Board of Supervisors — 2022-08-23

Good

Next order of business are the minutes from August 16, 2022. May I have a motion to approve the minutes?

So moved.

And a second?

Second.

Any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Minutes are adopted. CEO report. CEO Miyasato.

There is a report but I can't find it on my email for right now so I will come back to you. We'll go to Clerk Announcements

and then you signal to us.

Chair Hartman and members of the board, I do have a few announcements this morning. We posted an addendum to today's agenda on Friday August 19th amending the agenda to include an additional item on the closed session agenda. The closed session agenda was amended to include conference with legal counsel existing litigation paragraph one of subdivision D of government code section 54956.9 Jeffrey Arlington, the County of Santa Barbara et al. Santa Barbara County Superior Court case number 20CV03438. This addendum was posted online and has been made available to the board and the public.

Lastly, I would like to remind the public who are participating in our meeting today of the board's updated methods of public participation. For the Board of Supervisors methods of public participation and to provide public comment on general public comment or an item on the board's agenda please see page 2 of the agenda. Members of the public can attend meetings in person, both in the Santa Barbara Board Hearing Room Chambers as well as the Santa Maria Board Hearing Room Chambers.

Please note that the board is following all local and state guidelines and are no longer requiring face coverings indoors. If you attend the board meeting in person, you will no longer be required to wear a face covering but please be advised that the Public Health Department is still strongly encouraging all county staff and members of the public to mask and socially distance themselves in crowded areas.

I would also like to remind the public that if you require any special accommodations, please contact the Clerk of the Board to make that request preferably on the Friday prior to the board meeting. Individuals that would like to provide verbal public comment virtually may do so via Zoom by registering in advance via the link available on page 2. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing important information about joining the virtual meeting.

Once the chair has announced the item you want to comment on, please join the meeting with information provided. You will be placed on mute until it is your turn to speak. The clerk will call you by name and 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.

Each person may address the board for up to three minutes and this is at the discretion of the chair. If you have any questions please contact the clerk of the boards office at area code 805-568-2240 again that's 805 56822 40 and that concludes my announcements for today.

Thank you, CEO Miyasato.

Chair Hartman and board members this is just a quick recognition of an award that one of our departments won recently the county's climate change vulnerability assessment was selected for the 2022 American Planning Association Award of Excellence for innovation in green community planning The assessment was first recognized by the Central Coast Chapter of the American Planning Association, winning the local chapters local award. Its selection at the state level is a significant honor and we want to congratulate our long range planning team for achieving this award.

That's extraordinary. And that's it. Turning then to our administrative agenda, I see that Supervisor Nelson has pulled items A3 and A12. Do any other board members have items they would like to pull? And Madam Clerk, any members of the public?

Chair Hartman and members of the board. We have no requests to speak from the public on our administrative agenda.

All right, would you read A3 into the record please?

Chair Hartman and members of the board. Administrative item number three is from the Behavioral Wellness Department. It is to consider recommendations regarding a waiver of competition under County Code Section 2-39 for the purchase of pharmaceuticals.

Supervisor Nelson.

Yes, thank you Chair Hartman. I'm hoping that the enrollment staff is available.

Our director is here.

Oh there she is all right well thank you Mr. Barrow. Good morning. I just had a question on this item it's a waiver of competition for pharmaceuticals and this is paid for out of state and federal funds and I just wanted to Have the assurance this doesn't put us any additional audit risk with those funds. I know that's something that we're, as a board very sensitive to and so wanted to hear from you.

Yes today's resolution we're asking for an extension through December 2022. As you know staff and challenges in the department we've had significant vacancy in the contracts department. We are preparing the RFP to be released by the end of this month for a new competitive bid for this pharmaceutical service to ensure that this proprietor is still, we need to check. They were originally chosen in 2018 as they were the sole source pharmacy that could supply all the medications and drugs most commonly supplied by The Puff. Okay

thank you.

All right and

Madam Clerk A12

Chair Hartman and members of the board, administrative item number 12 is from the Planning and Development Department. It is to consider recommendations regarding an agreement for services with Blue Point planning for the preparation of a climate change adaptation plan and outreach strategies.

Supervisor

Nielsen. Thank you Chair Harmon, my question I had a little bit of correspondence with Director Plowman but i believe she might be on as well but um my concern with this uh contract is I wanted to make sure that the board has given sufficient direction on policy-wise before moving into this process and that we have the opportunity to have some updates in maybe direction from the board and then ultimately I want to make sure we have the opportunity as a board to weigh in throughout this process.

That we have options of kind of the low, medium and high. You know what's the minimum requirement to meet state law? Because I understand the reason why we're going about this in part is to satisfy a state requirement that we update our safety element. And so I just was hoping to get an explanation and some feedback from the director or her staff.

Director Plowman

Yes Madam Chair, Supervisor Nelson and other board members. So we did receive some direction already when we brought the vulnerability assessment that we just talked about that received the award so we did receive some then and then there is a point in the process where we will be coming with a draft to the Board and then we'll be getting direction from the Board at that point in time And then incorporating the comments then and then of course, at our final adoption. We have the board certainly can make comments and we hear you about options that you're interested in seeing.

And also there's a fair amount of public participation and outreach that we're going to be undergoing. We have. We have nine stakeholder meetings and then we have three small group. Meetings and then A larger public outreach meeting, so there'll be a lot of interaction with the community on it. And we're certainly happy to work with the board and provide options.

And certainly I can be updating the board in my regular meetings with them on the progress.

Thank you, Director Plowman. So just so you understand. What has been the direction that board's given on this? I know that we, we've asked to go ahead and prepare a climate action adaptation plan. But to me, that sounds like a very broad work project. And so I didn't know if there were some specifics policy that yeah, we'd actually had provided here.

So Madam Chair, Supervisor Nielsen. So there was some general discussion when we brought the vulnerability assessment to the board just about the future direction of the adaptation plan It wasn't I wouldn't, I wouldn't say that it was robust. But I would say that we did get some direction and some concerns or interests that were expressed by the board at that time.

Okay, well that's again where I'm coming from here is I want to make sure that as we enter into these projects it's um. I know that we have stakeholder outreach and whatnot but you know this the Board of Supervisors is the ultimate group of stakeholders as we represent all the um 450 000 people in Santa Barbara County so I think it's really important that um we are participants in these long-range plans especially this one it's going to take a year and a half before we Potentially we will see some type of update to the general plan here. So what would frustrate me is to go through this process and a year-and-a-half from now, we have a take it or leave it document that the board has and that we would have to then at that point accept it to comply with state law with the general plan and not have the options so I just want to make sure policy decision-making process of this board.

Absolutely.

Understood.

All right, so those are just my questions. Thank you Chair Herman.

All right. So that brings us then I need a motion to approve the balance of the administrative agenda.

Don't move. Second.

All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? It's approved now general public comment Madam Clerk do we have anyone who would like to speak on matters not on today's agenda

Yes, Chair Hartman and members of the board. We have one request to speak on general public comment today and that is here in Santa Maria we are going to Dana Howard.

Yes, good morning board. My name is Dana Howard I am the Director of Communications Outreach Recruitment and Enrollment for the California Conservation Corps now i know that a few of you have met Mike Anderson our District Director um for San Luis Obispo and for the location here that we have in Santa Maria and I am headquartered in Sacramento so I run the recruitment and enrollment statewide for the CCC And I wanted to just take a quick moment to see if, how you could potentially reach out back to us. I'm going to leave with you a folder like this that will go to your staff. Ana Mejia who is our local recruiter here in Santa Maria her card is in there along with mine But I'm hoping that we might be able to find a way to collaborate, to be able to reach 18 through 25 year old adults here in Santa Maria especially to be able to participate in this statewide program.

We're not a company or not a non-profit. We are State of California Department so we are government and we run a program state mandated To give 18 to 25 year olds a leg up in getting their career started. We provide a high school diploma opportunity, we also embrace those who are justice involved but we are not an at risk program. So about 20% of our folks have college degrees when they come into the CCC.

Most have graduated high school and done some college. But the work and the paid training that they receive, $2,610 per month as a monthly stipend plus health insurance. That paid training that they receive leads to direct and defined career pathways to state organizations like Cal Fire, Caltrans, State Parks And as well, I'm hopeful that it can lead to direct career pathways with county and city governments as well. As we all strive to be able to improve the diversity and equity inclusion in our own staff at hiring.

We believe that the California Conservation Corps is just a huge opportunity to do that because we are an extremely inclusive organization and program, giving paid training to those get them ready for the workforce. So if there is any plea that I can make today is to be able to work with myself and with the California Conservation Corps to figure out ways that we can bring young adults especially here in the Santa Maria area to the Santa Maria Center. Now, with that said we also have fire programs to the south of you and to the north of you one in San Luis Obispo and one in Camarillo and Ventura County I realize they are outside your counties but they were receiving fire training that can spell right back into your own local county fire suppression and fire departments that diversity into the program.

We are really striving to get to a 50% level with women doing wildland firefighting and we believe that the California Conservation Corps has that opportunity to increase women both in the state fire departments and with county and local fire departments so please if you can give me some direction of who to reach out to and how to do that,

Supervisor Nielsen.

Yes, thank you Chairman. Thank you Mr Howard for being here. I was one of those supervisors that got a tour from Mr Anderson at the Santa Maria location that the City of Santa Maria has donated and made available and so it's a really exciting program and I want to thank you for being here and reminding all of us that this is something that's really important out there I heard that you said it's not an at-risk program, but at the same time when you're willing to have justice involved youth and whatnot. It does seem like they have some nexus there. One of the groups that the county is really trying to focus on is our transitional age youth that are coming out of foster care. And so I don't know if there's already a relationship there with social services that we can help to move along and connect.

Because it does seem like this is the type of focus that could help some of those young men and women that are coming out of the foster care system, A more traditional family might have and so we'd love to help try to make that possible for you as well as the rest of the general population of the Santa Maria Valley in Santa Barbara County.

Great, that would be extremely helpful because we do have some relationship but we most certainly could make that stronger.

CEO Miyasato, do you have any suggestions?

I was going to say Anna can contact our office and we can work out and figure out who the contacts would be just so you get one point of contact. There's a lot I'm sure that people will be interested in wanting to participate. And so we'll do our best. So we'll reach out after the meeting.

Very good. Thank you. All right. Thank you all.

Thank you for being

here.

Departmental item number 1, Madam Clerk, would you read that into the record please?

Chair Hartman and members of the board, departmental item number one is from the Planning and Development Department. And it is a hearing to consider the withdrawal of the project regarding the Wholesale Rezone and Tentative Track Map Rezone 15RZN4 and Tentiative Track Map 15TRM11. And again I would just like to note for the record that this is on your agenda. The department is requesting a withdrawal of this item today.

Director Plowman. Oh Madam Chair yes yes I do have Ms. Shannon Reese she's the planner on this case and she's going to explain the circumstances to you

thank you

Miss Reese

Thank You madam chair director Plowman so at this time the applicant doesn't have a current preliminary cannonball sir letter or proof of supplemental water To demonstrate adequate services and orchid planning area. Uh, and therefore the project is currently inconsistent with a few. Orchid community plan requirements that have to be complied with. Prior to discretionary action, and we can't make the findings for approval at this point so.

That's why we're proposing to remove. The item from the agenda, um, the applicant did not provide a hearing date for continuance. I don't believe that the applicant team is in attendance remotely. Perhaps they're there in the hearing room, but they might be able to speak further and staff is available for any questions about the

removal.

Thank you Supervisor Nelson.

Yes thank you this is in my district and I got a chance to talk to the applicant about The development standards in our community plan, that is a bit of a headache for this project. And there's been some back and forth and some interpretation issues that I'm working with county council to see if we can resolve. It would be my preference that we actually just continued it potentially to the next Santa Maria meeting in a month four weeks from now.

And at that time if we're unable to resolve those issues, then we can move forward with the withdrawal. But at this point I think I don't want to get them back to square zero and we all know what the process is to get back onto a board hearing is. And while these hurdles may be a little bit large right now, I'm hopeful in the next couple of weeks that staff can work with council and go on state water to resolve those issues so that we might be able to have this item here sooner than later.

Let me start with County Council and then with P&D just to make sure that that would work and date certain.

Madam Chair, yes, that would work for County Council.

Ms. Reese, Director Plowman?

Madam Chair, I think that's fine for the department.

So then it would be a continuation till September 20th. Would you like to make that motion?

Yes, thank

you. Oh, I'm sorry. I forgot public comment.

Chair Hartman and members of the board, we had no requests to speak on this item. Okay

Supervisor Nielsen? All

right thank you Chair Hartman and thank you staff for indulging me on this so I'll make a motion that we continue item department item number one to September 20th here in cities are sitting in Santa Maria hearing. I'll second it.

And all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously. Turning to item number two in our agenda Madam Clerk

Chair Hartman and members of the board, departmental item number two is from the Treasurer Tax Collector Public Administrator. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the California Enterprise Development Authority, CADA issuance of tax-exempt and or taxable revenue obligations for the benefit of Dunn School.

Good morning Mr. Hagan

Good morning. This item before you today is a TEFRA hearing, which stands for Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982. Section 147-f of the Internal Revenue Code provides the pathway for qualified 501c3 organizations to access the municipal markets. In this case it is Dunn School that has made the recommendation and the issuer would be CEDA, the California Enterprise Development Authority In an amount not to exceed 5.5 million dollars It is an item that the DAC heard on July 29th and approved for recommendation to your board And we have members from Dunn school, I believe it is Chad Stacy the CFO and then Sam Ballacy who was from Kutak Rock Your responsibility and if I step on your toes, Rachel please stop me is to approve the issuance and hold the public hearing.

And so the public hearing is demonstrating there's the public benefit for this project and the county is not the issuer it again at CETA. So we have no obligation either legal or moral for the repayment of these issues. And that concludes my opening presentation and if you have questions like I said there are members from Dunn and Kutek Rock that are available on Zoom.

And do any board members have questions? Supervisor Nielsen?

Yes, thank you Chairman. And I do support and see there's public benefit here as an uncle of two earwigs. But so would we have the ability if we didn't see that there was a nexus there, that would be the chance for this board to hear from public that there wasn't public benefit? And then we'd make that finding and then it would stop. I'm just kind of curious because it is a little odd relationship that we have here with this process again not being responsible for these funds beyond this hearing.

Yeah, to Roger Nelson to the chair. And so you're you are conducting the public hearing because the project is in our jurisdiction and I guess you can make that finding

and

it

but then that would stop the process at point. Just kind of curious on process. I was trying to explain this to my staff yesterday and it was a little, um, I had difficulty so I was just trying to understand exactly what influence we have in this process moving forward. Yeah sure Nelson to

the chair or Supervisor Nelson to the chair. Um, I've done about 20 of these. I've never had one not go through. So that's kind of uncharted territory for me to be honest with you

I assume it's a ministerial act, but I guess we'd have to turn to our county council.

Madam chair members of the board, I'm not sure either, but I can take a look at that if you have that answer prior to the.

The purpose of this hearing, it's a moot case. Obviously since it is at least for the supervisor, it does meet the necessity of public benefits so I can do some research on it.

And we can follow up with you as well.

Thank you

and I'd like to know if anyone from Dunn School would like to make some comments that it is in the third district and as Supervisor Nelson has alluded, it it's treasure in our community. We're so glad to have it But if anybody from Dunn would like to speak

up.

So nobody's rushing to chime in.

This is Sam Balcy, I don't know if you can hear me.

Absolutely we can, loud and

clear. Okay great so this is Sam Balcy from QTAC and I can if i can take a minute I'm happy to address the earlier question from the supervisor yeah no I want like to make things as kind of simple as possible um so the internal revenue code sets up a procedure that requires a public hearing prior to the issuance of tax-exempt bonds that benefit a I'm going to go ahead and open it up.

You know, consider the issuance of tax-exempt debt for the benefit of a nonprofit. And the board has gracefully done that before and passed other projects that CETA has brought to the county. And I suspect also you've done numerous public hearings for low and moderate income housing, you know, that has been in the county's jurisdiction. So it's a requirement and it is somewhat ministerial but it does give the board It's a great opportunity to consider the project and the applicant and so forth.

And I think as has been expressed, most of the TEFRA hearings are somewhat routine if you will because the projects have been generally vetted. This project has to receive approvals for the improvements that they're gonna complete on So while it's fairly routine, the board sort of still does retain discretion if it doesn't like a particular project not to approve it at a public hearing. But consistently I think for projects in our experience and up and down the state, TEFRA hearings are fairly routine and the projects are routinely approved.

And I know the Dunn School is appreciative. I don't know if Chad's there, maybe he's having some technical difficulties but they're continuing to make improvements. A large component of this project would be to enhance the wastewater treatment system that they have on the property and refurbish buildings and so forth. So it's further enhancements for the campus.

Thank you both for that explanation of the project and the process.

You're welcome.

Madam Clerk, any public comment on this matter?

Chair Hartman and members of the board we have no request to speak on this item.

May I have a motion to approve?

I move approval.

A second? All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously. Item number three madam. Thank you.

Chair Hartman and members of the board, departmental item number three is from the Social Services Department. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding home delivery of meals to seniors and disabled in Santa Barbara County.

Good morning Mr. Nielsen.

Great, thank you.

Good morning Chair Hartman and Supervisors I am Daniel Nielsen your Director of the Department of Social Services and your Interim Director of the Public Health Department with me today is Mark Contois the Division Chief over the In-Home Supportive Services and Adult Protective Services programs and the person primarily responsible for gathering the information that i'm going to share with you today In December of 2020, I became involved in your board's efforts to provide bridge funding to the organizations in the county that were providing home delivered meals to seniors and disabled.

Some of whom had communicated to your board that they had been severely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic At that time, your board provided a total of $200,000 to assist programs in need for two months period of time. And my department facilitated the dispersal of those monies to assist programs who can meet minimal documentation requirements. Since early 2021, multiple providers of senior nutrition have approached board members individually or the board as a whole to ask for financial assistance.

The purpose of my presentation today is simply to educate your board at a summary level on the services currently being provided by the nine nonprofit meal delivery providers in the county, as well as other associated providers. It is my hope that this information will empower you with a general understanding of those providing services and those being served.

To gather this information, we created a survey to elicit the number of people being served, any eligibility criteria for participation, the use of paid versus volunteer drivers, the cost per meal of each provider, how their programs were financially supported, and the number of meals being provided each week. Mr. Contweis then proceeded to engage the executive leadership of each program in order to obtain as complete and accurate information as possible.

When looking at the current array of services being provided and the size of the population being served, it is important to recognize that the COVID pandemic changed the landscape in meal delivery to seniors and the disabled. Prior to the pandemic home deliveries were focused On people who have limitations making it difficult for them to leave their homes, to go to a congregate meal site at a senior center or to obtain food from a grocery store and prepare it themselves.

Not only did COVID shut down congregate meal sites, the pandemic caused seniors and the disabled to be cautioned to stay home and not venture out to restaurants or grocery stores. And the programs serving those populations did everything they could to meet this increased need. The current public health emergency has been extended to October 13, 2022 and it is likely to be extended again as the 60 day notice promised prior to this being lifted at the federal level has not occurred as of this time.

We identified nine nonprofits in the county that are providing home delivered meals to seniors and the disabled. They vary in terms of how many times per week they deliver, how many meals per week they provide, whether they deliver hot meals, bagged meals or refrigerated meals. What their suggested donation is per meal from the clients, whether they use paid or volunteer drivers, how they fundraise, how they obtain their food, what geographic areas they serve and how they identify who is eligible for their services.

The following five slides summarize some of this information. Table one shows that there are 2,419 clients being served with 8,850 meals per week and some of those meals are hot, some refrigerated and some bagged. Please keep in mind that these numbers are not static and they vary from week to week. Table two shows the range of costs per meal and the range of suggested donation by recipient.

The cost per meal is impacted by whether or not volunteer drivers are used, whether or not the administration of the program is volunteer or paid. Whether the meals are purchased or prepared by the provider and other factors. Table three shows the sources of funds as best we could ascertain, as this information was provided verbally by the providers. You can see in table three that a little over one-third of the total funds obtained to support the programs are coming from fundraising and charitable donations and unspecified sources.

Table four shows that five of the programs obtain their meals from a contracted provider, while four of the programs prepare the meals themselves. One program uses paid drivers exclusively, five programs use volunteer drivers exclusively and three programs use a combination of both. This slide shows the level of general fund support in the current year To four of the programs by way of the Human Services Commission and an action stemming from the June 14th budget hearings.

This slide shows the level of support requested and awarded from community development block grant funds. And this slide shows the general fund contribution that flows through the Department of Social Services to the Area Agency on Aging as the local match for their Federal Older American Act funding. All totaled in the current fiscal year, the county is contributing $166,974 to six programs as listed on this and the prior two slides.

The revenues previously shared do not capture several things, including the value of volunteer staff, volunteer drivers, donated food and other non-monetary supports that keep the programs operating. It is important to highlight that the Food Bank of Santa Barbara County provides fresh produce, dairy and other foods on a countywide basis, including to some of the organizations providing home delivered meals.

Also, the Wisdom Center which is a for-profit licensed healthcare facility provides many services to their clients including meals at their site as well as home delivered meals. While our initial focus in conducting our survey in order to make this presentation was on the providers we soon recognized that you would not have a complete picture of home delivered meal services without spending a moment focused on some of the challenges faced by the recipients of these services.

Some of the recipients have an inability to manage food that is intended to be consumed over several days due to their refrigeration capacity, lack of appliances for warming food and cognitive or physical limitations in remembering or being able to prepare the food for consumption. Further just like all of us recipients have certain foods that they like, certain foods that they will tolerate and certain foods that they won't eat If the meals are not consumed in their entirety, the nutritional value intended for the recipient is diminished.

Lastly prior to COVID an important part of the Home Delivered Meals program was the regular interaction with the drivers delivering the meals. With the onset of COVID some programs shifted to delivering more meals at a time and less frequently which meant that deliveries were occurring Maybe once a week or once every other week instead of three or four days a week.

And some programs shifted to dropping off meals on the person's porch, rather than having direct contact with the recipient in order to avoid any health concerns for the recipient or the driver. I want to point out that while we did not find long waiting lists with the programs, and there was only one program that had a short waiting list. That was not the case in January of 2021 when I was acting on behalf of your board dispersing at $200,000 to the programs. And at that time there were quite a few programs that have long waiting lists and the money that you provided cause those to be taken care of.

So there's a great volatility over time, depending upon the current funding of the programs as well as the number of people that are raising their hands saying that they are in need. The eventual lifting of the public health emergency will impact some of the programs in terms of who are they are able to utilize their funds to continue to serve at home. Currently, the public health emergency allows for federal funds to be used for people to be served in their homes without any limitations on their abilities at home and so once the public health emergency gets lifted those people would have to return to receiving their meals at our congregate meal site However, it is not known at this time if the previously established congregate meal sites will be able to be reestablished in the same numbers and at the same locations.

It is important to understand that some of those currently served by home delivery do not have deficits in the activities of daily living and In conclusion, the COVID pandemic has reshaped the structure of many programs that provide meals to seniors and the disabled in our community. The good news is that many of the programs in operation prior to the pandemic have been able to be resilient in adapting to drastically changed circumstances and there are not significant waiting lists for services.

However, what future operations look like post-pandemic and post the federal public health emergency remains to be seen. It is clear that our county is benefiting from a significant level of investment on the part of non-profit programs that deliver meals in one form or another, the food bank and other providers. Those working for and volunteering with all of these organizations are passionate and committed.

And I'm happy to take your questions.

Thank you Mr. Nielsen. Questions from the board? Supervisor Lavinino.

I really appreciate the report. It's been frustrating, seems like every year at budget time you know we get these last minute requests and while they are obviously we all want to make sure that any senior disabled individual out there is receiving a meal if they want it. The numbers are...I don't want to say they're insignificant dollar-wise but for the county You know, it's not that much money. It's just I want to make sure that it's going in the right place and being spent wisely.

So got a few questions. I really appreciate you bringing this because kind of gives us the macro level view of this. So who...you don't need to name them but are the ones that didn't respond? Are they significant players in the piece of this? I mean are we missing

No supervisor through the chair was not missing we were mr. Contreras was able to make contact with all of the programs There were a couple of programs where we were not to get able to get as much of the information We were seeking as others and that's why the numbers in the charts represent I kind of like in that neighborhood reality than precise, right? But we should be in the ballpark