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.0:03 – 0:087 turns
Good morning. Morning. I will call the order of the May 18, 2021 meeting of the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors. Madam Clerk, please call the roll.
Roll call, called by Clerk of the Board · 1 under review
Show transcript
I would entertain a motion.
Move approval.
Second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, Madam Clerk will you please call the roll.
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0 Move approval. Second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, Madam Clerk will you please call the roll.
Show transcript
Motion passes unanimously.
Madam Clerk are there any announcements or changes to our agenda today?
Chair Nelson and members of the board, I have a couple quick announcements this morning. I would like to remind the public that the Board of Supervisors meetings are now being interpreted and broadcast live in Spanish. We are broadcasting our meetings in Spanish both for Cox Cable subscribers in South County as well as Comcast Cable subscribers in North County.
Members of the public can now view our meetings in Spanish by turning on the secondary audio programming also known as SAP or SAP under their language settings. I would also like to remind the public who are participating in our meeting today of the board's alternative methods of public participation For alternative methods of public participation and to provide public comment on general public comment or an item on the board's agenda, please see page two of our agenda.
Individuals that would like to provide verbal public comment you may do so via Zoom by registering in advance via the link on page 2. After registration you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the Zoom meeting Once the chair has announced the item you want to comment on, please join the meeting with information provided in the registration email.
The clerk will call you by name or the last four digits of your phone number when removed from mute. You will hear a notification that your line has been unmuted if you are using a touchtone phone, you may need to press star six to unmute yourself again if you're using a touchtone phone, you may need to press star six to unmute yourself Each person may address the board for up to three minutes. This is at the discretion of the chair, and if you have any questions regarding this process please call the clerk of the board at 805-568-2240 again that's 805 5682 240. Chair Nelson members of the board my final announcement today is a quick oral report on administrative item number 38 Government Code Section 54953C3 of the Brown Act requires a legislative body to orally report a summary of a recommendation for a final action on the salaries, salary schedules, or compensation paid in the form of fringe benefits of a local agency executive as defined in Subdivision D of Section 3511.1 during the open meeting in which the final action is taken.
Administrative item number 38 is sponsored by the Board of Supervisors. It is to consider recommendations regarding appointment of and compensation for County Council for the County of Santa Barbara, which occurs pursuant to Government Code Section 27640-27641 and which comes after both a competitive recruitment and prior closed session consideration. And this is just a brief description of this item. This is to approve the appointment of Rachel Van Molen as county counsel for the County of Santa Barbara with a statutory four-year term that will be begin on June 28th, 2021 and to set Rachel Van Mullen's annual salary as county counsel at $245,000 plus other benefits consistent with those received by other Santa Barbara County Department managers and subject to further annual increases by the Board of Supervisors based on performance.
No separate action is required on this item and approval can be made as a part of the balance of the administrative agenda. And that concludes my announcements for today.
0:08 – 0:094 turns
All right thank you Madam Clerk. Have there been any Before we get to the administrative agenda,
next item of business is the county executive officer report. So, Ms. Sato do we have anything today?
Chair Nelson and board members this is just a reminder to our public that we actually intend to do a special meeting on June 1st. The meeting on June 1st will be held in the afternoon and the subject of that meeting will be discussing the federal funds the county's expected to receive and the board will hear a report from the sheriff's office as a follow-up to the budget workshops on jail staffing. And so we will put that notice out, but I just want everyone to know since this today is our last meeting in May there will be a special meeting on June 1st.
Thank you.
Agenda Discussionitems moved / continued / pulled, click to expand
Next item is approval of the agenda. Excuse me, the administrative agenda. Do any board members request to pull any items on the administrative agenda today?
Mr. Chair.
Yes sir.
Take A2 and A9 please.
My understanding is A12 will be trailed to later in the day. Is that correct?
Chair Nelson and members of the board, yes we did receive a request to trail administrative item number 12 to the end of the day for some additional information.
Just for the general public, A12 I believe there's some additional information going into the record and that would give the Board ample opportunity and to review that information prior to its approval at the conclusion of today's, or at least a vote on its approval at the conclusion of today's agenda.
Thank you and Chair Nelson members of the board just for members of the public who are participating today and for county staff administrate item number 12 is from general services this is to consider recommendations regarding an amendment and transfer of conservation easements at the Scolari Ranch from the county to the land trust for Santa Barbara County and this is in the third and fourth districts
Thank you. So, I have A2 and A9 from the 5th District. Any of the other districts have items to pull? Seeing none, Madam Clerk does the public have any other items?
Chair Nelson and members of the board, I do have quite a few requests to speak on administrative item number 29 which is a set hearing on our agenda today.
All right, I'm willing to take a motion to approve the balance of the administrative agenda. So that would be all the items except for A2, A9 and A29 and understanding that A12 will be trailed to part of that motion is that A12 would be trailed to the end of the day. That makes me try it again so moved
second
any further discussion? Hearing none, Madam Clerk will you please call the roll.
Motion passes unanimously.
All right let's go ahead and take the administrative items in order.
Chair Nelson?
Yes sir.
On A29 I think there might be some confusion and so if Madam Clerk could just kind of explain I did get some phone calls that people wanted to come and speak about 829, but I tried to tell the people that I talked to you that this is just all we're talking about today. The only reason it's on the agenda today is to set the meeting for June 22nd so if anybody wants to talk about the benefits or the lack of benefit of what we're discussing as far as a workforce agreement goes, that would happen on June 22nd. So if that can just be made clear and I think you might clear up some
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0 moved second any further discussion? Hearing none, Madam Clerk will you please call the roll.
Show transcript
0:12 – 0:1712 turns
public comment.
Thank you, Supervisor Lavanino. Yes, Chair Nelson and members of the board we did try to reach out to members of the public who did request to speak on this item and inform them that since it is on our agenda today as a set hearing and not an actual hearing today this is just a set hearing for June 22nd 2021 Excuse me. Any comments provided by the public should remain to the actual setting of this hearing for June 22nd, 2021 and why they may be for or against that hearing date and not on the actual substance of this item. And again, for members of the public who are participating, this is A-29 from the County Executive Office and Public Works. It's a set of hearings to consider recommendations regarding the development of a countywide community workforce agreement, CWA ordinance and project template.
And again this is just to set the hearing for June 22nd 2021 where we will have this discussion on that day. So any members of the public who would like to provide comment it would be to provide comment on actually setting the hearing.
Thank you Madam Clerk and for the public in English that means we're talking about talking about it in the future so. All right, so
moving on to item A-2. Thank you again Supervisor Lavenino for highlighting that. Do please read that item in the record?
Chair Nelson and members of the Board, Administrative Item number two is from the Auditor Controller. It is to consider recommendations regarding the release of prior years impounded property tax revenue for the 2020 through 2021 tax year and there is a four fist vote required on this item.
Supervisor Lavendino. Yeah, my question on this is so I just want to make sure that I'm reading this correctly. So there's going to be another in excess of two million dollars coming back to the general fund and just want to get clarification since it is property tax if that would be ongoing property tax or is that considered to be one time? And will it just be added to the how that will be added to the general fund carryover?
Thank you Supervisor Lavenino and we have Trevor Lysak with the auditor controllers office here.
To answer your question, no it is not ongoing. Starting in about 2012 due to significant assessment appeals by United Launch Alliance we started impounding property tax revenues at the time we did so again in 2014 15 16 and 17 Also starting in 2016 and 17, we impounded property tax revenues. And so the this is money that is taken out of its recorded as revenue in the year that the property taxes come in, but the money is set aside as non spendable pending the outcome of those assessment appeals on this year.
The assessment appeal board provided stipulations and we're ready to release those. It will not be counted as revenue this year it's already been counted as revenue in the past, but it will be a release of non spendable fund balance basically receivables, and so the money will be distributed out but it is not ongoing. In terms of the release of the impounds, I believe there might still be some ongoing questions and assessment appeal. But for these years impounded it's resolved and it's a one-time fund.
Thank you.
Thank you Chair Nelson. Just also to clarify, so it is spendable. It falls to our fund balance at year end as Mr. Lysak said it's not ongoing and typically what the board has done for any year-end revenues that are over budget that is used in the following years budget typically for planning purposes and to address any emerging needs. So it would fall to our fund balance and typically in the past we've been at year-end close. We save those monies Go on to fund new needs that come up in the next budget year.
So that is intended to offset, sorry I should have said this earlier. Following the stipulation by the Assessment Appeal Board the assessor did provide us roll corrections which actually exceed these amounts that have been impounded in the past those are Reef refunds back to the taxpayer this year. And so the release of these monies is intended to offset that, that's the purpose of doing this. So it isn't new money that's available per se, it's just offsetting those roll corrections.
That's all.
Thank you Mr. Lysak
Okay, so now I'm super confused. So is $2.2 million being added to the general fund carryover for next year?
0:17 – 0:1910 turns
Is that a question for me or the CEO? That it is a release, it's a release of non-spendable fund balance.
English please Mr. Lysak I'm trying to follow you and I know you're speaking in auditor controller talk and I guess it's more of a budgetary question. I'm sorry to cut you off. I just not going to be able to follow down that road so I guess it's more of a question for CEO Miyasato. So in A9 we're saying there's a 6.8 million dollar carryover as of the end of the third quarter does this mean there's gonna be a nine million dollar carryover?
Supervisor Lavinino, I believe so. And I'm going to ask Ms. Anderson because she speaks both budget and accounting. Thank you. Ms. Anderson?
Good morning members of the board and Supervisor Lavinino through the chair. So the transaction that's going to happen is you are correct in, and so this ties into item A-9 as well. We're anticipating that there's going to be We have an estimated net close to the general fund balance for just activities And in addition to that, there'll be a transaction through this item A2 that will add to fund balance. So it's both of those added together.
Thank you.
Thank You Ms. Anderson. All right I actually need a motion to approve that item?
I'll make that motion.
Second.
All right any further discussion? Madam Clerk will you please call the roll?
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0 motion. Second. All right any further discussion? Madam Clerk will you please call the roll?
Show transcript
Motion passes unanimously.
0:19 – 0:2312 turns
All right next item up would be Item number A9.
Chair Nelson and members of the board administrative item number nine is from the County Executive Office. It is to receive and file the fiscal year 2020 through 2021 third quarter budget and financial status report as of March 31st, 2021 showing the status of appropriations and financing for departmental budgets adopted by the Board of Supervisors.
All right, Mr. Lavagnino? Yes thank you so good news but uh so the end of the quarter third quarter we're still showing a 6.8 million dollar variance to the positive for general fund so and I i heard um Miss Anderson and CEO talk about the carryover goes to the next year i'm just curious it looks like now the way i'm hearing this so there's another 2.2 so we're talking about a nine million dollar carry over I know the policy may have been in the past that we put that in some sort of, you know, piggy bank for the next year. I'm curious what the last five years or maybe the last 10 years we've carried over if it seems like an awful lot to just put into some sort of emerging issues account when all of our other emerging issue accounts are already fully stocked?
So they seems like most of that could be used as one time And maybe it's prudent to leave two or three million, maybe in there. But I guess that's something we'll talk about at budget but I would when we get to the budget time like to talk about what the historical balance of carryover has been.
Thank you Mr. Labanino. CEO Miyasato?
Supervisor Lavanina, we can certainly do that and we can show you what the carryover has been. And I think if the board would like to appropriate that, the board certainly could do it. We were just saying that we would do it after year end. So year end closes June 30th and then takes time for the auditor to make all the corrections because what we're showing here remember is our best estimate and projection of how we will end the year.
And sometimes in the last quarter we see changes or we see things we didn't expect. So if the board would like to, we can have that conversation. We're just saying it should be done After the close of the year end.
Thank you, CEO. Supervisor Lavagnino?
That makes sense. Thank you Ben.
Can I go ahead and get a motion?
I'll move A-9.
Second. Any further discussion? Madam Clerk will you please call the roll?
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0 move A-9. Second. Any further discussion? Madam Clerk will you please call the roll?
Show transcript
Motion passes unanimously
All right, so we're trailing item H12 but we're gonna go move ahead to item A29 and before we get started Mr. Gazzone would you mind reminding the public on the context which they can speak upon set hearings
0:23 – 0:2912 turns
Chair and supervisors, Item A-29 is a set hearing meaning scheduling of future merits hearing for June 22nd on this item. And it is the board's prerogative based on that to reasonably regulate public comment to address the question of should a hearing be set or not? And then to defer public comment on the merits of this to a future meeting.
All right. Thank you, Mr. Gazzone. I understand that we have some public speakers for this item?
Yes, Chair Nelson and members of the board. Administrative Avenue 29 was previously read into the record but I will go ahead and reread that item into the record. It is a hearing request from the County Executive Office and Public Works to set a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the development of a countywide community workforce agreement CWA ordinance and project template. And this is a set hearing for June 22nd 2021 time estimate of one hour.
And we do have nine requests to speak on this item. And we are going to begin with Russell Johnson, to be followed by Richard Marcusen.
All right. Mr. Johnson?
Hello, thank you. My name is Russell Johnson I'm reaching out on behalf of the Associated Builders and Contractors so thank you chair and members of the board for your time today just wanted to reach out and express that you may want to expand the scope of what you're looking at for that item a 29 And take a look at what Ventura County is currently going through. What they did is they picked a set of pilot projects, and when they looked at those pilot projects, what they're doing is they're going out to bid with and without a community workforce agreement otherwise known as a project labor agreement. I would just encourage you to widen your scope beyond what is in your proposed set to agendize item. Thank you and appreciate the time.
We will now go to Richard Marcusen to be followed by Eric Christin.
Mr. Marcussen, when you're ready.
Good morning, Supervisors. I'm Richard Markeson for the Western Electrical Contractors Association, the Plumbing, Heating and Cooling Contractors of California, the Independent Roofing Contractors of California and the California Chapters of the American Fire Sprinkler Association. Regarding the setting for a hearing we have a couple of observations. One, we think that the guidance document that your staff has prepared is lacking In particular in item number four, it is recommending as an option for your consideration negotiating an entirely new CWA only with the tri-counties building trades. I would observe that I do not believe that any members of the Board of Supervisors or any members of the city staff While you're all extremely competent, are licensed construction contractors.
Collective bargaining agreements are typically negotiated between the employing contractor and the trades that they will employ. And so having the county negotiate a construction collective bargaining agreement we think is inappropriate and does not take into account the fact that you are negotiating a contract On behalf of employers who had no seat at the table. So, at a bare minimum we would encourage you as you consider setting this item that the participation of the negotiations include members from the construction community in Santa Barbara County also regarding the one hour timeframe for setting the stage for the negotiations We don't really think that this is an adequate amount of time, we would suggest that like many jurisdictions who have gone down this road that you establish beforehand a comprehensive.
A full day workshop, where you invite members from the construction community taxpayer groups and others who have an interest in good governance to participate in a lengthy and thorough discussion about the benefits of CWA PLAs and that type of collective bargaining agreement. So we think it would be premature for the Board of Supervisors to give direction to staff without taking into account the observations, the concerns and the perspective of members of the community including the construction contractor community in Santa Barbara and surrounding counties. Thank you.
This is drifting heavily into the realm of policy and not germane to the question of whether to have a hearing on June 22nd. The question at stake is whether to have the hearing on June 22nd, not to have policy discussion about the merits of the measure especially when the other side isn't here to balance that and it's not what I
understand. I thought the first public commenter there was a request to evaluate and expand scope, which I didn't necessarily think was beyond reason there. I agree with you Mr. Markeson went a little bit further into that. I would like to remind you know the speakers to speak to the hearing and if there's something as with Mr. Johnson do you think is missing? I think that is valuable for us but I will try to keep that more focused Thank you.
Next speaker.
Chair Nelson and members of the board, we are now going to Eric Christian to be followed by Lori Bennett and two members of the public participating. I do appreciate your enthusiasm using the raise hand feature. Unfortunately, we do not use that here with the Board of Supervisors. We do have an internal list going so I will not forget you and we will get to you shortly. Thank you again. We are going to Eric Christian to be followed by Lori Bennett
Mr. Christian when you're ready.
0:29 – 0:3513 turns
Thank you, my name is Eric Kristen I'm the executive director of the Coalition for Fair Employment and Construction. My first question I believe it was to Supervisor Williams would just be how does he know who's on the call and who isn't that's very strange. Um, we would be in support of this going to Thank you for your time.
Thank you Mr. Christian and just for the general public, the item does include a provision to provide other direction as appropriate so we will have I think as County Council would say broad discretion and authority to expand the topic on the 22nd of June.
And we will now go to Lori Bennett to be followed by Kevin Dayton.
Ms. Bennett when you're ready.
Good morning. Good morning supervisors. My name is Lori Bennett and my family's business is Fence Factory. We have a couple of locations there in Santa Barbara County also Ventura County and San Luis Obispo County as a union contractor who may be the other supervisor was referring to as the other side and a non-union contractor or merit shop I would I would suggest and maybe hope that you would move this meeting or hearing to December or January. So when the construction force is usually a little lighter or not having the same workload that we do in June, our employees may have a chance to weigh in as opposed Union leaders or business owners, maybe our employees need to have a say in this as well as they're busy out very busy in the summer months.
So I would strongly suggest that and appreciate the fact that you let us speak today at least on that date and time for this hearing. Thank you very much.
We will now go to Kevin Dayton to be followed by Jesse Bishop.
Mr. Dayton, when you're ready.
Supervisors Kevin Dayton, Labor Issues Solutions LLC. Thank you for your time. When you have this hearing, because I think a lot of people are going to be interested in this project labor agreement. In fact, you all know that there's going to be a lot of people interested in this project labor agreement. It would be interesting to see a vote to put this on the agenda today to get an early idea of where everybody stands on it. I hear a rumor you've got the three votes for the unions to get control of the workforce. And it's time to see where you stand before this comes up because the community is going to be very interested in this. So once again, have a vote. I think it's too late now and set five hours for it as other places do. Thank you.
Thank
you Mr. Dean.
We will now go to Jesse Bishop to be followed by Nicole Goring.
Mr. Bishop are you ready?
Good morning members of the board, Mr. Chair my name is Jesse Bishop with Cal Portland Construction a large employer in Santa Maria thank you for the opportunity to speak today I just wanted to mention that we look forward to a fair and inclusive discussion and I want to make a note that can't really happen when one side the non-union side or Merrick shop of the contract community roughly 80 to 85% of that contract community or employer base in Santa Barbara County is not at the table for the contract negotiations. That's what just happened in the city of Santa Barbara, that's on your agenda as a possible option.
There was no discussion other than public comment that was mostly disregarded as to the content of that contract it was very one sided And we ask that you please do not do the same. I would also echo what Miss Bennett just said a couple speakers before me, that it would be best to move this to later this year or early next in the interest of having those actual workers that you're going to be deciding on have the ability to come and speak before the board and that is their slower season right now it's very busy So I would ask the same as Ms. Bennett in that and I thank you for your time. Thank
you Mr. Bishop. Mr. Chair, the speakers are speaking to items that are going to be discussed the 22nd. The whole purpose of public noticing laws is to make sure that everyone in the public has the same heads up on whether there's going to be a debate These comments are not, with the exception of Ms. Bennett, these comments are not exclusively to the question of whether or not to have a hearing on the 22nd.
0:35 – 0:4015 turns
Thank you for letting me know how to do my job. Mr. Gazzone, I believe I have some broad liberties here and I do appreciate Supervisor Williams wanting all the people at the table. I think there's a lot of public comment that we can get that we can also disregard because we know it's not necessarily appropriate at the time. You and I do this every day The public doesn't. And so I'm trying to work through that the best I can as chair, to give people an opportunity to speak and eventually have a robust discussion. So perhaps
when we have a marijuana appeal, we should only allow one side to come in and comment on the merits of that appeal when we set hearings? This is totally inappropriate. Mr.
Guzzone.
Chair and supervisors, the board has discretion in this area. The Brown Act requires noticing and it also provides an opportunity for public comment on both agendized items and items that are not on the agenda. So as a practical matter you can allow public comment on the said hearing or it would probably fall into the things that are not agendized general public comment.
Okay, so to make this work for the people that have showed up for this. If you are not speaking to the set hearing I'd ask you to keep your comments specific to the set hearing and if you like to make additional comments on CWA's then would you please defer your comments to public comment? That will work for everybody. So Madam Clerk next speaker
Our next speaker is Nicole Goering to be followed by Lee Cushman who is our final speaker.
Good morning Chairman Nelson, members of the Board of Supervisors, Nicole Goering with Associated Builders and Contractors we have many member contractors who have been building in Santa Barbara County for decades building iconic projects that you all use as necessity and enjoy Regarding the hearing on June 22nd, I would request that you would consider moving that hearing to a later date to accommodate workers. That is their busiest time of year so that they can participate and second, I would ask that you would in the broad section allow for discussion of bidding projects with and without a PLA as pilots. Thank you for your time.
And we will now go to our final speaker Lee Cushman
Mr. Cushman, you're ready.
Good morning, Supervisors. This is Lee Cushman. We're a general contractor here in Goleta California. We've done several projects for the county. We are an open shop. Our employees choose to be open shop and I would like to second the opinion of moving Meeting to December January when our employees can attend. Right now we're very busy and it's quite a inconvenience for him to make it to a supervisor meeting.
I'd also like to further the agenda discussion on pilot programs as I've met Miss Hartman Supervisor Hartman on the IV bluffs when we finished a project for the county and made her aware that There was two contracts, two contracts that bid on our project. Both were open shop and no union contracts participated in that so I think a pilot program of bidding open shop and PLA bids would be appropriate. Thank you.
Thank you Mr. Christian.
And that was our final speaker.
Now back to the board we need to get a motion approve this item. So moved
second.
Okay, any further discussion? All right. I have a couple of things to say you know even though I allowed some greater latitude the speakers you know my vote today is to hear this item. I think it's quite the democratic process for us to be able to hear this item so I plan on supporting it I also see in the set hearing is provide other direction as appropriate for those of you who don't see the solution you're looking for. That falls under that category, so just want to let you know that we will have a broader discussion. I also further heard that there's some desire because of work schedules to delay this. I don't anticipate that happening but as chairman I will try to accommodate with some type of time sensitive point of view so that more people can have to or get a chance to participate as necessary.
So again, I will be supporting this set hearing. Madam Clerk, please call the roll.
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0
Show transcript
0:41 – 0:445 turns
Motion passes unanimously.
Okay that concludes our administrative agenda Now is the time for members of the public to speak on items that are not on the agenda. Madam Clerk, are there any requests to speak on items not on the agenda today?
Chair Nelson and members of the board we have one request to speak on general public comment today and that is Patricia Killeen.
All right I'm gonna go ahead and close public comment this time. Ms. Killeen when you're ready
Good morning. My name is Pat Keelan, CEO for Communify, formerly the Community Action Commission of Santa Barbara County. Communify has proudly operated the senior nutrition program since 1974 delivering healthy meals to community meal sites and homebound seniors from Carpinteria to Guadalupe at no cost. Our average senior participant is female over age 75 living alone and low income During the pandemic, demand for meals has more than doubled. In April alone we provided more than 17,000 meals to over 720 seniors.
I want to take this opportunity to thank the County Board of Supervisors for allocating $77,000 in February and March allowing us to serve an additional 114 seniors during those two months. For over 10 years we have provided these services at a significant deficit In fact, since 2011, Communify has absorbed nearly $4 million in unfunded expenses covering deficits with our reserves.
During that timeframe the match required to support the Senior Nutrition Program has increased to 60% of the total program budget largely due to minimum wage increases and transportation increases as well as a 30% increase in food expenses all while our per meal reimbursement rate remained stagnant It is simply not sustainable. For that reason, Communify's Board of Directors voted unanimously on May 5th to discontinue the senior nutrition program effective June 30th.
This is a very painful decision after 47 years of dedicated service to the seniors of Santa Barbara County. Food insecurity among seniors is a community issue that will only continue to grow as baby boomers age. Moving forward, it will take CBOs government health care faith based organization and the philanthropic community working together to meet this growing need.
Communify believes we have a central role to play in finding solutions in the future but in order to continue providing nutritious meals to seniors today we must have a commitment for an additional six to seven hundred thousand dollars in permanent funding on an annual basis even at this amount Communify will still be committing to fundraise roughly half a million dollars annually to break even.
It is a huge commitment, but one that we will that will result in healthier seniors who are able to live independently for a longer period of time avoiding costly hospitalization long term care and enjoying a better quality of life. Thank you so much for your previous support And I hope we can find a way to work together to address this urgent growing need to feed seniors in our community. Thank you.
0:44 – 0:579 turns
Chair Nelson and members of the board, departmental item number one is from the county executive office. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding an update on the coronavirus disease 2019 COVID-19
Good morning, Chair Nelson and members of the board. Today I will be presenting quick updates on our blueprint metrics, vaccination efforts and the latest on masking guidance. May I have my presentation? Next, next. We anticipate that it will be announced at noon today, that our adjusted case rate for this week will be at 2.1 and that adjusted case rate was adjusted downward from our raw rate case rate of 2.3. Our testing positivity rate is at 1.0 with the positivity rate in the health equity metrics I would like to start by saying thank you to all of the board members and staff for to be week one in the yellow tier next Tuesday. And if the trend continues, week two on June 1 and thus hopefully the yellow tier effective on June 2nd. However just want to underscore that this would be the best case scenario given what we know today it is hard to predict when we will actually If there is an outbreak in the next couple of days, that could potentially keep us out of the yellow tier a little longer.
And so because of this, we want to encourage people to be steadfast in practicing safety measures and consider getting vaccinated and get tested too. Especially if you're not fully vaccinated. We don't want to drop below the state median in testing next. This is a chart to describe our vaccination rates as of May 16th. 51, on your right-hand side, 51% of our county population has received at least one dose. So of this number 41% of our total Santa Barbara County population is fully vaccinated. On the left hand side If we look at only the eligible Santa Barbara County population to be vaccinated and this number, the denominator has been updated to reflect eligible persons 12. And over.
The percentage is of that number is 60% have received at least one dose and of this number 48.5% is fully vaccinated next. We continue in public health to press on with vaccination opportunities for our community. The goal is making sure that vaccines are easy to get, convenient to get and delivered in a comfortable and familiar setting. So this graph describes our mobile vaccination program. Week five is May 12th through May 16th.
We are focusing on second dose clinics, we had 10 clinics to complete the second dose clinics. We had an additional ten clinics for first doses and we continue to offer vaccines both second dose clinics as well as first dose clinics at open air markets Swap meets at AG work sites, at homeless outreach sites and addiction treatment center. Next. Our TPA allocation for this week was a total of 7,020 and it went to Sansum Clinic as well as the Goleta Valley Cottage Hospital. All other providers did not request additional vaccines because they have plenty in their stock.
Next. Are. Vaccination site started on Sunday at the Santa Maria Fair Park Pavilion. We are offering Pfizer at this site, so that means 12 plus can come and get vaccinated. The hours are Sunday through Wednesday from 10 AM to 7 PM with Thursdays being a late clinic starting at 11 AM To 8pm. The if community members would like to make appointments, it is using my turn or they can also just show up the site is offering walk ups next We have, as I shared with your board previously, we have been in planning stage with schools and school partners. And this is a schedule of some of our efforts. Starting this week, we will be at Regetti High School to offer vaccinations for those 12 and above.
We are still working on the details for next week For Santa Barbara, we have confirmed Mary Byrne Elementary School in Guadalupe for May 27th and May 28. We have confirmed to be at Carpentria High School on June 1st through the 3rd and we are working on details for Santa Anaz.
Dr. Dover, I also have a quick question on this slide if you could just second here. So for Getty High School for example so will those times be when the kids are in session? I mean where Getty's finally getting back to school this week would students be able to leave school and get their vaccines is that what's envisioned there?
We are based upon input from community members. We are offering it from 3 o'clock to 7 PM, so that is the hour which parents are picking up. Our guardians are picking up dropping off or and so that we can offer the vaccines to the whole family unit if it turns out that it's a that The hour we can, but for now it is really after school so that we can reach the whole family.
Great and I just wanted to point out for the public you know Rigetti High School is in Orkut but it is the high school for Guadalupe, Los Alamos and South Santa Maria so it's really a regional school and it's going to be a great opportunity to get vaccines for those who like to get them in that area. Supervisor
Williams? Mr. Chair my conversations with Diana Rigby which led to this Carpinteria High School one was mirrored that desire The intention we had was to get the parents as well and as other family members because there are many demographics where the vaccination levels, you know, are lower. And so we see this as an opportunity to get the whole family vaccinated particularly those kind of those individuals were vaccination numbers are lower statistically
Thank you, Supervisor Williams. Back to you Dr. Dovernesso.
Yes so the beauty of our vaccination clinics is that we are flexible and the goal is to get many arms as possible so again if it means moving or expanding our hours during the school day we're more than happy to work with our school partners to do so next I do want to highlight additional partnerships in the works that have or existing to vaccinate schools and great kudos to our hospital partners, Cottage Hospital.
began last week, as soon as 12 plus were eligible to be vaccinated. And so Cottage Hospital is vaccinating South County schools. We have entered into a partnership with Lompoc Valley Medical Center and they've entered into a partnership with the Lompoc Unified School District to vaccinate the schools there. And we are of course at the Fair Park I'd like to touch base on the current mask guidance.
Until June 15th, California will keep the current masking guidance without any changes On June 15th, California will be moving to beyond the blueprint. What this means is that this is the date when California will lift capacity limits on businesses permitting the state to fully reopen for the first time in more than a year. So in the interim between now and June 15th, CDPH will be developing new masking guidance that incorporates the new CDC guidance that was just released last Thursday as well as new CDC guidance for specific sectors such as school.
The priorities for CDPH for the next four weeks is to do disease mitigation, especially in high risk indoor settings so that we can protect workers, unvaccinated children and immunocompromised persons. And we will press on with vaccinating all eligible persons, especially in the health equity metric communities. Next. I'd like to end with this graphic that really is simple and conveys, and hopefully will address some confusion.
This is the current mask guidance for Californians indoors or outdoors if you are indoors you need to wear a mask If you are outdoors and this is for fully vaccinated people, if you are outdoors and it is crowded yes wear a mask. If you are outdoors and it is not crowded wearing a mask is not required. Next and that ends my presentation.
Okay questions from the board? Any questions up in Santa Maria?
0:57 – 1:0717 turns
I just had a comment. I had an opportunity to visit the mobile clinic in Los Alamos on Saturday and really came to appreciate the additional logistics that are involved with these smaller mobile clinics. They have to take people with no appointments or people who show up without their cards, they have to be packed up in a small A van ready to go every day. There's lots of supplies, and so it was just really impressive to see the care that is going into these logistics.
You tend not to think about all that is involved but I just really thank all these mobile teams and they're just giving it 100% and really appreciate it.
Thank you Supervisor Hartman. All right, I've got a couple questions for you Dr. Donovan. So there's this week has been pretty eventful as far as masks go. You know you have the CDC come out and say if you're fully vaccinated that you no longer need to wear a mask inside again the president said you know get vaccinated or wear a mask it's your choice yet we still have at CDPH this decision to hold on to that till June 15th You know, what's my response to the public with that challenge?
Chair Nelson, the CDC guidance does allow for state and local governance. And based upon our authority, our Sacramento CDPH, the experts are recommending that we maintain the mask especially indoors just because we're not there yet in terms of vaccination rate. And I don't know if Dr. Ansorg may have additional comments to offer?
Yes, Chair Nelson through the board obviously this has been tumultuous with you know perceived discrepancies what i like to do is point out the consistencies which are that California allows mask-free In the outdoors, even for unvaccinated folks so that's always important if you're outdoors. And if you are vaccinated you don't even have to social distance if you're not vaccinated make sure you have a six foot distance to others and you do not need to wear a mask.
If you are fully vaccinated, you may entertain guests that are also fully vaccinated in your home. The indoors masking mandate only applies to public places like going to a restaurant, going to the movie theater, please wear a mask. Whether you're vaccinated or not, we are seeing a surge of variants that might well cause problems in the next four weeks. And we want to be mindful to avoid any additional glitch in our smooth ride towards going beyond the blue tier all along. So what I'm trying to convey is The positive sides that there is a lot of less mask mandate already in place, meaning outdoors. And if you are in your private, in the privacy of your home and a private event and you entertain guests fully vaccinated, you're fully vaccinated.
You may very safely not wear masks or social distance. So I think that's already going a long way. And that's just what I'm trying to
In addition to Dr. Answork's remarks, I'd also like to point out that even though the CDC has issued a broader masking guidance in California, employers are still subject to the Cal OSHA COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standards which Does require that all workers are provided and properly wear face coverings, and I don't know if county council have additional comments with that regards.
Chair and supervisors, again I think we've got the federal guidance from CDC. And in California we have both the California Department of Public Health that Dr. Doreno, so Dr. Ansorge have discussed and the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration. In that last area, Cal OSHA The Cal OSHA Standards Board is meeting later this week to consider some revisions to their current temporary regulations that would address face coverings in part and provide a little more latitude indoors, and also address employees outdoors. But Dr. Doran also is correct As an employer, the county has another strand of this rope that we're looking at.
And the County Working Group had worked closely within the county and provided comments to Cal OSHA and shared those around the state with other counties and cities.
Thank you, Mr. Gazzone and II just I think when Doctor Dover know so made the point that the CDC guidelines gives that authority recognizes authority to other states. I mean, that's where I'm struggling here. It's it's an issue of authority and policy versus science. You know, CDC has come out and said this is not necessary if you're vaccinated and state of California is failing to recognize that you know, I'm not an anti masker. I was A mask promoting billboard prior to even getting elected to office.
But I think as the science evolves, we should react to it and I think it sends the wrong message. It's a huge mistake for the state not to recognize this right now. Especially with having that incentive right now for people to get vaccinated. I mean if this is, if that's the goal then then get the carrot because like I said last week people don't believe us anymore. Don't believe the government's going to actually go ahead and give away that authority um that they've taken during this emergency measures and I think this has been a huge opportunity for the state to go ahead and show Good faith, you know. And the other thing that's difficult is we're looking around at neighboring states that aren't having mask mandates to have nothing to do with vaccines and their rates continue to go down so we've got data.
You know CDC has three different studies that educated their guidelines. What was once considered Neanderthal thinking now is mainstream and I think it's really important for us to react appropriately Because I think that's what's going to get, you know gain people's trust. And so when people see that disconnect out in the public they don't understand that. They don't understand the different layers of federal state and county government and how that all actually works with their city. I mean this is what we do for a living this is not what they do for a living. They're watching nightly news You know, mainstream nightly news and getting that information. They walk in and then they're told you know what you heard on the news last night isn't appropriate here because of the authority that we have not the science it's the authority that we have and that's really discouraging for people out there for over a year They've been told to be team players, but when it comes time for the state to be a team player we're not.
We really need to respond to this as quickly as possible I know that's this is above your pay grade Dr. Donoroso so I'm not attacking you I just want to make that statement for the public. I think that this is something that needs to be addressed sooner than later and I hope I hope the states hearing that
Chair Nelson, the state did pull all of the health directors and health officers. And Santa Barbara County, your health officer and your health director did vote to align ourselves with CDC. So at least we were one of the few. But we did say, let's go with CDC to avoid that. And you're absolutely right to align ourselves and evolve in our thinking and our policy as CDC has presented their data. But unfortunately, our vote did not count.
Right? Thank you. Mr. Cozzone
Chair and supervisors, likewise in the communication we had yesterday. The written communication we had with Cal OSHA Standards Board. The county asked the Cal OSHA Standards Board to re-evaluate and harmonize its draft requirements in light of CDC's guidance from earlier on May 13th. So same message from the county.
Mr. Gazonian, the draft guidelines would still require indoor masking is that my understanding?
The draft guidelines require for employers indoor masking with a series of exceptions, including one to get pretty technical here. We have locations and we have rooms and in very small settings if everyone's vaccinated and did not have COVID symptoms then masking would not be required in that setting but generally we would be in a face covering environment through June 15th.
And the draft guidelines are supposed to go to what period
Excuse me, Cal OSHA has indicated they are aware of CDPH looking again on June 15th and anticipate that there may be yet another change on June 15th. All
right thank you Mr. Gazzone. All right any further questions concerns? Madam Clerk do we have any public comment on this item?
Chair Nelson and members of the board we have one request to speak on this item and that is Jeffrey Schwartz.
Thank You Mr. Schwartz when you're ready
1:07 – 1:1410 turns
Can you hear me?
We can.
OK.
The
shorts when you're ready, OK? Hundreds and hundreds of well educated and reputable immunologists, molecular biologists and medical doctors are going on the record with the claim of PCR test fraud. They're saying that the PCR procedure says absolutely nothing about clinical infection Dozens of attorneys are preparing lawsuits in California and the rest of the world, which will show in court that the PCR procedure is not a valid test for infection or contagiousness.
The test is fatally flawed and it's being used in a fraudulent manner. If any of this is true, can you imagine what this means? Because virtually every scary statistic we've heard about COVID is based on this particular procedure. These scientists and doctors say the PCR procedure can only say That there is some molecule, but exactly what that molecule is or whether it's the SARS-CoV-2 virus nobody can say for sure.
Even if you've only had the common cold sometime in your life, the test can show up positive to assert that the PCR procedure is a valid test for determining the presence of a deadly illness or the tendency to transmit a deadly pathogen is fraudulent. The truth is coming out that the COVID affair is the biggest scandal of our generation There should be panic among the people who are involved in this COVID scandal, because the court's doors are now flying open. The people who are promoting this fraudulent claim as well as the people who were enacting draconian measures on the population are going to be sued for liability and reparations to the people have lost their businesses or income as a result of this and also to pay for pain and suffering.
The World Health Organization is also going to be sued. This is not a joke. When are you going to start taking some of these issues seriously enough to look into them? Are you, your public health officers and county attorneys going to ignore these issues and just wait until subpoenas start getting served. I ask you to confirm what I'm saying by watching the brief video entitled PCR test fraud class action lawsuit at tinyurl.com slash 2YH2Z4HW You have hereby been put on notice, you cannot claim ignorance of these issues. Failure to look into this could be construed as negligence. The truth is coming out and is already available for all the public to see.
Thank you.
Yes, Supervisor Lavinio. Actually Supervisor Hart. Oh sorry, Supervisor Hart.
Please. Could Dr. Doronoso or Dr. Anzorg please speak directly to that public comment? This is the challenge of democracy is people have a right to say what they think but they don't necessarily know what they're talking about and it's important to have accurate information in the public sphere so if Dr. Doronoso or Dr. Anzorg could please speak to the public commenters This information, I'd appreciate it.
Yes, I feel compelled to respond. What was stated that the common cold other coronaviruses turn positive on our current PCR test is incorrect. That is absolutely not true. There's really no cross reactivity to other coronaviruses with our more sensitive platforms. We are also not just using PCR tests, we are using antigen tests in addition to PCR tests that are Helping us defining if there is actual virulent matter in the individual and therefore, the risk of contagiousness.
No biological test is 100%. However, sensitivity and specificity of our current PCR tests are very, very high in the 95 to 98% ranges depending on the manufacturer. So there is not a single There are no reputable immunologists or virologists who disputes the validity of our testing platforms and the WHO, the CDC and the State Health Department are all in the same boat.
And I find it concerning that unscientific Claims are being propagated like that. And I would encourage the public to please rely on reputable resources for their information, not from social media or from outliers but from reputable information sources like the CDC, the WHO and the state health departments. Thank you.
Thank you, Dr. Anzor. And to that point it does remain important for people to continue to get tested because in the circumstances that Dr. De Reynoso spoke about us getting to the yellow tier we ended up at 2.1% instead of 2% that would have allowed us to advance to the yellow tier today at least to begin the count of the two week time period And had we had a little bit more testing, we would have gotten the extra bump that probably would've moved us down. Testing is dropping off as people have gotten vaccinated and others do not see the urgency but it's still very helpful for the state's calculation. It could have made the difference this week and if people can continue to do that particularly folks who haven't been vaccinated.
And it's very interesting this dilemma that we have with the CDC direction in the state's guidance and we're in this transition zone But fact remains that by different measures, 40 percent of the population have not been vaccinated yet. So there still is risk of transmission amongst those people and if you haven't been vaccinated, your health is at risk still. And yet we're in this place where people who are vaccinated legitimately don't necessarily want to be wearing masks anymore but we can't tell who's been vaccinated and who's not been vaccinated so A little bit of caution, a little bit of diligence still as we get to the June 15th deadline could go a long way to really stamping out the presence of this virus reducing it to a level that's much more manageable.
This last percentages are important and I just want to add that to the conversation.
Thank you Supervisor Hart. Supervisor Williams?
1:14 – 1:176 turns
Part of our public is anxious to get rid of their masks and part of our public is scared that not enough folks are vaccinated so they don't want to get rid of their masks. The best way to get both groups to the place where they're at happiest would be if more people got vaccinated so that people could get rid of their masks by June 13th with less fear and less actual danger.
You know, I think the danger level is very low right now but we still have The unknown of the level of the issues of the variants, how transmissible they are. There seems like there's a new variant every other week and you know the best way for us to eliminate the uncertainty is for more people to step up and get vaccinated now it's easier than ever to do so.
And I agree, and I think that's where we have plenty of vaccines. So anybody who wants one in Santa Barbara County can get one. And I think the CDC guidelines is actually the compromise position for those people that are afraid. You know, those people that are afraid that if somebody's not wearing a mask that they're going to infect them. It's been six weeks since Texas ended their mask mandate and since as of Sunday it was the first time they had zero COVID deaths statewide Fewest COVID cases in over 13 months, lowest seven-day COVID positivity rate ever and the lowest hospitalizations in 11 months. That was six weeks after removing the mandate as a whole as of Sunday so I mean those things That's a pretty big sample size the state of Texas and I know that different jurisdictions are different, you know there's different behaviors.
There's this weather conditions. There's a different regulatory schemes but again, I think that the state should act quickly they should not wait till June 15th to release the mask mandate for those people who are vaccinated it's an incentive again we should have carrots. This is how we get people to behave In certain directions and so I'm hopeful that we as a state move in that direction moving forward. And that concludes my thoughts, so with that I'll take a motion to approve item D1.
Move approval
second any further discussion. OK hearing none Madam Clerk you please call the roll
Roll-call vote Passed 3–0 Move approval second any further discussion. OK hearing none Madam Clerk you please call the roll · 1 under review
Show transcript
Motion passes unanimously.
Thank you all right next item up is departmental item number two madam clerk will you please read that item in the record.
1:17 – 1:2012 turns
Chair Nelson and members of the board departmental item number two is from the treasurer tax collector it is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the California Municipal Finance Authority CMFA financing of tax exempt private activity notes on behalf of Westmont College
Okay, I believe we have Treasurer Tax Collector Mr. Hagan here with us.
Good morning Chair Nelson and members of the Board. This item today before you is a TEFRA hearing for Westmont College. Section 147 F of the Internal Revenue Code provides the process that allows non-profit 501c3 organizations the ability to access municipal markets for debt issuances This is a refinance of a previous issue from 2016 that the County Board of Supervisors held a deferred hearing for back then.
Originally, it was an $80 million issuance. This item today is a reissuance of their 2016 notes. This was heard by the Debt Advisory Committee in April and it was approved for recommendation to your board We have members from CMFA, which will be the issuer of this debt. I believe it is Ben Barker from CMFA and Doug Jones from Westmont College is also here to answer any questions you may have. I just want to remind you that you are holding the public hearing as a prerequisite of this financing but The county does not incur any liability for the notes or for the repayment of those notes. It does not affect our credit rating in any way, and so I say Doug and Ben are both here to answer any questions.
All right thank you. Any questions from board members? Madam Clerk is there any public comment on this item?
Chair Nelson and Members of the Board we have no requests to speak on this item
All right Mr. Jones did you want to make any comments?
Chair Nelson, members of the board I have nothing further to add thank you so much Mr. Hagan for your description there. Thank you for being here
all right with no questions no public comment can i get a motion to approve this item?
I move staff recommendations A through C.
Second. Any further discussion on this item Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll.
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0 move staff recommendations A through C. Second. Any further discussion on this item Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll.
Show transcript
Motion passes unanimously.
Okay bringing us on to department item number three. Madam Clerk will you please read that item into the record
1:20 – 1:2515 turns
Chair Nelson and members of the board, departmental item number three is from behavioral wellness. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the amendment of a fee ordinance relating to published charges for inpatient and outpatient mental health services.
All right, Dr. Blakehorn?
Yes. Can we have the slides up on the screen please? Good morning, Supervisors. This item is to review Behavioral Wellness Department published charges for our services. Next slide. These are charges that are charged to non Medi-Cal clients for psychiatric health facility, crisis stabilization unit and outpatient mental health services. Very few clients actually pay these published charges as non-medical clients are screened based on a state developed sliding fee schedule and pay on an annual fee based on their income. Published charges affect medical reimbursement rates for our county mental health services as reimbursement is limited to the lowest of actual costs or to the published charges So your board last approved behavioral wellness published charges in June of 2020.
Next slide. These are the recommended published charges for the fiscal year 21-22 I'm not going to read through them, but you can see their mode service function codes service description and the recommended charge per day per hour or per minute. Next slide. Our recommendations is that today you receive and file this presentation, consider and approve the introduction or first reading of an ordinance amending the Santa Barbara County Department of Behavioral Wellness published charges for inpatient and outpatient mental health services.
We read the title and waive the full reading of the ordinance, and then we continue the item to June 15th 2021 to consider the adoption upon the second reading of this presentation. And then on June 15, consider and adopt the second reading of the ordinance amending the Santa Barbara County Department of Behavioral Wellness published charges for inpatient and outpatient mental health services effective 30 days after adoption.
I believe that's the last slide.
All right thank you Dr. Glickhorn. Any questions from the board? Madam Clerk do we have any public speakers?
Chair Nelson and members of the board we have no request to speak on this
item.
Supervisor Williams you had a
question?
So just make sure I'm getting this right that the fees are going down because the economies of scale are improving because of getting out of COVID related procedures and capacity limits and so forth.
I'm sorry was that a question?
Yeah it's a Well, or a verification that I understand this. What I got out of the staff report in your presentation was that these fee decreases are due to the fact that we will have better efficiencies, better economies of scale and our costs will go down because I guess less COVID related impediments.
Supervisor Williams through the chair We have to publish these fees on an annual basis so that the charges related to our actual costs are published and recorded in the public. So, the structure of us coming to the board. Having a first reading and second reading and so forth is a requirement so that we are allowed to charge the fees that are reflected in the presentation. Variation in those charges, whether they're decreases or increases year-to-year, are based on the actual cost of what was encountered in the prior fiscal year. So it does vary per type of service and some of those may be up and some of those maybe down.
Thank you, Doctor. I'd entertain a motion on this item. So moved.
Second
any further discussion? Madam Clerk, we please call the roll.
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0 moved. Second any further discussion? Madam Clerk, we please call the roll.
Show transcript
1:26 – 1:3910 turns
motion passes unanimously
all right moving along next item is departmental item number four madam clerk will you please read that item in the record
Chair Nelson and members of the board, departmental item number four is from community services and human resources. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding an update in policy direction on advancing equity and inclusion.
Good morning. Can you hear me?
We can.
Great. Good morning, Chair Nelson and members of the board. I am Maria Elena Deguevara and I am the County Director of Human Resources. My purpose this morning is to provide an update on the board approved join framework and provide a context for next fiscal year's action on the joint framework. Collaborating with me this morning is George Chapin Community Service Director who will report on his department's work to advance practices that address racial and social equity, as well as the opportunity for the board to provide direction to staff on distribution of remaining equity funds allocated by the board during fiscal year 2021 budget hearings.
George will speak after me, along with a few community members who will also speak regarding their participation on the county's equity initiatives. Next slide please. Here is the flow of today's presentation. Can you put the next line up please? I'm not sure I can see the, do you have the agenda up?
We
do. Okay so um the agency government alliance for okay you can go to the next slide now Okay, the Agency Government Alliance for Race Equity titles their race and equity program The Year of Learning. And that's a very appropriate title. We didn't go through that program nevertheless this year has indeed been a year of learning. Google CEO Sundar Pichai summed up Our collective experience nicely when he said a diverse mix of voices leads to better discussions, decisions and outcomes for everyone.
Next slide please. So I'll be giving you the update for our joint framework next slide please. So in December of 2020 the board approved this four phased race equity and inclusion framework that you see here. We titled it join, join hands open hearts and minds ignite action and navigate change my updates for today will focus on phase one which reflects this fiscal year's activities and then I'll provide a sneak peek into phases three and four for next year's activities. Next slide So here's a closer look of phase one. The purpose of this phase was to help the organization prepare for the change process. In other words, we were laying the foundation from which to build. This included getting an understanding of terms definitions but also information about the organization.
The executive leaders completed an organizational equity assessment. I do want to remind you that we purposely focused our attention on the organization's leadership in this phase. Research finds that senior leaders play a critical role in building a race equity culture as leaders support their teams and examining issues of racism, And leaders also foster the conditions that can shift mindsets towards race equity through the policies and practices that they implement and model.
So all county executive leaders and board sponsors were invited to participate in the six leadership learning labs, as well as the equity assessment. As you can see from this slide, we accomplished what we set to accomplish in phase one. Next slide, please. Here in phase two we continue with the learning process and as recently as last Friday, we presented the leadership organization equity assessment findings. Now I wasn't able to include the results of those findings for this presentation. However, I did want to share that the assessment has identified the following tools that I'll mention in a few moments The tools and needs as expressed by the leaders. And they were one, equity education and training, dialogue and stories specifically from the perspectives of people of color.
Equity tool kits and resources, inclusive recruitments and culture change. And I'll talk a little bit more about these as I discuss next year's activities. Also in phase two, we have moved to the next tier of leaders and managers and have begun engaging them in this process. So as you can see here, we will be able to complete all that we wanted to complete in phase two this fiscal year.
Next slide. So here are phases three and four that are scheduled to go live in the coming fiscal year. These are trends Transitional phases as we move from the center to the outer and begin to engage more stakeholders in the transformation process. And get more in depth in our assessment of structure, systems and services. There will be four key activities involved in these phases and they are as follows. Next slide.
One We're going to operationalize the board's commitment to race, equity and inclusion. I might remind the board that last year you adopted the county's commitment statement to race, equity and inclusion. These statements that you see here come directly from that commitment statement. And what we hope to do is to have these become our guides as we focus beyond The joint framework, and so we hope that you'll see more of these throughout the next fiscal year.
Next slide please to. We hope to. Well, we need to organize ourselves in a manner that can support an equity culture in a sustainable and integrated way. We heard this from our leadership as I said, we just got the findings last Friday and that was 1 of the last things that our leadership identified that we needed a culture shift. And so we know that we're engaging in a lot of activity. The question is how do we organize ourselves in a way to have the highest impact?
We must think of how to leverage the momentum built thus far by the criminal justice team, be well public health community services and several other departments that are already making strides in the race equity and inclusion direction. And it's going to take a collective and integrative approach to have the impact and not just good intentions. Next slide.
The work of building a race equity culture demands an intentional approach, and my research has led me to literally dozens of resources available to guide us with specific best practices. Equity toolkits is one such best practice So we hope to utilize equity toolkits to lay out a process, to guide the development implementation and evaluation of policies initiatives programs to address the impacts on racial equity. While these assessments might be diagnostic now, the intent is for them to become part of our process and be very similar to what environmental impact studies have become they're expected That's how they become institutionalized by using race, racial equity toolkits. County departments can develop equity plans which identify strategies and the resources to intentionally disrupt unintended inequities.
As you heard me say earlier, county leaders identified the need for such tool kits and we plan on meeting that need in this coming year. Next slide. And Finally, we will disaggregate data. These are tools we have developed and are continuing to fine tune. They help us understand the current state of the organization and help us prioritize where to focus resources and time.
The data dashboard and scattergram that you see here are only examples of what is available by department and at the county level. These visual analytics are interactive and can assist when making decisions. County HR utilized existing tools in software to create these, and in the making of these tools we found that we had gaps. That's the beauty of taking this kind of stock. We find out where our weak spots are and what we need to do to strengthen it so we will county HR will continue to improve our data collection techniques And therefore, we hope to continue making better decisions as we get better at collecting the data. We know we're going to get better at our decision-making processes and we're also going to make the commitment to disaggregate data because often when the data is kept at the aggregate level, we can mask inequities and we're going to want to stay very vigilant about that very point.
Next slide. So the board approved $135,000 for this effort. And we've expended 43,000. Sorry there's a typo there it's not 100,000 obviously we have $92,000 balance and we think that that's going to carry us well into the next fiscal year however beyond that you'll probably be hearing from me next budget cycle but we won't know that until we know what the outcomes of next year's efforts will be so next slide.
To summarize, our next steps will be to continue with phase three and four of the JOIN framework. With special attention to how we operationalize the county's commitment to race equity and inclusion so that it guides our efforts beyond JOIN. How we organize ourselves so we integrate and unify all current county efforts into a sustainable systemic approach We are going to utilize the many available resources so we can develop our own toolkits and assessments that result in department equity plans. And we're going to de-aggregate data, so it's digestible, understood and relevant to make better decisions.
Building a race equity and inclusive culture is not a linear path. To drive equity deep into systems and structures takes focused work Resources both human and financial, and time. Lots of time. Culture change requires a ton of support from all levels of the organization in creating a sustainable and integrative approach will be key. The process that I've laid out might seem slow and the lack of tangible outcomes up to now may be frustrating But I believe it's the cumulative impact of all of these efforts that will net us the progress, move mountains and build greatness.
And in the unforgettable words of MC Hammer, this work is too legit to quit. This concludes my presentation and I'm prepared to answer any questions before I pass the mic on to Director George Chapin.
Okay, questions from the board for HR? Supervisor Williams.
I would only say as since I actually have met MC Hammer, Oakland resident we worked on a political campaign together he would be very happy that you used his quote for a racial equity and inclusion presentation
1:39 – 1:5017 turns
Okay further questions? All right let's go ahead. Supervisor Hartman.
Well I just wanted to thank Everyone who's participated and organized the joint process, it has been a profound experience. We can only have two supervisors so it's Supervisor Hart and myself but it has been a process of learning, of sharing, of telling stories and really understanding Thank you. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Supervisor Hartman.
Mr. Chair, this
is
Supervisor
Hart. Yes, Supervisor Hart please.
Yeah I just want to agree with my colleague Supervisor Hartman and I want to thank CEO Miyasato and Maria Elena DeGuevara for taking the lead on the join effort as Supervisor Hartman described this is really a transformational process we're trying to build a new culture in the County of Santa Barbara and Ms. DeGuevara's very intentional We're going to use the best practices possible to advance racial equity in county government. And the results from the leadership survey were very, very encouraging and also kind of sobering at same time. The thing that stuck in my mind was that there was great receptivity amongst county government leadership to this work of racial inclusion and equity They're on a five-point scale, 5 being the highest support for that.
The results were about a 4.5 so there really is a leadership team that is ready to do this work willing and committed to doing it but there are also very troubling instances that were described in the survey of us falling short of that goal and some of the practices We are very sobering. It really does underscore how important this work is, how necessary it is and how ready we are to begin and make tremendous progress in this regard.
Some of the language that's used when discussing diversity and equity can be very loaded or very maybe controversial. How does this approach work with working with our management employees to walk through those steps? I know some people might not agree with all the things that are being described as solutions, and how do we deal with diversity of opinion when it comes to our management with that? Are we making people sign value statements and whatnot? I'm somewhat concerned, not because I really trust our leadership here at the county. But you know what does that look like? You know is this I want to stay away from group thought and make sure that we're having conversations that are important so we can move the ball forward. I know some of these things can also get partisan and that's difficult as well.
So can you help me with that?
Hi, Chair Nelson. Those are great questions and I'm going to ask Ms. DeGuevara to step in but one of the most important parts of this joint effort is it's unlike any other race diversity inclusion effort I've been through and Ms. DeGuevara she said she spent 20 probably 30 years of her career in diversity inclusion types of activities but this time is different and I have to credit her because she said we need to start from the inside out And part of that is the trainer that we picked, World Trust. They're not One, they're going through language. What does the language mean? But also we spent a lot of time on strategic questioning which is about how do you open yourselves up and really learn from others and their experience and your own experience.
And it's not blaming, it's not pointing the finger at anybody. It's just strategic questioning about being open to asking questions and receiving information back. And we've spent a couple of sessions on that. That's the core of that program was strategic questioning. So in that way, I think it's coming from a different framework. And even the trainer who said her point of all of doing this is race equity inclusion, et cetera. But really her point of doing this is so there's peace and that people can thrive.
She's always taken it from that larger perspective. And Ms. DeGuevara if you want to add anything, I'd appreciate that.
Yes, I think what I will add The point of this is not to impart your perspective, but rather to seek to understand before being understood. Right? And so it's to learn about the other side and so it's through the strategic questioning To ask the questions is to learn more about the others. And so what struck me about the assessment results is that that's what people were saying, it's dialogue storytelling and so it's about hearing from others listening seek to understand before being understood and so this isn't about.
Me in. Telling you what you should be thinking. It's for me to say through the questioning process is to learn more. Now that really is a lot of it, so it's and then in doing so I learned about myself. So it's very interesting process and so that's what we hope to achieve is having more dialogue. And so how do we get people share about themselves and ask about others.
That's great, thank you I really appreciate that and just seek to understand I mean it's one of the habits of the seven habits of highly successful people so I think it's a great framework for this discussion that we're having these are values that transcend many things in this world. Supervisor Williams?
I also want to take it from the perspective of something that was revealed by that dashboard screenshot you put on there, which is that 72% of our employees are younger than all of us here. And look at it, look at that stat. They're all millennials and Gen Zers. We may see a lot of baby boomers still here in department heads but in among these younger generations you can see this in data they increasingly prize and value a workplace Where there is discussion and there is inclusion and efforts of inclusion like this. So I don't, I think it's important number one just because it is important to Act with inclusion as an organization, but I'm also raising up the point that it's important. It helps make it a valued workplace for people of younger generations actually regardless of their race which is a great sign about the future of race relations in the state of California.
Thank
you
Supervisor Levinino. Some of you know, I spent part of my youth at a Catholic boys boarding school. And one of the things we did at night is really relative to this presentation that's at the end of every night there was an examination of conscience and one of our teachers would lead us through this somewhat prayerful examination of where you are in your life and what you've been doing. And sometimes it can be, the first thing you have to do going into it is humble yourself, right? And realize that not everything that we're doing has been...
We don't have a stellar record everywhere and that's coming into this for me realizing that as we have more of these conversations You know, as Supervisor Williams says we're a little bit older. I'm probably whiter than most of our employees and as an older white male you do have different blind spots. And it's at some point... It's just getting to the position where we remove that defensive stance that I'm trying to do Listen more and like our director said to understand.
So, you know I think it's really incumbent upon us in order to lead on this issue that we have to get our own house in order so I'm 100% supportive of this and just really impressed with the work that's being done. It's not just work to say that we've done this and that we're working on it, I can tell that we've got the right people working on it that are 100% bought in.
And I think it's gonna serve our county and our constituents much better as we move forward.
Thank you Supervisor Lavenino All right, I think we have Mr. Chapschins up next on this item.
1:50 – 1:578 turns
Good morning Chair Nelson and members of the board can you hear me okay?
We can.
Okay great. First we'd like to express gratitude to the many county communities who've shared insight to help shape CSD's initiatives to facilitate more equitable approaches to service We've learned a lot about the tremendous work being carried out by community members and appreciate the opportunity to further support their vision. We have three members of the community who will speak during this presentation, but also want to point out that I have Sarah York Rubin and Ashley Watkins who worked on these issues and they're available for questions when you have those.
Following community feedback regarding existing efforts to document heritage spaces, staff wants to acknowledge and support those efforts and help provide resources for communities to document and commemorate their culture. We have Suzanne Obando, an intern studying Ethnic Studies at Santa Barbara City College here to share a little bit about her experience working on this initiative with our Office of Arts & Culture.
Suzanne?
Hello everyone! I'm Susana Vero Bondo. As said, I intern with the Arts and Culture Department. I'm going to talk about the importance of the intersection of art and community. Art has always been a tool for spiritual psychological work, emotional connection, and many other central concepts of the human mind because of this ability it has and currently helps platform The Voiceless reclaim and celebrate culture and foster bonds within the community Historically, art has been used to express the emotions of different communities providing space for accessibility where there was none. You see that from Dada expressing the trauma of World War I and then Felix Gonzalez-Torres who is a Cuban American conceptual artist who uses his art to reflect his experience with AIDS but also AIDS within the LGBT community in the 1980s From the Victorian era, with their expression and reflection of death and mortality.
Access to opportunities like this is critical to students in the community because it allows one to experience the profound influence art has in society and culture. It has a great potential in equity and diversity and inclusion Seeking to understand opens the door for all these things. And as said in the beginning of this presentation, storytelling and dialogue are essential elements to seeking to understand and art itself can create that space by bonding with the community and fostering that connection.
Thank you very much for hearing me. I really appreciate being an intern here and have enjoyed the work fantastically.
The Equity Advisory and Outreach Committee was established by our Sustainability Division to increase community awareness and participation in various climate-related planning efforts across the county. Staff has reached out to marginalized and vulnerable communities to ensure they are represented in these planning efforts. I'd like to introduce Michelle Sevilla, Chair of the EAOC who will provide her thoughts on the work of the committee.
Thank you. Thank you, Chair Nelson and members of the board for providing time to the Equity Advisory and Outreach Committee abbreviated as EAOC. As mentioned my name is Michelle Irabon Sevilla and I serve as chair for the EAOC and Ana Rosa Rizzo-Santino is our vice chair. County staff led by Ashley Watkins and our facilitators Whitney Wilkinson and Garrett Wong have demonstrated Thoughtfulness and sensitivity throughout building this diverse coalition of community-based organizations that is representative of lesser heard, underserved groups across the county.
In EAOC we have fellow colleagues who identify in the following communities black indigenous people of color LGBTQIA disabled senior or elderly immigrants And rural residents and more. The EEOC received presentations and opportunities to become integrated in county and statewide work, including SBCAG's Connected 2050 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy, the County's Active Transportation Plan, the County's 2030 Climate Action Plan Workshops, and more.
Members have already begun to provide feedback to the county staff on improving outreach and increasing accessibility to participate in the development of these plans. EAOC has also provided space to support community members' efforts on planning for climate. On Saturday, the Green New Deal Committee of the Central Coast Climate Justice Network who has some overlap and some membership in the EAOC hosted their Junta Grande, a celebration of over a year's worth of work, gathering among community to share priorities and visions of a climate-friendly future to be embodied in the Central Coast Green New Deal.
We cannot underestimate the importance of a role like the AEOC holds in planning for climate change. SB 379 in 2016 requires a community's general plan to address risks exacerbated by climate change in their next safety element update We understand that these climate risks are deeply felt by the most vulnerable in our community, who also struggle the most in recovery.
This includes but is not limited to the groups I mentioned earlier. Therefore planning an alignment with SB 379 and beyond demands equity as a core value and critical framework. With equity at the forefront and guidance from members of the EAOC, our goal is to ensure That no one feels like an afterthought. That everyone is equally, deeply integrated in planning our community's future and drawing community in like the EAOC is the first step to doing so.
Thank you.
Thank you Ms. Sevilla. Our listen and learn is being shaped in real time by community consultation and we're grateful to work with Poet Laureate Emeritus Sojourner Kincaid Roll who was recently recognized as a Congressional Woman of the Year. She has served the county community for many years and is here today to speak to the importance of having open and honest engagement with and amongst artists and cultural practitioners, and the significance of public initiatives in their work.
Ms. Roll?
1:57 – 2:062 turns
Good morning, and thank you very much for inviting me to be a part of this presentation to the board. I am particularly uplifted by all that I've heard so far in the presentation. I would like to say that I'm particularly appreciated hearing the report from Human Services in terms of many of the initiatives that they're doing for an inclusion Dialogue and I particularly of my great, um practitioner dialogue facilitation. I would say part of my work in the county has been both as an artist, uh, as a past member of the, uh. The County Arts Commission. Um And also as you know, as the group and organizational facilitators, so I am looking very much forward to supporting some The work that's going to go forward in the future. I think it's so important that we're living in this time, I would say for this past year we have had this dual relationship with the community dealing with the effects of the pandemic as well as addressing other issues of continued racial inequity In our community and I, I am pleased to hear that this has been taken on as a county wide objective to have a racially equitable society created for as a part of our culture.
So proud to be a part of Santa Barbara County and helping in this effort. It is important, specifically I think to the arts community because we are so often reflect the sensibilities and the needs of the community through art. And so I look forward to working with other artists throughout the community. I look forward to working with arts practitioners, non-profit providers of cultural programs. All, I think all of these endeavors need to be viewed and seen through their current relevance. The lack of traditional representation, the underrepresentation The fact that we have often come forward with a request to increase our racial representation and understanding. And not just racially, but I think across the culture in terms of intergenerationally, multiculturally all of the different aspects that go to make up our community.
So I just want to say I look forward to the work that I'm going to be doing in this area and hope that our next reports will reflect some progress in that respect, because I feel that the voice of the community is so important in the public deliberations and whatever decisions are made about public presentations should have the inclusion effort as a part of it. So thank you very much for this opportunity to speak to the ongoing work that will be done. Thank you.
Finally, the support of art by local communities of color will help provide small grants to Juneteenth celebrations as well as to further advance artistic visions identified by communities through the listen and learn process. Next slide please. During December Board of Supervisors meeting on equity, the board directed CSD to return with options for distributing $270,800 in equity funds. In review of public comment During and following the December 1, 2020 meeting community members voiced priorities that include the following.
One funds should be prioritized for external groups and organizations rather than internal county activities. Two local community members should play a prominent role in determining how funds are allocated. Three of the process to apply for funding should be streamlined or the process should support cooperation With this input in mind, staff shares the following options for board consideration.
Next slide please. These are recommendations for distribution of the remaining equity funds. Option one would be to contract with the Fund for Santa Barbara to administer a county equity support program and distribute equity funds. Option two would be to develop an internal county process led by staff to distribute equity funds And option three, it could be a hybrid process combining option one and two to distribute equity funds.
Next slide please. So for option one this would be the contract with the fund for Santa Barbara to administer the county equity support programs and distribute equity funds. The equity funds would be administered through the fund for Santa Barbara. The fund has over 40 years of providing equity-based grant funding and has the experience trust and infrastructure in place to administer equity funding with impact and efficiency.
They have established a trusted community table. The fund has a grant making committee made up of a diverse set of community members, each with a different perspective and background to collectively determine funding allocations. The fund is currently leading the region's first regional equity study which is anticipated to be complete in September 2021. I'll describe further the equity study in more detail later in my presentation Part of the fund services would also include presenting outcomes from the Central Coast Equity Study to county leadership.
The fund would share best practices and operating models for community-led funding, investment and grant making with county staff. This option would support continued assessment of current county funding practices and increase the County's capacity to support community visioning and leadership regarding diversity equity and inclusion goals. This option could be expedited relatively quickly and would not require additional staff resources beyond contract development.
If this option selected, the fund would work with the county to ensure the source of funding is appropriately recognized during the grant making process. Next slide please. Option two, community service staff have reviewed county processes and oversight bodies such as the Human Services Commission Arts Commission To either expand the scope of an existing commission or create a new commission responsible for coordinating DEI initiatives and creating a process for distribution of equity-based funding, staff estimates this would require full time position with the appropriate education experience with facilitating community dialogue and grant making to support diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Staff recommends that this funding for the FTE be ongoing and come from source other than the remaining 270,000 in equity funds. This option will take time and resources developed potentially 6 to 12 months. Next slide please. Of course Option 3 is a combined approach that would incorporate elements of Option 1 & 2 An initial round of funding could be distributed through a contract with the Fund for Santa Barbara should the board want to distribute the $270,000 in the coming months.
This would give the county time to identify funding and hire staff person dedicated to addressing DEI work and expanding scope when existing commission or creating a new commission. The staff member would also be responsible for coordinating countywide DEI initiatives. This option would enable the county again to quickly distribute funds while working towards a more long-term approach.
Next slide, please. For any of these options and for future policy considerations staff recommends that the results of the Central Coast Equity Study be considered and utilized. The fund, USC's Equity Research Institute and the UCSB Bloom Center on Poverty, Inequality and Democracy which is anticipated to be complete in September 2021. The aim of the equity study is to produce equity-based actionable data to support policy and system change efforts in the Santa Barbara and Ventura County regions.
The fund and the UCSB Bloom Center conducted 17 community consultations with over 130 key community stakeholders drafting an extensive summary of key findings and impact indicators. Areas of particular focus include policies related to housing and homelessness, climate justice, racial justice, access to health care, and education as key areas of interest in better understanding core areas of opportunity when reimagining what a more equitable region might look like.
Marcos Vargas, Fund Executive Director and Patricia Solorio, Director of Grantmaking are both here to address any questions about the fund or the equity study you may have. Next slide please. This completes our presentation and we look forward to your comments questions and directions thank you.
2:07 – 2:1211 turns
Thank You Mr. Chapchin. Any questions from the board before public comment? All right Madam Clerk
Chair Nelson and members of the board, we have two requests to speak on this item. We are going to begin with Andy Caldwell to be followed by Alex Espinoza-Kulik.
Chair Nelson, members of the board can anybody say mission creep? This is critical race theory and bias training disguised as management training Can you really sit back and think that this is what you were campaign for or why you were elected versus fixing potholes and paying off your $1 billion plus debt? This is the work of nonprofits and academics, not county taxpayer funded government services.
The fundamental problem that you have in society is not that we are a racist society, but the fact that it's darn hard to get young kids, minority kids especially involved in STEM enrollment. There used to be a staff that she'd referred to that had less than 10% of Hispanic males in this region would sign up for STEM classes. We don't believe that America is structurally racist We also find it hard to believe that Ms. DeGuevara is HR Director and she couldn't just simply reach out to and hire more minorities to work for the county? Does that take hundreds of thousands of dollars in navel gazing, to have her hire more minorities and for you to promote more minorities? You just hired a County Council, why 20 years of experience did you consider her race Was that one of the things you considered in hiring your county council today was race?
Why not, if in fact you're spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to influence yourself to do just that. Victor Davis Hanson talked about all societies and decline fixate on impossible postmodern drains As a way of disguising their inability to address pre-modern problems, leaders who are unwilling or unable to address these problems compensate by posing as philosopher kings who cheaply lecture on existential challenges over which they have no control.
Daniel Greenfield wrote this about environmentalism, but since this is mixed up today with critical race theory. He says it's a secular religion for a secular age. Bureaucracy as its priesthood activism is its sainthood. It's form of missionary work and central practices spreading awareness. The missionary activities invariably require their practitioners to violate the central tenet of living a simpler life.
You're spending hundreds of thousands of dollars grasping at a straw, when in reality it's easier to build strong children than to repair broken men.
Thank you Mr. Caldwell.
We will now go to Alex Espinosa-Kulik and we just had a late additional request by Chelsea Lancaster who will be our final speaker.
While the clerk is looking at that, we'll go ahead and officially close public comment. So those will be our last two speakers.
And Chair Nelson, members of the board before you did that I did have a raised hand by Lee Heller although we do not use the raise hand feature my staff will reach out to her and see if that indicated that she wanted to speak on this item thank you fair
enough
and Alex you can please proceed with your comments thank you
Thank you. Good morning everyone, thank you for your time and the discussion of this important issue I want to start by thanking the Board of Supervisors for your hard work and dedication on addressing equity issues that affect our cultural sector that affect our infrastructure that affect every aspect of our communities so much appreciated for all of the hard work that has gone into advancing equity Throughout the county and partnering with those organizations that have been leading these efforts for many, many years prior to that. I wanted to share as the Executive Director for Corazon del Pueblo at the Cultural and Creative Arts Center of the Santa Maria Valley that we support proposed option one to work with the fund for Santa Barbara to distribute these funds We have received grants from them in the past and have partnered with many other organizations that have also been a part of their grant making process.
And it reflects the values of our community, the diversity of perspectives that are present in our community and really has been honed over years of refinement and relationship building to truly reflect the values of equity and putting those into practice in an effective way So I believe that pursuing that option will be a truly effective use of these funds. So, I urge your support for that particular way of moving forward and thank you again for your time and for being here today.
Thank you.
And we will now go to Chelsea Lancaster to be followed by Lee Heller who will be our final speaker.
2:12 – 2:189 turns
Hello,
everyone. Good morning wonderful to see so many familiar faces on the screen sort of wanted to echo the comments made earlier. Wanted to thank and appreciate the county for taking seriously this moment, this movement, this work. Also wanted to just sort of counter some of what was said earlier by Andy Caldwell. Critical race theory runs counter to the myth of American exceptionalism. And I know that that is something that the right really wants Keep moving.
But we I just wanted to sort of be here. I didn't prepare anything, I apologize but just wanted to be here to uplift what's happening. I also serve on the Board of Directors with the Fund for Santa Barbara. So I've been bearing witness to the incredible work that the fund has been doing countywide for over 40 years now and also the internal work that we're doing to really examine our own biases So that work has been really meaningful and the fund for Santa Barbara has been a trusted table in our community for a very long time. So just wanted to sort of uplift that, of course following the lead of black indigenous and people of color in community and what they feel comfortable with and what they feel should happen but just wanted to sort of uplift that and again just show my appreciation For all the work that y'all are doing.
And Suzanne, I'm really glad you're at this table. Suzanne is an incredible leader in our community so great to see you here. Sojourner just wanted to also congratulate you on the really incredible well-deserved recognition that you recently received. Thanks again everyone.
Thank you Miss Lancaster
and we will now go to our final speaker Lee Heller
Chair Nelson and members of the Board, good morning. I also wanted to express my support for what's happening with this approach to genuinely and meaningfully addressing the absence of diversity equity and inclusivity. This is really hard work. I sit on a nonprofit board and we've been talking for years about trying to have more diversity and it's really only what George Floyd's daughter said which is that her daddy changed the world.
His death has pushed us all to truly confront What we are not doing to be truly inclusive with reflecting the needs of all of the members of our community and list the listening that has been described. The genuine effort to look beyond our assumptions is critical, so I want to applaud the county for doing this and continue to do it because I think it's finally going to make the difference we need to make. Thank you.
Thank you, Miss Hiller. Back to the board questions
Mr. Chair, this is Supervisor Hart.
Yes, Supervisor Hart please.
Well I think this has been a really great hearing lots of wonderful comment from the folks who are involved in the Equity Advisory Outreach Committee they're doing tremendous work we really appreciate their commitment to this effort and their creativity and their thoughtfulness because the voices of the community are the key to this being successful And as I think Suzanne or Michelle said, everyone needs to be included in planning our community's future. That's such a great aspirational goal and that's exactly what we're trying to do. I think having the Fund for Santa Barbara as a partner in this effort is a great way to jumpstart this and keep the momentum going. They are a trusted table for the community and I think they will Thank you, Mr.
Chair and members of the board. And I would hope that we would build that capacity in time, I could see the fund for Santa Barbara you know doing this work immediately to get these these dollars out in the community and have those have the leveraging of that take effect. I'd like those those recommendations from the grant making committee. I think it's important to come back to the board because we want to own those choices and make sure that our own input gets added The grants and same thing with the human services allocation. So there's a process there that works really well, but I don't know what the answer is long-term, but I do think it's important for us to consider the implications of making the investment to bring this in house, to work hand in glove with what we're doing Thank you, Supervisor Hartman.
2:18 – 2:266 turns
Well, the first thing I'd like to say is how grateful I am to have collected in one place what we're doing. It makes it much easier, I think for public to understand and for me to explain The second thing is I very much support having the Fund for Santa Barbara do this. When we first had this equity fund discussion, it was very important to me that people of color allocate this money themselves, that they not come to the county and our existing procedures and have to ask for money.
I happen to serve on the Fund for Santa Barbara grant making committee. And it was really a profound experience for me because you actually get trained in how to listen, how not to talk too much, how to frame a discussion in a way that isn't adversarial and then you split up into different small groups And go out and talk to people who are applying for these grants.
And you conduct site visits, and you get to see people throughout the county who are doing tremendous work. And they may not be organized as a non-profit. They may not have a big bank account. And so the Fund for Santa Barbara has the infrastructure to help them build capacity locally, and that's what they're really designed to do. When we look at organizations headed by people of color, they are often underfunded Thank you.
In all my professional career, I like to use existing infrastructure. Why duplicate if we've got something in place that works really well? So I'm very supportive of the Fund for Santa Barbara. Allocating these funds and bringing you back to the board. We contract with many, many different organizations to do this work various kinds of work for the county and I think the fund for Santa Barbara is particularly well suited to do this work on our behalf.
Thank You Supervisor Hartman. Supervisor Williams?
Well, I agree with Supervisor Hart that one of the weaknesses of the model that the county sometimes does is outsources the good work that we do into you know and it makes it Sort of the county's purpose, the county's mission and the county's identity. It diffuses it. It detracts from it. If we can't go forward with an internal model today then I'm very comfortable with Fund for Santa Barbara. I think they're the perfect organization if we are going to outsource this But I just wanted to put out there that I am incredibly uncomfortable with the results of when we outsource.
You know, there is an unevenness sometimes the nonprofit does a great job and sometimes they don't but almost never do the people who are know that it's the county that's helping them. And so, you know, it sort of... It not only means that the county doesn't get credit but I think more often it also means that the county doesn't internalize it as part of its mission and so that's the deeper thing is I feel like we should either have this capability now if we really rolled up our sleeves or we should have the capability.
But I you know, it's possible to convince me that we can't go there today. You know, I guess I'm on the fence on which one of the models to use but I do think it is really important for us to you know, for instance, our you know, I think United Way is an incredible organization but I think that that it was a very, it was a weakness of our rental assistance program for that to be outsourced to another entity.
And that's a lesson for me and I just don't. So, um, I guess I'm really on the fence today about which way to go.
All right. 11, you know, do you have any comments? I know I do.
Go ahead. I'm good either way.
Alright so. You know, I've heard the comments today. This isn't my first choice of how we should spend taxpayer dollars, but I understand that the commitment has been made by this board and I'm willing to support that commitment of those dollars. But I have heard things like everybody needs to be involved in this process. And the inclusion and equity, it shouldn't be partisan. It shouldn't be hostile but I've got concerns when we are looking at using the fund for Santa Barbara because I know that while they may align with some of the values of some of the board members, it doesn't align with the values of the county as a whole.
They've been hostile in some places and up in North County, and I know that there's some resistance there. And if you want to have an inclusionary I'd like to see somebody less partisan than the fund for Santa Barbara. I don't think it would be appropriate for us to use economic development dollars and give that to CoLab to go out there and spend, and I see that's equitable in this situation.
Santa Barbara Foundation, United Way, sure if we need to do something in a temporary measure to get to eventually a county-supported process. That's fine. I can see this eventually being the subcommittee of the Human Services Commission or at least closely connected to that moving forward and so I'm not personally in favor of sending these funds to the fund for Santa Barbara. I think that actually excludes A lot of people who you want to bring into the fold here.
And so that's the message I like to get out there is that there's others out there that you want to have a part of this conversation, but because of the use with a group that's considered at least partisan in my neck of the woods, you have them not feel like they can be a part or be involved. Supervisor Hartman?
2:26 – 2:3611 turns
Point number one, I think we need to launch this program sooner rather than later and so it would be more efficient to use an existing infrastructure. When I served on the Grant Making Committee, we gave a grant to the Kiyama PTA so they could have food and that they could have I would like to Organizations that didn't have all the existing infrastructure themselves and the fund is particularly well suited again to build capacity. I do share the concern about the county getting credit, although that's less of a concern than the work getting done I'd like Broad and reaches people who otherwise aren't connected to county services and the county process. And I can't think of another organization in the county that does that kind of work.
So to respond to that, yes there's probably some great things that they've done but they've also supported defunding the police and other political positions that I think strays from the mission of what we're trying to do with these dollars. I mean those may be a conversation but I think if we're going to have this organization be the adult in the room to be able to send money um in different directions to help different communities than need again I'm not saying I'm willing to support. Um I just say I'm just you know the message that they've been sending doesn't align with what The vision of these funds. If it is really to be inclusive, then we need an inclusive organization. I don't find them the inclusive organization. I understand that there's some groups on my side that aren't inclusive either and I'm working my...I'm committed to working to try to make those groups more inclusive and I hope that my colleagues will do that with other organizations as well but I think right now I don' think the proper entity to bring it forward and I can't support it this time.
I hear what you're saying. And, you know, I think this is a great illustration of the challenge that we have and this is exactly the kind of conversation we need to foster and develop and
get through some of
the language that folks
have about how I think as a practical matter is it's really a challenge to imagine that we would, and it would slow the momentum to build this infrastructure internally in the county. But I do think you know the combination of the hybrid that I talked about that gives the primary outreach and grant making role to the fund, you know, and then brings that recommendation back to the board Should be able to protect, you know your concerns about the ultimate decision making. You know being something that is a consensus amongst the different views on the board and protects that decision-making process by doing it that two step way having them at the hard work in the outreach and evaluation of proposals done by the fund and then ultimately the decision about allocating the grants And then we can decide over the longer term whether we want to build the internal capacity, which I do think is very important for the reasons that Supervisor Williams mentioned.
You know, we don't want this just to be a one-off thing. We want to internalize this. We wanna maintain a commitment to that. So I hope that's a bridge to everybody getting to a place where we can keep this work going forward quickly.
Mr. Chair?
Supervisor Labanino?
Thanks, I actually agree with both of you but for me it's more about compartmentalizing and I've learned. I have to work with a huge coalitions of different organizations across this county. I don't agree with everything that all of them have on their mission statement. And I can understand why you'd have some hesitancy, but for me it's about momentum. And I know how we are in house as far as trying to create something it's going to take a while and if we want to do this right?
Um. You know, um, I just don't see how we could bring this in right away so I just assume. Move forward with the recommendation and then let's build that capacity. And that ability inside and we can always bring it back. You know, and you know if we don't like what's being done. You know we can always course correct but for me it's like at some point. I have to pick and choose who I work with and when we work with them. And I think this actually fits their model pretty well.
All right, thank you Supervisor Lavinia. Before we get a motion go ahead and take a five minute small five minute break and then we'll be back for emotion and any further discussion on this item. Welcome back. We are going to conclude item D4. I think there's been quite a bit of discussion. I think we're ready. Supervisor Hartman?
Oh, I just wanted to clarify something about my role in the grantmaking committee for the Fund for Santa Barbara. It said that it was a 40-year old organization. I served 12 to 15 years ago and have not been involved recently
Thank you very much.
2:37 – 2:4310 turns
Chair, I think this will be helpful. And that is that in the area of contracts there are several exclusions to what might otherwise be a conflict and one of those families of exclusions is at Government Code 1091.5 and a particular exclusion for being an unsalaried member of a non-profit entity community organization, a 501C3. So although supervisor Hartman has disclosed this interest from days gone by, even if it was a present interest, it would not be a prohibited contract conflict.
Thank you Mr. Gazzone. Supervisor Hart?
Yeah I'd just like to try to get us you know to a place where everybody can be on board and and I hope that you know what I was expressing earlier about having a two-step process with the fund you know making the recommendations doing the outreach work and everything and then the Board You know actually making the grants provides that comfort for you Mister chair that in the decisions ultimately are going to be equitable and fair and something you can support so I would make that motion to.
Direct staff to use
Mr. Chair, if I could just wouldn't, if you wouldn't mind maybe we can hear from the fund for Santa Barbara in terms of how they feel about coming back and also just to remind them hybrid models is great it will take some time for us to develop staff and it won't wouldn't be just a subcommittee of the Human Services Commission. I think the work is a lot more than that. I think it's going to take a staff person to really build trust in the community. It's going to take a staff person with special expertise That we may not have internally. We are or human relation wherever it lands, I think is really going to. We're gonna have to recruit someone who does this for a living and is really good at it.
So just just to clarify.
And maybe just to clarify to appreciate Mr Chaptions comments but you know I haven't said anything about the process would be using to internalize this that's its second future conversation has nothing to do with what
All right and to I guess Mr. Vargas?
Yes, well good morning Chairperson Nelson, members of the Board of Supervisors, County staff and all those in attendance. First want to say on behalf of the Fund for Santa Barbara board staff our grant making committee or Youth Making Change board i just want to express how excited we are of the prospects of partnering with the county of Santa Barbara in this important county-wide effort You know, I see this collaboration with the county and the fund is a perfect match. One that's consistent with both the county's commitment to effectively partnering with community organizations and community leaders towards advancing racial equity and the funds long term commitment to addressing the root causes of social inequities by supporting and promoting grassroots civic engagement by individuals and organizations throughout the county.
It's been mentioned several times 40 years of experience in grassroots grant making led by community leaders is one that we've been able to evolve and grow over time. And one where we'd be happy to develop specifically for the county so that we develop collectively the guidelines and criteria moving that forward, also would be very open to maybe one or two of the supervisors sitting in on deliberations of the Grant Making Committee process would be great Also in reference to comments by Supervisor Williams, you know I come from the perspective that no one organization can do it alone and government can't do it alone. We all have to be in partnerships and collaboration and that's been pretty much the model of the Fund for Santa Barbara or whether it be collaborating and working collectively with the Santa Barbara Foundation, the Ventura County Community Foundation, San Luis Obispo Thank you for having me.
and working collaboratively with community-based organizations. I also want to reference as well that the Fund for Santa Barbara is a nonpartisan organization, we're a 501c3 so we adhere to IRS guidelines for advocacy and lobbying and we were very clear not to step beyond those in fact we train other nonprofit organizations on how to adhere to IRS guidelines around lobbying and advocacy. So again we are very excited about the prospects of working with county staff So that together, we can make a dent in addressing issues of inequity and racial injustice in our region.
Thank
you. Thank you Mr. Vargas. CO Miyasato?
Chair Nelson and board members just before you vote on the motion before you which is to how the Fund for Santa Barbara do the vetting process and the selection but bring something back I just wanted to check with Mr. Gazzone about what that means for contracting, because I think the staff's intention was then for 100% of Barbara to have any agreements with the selected entities and so I just asked Mr. Gazzone if the board does approve the final list, what does that mean for our contracts?
Chair and supervisors, I think there is a way to make this work. And I think that the CEO and I had offline discussed is this going to require a series of board contracts with each recipient that funds flow to through the fund for Santa Barbara? And I think there's a way to avoid that through a responsible delegation in the master contract with Fund for Santa Barbara perhaps with a template of what sub agreements we'd want to see out there We'd want to talk with risk management on portions of this, but I think there is a way to make that work and to minimize the overhead and move this along.
2:43 – 2:454 turns
Supervisor Williams? Well, I'm comfortable with this hybrid approach. I think Bob maybe if a supervisor sits in it should be Bob. I'll be glad to. My experience with the fund and particularly the executive director, just for disclaimer I worked for Marcos at a previous non-profit. It's an incredible place to address the systemic issues that lead most response to charity.
Their slogan is change not charity. It is about the idea of addressing issues like poverty, race at its root instead of just papering it over with welfare programs or charity and I think from what I know of you if you saw it closer you might really dig it So I'm comfortable with the fund as the contractor, but with a hybrid approach in an effort to make this a part of an internalization of the change we seek.
Not just outsourcing the change we seek, but making it a part of county work at its core.
All right. Do we have a motion? I guess we do have a motion for Supervisor Hart and this second. So, you know, I've made a commitment to this board that even when I disagree not to take my toys and go home so I will support Supervisor Hart's alternative motion. I'm glad to meet with Mr. Vargas and understand his organization better And maybe also provide for him some perspectives that you know, maybe some blind spots that I can help in that process as well. So Madam Clerk, please call the roll.
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0 motion. I'm glad to meet with Mr. Vargas and understand his organization better And maybe also provide for him some perspectives that you kn
Show transcript
Motion passes unanimously
All right, so I think we can get one more item in before we take our closed session lunch. So Madam Clerk will you read departmental item number five into the record?
2:45 – 3:007 turns
Chair Nelson and members of the board, departmental item number five is from probation. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding juvenile justice planning and realignment implementation.
Good morning Chair Nelson and Supervisors. I'm Tanya Heitman, Chief Probation Officer and with me is Deputy Chief Holly Benton who will be presenting an update to your board regarding the process of the transformational work occurring within our local juvenile justice system as well as the initial plan that's been developed to implement Senate Bill 823 otherwise known as realignment of the Division of Juvenile Justice or DJJ.
Several years ago, we conducted a deep data dive into our juvenile division and identified a number of areas where we wanted to affect change. As these changes have been implemented, we've been tracking their progress and reporting back to the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council or JJCC regularly. I want to acknowledge Chair Nelson and Supervisor Hart for the representation of your board on the council. We very much appreciate their role in this important work Today we would like to update your board with the changes that have been occurring while also providing an overview of what we anticipate to see under realignment.
Although there are additional improvements and continued opportunities for us to work with our partners on behalf of youth, the progress made thus far has been nothing short of amazing. I want to thank Deputy Chief Benton for her leadership And strategically setting forth the roadmap for the division and to express my appreciation for all of the staff within the juvenile division that have embraced the changes, learn new strategies for working with youth and developed new partnerships.
With that I'll turn it over to Deputy Chief Benton so she can go through the presentation with you.
Thank you, Chief Heitman Good morning, Chair Nelson and Supervisors. We appreciate the opportunity to present to your board today. To set the stage for today's presentation it's important to discuss the intent of juvenile probation. Next slide please Our work with youth is intended to identify significant criminogenic needs those needs which are drivers of criminal behavior and address them through targeted interventions including treatment and services This helps to change thinking and behaviors. The goal is to rehabilitate youth using trauma-informed, culturally responsive evidence based approaches.
Juvenile probation officers recognize youth are still learning and developing throughout adolescence and into their early 20s. This is a significant philosophical difference from adult probation which also focuses on treatment but it's much more about compliance with the law and imposing sanctions on repeat offenders. Next slide please. In 2017, as Chief Heitman mentioned and under her leadership the probation department conducted an in-depth juvenile data mining. The results of which were presented to your board in July 2018.
Data analysis showed that our county was trending in the wrong direction in several key areas in comparison with other counties of similar size and demographics. Four examples of this were the under utilization of diversion options, the overuse of detention for youth 14 years of age or younger One-third of youth in juvenile hall were in custody for a technical probation violation, which are violations of probation terms and conditions or rules set by the court.
An overuse of the Los Prietos Boys Camp for lower level offenses, which resulted in over 50% of youth at camp serving commitments on misdemeanor charges. In 2018, the department embarked upon an effort to transform how we worked with youth in our county. I am pleased to report to your board that our efforts over the last three years have yielded measurable positive results both in the trends we examine as well as the systemic changes we have made in our work.
Next slide please. Transformative change required the adoption of evidence-based and best practices for working with juveniles including a focus on positive youth development Building upon these strengths, assets and natural supports instead of focusing on deficits. And an understanding that many of the youth who come into contact with law enforcement have histories of trauma. Our strategies and reforms were wide ranging as you can see from this slide and touched on every area of our juvenile justice system.
Next slide please. Among the positive results we have seen are a 27% reduction in the overall number of youth on probation since 2019, and a 56% overall reduction since 2017. This matters because in the past too many youth were placed on probation for minor offenses or misdemeanors and not enough diversion options were in place. We've had a 32% reduction in the number of supervised misdemeanants.
In 2020, we implemented the Youth Empowerment Services or YES program in partnership with the Council on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse with evaluation provided by UCSB. This program offers direct diversion by referral from law enforcement schools and probation from a list of specified low-level offenses and educational code violations. Services for the youth and family are voluntary and involve screening and referrals into programs to address their needs. 118 youth have been enrolled in the program thus far.
Probation supervised diversion remains at approximately 10% of our supervised population, but we have heard success stories from the YES Program despite some implementation challenges due to COVID, and we hope to grow and sustain the program over the next few years. We have also seen a 56% reduction in technical violations. By carefully scrutinizing each violation and applying non-custodial interventions, we have been able to reduce the use of detention.
In addition, we have used incentives for positive behavior change which has helped to reward and celebrate both incremental change and big successes. We have had a 20% reduction in the use of out-of-home placement in the last few years and an 89% overall reduction since our peak use of placement in 2017 Probations philosophy on the use of out-of-home placement has changed and where youth can be served at home and in their communities, this is best practice. While some youth may find greater success with relative placement or foster families we have greatly reduced the use of congregate care and recommend placement as short term residential programs only for youth with a greatest need including the need for specialty mental health services.
Next slide please Measuring the success of our youth is another important way to evaluate the extent to which programs and services are changing behavior. Locally, we calculate the percentage of juvenile offenders without a new sustained petition for a felony offense at two time points. The first is within one year successfully completing probation. 97% of youth were successful at the one-year mark.
The second point in time calculation is during these term of probation supervision for that major 81% of those that exited supervision and fiscal year 2019 2020 were successful during their term of supervision. These measures show positive results. Going forward in order to examine this data in more depth, we are working toward what we call an apples-to-apples comparison of recidivism regardless of a year's time on probation supervision.
Specifically, this measure is the percentage of youth with a new felony or misdemeanor three years from their start of supervision. This measure will allow us to examine the rates at which youth reoffend in comparable timeframes allowing for greater comparisons of youth and interventions over time. This work is still in progress, but will be completed soon and will help complete the picture of how rates of reoffending have been impacted by our county's current approach to working with supervised youth.
Next slide please. The department has also embraced collaboration and transparency in our work with youth. In 2019 the department received a technical assistance grant from the Annie E. Casey Foundation to implement the Reimagining Juvenile Justice Initiative Our JJ allowed us to form a collaborative cohort of probation and partner agencies to examine our juvenile justice system practices and recommend change strategies.
The department has also developed and shared data on racial and ethnic equity and inclusion in multiple user friendly formats, including its most recent effort with the relative rate index or RRI. The RRI compares youth of different racial groups involved in our local justice system and measures over or under representation at specific decision points. This work has recently expanded to our adult division as well.
The data has been publicly shared at Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council meetings, as well as with the RJJ cohort and other partners. And the department has invited other systems stakeholders to share their data too. This allows for ongoing robust discussions about systemic disparities and impact points where change can be made. We will be bringing a presentation about our it your board on June 15 to discuss that in greater detail.
Many of these initiatives are captured in the county's annual comprehensive multi agency juvenile justice plan or CMJ JP, which is part of the package presented to your board today for your review. This plan highlights the collaborative nature of our work across agencies and disciplines to better serve youth across our county. The goals and objectives adopted as part of this plan outline the county's priorities and focus areas for ensuring public safety through the use of best practices when working with youth.
The plan also outlines a continuum of services and supports, and comprehensive responses which are supported by Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act and Youthful Offender Block Grant funding. Funded strategies include supervision, mental health treatment, treatment provided by community-based organizations, data analysis and outcome measurement, behavioral interventions, youth supports and project work meant to better understand the youth we work with and connect them to meaningful supports.
Next slide please. Juvenile justice continues to evolve and change and responsibilities for youth continue to be realigned to the counties. The most recent example is juvenile justice realignment brought about by Senate Bill 823, which was signed into law in 2020. This legislation provides that the Division of Juvenile Justice will no longer accept youth committed by the counties through juvenile court to DJJ facilities and realigns the responsibility for care custody and supervision of these youths to the counties along with an allocation of funding to provide for these needs.
Each county is required to form a subcommittee of its Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council to develop a plan for working with this population, which we have provided to your board today. Next slide please. The Juvenile Justice Realignment Plan or JJRP includes a brief analysis of youth previously committed to the DJJ from Santa Barbara County as well as descriptions of services and supports we intend to provide for youth who may be ordered to serve secure track commitments in our local facilities.
These services include education, vocational training, life skills, evidence-based treatment for a variety of needs, mental health supports, family engagement and reentry and transition planning. The plan also includes information on data collection and performance measures to assess youth progress and well being. It references discussions with San Luis Obispo and Ventura counties regarding how we can best use our county resources as part of a tri-county solution to working with the more challenging aspects of this population Including our female youth and youth over the age of 21.
In our county, we will be taking an individualized approach to working with each youth committed to the secure track. We will be providing contracted and embedded services as needed according to each use treatment plan rather than creating a cookie cutter program inside our juvenile hall It is important to note that this year's JGRP is brief due to the short timeframe available to develop it and bring it to your board for consideration.
The JGRP was prepared and written by probation department staff with input from the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council work group. The JGRP was subsequently approved by the JJCC and its subcommittee on April 2nd. It was further reviewed by the presiding judge of the juvenile court, the Honorable Arthur A. Garcia on March 25th, and with the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council on April 7th.
While the number of youth committing serious or violent offenses is small in comparison to the number of youth in our county and the number of youth under probation supervision, it is important to note that we are already seeing the impact of this realignment locally. We currently have youth in our care for very serious offenses most notably for youth being held on murder charges.
Additionally although juvenile justice realignment does not officially become operational until July when youth has already been committed to our care for four years in lieu of a commitment to DJJ This drives home the need for changes for our program design and the services provided in order to address these long-term commandments. We have provided both the CMJJP and the JGRP to your board in order to present a complete picture of planning and implementation of juvenile justice services in our county.
These plans are based on the foundations of public safety, balanced with positive youth development, risk needs responsivity, and interventions for behavior change. Our county has a robust continuum of responses to juvenile law enforcement referrals Next slide please. I'd like to close by noting that as the field of juvenile probation continues to evolve and transform. We continue to seek opportunities to transform locally in proactive and forward-thinking ways. We want to lead the change, not just respond to it. As Mary McLeod Bethune once said, we have a powerful potential in our youth and we must have the courage to change old ideas and practices so that we may direct their power toward good ends.
This concludes the presentation and I'm happy to take any questions you may have.
Thank you. Questions from the board? Up in center, Moran.
Supervisor Hart, I don't have any questions but if we're if there aren't any questions. I have a comment.
Yep, we're on the comment.
Well, I just wanna thank Chief Heitman and Ms. Benton for a really outstanding presentation. Every time I interact with the probation department, I come away more convinced about their ability to really collaborate and use data to make decision-making. They're not afraid of multi-agency coordination and collaborations. And just the initiative that Ms. Benton took To go out and identify the funding source of the Casey Foundation to do the reimagining Juvenile Justice Initiative is exactly what we want every department to be doing, you know really taking initiative to fundamentally examine how the work is done in light I want to echo those comments.
3:01 – 3:0311 turns
Sometimes when you've been working in government long enough, you sometimes feel like you're banging your head against some of the same things over and over again. And I never feel that way when I'm working with probation. It's so refreshing. You know just the can-do attitude Thank you Supervisor Williams. All right, I think we'll entertain a motion.
Oh, sorry. Madam Clerk is there any public comment on this item?
Chair Nelson and members of the board we have no request to speak on this item.
Thank you Madam Clerk. Can I get a motion from the Board?
I move that we receive and file this report and adopt A through C of staff recommendations.
Thank You Supervisor Hartman. Second. Okay any further discussion? Hearing none. Madam Clerk will you please call the roll
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0 move that we receive and file this report and adopt A through C of staff recommendations. Thank You Supervisor Hartman. Second. Okay any fur
Show transcript
Motion passes unanimously.
Thank you we will now recess to closed session County Council will you please read the items for consideration today
Chair and supervisors, today in closed session the board has two matters of existing litigation. The first is G versus America prize auto and home insurance. The second involves a Southern California fire cases where the board is sitting both as the Board of Supervisors for the county, and the Board of Directors of the Santa Barbara County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. You have one matter of significant exposure to civil litigation involving the cities of Buelton, Carpinteria, Goleta and Solvang and contract law enforcement services.
You have one matter of deciding whether to initiate civil litigation. You have one real property item concerning property at 630 Randall Road in Santa Barbara. And then you also have one labor negotiation item concerning all bargaining units, unrepresented employees, managers and executives. And my estimate is about 1 hour and 45 minutes after we begin closed session.
So we'll be back at 2 o'clock approximately. Yeah
right.
5:13 – 5:3611 turns
Welcome back. Mr. Gazzone, you have some report from closed session?
Chair and supervisors today in closed session the board considered two matters of existing litigation. The first case was Gee versus Ameriprise Auto and Home Insurance. The second the board sitting as both the Board of Supervisors for the county and the Board of Directors for the County Flood Control and Water Conservation District involved the consolidated and coordinated Southern California fire cases You considered one matter of significant exposure to civil litigation involving contract law enforcement service contracts with the cities of Builton, Carpinteria, Goleta and Solvang. You had one decision whether to initiate civil litigation.
You had one real property item for a parcel located at 630 Randall Road Santa Barbara and then conference with labor negotiators for all bargaining units on represented employees managers and executives and there are no reportable actions.
Thank you Mr. Gazzone Moving on to departmental item number six. Madam Clerk, will you please read that into the record?
Chair Nelson and members of the board, departmental item number six is from planning and development. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the adoption of amendments to the Coastal Zoning Ordinance CZO, the County Land Use and Development Code LUDC, and the Montecito Land Use and Development Code MLUDC to revise existing and create new Development standards and permit procedures to implement recent changes in state legislation regarding Accessory Dwelling Units, ADUs and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units JADUs. And consider the adoption of an amendment to the Santa Barbara County Uniform Rules for Agriculture Preserves and Farmland Security Zones uniform rules to revise the existing ADU definition at a new JAD U definition and allow JADUs as a compatible use on agricultural preserve contracted lands
Thank you. Director Plowman?
Yes, Mr. Chair, members of the board good afternoon. As Ms. Alexander outlined the ordinance amendments that you're seeing today are the result of efforts by the long-range planning staff to update our codes to be consistent with state law and as you know the state legislature is busy Much of the time looking at ways to ensure we can provide the necessary housing across the state. And this is just one of those ways, is through accessory dwelling units.
The staff has done a great job. They made it through the planning commissions both Montecito and County in one hearing on their way here to the board and we look forward to the presentation and the board's action with us today is Dan Clemon Deputy Director Alan Bell, Supervising Planner and Jesse Steele who's our Project Manager who is leading up this effort. And with that I'm going to turn it over to Ms. Steele for the presentation.
Hey good afternoon Chair Nelsons and members of the Board can you hear me okay?
We can.
Excellent before I begin I just wanted to make the board aware that staff made some revisions to some of the documents in the board letter including the proposed ordinance amendments. And these revised documents were submitted to the Clerk of the Board this morning and I'll go over the revisions in more detail in my presentation. In addition, staff received some comment letters that were submitted to the Clerk of the Board and I'm more than happy to answer any questions that you may have regarding these documents after the presentation.
So with that we'll get started next slide please. As a quick refresher, an ADU is an attached or detached residential dwelling unit that provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons and located on the same lot as an existing or proposed single-family dwelling or multi-family dwelling. An ADU includes permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation.
Next slide please. A junior ADU, on the other hand, is a residential dwelling unit that is no more than 500 square feet in size and it's contained entirely within an existing or proposed single-family dwelling which can include an attached garage. The junior ADU can have its own bathroom or may share one with the single family dwelling. Next slide
please.
This slide here just provides a quick timeline of how we got to where we are today. So in 2016 and 2017, new state ADU laws went into effect that made it easier for property owners to develop ADUs on lots zoned for single-family or multifamily uses. And it made it optional for jurisdictions to adopt ordinances to allow junior ADUs on lots zoned for single family dwellings.
In 2018 your board adopted zoning ordinance amendments to comply with the ADU laws and the Coastal Commission certified that coastal zoning ordinance amendment in 2019. Then on January 1st of 2020, new state ADU laws went into effect and caused the county's Inland Area Ordinances, meaning the County Land Use and Development Code and Montecito Land Use and Development Code to become null and void.
Until the county adopts new ordinances, the county must process ADU and junior ADU applications pursuant to state law. Then in summer of 2020, the board directed staff to initiate zoning ordinance amendments to comply with the new state laws And accordingly, staff has drafted amendments to the CZO, LUDC and MLUDC which are included as attachments 2, 3 and 4 respectively to the board's memo that was distributed this morning.
Next slide please. So consistent with state laws, the proposed amendment streamline the permit process and reduce the development standards for ADUs and junior ADUs. Some of the most significant changes are listed on this slide. For example, the new laws increase the number and type of ADUs allowed on a lot. They eliminate replacement parking requirements for all ADUs which means that principal dwelling parking spaces do not need to be replaced when they're lost due to the construction of an ADU.
The new state laws also make it mandatory for the county to allow junior ADUs. They reduce the permit processing time frame from 120 days to just 60 days And they reduce the floor area restrictions and fees applicable to ADUs. Next slide please. State law distinguishes between two categories of ADUs, those that are exempt from local development standards and those that are subject to local development standards.
And by local development standards we mean development standards that the county adopts by ordinance. So over the next A couple of slides will go over the differences between these two categories, which we'll informally call exempt meaning exempt from local development standards and non-exempt meaning not exempt from local development standards. But to clarify neither of these two categories of ADUs are exempt from permit requirements rather the county streamlined process still requires applicants to apply for and obtain building permits for ADUs in Junior ADUs The first we're going to go over the exempt category of a view. State law identifies 4 types of exempt ad use that must be allowed on live within residential or mixed use zone and they're subject only to a few development standards listed in state 80 law and the front setback requirements of the applicable about these 4 types of 80 you've got with it on the slide and they include the following We have one ADU per lot that is located within an existing single-family dwelling or an existing accessory structure.
One small, detached new construction ADU which can be up to 800 square feet in size but is subject to heightened setback requirements and it's located on a lot containing a single family dwelling. Next we have multiple ADUs located within non-livable portions of existing multi-family dwellings or accessory structures And lastly, we have two large detached new construction ADUs which have no size limit but are subject to heightened setback requirements and have to be located on a lot containing a multi-family dwelling.
So essentially what we have here for the first two types of exempt ADUs they are ADU conversions and new construction ADUs on lots that contain single family dwellings And the third and fourth types are ADU conversions and new construction ADUs unlocked to gain multi-family dwellings. And to clarify, a multiplied family dwelling includes two family dwellings or duplexes as defined in the zoning ordinances and multiple family dwellings.
Next slide please. So most ADU applications will meet the criteria for one of the four exempt types of ADUs that we just talked about However, some proposed ADUs may not meet all of the criteria and or may not be located within a residential or mixed use zone as required. So this leads us to our second category of ADUs. State law allows the county to apply local development standards to ADUs that do not meet exempt ADU criteria.
These non-exempt ADUs have to be located within zones that allow single family or multifamily dwelling and only one ADU is allowed per lot For these types of ADUs, the proposed amendments include development standards regarding design, environmentally sensitive habitat area, coastal resource protection, historical and archaeological resources, parking setbacks and tree protection just to name a few examples.
All of the proposed LUDC and MLUDC standards are objective as required by state law. And as for the CZO amendment, state ADU law provides that the county has to enforce the Coastal Act and therefore The county can apply coastal resource protection policies to ADUs in the coastal zone. Where possible, staff retained existing development standards from the previous ADU ordinances but some of these standards were deleted or revised in order to comply with recent changes to state law.
For example, state law now requires that any size-related development standards meaning standards related to floor area height and setback must allow for what we're going to call the minimum ADU which is an ADU of at least 800 square feet in size, 16 feet in height with four foot side and rear setbacks. In addition, state law also now provides that floor area standards cannot prohibit an ADU of less than 850 square feet if it is a studio or one bedroom ADU or 1,000 square feet for an ADUs that contains two or more bedrooms.
Next slide please. Over the next couple of slides, we'll show some of the major changes that staff made to certain development standards that comply with state law. So first, we'll talk about height and parking. The proposed amendments do not specify a height limit for ADU conversions because such ADUs are limited to the height of the existing structure. New construction attached ADUs are subject to the principal dwelling height limit and new construction detached ADUs are subject to a 16-foot height limit if they're one story ADUs and a 25 foot height limit for two-story ABUs.
Parking standards have also changed in order to comply with state law, and the law now prohibits the county from requiring replacement parking spaces for any ABUs which again means that if parking spaces are lost due to the construction of an ADU those principal dwelling parking spaces do not need to be replaced. One parking space is required for new construction detached ADUs only Unless one of the following situations apply.
If the ADU is located within 1 half walking distance of public transit or located within a historic district, if on-street parking permits are required but are not offered to the tenant of ADU, or if there's a car share vehicle within one block of the ADU. Next slide please. So next we'll talk about maximum floor area. The proposed amendments do not limit the floor area of ADU conversions because these ADUs are confined to the walls of the existing converted structure.
And as mentioned previously, state law now prohibits the county from applying floor area restrictions that are less than 850 square feet for a studio or one bedroom unit and 1,000 square feet for an ADU that is two or more bedrooms. So DAP incorporated these floor area limits into the proposed amendment And specifically what we did is we limited new construction ADUs on lots of 15,000 net square feet which is about a third of an acre to either 850 or 1,000 square feet depending on the number of bedrooms.
And on lots that are greater than 15, 000 net square feet the ADU floor area limits at 1200 square feet. However attached ADUs also have to comply with a 50% principal dwelling floor area limit as required by state law Next slide, please. Now we'll talk about setbacks. The proposed amendments do not require setbacks for ADU conversions because once again they're located entirely within existing permitted structures and in compliance with state law the proposed amendments also specify that no setback shall be required for an existing structure that is demolished and then reconstructed to the same dimensions and converted into an ADU.
As for new construction ADUs, the proposed amendments require compliance with the front side and rear setbacks that apply to the principal dwelling. Next slide please. State law now mandates that the county allow junior ADUs within existing or proposed single family dwellings which can include attached garages. And as such, the proposed amendments allowed junior ADUs within residential mixed-use zones when they're located on the same lot as an exempt ADU And Junior ADUs are also allowed within any zone that allows single-family dwellings.
Junior ADUs are limited to no more than 500 square feet, and they have to have side and roof setbacks that are sufficient for fire and safety purposes. Junior ADUs must also comply with the front setbacks of the zone in which the Junior ADU will be located. State law requires that Junior ADUS be subject to an owner occupancy restriction, meaning that the owner has to reside in either the Junior ADU or the single family dwelling.
This restriction, along with other requirements must be recorded within a declaration of restrictions which is a legal document that is recorded with the county clerk recorder and runs with the land. Next slide please. The proposed amendments also contain certain provisions from state law that apply broadly to all ADUs and junior ADUs including the exempt ADU.
First, the proposed amendment states that the minimum floor area for any ADU or junior ADU shall be an efficiency unit as defined in the building code. Efficiency units require a living room of at least 220 square feet plus an additional 100 square feet for every occupant in excess of two. The proposed amendments also specify that ADUs and junior ADUs shall not be rented for less than 30 days at a time, and therefore they cannot be used as farm stays, home stays, or short-term rentals.
Next slide please. When the new state ADU laws went into effect on January 1st of last year, the county switched to a new interim permitting process that required building permits only for inland area ADUs and junior ADUs. The proposed amendments codify this new process and will continue to require building permits only for the inland area. Coastal Development Permits or CDPs are still required in the coastal zone along with building permits.
This switch to a building permit only process was primarily due to the fact that state ADU law reduced the permit processing timeframe from 120 days to just 60 days. However, there are some exceptions to this timeframe. For example, when an ADU or junior ADU is proposed concurrently with an application for a principal dwelling, state law allows the county to delay acting on the ADU or junior ADU permit until it takes final action on the principal dwelling permit.
And to provide even more flexibility to applicants, the proposed amendments also now allow modifications for ADUs and junior ADUs. Modifications may be granted for reductions in setback or parking requirements under certain circumstances but they are subject to the limitations and processing requirements of the zoning ordinances. Next slide please. On March 17th of 2021 staff presented the proposed CZO and MLUDC amendments to the Montecito Ponding Commission At the hearing, the MPC adopted a resolution recommending that the County Planning Commission recommend that the board adopt the proposed CZO amendment with two staff-recommended changes.
First, the MPC recommended adding replacement parking requirements for junior ADUs located within attached garages and second, the MPC recommended clarifying the duplexes or two family dwellings as defined in zoning ordinances are considered multi-family dwellings for purposes of the ADU ordinances. And the MPC recommended the same changes to the MLUDC amendments, which are reflected in the copy of the amendment that was sent to your board. Next slide please.
So then on March 31st, the County Planning Commission held a hearing and recommended that the Board adopt the proposed QCO and LUDC amendments with two staff-recommended changes. First they recommended clarifying within the LUDC that ADUs and Junior ADUs shall not be used as farm-based And second, they requested that staff reinstate the location on lot standard from the existing null and void ordinances which specifies where a detached ADU may be located on a lot relative to the property lot lines and the principal dwelling.
Next slide please. So following the County Planning Commission hearing, staff made four non-substantive changes to the proposed amendments for clarity and consistency with state law First, staff revised two sections of the zoning ordinances, specifically the gross floor area definition and the exemption from planning permit section to clarify that the floor area as existing and proposed ADUs and junior ADUs shall be included in the gross floor area calculations for purposes of processing a development plan for other development on a lot.
Second, staff added language to the proposed environmentally sensitive habitat standard to clarify that only objective standards shall apply to ADUs, which is consistent with state law. And lastly, staff added a standard requiring compliance with the objective standards of the Riparian Corridor Goleta Overlay. Next slide please. Last Friday afternoon, staff received preliminary comments from the Coastal Commission on the proposed coastal zoning ordinance amendment.
Most of the Coastal Commission's comments were minor and could be addressed as part of the certification process. But today we'd like to focus on three of their comments, which staff believes require minor changes to all three of the proposed amendments. Which is why your board received a revised memo with revised ordinances this morning. So first, staff recommends revising the proposed junior ADU definitions to clarify that junior ADUs may be located within attached garages but are part of the single family dwelling.
Second, staff recommends revising the proposed ADU location standard To clarify, the ADU conversion shall only be located within existing structures and not proposed structures at stages in the previous draft of the amendment. And third, staff recommends removing the reference to junior ADUs within the Gaviota Coastline overlay clustering requirement. Junior ADUs cannot be located within detached structures and therefore they do not need to be mentioned in a clustering requirement.
Next slide please. As for next steps, the LUDC and MLUDC amendments will go into effect 30 days from the date of adoption by your board which could be as soon as June 17th. And state EDU law requires that the county submit the adopted ordinances to the California Department of Housing and Community Development or HCD within 60 days of adoption. HCD may submit written findings to the county as to whether the ordinances comply with state law.
And following submittal to HCD Staff will send the coastal zoning ordinance amendment to the Coastal Commission for review and certification. Next slide, please. Staff recommends your board determine that the proposed LUDC and MLUDC amendments are exempt from environmental review pursuant to state CEQA guidelines section 15282H. This section provides a statutory exemption for cities and counties to adopt ADU ordinances to implement state ADU law.
Staff also recommends that your board determine that the proposed coastal zoning ordinance amendment is exempt pursuant to state CEQA guidelines section 15265, which exempts government activities involving the preparation and adoption of a local coastal program amendment. And lastly staff recommends that your board determined that the proposed uniform rules amendment is exempt from environmental review pursuant to state CEQAs guideline section 15061B3.
which exempts activities that have no potential for a significant effect on the environment. Next slide, please. To adopt the revised ordinance amendments staff recommends that your board take the following actions which are outlined in detail on the memo dated May 17th 2021. First make the required findings for approval including CEQA finding as shown in attachment one to the board letter.
Second determine that the project is exempt from CEQAs as demonstrated in attachment two to the board letter. Third, adopt revised ordinances amending the CZO, LUDC and MLUDC as shown in attachments two, three and four to the board memo respectively. And lastly, adopt a resolution amending the uniform rules as shown in attachment six to the board letter. Next slide please.
And that concludes my presentation and I'm happy to answer any questions that your board may have
5:36 – 5:4116 turns
Thank you Ms. Steele. Supervisor Hermann?
Yes, could you go back to slide 6 and my question is this the exempt ADUs as I read the slide that applies only to residentially and mixed-use zone districts so it so the exempt does not apply to agricultural zoned lands
Supervisor Hartman through the chair, that is correct. The exempt category they've used is only applicable in residential or mixed-use zones not the ag zone.
Okay and then on slide seven so the ones that are subject to development standards those can be in any zoned land where a residential dwelling can exist. Is that correct? That is correct, yes. And then my question goes there are people who permitted second units under residential second unit regulations and those people can use for farmstay or for homestay or in mixed-use zone districts for short term rentals so going forward When you regulate short-term rentals and farmstays, homestays how are you going to put a system in place that distinguishes ADUs from RSUs?
Supervisor Hartman through the chair. On every permit within the project description it specifies whether the unit that's permitted is an RSU or an ADU And therefore subject to different conditions of approval. So that's how the Planning and Development Department would track those types of ADUs and RFUs.
Okay,
thank you.
Thank you Supervisor Hartman. Supervisor Williams?
So a couple questions about the amendments. The parking requirement proposed by the Montecito Planning Commission is that within our discretion?
Supervisor Williams, through the chair. The Montecito Planning Commission recommended adding replacement parking requirements for junior ADUs only and staff confirmed that this is allowed. It's not something that's stated in state ADU laws but it is something that's explicitly stated in the state ADU handbook.
And let me just ask a newbie question. What's the difference between a junior ADU and just adding a bedroom? You're talking, what's the difference?
Supervisor Williams to the chair. That's a good question we get that question a lot. The main difference is that a junior ADU is limited to only 500 square feet and it can share a bathroom with the principal dwelling which is not allowed for an ADU and in addition to that junior ADUs only have to have an efficiency kitchen which is sort of like a kitchenette whereas ADUs have to have a full kitchen
Okay, my question was what's the difference between a junior ADU and adding a bedroom? And so I'm just wondering in what requirements exist for adding. Well never mind let me just ask you the other question which is My understanding in the original ADU law was that jurisdictions that had already had a high fire zone designation of some sort within their community plan were exempted. Does that exemption hold in these latest changes in the state law?
Supervisor Williams, through the chair we did not impose any restrictions on ADUs based High fire severity zones or anything like that.
Well, then explain to me the mechanics in say Mission Canyon which had designation previous to the law? Supervisor Williams through the chair
Well, every ADU and junior ADU application whether or not we are prohibiting those types of units within high fire hazard zones. They still have to all applications still have to go to the appropriate fire department for review as part of the building permit process and during that review the Fire Department has the ability to apply restrictions based on the fire code which could include you know Requirements related to access, widening the driveway for fire truck turnout and things like that.
So while we are not prohibiting, planning and development is not prohibiting ADUs or junior ADUs in high fire hazard zones there are mechanisms in place through the building permit process and fires review that would I'm going to go ahead and open it up for questions.
5:42 – 5:5020 turns
Verify that this isn't changing it because I've gotten some questions on that. Not that we have a huge amount of discretion on this today anyway, but I wanted to maybe understand that but maybe not take any more of the board's time in it. Well, I definitely think that we're in a housing crisis and ADUs are part of the solution. And none of these changes to me are earth shattering.
All right. Thank you Supervisor Williams. Supervisor Hartman?
Well, I'll piggyback. I'm just curious and this isn't actually part of your presentation but how far would ADUs and junior ADUs go in helping us meet our RHNA numbers? And how do junior ADUs count? And it – I've asked this question at SBCAG but they weren't quite sure so coming back and asking P&D.
Great question.
Supervisor Hartman through the chair. So ADUs can be counted towards the county's RENA, however junior ADUs cannot and when it comes to the county's housing element update and the county zoning to accommodate our next RENA, the county can zone for ADUs, however there is a limit and I want No more than 25 percent of our RENA can be accommodated through ADUs and that's the maximum. However, the county in order to use RENAs or excuse me use ADUs toward its RENA would have to demonstrate that past permit data shows that the county could support that type of ADU development and that's something that would actually occur within the next planning cycle.
Thank you Ms. Hsu. Questions up in Santa Maria?
Mr. Chair?
Oh yes, Ms. Plowman
I just wanted to provide a quick response on the difference between the JADU and the bedroom for Supervisor Williams in that a bedroom doesn't have an efficiency kitchen so that's that's the clear distinction.
So but is it more difficult normally to permit an efficiency kitchen in a bedroom
Well we don't normally allow them.
Got it, okay that's the distinction I was trying to understand if some state legislator just made this up to be cool or if there was a functional difference and now I understand the functional difference. Supervisor Hartman?
I just wanted to piggyback but it could be that a bedroom We're still here locked down we're good. All right, good
I got Greg in a junior ADU right now.
This has got a hot plate. OK, Madam Clerk, do we have any public commenters?
Chair Nelson and members of the board, we have one request to speak on this item and we are going to Jonathan Alcock.
Yes, hello members of the board, P&D staff, clerk staff I'm requesting that I get longer than three minutes. If you can allow that, if not help me out when we
need to. We'll be cutting off and we don't accommodate for longer than three minutes but I pause you right now while we do that. But just let you know you're gonna only have three minutes.
Not a problem. I just want you all to know about my circumstances in my situation and understand the problematic situation so I found 34 errors just in the amendments and consistencies and inconsistencies. And I really think that the board should work with a working group, and or hire a consultant to review the entire ml UDC for consistency. I'm a lifelong Montecito resident. My family's history on the block where I reside dates back to the mid-1800s.
We came into Montecito well before zoning in 1929, a fact that few if any in P&D actually understand or know but they use that zoning issue to create barriers that limit affordable housing and accessible housing and alienate dwellings that have existed for over 100 years by labeling them nonconforming. I've been prevented from having hot water in a dwelling on the property where I live for well over a year by unfair illegal regulations and policies that violate federal housing laws, my constitutional rights and several other federal and state laws.
Additional delays have come via several inconsistencies, typos and errors as I mentioned in the MLUDC and then watered down interpretation by staff on several factors with the answer I keep getting is pay to see what we can do for you. It is time that the board follows a different path related to affordable housing. Given the guidance and the new laws set by Governor Newsom and adopted over the last couple of years, it is imperative that we take a bigger step forward than P&D staff has presented here. If you actually want housing versus giving a good political If you have a pitch for housing, then you consider placing a public RFP and public working group and do the following.
Fund P&D versus required as a fee-for-service. You alienate impoverished individuals from having safe and fair housing. As far as diversity equity and inclusion your reasonable accommodations are laughable they're lacking so far it's unbelievable P&D staff interpret it to be minor and insignificant changes, whereas federal housing laws require significant accommodations especially those for those that are severely disabled.
Speaking of inclusion in poverty and affordable housing, the development fees and building fees are actually very insignificant compared to the county's income from property taxes. When you're investing in building more property, you're increasing a property value and you're getting long-term value for the county and long term income versus short term cost coverings by a fee for service model.
Regarding departmental agenda item 6 specifically, treating existing legal non-conforming structures especially ones only non-conforming due to setback existing as of January 1st should not have to be quote converted to become compliant structures. I feel that you should be able to have a non-conforming structure that is already existent not a new structure that is allowable that doesn't count against the ADU standards so the county can better meet its arena numbers
Thank you Mr. Alcock, that is your time. All right back to the board.
5:50 – 5:5616 turns
Supervisor Williams? You know let me ask a couple questions just as a follow up on that so if somebody wanted to add a junior ADU in a non-conforming single family home would they be prohibited Because of non-conforming setbacks.
Supervisor Williams to the chair, I'm just about to bring up our zoning ordinance amendment so that I can give you the most accurate information possible.
This one obviously.
Mr. Chair, well, Mr. Clement, did you want to say something?
Yes, but go ahead. Go
ahead.
Supervisor Williams through the chair. I appreciate that follow-up questions. I just think we oughta be careful when asking questions about a particular case especially a nonconforming case because each particular case is unique and they're at least from my experience I don't think I've ever been involved with a non conforming situation that didn't have some interesting unique idiosyncratic fact that made it a little bit different from the last case so.
I just want to understand if someone would be prohibited from doing a JADU just because they have non-conforming setbacks in the existing structure. I'm not saying there might not be some other thing that interferes with their ability to do it. But I just want to understand that we're not passing something today that prohibited someone from doing a junior ADU, just because they have non-conforming setbacks in the existing structure, non-conforming structure.
Supervisor Williams through the chair. So the proposed amendments do allow ADUs and junior ADUs to be located within legal, non-conforming structures. So that could include a structure that is non-conforming as the setbacks provided that it either predate we can prove that it predates permits or it was permitted under an older version of the zoning ordinance.
And in addition, the proposed amendments do have a provision from state law that clarifies that the correction Non-conforming zoning conditions on existing permitted structures is not required as a condition of approval.
I've got a question about legal non-conforming in this situation whose burden is it to determine whether it's legal non-conforming or not? Is that, is it our burden to prove that it's not or the homeowner to prove that it's legal?
Karen Nelson, I'm going to defer this question to either Alan or Dan but i think they would be able to answer more accurately than I
would. Good afternoon Supervisors. Typically what happens in a non-conforming circumstance is the staff will do research but we'll do that research in conjunction with the property owner so we'll use all available information to make that determination in consultation with the property owner. One thing we might want to keep We are not talking about circumstances where we're adding on to a dwelling. They occur within that dwelling, so the fact that the structure is nonconforming doesn't prevent us from allowing a junior ADU in that structure. We just consider the structure it might be nonconforming as But that would not interfere with us permitting a junior ADU within that structure.
So still staying on legal non-conforming, so staff will make a staff decision on whether it's legal or not through that process? And is that actually an appealable decision?
Typically this Chair Nelson and Supervisors typically You know, if we have an application that comes in and there is a question of what its legal status is. That will be addressed as part of the formal application and part of the decision which would be typically yes appealable.
I guess where I'm still trying to figure out whether that needs to be determined by the applicant to prove that they're legal or is it the other way around You know, staff has to show evidence that they're not legal non-conforming.
Mr. Chair if I might just interject here. I think it's a collaborative effort right? And if they can't produce any information we don't have any information in our files to demonstrate its legal non-conforming and they don't have sufficient information that will be factored into the decision on the permit So it's a collaborative effort. But if we don't have anything in our files, they're going to need to provide something that demonstrates that it is legal nonconforming.
5:56 – 6:0019 turns
OK. Another discussion for another day. Questions from Santa Maria? We're good. All right, I have a question for County Council just to confirm this. The ADU, the Junior ADU, these ordinances are requirements of the state for us to come into compliance with state law? I mean that's where this is coming from. I think we want to make sure that the public understands Coming in a whole cloth out of from the Board of Supervisors or from our planning commissioner or commission or from planning and development. Can you give us a little bit of the background on that? It's important.
Chair and supervisors. I think the context here is that state law that became effective in January 2020 actually nold and voided the county's existing provisions in this area, and what you're doing today is providing provisions consistent with state law that will be clearer and more easy to directly implement than state law and really puts Residents able to look at the land use code and see everything in one spot rather than looking at the land use code trying to determine what's been preempted and then trying to directly implement state law.
So when our ordinance became null and void, then it was the state law was now controlling for the purposes of ADUs
That's that's correct. And I think that the benefit of going through Having these in their local zoning ordinances is the board is able to take advantage of what discretion it does have under this 65,000 series of state law because there are areas of discretion and In that these ordinances would now be taking advantage of that.
Okay. Thank you. That's helpful All right any further discussion All right entertain a motion
I will move approval with the amendments recommended by the PC, the MPC and staff.
Second.
Any further discussion? Before we make a vote, Mr. Gazzone.
Chair and Supervisors, just for clarification, I understood the motion to be all as indicated in planning's memo dated May 17th which is an update item.
That's correct. That's the seconder understands that. Okay, so there's agreement up here? Yes.
I have a question Mr. Chair. Supervisor Hart. Just wanted to make sure that the Montecito Planning Commission recommendations were included in staffs' recommendations. I wasn't sure about that.
Thank you. Mister Hart my my my just to make it clear I I moved. Staff recommendations along with Montecito planning Commission and planning commission's recommendations
right now, I just was making I was just asking the question if staff's recommendations are in alignment with that because of the substantive thing is the additional requirement of
I couldn't find my unmute button. Ms. Steele, did you want to respond?
Sure, Supervisor Hart through the Chair. Yes we did incorporate the MPC's recommendations into the proposed amendments before we proceeded to the County Planning Commission so they are reflected in the proposed and revised amendments That were included in the board letter, as well as the revised amendments that were sent with the board memo yesterday.
Thank you very much.
All right. So seeing no further questions from the board, Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll?
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0
Show transcript
Motion passes unanimously.
Thank you. Moving on to our seventh and final departmental item, we still come back for Item A-12 at the conclusion of this item. That comes from Madam Clerk, will you read Item D7 into record?
6:00 – 6:215 turns
Chair Nelson and members of the Board, Departmental Item Number 7 is from Public Health. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding a new vision for animal services and the jurisdictional contract fee options presentation.
Good afternoon, Chair Nelson and members of the board. I'm Dr. Vando Reynoso, Public Health Director. Presenting today is Ms. Angela Yates who joined the Public Health Department last October as our Animal Services Director. With over 17 years of animal welfare leadership experience, Ms. Yates brings talent, expertise and leadership to our Animal Services Program. Her years of experience in the animal welfare industry and strong collaborations with community partners are instrumental in our efforts to achieve innovation and best practices in animal services.
With me also today is Ms. Paige Batson, Deputy Director of Community Health, Mrs. Suzanne Jacobson our CFO and Stacy Covarrubas our Cost Analyst for the Animal Services Program. With that I'll turn over the presentation to Miss Yates.
Thank you so much. Chair Nelson and honorable members of the board. As the new director of Santa Barbara County Animal Services, it's a pleasure to share this presentation with you today on our emerging community-based vision as well as seek your direction on jurisdiction contract fees. To fully grasp why the COVID-19 pandemic brought about such a radical shift in the animal welfare world I'll share a historical perspective on the evolution of our industry which demonstrates clearly why now is the time for change The innovations that are being implemented by industry leaders throughout the United States are shaping the new vision for animal services, which is a game changer for both the animals and your constituents. I will then shift focus to the funding sources for our animal services budget and seek your direction on how to structure our upcoming fiscal year jurisdiction contract fees.
Next slide please. Throughout human history few illnesses have provoked as much fear and anxiety as rabies In the United States, efforts to protect humans and control rabies in domestic animals began early in the 19th century. Of particular concern were free-roaming packs of dogs which were routinely rounded up by dog catchers and killed. Animal ownership in the mid 1800s was very different than it is today, and owned dogs roamed freely and were also rounded up and killed.
In response to citizens who were not so happy when their favorite hunting hound or herding dog was killed, Short-term holding locations called impounds or pounds evolved so that owners could find their dogs before they were put down. Rabies has been considered controlled since the 1950s with only one to three incidences of human rabies occurring in the United States each year.
However, the role of animal control has remained firmly established around dog catchers and pounds. The fundamental concept being that animals are picked up or surrendered and then centrally warehoused. Our own county ordinance still uses the term pound, which is something we want to address in the future. As a result of this historical model of gathering animals and warehousing them, millions have lost their lives in United States shelters.
In response to public pressure, humane legislation started regulating shelters and animal care, and the Hayden Act was passed in California in 1998. The Hayden Act expanded the minimum impound time and required that adoptable animals be released to rescues or adoption organizations under circumstances. What is critical to understand is that while the Hayden Act changed our culture and our policies, it did not change the physical shelters themselves which were designed only for term holding prior to euthanasia. These old shelters did not consider the welfare of the animal nor were they built for humane longer-term housing.
Both our Santa Barbara and Lompoc shelters are over 50 years old, and their design is reflective of the pre-Hayden era. Next slide
please. Great.
Since its inception... Oh! I think we've skipped ahead on the slides. We should be on slide three? Thank you. Since its inception, Santa Barbara County Animal Services has been operating around the functional mandate and model of rabies control and the central warehousing of animals in physical shelters. Operations have been focused on three physical shelters in Santa Barbara, Santa Maria, and Lompoc, and animal staff volunteers and resources have been divided and stretched and siloed by these shelter boundaries creating inefficiency and a potential lack of cohesive service countywide.
Our three counties shelters vary greatly with regard to their physical condition and ability to support services. The newest of our shelters, the Santa Maria Animal Center was built in 2005 and provides the most up-to-date housing options for both cats and dogs as well as a large veterinary suite public clinic and education center but both the Lompoc and Santa Barbara shelters are in need of critical facility upgrades to animal housing.
As a result in October 2020 We temporarily closed the Lompoc dog kennels and are housing the majority of dogs at the Santa Maria shelter, which has adequate kennel space. Next slide please. In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic brought an unanticipated silver lining to the animal services industry, an opportunity to look at things differently from a community perspective.
Throughout the pandemic, caring people stepped up to help people both inside and outside. Help animals both inside and outside of the shelters. In Santa Barbara County alone hundreds of animals have been cared for during the pandemic by foster families rather than live in cages or kennels. This has turned the historic model of sheltering upside down as experts across the field are working to create a better vision for cats dogs and other companion animals.
This vision is coming together in the Haas model, which is transforming the way shelters care for animals and their people. The Haas model focuses on solutions with two primary goals to reduce intake and move pets through the shelter system quickly and to reallocate resources to serve more animals and people outside of the shelter walls. We are a tier 2 pilot shelter in the Haas program. This includes purposely exploring community based approaches while still focused on the county's mandate It means getting in front of the reasons why people surrender animals and why animals enter our shelters at all. And ensuring that people have the support and resources they need to keep their beloved pets, as well as finding alternatives to impound.
Similar to healthcare think prevention versus treatment. The primary goal of prevention here is to keep animals with their people and out of the shelter. Next slide please. In addition to embracing the Haas model of community-based sheltering, the new vision for animal services is based on a countywide infrastructure for providing services with the emphasis on services.
Our historic model of three independent shelters is no longer optimal and nor is it in alignment with best industry practices and innovations. By utilizing a countywide infrastructure operational barriers can be eliminated And more functional economies of scale in terms of service provision and use of facilities can be created. Our new countywide model of sheltering will allow us to maximize the use of facilities and staff to provide the best care and optimize services, regardless of where the animals originally come from.
It's important to note that the staffing structure for this new model is already in place as our current job classifications are broadly written and can accommodate the operational shifts needed. This model can also benefit our nonprofit partnerships by creating opportunities for impact and targeting fundraising for critical projects. The historic model of animal services really depended on us being the sole or primary resource, but in this new model, Animal Services is the resource hub. We will not provide all of the resources, but through our network and collaboration with partners we can collectively increase services and have more impact in our community.
Next slide please. Simply staffing a shelter without prioritizing services and programs isn't a smart use of resources. But being more strategic and targeted with staffing enables us to channel time and resources into the services, and new technology and programs to increase support to our county. Where possible, the goal is always to provide services and support ahead of the need for an animal to enter the shelter. But of course, the shelter will always be needed as a safety net for animals But we can reduce the amount of time they are housed in cages and kennels by utilizing a foster based model and our network of transfer partners.
Under this new model, all of our services are still available throughout Santa Barbara County. Different does not mean less. And it's important not to confuse the services with a brick-and-mortar shelter. In fact many of our services are not dependent on a physical shelter at all and can be offered outside of shelter walls directly in the communities that need them the most. For example Pet food distribution, special adoption events, vaccine and licensing clinics, mobile veterinary care in Spain neuter just to name a few. Bringing services into the communities that need them the most increases equity and access for historically underserved populations in our county.
We are actively expanding our partnerships most particularly with Care for Paws to bring more veterinary care vaccine clinics and licensing opportunities into communities. Our partnership with Care for Paws at a recent community clinic in Guadalupe provided care and services for 361 animals, including 53 licenses, 70 microchips and 189 vaccines in a single day. These numbers far exceed our capacity for services in a single day at the shelter.
Another key example of partnership collaboration for increased impact is the upcoming launch of pet resource centers that are Santa Barbara and Lompoc shelters on May 26th Together with Care for Paws and five other partner organizations, we will soon have free pet food and supplies available at all three shelter locations to support families in need and prevent unnecessary owner surrenders.
As a result of COVID, most services were moved to appointment-based for public safety, and we have discovered how beneficial this system has been for community members as well as our animals staff and volunteers. Appointments allow us to better provide more focused customer service While simultaneously reducing stress on the shelter animals and creating efficiency with staff time.
Well, we will be maintaining an important and sorry an appointment based system in the future for many services. We will also be flexible to accommodate the needs of community members who require walk-in services. Many services have also moved online improving efficiency and customer service and saving resources. But at the same time, we recognize that service provision needs to be inclusive for community members who do not have access to technology. And to support this, we have installed requests for help boxes outside each of our shelters so that people can manually fill out cards to get specific types of assistance.
One of the new technologies that's highlighted on this slide are our new smart license tags that have QR codes on them So anyone with a smartphone can scan the tag to access information to directly reunite an animal with its owner, bypassing the shelter altogether. In addition, we are open to creative ideas for using our shelters to benefit the community. What is the best use of our facilities in the post-COVID future of animal services?
We also need to come to terms with the limitations of our physical shelters and determine appropriate uses based on capital resources and staffing available. Next slide. Since 2013, prior to COVID our annual intakes have been fairly stable at between 6,000 to 7,000 animals each year. The fiscal year 2019 and 20 intakes were impacted by COVID down about 12 1⁄2% primarily in the last quarter.
Our current fiscal year intakes are reduced about 24% from prior year trends but are starting to increase as we move into the peak summer season. Data collected from 144 California shelters from January to April, the January to April timeframe from 2019 to 2021 reveals that cat and dog intakes remain down statewide about 32% to 33%. So the fears that our shelters will be flooded with animals as people return to work post COVID appears unsupported by data.
That said this is uncharted territory and the animal services industry as a whole is really unsure of what multi-year post COVID trends will look like. There are many unanswered questions regarding the economic impacts of the pandemic and possible long term impacts on pet ownership. These unknowns create an imperative for us to be providing increased services and resources to our community, to get in front of the reasons why people may need to relinquish an animal.
Contrary to a KUI news report that aired this morning we do not euthanize adoptable animals that are not placed In fact, we are exceedingly proud of our live release rate which was 95.6% in 2020 but we also recognize the importance of no longer relying solely on the live release as a measure of success. We have trained ourselves and our community to believe that warehousing animals in brick-and-mortar shelters is the only way to help them.
As a result, our industry metrics have focused on intakes and outcomes of animals inside the shelter In the future, we will measure our impact and success by how many animals we save from ever entering the shelter at all. Not by denying access or creating barriers but by providing options and support for pet owners and finding alternatives to impound. A prominent example of this is the changing perspective on free roaming cat intake that challenges deeply held beliefs and ingrained but outdated policies. We have taught our community members that the only way to help a cat is to scoop it up and bring it to the shelter. But we now have research and data that can inform better policies and procedures to benefit the cats and the people who care about them, as well as balance the entrance of wildlife and community.
We recognize that this will require significant staff training and outreach to community members but it is a process that we will take time and we are committed to. We want to engage with our community on this topic, because it will ultimately save more feline lives. And it also allows us to strategically allocate limited resources for greater impact next slide.
Shifting our focus now to our animal services budget and jurisdiction contract fees between 2014 and 2017 a total of 7 new positions were added to animal services. including four positions specifically recommended by the American Humane Association or AHA program assessment, and others to augment existing staff per the report suggestion. The board approved adding these positions with funding from the Master Tobacco Settlement or TSAC and the General Fund to prevent burdening the cities with increased cost. This has been our approved budget model for the past seven years.
No new positions have been added since fiscal year 2016-17 And one position was reduced in fiscal year 2018-19, which brings our net increase in positions to six since 2014. Next slide please. The recommended upcoming fiscal year budget for animal services is $5.68 million. Eight jurisdictional contracts provide 37% of our total budget and 22% is recovered through consumer fee revenues for services.
Local funding sources from the general fund and the TSAC program represent 37% of our budget, and provide funding for the unincorporated areas of the county. Because of the previously mentioned position changes and other board approved enhancements due to the AHA report, the program has supported the jurisdictional contracts by an amount of $584,500. The fee structure for our contracts is based on per capita, which is also applied to the unincorporated areas which are the jurisdiction of Santa Barbara County. The fee basis for all eight of our contracts is the same regardless of whether or not there's a physical shelter in the jurisdiction or not. In fact it's important to note that all of our contract cities do not have a shelter in their midst.
Next slide please. The Public Health Department has engaged MGT consultants to provide a full cost analysis for all fees including the fees for animal services for all contract jurisdictions and the unincorporated area. The proposed timeline for completion is December 2021, and the results will inform our fees for the fiscal year 2022-23. It is considered a best practice to have an external review to analyze activity based full costing of services and to compare fee structures with other counties in order to determine the full cost of services for partner agencies.
For the upcoming fiscal year jurisdictional contracts, the Public Health Department has provided two possible per capita calculations for your board's consideration. The first row of this table is our current fiscal year contract fees which provide the baseline for comparison. The table includes dollar amounts for each jurisdictional contract as well as the percentage increase from our current fiscal year baseline.
Option one is the budget neutral recommended fiscal year 2021-22 budget submitted for animal services, which includes a flat 2% increase across all eight contracts. This results in a balanced program budget for animal services provides for a 2% total increase of $39,572 for all jurisdictions, which matches employer COLAs and provides a flat increase for the one year period while the MGT study is completed.
Option two estimates full cost recovery by updating costs to the fiscal year 2021-22 recommended budget, updating populations using the Department of Finance 2020 data and removing shared general fund and TSAC funding previously approved to support the cities. This option would increase the jurisdictional contracts Next slide, please. The public health department recommendation is option one.
which is the flat 2% increase across all eight jurisdiction contracts. This option provides for continuity and stability on the heels of a year of hardship brought about by the pandemic. In addition, it provides time for the new animal services vision to be more fully implemented and for the contract jurisdictions to realize more concrete benefits to their constituents.
Holding steady with the flat 2% increase also allows for the best practice of having the external full cost fee analysis completed by MGT. This study is currently underway and we anticipate returning to your board in the spring of 2022 with a report on full cost recovery. In conclusion, I hope you are excited about the new direction for animal services in Santa Barbara County. It is a long journey that we are just beginning but we are committed to bringing innovation and best management to the maximum benefit of the animals in our community and the people that love them. Thank you so much for your time and we will be happy to answer any questions.
6:21 – 6:2711 turns
Thank you, Ms. Yates. Questions from the board? Getting questions. All right. Not seeing any questions. Do you have questions for Supervisor Williams? Okay. All right. Madam Clerk, we have at least one speaker.
Chair Nelson and members of the board, that is correct. We have two requests to speak on this item so if you are a member of the public and have requested to speak on this item please log in now to provide your comments to the board otherwise we will go to Lee Heller who is our only speaker. Ms.
Heller when you're ready?
Can you hear me?
We can.
Excellent thank Chair Nelson and members of the board, I am so pleased to see that Animal Services is focusing on being out in the community and embracing a new vision. That's the direction that it started with Project PetSafe 11 years ago, and there are many promising initiatives to expand that effort. That said, I'm concerned that this community-based approach is creating barriers to entry for the still essential service of providing shelter, and sheltering still remains essential as Angela pointed out.
Over the weekend, I checked the website and was disturbed by what I read Owners of healthy animals are being told they cannot turn them in. This despite the fact that before Angela became director, she and I worked together on many occasions when animal services refused to take in animals whose owners could no longer keep them. In one case a woman with advanced cancer needed to turn in her animals and was told they would be euthanized and it was Angela who intervened and took them in at ASAP.
Just this morning The Washington Post cited an ASPCA study showing the reasons people give up their pets involve serious needs In the absence of a shelter safety net, these animals will end up on the streets. A blanket refusal to consider surrender is the opposite of the kind of customer support that community-based programs are meant to offer. A better approach used in Los Angeles is to have a counselor available at the shelter to assist people coming in to see if they can find an alternative.
I'm also troubled by the violation of county law reflected in policies regarding strays. Currently the county requires any animal found stray to be reported and impounded within 24 hours. This ensures the animal has a safe place to land, and the owner knows where to look for it. Requiring finders of strays to wait for an appointment puts an undue burden on the public.
I'm wondering how many of you picking up a stray pit bull on the street could take it home and hold onto it? Most people faced with obstacles will simply let a stray dog go. Refusing to impound straight housing them in the community Before their stray hold period ends, exposes the county to liability. During this period, the county functions as a fiduciary depository while the owners have a chance to reclaim it. If during that period something were to happen to the animal, the county would likely be held liable and if the animal were to injure a person, ditto. It also increases the likelihood that the owner will not get its animal back since the animal will not be in the place the owner expects to find it.
Community based sheltering has many wonderful qualities, but in some ways it reminds me of the well intentioned but failed mass de institutionalization. Of mentally ill persons in the 1970s which was touted as a solution to the problem of housing them and resulted instead in streets flooded with homeless people suffering from mental illness we're still struggling with the consequences of that.
So of course I support community-based approaches, but the better approach regarding impounds and blanket bans is for animal services to be getting the animals into the shelter where necessary. And then back out into foster homes as soon as possible after their holding periods are up and being proactive about adoption outreach and the kinds of programs like pet resource centers and partnerships with care for POTS. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Ms. Hiller. All
right.
Questions from the board, comments? Supervisor Williams.
Yeah I really appreciate the department's new vision but I do think that it would be wrong to move towards a system that does not use every opportunity of customer interaction. I personally feel like A system that encourages in every way people to make appointments is great. But I think any animal that shows up at our facilities is an opportunity to spay and neuter them, to deworm them, to improve the situation. And so I personally don't believe that we should be turning away any animal that comes into I think we could have the right kind of incentives and say, look you know if we want you to foster this animal as long as possible. And this is the benefit package for anybody who's willing to foster. We'll take care of a veterinary appointment.
We'll do X, Y, Z. That will help create the right incentives and maybe fits into the vision that the department is articulating But without, you know, relying on everybody's idealism to carry us through. I think Ms. Heller points out accurately that there are going to be people who have limited ability It's been a long time coming, but we're very pleased to have the opportunity to retain animals that might be good enough Samaritan to pick up something that stray and bring it to the shelter but may not We are going to see some people lose their housing, right? We are going to see some people with legitimate reasons to surrender pets and we should be equipped for
that. Ms.
6:28 – 6:3811 turns
Yates. Supervisor Williams through the chair. So I agree 100% with Supervisor Williams. Absolutely want to take every opportunity to engage with the public, spay neuter, provide veterinary care for the animals that need it. So I think we are in alignment with that. I don't think our new vision should be confused with our immediate COVID response and I wanna clarify that the section on our website that Ms. Heller was referring to was under a special section that was put up When the pandemic started and our industry was being recommended at a national level to slow down intakes, to try to keep people safe. To reduce the number of people in our shelter, to even stop spay neuter for a time period because we were concerned that PPE might be there might be shortages there.
But that section I became aware that it was up there and we belatedly realized we needed to take it down so it has been taken down And we have reverted back to our pre-COVID policies in terms of intakes. But moving forward in this new vision and this Haas model, and continuing to provide a safety net for the animals while we implement community based approaches.
Thank you. Supervisor
Hartman? Mr. Chair, this is Supervisor Hartman too.
Yeah let's go ahead and Supervisor Hartman then we'll do Supervisor Hartman.
I just first off, I just want to say what great photos of safe and happy animals in that presentation. That was really charming and really appreciated Ms Yates historical summary of the evolution of animal services and the new vision that the department is embracing There's a lot of upside to what she's talking about, having services in partnership with other NGOs and volunteers is obviously the way to leverage the resources that the county has limited resources and to more appropriately use the antiquated facilities that we have. But I definitely have heard you know multiple times yesterday in a conversation with Ms. Yates, today in her presentation today now also an answer to Supervisor Williams question that she understands that we got to maintain the traditional services enhance and Make those more robust, but also migrate to new ways for people to access animal services in non-traditional ways because that's expanding access.
And of course the bottom line to all this is execution and it's hard to do change like this. It's hard to communicate that change and it's hard to follow through effectively in that kind of change. But you know, that's the challenge of change is that we have to embrace it and we have to make it work. And that's not insignificant. I know Ms. Yates is a tremendous leader and she is committed to making that change through partnerships and engagement and communication but this is an extraordinary time too with COVID and it's been very difficult It's just a matter of having the people who can effectively work with the public.
Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the public for joining us today. I want to start by saying thank you to all of our partners who have been working tirelessly to make sure that we are able And then the second thing is you got to make sure everybody's on the same page internally with the staff and the other partners too. So communication, communication, communication.
Thank you Supervisor Hartman.
And I want to build on what Supervisor Hart said. But first, I just want to say I believe this is Ms. Yates' first board presentation. I'm so excited when I learned of your appointment. I knew you at ASAP and I think you're really the right person for the job and so glad you're here. I have a keen personal interest in all of this. I have three adopted dogs and three adopted cats in a BLM borough among others.
And so I really care about animal welfare. It seems to me that we have three major changes going on in animal services right now. We're moving from shelter-based to more foster management, the HAAS model. We're considering closing the Lompoc Shelter largely to the public And then the community cats. And so this is a lot of change at one time and having spoken with you at some length yesterday I really understand the basis for this but I think There's probably nothing, no county program that engages volunteers and the community as much as animal services. All of our partners and just people who have keen passionate interest in this. And so I really strongly want to echo what Supervisor Hart said about communication. I think it's not just that, I think we need a campaign for people to understand in the media You know, various kinds of communications and designing things so that people understand the rationale for this.
They understand... I mean when you gave me the numbers of how many cats we have in our county and how few can actually be handled at the shelter And then bringing cats in, maybe that doesn't make sense. So I think there's just an enormous amount of education on all these programs that requires a campaign because these are huge changes. In an area that has been relatively stable for decades, as you pointed out.
I also feel strongly that we need a presence, a navigation center where people can call, where people can encounter another person. I assume that would be at the shelter and so I just strongly believe that somebody has to answer the phone. comments about how you can get lost in the phone tree. So I think we all want government to be more responsive to people and to our non-human companions on this earth, and so a physical presence and being able to navigate the phone system readily is really important.
You use the phrase Ms. Yates, synergy of partnerships and there's no one more capable than you of doing that. We do have a lot of duplication. We have gaps. We have many people, many organizations trying to do their best but if we could create more of a network and a system so that we don't have all the duplication We can deliver a lot better. And so I think you're the right person to change the role of the county, but I do think we have to consider how we communicate this much more thoroughly systematically to the people we serve.
Thank You Supervisor Hartman. Supervisor Lavagnino, do you have any comments or questions?
I think a lot's been said that I agree with, and I'm not the expert on animal services. I will tell you that I personally have picked up a few dogs. Actually it wasn't me I'm in the car with my wife and I'm trying to go somewhere and she sees a loose animal and so it's like okay we have to stop. And so I got to give her credit. But if I did have to have an appointment or I had to go take the dog back to my house, that's kind of where I draw the line. I mean, I'm fine taking it either to the vet or to the shelter and let somebody else deal with it.
But I've got to say too that I'm not going to sit here and second guess. To me, you know, if you're gonna make an omelet, you gotta break a few eggs and you gotta try something different. You know, I think like what has been said is communication's the key to everything. And the last thing I want to do is get in the middle of something that I have probably the least knowledge about as far as when it comes to board members and dealing with animal services. So but I do believe strongly in both what Supervisor Hartman said is the key to all of this is to making sure that all All of our groups, our volunteers and those interested in the community know exactly what we're doing and why we're doing it. I think they will follow you though Ms. Yates because you love animals and as long as we know we're not trying to do something because it's cheaper or because somehow it's more convenient but because it's best for the animal we're going to be okay in that regard
Thank you. I just have a couple of comments and questions. First of all, congratulations Ms. Yates. It's neat to see you move from advocate to administrator, and actually see in this presentation some of the things that you actually had envisioned when you were an advocate. So the decentralization and maximizing our resources. So just a kudos from someone who has been observing your advocacy for years. So that's the first part I wanted to get out. Second part was about the contract fee options.
Where does the 2% number come from? I know we're trying to make sure that we add something to there because we see that there's a deficit. Are there other numbers we've considered? Well, I am troubled that you know we're looking for a $40,000 increase across all jurisdictions while we acknowledge that there's somewhere over half a million dollars in deficiencies there so can we speak to that for a
moment? Yes thank you Chair Nelson Should I defer this question to our fiscal department, Suzanne or Stacey?
6:38 – 6:4410 turns
Hello Angela. I'm happy to answer that. Mr. Chair we chose that number and it's generally what we do at budget time because it approximates the amount of employee COLAs Currently our animal services department is 65 to 75 and 70% salaries and benefits. So when we're looking at anticipated increases in all costs, we always find that that's a pretty good indicator. So using that and then balancing to that budget time and using that in our basically in our jurisdictional contracts has served us well over these years.
Okay I guess but at the same time we need to marry that to our new 22 principles where we're looking towards cost recovery and am i hearing that we're just going to defer that for a year as we start to work through some of these new models is that my understanding?
Yes, Mr. Chair we've already started an engagement with MGT there's some consultants that we used in the past for environmental health service fees and we've been very happy with them and we actually kicked off our engagement probably about three or four weeks ago and we expect to have it done in time to inform the 21 no 22-23 budget process, working closely with the cities and engaging the CEO in that process.
So I guess my question is so we already have these numbers here that show us that you know that we're half a million dollars behind are we expecting to see new numbers they're gonna tell us a better story or maybe afraid of worse story?
Mr. Chair, exactly where we're not really quite sure what we're really excited about with the engagement is currently MGT is working with the County of Los Angeles and they're also working with the county of Monterey it with their animal services so we developed this methodology it's covered in the in the board report back when the city of Goleta was formed and we've worked with LAFCO and some other consultants I'm going to go ahead and open it up for questions.
And develop new fees per city, but that could change again in a year. So we felt it was probably better to have the external review, have it be very supportive and also probably independent so basically nothing can be called into question.
I think I can support option one at this time, but I think it needs to be a strong message to our municipal partners that this isn't going to be the new normal moving forward. You know my fear is we do you know they've been used to 2% when really the numbers like 30%. And so not that I'm going to rework your math, but it seemed like we did something a little bit bigger this time that they might be able to start to right size their budgets. But maybe if we just may put them on notice Thank you. Other questions for staff?
If not, I'd entertain a motion. Supervisor Williams.
I will move A B and C but I would want to add to it the expression of policy that we would I think it's a good amendment to the new vision.
Supervisor
Hartman. I guess I would like to hear what Miss Yates has to say about that. I agree with it, I just I would like to hear her response.
Supervisor Hartman through the chair thank you for the opportunity to address that so yes absolutely. You know it is incredibly beneficial for us move as much as possible towards an appointment based system. However, we always want to be responsive to the needs of a community member or an animal who may need to walk in. There's an immediacy of needing to address whatever that situation is for that animal with walk-ins. So we will encourage appointments but we will be nimble and flexible with walk-in appointments. I would hesitate to say that we will intake any animal that is brought to the shelter Because it may not be in the best interest of that particular animal. And we need to really engage with a community member and make the best decision for that particular animal given the circumstances.
6:44 – 6:4923 turns
My point is, it should be a matter of policy to not turn someone away just because they don't have an appointment. If there's another reason why they should be turned away then that's that but just no one turned away for not having an appointment.
So with that, I second your motion.
All right and Miss Gates you understand the policy request?
Chair Nelson yes thank you I do and we will not turn away walk-ins.
Thank you any further discussion all right Madam Clerk please call the roll.
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0 motion. All right and Miss Gates you understand the policy request? Chair Nelson yes thank you I do and we will not turn away walk-ins. Than
Show transcript
motion passes unanimously
okay so we have one additional item left on our agenda thought you were done huh all right madam clerk will you please read item a 12 into the record
Chair Nelson and members of the board, administrative item number 12 is from General Services. It is to consider recommendations regarding an amendment and transfer of conservation easements at the Scolari Ranch from the county to the land trust for Santa Barbara County. This is in the third and fourth districts.
All right.
And Chair Nelson, members of the board joining us today via Zoom we do have Skip Gray and Jeanette Powell
All right. Since we have you, can I get some clarification on what the holdup was today just for the record?
For the
public's knowledge?
This is Skip Gray. Absolutely as you may be aware this was a rather I guess complicated would be a good word board letter Involving four county departments with eight different attachments of almost 6,000 pages and we didn't have all of the original documents until Thursday night last week for the late docket. And we had to organize and make those copies on Friday which took pretty much the whole day Several exhibits, attachments 5, 6 and 7 were not included. So exhibits A and B in those attachments were not included they were left out of the electronic copies that we sent to the clerk.
Those exhibits were included in the paper copies We submitted. So we just resubmitted those electronic, those three electronic attachments 5, 6 and 7 to the clerk so they could be uploaded to Legistar and I understand they have been so we should be good to go.
Thank you Skip. County Councilor, I just want to make sure that we've done everything appropriately it's been noticed and that it's ripe to be voted on.
Chair and Supervisors, yes. The action comports with the Brown Act and then through an abundance of caution Deputy County Council Brian Pettit reviewed the After docketed electronic documents to make sure that they match the previously docketed paper documents and all as well So the board has policy discretion to to act on that item.
Okay understand that I'll take a motion
Staff recommendation
Second. All right, I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
Mr. Chair, I just want to thank General Services and Planning and County Council for working overtime even through today to get this item ready for our consideration. This is a really important project, and it's been a very difficult project. So I really just want to say thank you very much to all the people that put in extra time to make this happen. Keep this project on track. It's an important thing for the county.
With that, Madam Clerk will you please call the roll.
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0
Show transcript
Motion passes unanimously.
All right. I do want to take a moment to close today's meeting in memory of Luca Benedetti from the San Luis Obispo Police Department. Was killed in line of duty last week and he touched many lives, especially in the law enforcement community and in the North County. He graduated from Hancock Police Academy with many of our linemen and women of our Sheriff's Department.
His loss is being felt throughout the Central Coast and I just wanted to have a moment of silence in his memory before we conclude the meeting.
6:49 – 6:492 turns
Thank you.
This does conclude the meeting of May 18th, 2021. Our next meeting will be a special meeting on June 1st. The meeting for public's knowledge will open up and immediately go into closed session. The meet of the public items will not be heard until the afternoon. So for those of you planning on attending or speaking, those items will be in the afternoon on June the first.