role5:54:45 · ≈ 2:54 PM

I don' t know if you are speaking about corral or an invisible corral. That is along with the location limits that' s something this is enabled by this process as I understand it. We could in some cases say we need to be And I think that could go a long way towards reducing some of the problems that's been associated. And we could even have it be tied to the amount of the permit, meaning if they don't deploy in the box it costs them more or something like that.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:55:34 · ≈ 2:55 PM

Or it's a violation of their permit?

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role5:55:38 · ≈ 2:55 PM

I always believe that the best punishment is hit them in the pocketbook but I would say some form of accountability is in order. Supervisor Labanino?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.875:55:51 · ≈ 2:55 PM

How would you know if they deployed it there or somebody drove it there? You're not going to be able... Seeing these, I have a question for you Mr. Chair. I know we are in a residential neighborhood but who is to stop the guy from just taking it

not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:56:20 · ≈ 2:56 PM

I think that's the crux of the problem. And that's why I think they should be deployed and delivered in a commercial zone rather than taken into the residential area because then you've got people picking them up. I mean we'll hear from the public but I will say, I was surprised to see one of our park rangers at Tucker's Grove. He had these scooters in the back of his truck and he was placing them on the corner of Cathedral Oaks and Turnpike. He said people were driving into the park and throwing the scooters And so he was collecting them. He didn't know what to do, he didn't have the phone number of Byrd, so he was told to place them on the sidewalk.

So driving them into residential areas is really a problem. It's the deployment number one and also allowing If people want a scooter, and I think that's what this vehicle code was really the essence of it, was to say we like scooters. If you want to own a scooter and drive on the streets, that's fine. I don't think legislators ever envisioned these companies were going to come in and kind of wreak havoc to the extent that they have.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role5:57:56 · ≈ 2:57 PM

Please proceed.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed5:57:58 · ≈ 2:57 PM

Okay, so these fees as I said will be to administer the program there's also a permit application fee for us to process and go over all the submittals and everything like that The last item we have is sort of a housekeeping item. At the November hearing, members of the board asked us to look at some of the options for potential revenue sharing or franchises or things like that.

That, if that route was taken it would involve other departments and it would be kind of outside the codes that we typically work with in Public Works for roadway stuff. But we would be happy to work with the other departments if the county wanted to go the franchise route at some point. We would recommend doing that if that was done in the context of the larger discussion that's happening. The regional stakeholder meetings that Mr. McGulpin mentioned Those will be happening in the spring. And the reason for that, and we've actually done something similar to that with bike share is that you don't want to have the county have one franchise and city of Goleta have another and city of Santa Barbara or UCSB have another. It makes sense to do those types of things on a, or to at least explore whether it makes more sense to do those on a regional scale so Exploring this in parallel with that process that goes through the regional process, and then we can revisit it as it becomes available.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role5:59:40 · ≈ 2:59 PM

Supervisor Wolk?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed5:59:42 · ≈ 2:59 PM

So at our last SB CAG meeting that the scooter issue was brought up, and I think it was Supervisor Hartman that talked about. You may have had a call from UCSB about the safety of scooters but everything was going to be discussed next year we had to put off the hearing. And then we just got an email from SB CAG that they're going to the SBCAG board in January and then they're having Thank you Madam Chair. I'm here to speak at the board hearing in February and when I also listen to the Goleta City Council meeting they have a ban right now on Now is there any, I mean what we may be doing today could be in conflict with what happens or recommendations not just at SBK but also with the cities that we are adjacent to Santa Barbara and Goleta.

Have you talked to those cities about what we're doing?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed6:00:48 · ≈ 3:00 PM

Thank you Mr. Chair. Supervisor wolf to the chair yes we' ve been in discussion with both city of santa barbara and city of goleta we' ve talked to ecsb as well there' If it makes sense at some future date to come back and change the ordinances. And as Mr. McAulpin said, there's a three-tiered structure. We can change conditions. We could change the fee resolutions. We could change the ordinances if it's determined that a regional approach is the best way to go.

We just felt it was prudent to not wait a year before and have it just be operating how it is. I

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:01:29 · ≈ 3:01 PM

will say, it feels like it's operating how it is and there's no... It's very halter-skelter. I was pleased that we were going to be seeing some rules and conditions but then I found out even today we're not going to be voting on the conditions. The only thing that we can look at are the suggested I'm wondering if you have a map because when I understood it was difficult to regulate by zone although I' m not really moving away from that, then another way to regulate is the number of scooters that could be in an area.

You outlined that in our board letter under potential conditions and you had a map. You and I talked about the map and I think you said you were going to have a

6:02 – 6:0910 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed6:02:25 · ≈ 3:02 PM

We're still working on drafts of it, and I think ultimately what we want to do is have an interactive map. Like you see for example the Thomas Fire where you can kind of zoom in on what areas are where the line is by roads. But we have a map, I think one of the things you mentioned was just sort of delineating where the different areas are by the two different zones that are in the eastern Goleta Valley slash Isla Vista

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:02:51 · ≈ 3:02 PM

area. Well that's what I was concerned about. The Supervisors may want to see what the numbers are in their zones.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed6:02:58 · ≈ 3:02 PM

Yes, so this map would ultimately have a tidier base map underneath it so that you could zoom in on each of the zones and see the boundaries of them.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:03:11 · ≈ 3:03 PM

And so my question to you before today's meeting was what 2A is. So can you go to the next slide because I think that's where you explain it?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed6:03:19 · ≈ 3:03 PM

Correct, so basically we initially had kind of that 2A and two was just one big zone but now we've delineated out into Zone Two which is just Isla Vista area and then Zone Two A which is Eastern Goleta Valley and that would go from Gaviota Coast to the city limits.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:03:40 · ≈ 3:03 PM

Okay so it crosses supervisorial districts? Correct. And so you've got the City of Goleta in between, so Zone 2A is Eastern Goleta Valley out to Gaviota and there's a limit of 100 scooters for that area?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed6:03:55 · ≈ 3:03 PM

Correct we set that as an initial limit

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role6:04:02 · ≈ 3:04 PM

Okay. Supervisor Hartman?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.836:04:04 · ≈ 3:04 PM

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to say that I share Supervisor Wolfe's frustration. Gina Fisher in my office has been fielding calls and complaints. And most worrisome are those from Cottage Goleta, Cottage Santa Barbara as well as medical services at UCSB and our fire people. So the injuries are really significant and head injuries. In addition to that, the nuisance I think what we have here is kind of a rush to get market share. And so people just dump these things and they've created a really bad taste in all of our mouths for the way they went about it.

And we look to some of our neighboring jurisdictions and we say, well gee can't we just ban it? And I believe the best answer to that is that's a risky proposition. And I'd like Mr. Gazzone to talk about that. So we find ourselves, and I'll stop in just a second but We're in a position of tremendous technological disruption, and I think our public works and streets people have been working and are really ahead of the curve in trying to frame this out. And I think they'll be leaders at the SBCAG process once we get through this.

So I think they're to be commended. They kind of got ahead of it. This is a situation where technology is really ahead of government, and I don't think there was much we could have done about it. Mr. Gazzone?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 23Proposed6:05:49 · ≈ 3:05 PM

Chair and supervisors, yes we'd worked closely with Public Works on this project. And I think I had said previously that we have not had a project where we had quite so much legal work in such a short amount of time. One of the things that that legal work showed, and paraphrasing the case law is that there are no uniform criteria for evaluating the proper use or permitted use of a public right away. So that's the case law that we're looking in the mirror at when we try to shape a program.

In this case, When we talk about a potential ban, the in quotes, the ban that most people are used to is in the land use context under government code 65858 where the predicate is that the board or city council is contemplating an amendment of its general plan specific plan or land use ordinance. And in that case, so long as they're about to study that. There are some express periods whether it's ten months or 22 months but there are provisions for that and the county has done those before in the land use context.

Once we step away from the land use context both cities and counties have a identically worded authority for urgency ordinances for the immediate preservation of public peace health or safety. Where a declaration of the facts constituting the urgency is required. In the city of Goleta's case, there was discussion that they went down the road in their public staff report. They discussed both an urgency ordinance and a regular ordinance in case there was a legal challenge. And a legal challenge was certainly on our mind as we helped to shape this.

I think the path That the county ended up taking with a lot of involvement with us at Public Works side was to, rather than rely on direct enforcement under street and highway code 1450-1460 series. Was to include those. And that was Chapter 9, which was amended through the first reading and second reading in November and which will become operative on Thursday.

And within that, for example there's a discussion of removal of bicycles or shared mobility devices in a site back to Streets and Highway Codes 1460 and 1496. So the thought was in an area like this where we'll have multiple county people touching it Whether it's public works enforcement staff, or the sheriff's department, or the CHP. That there was a value rather than directly enforcing out of the streets and highway code to provide some more clear criteria through the amendment of chapter nine.

So I think that when we look at case law which describes itself as not providing uniform criteria and with a special tag that says there is lack of clarity about use of the public right away by private entities. That was our recommendation to have a step-by-step process to implement the authority of the county and most particularly, the authority of the road commissioner to set these terms and conditions which I think is a solid way to do that. And as we look at other jurisdictions that may or may not face litigation challenges, I think the package that the board enacted in November And it's discussing again today is one that is very solid in terms of both the board's authority and the Road Commissioners Authority.

not transcribed≈10s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

6:09 – 6:2027 turns

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role6:09:40 · ≈ 3:09 PM

Supervisor Hartman?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.836:09:41 · ≈ 3:09 PM

Thank you, so I think that helps explain a bit why we're where we are today and the question I have for Mr. Sneddon is then still what is the timeline when are people going to get relief?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed6:09:57 · ≈ 3:09 PM

Supervisor Hartman to the chair. So the ordinance goes in effect Thursday, so we're ready to go and receive applications and begin reviewing them immediately after today.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role6:10:13 · ≈ 3:10 PM

Supervisor Wolf?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:10:16 · ≈ 3:10 PM

Well, so these are draft conditions that we have in front of us. So that means that in two days you're going to finalize the conditions? It just seems like it's very rushed in order for someone to get a permit. And you had also mentioned that there is an application they need to fill out to ensure that they're safe to ride and that they follow all of the rules of the road for themselves and their patrons.

So I don't know how, I mean, I don't know how you folks can start issuing permits in such a short time. But that's an administrative issue that you'll have to deal with. Can we go back to the other slide, the map again? I'm

not transcribed≈10s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed6:11:00 · ≈ 3:11 PM

sorry, just to clarify, Supervisor. That's a good clarification. We'll be ready to begin the process of going through the applications and reviewing and getting all the submittals and things like that immediately.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:11:14 · ≈ 3:11 PM

Just go back to that map. The red line right there where it says Zone 2A Eastern Goleta Valley, what does the red line signify?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed6:11:31 · ≈ 3:11 PM

That' s just the 101. This map definitely is a draft form and will be more cleaned up for the final version.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:11:42 · ≈ 3:11 PM

Again I think that' s important too so they know where they can if we move forward with this they know where It sounds like the county or a municipality has authority over aspects of this business, such as where or what zone they can deploy from. Is that correct?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 23Proposed6:12:11 · ≈ 3:12 PM

Chair and Supervisors, the short answer is yes. And the longer answer is that we took the criteria from some of the case law and spelled that out actually in the board agenda letter at factors that the road commissioner is supposed to look at when determining whether a particular use or location is compatible with the rest of the public interest for that area. And I would just build on something that Mr. Sneddon said a moment ago to say that even while the county is processing permits, the authority under Chapter 9 of the County Code which was amended in November and is effective on Thursday describes in pretty clear detail Locations from which shared mobility devices may be removed, who may remove them and what that process is. So that was spelled out more clearly than the street and highway codes but based on that street and highway code authority.

not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:13:09 · ≈ 3:13 PM

So just in clear layman's language we can state where they can be deployed? We have that authority

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 23Proposed6:13:22 · ≈ 3:13 PM

Chair and Supervisors, the case law tells us that the starting point is the road commissioner's making that decision. But

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:13:29 · ≈ 3:13 PM

don't we give input to the road commissioner?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 23Proposed6:13:31 · ≈ 3:13 PM

You can certainly provide input to the road commissioner. And I have said before that the zoning characteristic of a neighborhood is certainly a factor the road commissioner can

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:13:42 · ≈ 3:13 PM

contemplate. When we adopted this back in November One of the things that we adopted, one of the statements was that In drafting the final ordinance, such other conditions may be necessary to protect public health and safety or to protect public improvements. And I think what we've heard from the public is that we as a board or decision makers need to do what we can to protect public health and safety.

And I think when you start seeing the scooters being deployed in the neighborhoods, that's where it steps over the line. Now so we could be more restrictive and then let's say in a year this comes back to the board for further discussion which I think makes sense. I think at this point we should try and be as restrictive as we can. There was something in the draft conditions that says for permit applications outside the zones delineated in Exhibit 1, which is the map, the Road Commissioner shall determine the allotment of scooters for the zone.

Then we're just going to say then that the road commissioner can determine how many scooters can be in a zone after we've determined, say 100 in Eastern Goleta Valley? What's the process for that to happen? Because I'll tell you if we start seeing 500 scooters in Eastern Goleta Valley again. That's just not going to be acceptable. So how does a public have input into a road commissioner's decision to change what we do?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed6:15:38 · ≈ 3:15 PM

Mr. Chair, Supervisor Wolff and I think what that said was outside of the zones that we're proposing and I think the boundaries we put around these particular zones are probably going to be 98-99% of the market area within the unincorporated county where the scooters will go so if for instance scooters started to show up outside of the zones we would work directly with the companies that are going there to determine a number if they feel like there's some type

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:16:06 · ≈ 3:16 PM

Why do they get to determine how many?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed6:16:08 · ≈ 3:16 PM

They wouldn't. They'd be working through myself and my team and Public Works on it.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:16:13 · ≈ 3:16 PM

Okay, so then I'll take the next step. How does the public get involved in that because I'm not going to be here next year, so it's going to be the supervisor or another supervisor's office who is going to be getting all those calls. So how do we hear from the public?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed6:16:32 · ≈ 3:16 PM

Well, you know Mr. Chair, Supervisor Wolf, I am the road commissioner and I work directly for your board and I take the input that your board provides us. Like today, I'm hearing the condition input to the draft conditions that we put on the screen. We've also included in the package as well. So we'll go away from this hearing today and we'll work on some final draft conditions that we can use when we work with the scooter companies.

We're going to call our contacts from Lime and Bird today to let them know that Thursday's the day. So hopefully we'll see you folks in our office tomorrow, and we can start working on these permits because if they want to operate after Thursday, they're going to need to have an encroachment permit to do that.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:17:12 · ≈ 3:17 PM

Let me just thank you Mr. McLaughlin and your team for listening to their concerns. And doing the limitation to 100 because I do think that's a limiting factor to the impact it is going to have in the community. But, I don't want to give up the commercial zone but I think we have public speakers who probably want to speak.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed6:17:32 · ≈ 3:17 PM

Sure certainly and just one other comment on the conditions as Mr. Sneddon mentioned Our conditions are gonna, the draft conditions that you see there and the conditions that we'll develop after today are going to be based upon ensuring that the companies do what they say they need to do as you mentioned. Properly maintaining their equipment, taking care of their equipment. And thank you for bringing the San Francisco plan to our attention, the Portland plan to our attention. A lot of great information in there, staff support through that and we pick conditions that we think would be appropriate here as well so.

Supervisor Hartman?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.836:18:03 · ≈ 3:18 PM

Thank you, so two points of clarification. First is then finalizing this first round of conditions for the permits will be something within your discretion and you're getting feedback from us but come Thursday you're gonna start negotiating the permits based on these conditions, is that correct?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed6:18:24 · ≈ 3:18 PM

Yeah my hope is we're doing it tomorrow with the companies because we'll call them tonight and tell them to come in and start working with us

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.836:18:30 · ≈ 3:18 PM

And the second question, I mean these are how we're regulating the companies but the companies have an opportunity to regulate the riders. That's their customers absolutely. Right exactly and they have the ability to block them. You know some ability to gather information, track where they're going. If they don't park it where they're supposed to they can make sure they never rent one again. So that's the next iteration but I would love to hear more about that perhaps it'll be in the context of the SVCAG.

And I think that's going to be public, and I just wanted to put that. I think the IV Rec and Park District and the IV CSD should be part of that because I think we were originally thinking the cities in the county members of SB CAG but it probably has to be broader MTD and others CHP. So I hope we'll work on that in our role on SB CAG. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed6:19:32 · ≈ 3:19 PM

Thank you. And Mr. Chairman and Supervisor Hartman, that's an integral part of the conditions we're going to put out as well because there is the deployment piece where do the scooters go when the company puts them out? And then the riders use them and where they leave them so there will be conditions in our permit that tell the companies that they have a certain amount of time to correct the location the scooter is left at if it's not in an appropriate spot.

Let's go to public comment.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed6:19:58 · ≈ 3:19 PM

Chair Williams, members of the board we have one request to speak. Rodney Gould.

6:20 – 6:296 turns

CommentRodney GouldProposedself-stated6:20:09 · ≈ 3:20 PM

Hello. My name is Rodney Gould, I'm a 40 year resident of Isla Vista. And also I'm the general manager of the Isla Vista Recreation and Park District. However, I should note that I am not here at the behest of my board, I am here as an individual. Anyone who knows me knows that I'm not one to speak out in public on controversial issues but this is such a bad situation that I felt compelled to speak.

If you'll please bear with me, I'm going to go ahead and just read my comments to make sure I don't leave anything out. And also note that I haven't had an opportunity to read the entire proposal. So some of the things I addressed may be already addressed, and I know some of the points have come up here at this meeting. The only thing I know is what I read in this morning's news press.

Currently, Isla Vista sidewalks are in total chaos. Yesterday at about 1 PM I went to pick up some lunch. I walked from my office at the corner of Seville and Embarcadero Del Mar to Pardal Road and Embarcadero Del Mar. It's roughly, just a total guess, roughly 200 yards. And I counted over 70 scooters, 15 of which were lying down and partially blocking sidewalks to different varying degrees.

And creating safety hazards, and that's just in two short blocks of Isla Vista. And this isn't an isolated incident. I can go out any time of day or night and find scooters creating safety hazards for pedestrians blocking ADA access and blocking fire hydrants. Although it's against the scooter company rules my recreation leader has seen children from her program which serves Children from the age of five to 12 years old riding the scooters. The youngest one she observed was six years old, and people on a regular basis ride two to a scooter which is also against the rules but it's something that Isla Vista is not real big on obeying rules and just it happens.

And I'm aware of one such incident that ended with a person having to have their jaw wired shut. These companies, they're not limiting their pickup spots to sidewalks. They are at the entrances to parks. They block fire hydrants and on five different occasions I've had them set up on my front lawn. Since the free for all began with scooters, I'm now noticing that the hopper bikes are also not being placed in the corrals. They're being put out on the streets for picking up.

So, I've watched people put scooters in trees. I watch students knock over rows of scooters like dominoes. They think that's fun and they're being thrown into the ocean as well. There's photographs of the scooters in the ocean. And I'm sure you're all aware that there's a great number of people who've put in countless number of hours trying to change the culture in Isla Vista and move away from the chaotic atmosphere of the past, including installing additional lighting and sidewalks to create a safer environment.

In my opinion, allowing this business model to persist in Isla Vista is taking three steps back. It's the sidewalks we're putting aren't even usable in a safe manner. And what I would like to say is if the board does choose to allow this business model to continue, I would ask that it severely curtailed. That the number of scooters be limited to a couple of hundred at the most and that they'd only allowed to be staged in designated corrals like the shared bicycles.

I'd also like the county to consider immediately impounding scooters that are found creating safety hazards rather than relying on the public to notify the companies, which seems far too lenient considering the impact they're having on the community. Rodney,

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role6:24:18 · ≈ 3:24 PM

I gave you an extra minute of time. Can you wrap up?

CommentRodney GouldProposedself-stated6:24:21 · ≈ 3:24 PM

I am almost done. Thank you so much. These companies have come into Isla Vista with zero consideration to public safety or the quality of life of residents who are not their targeted customer base. I do recognize that as these companies are being blocked out of municipality after municipality, they're trying to take steps to improve their situation but I assure you that it's not working nor do I ever see this working in Isla Vista. Thank you for your time.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role6:24:51 · ≈ 3:24 PM

To the board, I think. Go ahead, Supervisor Wolk. I feel like this is very new ground. I feel like our staff has really a good grip on the challenges both from safety nuisance but also the potential of it in places where it can be harnessed correctly. And I know sometimes it's a little bit easier if we put all this stuff in ordinance. But, I wouldn't want to put the numbers of the zones or other things in ordinance right now because we don't really know the best way of regulating it and you know, I think that this is a better strategy than sort Pretending that we have the legal rights to ban it everywhere in the county and then just daring somebody to sue us. I think this is a more thoughtful strategy, and it's good strategy. And we can adjust based on conditions.

One question for you Chris, because I should have given you a heads up on this question. But you know a lot of the stuff off the top of your head. I seem to remember from some of the data that in Montecito like a third of peak hour trips are locals. Do you know what that number is for either Eastern Goleta Valley or for Santa Barbara City during peak hour trips? Is that similar to the Montecito stats or is that not?

not transcribed≈7s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed6:26:42 · ≈ 3:26 PM

Supervisor Williams, I don't know off the top of my head.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role6:26:45 · ≈ 3:26 PM

I mean, I'll just say from, you know, I think that's something to look at but from at least from what I've seen in other areas and I've seen it on the street myself when I lived in the city Santa Barbara a lot of people drive from I do think there's a potential in these devices. The rush to deploy them in large amounts has been an incredible nuisance, and it's more than a nuisance because it has created some safety problems.

But I think that adding something that's illegal onto something that's already illegal isn't always the way to control it. Because if it's already illegal, And we haven't been able to control it through that means, then adding another reason that it's illegal does not mean we're gonna be able to control it. And that's why I believe that the Public Works Department and the Road Commissioner are negotiating with these companies as to the conditions of deployment To be done in a more rational, more restrained and in a manner that's more useful to us both from our sustainability and our mobility goals.

Having these in places where we know we have a need for the last mile I think of The fact that we could get a lot more people on our train commuting if they know they have last mile uses for reasonable costs afterwards, which we don't always have. My hope is this framework will give them the ability to start providing accountability right now, but the flexibility to adjust to the needs of our county and our constituents.

Supervisor Wolfe?

not transcribed≈21s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

6:29 – 6:353 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:29:26 · ≈ 3:29 PM

Thank you Mr Chair I guess I just want to make some suggestions And I appreciate the resident from Isla Vista speaking. I think if these were deployed in other areas, you'd be hearing a lot from constituents. I think the notion of last mile traveled is a good one but I think in reality you have to look at the area in which you're speaking and even looking at the vehicle code when they talked about scooters there was a focus on cities So I'm a little Eastern Goleta Valley centric right now, and I think what people have been seeing anecdotally and from emails and phone calls is that it's not used for that. It's not being used as a mobility device. It's being used as a recreational tool.

And plus, I will say that we're very lucky to have a very good program or MTD has I don't see that this is something But I'm also a bit in a quandary because my senses and my gut feeling is to ask that we ban scooters until you can all come together next year and come up with some semblance of coordination. I do feel very strongly though that in the conditions that the board does have the authority, and I understand that we do. And that is to ensure that the deployment of the scooters only happens in commercial zones.

And they are also parked in commercial zones. If at some point the road commissioner wants to review that because of information that you get from the companies, that it's not working for them or there is a need from consumers or constituents that they need to get to their house then those conditions perhaps can be changed but I think I feel that they should be as restrictive as possible. So that's my suggestion is deployment and parking all be done in commercial zones.

I think the hundred number, the scooter number in Eastern Goleta Valley actually that's part of the conditions it's not part of the ordinance I'm going to weigh in on that. So again, I guess I'm just going to make a motion that we move forward with staff's recommendation and modify the permit conditions. That zone 2A be limited to 50 scooters and that deployment and parking only occur in commercial zones.

not transcribed≈12s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈17s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
GuestSneddenProposed · by introduction6:33:04 · ≈ 3:33 PM

Second.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.876:33:07 · ≈ 3:33 PM

Supervisor Labadino? Well why don't we go ahead. I have comment but not on the motion so... I'll go ahead since I haven't said anything about it. Look, they're not going to obviously, I don't have any unincorporated area and I don't see them being a big thing at Gary's Sisk Walk in Tippiscay but I have seen them and we spent a lot of time in San Diego over the summer and they are pretty prolific Maybe I'm a little old for it, but I probably saw three or four people with severe road rash in my hotel lobby.

And you could be like, scooter rider, scooter rider, scooter rider. But I'm not into banning things either so my whole thing was is I wish that the app worked That app kept running and your time kept going until it was placed back into a rack, because that's what makes sense to me. I think they're fine. You cruise around if that's what you want to do with your life and cruise around on a scooter like in the gas lamp is pretty cool because you're taking a car off the road and you're cruising around. You get into wherever you need to go and you drop it off. But if there were racks around, what I have a problem with is them laying all over the place and they look like blight.

I think the only reason why you don't do that with your bike is because somebody would jack it, right? And these things nobody wants. But at the same time if people... The only reason why they're there is because people are using them. It's supply and demand so somebody must like them. I think it's a good idea to... I don't know about the limit down to 50 but I'd be cool with I think deploying only in a commercial zone, I don't know anybody. But I guess one of the questions I have is how long does the guy have to, how long does the company have to pick something up from a zone that it's not supposed to be in or usage it's not supposed to be in? Because if somebody takes it from a commercial zone and rides it home that night we're gonna charge the person 300 bucks for a pickup fee If it's been there for just a couple hours or how soon is he supposed to be able to turn this thing around?

not transcribed≈6s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

6:35 – 6:4013 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed6:35:37 · ≈ 3:35 PM

Mr. Chair, Supervisor Lavendino, our draft condition now says they have up to two hours after they get the complaint to move the scooter back and get it to either an arterial or a collector road and position it back in one of those deployed locations.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.876:35:54 · ≈ 3:35 PM

Okay, well I'd be fine with that part of it. I just don't know about the 50. I guess that's up to everybody else.

not transcribed≈10s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:36:01 · ≈ 3:36 PM

Well the reason I picked 50... Is because

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.876:36:04 · ≈ 3:36 PM

it was half of 100 and closer to

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:36:06 · ≈ 3:36 PM

zero? No, it's because I really am looking to the people who I represent and what people have said is if you're going to do it regulate it Thank you. That's what I can speak to from my district 2A. And then again, if there is a need to look at it later then that can happen but I feel we're not banning it, we're just restricting it.

not transcribed≈21s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role6:36:56 · ≈ 3:36 PM

Does staff have an estimate of how the approximate number is there now?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed6:37:05 · ≈ 3:37 PM

Mr. Chair, I mean we can look at the application and it tells us like when you look at IV it tells you ballpark how many scooters are out there? I don't think we've got a specific number have we? What approximately

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed6:37:16 · ≈ 3:37 PM

is it? The last time we talked to the company there were about 600 in Isla Vista and then 500 in the other areas.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed6:37:23 · ≈ 3:37 PM

Which that would include the city of Goleta and Corporate

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed6:37:25 · ≈ 3:37 PM

Goleta? Yeah somewhere on the order of 12-1500.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed6:37:30 · ≈ 3:37 PM

And then one thing if I can add Mr. Chair, Chris if we could go back to the slide that talks about the three different categories under the goals mobility safety And quality of life. We think through the conditioning process and through the encroachment permit process that we can establish conditions that help us kind of achieve all three of those goals, right? And I heard public health and safety today, and as the road commissioner, that's my paramount priority as well. And we live at 24-7 in transportation because our road system is open to the traveling public 24- 7, 365 days a year.

And we think through proper conditioning, we can work on an encroachment permit for each of these companies that help us achieve the utility of these devices for that last mile of the commute to give people options rather than having a single occupant vehicle take a trip. On a roadway that's thoroughly congested now and maybe get on a scooter or bike share or something like that, I think we can check off the mobility box. We can create conditions that preserve the safety of the traveling public as well as the public that are using the sidewalks and the public that live in these residential communities and at the same time preserve the quality of life and provide Additional options, alternative transportation options to the community that we serve.

And as we talked about this is cutting edge stuff and we're trying to evolve as this new technology evolves so it's not easy but we think we have some very creative staff, some really great staff on the encroachment side and if you allow us to I think we can put a permit together that works for all these companies and works for the public that we serve at the same time.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 23Proposed6:39:17 · ≈ 3:39 PM

Mr. Gazzani? Chair and Supervisors, I understand the goal of having less of these. I would offer that probably the safe harbor for doing that would be to have the discussion and rely on the road commissioner to implement the conditions after he looks at these criteria. I say that in part because we know that the Road Commissioner's decision And this area is reviewed at any abuse of discretion or arbitrary and capricious standard, which there's no language as to how that would be applied for the board providing direct input on this. So as we had set up this matter it was to provide the board with an opportunity to impress on the road commissioner your concerns. But I think the safest path if there were litigation would be to allow the road commissioner to actually come up with those numbers and apply those two particular permits.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:40:10 · ≈ 3:40 PM

Okay, well what I would like to say is so the road commissioner said they came up with these conditions and What I would like to do is provide input To the Road Commissioner to decrease the amount of scooters in zone a 2a and limit the deployment and Pickup in commercial zones to ensure the public to protect public health and welfare.

6:40 – 6:4615 turns

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role6:40:46 · ≈ 3:40 PM

You know, I understand why especially today that you would want to provide very specific direction to the road commissioner. But I think that I guess I philosophically want to give something that is as cutting edge and is going to take some tinkering. We, I think made a clear signal that we want the safety issues and nuisance issues addressed. But I want to provide staff the flexibility to clean this up. And if they don't clean it up then we would have to make some stronger recommendations. So I guess I am not supportive of a motion that sort of puts borderlines on staff. Thank you Mr. Chair and members of the board. I appreciate this meeting particularly the fact that if we' re trying to address and I agree it' s not our job It is our job to facilitate mobility.

There are going to be places where it works for one and doesn't work for the other. That should help guide what the road commissioner addresses. are probably zoned R but are connecting to C's. And I'm not really sure that that is where we want to limit mobility choices. I think you're

not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:42:40 · ≈ 3:42 PM

on the right track. I would like to make a motion and a second. And I just suggest that we vote because I really believe that the road commissioners set out guidelines and we have an opportunity to modify them.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role6:43:01 · ≈ 3:43 PM

I understand that, I just disagree. So there is a motion and a second. Can you repeat your motion?

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:43:22 · ≈ 3:43 PM

that we move forward with staff's recommendations and concerning the draft permit conditions, that we rely on the road commissioner and suggest that zone 2A be decreased from 100 to 50 scooters. And that deployment and parking of scooters be allowed only in commercial zones.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role6:43:51 · ≈ 3:43 PM

Supervisor Hartman?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.836:43:54 · ≈ 3:43 PM

Thank you. I just had a couple of questions still. When are you going to report back to us about what happens with permit applications and conditions that you've adopted?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed6:44:08 · ≈ 3:44 PM

Supervisor Hartman to the chair, that would be up to your board. I would think at a minimum it would be annually but we could do it more often. We will be collecting data immediately so three, six months maybe six months makes, we'll have a good data record established that we could have something to present kind of an update type of thing if that suits you?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.836:44:31 · ≈ 3:44 PM

Yeah, so if I understand one proposal was that we had 400 scooters and that would be kind of a lottery or we would allocate that across the different companies. Bird, Lime, Wind whatever. I mean I would like some kind of informational report within say two months. What conditions, what are we learning? It doesn't have to be exhaustive but you've been fabulous. We've just forwarded all our complaints to you and you've handled them with your usual grace.

But it would be nice to have something so that we can put it out to people sooner rather than later. Should I add that to my motion, that they

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed6:45:17 · ≈ 3:45 PM

come

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.836:45:18 · ≈ 3:45 PM

back in two months? Yeah. I'm just trying to figure out your motion how much discretion there is because I'm willing to give our road commissioner the discretion. I think they are experts in this and so I'm willing to go with staff's recommendation. So I'm still struggling on that one.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role6:45:39 · ≈ 3:45 PM

Any other discussion on the motion? There's been a motion and a second. All those in favor, please say aye.

CommentRodney GouldProposedself-stated6:45:46 · ≈ 3:45 PM

Aye. Opposed?

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role6:45:47 · ≈ 3:45 PM

Nay. Is there another motion? Supervisor Hartman.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.836:45:57 · ≈ 3:45 PM

I move staffs recommendation however with the two month and just keeping us apprised of what's happening. Thank you.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role6:46:06 · ≈ 3:46 PM

Is there a second? There's a motion and a second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? No. 4-1 Next item, coastal resiliency.

6:46 – 6:537 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed6:46:25 · ≈ 3:46 PM

Chair Williams, members of the board. Item five from planning and development is to consider recommendation during a resolution amending the coastal land use plan in an ordinance amending article two chapter 35 of the zoning code for local coastal program to prepare for mitigate and respond to threats current and reasonably foreseeable future sea level rise and coastal hazards.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 23Proposed6:46:49 · ≈ 3:46 PM

And Mr. Chair, while planning is setting up, excuse me, while the department is setting up perhaps I could do a closed session report?

PresenterRobert PerryEnergy Research for the World Business AcademyProposedself-stated6:46:56 · ≈ 3:46 PM

Yes

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 23Proposed6:46:57 · ≈ 3:46 PM

please. So in closed session today the board considered six items for existing litigation. All Cox v. City of Splump Oak, Barberry versus County of Santa Barbara, Whitson versus Santa Barbara County, Schlaggs versus County of Santa Barbara. One item of anticipated litigation, deciding whether to initiate civil litigation. And the report from that item is that the board through a 4-1 vote directed county council to initiate litigation against certain manufacturers and distributors or prescription opioids to recover the county's damages from opioid drug misuse after the deceptive marketing and sale of prescription opioids. The no vote on that was Supervisor Adam with Supervisor Williams, Wolfe, Hartman and Levanino yes votes. The board also considered public employee appointment for human resources director with no reportable action.

Thank you, Mr. Zani. Mr. Klaman?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 26Proposed6:47:56 · ≈ 3:47 PM

Good afternoon, Chair Williams, members of the board. I'm here with Ms. Selina Ebelsizer, the project manager for the Coastal Resiliency who will be making a presentation accompanied by Mr. Alan Bell, supervising planner and of course Director Black. So Ms. Ebelsizer?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 27Proposed6:48:12 · ≈ 3:48 PM

Good afternoon, Chair Williams and supervisors. Today we are returning with the Coastal Resiliency Project Local Coastal Program Amendment. And I have a brief presentation for you today. Planning and Development brought this project before your board on November 6th. The Board directed staff to make five revisions to the Coastal End Use Plan, and one revision to Article 2, the Coastal Zoning Ordinance.

Based on the Board's discussion, planning staff also made additional revisions to address properties within the coastal hazard zones that are north of Highway 101. I will discuss all these revisions individually. First, the board directed staff to revise the LCP amendment to use the high sea level rise scenario when analyzing potential hazards instead of the medium scenario.

Staff revised the screening maps and the technical guidelines for preparation of a coastal hazard report. We also modified relevant policies and development standards to require use of the high sea level rise scenario for coastal hazard analysis, development permitting, and land division processes. Changing the sea level rise standard from the medium to the high sea level rise scenario reduces potential risk from coastal flooding, erosion and high tide hazards from sea level rise.

The second revision was to propose policy 3-7, to require more frequent reporting on sea level rise projections and monitoring results. Staff shall report the results to the board every five years instead of every 10 years as originally proposed. We also modified proposed policy 3-10 regarding the anticipated life of development. The revision clarifies that the most restrictive standard shall be used when there are conflicts between this coastal land use policy and relevant policies in the community plans.

Proposed policy 3-20 was revised to require the county to coordinate with Caltrans on State Route 217 in addition to Highway 101, to protect public access to the coast and minimize adverse impacts of sea level rise on these transportation resources. And the final revision to the Coastal Land Use Plan was to policy 3-22, to require that the county shall coordinate with the Union Pacific Railroad to identify risks and protection methods and to protect public access to our coast.

The article two coastal zoning ordinance revision was to section 35-154.3, to require that permits for onshore oil and gas development processing facilities shall be issued in conformance with findings required by public resources code 30260. The findings require in part that these facilities should be located within existing sites when possible, and new sites can only be allowed under certain conditions.

In addition, staff made revisions to the LCP amendment that were not part of the board's motion but were discussed by the board on November 6th. The revisions relate to properties within the coastal hazard areas that are also north of Highway 101. Text was added to Coastal Land Use Plan Section 3.3.2 and to Article 2 Appendix 1, which are the technical guidelines for preparation of a coastal hazard report, to require a site visit report process for these properties.

The first step in analyzing potential coastal hazards on properties north of Highway 101 would be a site visit by a qualified professional. The professional would then prepare a site visit report. If the initial evaluation determines that the proposed development may be subject to coastal hazards over its anticipated lifetime, then a site-specific and more detailed coastal hazard report would be prepared.

Since these revisions I just discussed were not part of the board's motion, I am prepared with draft LCP amendments that do not include this language if your board decides that you do not wish to include it. This slide summarizes the recommended actions of your board for today. Please see pages one and two of the board letter for the recommended language. Thank you very much and I'm happy to answer any questions.

not transcribed≈6s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role6:53:07 · ≈ 3:53 PM

Any questions from the board?

6:53 – 6:558 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed6:53:11 · ≈ 3:53 PM

We have one request to speak, Charles Newman.

PresenterCharles NewmanCommunity Environmental Council where I serve as a director and officerProposedself-stated6:53:18 · ≈ 3:53 PM

Good afternoon, Chair Williams and honorable supervisors. I'm Charles Newman. I am speaking personally and on behalf of the Community Environmental Council where I serve as a director and officer. I speak here in support of the staff recommendations. And I do so because, as I believe they recognize and I hope all of you do as well, there is no more precious resource to our community than our coast.

It is our region's most important resource, in fact in many respects. It's essential to our personal well-being, to our economy and indeed to recreation as well. This coastal resiliency plan, which is before you today represents a crucial intersection between good environmental policy and planning to implement environmental policy. I believe that the staff recommendation that's before you today strikes a balance that is appropriate for both functions.

I appreciate greatly the supervisor's careful consideration of this issue. I know it's a difficult one that there is lots of data and different points of view here, but considering what's at stake, I think that the outcome proposed by staff is a valid one and I commend it to the board for adoption today. And thank you for considering the views of the Community Environmental Council on the environmental community.

Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed6:54:48 · ≈ 3:54 PM

That concludes public comment.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role6:54:54 · ≈ 3:54 PM

To the board, is there a motion? Supervisor Hartman.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.836:55:00 · ≈ 3:55 PM

I move staff's recommendation. I'll second.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role6:55:03 · ≈ 3:55 PM

There is a motion and a second. Any discussion? Supervisor Adams.

GuestSneddenProposed · by introduction6:55:09 · ≈ 3:55 PM

Well, I'm gonna support it because it doesn't affect any of my constituents and it will make us go broke faster. Because we're gonna be denying permits to fix houses and businesses and we'll lose property tax revenue so that's fantastic let's do it.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role6:55:31 · ≈ 3:55 PM

Okay there is a motion and the second all those in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed? It's unanimous for very different reasons. Our final item of the day.

6:55 – 7:0410 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed6:55:49 · ≈ 3:55 PM

Chair Williams, members of the board. Item six is from Planning and Development. It's a hearing to consider recommendation regarding the adoption of amendments to the county land use and development code. Article two, the coastal zoning ordinance streamline permit process for ag employee dwellings in the Ag one and Ag two zones in the unincorporated areas of the county.

CommentJessie SteeleProposedself-stated6:56:25 · ≈ 3:56 PM

Good afternoon, Chair Williams and Supervisors. My name is Jessie Steele and today I'm going to be presenting the Agricultural Employee Dwelling or AED Ordinance Amendments On November 13th, the board considered the proposed AED ordinance amendments and recommended the following revisions. First to revise the number of employees allowed to occupy AEDs at various permit levels in the AG1 and AG2 zones.

And also revise the employment location requirements for certain AEDs. Pursuant to this direction, staff revised the proposed amendments to require a CUP for AEDs for 20 or more employees in the AG-1 zone and for 25 or more employees in the AG-2 zone. The board also directed staff to remove the MCUP level in the AG-2 zones. And as a result of these changes, AEDs in the inland area AG-2 zone now require a zoning clearance for one to nine employees and an LUP for 10 to 24 employees.

And because there is no zoning clearance permit path in the coastal zone, the proposed Article 2 amendment now requires a CDP for 1 to 24 employees in the AG-1 zone. The board also directed staff to revise the proposed amendments to more closely align with the PC's recommendations regarding employment location requirements in the AG-1 zone. Accordingly, staff revised the proposed amendments to require full time on site employment for AEDs permitted with a zoning clearance LUP and CDP.

And to also require majority full-time on site employment for AEDs permitted with a minor conditional use permit in the I-1 zone. And then lastly, at the direction of the board staff added language to allow work to occur not only on the farmer ranch upon which the AED is located but also any other farmer ranch operated by the same owner or employer of the farmer ranch where the AED is located.

The proposed amendments presented to the board on November 13th included minimum size requirements for dwellings, including efficiency units. However, staff did additional research and found that as of July 1st 2018, the California Residential Code was amended to repeal sections regarding efficiency units. Therefore, the California Residential Code which regulates one and two family dwellings no longer applies to efficiency units Now the building code only would apply to efficiency units that are proposed in larger multiple family structures.

As a result of these changes, any references to efficiency units have been removed from the proposed amendments. Staff recommends that your board take the following recommended actions. First make the findings required for approval including CEQA findings. Second, determine that the negative declaration adopted for the housing element fulfills the environmental review requirements for this project. And no subsequent environmental document shall be prepared pursuant to CEQA guideline section 15162 and lastly adopt ordinances amending value DCN article two.

And that concludes my presentation and we're happy to answer any questions.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role6:59:53 · ≈ 3:59 PM

Questions from the board? I just did have one. I love your new grid, that's much more readable and understandable than the old grid. Can you put that back up? Great. So if an applicant came in with say a A project that was only five units in the inland portion, but was to provide both him or her. Three of the units and another company nearby, two of the units.

Would you allow it to be processed but it would have to be processed under the minor CUP because that's the more restrictive? I'm wondering if a project isn't linear but is diagonal in its nature on this grid, do you still allow them to process the application but And if the answer is that's not allowed, well why wouldn't you allow someone to process an application for ten units at the MCUP but only build five?

I guess. I don't think you're understanding my question. Yeah, sure. Okay, sorry I'm not being very intelligible right now. So I guess my question is if someone wanted to process a permit that only had a majority full-time on site employment instead of full time on site employment would they be able to use the MCUP process instead of the LUP? I mean, I think the only reason why they would want to do it is if they were building some of the units for their own workers and some units for say their neighbors' workers.

CommentJessie SteeleProposedself-stated7:02:18 · ≈ 4:02 PM

Chair Williams and board, pursuant to the way the ordinances are currently written we don't provide a sort of alternative option that doesn't meet one of these permitting paths. So if someone proposed either less units or to follow a different sort of employment location scheme then it would not fall into that permit category.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role7:02:38 · ≈ 4:02 PM

So conceivably what they would have to do is process an application for 20 units and then only build five of them? That would be the only path to do that.

CommentJessie SteeleProposedself-stated7:02:55 · ≈ 4:02 PM

Yes, Chair Williams they would have to follow that permit path and then supposedly build fewer units.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role7:03:01 · ≈ 4:03 PM

Got it okay all right well I guess that's a workaround. I understand it now and let's go to public comment unless there's other questions?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed7:03:14 · ≈ 4:03 PM

Chair Williams, members of the board we're going to go to Santa Maria for Claire Weinman and then back here to Santa Barbara for Kathy Allen and Eric Torbert. Okay, greetings. Pardon me. We're going to Santa Maria first for Claire Weinman then you guys. Thank you. Thanks a lot. Claire, go ahead.

PresenterClaire WeinmanGrower Shipper Association of Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo countiesProposedself-stated7:03:37 · ≈ 4:03 PM

Are we live? Good afternoon, my name is Claire Weinman. I'm the president of the Grower Shipper Association of Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties. We appreciate the efforts of staff, the planning commission and the board of supervisors in this process in drafting what's before you today. We do support the ordinance before you today and the recommended findings, so let's do this.

Would certainly be happy to come back at a later date to address some of the footnotes but I think within the scope of what we're trying to accomplish this is a perfect fit and we wish Supervisor Wolf all the best in your next chapter. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed7:04:14 · ≈ 4:04 PM

Okay now we'll go with Kathy Allen and then Eric Torbay or

7:04 – 7:097 turns

CommentKathy AllenProposedself-stated7:04:23 · ≈ 4:04 PM

Hi, I'm Kathy Allen. I was wondering if it's okay to have Eric go first? We kind of have a- Sure, absolutely.

CommentEric TorbettProposedself-stated7:04:32 · ≈ 4:04 PM

Good afternoon, supervisors. My name is Eric Torbett. I'm a resident of Supervisor Wolf's district for the past 20 years. I am currently an organic farmer. My interests include organic farming, of course, ultra-affordable housing, sustainable living, natural home building and cooperatively owned businesses. Today you're addressing the issue of AEDs, Agricultural Employee Dwellings.

And I imagine you have in your mind an idea of a farm consisting of an owner who then decides to hire employees and then perhaps build dwellings for these employees that work for him. You're also including Where they work off site, but I'd like you to imagine another scenario where the farm is owned collectively by multiple owners and these owners are also the workers. So it's a cooperative farm.

And in this situation, these workers' owners might decide to build dwellings for themselves. They would live in them, they would work on the farm, they'd be the owners. So far so good but it gets complicated now what if these worker-owners decide that they would like more of a village aspect to their farm? It's still a farm but Maybe some non-agricultural workers to live in this village, let's call it an ecovillage.

It might include retired people that just want to enjoy an agrarian lifestyle. It might include people with full time jobs off site that have nothing to do with agriculture but they want to be part of this community. So today, I don't want to ask you to write whole new code to your amendment. But maybe just make a slight little tweak and Cathy's going to talk more about that but basically to allow for a conditional use permit to go forward with these ideas. So I'm going to let Cathy now speak. Thank you.

not transcribed≈10s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
GuestSneddenProposed · by introduction7:06:51 · ≈ 4:06 PM

Can I ask a question of staff? Sure. Is that not called the subdivision? Yeah, okay thanks.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role7:07:02 · ≈ 4:07 PM

It seems to me that they would be able to pursue an application as a CUP if they're working on the farm.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 28Proposed7:07:12 · ≈ 4:07 PM

Mr. Chair, I think the point was that they would like to be able to have some people live there that don't work on the farm and that's not contemplated in the ordinance at all.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role7:07:21 · ≈ 4:07 PM

Go ahead.

CommentKathy AllenProposedself-stated7:07:22 · ≈ 4:07 PM

Good afternoon, Chair Williams and members of the board. My name is Kathy Allen and I'm currently a resident to the City of Santa Barbara. I attended UCSB and began as a city planner at the City of Santa Barbara in 1986. I now currently work with the City of Goleta as a planner but today I'm just speaking as an individual. As Eric stated, our request today is to add a section or a column to the AED ordinance. To create a possible permit path forward to allow what we're calling an eco-village development.

I submitted a letter to the board earlier today and which shows a possible way to allow an eco village in the Ag One Zone District without the requirement of a full time employment. Sorry, full-time employment as an agricultural employee status. This could be achieved by requiring a CUP for an equal village type of development for one or more units. The CUP could provide the county and neighbors a way to ensure that ag lands are sufficiently protected and a method to address any other concerns that such a development might have for the neighbors.

To my knowledge, there is no use category or zone that would allow ag use as a primary use with residential use as an accessory use. So that concludes my statements and I just thank you for even considering this potential addition to the AED ordinance and also congratulations on your retirement. Thank you. Sorry, may I address the question about is that called a subdivision when we were talking about the other owners?

I'll say that I have lived up north in a cooperative type of situation where the owners collectively purchased an apartment building and then all the owners just did tenants-in-common type of ownership. So it didn't, we didn't need to subdivide. And in this case, we wouldn't necessarily need to subdivide

7:09 – 7:129 turns

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role7:09:48 · ≈ 4:09 PM

So maybe to follow this line of thought for a second, I mean, I'm anxious to wrap this up like everyone is. But wouldn't if an owner can live on their farm? So if they're all owners why wouldn't they be able to live on their farm if they own the farm collectively?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 28Proposed7:10:15 · ≈ 4:10 PM

Mr. Chair, members of the board-

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role7:10:17 · ≈ 4:10 PM

Or have we become the country that controls people being able to live in their own property?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 28Proposed7:10:28 · ≈ 4:10 PM

So, Mr. Chair and members of the board, they can live on their farm in one residence. So they have to live in one residence.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role7:10:38 · ≈ 4:10 PM

Yeah,

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 28Proposed7:10:39 · ≈ 4:10 PM

that would be the- All together in one residence, yeah.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role7:10:44 · ≈ 4:10 PM

So the restriction would be in just simply the number of units. You would still be held to the same kind of framework that another farm is. You can have accessory dwellings, you could have under this ordinance, to be able to have employees but non-owners or non-employees would essentially have to live with an employee or owner to be able for that to work. Got it.

Any other comments

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.837:11:30 · ≈ 4:11 PM

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to comment that I think somewhere down the line it might be worth exploring in detail but we've worked long and hard on this particular ordinance and I think we'd like to get it finished up here today and maybe come back to this other idea. I'm much intrigued by it but I also want to finish this off so I move staff's recommendation

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role7:11:54 · ≈ 4:11 PM

All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Supervisor Hartman has an adjourn in memory so...

7:12 – 7:167 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed7:12:03 · ≈ 4:12 PM

If we could just get a motion on A28.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role7:12:10 · ≈ 4:12 PM

Yes, the trailed item that accompanies this. Is there a motion on A28?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed7:12:14 · ≈ 4:12 PM

There's

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role7:12:17 · ≈ 4:12 PM

a motion and second. All those in favor please say aye. Aye Opposed

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.837:12:27 · ≈ 4:12 PM

Thank you, I have two things. First, I'd like to take a moment to remember Richard Dick Atkinson who passed away in November. He secured his first post-college job at Los Prietos Boys Camp in 1959 where he served for 25 years as a teacher and later a principal. He also served in the US Army Reserves and he finished his career in the classroom at Santa Maria Juvenile Hall, retiring after 35 years of service to our county's youth. As a testament to his transformative influence many of his former students visited him for years after his retirement to thank him for helping turn their lives around.

I met him post-retirement. He was the face of the Santa Ynez Valley Opportunity Shop, an all-volunteer thrift store that donates proceeds to veterans' causes and scholarships. He was daily found sitting at the front desk with a story or song to share. Known as The Music Man, Dick embodied the traditions of service and community, and our thoughts go out to Katie, his wife of 57 years.

On a happier note, I had an email and a call from Chancellor Yang today at UCSB. He said that philanthropist Charlie Munger has made a visionary and generous gift of $70 million to UC Santa Barbara to cover the total cost to acquire Las Farras Ranch. Located six miles west of the campus, this extraordinary gift from Mr. Munger is in addition to his previous gifts for student housing on the campus and the intent is to keep it in agriculture and keep it in the current use and to work with the community on how it could best serve our common vision.

UnidentifiedChairProposed · by role7:14:18 · ≈ 4:14 PM

We will adjourn to a great party at 5 o'clock in honor of Supervisor Wolf. You.

CommentZone TwoProposed · by introduction7:15:34 · ≈ 4:15 PM

♪ You.