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.0:00 – 0:0415 turns
Good morning. I will call to order the December 12th, 2023 meeting of the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors. Madam Clerk please call the roll.
Roll call, called by Clerk of the Board
Show transcript
Next item of business is the minutes for December 5th. Is there a motion?
Move approval.
Second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? It's unanimous. CEO's report.
Good morning chair and board members this morning I'm happy to present to you the kickoff of our annual Toys for Tots drive The county is sponsoring the Unity Shop and Marine Corps Toys for Tots drive. County employees and the public may donate new unwrapped toys. Collection bins are located in the county administration building, in Santa Barbara and in Santa Maria through December 15th. Collection boxes are also located at fire county stations. All these toys will go to low income children in our community.
And Angela Miller-Bevan from Unity Shop is joining us today If the board would please, if you want to make mention of your toys and then come down and officially top off the box. Any comments on your toys this year? Supervisors?
Of course. But why don't we go, anybody want to go first? Sure. I'll lead off. Mr. Lavinino. Thank
you. So while many of you think this is a classic toy, this is being repackaged now. So this is like a United States congressional toy. This has the red trying to knock their head off with blue and used to be called Rock'em Sock'em Robot. So this was one of my favorite toys growing up so I'll be donating this one.
Mr. Nelson?
Yes. Fourth district wouldn't be complete without having something agricultural related. So we actually have a John Deere Lego set here, including some John Deere toys. I want to thank Calculus Machinery, one of our local tractor dealers for helping to get this for us together so thank you.
All right. Ms. Caps?
Yeah this toy is from a beloved part of our second district, Chaucer's. Which is good place to patron these days local shop and it's a toy that I would have loved to have had as a kid as I tried to play vet my puppies back then. It's an actual vet set for fostering kids in their love animals.
Ms.
Hartman? My gifts foretell some upcoming policy issues we're going to deal with. This is the Ag Enterprise Ordinance and this is a farm stand that ordinance is designed to promote more economic opportunities for those on agricultural land, and then this is the Recreation Master Plan. This is a camper so more to come!
Apparently Ms. Hartman and myself always think about this in terms of policy things, so we have Chicken Little from Chicken Little a little toy store just a block away local store but I hope people from Public Works and Marburg are watching because this is the county's first non-fossil fuel recycling truck so It's recycled materials, of course. And you know, we, Kate put a little EV sticker on it just so that we can make sure we model the future of greenhouse gas emission reduction for Santa Barbara County.
Was that made in China or? No, I'm just kidding.
If you could please come down and top off your boxes with Angela
0:05 – 0:085 turns
Bob opened his toy nice.
Doubled. So we're seeing double the amount of children and families coming through our doors and We're looking at giving out thousands of gifts this year, so this is very helpful. And I want to say thank you for shopping at Chicken Little and Chowsers because Chowser's has actually been very great for us. They help us to get the word out about our Messiah Sing Along which is this evening at First Presbyterian Church.
So thank you so much and please keep giving toys!
Madam Clerk, are there any announcements or changes to our agenda today?
Chair Williams and members of the board. I do have a couple quick announcements this morning. I have a quick announcement to make on administrative item number 11. Administrative Item Number 11 is from the County Executive Office. It is to consider recommendations regarding the appointment of Metta Richardson as the Child Support Services Department Director. And prior to Board action on administrative item number 11 in accordance with government code section 54953 subdivision C3 The Child Support Services Department Director salary information shall be summarized verbally. Effective January 8th, 2024 Metta-Richardson's biweekly salary will be approximately $7,273.
And lastly 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 two of the agenda Individuals that would like to provide verbal public comment may do so via zoom by registering in advance via the link available on page 2 If you have any comments, please contact questions. Please contact the clerk of the board's office at area code 8 0 5 5 6 8 2 2 4 0 again That number is eight zero five five six eight two two four zero and that concludes my announcements for today
Thank you. I also have two items pulled by the public, A33 and A44. A44 can only speak to the setting of the hearing not the item itself. I just want to remind members of the public. And can I get a motion on the balance of the agenda including A11.
0:08 – 0:1010 turns
So moved.
Second is a motion by Hartman's second by Labanino all those in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed? It's unanimous. A33
Chair Williams and members of the board, administrative item number 33 is from the Public Works Department. It is to consider recommendations regarding a Mission Canyon Trailhead Improvements funding agreement with Southern California Edison and this is in the first district. And we have one request to speak from the public on this item and we are going to Zoom with Ray Pock. Ray?
Thank you for being here today, Ray. Mr. Pock?
And Ray, we have unmuted you. Oh, there you go.
Hi, I was only requesting to participate if they're to respond to any public comments. I don't have any comments on the item. Thank you.
And that concludes public comment on this item.
So I'll just give it brief explanation of that this item. Mr Park is from Southern California Edison and as mitigation There's a mitigation agreement with the neighborhood that includes improvements to the egress at tunnel, the elimination of a couple parking spots but the addition of more parking spots which I thought was a productive direction by the neighborhood in Southern California Edison. There's small portion of this that's in the city.
And it will be well-received by the neighborhood. Can I get a motion on A33? Move to approve.
Second.
All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes. A44 again is a setting of the agenda so please keep your comments to the setting of the agenda.
0:10 – 0:1411 turns
Chair Williams and members of the board, administrative item number 44 Is a set hearing for January 9th, 2024 to consider recommendations regarding an ordinance amending chapter seven animals and foul article one and adding Article nine roosters to regulate and to limit the number of roosters by personal size that may be kept on a single premise in Santa Barbara County. And this is from the public health department. We have two requests to speak on this item and we are going to zoom to begin with Lee Heller to be followed by Susan Ashbrook Lee.
Chair William and member of the board. I will be brief because this is just a set hearing item, but I want to express my appreciation and support for moving forward with this to address the neighborhood noise concerns that rooster operations represent as well as the animal welfare issues. So I appreciate what you're doing and I plan to be there on January 9th. Thank you.
Thank you.
And
we will now go to Susan Ashbrook. Susan? Hi, I want to. Can everyone hear me? Yes we can please proceed.
Okay thank you. I want to thank you for allowing me to speak for a few minutes today. I think it's very important for this rooster ordinance to go through. It impacts me and my neighbors in Sabata Canyon who live next door are close to a rooster facility. If you're not already aware, roosters make noise 24-7 and we've already seen two neighbors sell and move because they live next door to a rooster operation.
One neighbor said he had to wear noise canceling headsets to step outside his home. 20 roosters as proposed is 19 too many. No one eats roosters They live in cages and cockfighting is a cruel and an illegal game. I invite any of you that are interested to see how they live, to my home. They live behind black mesh fences or under enclosures under oak trees making it difficult to count 20 or the 160 that animal services are telling me live in one of these facilities now.
Living in a residential ag and EDRN community, I think one rooster is more attuned to family use. At most four could be considered reasonable family use in an EDRN Ag One neighborhood. Thank you so much for considering this proposal.
Thank you, can I get a motion on A44 which again is just to set the hearing?
So moved.
Is there a second?
Second.
All those in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Okay now let's go to item 47.
0:14 – 0:162 turns
Chair Williams and members of the board, administrative item number 47 is sponsored by Supervisor Labanino. It is to adopt a resolution of commendation honoring Maria Salud Rodriguez de Martinez as the longest living Latina in Santa Maria and wishes her continued health for years to come. And joining us in person today we have Maria Salud Rodriguez de Martinez, Griselda Gomez, her ninth daughter, Alma Rosa Gamez, her 10th daughter Montse Norris and Diana Norris.
And if you can please join us all at the podium, I'll go ahead and read the resolution into the record. Whereas Maria Salud Rodríguez de Martínez was born on December 8th, 1920 in Quidoga, Michigan. And whereas Maria had 10 children and adopted 5 more. And whereas Maria has 34 grandchildren, 85 great-grandchildren and 48 great-great-grandchildren. And whereas Maria has survived many hardships including being widowed at 1979 and surgery at the age of 95.
And whereas at 103 years old, Maria is now the longest living Latina in Santa Maria. Now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors honors Maria Salud Rodriguez de Martinez as the longest living Latina in Santa Maria and wishes her continued health for years to come. Passed and adopted today
Thank you. Item 48.
0:16 – 0:205 turns
Let's go to item
48.
Chair Williams and members of the board, Administrative Item number 48 is sponsored by Supervisor Hartman. It is to adopt a resolution of accommodation honoring Alicia Hawkins upon her retirement from the Planning and Development Department after over 25 years of faithful and distinguished service to the citizens of Santa Barbara County. And joining us in person today we have Alicia Hawkins And our planning and development department director, Lisa Plotman.
And I'll go ahead and read the resolution, whereas Alicia Hawkins retired on December 10th, 2023 following more than 25 years of dedicated service with the Santa Barbara County Planning and Development Department's Building and Safety Division. And whereas Alicia began her career with building and safety in 1998 As extra help in the Buelton office working as a building permit technician. She was hired full time in late 1998, working in Buelton until joining the Santa Barbara office in 2010. Throughout her career she has trained many employees and been a guiding force that has helped build several successful careers at Santa Barbara County and has been a constant source of knowledge wisdom and support for co-workers and applicants alike.
And whereas during her career Alicia has issued a countless number of building and film permits throughout Santa Barbara County Has provided guidance and support to applicants, including those attempting to rebuild in the aftermath of the January 9th 2018 debris flow. And she continued to demonstrate her commitment to the public by providing in person counter service at building and safety throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.
And whereas the planning and development department will miss this caring and helpful office moms legendary office decorating skills during the holidays and her contagious laughter that quite often finishes with a snort. And whereas Alicia Hawkins, who is known for her consummate service customer service depth and breadth of knowledge. And above all, her kindness has retired and is looking forward to attending Los Angeles Angels baseball games, spending time with her daughters Shaina and Risa and her granddaughter Reagan and working on home improvement projects with their husband Mark now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors of Santa Barbara County does hereby acknowledge Alicia Hawkins For her longtime commitment to the citizens of Santa Barbara County, passed and adopted today.
I just wanted to acknowledge Alicia. She is the consummate problem solver, no matter what people bring a problem to her and she works on it quickly and efficiently. She's managed all kinds of difficult situations and been an incredible asset to the department, and we're really going to miss her and her cheerful spirit. And we're very excited for her to enjoy her retirement with her family. Thank you.
I just want to thank you, to the board, Planning and Development Department, and pretty specifically the awesome building and safety team that I've worked with for so long. Thank you.
0:20 – 0:255 turns
Now is the time for general public comment, time for the public to speak on items that are not on the agenda. Madam Clerk, are there any requests to speak?
Chair Williams and members of the board, yes we have three requests to speak in general public comment today. We're going to begin here in Santa Barbara with Mary Folsom to be followed by James Silva. Mary?
Good morning members of the board. I attended last week's meeting and I heard Supervisor Williams inform the audience of your very wisely made rule that applause is limited. that applause is limited to ceremonial procedures. I also watched the video of your November 7th meeting, and especially the applause on the adoption of your resolution in reference to Israel. Clearly you considered this a ceremonial resolution.
But ceremonial resolutions should not result in the exacerbation of strained relations between cultural segments of the community. Ceremonial resolutions Should not cause pain to a segment of the community who are grieving over tragic losses being suffered by their relatives and friends. Ceremonial resolutions should not result in supporters of an ethnic cleansing operation congratulating you for your courage.
There have been many opinion posts in media on this topic. Even those who had no position on Gaza posted opinions that you'd better serve your constituents by not venturing into this issue. When a ceremonial resolution results in such unintended consequences, the only right thing to do is rescind it. I can understand a large temptation to hope it doesn't just blow away but I urge you not to leave this black mark on the record and do the right thing. Thank you for your time.
We will remain in Santa Barbara and go to James Silva, to be followed by Karen Hauenstein who is our final speaker and general public comment. James?
Good morning. I'm here to Talk about the resolution, not necessarily the resolution per se but about the Israel-Palestine situation. I noticed that your resolution stated that it supported Israel's efforts for peace but that was when there was about 10,000 dead and now there is 20. Not counting the ones under the rubble. At the time of your resolution, it was about 70% women and children.
They say 50% now. So I wonder how that could happen? And I just think well at one point in time, I used to think that Israel was the victim surrounded by a bunch of crazy brown Arabs who just wanted to destroy them. And Jews have been persecuted in Europe Eastern Europe, Russia. They wanted a homeland so that they could escape that as far as the Zionist movement goes.
But it's important to know that there are other people who are Jews who aren't Zionists and who may not approve of taking another people's land so that they can have a home. And so I would like to hold up these maps for you First of all, I'd like to say that I used to think that Israel was a victim because I was just a victim myself of the America's propaganda and what we get in our media.
But what I've learned from almost everything I've learned about Israel is from Jews. Blumenthal, Halper, Chomsky. One thing that affected me and kind of helped me out was to see that in 1946, before the UN established the state of Israel and gave most of the land to the Israelis, actually the Jews owned 6% of the land at that time. And they owned, and there were 3% of the population before the British brought in more Jews to settle in Palestine because they wanted to control that area. Because they actually between India and Egypt, they needed to control that area. And they thought if they bring in a European We will now go to Karen Hauenstein, who is our final speaker.
Good morning.
0:26 – 0:292 turns
Karen with an eye. I'm here in front of you today speaking instead of being at work because I've been thrust into a situation in this county that has been dictated by corruption. That's why I'm here today and I'm sorry that I'm here to complain about it, but it's the only thing I can do is use my voice. When my parents accepted commercial cannabis tenants on their rural land in Sabata Canyon, we didn't know what we were about to get into.
In this county everything that happened to us regulatory wise was controlled by Dennis Buzanich He made claims on this dais to our entire county about how things would be run and how things would be treated, and how people would be treated, and how landowners would be treated. And I'm sorry but it's probably visible that I am traumatized by the experience I've been put through The sheriff's office and the district attorney's office has evidence concerning the trauma that I have been put through by people who have false reported and borne false witness to felonious proportions.
I'm sorry, but I'm getting a headache because I'm standing up here talking to you about this because it does affect me so personally. Joyce Dudley back in 2020 did not perform any due diligence, she didn't perform any effective due diligence when she sued me personally in civil court. In case number 20CV02746. She bankrupted me and made it so it's very difficult for me to help my elderly parents who are currently being targeted by those cannabis tenants.
They formed a pass-through organization with the state of California called Le Fuque LLC. It's spelled L E P H U Q U E. That's what they named it.
Thank you, that is your time. And that concludes general public comment.
0:29 – 0:434 turns
Thank you. We will go to departmental item number one.
Chair Williams and members of the board, departmental item number one is from the social services department. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the farm worker resource center project update
Good morning Chair Williams and Supervisors. Daniel Nielsen with the Department of Social Services, and we are here to give you a presentation on the Farmworker Resource Center program from its inception after the grant was awarded up until the current time. I do want to note that we will be back before your board in March of next year for another presentation at which time we will be looking at the future of the program Giving you recommendations regarding what the scope of the program should look like as it moves forward beyond the initial grant period, and addressing whatever other information we have at that time regarding funding from outside sources to support the ongoing nature of the program. With me today to make the presentation is our Workforce Development Board Executive Director Luis Servine and Cesar Guerrero who is the Program Coordinator for the Farmworker Resource Center Program.
Good morning, Chair Williams and Supervisors. We are very pleased to have this opportunity to provide this update on our Farm Worker Resource Center. We have prepared a, I promise, a short presentation for you today. Today's presentation will cover the following. First we'll provide some background information on the project, an overview of the project design and structure, and an update on the implementation activities and services provided as of now.
To provide some context, the Farm Worker Resource Center also known as Proyecto Campesino in Spanish is funded primarily by a state grant established through AB 941. This bill aimed to establish farm worker resource centers. The funding was made available through a competitive grant awarded by the State of California Department of Community Services and Development. We were one of three counties that received this funding.
The funding includes $833,000 through this competitive grant and a 25% local funding match of general funds in the amount of $208,000. The Department of Social Services and the Workforce Development Board are overseeing this project which began five months ago in July and will come to an end May 2024. The Department of Social Services and the Workforce Development Board in partnership with the Public Health Department conducted a needs assessment. The needs assessment was done to gather actionable information about the resources, needs of farm workers and their families. How to best structure that farm worker resource centers and impact of social factors within the farm worker population?
That this assessment consisted of the following, data collection gathered through over 2,000 surveys received from farm workers and family members. Focus groups conducted with representatives from community-based organizations, education providers, health and human service agencies, employers, and healthcare providers. And one on one key informant interviews performed with community based organizations and employers.
Working within the allowable activities of the grant, the recommendations gathered through the deeds assessment process created a foundation for our project and how our services are delivered. These were included as part of a project implementation plan document in which we identified and operationalized those recommendations to meet the needs of community members.
Much of the success of the program thus far has contributed to ongoing feedback and recommendations provided by a newly established community advisory workgroup. The group provides strategic guidance to staff as to the best approach to deliver services. The current members include Jennifer Camacho from the California Farm Worker Foundation, Jose Chang, Santa Barbara Ag Commissioner.
Holly Chavez from the Community College South Central Coast Regional Consortium. Jose Clemente, Division Chief for the Department of Social Services. Kerry Jordan, HR Director for Bay Farms and local employer. Thomas Lamica, a Dean from Alan Hancock College and a member of the Workforce Development Board Executive Committee. And Claire Weinman, President of the Growers and Shippers Association.
Secondly, we will not be able to do our work without the support of our community partners. The objective of the Farm Worker Resource Center is to offer farm workers and their families information and a wide range of services provided by community-based organizations, other government agencies and county departments. This slide includes some of the organizations we work with. So, we currently collaborate with over 40 partners that are working on a daily basis servicing our farm workers and their family members.
These are our staff. So the staff assigned to the project consists of our coordinator Cesar Guerrero and two staff Ramon Ramirez and Leticia Santiago. All of our staff are fluent in Spanish, with one being trilingual in Spanish, English and Mixteco. I'll have passed professional and personal connection to the ag industry. Our mission and vision statements were created based on grant requirements and needs assessment recommendations.
Both have in mind building trust and enhancing accessibility of services for farm workers, their families, and our ag employers. Our vision, for example, is to provide access to services and programs that address the needs of farm workers, their families, and employers throughout the county of Santa Barbara. Some of the project goals as mandated by the grant and recommendations established in its assessment include to serve as a liaison for farm workers, employers and other representatives in the ag community.
To conduct countywide outreach, serving as a one-stop shop while providing information on available resources and services to farm workers and their families. To build trust and relationships with farm workers, community partners, and employers. To foster collaboration with ag employers to effectively support and respond to their needs. And to promote and enhance the reputation of the ag industry in Santa Barbara County.
Lastly, as required by the grant, the Farm Workers Resource Center staff provide referrals to six main domains. These include number one employment assistance. The services part of employment assistance include resources on job readiness training, job referrals training needs. Number two, it's education access and support which includes school supplies, information on computer literacy classes, English and Spanish language education, GED and high school diploma acquisition.
Number three is rental assistance, including information on financial literacy and financial management classes. Number four is emergency support services and referrals which includes access to rental and deposit assistance, temporary housing assistance, utility assistance, food and clothing, and citizenship and immigration legal services. is the Health and Human Services, which includes mental health services and childcare assistance. And lastly number six is the Labor and Employment Rights and Legal Services, which includes referrals to address wage and hour claims, tenant rights and homelessness prevention, occupational health safety and safety issues, and assistance with a completion of forms and documents.
This next slide provides an update on our progress during the first five months of the project At the bottom of this slide show the three levels of engagements we are currently tracking. On the bottom left-hand corner is a number of farm workers engaged. This number, 3,578 represents the number of farm workers who our staff have interacted with and having provided information about our project through the various outreach events.
The second level of engagement is the number of farm workers registered on our system. This means that farm workers are provided, farm workers provided with their basic contact information. Now this is optional but once registered a farm workers are able to receive information about services, special events or information and an event of an emergency. At number three, this number is required by our grant is the number of services requested by farm workers. Depending on the service that farm worker is connected has a warm handoff to one of our community partners.
Once that worker is connected or referred to an agency Farm Worker Resource Center staff are subsequently conducting follow-up calls to ensure that the workers receive So as of November 1,000 farm workers have been connected and served These services are broken down in the pie chart. As you can see, the majority have been in education access and support, specifically requests for school supplies and emergency services which includes primarily requests for food, clothing, rent assistance, and immigration legal services.
These two domains represent over half of our referrals thus far. This next slide provides an update on our outreach activities since the launch of our project. I wanted to point out that all the pictures that you see in this presentation are actual pictures of farm workers and local employers, and our staff. So there are three primary methods we're currently using to reach our farm workers. Number one, by participating in community outreach events.
Number two, through events coordinated in partnership with our local employers and number four by offering remote office hours. So this slide shows the community outreach events during the first few months of the project. We have participated We are extremely thankful to the community organizations who are supporting our farm workers and who are inviting us to these various community events.
The second and most successful strategy used to connect with our farm workers has been by collaborating with our ag employers. We are especially thankful to our ag employers and growers for their support. As of November, we have collaborated on 11 special events with employers. These events take place at the employer's worksite and are customized to the needs of the employers and their workers.
This slide contains the names and logos of various employers who have supported our project as of now. The third method we use to reach our farm workers is by providing remote mobile office hours in different locations throughout the county. This allows us the opportunity to reach farm workers in remote locations. On the screen, it's our current schedule. I mentioned that this schedule is fluid as the needs of our community members are ever changing and we have adapted our program design and delivery or services with our established capacity to meet those needs.
This slide shows our mobile center. This vehicle provides the opportunity for our team to be able to travel throughout our county and reach our farm worker community. The mobile center is equipped with all the necessary tools and technology for tasks such as printing, copying, electronic communication with other agencies and employers. Now this streamlines the referral process while also providing a convenient space for in-person meetings including one on one and small group interactions and trainings.
In addition to providing in-person services, we have launched a website. We are active on social media. We utilize platforms that our farm workers and employers frequent including Facebook and Instagram. On average our posts have over 500 views. In the trust of our community thus far, we are discovering and evolving our approach to better meet those needs. We are very appreciative of the support and engagement received by our Board of Supervisors, community based organizations, members of our Community Advisory Board Group and employers.
To conclude that Department of Social Services and the Workforce Development Board are honored to be able to lead these efforts. Now this concludes our presentation and we are happy to take your questions.
0:43 – 0:4911 turns
Questions from the board? I will let Ms. Hartman go first because I think she clicked her thing first, even though I'm not seeing this yet. Go ahead.
Well, first of all, thank you. I've seen you out and about in many different places in the community and there's lines people are really using it. There's a lot of excitement about it. And I think that the level of expertise you can bring out into the field is really extraordinary. I had a question about slide 11, the education access. That was the pie chart and you mentioned that school supplies. I just wonder if you could elaborate a little? It surprised me that there was that much interest or desire so I just wondered if you would unpack that a little bit more.
And I can start and I'll pass it over to Cesar. So part of our outreach activities when we go out and interact with the farm workers, we do provide the option for them to be able to get school backpacks so we did that at the beginning of the project before this, the beginning of the school year during our kickoff event. So we had backpacks for farm workers that will bring their kids to our events then we will provide a backpack with supplies. Cesar you want to talk about it a little bit more?
Good morning. So what we do is basically obviously with school supplies when our farm workers come to our mobile unit, they obviously school supplies don't last forever. So one of the things they always ask is like, Do you have any school supplies for my children? Things like that so we will connect them with backpacks, school supply kits if there's any type of specific need that they need specifically for school then we'll be able to provide that service for them at a later date that they can be able to then receive.
Okay, so it's not that they're wanting to learn English or they're being put out of jobs by robots but really just for their children. Yeah well that's interesting to know and I think I know public health had a fair and gave out school supplies and that was very successful maybe we need to do more in that area. Geographically, do you have a sense of maybe next time a pie chart to give us a sense of where your I don't know how we would divide up farm worker communities in absolute numbers and then how many are availing themselves but that would be interesting information to have.
Yes, Supervisor Hartman to the chair. So we do track the demographics of the farm workers that we serve. So for our next presentation will be happy to bring a breakdown of where they live or where they work.
Terrific, and I'd also be interested in knowing how many are single and how many are family members. That I think goes to the kinds of services that we provide. So my last question is just what has surprised you most since you've started working and been there since the beginning?
Yeah, and I guess I'll start and I'll pass it over to Cesar. He's the one in the field with our staff doing a lot of the work but I think one of the items that surprises even though it's not shocking is really the level of need in the community and each individual needs A lot of our farm workers struggle, for example, completing basic forms for services. And I'm talking about forms that might be in English or Spanish. So what we're finding is that we're having to spend a lot of time with individual farm workers helping them and walking them, for example, through the process of applying for any.
All right, thank you. Yeah so that's one thing that is not surprising but we I guess we were not expecting that our staff were going to be dedicating that much time with the individual farm worker.
Supervisor Mendoza, through the chair. So one of the biggest things that we experience is obviously with the language barrier, obviously with the Mixtec community. One of the benefits that we provide is that we have an actual staff member who does speak Mixteco and so that seems to attract the farm workers do kind of relate to her on that aspect. But that has to be one of the biggest challenges, just being able to complete the forms which actually has been very beneficial to our program because they do need assistance with just a basic application when it comes to just even CalFresh applications, Medi-Cal, any type of programs you know government forms things like that. So that's probably one of the biggest things that we've seen where they just need more help with completion of forms
So one final comment, you'll be coming back in March with recommendations for us about what we should be doing going forward. But you had a really impressive list of partners there and I wonder if they can be engaged as well to meet some of these needs?
Supervisor Hartman, through the Chair. Yes and they are in terms of our growing together at this time coming to a joint understanding of what the needs are and how they can best be met so when we come back in March our perspective about what the future of the program could look like in addition to what funding we've been able to find will also include an articulation Who all is going to be involved moving forward if the program moves forward in supplying these services and partnering?
0:49 – 0:546 turns
Mr. Nelson,
yes thanks Chair Williams. To expand on that comment about the forms that you guys are talking about I think it would be helpful for my colleagues to kind of hear some of the stories that you guys have experienced. It's not only There's this help that's needed for forms, but there's been a cottage industry of people who fill out forms for farm workers because they can't do it themselves. So they have often charged exorbitant amounts of dollars to just fill out a governmental form and so that's something that it's a barrier for many families and so if you know Oscar would you or would you Cesar sorry would you continue with that?
That's correct. So one of the things when it comes, when we have farm workers come into our office or our mobile unit is that they're experiencing people or agencies charging X amount of dollars just to complete a simple form. One of the things that we discovered was basically when it comes to just doing a set up an appointment with the Mexican consulate. People don't realize that they can actually use their smartphone Through the WhatsApp app and be able to set up an appointment for free, but that they go to other agencies who charge them an X amount of dollars just to set up an appointment that they may or may not even get an appointment with. So what we offer is we were not just only provide that service to them, but we also educate him on how they can actually do it on their own time so that they're able to do that whenever they are available to you know, set up that appointment with the Mexican consulate.
So simple forms when it comes for example Since we work for the Department of Social Services, Medi-Cal, CalFresh applications. Obviously the forms themselves can be a little bit complicated so they do come to us and we're able to be there right there at the Workforce Resource Center where we are able to provide that immediate service for them and be able to connect that service automatically and be able to submit it at the same time. So we're able to streamline the process with not just the forms but with any type of verifications in relation to not just the Department of Social Services but with any other partner agencies.
Thank you, Mr. Burrow and also you guys did about 2000 surveys what were the top things that end up on those surveys? I know that may not have translated to which of the services now you're providing but what was showing up when he has did those surveys and focus groups?
Yes, Supervisor Nielsen through the chair. The needs assessment which was included as part of the board letter has a lot of content, a lot of good information. Really the needs assessment really provided the initial sort of recommendations for how we wanted to implement the center. One of the biggest findings for example was what's the level of literacy with our community and that translates to why we're talking about the forms It was, it also recommended the office hours. So recommended afternoon, recommended weekend office hours.
So a lot of those recommendations that are contained within this assessment are things that we implemented as part of our implementation plan but the needs assessment itself is documented. It's a very good document. The state has really praised our county for that needs assessment report And as we continue to expand our program, we definitely want to utilize a lot of those insights that are contained within that assessment for us to be able to kind of expand it and have a really deep impact in our community and with this population. Thank you,
Mr. Servin. You know what? This grant when we applied for it, I was the deciding vote to get us there. And I took a lot of heat in our community for my position on this. And I've got to say after a year, this is the best case scenario I couldn't be happier with the work that you guys are all doing. I think you guys have hit it right down the middle, the amount of work that you guys have been able to do.
The trust that you've been able to build with both farm workers and employers. You guys are really becoming the face of county services for the farm worker community in our county. And I think that is a really important branding. Of our residents who aren't used to engaging with government and often fearful that are now, you know, registering with us and working through the system. And I just think that's a real testament to the work that you're all doing.
I definitely want to thank, you know, department head Mr. Nielsen and Mr. Servin but you know Caesar and Ramon and Letty. I mean they're really the feet on the ground doing a great job in our community. Like I said there was a lot of people concerned in our community Program would be hijacked and be used for other purposes, but this is doing exactly what the intentions of this board. And I think the legislation was looking for you know in other communities that had farm worker resource centers or that in the past.
I don't think that they were doing the kind of work that you have done. I think this is now with a model for the state. It's not more than just a hotline like a 2-1-1 type of situation. This is really getting boots on the ground connecting people who with needs in our community to the services that we already offer You know, this isn't really a new program. This is making sure that we have the connectivity you know it's not fiscally conservative to have a bunch of programs and have nobody use them right? And this is really a great program again I think Cesar is one of the young leaders in our county and I'm happy to see him take this team to the next level and I'm looking forward to supporting on this program moving forward.
0:54 – 1:0723 turns
Ms. Camps
Thank you. I also share, uh, I'm very impressed with the breadth of all that you're providing and the services to kind of tee off of my colleagues. I want to focus on the forms and the financial services that you're providing because I think there's so much opportunity. I would add to Supervisor Nelson's point that it's also not fiscally conservative to leave money on the table. And we know that we are every county does in terms of money from the state and federal government that's already been appropriated. So the fact that your folks are sitting down with People who have already earned money in the form of these well-intended programs, but often don't get to the finish line because the forms are very arduous or other barriers. So I really appreciate hearing that is I would love to know if we're going to start tracking enrollment in CalFresh which we know our county is only reaching about 70% of those eligible.
If at some stage we're going to actually have those metrics, because I think that would be really important. We actually can quantify then how much money we're bringing into our county that we would otherwise be missing out on and helping folks become more financially secure.
Yes, and that's a really great point. So one of the items that was approved as part of our proposal to the state for this project is the creation of a case management system to better track the services that are provided so we are currently working on that. We had a conversation with the state last week About that and Dave they gave us a green light to move forward with that So all those things are definitely things that we could definitely track For us to be able to kind of showcase the value and at the level services that we are provided. So definitely
good I think it's important because again, we can quantify in dollars What were the value of the work in addition to the value for families? But along those lines, I just wanted to add and give an update that my office and working with Mr. Nielsen and his team were working with Assemblyman Hart on simplifying the CalFresh form, because I think it's something like 200 questions and takes a lot of time with these sort of random questions that don't really bear on people's lives. So hopefully we'll help you do your job better and the folks that are actually sitting down with people.
I do want to ask Mr. Nielsen or maybe for either of you have you gotten into the area of the earned income tax credit yet? I know that takes more of a lift Because people actually have to come with their tax documents. But just to give the statistic there and the opportunity, we're missing about 12,000 people in our county that have earned up to $2,500 back yet don't receive it every year. So of those two or 3,000 that you're serving, I bet there's some that aren't receiving that Earned Income Tax Credit.
Even though the tax season hasn't really started yet, one of the things that we've done with the program is that we just had a financial literacy class about last week. So that was one of the things where we brought a credit union and one of the things that we discussed was to bring more awareness to the earned income tax. So one of them focuses on the programs who want to make sure that we educate the farm workers and anyone that comes to our workshops Or events to be able to understand there's other resources available that they may or may not be aware of. So we're definitely working on that, we do have working on the program with Allan Hancock College as well to try and get something going with that as well now that tax season is around the corner.
Yeah, we just actually met with Allan Hancock and they're getting their accountants geared up for, their student accountants geared up for tax season so the more synergies the better and I'm here to support you in those efforts. Thank you so much.
Well, I can always tell that there's a great presentation when I have questions that you answer in the middle of the presentation. That's a great sign and I just want to thank Mr. Servin and Mr. Guerrero for your work. The only thing I would have to add is that of course we have a lot of farmers in my district, in the first district, in Carpentria and Cuyama A lot of them are very proud of their wages and benefits. That would probably not view your visit to them as a threatening thing, so if I can kind of help arrange a visit to some of the larger employers it would be good for the people who work there to have the resources that you've been able to connect people with.
Chair Williams, just really quick. On our website we actually created an inquiry or a request form for anyone that might want to request our mobile center so the intention for that was for our employers, our businesses that might want to have us on their site so we do have a link on our website where they could submit basic information and we'll get in touch with them. Great. We appreciate it.
Mr. Labnino? Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think you brought up a good point there too. You know, I was surprised at some of the names that I saw with the employers. That's an awesome step because no matter what we do if we don't really get the buy-in from the employers then basically we're fighting an uphill battle so it's great that you've established some relationships there and I'm really looking forward to March to kind of see... The reason why I didn't support it at the time was not because I didn't think that the need was there.
I just didn't want us to get involved in a The state grant provided 75% of the funding and based on where we see the state right now, I don't really see them coming in refunding this in the future. So it's going to be interesting to see how we're able to sustain this moving forward but I think with the successes that you're bringing us, it's making it a lot easier to make that transition as well so One of the things I'm curious, okay so the mobile unit that's purchased that's done. Okay so that's ours no matter what all right?
So have we worked at all or outreach to the other two counties to see what kind of successes they're having are we learning anything from them and are they learning anything from us? So
Supervisor Lavagnino through the chair. So we meet with the state on a quarterly basis and we just had our most recent meeting which we, on their PowerPoint presentation slideshow that they did, they incorporated a lot of our pictures that you saw on our PowerPoint. And the reason for that is because they are very impressed I would say because of the way that we work with the growers and the employers and how we collaborated with them to try to make this a success so they actually were I mean, I don't want to brag anything but it seems like we're actually... Yeah, this is your time man. Let's do it! But it does seem like we are about maybe a step or two ahead of the other two counties just as far as how much impact, how much growth we've done with the growers and employers should then be able to connect with the farm workers directly so one of things that I presented to the state as well was obviously we want to work with the growers because we don't wanna It's more beneficial for my staff to be at an employer site for two hours and reach anywhere between 80 to 100 farm workers versus going to a shopping center, being there for seven hours and only reaching five to six people.
Right? So it's more beneficial to work alongside them and then try to work to see what is it the specific need that each growing employer has and how we can benefit by providing the resources that they feel will benefit their staff as well. And at the end of day two, that mobile unit is intended for their use as well. So if they have any type of trainings that they want to do out on their site, they're more than welcome to use the mobile unit because that's what it's intended for and we will just be there providing type of resources that they may need.
Excellent. All right. That sounds like a great strategy. Um, lastly I just, uh, in preparation for March, I think the thing that'll help me the most is kind of the breakdown of expenditures so that we can figure out as, as supervisor Williams was talking about, um, Oh, maybe a supervisor Hartman talking about our partners. And if we get the breakdown of expenditures figuring out how we might be able to divvy those up so that we can keep these resources the resources that were able to provide. Of course, working together with all of the partners to figure out who can pick up what end Of where we need to go so very excited about what you guys have been able to accomplish.
I was skeptical it's probably because your success is probably because of who we have on the team. So really appreciate all your hard work and looking forward to March
supervisor 11 through the chair if I may just a little bit more about March. So we always intended with this grant being just for a year or less than a year To learn as much as we could, and then look envision for the future of the program focusing in on what we learned were the priorities for all the players. And then at that point will no longer be constrained by the grant requirements so we'll be able to bring to you in March.
Our best thoughts based upon our experience and the willingness of our partners to continue to partner with us, as well as we're currently looking at outside funding that would pay for some of the types of things we currently do for farm workers. And I am a little bit more optimistic than you regarding the governor having something in January related to at least our county and the other two.
But in March, we'll have that sort of picture and hopefully a pretty good clarity The role that our partners are willing to play with us moving forward into the next year. Outstanding. Can you just refresh my memory who the other two counties are? One of them was Monterey and what was the other one? Stanislaus,
okay thank you. Are there any requests from the public to speak?
Chair Williams and members of the board we have no request to speak from the public on this item.
Mr. Nelson
Yes, thank you Chair Williams. I thought I would share some of the new technology that we have up here on the board where we can actually now project our laptop screen so let's see if this works here.
That could be dangerous.
Yeah it is. Make sure I'm right screen. Pushed a button click.
I might need some help from our engineers. All right, perhaps all could
we're doing I did that there might be a lot of Lord of the Rings right work. So what I was going to share was there was a picture of myself and the team from the Pharmacy Resource Center at the Santa Maria Parade of Lights where they had A float, and that's just really it's really neat that they have this presence. I think you know you guys all saw in the hours of operation that there, you know, they're not a nine to five group, they're out, you know, in the community, and these various events that we have as well Reaching out that Home Depot at 630 at night on Fridays, right? So I mean that's just shows the work and commitment of this team. And I'm really like I said really proud of it and looking forward to March as well so I'd be happy to make a motion chair to receive in file and be looking forward to taking action on this in the spring.
And I would second, but I have another more something else to ask.
Ms Hart
and this was really raised by Supervisor Nelson's description of what I would describe as price gouging for filling out the forms that is we know that People exploit vulnerable people, and that can kind of be underneath in terms of loans or in terms of other kinds of scams. And so I know that with regard to seniors the DA is constantly monitoring and tracking that. It just seems to me that to have your antenna out for that you're already working now with the financial Education course and I think that's terrific, but just to monitor and see if there are forces out there trying to exploit vulnerable people and alerting them to that.
So the last thing I just wanted to say was This program has been an amazing success. I remember Director Nielsen got his top team on writing the grant and we were very successful, just three in the whole state and we pulled it out in short order and that was because Director Nielsen did put his talented people on it and now he has done the same thing with actually making it work on the ground We're really proud of this success and thank you so much for your hard work.
It was an experiment, and it's an experiment that's working.
1:07 – 1:186 turns
Go ahead and press that second button Ms. Hartman. Great we have a motion and a second all those in favor please say aye. That's the motion is A and B. Aye. Any nays? Great, thank you for your time. Thank you for your work. We will go to departmental item number two.
Chair Williams and members of the board departmental item number twos from the Human Resources Department, the County Executive Office and the Community Services Department It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding a diversity, equity and inclusion DEI initiatives update.
Good morning.
That's better.
Good morning I'm Lindsay Walter and the principal analyst for the county executive office and joined with me today is Dr. Mighty from human resources June mighty Ashley Watkins from community services and Dr. Vernita Perkins From transform G joining us from zoom is going to be Anna Jacoba Anaya from public health. We're here today to present on the countywide initiatives to advance diversity, equity and inclusion So many of you may ask how did we get here? And I just want to kind of set a little background setting for those who are new or hearing On December 1st, 2020 following the murder of George Floyd and a decades long recognition of injustices towards members of our community. The board held a special meeting and received a presentation on efforts to develop a systemic approach on advancing racial equity and inclusion in Santa Barbara County.
On January 26, 2021 the Board approved a Statement of Commitment to Equity and Inclusion which commenced the County's journey of self-evaluation and reflection and commitment to organizational values, policies, practice, and service delivery which specifically and directly impacts countywide inequities and injustices. At the same time that fiscal year at the budget hearings, the board set aside one-time funding to advance and support equity within the county and continue this yearly set aside first with cannabis funding then transitioning to general fund when Canada's revenues declined.
Over half of that those dollars have been allocated to the equity grant program from community projects and they're remaining mostly from human resource programs. Additionally, in response to COVID and needed community recovery efforts, the board dedicated American Rescue Plan Act funding Services Recovery Plan on October 8, 2021 to support support expansion of language access and DI initiatives.
Over the past years departments have been working on these efforts both internally with county organizations and community facing with the services we provide. The County received an initial update in July 2022 on the status of human resources activities and today we're here to discuss subsequent updates on Human resources are internal efforts with departments and to highlight the DI community services and engagement plan.
Overall, we want to ground ourselves to our DI commitment on the fundamentals. We really are trained to focus on creating inclusive engagement in equitable customer service. For discussion on county workforce and culture, I'd like to turn it over to Doctor June Mighty.
Good morning members of the board so One of the things that the previous HR director presented back in July was just a reminder to the board that D&I and joint initiative is a journey. As we continue to embark on this journey and take a look at it in a moment in time, one of the things that was important was to have guiding principles acknowledging the fact that there's a lot that we don't know that we need to learn about ourselves and where we start with that is with ourselves in terms of the journey. And then, of course, one of the last things in terms of we don't have all the answers and we still don't even where we are in this journey and the journey continues.
When we started this journey, we began with a framework from GARE which is the Government Alliance on Race and Equity and so in the process one of the three things that we looked to do was to actually Normalize conversations relating to diversity, equity and inclusion. Develop different strategies as an organization how we were going to do those. And one of the principles that was presented to this board I know last year but we do not have a slide for or features in terms of how we would cascade those. And then of course in terms of having shared definitions, shared concepts and then move forward in terms Throughout the organization, so the updates that you're going to see from county HR today simply just gives you a highlight of some of those things that we have accomplished since 2020.
This slide it just gives you an overview by the years in terms of things that we have done one of the first things that we accomplish was to gain that. Your membership and of course, I know that you've seen the joint framework That was actually developed and then we created the DIP group We then moved on and the board supported and participated in the development of the statement of commitment That we have actually subsequent especially In our role in organizational talent development. We cascade this and share this information During our classes, do our various programs to make sure that we get that information and commitment out to our employees. We have a complete, we have the DNI Advisory Council and as well as Leadership Labs which the DIP group and the Leadership Labs actually started and were facilitated by one of my colleagues Henry Ventura here as well.
And then of course we moved on to the regional symposiums now we've had And actually, I'll wait until I get there. No, let's go. Yeah, because I'm just talking. So then the impact areas when we have the guiding principles, there were four impact areas that were identified in terms of where we wanted to look at and our action items and objectives all align and support these specific impact areas. And that is one to be able to promote the understanding and the dialogue around the E&I To invest in systems so that we could do so. And then, of course, prepare for equitable future. That's also sometimes looking in terms of our talent management and then driving accountability for it. So the next two slides here just really highlights in pictures because they say pictures are worth a thousand words Some of the things that we've accomplished again, the commitment statement in last year 20 in July.
I believe it was 2022 the equity as a survey was Have had three D&I regional symposiums there was one I believe is spring of 2022 one in the fall and then just one recently in spring of 2023 That was well attended. I still continue to receive on my LinkedIn page Feedback from employees who attended the D&I Regional Symposium about the impact that it had on them in the attendance.
DEI toolkits, when you saw the presentation last year there was just one toolkit at that point now we have three. One focuses on individual interpersonal and leadership And so these toolkits are currently available for employees. They've been developed. We launched a framework for the speaker series, which was launched this year. We also have the County Village Connect, which I want to highlight when we look at certain efforts that will highlight the kind of village connect was an effort that was actually generated.
Many of you are familiar with the leadership certificate program. So this is a project that actually came out of the leadership certificate program that aligned With the joint. As I mentioned, we did the speaker series started in September. We had the first speaker series there will be three more they're going to be done on a quarterly basis and so the next speaker series is scheduled for January 2024. We continue with crucial conversations which continues support the training we started when we did this start it in June. We started with HR professionals, just giving them sort of the first pilot taste of the program. And based on the feedback that we received from the participants, we want to continue the crucial conversations. Crucial conversations is not just about having dialogue around a D&I.
It is a tool and mechanism for having difficult conversations around any topic but it just serves that purpose. And then the other one that I do want to mention, in addition to the County Village Connect and the Village Voices, which is a newsletter that we launched this year, is the upcoming COSB Mentorship Program. Another project that is a result of the leadership program initiative.
The participants, the project team, is actually still serving as part of the committee and part of the formation of this pilot program that we hope to launch next year. On the line, we do have a participant, Anna Jacopo Anaya who I was having just an informal conversation with her. She reached out to me because she wanted to serve as a co-lead of the other abilities group which is part of County Village Connect and in that discussion she started talking about the benefits of the Oblamos program which I hadn't mentioned before which is also part of County Village Connect so I thought it would be great just for her to share in terms of her experiences.
1:18 – 1:275 turns
Hello, good morning. My name is Ana Jacobo Anaya. I'm an employee with the Department of Social Services and I'm here today to express my gratitude and appreciation of our organization's DEI initiatives, in particular the HROTD Hablemos training series. As a first generation immigrant whose first language is Spanish I often don't think about the amazing benefits of being bilingual. My husband, who is also a County of Santa Barbara employee only speaks English but is always seeking out opportunities to learn more Spanish in an effort to feel more connected not only to me and my culture but to the community he serves. Through his participation in the Hablemos program, he was able to feel much more confident in his understanding of introductory and key Spanish vocabulary terms.
He was also inspired to continue learning more of the Spanish language more about the Latino culture. We are both so thankful for the opportunity he had to attend the Hablemos training and highly encourage all other interested employees to attend this training series. Additionally, I'd also like to comment regarding the critical work being done in the field of DEI. Recently, I was able to connect with Dr. June Mighty regarding my interest in the Other Abilities Employee Resource Group I am incredibly proud of our organization's commitment to creating a community for differently abled employees.
As a neurodivergent individual, I feel so lucky to work in an environment where I can bring my whole self to work. And where my status as a differently abled staff member has never felt like a weakness, but is instead accepted and seen by my colleagues as a strength. I look forward to seeing our organization's continued growth in this area while also celebrating the great strides we have already made. Thank you for your time.
Thank you Anna and thank you. This just highlights some of the things that we've accomplished so far. We do have an action plan that is constantly Being revamped and adapted. And that's scheduled to go out for fiscal year 25 through 26, so more to come Thank you
Thank You questions to the board
So next we're gonna turn to a community facing efforts you've heard from June dr Perkins discussing some of those internal efforts with our employees and we really wanted to highlight some of the activities happening within our departments and Measures department has been meeting with my cop. They've been expanding outreach engagement and bilingual brochures, and they recently actually just created a new online complaint form where they can try to get real feedback from community members and make improvements and make changes to the things that they're hearing.
Public health has been doing some self assessment work. They had an engagement survey with all of their staff. They have farm worker vaccine clinics. They've had the COVID-19 response task force. And COVID-19 at home test kit distribution. Behavioral health wellness has been working in this area for quite a long time, it's one of the areas they were required to do as part of the mental health plan yet they have been keeping up their monthly cultural competency and diversity action team and they hosted the first countywide behavioral health equity summit in July 2023 which was open Members of the public and had over 150 attendees. Child Support Services has been really focusing on training and hiring, they upgraded their recruitment materials for caseworkers to try to attract a diverse backgrounds and experience.
And recently hosted a DEI training with on LGBTQ 101 with the Pacific Pride Foundation. And now I wanted to turn it over to Community Services Department, Ashley Watkins, to provide an overview of the activities happening in her department.
So the Community Services Department has three initiatives related to equity. The first of which is the Equity Advisory and Outreach Committee also known as the EAOC that was established by our Sustainability Division Largely to increase awareness and participation in various climate-related planning efforts that were going on throughout the county, EAOC meets bimonthly and they've provided input on the Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment, the 2030 Climate Action Plan, the Environmental Justice Element, and Active Transportation Plan among others.
The committee members also serve as ambassadors going out and providing information about the planning efforts that we have going on at the community. Leadership is diverse, we have organizations that range from the Santa Maria Energy to the Independent Living Resource Center and committee members who represent vulnerable or disadvantaged communities are eligible to receive a $100 stipend per hour of eligible activities so For things like participating in the EEOC meetings and conducting community outreach.
This particular initiative, I think has done a lot to kind of change how CSD and sustainability interacts with the community. It's kind of transitioned us from a more transactional relationship where we're going out getting information and input on a planning effort and then maybe not following up or you know not Continuing to engage in those relationships and so this has helped us kind of shift to a more relational relationship with our community members.
The second initiative is the Promotoras Network Outreach, and so a lot of you are probably familiar with this in the context of getting information out to the community around health issues. Something a little bit different with the Promotoras We've partnered with Planning and Development, Public Works Department and the Tri-County Regional Energy Network to conduct Spanish outreach with the Promotoras.
That is really a wide range of activities everything from surveys on housing needs to climate adaptation and environmental justice issues. They've also done presentations on things like our DIY Sustainability Toolkit And they're currently doing a lot of outreach related to electric vehicle education, as well as 3C-REN energy efficiency and electrification programs.
The third initiative that CSD is involved with is the Racial Equity Grant Program. This is administered by our Office of Arts and Culture in partnership with the Fund for Santa Barbara. We first kicked off this grant program In cycle one, which was 2022 and then cycle two. 23 we're currently underway with Cycle 3 the there's actually grant applications are due on January 22nd of 2024 so people can go to the Fund for Santa Barbara's website to access information about how to apply for those grants and once cycle three is complete The county will have distributed $820,800 to local organizations.
In your packet there's a full list of the organizations that received funding but just to kind of give a little flavor for some of the different organizations in cycle one entities that received grant awards range from Gateway Education to NAACP Supporting things like cultural festivals as well as parent workshops. In cycle two, we also saw a range of activities. Some of the organizations that received funding were C4 Lompoc culture collectives creating change and... California Santa Barbara focusing again on cultural festivals and celebrations And then also supporting recovery from untreated trauma.
1:27 – 1:333 turns
Now we'd like to move into our Community DEI Service and Engagement Plan. In 2021, the County Executive Office in coordination with the HHS Departments reviewed the key impacts of what was occurring in the health and human sectors as a result of COVID-19 to ensure economically socially and emotionally impact communities and address recovering areas. Across the US, the state and the county COVID-19 disproportionately impact low wage essential workers are seniors and substantively those historically unserved and underserved populations.
ARPA funding was dedicated by your board at that time for community health and well being to promote equitable outcomes for our community residents. The three outcome areas were to coordinate DI among departments and outreach initiatives, including Tromadores. The strategy was really trying to recognize that we had a lot of activities occurring within the county yet it wasn't always coordinated and there could be better communication amongst the departments and also leveraging some of the activities so that we can learn and really help our community in knowing how to access our programs. An example is perhaps there's a service within social services, there's a program within behavioral health And public health and it's the same member trying to in our community, trying to go to each three departments and knowing how to navigate.
And so really setting some grounding on how we can improve access coordinate with each other and build off of the systems that we have in place and improve The county hired Dr. Perkins from Transform GLLC Bernita Perkins is here to guide the county's internal reflection in DEI in relation to community services and engagement as that third prong, or actually yeah, the third prong in the ARPA plan.
Dr. Perkins is pretty unique. She brings a very unique skill set to this project. There's an organizational leadership with a specialization in organizational management. She also has two decades and serving in multiple private sector industries, including finance legal multimedia entertainment marketing and self licensed self developing code counseling. Dr. Perkins engages in leading equity research and has received two American Psychological Association Fellows, one from the Society for Community Research and Action which is a community psychology division and one from the Society of American Society for Psychology of Women Both from their unique and international contributions to social justice and psychological science.
Overall, I'll tell you this is a pretty unique combination of organizational development expertise, leading research non-profit and real world private sector experience which makes Dr. Perkins the ideal candidate for this complex countywide initiative. We're really excited to have her here and I'd like to pass it now over to Dr. Perkins.
Good morning, Board of Supervisors.
So we started this county plan with the focus to do it in three phases. So the first phase is about assessment. The second phase is taking action and the third phase is to organize an ongoing and sustainable structure And we started with the three first wave stakeholder departments. And so I'm gracious that the CEO selected these three departments as a reflection of the 21 departments across the county. So, we get a little bit of each of the types of issues and issues around equity in DEI that we project will probably be resulting from across the county.
Now when we met in August, I had formal meetings with most of the department members that we pulled into this First Wave Stakeholder Department. Feedback so we started to center our attention on the inequities and barriers to entry because those are the main issues that we just really wanted to begin to focus on an address and as you see Across these three departments, we saw some themes which are the barriers to entry for languages. So we realized there are languages that the county may not even be aware of that are not being served. We also saw feedback barriers to entry so opportunities for the community to actually provide feedback. We saw some of those were disconnected in a way and we also looked at payment barriers.
When we have a county member coming in to make a payment for various issues or various payments on contracts and such, they had to go to multiple departments. So we were looking at that as another way to create, to reduce these barriers to entry. We also across the three departments inherent bias came up as an issue that we want to address with equity. We also looked at equity hiring and local hiring Three departments and in our conversations, we found out that.
1:33 – 1:3914 turns
Hold on just one moment so we get that mic working.
So the equity understanding was the main outstanding issue. So what that means is What we want to do is we want to look at giving.
I think that's gone out again.
Is this better? OK, maybe this is. Let's try it. Are we good?
And so we're not distracted by this. We're still on slide 24, equity understanding.
Right and so to give everyone a baseline understanding of what equity is and how it operates in the county in regards to service delivery and in regards to engagement with community members then we actually and to use the fishing analogy right showing having somebody fish or teaching them how to fish
I think it's out again.
There.
Okay,
do we want to switch? Okay, that's
fine. Thank you Ms. Mighty.
You can keep me
on my toes. Well that mic is definitely connected to something so I think the other one is me. So
basically that's the understanding. So as opposed to, you know, teaching people to fish we're actually going to help people understand the whole concept of equity. Acts with their daily interactions and also how it serves the community. The goal, of course, as Lindsay mentioned at the beginning of the presentation is to provide to value the county customers, the county members and to provide excellent services and engagement.
And then that leads us to my recommendations in the first phase, which are to create that county baseline. But we also want it to be a place where there are resources now the focus is to ensure That when we say equity, everyone knows what that means. When we say inherent bias, everyone knows what that means. Then we want to have an equity quick guide which would be like a reference so if you think about applications that we use on our phones this would be sort of like the tips. So it would help us, the county members and across the county staff understand how to operate within the scope of equity. And then finally the Equity Hub And this was an insight from the public health department meetings where we can have this engagement.
But it would be an opportunity for countywide staff to interact, to discuss. We also want to have leading research available and other resources so that people can actually You know, create that engagement and create that continuous ongoing work. One of the things that Dr. Mighty mentioned is that this is an internal process so it's not just a matter of doing something performative like much of the DEI we now have seen in the world. It's sort of just people are just doing things robotically as opposed to really engaging and being connected to it.
And then as we move into the second phase where we started last month, we have the three first wave departments who will be doing their roadmaps or equity plans. So they'll start developing that. Then we would like to have a self-select second wave where folks who are involved in departments but maybe that's not their role or they may not have time but have passion around this to be able to self select themselves into And then the final thing would be across the remaining 18 departments that we model what we learned in the first wave, but then also add in any evolution and there are any adaptations or changes.
And then all of this continues to have as the baseline, this foundation of equity understanding. And then finally, the intended outcome. So if we could step into the future in a time machine, the intended outcomes will be this Continuous education for the county, that we would have these open communication channels. And so many of the things that my colleagues here addressed would be the focus of that. So that we constantly have these open communication channels. We're gonna look at the organizational feedback mechanisms and then also being constantly aware that we will be setting up an organizational chart That has roles and responsibilities that we can implement in alignment with moving this equity forward, and then having sustainability.
And then finally the overall goal is to create engaged county experience for our county members and staff. And that would be intentionally serving and supporting and really resourcing our county members.
1:39 – 1:447 turns
So we really wanted to say thank you for hearing us today and learning more about all of the activities that we've been doing. So we do request that we receive and file this report, and determine that it doesn't meet CEQA as a project. Any questions?
And board members before you get to questions, I just want to also thank our panel today. But I also want to take an opportunity. We wanted to present an update to you and we wanted to do it before Dr. Mighty left. So I just want to acknowledge June Mighty has been head of our organizational development efforts in the county. She's made incredible progress for our county. Today is her last meeting she'll be going to Texas where she isn't. She'll be starting as an HR director shortly but we want to thank her for all her work with the county.
Questions from the board? Mr. Labnino. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I don't have any questions. This wasn't just a check the box, right? Because we see that a lot. I'm on the, I serve on the county's retirement board and every corporation now is forced to have a DEI unit. And when you really peel back the onion, a lot of it is just, it's piece paper and it doesn't really change culture. And so I really appreciate the fact that That's what our goal is here. It would have been easy to do it the other way, but I can tell that there's been a lot of hard work and I think the three departments that we picked or CEO picked were the right three to get started.
And I'm really encouraged at the progress and looking forward to seeing how it blossoms when everybody else picks it up as well. So thank you very much and Dr. Mighty, we're gonna miss you. Thank you.
I'll just ask, and I want to echo the comments about Ms. Mighty, Dr. Mighty we will miss you. I will miss you. How do we assess sort of in the longer terms how deeply it does permeate into the culture of the organization? That's something that I've wrestled with. You know, A serious long-term effort that lasts beyond, say the ups and downs of funding and the ups and downs of popularity of the effort.
I would like us to be a place where Equity means something in the long run. And how do we really assess that? I mean, do you have any of you have any advice on how do we assess that in future years?
I'll respond to that Mr. Chair. So one of the challenges that we've had with the DEI is has been expressed and a lot of the leading firms are now consulting firms are now agreeing that it didn't work as the board has mentioned But one of the things that we have found out through the research is that it has to be an internal action. So there has to be a willingness to do it and the motivation, of course for the county, is to serve the members and to provide this positive experience for members. But we know that we can see a change when people really begin to understand what equity means. So in our August meetings, I sort of summed it up as the way that we choose to see each other, acknowledge and recognize each other, and ultimately from that the way we choose to treat each other.
So we've been focusing on that one verb how we want to treat each other and using that as a way to begin to help people understand how deep This is and how important it is, and how when you do this when you have an equity understanding. It actually really changes the person themselves so it helps everyone operate better and experience, you know the services, the engagement better, and people can tell you know the county members can tell when they're seen and when they're valued as customers as clients Right, and they can tell when they're not. And so that's one of the visceral things we're looking at and then of course we will look at qualitative and quantitative data.
Supervisor Williams in response to your question I do support what Dr. Perkins- That mic doesn't
work.
1:44 – 1:4911 turns
I do support The comments that Dr. Perkins just made, but one of the things that I want to mention is that this is already ongoing in terms of the results you want to see. The board for several years now through our Renew initiative we've adopted values, behaviors that we want to see in terms of how we work and the delivery of customer service. This aspect is already being integrated into that process so when we're looking ongoing We should still look to see how it aligns overall with Renew and what we say that we value. In addition to that, there are measures that we currently have that we probably should continue to have in terms of our culture survey because this really is a culture aspect. And then one of the tools that will come with the Workday platform That is a subscription already paid for, no new dollars for that.
Is this tool on the dashboard called Vibe? And so that tool can also be a resource once we get to that phase in terms of really helping to see how we track that and how we're really embedding that. But if the work starts internally first but we do have some upcoming resources that would be able to help us to do that.
Thank you.
Couple of questions. This one about the EAOC, I'm really impressed by that. I've always wondered about how our county can do better in reaching out to various constituents and engage them in the planning efforts. And I just wonder if you'd be willing to take on an additional duty? We all have commissions and committees that we have Uh, Phil and I'm always looking for greater diversity in representation. But if it might be possible, if other board members are having any issues filling some of your committees and commissions with kind of the breadth of interest we'd like to see represented, I could sure use some help.
Supervisor Hartman through the chair, yes we'd be more than happy to help and I can provide you with a list of the people that are participating in the EEOC. We could meet with you and learn more about kind of your specific needs so happy to help with anything that you're... Sure
and maybe some of the people you're working with can broadcast it more to others who might have an interest, might have a much broader network than I do.
Yes absolutely let's meet and talk about how
Thank you. My second question has to do with, for me our efforts really started or became more prominent with the Latinx Indigenous Migrant Task Force during COVID and we realized that we weren't reaching the people we needed to and that's been continued with the community conversations and I guess this may be a Dr. Hamami question but I just wondered how those are going How it's changed and if that's still a really important piece of this overall puzzle.
Thank you for the question. Yes, we definitely understand that there is no equity without also addressing health equity and this is something that we are definitely addressing and working with Dr Perkins one of the priorities that our department has put as one of our strategic direction is to look at equity on a three level so we're looking at it from an organizational as well as from health and from a community level Leveraging some of the partnerships that already and the work that already was done during COVID to take it beyond COVID. And look at things such as the anchor mission strategy, and hiring locally, and sourcing locally. We're part of an environmental justice group as well that looks at how do we contribute to environmental equity as well.
So this is, as Dr. Perkins and the team mentioned, it is a journey that starts with looking internally but also going across and looking at the community and going forward. So a lot of exciting work, and we're very excited that we were chosen as one of the first three, and we're looking forward to continue with that.
Good work. Thank you.
Thank you, Supervisor Caps.
Thank you. My questions have been addressed and I just wanted to express my appreciation for the depth of this work, how integral it's clearly become and and just what the way in which he presented today because as Supervisor Lavagnino said, it's easy to sort of think about this, you know, you have to check the box or even I would argue that acronym itself gets tossed around so much that it dehumanizes the work. And so the fact that you gave us some examples and people and helps humanize the lessons helps humanize the growth.
And so I appreciate that. And just here to support. Thank you very much.
1:49 – 1:585 turns
Madam Clerk, are there any requests to speak from public?
Chair Williams and members of the board, we have no request to speak from the public on this item.
Then can I get a motion from the board?
Move staff recommendation.
That is A and B. Second. There's a motion by Hartman seconded by Nelson all those in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Thank you for your work. We will take a 10 minute break and then take up Item 3 Thank you. We're reconvening. Item, departmental item number three.
1:58 – 2:224 turns
Chair Williams and members of the board, departmental item number three is from the Behavioral Wellness Department and the Treasurer Tax Collector Public Administrator. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding a resolution deferring implementation of Senate Bill 43 2023 through 2024 Reg Session which modifies Welfare and Institutions Code Section 5008 by expanding the definition of gravely disabled.
Good morning Chair Williams, Supervisors, CEO Miyasato and County Staff. Toni Navarro here with the Behavioral Wellness Director. I'm sorry I can't be with you today in person. I've been very ill and I did not want to come spread germs even to bring forward to you this very important request this morning. Myself and Arlene Diaz, representing the Public Guardian's Office. Thank you for the opportunity today to present to you on our request to delay implementation of the recently signed Senate Bill 43.
In recent years, crises here in California including in regard to affordable housing, mental health and the proliferation of opioid and fentanyl use have resulted in a growing awareness and rise of concern For those whose mental health and or severe substance use disorder places them in the category of those whose lives are most in our communities. Senate Bill 43 was one of some 269 bills that passed through our state's legislature this past year, that address some aspect of county behavioral health treatment and operations in California.
In mid-October, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law Senate Bill 43 which expands the criteria for involuntary detention treatment and conservatorship of persons in California to include not only persons with serious mental illness but now also those diagnosed with a severe substance use disorder. And this law goes into effect in January 2024. Behavioral Wellness, the Public Guardian's Office All of our partners are in full agreement with SB 43's author and sponsors, and statewide advocates that too many individuals suffer without adequate and appropriate treatment and housing.
We share in the urgency to bring about real change to address the needs of those who are unhoused and living with a serious mental illness and severe substance use disorders. SB 43 represents the first time the state's involuntary detention and conservatorship laws under the Lanterman-Petras Short, or LPS Act are being modified since it was first established over 55 years ago in 1967.
An acknowledgment of the various changes that will be required to the existing 55 year old law in our county systems to adapt to the new requirements SB 43 allows for counties to postpone implementation from January 1, 2024 to January 2026. OK, I will. I'm sorry I'm tag teaming this via zoom so Arlene it's your turn.
All right, so the Lanterman-Petris Short Act. So under its... Lanterman-Petris and short were the gentlemen who codify individuals with mental illnesses civil rights. And this was created under California Welfare and Institutions Code 5000. And this is the law that is gonna be modified by Senate Bill 43. So currently, this legally applies to someone who due to their mental illness is substantially unable to provide for their food clothing or shelter and is a danger to themselves or others.
This individual who's been identified undergoes involuntary psychiatric hospitalization and involuntary medication with psychotropic drugs. The law begins with a three-day involuntary hold, and then if necessary another two week involuntary hold. And then if there's ongoing issues an additional 30 day involuntary hold. So when someone is initially put on a hold they are taken to a local hospital so they can be quarantined and wait for a psychiatric hospital bed And the psychiatric hospitalization provides evaluation and treatment for their mental illness.
If the individual is not recovering and appears to need long-term involuntary treatment, then a referral for a conservatorship investigation is made. This is an additional lengthy process where the parameters of the law and whether the individual meets those parameters is evaluated If they do meet that legal criteria, the public guardian goes forward and requests petitions for a one-year LPS conservatorship. And if the judge agrees, that's established.
So effective upcoming here January 1 SB 43 expands involuntary treatment and conservatorship criteria in unprecedented ways. When you consider it truly has been 55 years since the criteria was established. It's a pretty, not a well-oiled machine but everybody and we're working within the parameters of what those roles are. This will amend Welfare Institutions Code Section 5800 and expands the state's gravely disabled criteria for an individual's involuntary detention in conservatorship Due to a standalone severe substance use disorder, otherwise known as SUD.
Or co-occurring mental health disorder and severe substance use disorder. It also expands the definition of grave disability so it's not only food clothing or shelter that the person can't provide themselves with but includes those unable to provide for their personal safety Or necessary medical care, which a licensed healthcare practitioner determines necessary to prevent serious deterioration of an existing medical condition likely resulting in serious bodily injury if left untreated. So these are two separate changes that have substantial impact on the way the law is evaluated and implemented.
And Tony?
All right. Okay, thank you. So then in light of those significant changes as highlighted by Arlene and also again to reiterate in light of the short time frame just about 12 weeks from the time the law was signed in mid-October to expected execution date of January 1 2024 that less than 12 weeks to redesign retool retrain Reset what constitutes an involuntary hold and LPS conservatorship within our system is quite a heavy lift. And at this time feels like relatively or unnecessarily short timeframe to do all that's necessary to enact this sweeping change, to be effective and ultimately the most successful for those who are most deserving in our county of this care.
By expanding this LPS to capture any person who has a severe SUD substance use disorder, initially the first thing it does is it creates and expands the number of persons who will be evaluated and likely placed on hold. And estimates are that this could Increase that anywhere from about currently about 1% of our population meets the criteria for the current LPS, for the previous LPS law to the new law of about 10%.
To give numbers to that in 22-23 there were 425 involuntary holds placed in Santa Barbara County. And this could then with that estimated number potentially increase those being evaluated tenfold Successful implementation of SB 43 is going to require a lot of significant changes, not only in training and the criteria and the development of policies and procedures but also in staffing and program development.
Under LPS only those designated by the county And in our county now, we do have some in our Sheriff's Department who are exercising their authority to do 5150 holds. May with probable cause detain a person and take them into custody for an assessment. Counties will now need to develop a criteria for severe substance use disorder grave disability, a completely different assessment for which there currently none exists. And so we need some time to work with developing those criteria Creating policies and procedures, identifying and designating persons to perform that retraining our current 5150 designated staff throughout the county.
And then we will need to also recruit and hire and perform severe SU staff who will then be able to perform these abilities because given the current staffing numbers a tenfold increase or even anything I'm As Arlene noted, this is not just a change to the addition of severe substance use disorder as a category for eligibility and increasing that population. It is also a change to the law by identifying necessary medical care as a criteria.
And that adding of a physical health condition as a basis for the assessment is going to require us to work also with our county chief, our Be Well Chief Medical Officer, our local hospital partners. To be able to and then identify an adequately train our staff who are not currently medical professionals and are not doing medical assessments to then learn how to make those qualifications What a severe substance use disorder in the context of medical care provision and mental illness in the context of medical care provision means for those who are eligible.
As we already know, our current system is stressed and implementing this prematurely it would exacerbate and compromise care for those most vulnerable in our counties. It's important to note here that hospitals, including emergency departments will be severely impacted. Often when a person is detained by law enforcement or when we are riding a hold out in the field and be well persons are often taken to a hospital emergency department for medical clearance and or brought there by their loved ones for assessment.
Because SB 43 expands the Lanterman-Petrashort criteria to include an assessment of whether an individual is unable to survive safely in the community or provide for their medical care. Again, we will have to develop procedures and policies for that and work with our local hospital partners to enact those. Additionally, our hospitals will be without qualified designated individuals to perform assessments needed The investment and development of those types of facilities.
Moreover, there are very few treatment settings that have the capacity to serve individuals with co-occurring and complex medical and substance use disorders. In our current system in the behavioral wellness drug MediCal The levels of care that we provide for inpatient substance abuse treatment are voluntary. And at the same time, there are very few providers who really specialize in that complex need.
Currently in county we have 64 beds can be utilized for that level of care provided by our partners Good Samaritan and CATA Arts at this point. But again, as we talked about earlier on in an earlier slide the potential increase to the numbers of persons now being involuntarily detained under this change to the Lanterman-Petrash Short Act Indicates that those 64 beds will be quickly utilized and we will be overutilized in no time. And so allowing us some time over the next two years to develop a system of care that can meet the needs, so that folks can step down from holds into appropriate levels of care for the right time is vital.
Implementation concern, of course, is that this law does not provide additional funding. The delay that we're asking for will allow us to plan our budgets as we are right now in this budget season and see what not only behavioral wellness needs to do in terms of its staffing to meet successful implementation of SB 43 but also allowing the Public Guardian's office to look at what their staffing is going to need to be because as we bring people into the system Very different from LPS conservatorship with someone with a severe and persistent mental illness, someone with severe substance use disorder. Their symptoms are related to the usage and oftentimes once that is resolved they are back and able to engage in their treatment effectively and decisions about their treatment and looking and needing to have systems in place at the public guardian's office as well as in the court system to have A system in our county whereby people enter into LPS conservatorship, but then are effectively and efficiently provided their rights to step down from LPS conservatorship when actively participate in their own treatment voluntarily for a lifetime of recovery.
Again, as no additional funding is attached to SB 43 as it stands. An implementing concern at this point would be as we were needing to add new folks to the LPS conservator roster in our county that needed this higher level of care for long term without the appropriate yet Uh, processes moving forward and in place to create a system whereby people can also then be stepped down. We look at overburdening the system financially as that full cost of of that long-term care is beholden to is the county's responsibility and there are currently no federal funds and match to help with that.
But if we go to the next slides and plan for success One of the first things that we'd like to talk about is, of course, we know that Behavioral Health Connect has been put forth Their feedback on that, and the state of California is looking for an IMD exclusion waiver. And what that would allow us to do is it would allow us to receive some match of federal funds for those who are placed in long-term care and would help us to better execute and provide a sustainable system of care for persons covered under SB 43.
As of 12-5, 24 counties in California successfully delayed implementation of SB 43. And today an additional 30 plus counties are presenting before their boards and asking for a delay. If we are granted a delay what that allows us then is A nearly statewide, literally nearly statewide cohort to collectively work with to share policies implementations protocols and work collectively together. And what I think will be much more expediently And all implement SB 43 ahead of the ultimate deadline. So January 21, 2026 is the ultimate deadline that we would be able to execute SB 43 but myself and Arlene as expressed to our partners in stakeholder meetings that we held prior to bringing this forward to you all Was to say that our intention and our goal is, of course, to implement this ahead of that final deadline.
Certainly because again we agree that this is a service that is much needed and those most in need need to get this sooner than later. We just need a little time to get everything in place so that we will be successful and not setting things up to be a disappointment. Our intention is that by July 2024, we'll bring forward a plan to back to the board that will provide for you an extensive array of the new policies procedures and plans that we have to identify workforce treatment capacity.
And everything we need to realize as time give you a timeline of regular updates post that for our execution final execution date. As I already stated during this budget year and at this budget time as we're preparing budgets, myself and the Public Guardian's office are proposing the necessary budget expansions to be included in our budgets. So all of this again Just to highlight that this is again the most significant change to a process and procedure that's been in place in our county for about 55 years.
We have ourselves, County Behavioral Health Department are the sole providers of 5150 authorization and holds and work with and the LPS conservatorship assessments with the Public Guardians Office. This is a It's not quite a lift for us in this amount of time, but we are fully committed to making this effective and successful. One of the final things that is important to note is that policies procedures and protocols for SB 43 Specifically, that will make this a successful implementation. It's really about allowing be well and what we are already putting in play is identifying places in our system. We'll be bringing forward to you in February on evaluation of our crisis services branch which was done recently And with that comes a whole host of recommendations and some transformations that will really be creating our entire system of care to be much more responsive to the specific population that we're discussing here today.
And so, we'll not only be working on the specific SB43 pieces of the puzzle that need to be created but also working on creating the other pieces of the puzzle which is how the entire system of care works to be more responsive timely And effective for people early on in their illness and disease, really hoping to engage people early on and keep them out of these higher levels of care ultimately. So finally in our last slide we know Prop 1 coming to us all sorry my time limit on my voice is letting me know Proposition 1, which will be on our ballot in March 2024 addresses some of the placement and housing issues.
As we know it has AB 531 attached and will allow for not only some Mental Health Services Act to be used for substance abuse only treatment which is a change to the funding restriction at this time but also will bring with it some much needed housing funds and infrastructure funding. We are also aware that private entities are working to create in our community and other surrounding communities, the capacity for individuals with complex co-occurring medical and severe substance use disorder and mental health needs. So we are encouraged by hearing about those efforts and being asked what we think about them To bring those forward to you should we be given the opportunity to gain some treatment capacity there as well.
Arlene, can you take over the last part of this request here? Sorry. Of
2:22 – 2:299 turns
course. I just want to briefly thank our director for hanging in there. Arlene please continue
Because SB 43 has not come with dedicated state funding to support the expanded obligations, all counties will need additional lead time to arrange a staffing and resources necessary to support the implementation. Therefore behavioral wellness and our partners are urging the Board of Supervisors to delay the implementation of SB 43 until January 1st 2026 as allowed by law.
Questions from the Board? Supervisor Caps.
Thank you to you both, actually I'll just address this to Ms. Diaz to save our director from needing to speak further but I just wanted to ask you could you explain a little bit about Public Guardian I just give sort of a bit of an elaboration about what you do and how you'll be involved in the implementation. So
when the LPS law was created, it was created to protect the civil rights of people with mental illness. And so prior You know, you could put Aunt Nellie in a mental facility because she wasn't sharing her money. Anyone could put anyone anywhere and this kind of reigned that in. So most of the counties have public guardians offices and this is, of course, California law When someone is identified as maybe needing a conservatorship, it takes two psychiatrists to make or two psychiatrist signatures which includes the county mental health director. So all referrals go through the county mental health director and then if he agrees they're forwarded to our office.
We interface we are a third party entity so we don't do anyone's bidding. We look specifically at the individuals. We work with County Council To do a temporary conservatorship that is solely to investigate whether the person qualifies, gives us 30 days and then we go to court. We make a recommendation to the judge. The individual is represented by public defender. The public guardian is represented by county council.
And we recommend whether or not conservatorship is warranted and if so who the conservator should be? The individuals are allowed to have a jury or a court hearing, and the majority are court hearings. And so then the judge makes the final decision about whether or not someone qualifies should be conserved and who the conservator is. These conservatorships last one year.
So if towards the end of one year their mental illness is remedied, they're on track, then they're released from conservatorship. If not, then we have to go through the whole process all over again to reestablish that conservatorship to continue their care.
Thank you for that. I wanted to ask about the stakeholders in this process of implementing this new law, a few of whom are waiting to speak but just obviously we have such an interconnected group of advocates and other service providers that will be instrumental in the implementation of this. How is their feedback being solicited? What's the role, how is that working? If you're able to
answer. Supervisor Caps through the chair. So we're just beginning so we are actually meeting with the Mental Health Commission and next week I believe. And Tony and my intention is to keep everyone updated as to what What the plan will be, I mean because again we're looking at what it's been a month and a half. So we spent a lot of time saying okay, we just need the time to be able to implement the plan or to create a plan so our Our intention is for this to be successful. That is what we want. We are public servants, and we understand this population is very vulnerable. So as we go about creating the infrastructure and the processes, we will be updating all of the stakeholders.
That said, a large portion of this is dictated by law, so we want people We want all the stakeholders to be informed, we want to get their feedback. But a lot of it will be structured by law so that whereas there's programs that their input might support the actual function of the law is just that, the function of the law. So no, I don't want to create any false hopes or but we intend to be as collaborative as possible.
I understand yes and and I think you know in addition to going to the Behavioral Wellness Commission and keeping that group updated regularly We are actually We had put the Crisis Action Team on hold a few months back that BWELL hosts as we went through an evaluation assessment of our crisis services branch. That is actually restarting next week on the Thursday, what day is Thursday next week? Is that our regularly scheduled Crisis Action Team? I think it is.
I'll have to look at my calendar really quickly. I know the invite has already gone out, but that will also be a place and that is a public meeting where we have our stakeholders in our advocates there and we will be keeping them abreast of this and getting their feedback and hearing their concerns What they would like us to hear and know about. We also, of course, are invited regularly to participate in NAMI meetings and outreach to the community in that way.
Those are just my additions to Arlene's comments. And we certainly are working with our local hospitals in the implementation design and delivery and getting their feedback as well.
Thank you. My last question is, I understand the first step is to grant this leeway that it seems alongside 43 other counties but are there other ways that the board can support you all in this big lift?
2:29 – 2:348 turns
Tony?
Well, I think that we're going to do our best to identify our budgets currently effectively as we come forward to you in the next few months with our budgets. There may be some things that we have to come to mid-year once we have really started to better identify what is needed for an effective process for our community. I think also that just in terms of Providing us as you always do when you receive feedback from the community, bringing that forward to us and allowing us the opportunity to make sure that we are making. We have the boxes that we check and the people that we see in the meetings we attend but we really appreciate you all being the eyes and ears in the community and bringing us forward any concerns immediately so that we can address them.
Thank you Director Navarro and Miss Diaz and Mr. Chair thanks
Mister Nelson. Yes, thank you Chair Williams. I guess my first question is from Miss Navarro. You know, I know you're asking for a 24 month extension. How long would it take for us to get something up and going?
Again this is brand new. Processes and protocols in place in terms of how long those things take, in terms of approval for policies and procedures across our different departments. But I want to reiterate, I don't want to over promise but I am optimistic that January 2026 is an ultimate deadline and I don't see us getting there. I really do think that we need to take this next six months and really set a strong foundation, getting in there with our teams breaking apart the different pieces of it looking at the medical care piece as well as the severe SUD gravely disabled hopefully getting some statewide guidance at some point because again there is no assessment for SUD with grave disability out there anywhere So getting some guidelines from the state would be really helpful.
I think that we could better answer that question by July when we come back, and I would hate to give anything ahead of that because I think that would just be premature.
Great, well I'm glad you said six months because that actually gives us nine months since it was signed by the governor. That's where I'm at right now. I'm not ready to make a two-year extension on this. I guess my next question is from County Council. Are we able to give maybe just a partial extension at this point and if we are still not able To get everything set up within this for this first six months that they come back to the board and ask for an additional extension if not able to.
I'm sorry, actually asking County Council. OK.
Supervisor Nelson members of the board? Yes, the statute allows us to defer until January 1st 2026 but you could do a shorter period of time and then come back in this to extend again if needed.
And I guess the, I just wanted to as we listen to speakers and discusses up here in the dais. I understand that the burden this might put on our system but at the same time there's a reason why the legislature approved this and move this forward. This has been one of the areas in the homelessness issue that we're not able to address where we can't get people through the system that obviously need help but are service resistant And it's my hope that we implement this much sooner and we have a lot tighter of a window that we look at here because we've invested significantly in homeless services throughout the county.
And, you know, we have limited funding for that. So I really think this is important to have this in place so that we can maximize the opportunity that we have. I know we only have a few years of Hope Village funding. I'm afraid that we're not going to be able to fully utilize that in the Santa Maria Valley without having this piece in place to be able to get people into services and maximize what we have at this time.
Personally, until I hear a little more information. I like to see us limit this to a six month period moving forward and then if beer wellness is not able to implement that into next year's budget that we might be able to come back and And discuss this further. But I do think it's really important if you look at the legislative votes, this was unanimous in both houses and you know the state of California. You think about what's going on up there that for this to not have any no votes?
I think sends a loud message that the legislature wants us to deal with this and I understand it's a new and scary thing for us in the counties and that's why a lot of counties are pushing back and saying hey we need more time and we need more funding and I get all We are devoting a lot of funding to services, and we're not able to deliver those services at this time because some people are just too resistant and the old definitions don't quite work. So I'm as of now not supportive of a two year extension but I'm open to some alternatives.
2:35 – 2:4113 turns
I just had a question and you can wait to answer it until after Mr. Labanino's questions, but is part of the issue here that if you're negotiating with one of the few facilities right now there are no facilities that do this but one of the few facilities that might exist in six months or a year's time That you're going to be in a much less favorable position negotiating with an entity if you have a six month or 12 month mandate rather than a two year mandate. Essentially, will we pay more the shorter mandate that we have?
First of all, thank you for the question. I just want to say that ahead of SB 43 and regardless of SB 43 B-Well's role as we brought to you last spring is to expand our system of care for residential treatment beds across the spectrum, whether that's severe substance use disorder or mental health. And so we have been looking to find those providers and hopefully encourage them to be partners with us in our adjacent county partners to bring those services forward.
We are actively always looking for those and we'll need that level of care in our system. What is different here for SB 43, of course, is the locked expectation that people will be in a locked facility. Those facilities do not exist in the state of California anywhere, they do not exist by statute or allowability so in the organized delivery system for Medi-Cal people must voluntarily agree to go into residential treatment and it's only when they voluntarily agree are they placed in these facilities including Tarzana Treatment Centers down in Los Angeles which is the other one we use when we have overflow And so that those will exist in a six months is not gonna happen. However, I don't think that whether we invest now or later will or commit now or later to beds for SUD really goes hand in hand with SB 43.
That is something we need for our continuum anyway because our goal is to have to utilize something like ladder and Petra short. As little as possible ever for any population that we treat, and that requires us to build out our entire system of care robustly starting at the beginning with outreach. And that is what we are committed to doing.
Mr. Lavanino?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Well, Supervisor Nelson's point I think the reason why it was unanimous is because they aren't paying for it. That's like, for me it would be like us telling the cities you gotta go fix your homeless problem and they need to be taken care of period. Okay well we're not giving them any money to do that so I'm not sure how that's gonna work but I also understand your passion for this and I also have the same fear some of our the funding that we've already put out there for homelessness. I guess my question is locking up somebody with a substance abuse problem I'm curious if we know of another place that this is being done and we're like, okay. This is the model we're following
or? I am only peripherally aware and did not have time to spend looking it up myself, but I think Massachusetts has a law similar to this. And because of the fact that there are no locked treatment facilities that are funded federally for drug severe substance use disorder treatment, I think they find themselves utilizing their Prison system often for those individuals, but don't quote me on that. But that is I mean you're going to quote me. I'm speaking publicly, but please this
is off the record off the record. Yeah,
that is my limited understanding. This is very weird doing this by zoom by the way. I am really sorry.
Well we appreciate you being here for this.
And yeah, so Massachusetts is the only other state that has a similar law at this point. And I would like to just put forward that involuntary treatment for persons with severe substance use disorders or substance use disorders of any kind has been demonstrated in the research time and time and time again to be a failure. That the recidivism and rates of over accidental overdose and death are high for any type of forced treatment, and it's really about having consistent effective.
Walk hand in hand, highly trained individuals doing a lot of consistent care and outreach which is the real expensive stuff and costs more money. It requires more staffing that gets people to voluntarily get into care is when people get into long term recovery. And that is what we are looking to do as best we can in our system of care, especially with the hope of Prop 1.
You know there's not a lot of hopes in it but one of the good things about it is to be able to more effectively utilize our MHSA dollars for SUD substance use disorder primary individuals as well.
Well, while you're still off the record. What is the do you happen to know? Director Navarro what's our cost because I'm thinking that it might be somewhat similar now in a locked facility. What's our daily rate at the Puff?
I think my CFO Chris Ribeiro is in the room. Chris are you there?
He is he's coming forward.
Okay we're gonna let him answer thank
2:41 – 2:4717 turns
The rate the state set for us is just over $2,000 a day. And our cost
is around that, so 2,500. Okay, so $2500 a day for about 10% increase of individuals. So we're talking about I think we had 400 conserved from mental illness, severe mental illness and
No, that
I'm sorry 1000% to 10% of the population.
Yeah, sorry supervisor 11 you know through the chair note that was that was over 400 holds
for our whole
and that and that is the people who stay in the path
correct?
So we have currently 165 LPS conservatees okay, and then of course that would expand and just something to keep in mind that it is entirely the responsibility of the county Who is conserving the individual to pay for their treatment and stay? So if you have, if they're in a place where Medi-Cal covers then Medi-Cal does cover a big piece of that. The county does additionally usually pays a little more than that but there's no Medi-Cal coverage for a stay for substance use disorder so we're looking at the additional people that we bring on under this new law will be entirely funded by us here at the county
Okay, so this is something I think our Ledge Committee needs to really pick up and run with because I'm not sure if this just happened at the end of the session or if there was a big run-up to this. But obviously we need to get our consultants on board and our lobbyists and start talking about possible changes because as much as we'd like to do this, I just don't see... There's no facilities, We bankrupt everybody. I'm not really sure how we would even move forward with something like this, whether it's now or in 2026. Not whether or not we have the will to do it but just the ability to do it at all. So I'm interested to hear from public comment but it's very concerning.
Well let's go to public comment.
Chair Williams and members of the board, we have six requests to speak from the public on this item. And we are going to begin on Zoom with Lynn Gibbs and then we're going to return to Santa Barbara with Dr. Paul Erickson. Lynn?
Hello can you hear me?
We sure can
Lynn. Yes we can please proceed.
Oh thank you. Thank you Chair Williamson. Supervisors, I serve as NAMI Public Policy Chair and I'm an advisor to Families Act. And as such is I hear regularly from family members who have loved ones with serious mental illness. This has been very painful because we know that Any postponement of SB 43 adoption is going to occasion more suffering and more deaths in the community.
And we knew we were likely to lose an argument to avoid any postponement, and this was despite my change.org petition that Had 650 signatures in 11 days, pleading not to postpone. I want to thank you for making this a departmental item because there are at least a couple other counties who put it on their consent agendas and so there was no opportunity even for a presentation and discussion. So I want to thank you for taking this seriously enough to schedule it as a departmental item On the positive side, Director Navarro has pledged that by July 2024 we will bring forward a plan for an extensive array of new policies, procedures, workforce facility and treatment capacity.
And we've been advocating for this for decades. This was coming there were two previous versions of this bill That only didn't get through the legislature because they were killed in committee by judiciary and appropriations chairs. So it's not as if we didn't know this was coming. I would urge you not to set a premature extension of so long as two years, but to schedule a presentation of the plan When it's in place in July, and then go from there and determine what more is necessary.
Other counties are mandating periodic reviews of benchmarks and progress on readiness. And not so long as two years extensions. We have an urgent need to save the lives of the most severely affected Building out an adequate system of care won't be accomplished in even a two-year period. This is a sea change, no doubt. It's bound to be a phased implementation over years.
We can and we should continue to build out our community based and inpatient systems of care in these coming years. Thank you Lynn that is your time. To the most ill and at greatest risk when we do adopt SB 43. Thank
you. We will now return to Santa Barbara with Dr. Paul Erickson to be followed by Denise McDonald, Dr. Paul Erickson.
2:47 – 2:548 turns
Thank you, Board of Supervisors for this opportunity to speak about this important issue. I'm the Psychiatry and Addiction Medicine Medical Director at Cottage Hospital. We work closely with behavioral wellness. We also at Cottage are dedicated to this population that is severely ill both in mental illness and substance use, and often combined problems. And we work with these patients throughout the hospital on the medical and surgical services but especially in our emergency department where we have 5150 involuntary patients come and stay and we find it already very challenging to find hospital beds for these individuals sometimes it's many hours and it can be two three or more days before we can find a bed Now, we have four patients who are on 5150s.
If we had many more 5150 patients coming to our ED it would create enormous problems for us just in terms of the space, the facilities, the staffing because we would anticipate we would have more and more patients we were not able to place particularly when there are no institutions that will take substance using individuals on an involuntary basis. We want to work closely with county and we've had good meetings about new plans to develop outreach and crisis services, to meet people earlier in the course of their illness and stabilize things before they become a more severe crisis. But this work is going to take time and planning as Director Navarro has spoken I think very clearly, we are very committed to serving the severely mentally ill population and those with severe substance use disorders.
And we want to do everything we can to improve our services at the hospital and to collaborate with the county in their services. I would mention also that I think in taking some time We may also have the opportunity to learn from other counties that go ahead and implement this, about what works and what doesn't work. And what are the best practices? And where can we optimize the chances of success for our county?
Thank you very much.
Supervisor Hartman, I have a question for you Dr. Erickson.
Yeah, Dr. Erickson the most concerning thing I've heard so far is that studies show that involuntary holds are not effective treatment for people with substance use disorder could you comment on that?
So I'm not an expert in that area, but for instance, I just reviewed an article from Hazelden Betty Ford looking at involuntary commitment of substance use disorder patients across the country. Their report states that there are 37 states that have some kind of statute that allows for that, but almost nobody has implemented it on any significant scale. There's no model state across the country that I'm aware Where this has been implemented and succeeded. So I think it's a kind of idea that has appeal in terms of helping these individuals to have an opportunity for treatment, but it has not succeeded historically in states that have tried it.
And I think there are better ways to reach and help this population.
So either the jury's still out or you're doubtful. And so we're stuck to implement this program no matter what? Okay, thank you just want to be clear on that.
Yes and I think that's a challenge and then I think that's part of what we'll be learning over the next two years from counties that do implement this but I think it will be a big challenge in terms if you look at the historical record And it's been very challenging to make something like this succeed for substance-using individuals.
We will now go to Denise McDonald, to be followed by Dr. John Andres.
Good day and thank you for the opportunity to address this. My name is Denise McDonald. I'm an RN. I've been an RN for over 45 years. All of my experience is in the emergency departments. I am presently the director of the three EDs in trauma for Cottage Health. I can assure you if we fail to roll this out correctly, these patients are going to default to my departments. They are going to linger for days, hours, weeks because we have no place to send them. So what is the point of creating a program and starting a program prematurely when we don't have anything to offer to these patients? The ERs will become chaotic These patients are not easy to take care of. They're sick, they can be acutely in need of detox. They're going to take up critical care beds as well as emergency department beds as well as hospital beds.
They have multiple comorbidities just saying that we're gonna put you on a hold and make you clean sober. That journey is not that simple and we need to be committed to the resources to do this right There's nothing harder for an ER nurse than not being able to help a patient. And this is what we're going to fail miserably as health care workers, and we're not going to enjoy that feeling. So I beg you to defer in the two years that we're gonna do this. We are committed to lending my collaboration, my leadership, my experience to the county be well. Working with Tony Navarro and her team to make this work. We will come as close to fulfillment in the two year deferment, as we possibly can. And we can also learn from our fellow counties in the state that are going forward that do think they have the expertise and the resources to do this so we'll have some examples to follow.
So I really, really do not see this being able to be rolled out in January of 24. And I advocate tremendously for my staff and my emergency department patients. You're going to overcrowd already all the county ERs in the county, and the people that are sick and need our attention are going to be in our waiting rooms. Thank you.
2:54 – 3:0314 turns
Mr. Nelson has a question for you, Ms. McDonald.
Thank you for being here, and I understand your concern. This chaos that might happen in your emergency rooms When this clientele is stuck there. If they're not stuck there, where will all this take place otherwise? So where would they all be if they're not in your waiting room receiving your treatment?
They'll be on the streets not receiving any treatment. Thank you.
We will now go to Dr. John Anise to be followed by Dr. Laura Canfield.
Thank you members of the board for the opportunity to speak this morning. My name is John Anise, I'm an emergency physician here in Santa Barbara. I'm also currently the chair of the Emergency Department at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital. I support SB 43 but today I come to you with a request that we proceed with the resolution favoring deferment of implementation.
Without the resources in place for the treatment of severe substance use disorder, placing a patient on an involuntary hold provides little if any therapeutic benefit and in fact threatens the future opportunities for successful treatment of this patient population. We know that substance use disorder is a chronic relapsing medical condition. We will come in contact with these patients multiple times throughout their journey.
If they are left in the emergency department without an appropriate place for disposition and treatment, we run the risk of jeopardizing our future chances for success with that patient population. We must maintain their confidence in us and their trust in us. And by putting them on an involuntary hold without them receiving treatment doesn't do that. Speaking as the chair of the emergency department my other concern is for the potential to create a real crisis in an already strained emergency safety net.
With these patients Staying in the department lingering for days hours, especially longer than that. We we have limited real estate. We have limited bed capacity. We have limited nursing staff. We are limited physician staff. We cannot have Edie that is overburdened as it is already with patients that were not providing care for it limits our ability to take care of heart attack patient stroke patients pediatric patients trauma patients.
It's for those reasons that I request a deferment of implementation.
We will now go to Doctor Laura Canfield, to be followed by Ron Werft. Doctor Laura?
Thank you. Good morning to the supervisors. I appreciate the opportunity to add to the conversation and support my colleagues that have spoken before. I'm Doctor Laura Canfield. I am the Chief Nursing Officer for Cottage Health Agree fully that giving us more time to implement this initiative will allow us to meet the needs of the community as well as establishing policies to support our healthcare staff, to create the most safe environment for the implementation.
It is routine that our emergency department is at capacity And is full with patients needing a variety of services that we provide. And, we do have concern about the increase number of patients that this initiative would bring forward without the ability to provide them appropriate disposition. We understand and are committed with Tony Navarro's team to caring for this group of patients.
And understand the sensitivity. With due respect, Mr. Nelson, when patients are confined and held they often become more volatile, more unhappy with being confined. And that may be a difference in the chaos that Denise McDonalds was speaking of previously from being in the community versus against their will in a hospital. So I offer that for your consideration as well and thank you for your attention.
And we will now go to our final speaker, Ron Werft.
Chair Williams, members of the Board of Supervisors, we really appreciate opportunity to address you today and how seriously you're taking this topic. I'm here to speak in support of the recommendation of your Department of Behavioral Wellness For two-year extension on implementation of SB 43 for really all the reasons that you've heard already today. We completely agree with all the points that were made in the presentation, particularly the intent of the legislation. The intent is to provide help for people who need it and we know we have a lot of those people in our county. Every community has these individuals And we need to develop services that will provide the support that they need.
This bill was only signed into law weeks ago, and we just don't have the capacity to do that now as has been indicated. I want to just acknowledge the testimony of your first speaker. Who spoke eloquently and passionately about this need, we need to solve this problem. This is not the way to do it with only a few weeks notice when we don't have capacity to provide the care that is needed here.
Our concern does relate at the hospitals and we have had discussion with Marion Medical Center, with Lompoc. Our views are shared on this. The primary concern is about the impact on the emergency department In terms of how it affects our organizations, and you've heard what that could look like. We have at our three ERs in Santa Ynez, Goleta and Santa Barbara we have over 70,000 patients who are coming right now every year for emergency medical care in need of surgical follow up or coming in for traumatic injuries or illnesses.
We need to make sure that we have capacity to continue to provide the job that we do there. As Dr. Erickson mentioned, we also provide support for patients who come to our hospitals in need of mental health services who have severe mental illness and we've worked very closely with the county. The county's worked with Marion in developing a CSU. At Santa Barbara, we developed an ED area that's outside of the ED That operates very much like a crisis stabilization unit. And in that unit, we are able to provide support with psychiatric support, with nursing support that cares for those patients. And even with that as was mentioned, we have capacity issues. There are only 16 involuntary beds in this county.
We oftentimes cannot find placement for these individuals. And so when we think about expanding the pool of people who will be eligible for involuntary holds, it's just hard to imagine what that impact will look like. We just received board approval to construct a new holding area for this growing population adjacent to our emergency department. It'll take a couple of years for us to build that. It wasn't built or approved in response to this law. It was in response to our current patients.
Again, think of the demand that will be created here and the impact on our emergency departments. And the last thing I'll mention out of time here, I understand is just I really want to acknowledge the leadership of Tony Navarro and the Behavioral Wellness Department. We have a partnership with our hospitals that is really constructive In the ways that we're trying to address this and other issues related to patients in need of support for mental illness and others. And I really have a lot of confidence, more than I've ever had, that we can work very closely with Tony and her team and the county and other providers in creating a system that is much more responsive than we would ever have a chance of doing on January 1st. Thank you very much.
I have a
question- And that concludes public comment on this item.
Mr.
Labadino has one question for you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. So when you mentioned the CSU and I know Dignity Health always also has one up north for those that are suffering from mental illness. You don't see that there'd be crossover in that facility do you? Or would, I'm just curious capacity wise would folks that are suffering from substance abuse under this bill they would probably be looking at a separate facility?
Yeah, I would defer to Dr. Erickson on that. The needs for these two patient populations are very, very different and so I think your presumption is accurate. It will take certainly different staff support in a different process, different procedures and maybe a different location.
3:03 – 3:1412 turns
Supervisor Hartman?
So are we starting into deliberations or are there still questions?
Unless you add a question for Mr.
Werth. No.
Okay, thank you Mr. Werth
So I wasn't sure exactly where I stood on this before today's meeting, but all the experts who deal with this population that we've heard from are telling us we need to delay. We see 54 counties that are in the process or have delayed and we could learn a lot from them if we aren't on the cutting edge. We also heard we don't have facilities, and we also heard that we're in the process of rolling out other programs that could feed into this and help us better understand how this all fits together.
So I think sometimes you have to go slow in the beginning so that you can go faster later on. You have to really build a foundation. Here the state hasn't adequately defined what What the definition is for this population, how we actually know who they are. I am intrigued with the idea of a phased implementation. I think even two years is gonna be an aggressive schedule and I don't know what that might look like but I think that is something that's interesting to consider.
And the final point You know, any organization has you can bite off a certain amount but you can only chew and digest. And our behavioral wellness department is under a staggering weight of new programs. I heard Director Navarro say 260 plus bills from the legislature And a whole host of other programs, including Cal AIM and CareCourt. So I think we have to be reasonable in what we expect this department to do.
As our CEO has said, we can do anything but we can't do everything.
Mr. Nelson?
Yes thank you Chair Williams. See I don't necessarily see this as a new program but more of a new tool that we're able to use and it's not just The involuntary holds, but it's also the threat of involuntary holds. You know I've heard one of the most effective things to getting people into services is that black rope therapy you know knowing that if they don't get help now that they may have other consequences down the line.
You know I'm very much impacted by the letter from For Miss Gibbs, where it goes through some different examples of people anecdotally in our community. A young woman who jumped from the UCSB overpass thinking it was a shortcut to where she was going was paralyzed and as a consequence but still did not qualify for temporary involuntary mental health care. She later died of a drug overdose.
The son of a NAMI board member who delayed treatment for cancer. He still doesn't qualify for LPS conservatorship A young man who suffered a brain aneurysm and chose to leave Cottage Hospital to return to the streets with a plain brain bleed. I understand that the chaos that might occur out there, but I'm concerned that we are sending people out back to the streets. To suffer and to not be treated while we try to figure out our systems, and that's where I'm coming on this and saying hey guys two years is is not enough or it's too long for me.
I think this is a tool, not a program to get to what Supervisor Labnina was talking about You know, most of our funding is coming from the state when it comes to behavioral wellness and public health. This is a tool not a program. We are already serving these people in other programs but this is something that we're going to be able to do to hopefully push them towards receiving the services that they need and you know hopefully in the future be able to resolve some of these problems.
I'm open to six month Extension and if we can't get there, then coming back to the board. I disagree that this is only been signed a couple weeks ago. It's actually been a couple months ago and it was read into law back in January and passed three months ago by both houses so unanimously. So I think that we've already had indication that this was coming. I don't think that this should have been a sure bet that the extension would be coming from our county.
I'm definitely not supportive of a two year extension. I prefer to see six months but I'd be willing to compromise on a year.
Well, I think it would be a very strange world that the county would be in if we began to change our policy based on bill introductions or even by just what is passed by the legislature. I was trying context for the conversation. We ignore the governor's role of signing things into law and we started implementing things before that was the case That's As you might remember, I was the joint author for Senate Bill 350.
A year ago there was one piece of the last piece of that legislation that was implemented. That's seven years of implementation for a landmark climate change bill but we're going to implement the biggest change to LPS conservatorship In the history of the state of California in eight weeks? I don't think so. You know, that's just an unrealistic thing and so, you know- You're
picking a small part of my
argument. Mr. Nelson, I didn't interrupt you repeatedly during your comments, so I expect you not to interrupt me repeatedly during mine. I will support Ms. Hartman's position and that of staff and our healthcare partners, it is not because I do not think we should be unresponsive to the need to serve These individuals in a more meaningful manner. I also think that there may be some value to the black robe effect that has not yet been substantiated in other states across the country, I think we will find out.
But just the consequences for our health care system for packing our ERs With individuals that don't want to be there is real. It's real for the health outcomes for all local people, anybody who goes and tries to receive treatment for an emergency. I do not think that it is right for the state or for us to sort of get in the way of our healthcare professionals' ability to prioritize treatment and prioritize beds.
So, I think that we should Support staff recommendation, but I also understand in a very personal way the yearning of Ms. Gibbs and others to see that this implementation Is a meaningful effort on our staff's job that they're not just trying to slow play. I mean, I think that's really what this conversation is about and so it would be my hope that our six month review be super be substantive and transparent to the public This is what was decided to be done in the County of Ventura, and I do think that would be wise for us to be uniform in that.
That staff should return in six months and show us and show the public that steps are being taken for real implementation. Mr. Labnino? Thank you Mr. Chair,
well I for one take my hat off to you because most of the time conservatives are labeled as you know all they're concerned about is the bottom line and you definitely have a heart for this and I know your hearts in the right place. For me it's just the fact that we're being tasked with the impossible it's not hard to do it's just there's no facilities to do this if there were we would have been working on A long time ago.
So we've never been doing more, I don't think in this county for the mentally ill than we are doing right now under the leadership of Director Navarro and a few of our past directors. We built out capacity in this county more so than we ever have done at all levels of care. And I think even Miss Gibbs would as they have, The advocates were here not long ago where they were telling us that, you know for once we.
They would actually give us some kudos that we have moved in the right direction. I think this. I'm actually shocked at the state would call for us to move into an area that is unproven That experts are telling us doesn't work. And I guess that'll be proved out in the long run, because your point is also well taken that what we're doing right now isn't working either so we've got to figure out a different way to do this. I don't believe locking somebody up and I'm not an expert at all but I just think locking somebody up with a substance abuse problem and keeping them there involuntarily probably isn't a recipe for great success. So I don't think we'll get there in two years, but I hope to see some progress along the way. I don't really know if we need to come up with an actual date right now of when we're pushing it off to except that are we required by the state at this point to give a date or do we just say we're not ready to implement it now and we have a hearing in July and we'll talk about it then?
And I don't think it's because we're slow rolling it, but I don't see where we're gonna all of a sudden have all these great ideas in six months when we understand what the problem is. Those are year long problems to solve if not decade long problems to solve so If I had to pick a date right now, I would move to the two years and try to do it quicker than that.
3:14 – 3:209 turns
Ms Hartman.
With regard to what Supervisor Nelson said, a tool not a program. I think it's both and I appreciate what you're saying about the tool, the threat. Wished we had that to wield to see if it would work but if you have a tool and you don't have the infrastructure in place then it's pretty empty or if what you have isn't going to work well. We want to do this and we want to do it well. We want to test this approach, and it's not fair if we don't have the systems in place to really make it work. We don't want people to say, well, we tried that. It didn't work.
So I think we need to take the time to do it right. We're going to hear about this according to Director Navarro's budget, so that's in the spring. So I think at that point we can decide, you know, hear back from her what she's thinking. Again, I don't know what the state is expecting in two years but I would like to hear about a phased implementation. What might that look like? I have no idea but I think that was Something that Ms. Gibbs suggested and I think it's worth considering so again, I'm ready to support staff recommendation and this is such an important topic we will be hearing about it in budget and at that point we can decide what next
Mr. Nelson
Yes, thank you Chair Williams and I just wanted to publicly apologize for interrupting you. I think my first in my three years here on the board this first time I've done that and so it's just I think guys can all know where my heart is on this and where I want to see this go. So that's where it's coming from. I'm not going to be able to support the two-year extension, and I am going to be one of these hopeful people that we can get here sooner.
I do hope that staff when they come back around budget time can talk about is there a way for us to implement the tool without the program yet or maybe soft roll in a program? I'm not exactly sure what that would look like but Reading the stories in Ms. Gibbs's letter, as well as it's been hearing them for the last 10 years I've been here at the county is so many people that need help but can't get help or that we're sentencing people back to the streets and it's led not just to those with severe mental illness suffering, but that's a big part of our homelessness issue in our county. Those are absolutely connected and so if we're ever gonna get arms around it, These big measures.
And so that's again, that's where I'm coming from on this it's not that I think that staff is or my colleagues are heartless by any means. I understand you guys all care but this is where I am today thank you.
Before your motion John let me just ask staff if we do want to show the public that were meaningful about transitioning and implementing What, can you return in six months? I mean budgets is like in three months. So tell me what is implementable from a staff perspective.
Director Navarro, I think you're we've been talking about this and I think their plan was to come back in July with a plan of how it could be implemented. If you say April's around the corner, I don't know if she's going to have any more information. I don't think so. And so I think the plan was to come back in July. But Director Navarro, if he could clarify that?
Yeah, but the plan was to come back in July with Arlene for us to present the fuller progress on the plan What I was talking about in budgets that you will see additions to our budget for staffing that will be tied to this legislation. Okay, because we need to expand our staff and we need budget requests for training and staffing.
That six months was also my thought, but so I hope you will keep that in mind as you make the motion. Supervisor Hartman?
Yes, before I actually say the words, we need to see this in a larger context. I'm thinking of sobering centers and we're just starting to get one in place in Lompoc I think of medically assisted drug treatment in the jails, there's a far longer list wanting it than are actually getting it. So what we're talking about today is the last resort but we have a lot of pieces that we haven't put in place that would come before this and so I think that's another compelling reason why we don't want to rush You know that the nuclear option when we haven't filled out all the diplomatic, all the other things we can do first. So with that I will move staff recommendation.
3:20 – 3:227 turns
Seconded, I have a motion by Hartman second by Labanino. All those in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed?
Nay.
That's 4-1 OK, we will be recessing to closed session. Will county council please read the items for consideration?
Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the board. The board will meet in closed session on three items conference with real property negotiators assessor's parcel number 007020 052, which is 915 Park Lane in Montecito. The agency negotiator are General Services Director Kirk Lagerquist and Public Works Director Scott McGolpin. Negotiating party Peter Mill and Deborah Dubois.
And negotiation is price and terms payment. There's also one item of existing litigation, American Medical Response West versus County of Santa Barbara and conference with labor negotiators. County Deputy Sheriff's Association and the agency designated representatives are CEO Miyasato and Interim Human Resources Director Yvonne Torres. And the time estimate is 45 minutes to an hour.
I'm going to put it at 45 minutes but we may be closer to an hour but just so that we have the discretion to start when we're ready.
Okay,
we are reconvening the meeting of December 12th 2023 County Council. Can you please report out from closed session?
3:22 – 3:485 turns
Thank you members of the board I met in closed session for one item of real property negotiated negotiations One item of existing litigation, American Medical Response versus the county. And one item of conference with labor negotiators involving the Santa Barbara County Deputy Sheriff's Association and the board took no reportable action.
All right fantastic that takes us to departmental item number four and Madam Clerk would you please read that item into the record?
Vice-chair Lavinino and members of the board, departmental item number four is from the county executive office. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding fiscal year 2024 through 2025 budget development report and proposed policies.
All right Mr. Clemente or CEO Miyasato
I'll take it. Good afternoon, Chair Lavinino and members of the board. So I'm Paul Clemente, your budget director with me is Stephen Yee one of our fiscal and policy analysts. I'll be presenting the budget development report including a five year forecast and proposed policies. So doing a forecast is useful because it sets the stage for upcoming budget development by identifying potential demands on county resources in coming years And discussing those to provide the content, term and long-term goals in identifying key areas that will need attention when preparing the 2425 budget.
We do this by forecasting discretionary revenue growth and labor costs and other likely cost drivers with the primary focus being on the general fund. I'll also discuss some fiscal issues under review in a few of our other major county funds. In today's report, I'll be discussing the budget development timeline, the economic outlook, our general fund five-year forecast, fiscal issues still under review, new budget development policies and end the discussion with some funding priorities.
So here we are in December, the kickoff of our budget development cycle. In the coming months departments will be working to develop their requested budgets which they'll be working on with Our department, we review their workshop. We go through workshop review meetings with them in March leading into the April budget workshops scheduled on the 8th 10th and 12th of next year.
After those workshops we develop our final by the end of May and then we head into budget adoption hearings scheduled on June 11th and if necessary June 13th For our economic outlook, we looked at both the UCLA Anderson forecast in their October report as well as the Legislative Analyst's Office report from the state. UCLA's prior reports had been presenting both recession and non-recession scenarios but they've now said they don't think a recession in 2024 is likely.
They are instead projecting a softening of the economy which were already seen signs of followed by a return to more normal growth in 2025. But they do outline some risks such as upcoming national elections, unpredictable world events and the potential for more interest rate increases. In October the Legislative Analyst's Office was pointing to the state income tax filing extensions which were delayed from April until November as a source of great uncertainty for the upcoming 24-25 budget since they still didn't really know what the 22-23 tax revenues were.
And just this past Friday, the LAO announced that revenues came in very low and set the stage for a $68 billion budget deficit in 24-25. Not much more will be known until the governor releases his preliminary budget in January. This is clearly a big cautionary note for us as we look at the economic landscape ahead. Before we dive deeper into the numbers, just a high level summary on what we'll be seeing in the general fund forecast. Which is moderate revenue growth being outpaced by rising salary and benefit and other operational costs which is leading to deficits in all five fiscal years. Those deficits can be offset in years one and two by the release of unallocated revenue which your board took prudent action to set aside in prior fiscal years because we were projecting deficits on the horizon.
Once those set-asides are depleted without additional revenue in future years, budget reductions would be necessary. Finally while there is substantial unallocated one time balances they're not enough to fund all identified funding priorities that we'll be discussing at the end of this presentation. At forecasted salary and benefit growth, the key takeaway is that forecasted growth is staying fairly consistent with average annual increases from prior years.
I'll touch on the assumptions we've made for our three major salary and benefit line items. Salaries are averaging about 3 1⁄2% increases in each year of the forecast, consistent with prior years. This assumes staffing levels stay flat at current 23-24 adopted FTE for all five years, and it's important to note That it also assumes 3% salary increases each year for all bargaining groups past their current MOU end dates. For all the non-safety groups whose contracts are ending at the end of this fiscal year, this means 3% salary increases were assumed for every year of the forecast.
Pension costs are averaging about 3.4% per year, which is slightly lower than prior year experience. This does assume SPSRS makes their targeted 7% rate of return on investments each year and costs continue to be partially offset by employee cost sharing. Finally health insurance is growing at a much higher rate 11.1% annually driven by an assumption of premium increases at 10% per year, as well as the continued phasing in of additional county contributions towards dependent plus one and family health care plans.
This is just a visual of the five years of budgeted prior budgets added with five years of the forecast period. We got salaries in blue, pension costs in orange, healthcare in green and we can see that healthcare, that size of the healthcare bar getting larger in the upcoming years. That orange is other which is all of the other costs that we pay for salary benefits including social security payments, Medicare workers compensation and a lot more.
Moving now to the General Fund Discussionary Revenue Projections. We see here four years of actuals plus current year adopted, followed by five years in light blue of projected growth. We see the slowing growth in those forecast years averaging about 3.1% per year. The robust growth in the prior years which, excuse me, averaged about 6.2% per year. I'll discuss the largest contributors on the coming slides.
Property taxes make up 80% of our discretionary revenues, which is a budgeted at $291 million in the current year. The forecast is projecting about 3.4% average annual increase, which is quite a bit lower than the 6.4 percent experienced in prior years. One of the main drivers of property tax growth is the assessed value of properties, which the auditor is projecting to go forward at a slower rate 4% next fiscal year followed by three and a half percent for the remainder of the forecast years.
Their projections are based on the steep decline we have seen in property transfers that started last fiscal year and continues today, with monthly property transfers being recorded at low volumes not seen for many years. Almost half the volume we were seeing in some months compared to just a couple of years ago. Transient occupancy tax makes up 5% of the county's discretionary revenue at $17 million a year.
Tourism and the availability of hotels in the unincorporated area. The forecast assumes 2.5% growth next year, followed by 4% growth for the remainder of the period. In prior years we were seeing an average of 14% growth annually as a post-pandemic travel boom, as well as a couple new hotel openings drove revenue up. Finally, sales tax makes up 4% of the discretionary revenue budgeted at 15 million in the current year.
Although recent national and world events have driven a lot of economic uncertainty, consumers have continued to spend which was keeping sales tax growing at around 8% a year the past five years. Recently we've seen slowing and are projecting revenues flat both this year and next before growing again at around 3% annually starting in fiscal year 25-26. Now I'll move into the five-year forecast.
And as I discussed in the coming slides, I just wanted to set some context first for the revenue that we're talking about. The county's overall operating revenues and the current adopted budget are just over $1.5 billion, and two thirds of that come into funds other than the general fund. The general fund itself has about $550 million in operating revenues And two-thirds of this, $372 million are the discretionary revenues that we focus on in the forecast. The remaining general fund dollars are mostly state revenues such as Prop 172 and 2011 realignment and charges for services such as a share of city contracts revenue which recoup costs of certain services.
So even though these general fund revenues are generally restricted in their allowable uses Let me restate, even these other general fund revenues are generally restricted in their allowable uses and why we focus our forecast mainly on the discretionary. Projections for all other revenues are developed by departments over the coming months with our review and input and will be presented as part of the preliminary budget in April.
This is the forecast table I will go into each of the ongoing costs on subsequent slides, but want to draw your attention to the top line. This is where we are projecting incremental discretionary revenue growth each year driven by the revenues I discussed. We compare this incremental growth against the incremental ongoing costs we're anticipating in each fiscal year to arrive at the bottom line, which we see balanced at zero in the first two years only with the release of those prior year set-asides that we see in row 14.
And then deficits beginning in year three. We break the ongoing costs into category areas. The first one forecast is the GFC impact of the salary and benefit increases we've discussed on the prior slides The next category, policy are those driven by adopted budget policies. The operational category contains costs driven by operations in departments often as a result of state legislation or other unavoidable costs.
Finally fiscal planning is the release of your board approved prior year set-asides. So for policy commitments, the Northern Branch Jail Operating Plan costs are anticipated to increase $9.5 million over the forecast period with the largest increase in the first three years as we continue growing the ongoing funding up to eventually match the ongoing operating costs which may occur in year three.
After that, the annual cost growth to maintain operations is anticipated about 1.3 million a year. The deferred maintenance policy directs 18% of unallocated discretionary revenue growth towards deferred maintenance. As we've seen on the forecast table, there's not anticipated to be much allocated, unallocated revenue growth once the other policies are addressed. So the increase is only 330,000 over the forecast period.
Finally, mitigating increasing internal rates such as for liability insurance and IT charges to avoid service level reductions was a policy adopted last year. Certain rates like liability are anticipated to continue increasing at a rapid rate and we anticipate $8.6 million over the forecast period to help departments meet rate increases. Under operational changes Homeless services costs, the county's providing many services in the homelessness prevention shelter and interim housing and outreach areas with a variety of one-time state and federal funding sources.
This includes operations at the Hedges House of Hope and cost to maintain the homeless management information system and coordinated entry system. As these grants drop off unless the state provides additional revenue, the general fund will need to pick it up or lose services with a cost of $4.7 million over the coming period. In-home supportive services are paid for with 1991 realignment revenue and general fund contribution.
With costs expected to grow beyond the state funding sources due to increased labor costs and an annual escalation in the maintenance of effort with a total general fund increase anticipated over the forecast period. The Voters Choice Act allows counties to implement election models that provide flexible options for voters. The elections office has indicated they're considering implementation during the 24-25 fiscal year, which would have an ongoing impact of $1.2 million for additional staff annual equipment and software needs increased printing costs and more.
Elections would be coming back to the board to discuss this in more detail if they opt to move forward. A couple of years ago, AB 1869 repealed the ability of probation and sheriff to charge defendants certain fees that recoup service costs but included a provision that provided one-time revenue backfill for five years. That backfill sunsets after fiscal year 2526 unless the state replaces it with permanent revenue. The general fund would need to provide $850,000 in year three or look at reduction in those departments. This impact is mostly in the probation department The cost of the current medical services contract in jails and probation facilities is about $14 million annually.
Assuming no additions or enhancements to that contract, and an average annual escalation of 5%, the cost would be seven to $800,000 a year totaling 3.9 million over the forecast period. Finally, ARPA is funding a variety of criminal justice programs such as additional arraignment attorneys and public defender data analysis in multiple departments and co-response teams in the Sheriff's Department.
We have some GFC set aside to cover these costs when ARPA expires in 2627 but with ongoing cost increases by the time ARPA runs out we're anticipating needing an additional $870,000 ongoing dollars to maintain everything that's currently funded or look at reductions at that time And finally, here we see the planned release of the $10.7 million set-aside in prior years to balance the deficits projected in the upcoming years.
Ages with the annual revenue shown in green stack next to annual cost increases and those various categories we discussed. Dark green indicates release of the set aside which is balancing us in years one and two not enough to balance us in year three and then nothing available to release from set asides in year four and five To reiterate the key takeaways from the forecast, we're seeing projected revenue growth failing to offset the salary and benefit and other costs leading to deficits in all five years.
Avoiding those with the set-asides in years one and two. We're asking departments to remain focused on maintaining existing services as opposed to expansions. And need them to continue finding operational efficiencies now because we may need to look to cost cutting in the future. One-time funds may be needed to bridge budget gaps in the out years, and the CEO will recommend new priorities be focused on one time projects or needs not ongoing costs.
In the next section I'll briefly touch on other issues we're monitoring in the general fund and other funds that could add additional expenses as to cost requirements. In the general fund, we continue to see a variety of legislative changes that impact revenues operations and statutory responsibilities in the criminal justice departments including elimination of revenues associated with criminal justice fees. Expanding requirements for post conviction case review in the DA and public defender and by revising funding formulas that support existing programs.
Deferred maintenance we're always monitoring. The backlog currently coming in at $538 million, the bulk of that in public works. As we saw there may not be much growth in 18% ongoing funding over the next few years although coming up I will be discussing potential uses of one-time revenues. Finally compliance with the Disability Rights California stipulated judgment will require additional funding in a variety of areas ACO Heitman is coordinating this effort and still working on the plan and associated costs.
We did set aside some funding in the current year budget towards this, but it is likely that more would be needed. Issues under review in special revenue funds include the Inmate Welfare Fund, which provides programming for the benefit, education and welfare of inmates in the county's jails. It is primarily funded from commission on inmate telephone calls and commissary purchases.
And a recent state law placed a cap on how high those telephone rates can be. This has caused a shortfall in the fund, which needed to draw over $200,000 to balance last fiscal year from their fund balance. There is adequate fund balance to maintain services for some time, but the Sheriff's Department will need to look at cost reductions and is already doing so to bring operations back within funding levels or risk fund balance depletion.
The health care fund continues grappling with a loss of 340B pharmacy benefit revenue which lost them more than a few million dollars a year. Currently they're bridging the gap with fund balance, which risks depletion by fiscal year 28-29 if they continue with such heavy draws every year. They have been aware of and planning for this issue for some time now and are interested to increase the financial strength at their health care centers.
Your board discussed this item this morning SB 43 which may have general fund impact if other funding is not provided by the state. Impacts are unknown and with implementation delayed it will provide them time to refine their estimates and we'll learn more on this one as we go. The Mental Health Services Act Fund Is funded through a 1% tax on personal income in excess of $1 million. Proposition one on the ballot this March could redirect 30% of this funding towards housing for the chronically homeless, which our behavioral wellness department estimates could reduce their available funding by $9 million.
If passed there would be an 18 month transition period in which the department would continue to receive their current MHSA distributions while developing a transition plan. And the Farm Worker Resource Center Program, your board also heard an update on this morning and staff social services. Months with a discussion on the service delivery model and funding options before the grant ends in May.
So we're proposing our existing budget policies plus one amendment to a policy Policy 3F, which currently requires departments to build in assumed salary savings of either three percent or their historic five-year average. The amendment we're proposing adds language that the CEO's office may recommend the deletion of extended funded vacancies, defined as vacant for two or more budget cycles. So the funding could be reallocated to other more urgent needs.
We'd be looking at these particularly in cases of departments with expansion requests or facing service level reductions and asking them to provide explanation for why long term vacancies exist. In many cases, there are valid reasons and the funding is often being used towards a desired service in some other way. So we didn't come at this moment with a hard and fast two years and we're cutting it approach but we do think this policy will produce some departments particularly given the forecast outlook as we try to figure out how to address our highest needs within existing resources.
And finally, we'll take a look at available one-time balance and review priority areas that we've identified for use of these funds. In the general fund, we're looking at over $20 million in available fund balance made up mostly of what remains from the 22-23 fiscal year end carryover as well as reimbursements back to the general fund when we issue certificates of participation later this year for some capital projects We also anticipate over $4 million of Prop 172 fund balance available to be used towards public safety needs.
So we've discussed lack of ongoing GFC for new programs and expansions, the coming slides identify and categorize by priority area potential one-time needs although there are more needs than there is balance available. Coming slides identify existing obligations, board commitments and emerging requirements that we would consider first when developing recommendations in the coming months.
Our first area is coordinated community service delivery and strengthened safety net. Bolded projects include dignity moves projects. There's two of them with planned five year project but funding identified for the first two years so they still need funding for years three, four and five. Housing element implementation actions if necessary as planning and development moves forward with that process.
And improved access to inpatient mental health care treatment. Other items we've included here include workforce housing options The recreation master plan implementation, other homeless services and projects underway. Consultant services for building to work through a building permit backlog in planning and development. And for the past couple of years there's also been available funding for a set aside to each district, each board district, Next category is improved criminal justice system with the focus here on jail improvements in accordance with Disability Rights California settlement. This includes Northern Branch Jail design, Main Jail ADA accessibility well-being improvements and potential augmentation of jail medical services.
Under Financial and Organizational Excellence, we've included labor agreements, enterprise resource planning software implementation and adoption, and backfilling state revenue losses and set-aside for future deficits. Under Sustainability and Climate Resiliency, we've included disaster recovery set-aside and projects, project clean water projects, electric vehicle charging infrastructure And Climate Action Plan implementation.
And finally, under Facilities and Infrastructure we've included new capital projects and deferred maintenance projects for plan. That wraps up my presentation. We've got the recommended actions on the screen to receive and file the report, adopt the budget development policies, review and provide any additional direction as appropriate on the funding priorities, and determine per se whether this is not a project.
3:48 – 3:5514 turns
Questions from the board? Mr. Nelson.
Yes, thank you Chair Williams. Is there any opportunity in the future to look at our healthcare costs and see about any other potential options that we might be looking at? Maybe even potentially some self-insurance? It seems to be a cost driver and I know that's happening throughout the marketplace but at some point with 4600 employees we may be able to have a big enough unit that that's something we could pursue or look at in the future I'm on another joint powers board that we're, we're doing some of that for our liability at this point because we've become large enough that that's an option out there. So I don't know if there's been any considerations with HR to try to wrangle those costs down. I know we're trying to provide more services at the same time trying to keep costs at bay and we don't quite have those funds.
Any thoughts in that direction or any direction from the board in the future to potentially explore those options?
Supervisor through the chair, at some point I know we did look at whether we wanted to go to CalPERS health plans at one point. And it didn't make sense for us at the time. A lot of our drivers, you're right that healthcare costs have increased. We can talk to HR about that. Some of the cost drivers are just the plans we choose and remember we have to negotiate any plan changes and there's been some reluctance and understandably so on making significant plan changes to reduce costs in this environment but we can also take that back to HR and have a discussion about it for sure.
When we go into negotiations with various bargaining units, are we already including these cost increases in those future contracts? So when we look at when we're negotiating with a bargaining unit.
Supervisor through the chair, we basically bargain with the group as a whole. It's part of the Health Care Oversight Committee or HOA. I can't remember the name. HOC?
Health Oversight Committee.
Health Oversight Committee and so we talk about different plan changes potential and then Basically if because the county pays for the lowest cost plan for employee only, those costs are included just in our budgeted costs.
So we don't necessarily get credit for that?
It's just part of the board's policy about what we would pay for in health care and as you know we are striving to improve our contribution for employee healthcare.
Okay thank you. To something that I think that we should be considering and thinking about as we move forward. Just, I know it's kind of a big deal so I know it's not a small task but it should be something in the back of our minds that we're thinking about as we move forward with this. I think we're large enough bargaining unit at this point that might make sense and maybe if we explore that we might be able to keep those costs under control and be able save money in the out years.
If we go to slide 17 for a moment. I just wanted to look at and ask a few questions So that was the, almost there. Yeah I wanted to review some of those years there. It seems to be uneven and I just wanted, I think I asked this offline but I was kind of curious on the annual deficit surplus in some of those years in that bottom line How that goes back forth. I know we're covering 24 25 and 25 26 with some of the fiscal planning that we've done But it jumps up from two and a half to seven, but then comes back down. Can you explain what's happening there?
Yeah supervisor Nelson through the chair One board I can explain the jumps in each year one important thing to remember is these are incremental so 28-29 year assumes 27, 28 got balanced. However it had to get balanced and this is new cost exceeding revenue so it would look like otherwise yeah it should be an even bigger number the next year but that's how that's working.
The large increase in the fourth fiscal year if I can draw your attention to row three of the pension costs we see the prior year were actually anticipated go down a little bit negative $509,000 and then An increase of $4.6 million, that's a $5 million swing just about on that one and That's driven by the various smoothings in, smoothing ins of the different five year for SB CSRS each year they have their earnings whether they exceed or miss their investment mark. They smooth those in over five years and we have a pretty good year of returns that is ending their fifth year in 26-27 And then it was followed by a fairly bad year of returns, which its fifth year is in 27-28. So in prior years and once that smoothing in of the good returns ends you're going to see that upward pressure.
Once that's fully smoothed in as well we don't have too bad of a change in the next year at only $1 million.
And so that's how the national economy ends up impacting our budget on a local level?
Because it's driven by their investment returns, yes. I would say to some extent yes.
All right my last question or comment potentially is in slide 34 when we looked at the different priorities that we would evaluate once if we had excess revenue I believe and one of those was a consultant services for building permits and I'm not sure why that costs more when this is a cost recovery item and when we're paying consultants less than what we charge hourly in the department. So can you help me out with that a little bit?
3:55 – 4:009 turns
Supervisor Nielsen to the Chair, I'm not certain on that point. I haven't dug into that but what we're listing here, this is an issue that has been indicated solution to work through the backlog that apparently P&D is experiencing here. It
seems nonsensical to me that by outsourcing for less money, somehow we lose money or it costs us money I think. So I'm concerned with that as a potential cost. It seems like that's something that's potential savings is that there's a workload there and that we could actually move things through the building permit process and free up staff for other things So I'm not sure why this is a cost. And so, I think that's something we should be keeping an eye
on. Supervisors to the chair you're right. I think that we're just saying if we wanted to get this done there might be some initial costs and maybe we could recoup but to get it started we would look to see if there's some initial money that have would have to be spent whether we could recoup that but you're right as far as how that money comes in now.
Okay
thank you. Supervisor Caps?
Thank you Mr. Chair, thanks for this broad overview it's very helpful as we move into the next year I had a couple questions about staffing and our budget hearings last year we were provided a list of vacant positions and I know that's been a challenge for many reasons the pandemic being front and center but I focused on the policy change that you all have put forward I would hope that CEO Miyasato could address it, whereas if a position's unfilled for two years only at that point, that position might be questioned as to whether or not we really need it. It seems fiscally prudent to maybe ask that question sooner and what is the current policy?
Supervisor Capps through the chair. So we don't really have a current policy on Funded vacancies and how to address those at all. What we do receive from departments is a quarterly, and we've started publishing this in our quarterly reports just this past for quarter one. We always get from them their funded vacancies and we're keeping eye on those and we are having those conversations with departments particularly with ones that they recently received as an expansion request or something. We are tracking those with them Urging them or finding out why they haven't been able to fill yet.
Two years to us, for some there are often hard-to-fill positions in many departments and HR kind of tracks those difficult-to fill positions often in a continuous recruitment things like that but nothing precludes us from having those conversations earlier if that makes sense?
Supervisors to the chair, so I think we appreciate you flagging this. Yes if departments aren't going to be filling positions and they're budgeted should they just go back to the general fund? We think yes and the question is to try to have some flexibility with the department. So sometimes it's hard Sometimes they've done several recruitments, sometimes there's a backlog in recruitment. Having said that as Paul said we track through our quarterly reviews of the departments but we could also maybe because it is two years maybe at the one year mark we can either bring that forward as part of budget discussion To your board earlier, so it kind of puts the departments on notice. We've tracked this, you haven't filled it, what's your plan? I think the budget staff is already doing with the departments but we can be more formalized about that to help track these and make sure that if there are budget positions, we're actually filling them and if they're not needed then we are having the funds go back for other uses.
Yeah, I'd appreciate that. It just feels responsible for us to be pushing that and sending that signal. I don't have any department in mind when I say this is just more general. But if you're a part of being the head of the department is to make sure that positions are getting filled and I can see there's an incentive to sort of want to hold on to your to your FTEs when in fact that's I mean staffing is obviously our biggest expense so we could see some savings and we could see some more efficient government. I believe if we kind of tightened up that process And I just appreciated, and I think it was Supervisor Lavagnino who asked for that list of vacancies. And if it's been more than a year or two years, I think they signal some issues going on that we should be focused on.
I know we've tried to provide incentives, signing bonuses, etc., to try to overcome some of these hiring issues but to me that seems an area of tightening up going forward. And with that, related to the Sheriff's Department I know can you just discuss sort of the difference between overtime costs and vacancies? Are we sort of double paying there in a sense?
4:00 – 4:0613 turns
Supervisor Capps through the chair no when there is an actual vacancy it's a funded vacancy in the sheriff's department particularly they are often then working overtime to cover that The funding goes to cover that instead of the position. It's only in the cases where then they've hired and they have an extensive training academy, and then out in the field and things like that before they are able to kind of Be out and do the job that they're filled that position for. That the sheriff's office often has to run overtime, to cover the shifts still for the position the person was hired into until they are trained up and ready to go. So that is a point where they do have kind of a double pay. You're paying the person to go to academy and training everything but you're also still paying overtime to someone to cover them out on the field.
When we see the churn kind of lesson, we'll see less of that as staff is able to stay in their positions longer and you got less turnover.
Thank you. We'll end with a kind of overarching question of what keeps you up at night? There's a lot of data here. What should we be really focused on going into the new
year? Supervisor Capps through the chair. You know, I think we're looking OK with the releases the next year or two like we showed. But it's really if we didn't have those, the fact that just kind of the salary benefits like I mentioned aren't shooting up. They're not flying. It's moderate growth that we've seen in the past few years and revenues aren't Aren't keeping up with that. So that's the concern going forward is in our status quo Operations in the out years, we're not seeing the revenue keep up just to maintain the existing services
Thank you
Supervisor Hartman
My question is about property tax. If I remember this current year, property values went up significantly and then we had a fair amount of money, I think $20 million more than we expected in this year's budget. I believe we used that for one-time expenditures? And so how are you thinking about property tax revenues? You're just predicting growth but we got a big increase To our base, so could you help me understand that?
Supervisor Hartman through the chair. We anticipated that and we basically in the 23-24 adopted budget we normalized to that new base. We bumped it up. We did not expend it mostly on one time where we saw the one time was really in the prior year 22-23 budget Where that's really the year that the tax revenue came in much higher than was budgeted. And that's what led mostly to that $27 million surplus we ended last year with and are working through as a one time balance. When we adopted the 23-24 budget, we moved that base up and that is the ongoing revenue that we allocated in the current year.
Part of that was seven and a half million dollars that we set aside and are talking about releasing next fiscal year. So we were able to save it and move it over and help us balance our deficit next year.
Thank you.
Are there any requests to speak from the public?
Chair Williams, members of the board, we have no requests to speak from the public. I got a question
And then, Mr. Labadino? Thank you, Mr. Chair. So on the deferred maintenance backlog It seems like we've done a pretty decent job of holding roads. I was going back looking like 10 years history, roads backlog really hasn't increased that much but for some reason CSD buildings and parks have pretty much gone from about a $56 million deficit to about over 160 million. Just curious if we might be taking another look at the 18% or how that gets distributed I don't know, it just doesn't seem like we're making any progress on that side of things and just trying to figure out.
I guess from your perspective or revenue but exactly that's the answer but are we ready to take another look at that? Or kind of what's your
thought? Supervisor Lavinino through the chair. One of the ways we've allocated since that revenue first came in was it's 50% if it goes to public works, then 35% to general services and 15% community services. We haven't really taken a look at that allocation and that's not prescribed in the policy. That's kind of an operating practice that we've done because I think because Public Works had such Chunk of the backlog.
But it's a good point. We can go back and look at kind of the rate of growth in each of these areas, and if we see general services is really skyrocketing and public works has been able to maintain or something like that, that would be something to look at as far as the revenue available. Using some of this one-time balance we have towards deferred maintenance projects, maybe that would speak to looking at general services projects. Yeah
I'm not interested in that just because it looks like we're basically just going to keep the lights on with the money that we saved from previous years so all right very good and as somebody that's only gonna be here for three years I really appreciate the fact I told Paul when he sat me down, I said, I'm only interested in a three-year forecast.
4:06 – 4:097 turns
Supervisors if I may say something? I've been talking to some of my colleagues and some counties are looking at taking cuts next year because everyone's looking at the state budget. Properties aren't turning over like they had been because interest rates are being so high and although we get money from the base level of inflation from property obviously it's when the properties change over that counties Actually recoup some of that revenue towards their property taxes. And as Paul mentioned, we look at how much properties transfer the documentary transfer tax and that's gone really low.
I just want to commend your board that we did have a, we had more property tax revenue ongoing and we set that aside because we knew there were going to be deficits. And what we told the department directors were it not for us on the board setting that money aside we would be taking cuts next year so I just want to applaud the board for your prudence and being fiscally conservative in that sense because we don't want to cut services especially right now and to the degree that we can We all need to be more efficient, continue to look for efficiencies and other ways of generating revenue.
Well I sure wish that one of the hosts of folks who say well of course you guys have plenty of money for X in the course of a year would look at one of these hearings and see how much of the county's Revenue, first of all isn't discretionary and then even of the discretionary how much really isn't discretionary of the discretionary. Because there's plenty of stuff on the discretionary end that I'd rather not spend money on but there really isn't an option not to spend money on.
And so you know I think it would behoove folks Leveraging us to spend hundreds of thousands or millions more on different things to be able to understand that. Any other comments before a motion? Let's get a motion.
Move staff recommendation A through D. Oops, I'll
second.
I have a motion by Hartman, seconded by Caps. All those in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed?
It is both.
No, no. Oh, right. She can she can correct that you can control that. There you go. Everything's fine. OK. Item number five.
4:09 – 4:282 turns
Chair Williams and members of the board departmental item number five is from the sheriff coroner's office It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding amendments to Santa Barbara County Code Chapter 6, Article 6 regarding outdoor festivals and Chapter 36 regarding public nuances. Nuisances excuse me.
My name is Garrett Slom an 18 year veteran of the Sheriff's Office having probably served in a variety of assignments within each of your districts over that time period. I'm currently the Isla Vista Foot Patrol Bureau Lieutenant in charge of day-to-day operations within the bureau. At times in my career, I've also been a patrol sergeant in Isla Vista and a patrol deputy in Isla Vista as well.
It's with this depth of knowledge about these unique challenges and opportunities faced in Islan Vista that I am here before you today to encourage you to support the revisions that we have proposed through Chapter 6 and Chapter 36 of the County Codes. Isla Vista may very well be the most diverse community in the entire county, and we want to continue to honor that uniqueness.
So when it came time to look at the necessary updates for our County Code, we reached out to a wide sampling of the Isla Vista community that included representatives that are here today, people from the Isla Vista Community Services District, UCSB's Associated Students, UCSB Student Affairs, Ivy Rexon Park, long-term residents and representatives of local property owners and managers.
This group of seemingly disparate interests sat together in our conference room at Foot Patrol for the last nine months and worked through some of the current challenges that we're seeing in Isla Vista. As a result, with these revisions when they left the working group they had their unanimous support and when we brought the proposed revisions to the IBCSD board it received unanimous support from the members that were present for the vote These leaders in our community saw that although the Sheriff's Office cannot and should not be the only solution to these problems, we have an opportunity to do more. To participate in public safety in a way that we cannot under the current codes.
These revisions are also congruent with and incorporated into Supervisor Capps' Eight Point Isla Vista Bluff Safety Plan that this board recently endorsed and supported since day one. These proposed revisions are driven by a very real public safety need to prevent potential mass casualty events and the deterioration of the quality of life in Isla Vista. We have an opportunity to do better, to mitigate these dangerous situations, educate our citizens, and provide a safe neighborhood for our residents discouraging situations that we know are problematic and often tragic.
Appropriately, bluff and rooftop safety are a priority of these revisions. But so too are preventing other tragedies that go untold in public. Sexual assaults, violent assaults and attacks, domestic abuse and drug and alcohol overdoses are all too common in Isla Vista. And we often find these events originate from the large parties that Isla Vista has become known for.
These weekly parties are occurring on a scale that hasn't been seen in Isla Vista throughout my career. And though we have successfully wrestled with Halloween, the unsanctioned Deltopia event remains a serious threat to public safety. And it's a drain on emergency services within this county. It has become so popular that a major film studio recently released a major motion picture titled Deltopia, dramatizing the event as a drug and alcohol fueled violent.
It was the promised land of permissive behavior. These are the top four problems we experience every weekend in Isla Vista. In 2022, we began to see a sudden influx of profiteering activities of both local and out-of-town concert and party promoters utilizing residential zones to capitalize on our population density to make thousands and thousands of dollars.
These parties are already illegal by way of a variety of laws I'll share with you in a moment but they're administrative in nature and our ability to address the issues is currently woefully inadequate Fentanyl remains a huge public safety threat in Isla Vista and throughout the county, and we continue to experience consistent calls for service along with alcohol overdoses and physical assaults.
Unfortunately during the 2023 Deltopia event UCSB junior Jude Coronel died of a fentanyl overdose while attending a Deltopia related party. The response to medical emergencies is also a consistent issue. What is unique to Isla Vista that's typically not seen in other parts of the county, is the necessity for law enforcement personnel to respond not just to render aid to the victim but to protect our fire and EMS personnel from confrontational party goers who try Regarding infrastructure and public rights-of-way, it has been the culture of Isla Vista for decades that Del Playa becomes congested with pedestrians in the roadway during the nighttime hours. This is compounded by the parking and traffic congestion in our densely populated community.
And this is not a new problem but it's a growing problem. As you'll see in the next few slides, the organized and paid parties have been utilizing our public rights-of way as their concert venue which exacerbates the issues, delays response times from emergency personnel And creates dangerous environments where cars and pedestrians are interacting, often with alcohol consumption mixed in with that.
Last and of course not least our constant concerns about bluff and rooftop safety. Unfortunately on September 2nd of this year at the beginning of the school year we experienced the tragic death of Benny Schumer a 19-year old City College student who passed away after falling from the bluffs while attending a concert on a patio overlooking the bluffs These proposed changes we are asking you to consider our effort to participate in finding a resolution to this ongoing issue.
These images are taken from social media accounts and document some of the issues that we saw this year during Deltopia, and that we continue to see on The first photo on the left is a picture of 6653 Del Playa Drive, and it's taken from across the street where a DJ was holding a concert. The middle photo is of an alleyway and a patio between two apartment complexes looking towards the ocean with several hundred people packed onto a bluff patio.
The picture on the right was taken from a social media account of one of the commercial concert promoters and one of the events that happened that day. That photo is taken facing Del Playa Drive from the stage, and you can see thousands of people who overtook the parking lot and Del Playa Drive for the concert that required a ticket purchase for entry. This is just a small collection of social media posts advertising the paid parties in Isla Vista from the last couple weeks.
These parties are held both day and night, and they charge a ticket for entry. These promoters use private social media accounts, and they take significant steps to evade detection by law enforcement. Though they advertise in the open, the address is typically not provided until someone has purchased a ticket. This makes it very difficult for us to be proactive in addressing these commercial events that are occurring on residential properties, and landlords and property owners are kept in the dark We also know that many of these parties are selling alcohol for profit, skirting ABC laws that require proper licensing training and education of the staff that does serve alcohol.
This is another picture of 6653 Del Playa Drive during the 2023 Deltopia event. This picture is taken from across the street, so you can see the large crowd that's blocking the street and the parking lot of the apartment complex. On the right side of the photo between those two inflatable palm trees is a stage with large speakers and a DJ performing. The balcony above the crowd is significantly overcapacity as people bounced, danced, and dove into the crowd with dozens of people below them. And this is a good example of how these larger organized parties are utilizing the public roadway and our sidewalks as part of their venue.
This is an overhead shot of large parties during Deltopia. The red arrows are to highlight places where we see people casually standing or sitting on the edges of the bluffs. You'll notice at the bottom right of the photo, a young man is standing on the edge of the bluff in a portion that's already been undercut by erosion. To get to this point he had to climb over a waist-high fence and a knee-high barrier.
At the bottom left of the photo, in the pink shorts you'll see another young man Dangerous event even when sober, but we know that basic science tells us that alcohol lowers inhibitions and fuels reckless behavior like this. It is also a public health issue for people below him on the beaches. Above them you'll see people sitting and even standing on the balcony railing with only a few feet between them and the fall from the bluffs below.
On the balcony on the right under the tarp you see how overloaded the balcony has become by party goers. As a father this image breaks my heart. This party was charging $20 for admission and was selling alcohol to attendees once inside. This is Sergeant Corbett tending to a young woman suffering from a severe alcohol overdose. She was completely unconscious. Nobody at the party was helping her, and nobody would call 911 despite the severity of her condition. The crowds were so thick that our deputies had to carry her out to the street because the fire engines in the ambulances couldn't reach her.
Our emergency medical personnel then had to leave their vehicles including the fire engines and their ambulances. They'd leave them behind and walk into Del Playa to treat this young woman. Scenes and scenarios like this have been repeated throughout the weekend of Deltopia As you can see, Deltopia is on an upward trajectory. Though we experienced a slowdown during the pandemic when campuses were mostly closed, Deltopia quickly resumed activities and is continuing to grow.
This past year, we issued five times as many citations, made three times as many arrests, handled twice the amount of medical calls, doubled our hospitalizations, and unfortunately experienced that overdose death. All Isla Vistas have had to confront some significant changes to the community over the last few years. The current codes are inadequate in addressing the realities of Isla Vista as it exists today. And the evidence of that reality is in the overwhelming support these revisions have received from our community.
To address this new environment, the Sheriff's Office has put forward the proposed revisions under consideration today. The biggest asset we have when it comes to combating the ill effects of Deltopia is the noise curfew on...is the noise curfew of outdoor festivals as defined in Chapter 6. That ordinance expired this year, so our first request is to extend the prohibition of these activities in perpetuity similar to what it currently exists for Halloween.
I cannot overstress that the Outdoor Festival Ordinance prohibits events like Halloween and Deltopia. A lot of confusion also exists around what is currently legal and illegal under various state and local laws. One goal of these revisions is to provide the public with clear guidance on what is allowed and what is prohibited within our residential zones. I also want to emphasize that by bringing these already illegal activities into one cohesive ordinance, we minimize the chance for confusion or misinterpretation of existing laws.
Also if implemented, we would spend a significant period of time educating our community about the changes before we consider beginning any enforcement action. We want to discourage abuse of residential properties for profiteering activities. The concert promoters will typically contact a tenant and form an agreement with them to host a party. That tenant sometimes receives payment upwards of several thousand dollars in the way for hosting that party.
The problem is that these activities greatly affect other tenants, nearby properties, and property managers leaving our local property owners exposed to liability if something goes wrong. We also want to discourage the conditions that create overcrowded balconies and patios. Significant injuries and deaths have happened across California, structures being used for purposes beyond their design. Though we certainly can't eliminate all these types of dangers, we can address the most gregarious issues surrounding these outdoor festivals.
Lastly, Isla Vista has several viable locations for outdoor festivals that are appropriate and designed for these purposes. It is not our intent to eliminate music or concerts in Isla Vista, and we want to honor the vibrant music scene that has produced some world-famous artists. These proposed revisions consider that, and concerts that aren't driven by a profit that don't overwhelm residential properties would continue to be legal.
I'd like to take a quick moment and highlight the members of this working group that I touched on at the beginning, who participated in crafting this language that we have in front of you today. In particular, the work of Olivia Craig and Ella Scholes of the Isla Vista Community Services District. Both of them were instrumental in helping us balance the needs of the community with reasonable changes. Both serve as directors on the IV-CSD and both are UCSB students. And they both voted in favor at the IV CSD board meeting of these changes.
We also had Osaze Osayande from UCSB Associated Students participate in these discussions. And also, long-term residents, property managers and District 2 were all involved. I'm going to spare you a line by line reading of these next two slides but I added these to show you how confusing the local ordinances currently are when it comes to holding a concert or outdoor festival.
Also, many of these laws are administrative in nature and rely on other county agencies to conduct enforcement. The other issue with administrative fines is that they're largely reactive and cannot be used in the moment to stop dangerous activity. By defining these issues clearly and attaching enforcement penalties we, the Sheriff's Office can better serve our population who are experiencing these events on a weekly basis.
What's important to note about this slide is how the concerts and musical performances are already prohibited in our residential zones. And this of course is just a zoning map of Isla Vista to highlight how the vast majority of Isla Vista is a residential zone. So under current laws, the concerts and outdoor festivals are already illegal but the Sheriff's Office as the primary public safety enforcement agency in Isla Vista has no real authority to enforce laws that the county has already deemed to be important to rectify that issue.
So here are the goals of the proposed revisions. We want to extend the noise curfew of outdoor festivals and similar activity during Deltopia Weekend. Given the population density in Isla Vista, the attendance level that would require an outdoor festival permit would drop from 500 in other parts of the county to 250 attendees in Isla Vista. Outdoor festivals with over 250 attendees would be prohibited in the residential zones of Isla Vista.
Outdoor festivals or concerts of any size that sell tickets or alcohol would be prohibited in Isla Vista residential zones at all times. And we would add penalties for hosting illegal outdoor festivals by making it a misdemeanor consistent with other county codes. The next portion of the proposed revisions affect Chapter 36 of the County Codes. Within the existing Chapter 36 language, there are certain conditions that have been identified that declare a party or social gathering a public nuisance.
Once those conditions have been met, current law allows the Sheriff's Office to shut down the party on behalf of our citizens. The changes we are proposing to Chapter 36 add some new conditions in seriousness. Chapter 36 deals with a lot of out-of-control parties we see not just during Deltopia but on any given weekend when combined with the changes in Chapter 6, our goal is to be able to stop dangerous and reckless behavior early and hold those accountable who encourage and support this behavior.
This is also where we were able to contribute to bluff and rooftop safety. As we saw earlier, bluff and rooftop issues go hand in hand with large out-of-control parties, and where party hosts and party promoters have little emphasis on the safety of their attendees. Under current law, section 36-6 is divided into two main categories. I refer to them as the three or more section that you see on your left and the one and done section that you see on your right.
Under current definitions a party can be shut down if we observe any combination of three or more events from the column on the left. Or a party can be shut down immediately if we observe any one event from the list on the right. What surprised many members of the working group, members of IVCSD and many of our community members was that some of these events in the left column are very severe and very dangerous.
For example, weapon or a sexual battery happened at a party we currently do not have the authority to interrupt the party to prevent further victimization until we witnessed two more of those same events for a combination of anything on the left. Or if we were making contact with an out-of-control party, it would take three deputies being assaulted before we could shut down a party.
Therefore, we're asking that the serious offenses in the Three or More section be moved over to the One and Done section. We've also proposed adding new sections to the One and Done section to include lewd acts in public, brandishing a weapon, and contributing to the delinquency of a minor. The last additions to this section are to deem parties in Isla Vista that sell tickets or alcohol to be a public nuisance, and that parties where attendees are allowed to climb onto rooftops or over fences and onto bluffs a public nuisance that can be shut down by law enforcement.
When originally enacted the public nuisance sections of Chapter 36 were effective in curbing the large keg parties and concerts that the ordinance was originally intended to address. Much of that was the result of self-policing by our population who, in an effort to avoid getting their party shut down, complied with the requirements to keep kegs I believe that we'll see similar compliance when it comes to bluff and rooftop safety, and that very little intervention will actually be needed from the Sheriff's Department in the long term.
The final revisions we're proposing are to modernize the penalties to have them conform with the government code requirements for fines imposed by counties. As you can see, current penalties of one to five hundred dollars do little to discourage these activities particularly when a concert promoter is making thousands of dollars in an afternoon. By increasing the penalty to become a misdemeanor it provides law enforcement more options to address these parties both in the immediate moment and in the aftermath of these events.
I also want to take a quick moment to highlight the role of Sheriff's Office Pretrial Restorative Justice Diversion Program will play in the future of these events. It's a program we worked on creating with the District Attorney's office and the Public Defender's office, to allow offenders in Isla Vista who are cooperative and eligible to attend a restorative justice class.
At the class, we teach about local issues including the dangers of these parties and related issues about being a good neighbor and citizen of IV. Offenders who successfully complete the class have a citation dismissed with no record of contact from law enforcement. Although we're asking to increase the top end penalty for these public nuisance. We are going to utilize our successful restorative justice program as our first intervention for most of these new offenses, emphasizing education over enforcement.
Thank you for your time and attention to this important issue and I now welcome any questions that you may have.
4:28 – 4:4016 turns
Questions from board supervisor caps
Thank you, Chair Williams and Lieutenant Tesla. This is a phenomenal job just want to applaud you and your colleagues For many many things starting with the way in which you've brought so many different divergent voices together Including students which is incredibly important. Can you just speak to? the impetus for that because you've been able to pull off something that's I Quite remarkable to get consensus about things like this.
Back in January when this started, was there a preceding event? Obviously we know about Benny Shermer's death in September but was there a preceding event that really galvanized and gave this momentum to have such unanimous support?
Supervisor Capps, through the chair thank you for the comments and for the question. It's been a slow burn, so to speak of changes in IV and people who are stepping up as leaders in the community who are all seeing the same things that we've been seeing for some time. And this event I think really was sparked by the 2023 Deltopia which we saw to be a dangerous event as I described with the photos at the beginning.
Members of IV CSD saw it as well even members of Associated Students recognized that there were significant dangers Resulted from that activity and so unfortunately by the time that Benny Schirmer fell from the cliffs on September 2nd, we were already well underway addressing these issues. And the time is of the essence but the students of UCSB and City College have really stepped up and seen that this is something that has to change in Isla Vista.
Yeah, and I've experienced the same. And I certainly have learned so much from you and Deputy Carroll especially being along Del Playa around midnight. And those images speak volumes but what I think people should also know is that, and maybe some of you do, there's still thousands of people there when it's not Deltopia on a Friday-Saturday night. I mean just sheer volume is... That was my number one takeaway. It was like walking out of a football game And you know, yeah it's just a typical Friday night and so just the sheer volume of people. Also too my second impression was really my question is your focus on prevention not enforcement? And I think that's something that students have had questions about is this isn't really necessarily about Increasing enforcement, it's about giving you more tools on the prevention side.
And that's so clear when we were walking the streets with you that even your restorative justice program is about not getting kids in jail. After the fact after the thing that accidents already happened or the crime, but really preventing it. So can you speak to that motivation and how you might like let's just take the example if you see a bunch of like 35 kids on a crowded balcony? What will this change be able to help you prevent and how so?
Our goal here is behavior modification not increased penalties are not increased revenue from citations and certainly not increased incarceration or arrests. Our goal is to prevent this dangerous activity from occurring. And you've heard me speak about my belief that we are not just law enforcement, but we are public safety and that we have an obligation to operate through the lens in that paradigm of being responsible for public safety, not just when it requires enforcement of the law. And so we would absolutely take an education first approach To all of this, and if the board were to move forward with this item we have perfect timing for the next tell topia where we have several months where we would work to educate our citizens.
Let them know about these things that are coming up the dangers of them, we were closely with IV CSD routinely on these kinds of issues associated students student affairs the Chancellor's Office for Student Affairs. And we would spend a long time in a pretty significant public campaign making sure that they knew these changes were coming, knew why. And then once those changes were to be in place, we would still spend a significant amount of time educating them providing those verbal warnings before any sort of enforcement action were to be taken and we understand that this would be a significant change to some people in Isla Vista and we want to be patient with that because we're thinking long term again about public safety not just trying to get a new law on the books.
Thank you. And how would this prevent these paid parties? I know you touched on it, but what tools does this give you and other residents to prevent these paid party promoters that are really adding to the problem?
Supervisor Capps to the chair, thank you. The biggest thing is that word of mouth because once these paid parties are explicitly listed as illegal in our residential zones it will discourage the out-of-town events particularly from coming in they risk losing their sound equipment as its booked for evidence they risk fines they risk potentially arrest and so discouraging that behavior is going to quickly Discussing solve a lot of that problem. We will always have some level of underground activity as a result of all of that, but we do have deputies who are very adept at being able to identify what's occurring in Isla Vista and so I do think that just having this on the books as a potential penalty is a significant step forward in addressing this issue.
And you that chart you have sort of the one and done versus what's currently in our ordinance which is baffling to me that it would take You witnessing three incidences of sexual battery in a party before you could do anything. I mean, right? That's like a showstopper statement right there that would warrant, I think us changing our ordinance to make sure that how frustrating for you and if you've ever you or your colleagues have witnessed something like that or been told something like that and you literally at this stage can't explain it. I just really can't get my head around how you're not able to stop a party unless it takes three incidences sexual battery.
I'm appreciative for the fact we even have it, because that is somewhat unique in terms of the culture of a college town like that. But it is one of the most utilized things we do to or that we utilize to be able to keep control of those events. As you noted, I spent a lot of time talking about Deltopia, but this happens on any given Friday or Saturday night. And so a large party can get out of control very quickly and significant assaults happen at those parties.
All the stuff that we just touched on And it's frustrating for us to know that we could do more if given the tools, and hence why we're here today.
Yeah so just my last point really is to underscore what happens with the night that Benny Shermer died there was a paid DJ right which adds to the crowd swelling and overcrowded that picture that you had in your presentation of people clearly on the other side of a four-foot fence Again, just kind of my last point is just tell me how this ordinance change because it's quite technical would in the moment because you were there that night give you the tools that could have potentially prevented.
That kind of crowd that led to him jumping over the fence the way that he did
supervisor caps yes through the chair. The biggest thing we have with these parties is of course that there's no infrastructure for him because we're in a residential zone not in a place designed for concerts so when 2, 4, 500 people packed into a residence and then that residents will often close off their own restrooms. Two party goers and will actually advertise no bathrooms allowed. The natural result of that is people scatter out into the either under the bluffs or into parks or just onto the street to do what you need needs to be done after consuming large amounts of alcohol, and so that exacerbates the problem. And so if we are able to walk down the street and identify the fact that a concert even if it's not paid necessarily has a large crowd of that size, we can shut that party down and disperse that crowd and potentially keep that from turning into a powder keg of either violent activity or dangerous risky behavior such as climbing over onto the bluffs.
And so it gives my deputies in that moment the ability to address it right then and there. Some issues of this are related to things like the rooftop safety. You know, currently the rooftop safety issues that we deal with are a capacity over-the-roof issue and it's not a criminal act to stand on a roof of course but it's a dangerous act and when you have 10, 20, 30 people standing on a roof that's just a recipe for disaster And so what our current system is, is that we have to contact the fire department assuming they're not on a call or they are busy and then wait for them to respond. They can come out and make a determination that's too many people on a roof to be safe.
more than one or two unsafe, but they make a determination that's unsafe. And then we can use the fire code to shut down the party that's encouraging rooftop access. And so what these part of these codes are intended to do too is mimic the fire codes to give us authority in that moment to shut it down right then and there. So we don't have to wait for fire to finish their call for service or their medical emergency that they might be on elsewhere in the area.
That's it for my questions. Thanks very much.
Supervisor Hartman.
Well first of all, Isla Vista is fortunate to have you. It takes a special leader to be able to navigate that very complex community. I had a little history there as well and you know it seemed like some of this was going down from 2016 till, I guess about 2022-2023. The weather at Deltopia makes a huge difference but the real difference is these commercial parties and you've described how the new ordinance will affect that. Could you elaborate more on ABC? And you know they really There should be more than they're afraid of the threat. I mean, they really should be called to the mat for really inciting all of this and so I'd like you to talk a little more about that
Supervisor Hartman through the chair, yes. One of our closest partners in this whole issue is the Department of ABC and their investigative arm. They are with us almost every weekend through the fall orientation period and this board recently approved a grant from ABC for additional alcohol enforcement in Isla Vista Thank you, by the way. And so we work with them quite regularly on that and there are some authority under state law that they have and that we have to shut down parties that are selling alcohol but it is also a bit vague and it is also up for interpretation at times and part of like I said part of the goal of this is to point our local residents towards a local ordinance that we can say here is why it's illegal not because you didn't get your ABC license but because you're doing this in a residential zone And that if we can make it clear that any selling of alcohol in the residential zones are illegal in Isla Vista, then we can make that.
It's just about as explicit as we can get for our community.
So if I'm understanding the APC laws regulations are vague and you're trying to make it black and white? That they're not...I mean what's the worst penalty they can get?
4:40 – 4:4616 turns
That may be a difficult question to answer in the moment, but certainly there would be criminal prosecution involved in that at the state level with ABC's investigation.
Can they have licenses revoked and not allowed to do business?
Not really because for their ABC license to be revoked, they would have to have one in the first place. And these are groups that don't have a license and are operating outside the bounds of ABC. So it's similar to the administrative fines issue I brought up where yes, ABC can sanction if they have a license but they're never going to take away a license that doesn't exist so they can pursue the criminal penalties on it and the social host ordinances changes here very specifically say any violation of ABC licensing laws is a reason for us to shard a party down But again, we want to make it clear that even if a licensee were to have a license they wouldn't be able to do it inside a residential zone in Isla Vista.
So what's the worst penalty that the head of a profiteering party company can experience?
Supervisor Harmon through the chair. Currently, it would be kind of a mishmash of infractions and potential noise ordinance violations or a noise curfew maybe with the revisions that we're asking for it would be at least a misdemeanor and there would be subject to up to $1,000 fine and there could be incarceration or some sort of you know work release or something similar to that that would hold them accountable
So that criminal stigma is a piece of it and the $1,000 fine may be a little.
Correct, we feel that the increase of a fine making this a misdemeanor does make this more significant. It does give us more options. It does give us the option or the opportunity to arrest if need be to again solve that problem in the moment. It's not something I anticipate us using on any regular basis and it also gives us the ability to pursue things from a criminal investigation standpoint that we can't with either administrative fines or with infractions.
Right. And I'll just say that the rooftop and bluff top, that's been ongoing and I think there's more to be done with the landowners and the leases and this is an ongoing process. And I just wanted to recognize Lieutenant Camarena who he was the one who piloted and put into place the restorative justice and I think that that's been very significant as I understand it You know, people would come in kind of grumpy and they go out. I'm a citizen of a wonderful community, a beloved community. And so it was a really successful program and I'm glad that it's still doing well.
Supervisor Nelson?
Yes, thank you Chair Williams. It just baffles me that someone who can have a party like this where somebody could be injured or, you know, it's an obvious dangerous condition It seems that, you know, it's like, you know. Yelling fire in a crowded theater type of situation here where they're obviously there's some impacts from some other people's decisions whether it was intentional or not. That's not something that we've been able to dig into at all and prosecute some of these party promoters.
Supervisor Nelson through the chair. Thank We have other laws that we can kind of address these things in a hodgepodge manner, like I mentioned. But there's nothing that consistently points to making these acts illegal in Isla Vista. And so if a party promoter were to come in and then host 2,000 people in the front driveway of an apartment complex, if they are shutting the music off by the end of the noise curfew, then we don't have anything really to go on at that moment to discourage that behavior.
Even though we know they may be selling a ticket and encouraging people to come in, people coming in from out of the area. There isn't anything currently on in the laws that we have found to be successful in mitigating those issues.
So somebody creates a dangerous condition and there's no legal ramifications for that? It just seems odd to me. Again I'm not an attorney and definitely not... Neither am
I! But you're right sir We have had to use different laws that aren't quite adequate to addressing the specific situations of these commercial parties. One of the issues we've tried in the past is writing a citation for not having a business license, but again that's more administrative in nature and it doesn't disincentivize people from participating in that activity.
Yeah, I'm amazed that there isn't other tools out there for creating such a dangerous situation. And I do commend all of you for putting this together. It's an obvious vote that we have to do today. There's no doubt about it. I also appreciate from when I've looked at this, I was concerned initially On how the you may be unintended consequences about how this may impact other places in the county, and I don't see it.
It seems to be very carefully crafted to specifically address the Isla Vista area. Did you guys look at that at all? Were there any thoughts about other outdoor festivals? That's something that is pretty... There's a lot of that going on in the North County. There's some bad with that as well but I wouldn't want to see this unintentionally impacts some legitimate I'm going to turn it over to you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak with you today. I want
to start by saying thank you so much to all of our board members and staff who have been working tirelessly to make sure that we get this done. Dissuades people from holding those fun events that are proper and done in the right ways. And so yeah, the language was intended to be very careful in terms of addressing what was occurring in IV without negatively affecting other parts of the county.
Well thank you I'm looking forward to hearing from public comment but I'm looking forward to supporting this ordinance change.
4:46 – 4:5311 turns
Let's go to public comment. Gonna try to keep it to two minutes got another hearing after this
Chair Williams, members of the board. We have nine requests to speak on public comment for this item. Go
ahead. Oh and I'll close the roll for public comment.
We will begin on Zoom with Peter Neuschul to be followed by Kristen Deschler. Peter? Can
you hear me?
Yes we can please proceed
I'm a decades long resident of IV and a property manager in IV. I support every change proposed by Lieutenant Teslav. I am speaking today as a manager. App driven parties pose a serious threat in IV. As a manager, I've had multiple encounters with the sounds of IV app-driven band parties. With this technology, a non tenant is directing hundreds of subscribers to a residential address at a moment's notice.
Tenants expecting a quote, small backyard gathering unquote encounter a horde of attendees with no regard whatsoever for lease rules regarding parties. There's nothing a manager can do once these events are underway. Prior to party weekends commercial party app entities approach tenants on double lot properties offering money to host the party at their house. At times tenants violate their lease agreements and contract with these companies that leads to multiple injuries. Parties are occurring at property zoned residential that are not venues for large parties. Gatherings are especially dangerous on the ocean side of DP when inebriated party goers climb over fences. Our park district settled at least two lawsuits with families of these unfortunate people, I do not want to continue paying for this.
Halloween is still potentially dangerous and expensive after decades of stupidity and millions of tax dollars that event is curtailed for now. Deltopia must end the same way. Taxpayers must not bear the cost of this unsanctioned, illegal festival where residents and visitors are injured sometimes fatally. Lieutenant Tisla is proposing measures that if enforced, emphasize on that, will help end dangerous parties that cost taxpayers millions or an embarrassment to UCSB. Lastly the Isla Vista Community Services District needs to stop spending $85,000 funding Deltopia parties. That money must support law enforcement to end this stupidity. Thank you
We will now go to Kirsten Deschler and we will return to Santa Barbara with Henry Saria. Kirstin?
Good afternoon, Chair Williams and supervisors. My name is Kirsten Deschler. I am director of government and community relations at UC Santa Barbara. I also sit on the Isla Vista Community Services District Board as the university representative On behalf of UC Santa Barbara, I'd like to express our support for the changes to the Outdoor Festival Ordinance and the expansion of the Public Nuisance Ordinance.
I want to just acknowledge Supervisor Hartman. She made a nice comment about Lieutenant Camerina and it made me think that there are so many people that have taken and played such huge leadership roles in Isla Vista over the year, many of them sitting on the dais. And I want to appreciate the work of Supervisor Hartman as well as Supervisor Williams Supervisor Capps and kind of getting us to where we are today. It's definitely no small feat to bring people together on very complicated and tough issues. I want especially give a shout out to Lieutenant Tesla, oh my goodness!
Through his proactive and collaborative leadership he's brought people together from very different points of view to agree on enforcement related issues in Isla Vista that is no small feat And it's really testament to his leadership, as well as to the working group participants who were students, community residents, as well as university representatives. To come to consensus on these ordinance changes is a big deal. Everyone has their part to play in ensuring that Isla Vista is a safe and vibrant community. It touches all of us.
I want to just especially today thank you to everyone who's taking the initiative to create Isla Vista community that so many people desire And so many people deserve. Thank you so much.
Good morning Supervisors, staff and public. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Henry Soria, 36 year Isla Vista resident, retired engineer. My wife and I live on Segovia Road next to one of the known party houses that hosts these pay-to-play parties. These parties draw an element that has proven to be an issue for neighbors, emergency personnel and law enforcement. Between emergency calls for overdoses and aggressive crowds blocking the street, the situation gets very volatile on any Friday or Saturday night.
There's individuals trying to sneak in through neighboring properties that are so bent on the goal that they will intentionally damage properties such as fences and park vehicles to sneak in. When intercepted in a polite and respectful manner, to ask them to not go through the property their response is typically hostile with threats of violence. There's also those that decide the neighboring properties make a good spot to urinate and again efforts to intervene are met with threats of violence.
Isla Vista is known for its party culture. I still enjoy going to parties, but in my 36 years here, I have never paid to go to a party and I support the party culture. In fact you can ask Supervisor Williams when my old band Latchkey Kids played his Going Away Party at Silverwood Apartments back in 1990. The promoters of these parties, these pay to play parties usually out-of-towners cashing in on the community or destroying Isla Vista's culture by holding our community hostage to their whim while forcing neighbors and residents to endure an unwanted sonic bombardment. They also bring other outside elements to the area bent on disrespecting the community. There is a level of lawlessness that already exists in Isla Vista exhibited by some within our community that believe laws don't exist once you go south of El Colegio Road.
When you get the out-of-town component that shows up for these pay to play parties, the lawlessness only gets worse. We've seen it firsthand from our vantage point. No one is asking to end parties in Isla Vista and that's not the case. That's not the intended goal of proposed ordinance changes by Lieutenant Tess Law. The goal is to make Isla Vista and its residents safe so I ask you to please consider the much needed support for this or the ordinance changes by voting in favor of them. Not only for Isla Vista but in the name of public safety thank you for your time on this matter.
We will now go to Carmen Bailey to be followed by Catherine Miller. Carmen?
4:53 – 4:598 turns
Good afternoon, board members. My name is Carmen Bailey and I'm a resident of Ivy. And I moved in here about three years ago and after listening all the comments, I'm just going to truncate my concerns to one point which is currently the ordinance, the noise ordinance in Ivy consists of allowing anyone to make any amount of noise from 7am to 10 p.m. on the weeknights and 7 a.m in the morning to midnight on Fridays and Saturdays, and I found that there are people who are practicing music or having amplified music at any given time. And so if you can consider maybe shortening those party times or whatever you can come up with again Just listening to the other comments that we're not here to prevent parties But if you can somehow minimize their ability to just create noise at any time of the day two-thirds Two-thirds of the day, that would be most appreciated.
So thank you for your time and attention
We will now go to Catherine Miller to be followed by Carrie Topliff Catherine I
Hi, my name's Catherine Miller. I've been a homeowner at 874 Fortuna Lane, Isla Vista for 25 years. I pay property taxes, Isla Vista bedroom taxes and additional monthly 8% Isla Vista tax on all my utility bills, water, garbage, electricity and gas. I understand that that is part of owning a home in Isla Vista. Oh, and I don't throw my trash in the street. I want to say first of all that I completely support the measures being presented today.
I live in Isla Vista because I love the weather, living near the ocean and all the great dirt paths that allow me to be in nature at my doorstep. I also really like my adult neighborhood community but there's some serious issues we need to address in Isla Vista that we've been talking about today and one is the rise of the mega parties that charge admission to hear bands or DJs with hundreds, hundreds of people in attendance The tenants who offer up their houses and yards for these events do make money from them, so that is a draw to continue this practice. The noise levels at these parties seem to be at the highest decibels possible.
The online flyers for these events list only the street and a partial number of the house hosting the party. That's so no one can contact their landlords or rental companies in advance. Party goers then follow the band music to the correct house. It is social media that attracts so many people to these venues. I'm gonna skip and go back to saying, basically the way the law stands right now we're allowing nightclub businesses operate without licenses or restrooms in the residential zones of Isla Vista. That just can't be okay. If the measures before us are enacted please make sure we have enough law enforcement officers to make them effective. Thank you.
We will now go to Carrie Toplift to be followed by Jonathan Abood. Carrie?
Good afternoon, Supervisor Williams and the board. I am the vice president of the Isla Vista Community Services District thanks to your appointment, which I'm very grateful for. And we're very grateful to be working with Lieutenant Teslaw. We feel like there's a lot of infrastructure that needs to be developed in Isla Vista so that it can be safe And yet retain its really vibrant and unique qualities. And we're very pleased to be working in partnership on this. The board is in 100% unanimous support of these changes, and we think that they'll really help our community. Thank you.
We will now go to Jonathan Abboud, followed by Jordan Killebrew.
Hi board, thank you for having us. I'm a 13 year resident of Isla Vista and speaking as the general manager of IVCSD today. I want to thank Lieutenant Tesla for his work on this. It was a masterful process and the process really got us outcome that brought us all together and excellent result that we can all support. IVCSD has been leading the Isla Vista Safe Coalition. We took the baton from District Attorney Dudley last year, and this was one of the first projects that came up in the IV Safe Coalition and something that we've worked on. And so we're happy that we're getting these real results.
The new ordinances are balanced, and they take into account community priorities from on the ground. I can't tell you anybody in Isla Vista besides the paid party organizers themselves who support the paid parties. And I just wanted to clarify one comment made in the public comment earlier. IVCSD does not, in any way, provide money to the private parties during Deltopia. What we do is we host community festivals that are further away from Del Playa to draw people away from the crowds. Last year we were successful in drawing 3,000 people away. They were queuing in line for free tacos, sobering up, staying safe and we also worked with Public Works and Ivy Foot Patrol to get grass streams placed on Sabo de Tarde again as a way to draw people away from Del Playa.
And to keep them safe from needing to use the cliffs. So we're excited, our community engagement department is going to be working with the foot patrol to get the word out about these ordinances once they are in effect so that the community can self-police before it gets to enforcement. Thank you.
And we will now go to Jordan Killebrew who's our final speaker on this item.
4:59 – 5:025 turns
Good afternoon, this is all familiar for me. So thank you Supervisors for having me and of course thank you IV Foot Patrol, Tenet Tesla, this is amazing. I am Jordan Killebrew, I currently am at Santa Barbara City College as the Executive Director of Public Affairs and Communications but formerly I got to work the lovely opportunity to work with Supervisor Capps and work on this project with The Working Group. And for me now in my role at SPCC We have a lot of priorities, safety and collaboration are at the top. And that's exactly what this project does and that's exactly what this update does.
And so I want to commend Isla Vista Safe, Tenant Tesla, Isla Vista Foot Patrol and everybody that came together to make this a collaborative effort to put safety first. Ivy is a special place where students live work and play. Unfortunately you know we lost a student earlier this year or academic year And we just want to keep it safe so that our student or SBCC students can.
Just live and be safe, sorry I'm getting emotional because I've talked with several students about Benny Shermer and his story is amazing but we just want to keep it safe and I just want to say thank you for your time and I hope that we stand in support of this effort.
And that concludes public comment on this item.
Do the board? Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion.
Mr. Chair, I am happy to move to support this ordinance change that supports consensus and common sense and with great respect for the stakeholder process that went into it.
So a motion by CAPS And is there a second? I will second it. And any comment on the motion? I will just thank the public commenters for their brevity and for their great memories. Let's try and really quick, Carrie to find that picture of you from your first stint on the Goleta Water District just to let you guys know that this is Our appointee has real background in the community and has served it on more than one occasion.
And appreciate the work that you're doing and your office is doing, Supervisor Capps. So any other comment? All those in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Thank you. We have one more item D6.
5:02 – 5:0612 turns
Chair Williams and members of the board, departmental item number six is from the Public Works Department. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding termination of the contract with MSB Investors LLC for development and operation of the Tahecus Resource Recovery Project, and this is in the third district.
Please proceed.
So good afternoon, Chair Williams, members of the board. I'm Walter with Public Works. It's unfortunate that we are here today.
Actually, Walter, I should lay the ground rules out. For folks. So we're going to allocate a 15 minute presentation to both staff and to MSB. They'll get rebuttal after the public comment if there is any, and if they run over they can take that out of rebuttal time. And the first thing we should do is make any ex parte or Levine Act disclosures and we'll start to you Mr. Nelson
Yes, thank you. I'm going to make a Levine Act disclosure that I received a campaign contribution from Mr. Dewey had actually exceeded the $250 amount so we actually sent back a refund for the balance to bring that under the appropriate number and to be in compliance. I spoke briefly with Mr. Dewey at a fundraiser about this item. Also spoke with county staff about this item as well in preparation for today.
Mr. Lab, do you know? Thank you Mr. Chair I've had conversations with county staff in particular public works director Mr. McAuliffe on this issue and received an email this morning from Beth Collins. And I
I have no ex parte communications since the termination of the contract. But I did speak with Beth Collins and John Dewey on Halloween, the 31st about some of the issues. I think the substance of it was sort of what would be necessary to fix some of the issues with the operation and Getting to agreement with staff. Ms. Capps?
I have no ex parte communications other than receiving emails, but I don't believe that qualifies. Thank you.
I have had many, many, many meetings with staff and discussions about this. I did receive an email from Beth Collins and it's been some time since I talked to Mr. Dewey. We have had some neighbor forums. I get daily emails from the Arroyo Camado neighbors about the odor.
And I do think that we will probably have to vote this last dot last email in into the record. No, it was received early this morning at eight oh nine a.m..
Chair Williams and members of the board, I would just like to note for the record that is available online and has been distributed.
Oh great. So bringing it to you early fix that. OK, great. We will take a quick break because one of our screens is blank and so don't go anywhere. Thank you.
5:17 – 5:235 turns
Do you have the script?
I believe Walter and Public Works staff are ready. Mr. Rubalcaba.
So good afternoon, Chair Williams, members of the board. I'm Walter Rubalcaba with Public Works. It is unfortunate that we are here today. This type of hearing is not common for our department and as a matter of fact it is the only termination of a large scale contract that our current leadership has ever requested. What we hope to convey today is that our public works team over the course of several years have gone through many efforts to resolve the situation, but we are now at a crossroad.
And as you'll hear today, the impacts of the MSB's failure to perform are threatening the viability of our resource center. Today we have three individuals from our Resource Recovery and Waste Management team who will present details regarding this situation. Starting with Jeanette Gonzalez-Knight, Deputy Director overseeing technical projects and administrative functions for the division.
Marty Wilder, Deputy Director overseeing solid waste and wastewater operations. And Carlisle Johnston, Resource Manager overseeing operational activities and contractual compliance. Our presentation will be approximately 15 minutes, and I'll now hand it over to Miss Gonzales-Knight to begin the presentation.
Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair Williams and members of the board. This item is on the agenda to consider termination of the agreement with MSB investors for the development and operation of the Tahequs Resource Recovery Project And to consider next steps for transition to new operators. Next slide, please. Termination is recommended at this time based on MSB's failure to comply with the agreement including inadequate performance, inability to timely cure the project and complete the project, incursion of regulatory violations as we will discuss in more detail. We will also propose two Based on the county's desire to ensure continuous services.
I'll now hand it over to Mr. Johnston.
Next slide, please. Thank you. The County of Santa Barbara has owned and operated the Taheqa sanitary landfill since 1967. As a means to reduce landfill dependence as well as mitigate the environmental impacts of our community's waste, the County contracted with MSB investors on December 13th 2016 to develop and operate the Resource Center at the Tegus Landfill.
The revised project was approved by the Board in November 2017 and consists of several facilities including the Materials Recovery Facility also called a MRF, The anaerobic digestion facility, sometimes referred to as an ADF. And the compost management unit also known as a CMU. Commissioning of the Resource Center started in 2021 and has provided limited service and limited success due to MSB's incompletion of various components of the project.
Although the Resource Center has not achieved the status of full operations it should be noted that the project is still one of the county's largest reducers of greenhouse gases and is diverting tens of thousands of tons of waste per year that was previously buried The Resource Center is diverting approximately half of the materials in total that it should be diverting if operated properly. This is a crucial part of the county's efforts to reduce landfill dependence, that includes dozens of programs managed by the department that divert around 70% of all waste from the region. Next slide please.
Although MSB is responsible for operating the resource center, it has subcontracted operation of the materials recovery facility to Marburg Recovery Here we see a list of the volumes of materials processed. The operations of the management recovery facility engines, flare condensate management water wastewater treatment systems are also subcontracted by MSB to other third party contractors.
It should note I should note that the MRF has passed most acceptance tests and staff has been satisfied with Marburg's operation of the MRF to divert the majority of organics to the anaerobic digestion facility, as well as the vast majority of recyclables that have been misplaced in our trash cans. Next slide please. Operation of the anaerobic digestion facility itself.
Over the last year I have a list here of the various materials that have been produced. I'll highlight the third point and that is generating energy of only 0.9 megawatts which is less than half of what should be generated if properly operated Similar to the MRF, operations of the flare water wastewater treatment systems and other activities are subcontracted by MSB to third party contractors. Next slide please.
Operation of the compost management unit is also performed by MSP over the last year. The compost management unit has processed the following materials If you look at this, one of the second item finished compost, you'll note that it was only 640 tons. This is well short of the 16,000 tons per year that would be generated if properly operated. The past year of the 38,500 tons that was stockpiled of unfinished compost that was stockpiled, landfilled or shipped out to other companies for further processing these activities in that last bullet all demonstrate a failure to achieve Aerobic Digestion Facility and Compost Management Unit are only achieving half of the diversion needed in order to fully pass acceptance testing and complete commissioning.
When properly operated, it should be noted that the organics lose more than half of their total mass through digestion and dehydration. Next slide please. The Resource Center is not only essential for managing regional waste, but is also crucial to Santa Barbara County's Energy and Climate Action Plan as one of the largest reducers of greenhouse gases. This project is not only included in the county's plan, but also in our partner city's climate action plans.
Additionally, the county and the following participating cities also depend on the Resource Center to comply with increasing waste diversion requirements of new laws such as Senate Bill 1383. This partial success still means that we are achieving a majority of our greenhouse gas reduction goals for this project, which is the equivalent of roughly 14,000 cars off the road each year.
Currently, the majority of these GHG reductions are being achieved by reducing the methane potential of organics through digestion and the generation of renewable energy. I am now handing the presentation back
5:24 – 5:376 turns
to Barbara County Board of Supervisors. It's for these reasons that the Public Works Department is dedicated to developing and implementing innovative environmental solutions to manage the community's waste. Our mission is to effectively provide, operate and maintain facilities to make life safe and convenient for the public we serve. Although we've achieved some success with the Resource Center, the community deserves a project that is 100% successful. And unfortunately MSB has failed to do this.
It is at this time that we will present the basis for termination of the agreement. Next slide, please. Item number one, MSB failed to complete final acceptance testing for the Resource Center in a timely manner. MSB failed to meet milestone set in the project development schedule. The original development schedule required a completion date including passage of acceptance test by December of 2020 due to impacts from COVID-19 The county approved extensions to the development schedule to March of 2021 due to additional project complexities.
To date, MSB has not attained final acceptance nor full operations of the project. On March 1st of 2023, county staff issued a failed acceptance test rating and gave MSB additional time to provide evidence supporting its passage which they failed to do. MSB is responsible for preparing and implementing a county approved compliance plan, and complete additional actions required in order to pass the acceptance testing.
But again has failed to do so in a timely manner. This has contributed to missed performance guarantees and issuance of violations from multiple regulatory agencies. For example, MSB's delayed response to addressing odors from the Resource Center has resulted in the failure to pass odor acceptance subtests. Odor violations issued by the Santa Barbara County Environmental Health Services and the county having to step in and invest 4.9 million to address odor abatement alone.
Item number two, MSB failed to cure the material breach of the agreement. MSB failed to complete the actions necessary to rectify violations issued by the Central Coast Water Quality Control Board within the agreed upon time with the water board And within the allowed time to cure these breaches provided in our agreement. The Water Board first issued violations to MSB on March 17th of 2023. The county met with MSB and provided written documentation with explanation of noncompliance to MSB in April of 2023 When MSB failed to rectify these violations in a timely manner, the Water Board issued additional violations to MSB on June 20th.
The county then issued a formal notification of the curable breach to the agreement on June 21st and gave MSB A deadline to rectify these corrective actions by July 6 staff continue to meet with MSP to try to resolve the violations and allowed MSP additional days. Breach prior to the start of the wet season, which is October 1st however. MSB did not cure the breach by the October 1st revised deadline and continues to operate the CMU in violation of the waste discharge requirements for commercial composting operations, thereby jeopardizing the Resource Center's ability to operate and process waste.
Due to MSB's inactivity to rectify outstanding violations The County continues to take over MSB's responsibilities at the Resource Center, such as recently replacing the drainage pipe system at the CMU in order to properly capture compost waste water and prevent it from entering into the Tahequs Landfill stormwater drainage system. Next slide please. Item number three, MSB has failed to pay liquidated damages owed to the County.
In April of 2023, The county issued a notice to assess liquidated damages for the failure to pass acceptance tests and for the water board violations. County staff met on several occasions between April and September to discuss a compliance plan, and evaluated evidence presented by MSB in writing over the phone and through the testimony of MSB employees regarding progress made and delays in addressing those corrective actions.
Based on the status of unresolved corrective actions, liquidated damages continue to be assessed in accordance with prior notice sent to MSB. As of November 1st, MSB incurred over $1.1 million in liquidated damages for failure to complete the work on schedule, to failure to comply with permit requirements and not pass acceptance tests. The county requested MSB pay the outstanding liquidated damages On September 23rd, on October 6th, on October 13th and to date the county has not received any payment from MSB on any of the assessed liquidity damages for the Resource Center which totaled $3.7 million as of December 7th.
Next slide please. Fail to pay subcontractors and regulatory agencies. As of the last reporting from MSB to the county on November 15th of 2023, the outstanding payables from MSB to subcontractors performing work at the Resource Center is $5.9 million. On several occasions staff have been notified by contractors of their refusal to complete outstanding scopes of work As well as refusal to perform future scopes of work due to either non-payment or non-timely payment from MSB.
As of November 15th, MSB owes even the Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District approximately $63,000 for resource center related fees. The nonpayment of fees owed to the district may result in the non-issuance of permit modifications that are required for the Resource Center. In addition, it should be noted that nonpayment to subcontractors has interfered with the ADF's ability to operate reliably since automation is required for the plant.
This jeopardizes the Resource Center's ability to meet performance guarantees, to meet permit requirements and to meet energy production requirements set in the county's power purchase agreement with Southern California Edison. The lack of automation at the ADF has resulted in MSB's employees manually operating the ADF, including the digesters, the engines and the flare.
And this has led to human errors such as venting of untreated biogas. The venting of untreated biogas being directed away from the engines causes a reduction in revenue earnings via the power purchase agreement with Southern California Edison and continues to contribute odors at their resource center. Next slide, please. Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, the county has met and continues to meet its payment obligations to MSB.
The county has compensated MSB for project pre-development and development costs totaling $15.9 million. This does not include The county has compensated MSB for operating fees from processing incoming tons at the Resource Center, which totals $14.7 million. The county has provided cash flow assistance to MSB totaling $2.4 million last fiscal year due to the shortfall of revenue from recyclables.
The cash flow assistance is funded by the Jurisdictional Rate Stabilization Fund, which is designed to enhance liquidity for the Resource Center including making payments to the contractor due to the lower than expected recovered materials revenues. And the goal is also to mitigate increases to the tipping fee. While MSB can ask the county for cash flow assistance to cover recyclable revenue shortfalls, the process to make funds available from this reserve is formulaic and has a target value of $3 million.
It should be noted that the remaining balance in this fund will not come close To cover its subcontractors. In addition, MSB has failed to provide audited financials and inventory of recovered materials by the September 1st deadline which is required as a requirement to receive further cash flow assistance. Today the county has not received the audited documentation Lastly, the county has paid and contracted directly with vendors on behalf of MSB to only 5.1 million in order to address odor complaints and violations noncompliance with wastewater management and other operational activities acting in good faith. The county has made many concessions and many changes over the course of the resource center to ensure its financial success and stability.
Next slide. I'll hand it over now to Mr. Wilder.
Thank you. Item five, MSB failed to maintain a safe site for employees and visitors. MSB failed to ensure the health and safety of personnel working at and persons visiting the resource center which has resulted in accidents, injuries or hazardous conditions. On several occasions vehicular incidents have occurred. The most recent being on August 28th when an MSB loader struck a park Man lift and on September 19th, when an MSB loader backed into a refueling truck.
Despite county staff issuing safety warnings in person and biweekly teams meetings through formal notices and communicating opportunities to rectify safety deficiencies, MSB has not taken adequate corrective actions in a timely manner to mitigate the risks and ensure a safe working environment. These inadequate safety measures were the cause of the May 12th, 2022 compost fire that started with dry compost left too close to the DOPSTAT screen on the CMU deck that damaged nearby equipment.
MSB's consistent pattern of disregard in health and safety protocols poses an ongoing risk to the wellbeing of employees and visitors to the Resource Center. Next slide please. Item six. MSPs interference with the county's ability to obtain and modify permits required for county projects. Relations with regulators, as previously mentioned, the nonpayment of fees
already I just want to let you know that 15 minutes has gone by so we'll take the additional time out of your rebuttal or add time to MSP.
So continue? Oh yeah, you can
continue.
As previously mentioned, not paying a fee is owed APCD result in Non-issuance of permit modification required for the Resource Center. On March 12th, the county was forced to rescind its application to modify the solid waste facility permit after being notified that CalRecycle would not give concurrence to the proposed changes due to violations issued at the ADF and CMU. On September 19th, staff received confirmation from the Environmental Health Services Office that future permitting for the proposed Tahecus Landfill Capacity Increase Project could face delays And non-concurrence from CalRecycle due to ongoing odor issues at the Resource Center. Next slide, please.
The recommendation presented in the board letter are intended to implement changes to move on to a better operating position. Next slide, please. To implement these changes staff is proposing two separate terminations upon board approval by exercising the terms of the direct agreement and assuming MSB agreement with Marbork for the operation of the MRF. This allows for direct payment to Marburg and avoids significant payment delays.
The second is for a period in which county will work with MSB as necessary to transition operation of the ADF and CMU facilities. The county intends to set up Baycon during this time period on a temporary basis. The second timeframe also allows for the county to negotiate long-term agreements with Marburg and Baycon. Next slide, please. These actions are considered exempt from CEQA because they're related to administrative activities Staff further requests, any other direction that may pleasure the board.
Lastly staff is available to answer any questions the board may have. That concludes our presentation.
5:37 – 5:542 turns
Thank you. Questions for staff? Seeing no lights we'll go on to MSB's presentation
Thank you, Madam Clerk. Good afternoon, Honorable Chair and Board of Supervisors. My name is Jessica Dias and our firm represents MSB Investors LLC as its legal counsel in this matter. I'll be presenting today and also joining me is Mr. John Dewey, CEO and managing member of MSB who's happy to help answer any questions your board may have. MSB has submitted a detailed written response to the notice of intent to terminate, addressing in detail the points raised in the staff presentation.
In addition to a letter... The legal issues with actions that staff has recommended. I don't think this is the right forum to try to adjudicate each and every fact that staff has asserted and I won't repeat everything from our written submissions. Instead, I want to help offer some important context that I think is most critical to understanding The decision you have before you today.
Before I proceed, I just want to acknowledge that there is scarcely a position I am more loathe to be in than at this podium offering statements that are in any way critical of the actions or conduct of your county staff. Regrettably it is the unenviable position that MSB finds itself in is a result of the initiation of this unilateral termination process and this necessity to present MSB's side of the story in this very public forum.
Next slide, please. So why are we here today? Unfortunately, we're This good faith was essential to making sure this contract delivered the best results for the ratepayers, the public and the environment. It is also the hallmark of a successful public-private partnership. And what do I mean by that? A successful public-private partnership cannot endure if the public agency turns to the private partner as a bottomless bank account or A party to be the repository for blame when inevitably unanticipated circumstances or complexities arise in the course of a major public infrastructure undertaking.
And under California law, this good faith and contract implementation is also legally required. We're here today because the county has not yet responded using the contractually required mechanisms to the economic and global realities So what are these realities? A steep decline in the global recycling market due to policy established by China in 2017, followed by the COVID pandemic in 2020 through 2022. You may have seen headlines such as these.
In July of 2017, China announced that it would ban the import as several kinds of recyclable waste including plastic commonly known as PET used in recycled in recyclable water bottles and other plastic items. Then the COVID-19 pandemic compounded these issues, leading to systemic changes in consumer consumption habits and putting immense pressure on waste management infrastructure.
The demand for single use plastics in the form of gloves, masks and other PPE surged at the onset of the pandemic and continued throughout its course. Next slide please. Decline in recycling revenue mean for the Resource Center here in Santa Barbara. I think these numbers help best put it in perspective. So, in 2016, the county's consultants estimated that this project would be funded by $10 million in annual recyclable revenues to support what was then a $15 million annual operating budget.
As a result of changes to the global recycling market Recyclable revenues in the past three fiscal years have averaged less than half of that, only approximately $4 million annually. Next slide please. Without background I think it's important to keep in mind that this is not a fixed price contract. To borrow a phrase from the environmental field, the contract puts in place what might be called an adaptive management approach to this public-private partnership In fact, the terms of the agreement show that the parties recognized that there was no crystal ball, no economist or technical consultant that was capable of predicting recyclable waste uncertainty to result in a fair agreement under a fixed price model.
Accordingly, there were levers built into the agreement to account for this revenue uncertainty. Most importantly among these levers, the agreement required the county to increase the tip fee annually to fill the gap in recyclable revenue resulting in a significant hole in the operating budget. Next slide please. Unfortunately, the increase in the tip fee simply did not occur.
Public Works staff has withheld more than $3 million from MSB of agreed upon budgeted operating funds just over the past seven months. These are funds that are critical to meeting the operating expenses of the project. This deferred maintenance, the accrual of which was a choice made by public works staff will require an even greater investment by the county and the rate payers in the future I know it's a bit of a cliche for an attorney to invite anyone to engage in a hypothetical, but I think it's important to imagine what choices the county would make were this not a public-private partnership and if the county was bearing the sole financial responsibility for the operating expenses, ownership, and management of this project.
Next slide please. I'd like to talk about MSB's performance Staff's presentation is offered but a fraction of the story of the Resource Center's development and operation, and MSB's performance under the contract. MSB has been a reasonable and diligent partner and project developer. MSB has patiently supported the county and the Resource Center as its design-build operator for the past 14 years.
And in fact, MSB and its affiliates have invested more than $30 million in the Resource Center. Next slide please. As MSB has set forth in detail in its written response, the alleged grounds for unilateral termination of this contract are simply unsupported. And I'd like to hit the high points of that response. Next slide please. First, with respect to the acceptance tests.
So MSB has passed to date 11 out of the 12 acceptance tests based on the acceptance test plan approved by the county in 2020 according to BCON. BCON is the anaerobic digestion technology vendor that the county has proposed to hire to operate the AD facility. Instead of the county accepting the BCON acceptance test report, the county proposed to revise the acceptance test criteria with more onerous criteria that were declined by both MSB and BCON.
As to the one remaining open acceptance test, the residue test, MSB has proposed a compliance plan and the county has not responded to MSB's invitation to schedule the test. Next slide please. With respect to regulatory compliance, MSB's had a good relationship with its various oversight agencies over the past 12 years of permitting construction. When operational issues arose is they inevitably do in an undertaking of this nature? In every case, MSP has developed and implemented a compliance plan that was approved by the county and the respective regulatory agency This was the case with the local enforcement agency as to odor issues, which resulted in implementation of the Gore system.
This was the case with the Air Pollution Control District as to the MRF biofilter, which was destroyed by the Alisal fire. And finally this was the case with the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board as to the drainage infrastructure damaged by the historic storms this past winter. In fact, MSB would have completed these repairs by the county imposed deadline had the county not added additional requirements on the project the day before completion.
Importantly that drainage infrastructure was repaired prior to the first storm of the season and there were no violations or damages incurred during completion of that projects. Next slide please. As for termination here too there's critical missing facts In context, as to liquidated damages. These were imposed by the county without following the agreement prescribed requirements and significantly in three of these six cases the county declined to meet with MSB and did not impose liquidated damages due to a county and regulatory agency approved compliance plan Unfortunately, there has been some indication based on comments made to MSB by county staff that liquidated damages may have been imposed in bad faith on MSB is a tool to induce MSB to abandon its operating agreement.
As to the alleged nonpayment of subcontractors and regulatory agencies, as stated previously the county has refused to provide contractually obligated operating funds for the past three years in response to the downturn of the recycling markets. This has forced MSB and its subcontractors to absorb $10 million dollars of operating costs over MSB has absorbed approximately $4 million of this revenue shortfall with working capital loans, and MSB's subcontractors have absorbed approximately $6 million of the shortfall.
MSB has been communicating with county staff about the recycling revenue downturn and the consequences for the past three years, and staff has refused to acknowledge it as a problem that needed to be resolved through the contractually required mechanisms. Next slide please. As to health and safety violations, the fact is that withholding of funding has put the safety of MSB's employees and subcontractors at risk.
Nonetheless, MSB has worked diligently to produce the highest standards of health and safety at the project site. In fact, a site visit by Public Works Health and Safety Manager in November declared the ADF and CMU free of any health and safety issues. And noted that the site housekeeping was the best she had seen. Not included on my slide I'd like to briefly mention a quote raised in the letter from the Gaviota Coast Conservancy.
MSB's MRF Organic Waste Derived Compost has consistently passed the U.S. Composting Council's suite of testing assurance or STA compost criteria and CalRecycle's guidelines for compost land application and organics diversion. In fact, MSB actually currently has an order backlog of 7700 tons of compost that have been requested from eight ranches and farms in North County, the Gaviota Coast, and Carpinteria as they have found that compost has excellent nutrient value for land application.
The county has recently taken over trucking of the finished compost product. And if they're able to arrange adequate trucking, all compost stockpiles could be cleared from the site within the next 30 to 45 days. Next slide please. The final question for this board is really why termination? Both sides of this public private partnership want the resource center to be a success. A success for the rate payers community and a success for the environment.
The way to make that happen is not through unilateral termination, but through a good faith negotiation of a fair pathway forward. This would save the county and the rate payers potentially more than $40 million if MSB is allowed to sell its interest to a new operator or investor. For these reasons, we asked the Board of Supervisors to reject the proposed termination and direct staff to engage in good faith negotiations with MSB and a third party investor.
And significantly this good faith negotiation requires a commitment of operational funding during any interim period. Although not directly addressed in the staff report I wanted to address the concept of partial termination of the contract We do not want this board to labor under the impression that partly terminating MSB's contract is a reasonable compromise.
In fact, terminating the contracts only to the MRF and requiring MSB to continue to subsidize the ADF and the CMU at considerable expense would be highly prejudicial and objectively unreasonable. Conscripting MSB into a continued subsidy while the county is getting ready to complete termination would be equally as prejudicial to MSB as terminating the contract.
If the board is inclined to adopt staff's recommendation to terminate, the county should fund all ADF and CMU operating expenses for the proposed 90-day In term period. Next slide, please. Thank you for your time and attention to this important decision. Mr Dewey and myself are available to answer any questions that you might have.
5:54 – 5:5915 turns
Key questions for MSB. Or for staff? Recording in
progress
will go to public comment.
Chair Williams and members of the board, we have three requests to speak on this item. We are going to begin on Zoom with Paul Rellis to be followed by Kat Lane here in Santa Barbara. Paul? And Paul, we have unmuted you on our end.
OK.
There you go. Can you
hear me?
Yes, we can. Please proceed.
Dear Chairman Williams and members of the Board of Supervisors. My name is Paul Rellis, I was a member of the California Integrated Waste Management Board in Sacramento from 91 to 98. It was the precursor to CalRecycle which is the enforcement agency that oversees the Tejigawas facility and its solid waste permits In my time in Sacramento, I was extensively involved with solid waste recycling, landfill and composting.
And at that point anaerobic digestion had not come into play but we were the permit authority for Tejiguas. My comments are directed To what to do with this $140 million in counting facility that is failing on multiple fronts, as we've heard, including recycling rates, compliance with 1383 and odor violations. And I just heard of the water ones as well. Serious problems were predicted when this facility was marketed to the county Respected experts in the field warned against going forward, but their expertise was ignored and this development was approved.
As a result rate payers are paying for a faulty facility that is frankly in my view an embarrassment to Santa Barbara's environmental legacy. From my long experience with AD anaerobic digestion Material recovery facilities, composting and other aspects of waste management. I recommend to the board that you move to establish an independent committee to oversee this project taking it out of the hands at least interim from the county.
And you should not pick a successor operator until the committee can review The multiple evaluations that have been made of the operation by reputable firms, and only then recommend a path forward. I predict that it's going to take many millions more in payments to make this facility right in considerable time. You need the best advice possible and you haven't gotten it today. Thank you.
We will now return to Santa Barbara with Cat Lane, to be followed by Ana Citron who's our final speaker. Cat?
Okay. Dear supervisors, thank you for letting me speak this afternoon. My name is Cat Lane. I'm an Isla Vista resident and former UCSB Environmental Affairs Board Executive Chair, and I previously worked with the Isla Vista Compost Collective though I am not speaking on behalf of either group today. I'm here to discuss the Tehiguas Landfill project, though I do understand that the discussion today is for the MSB contract.
Clearly, the Tehiguas landfill is in a grave state of noncompliance and taking a service that is supposed to greatly benefit the community and turning it into one that is harmful to local residents. Based on the letters from SBC, APDCD, CCRWQCB and SBCEHS and comments from our board and MSP subcontractors. The landfill has clear systemic issues that will not be solved by expansion.
There are disastrous problems with air pollutants, leachate, berms, water quality worker and visitor safety and the quality of life for nearby residents among a plethora of other issues that will not be solved.
Expansion is not one of the items for today. I would ask you to direct your comments to the agenda item that we have.
Okay, perfect. Should I continue my comment then or?
It depends on if you have comments.
I think it was more focused on the EIR for Tahequis.
5:59 – 6:059 turns
The EIR for Tahequis is
not
an item for today.
Okay thank you.
We will now go to our final speaker on this item, Ana Citrin. Ana?
Good afternoon, Chair Williams and board members. Ana Citrin, Legal and Policy Director for the Gaviota Coast Conservancy. We're not weighing in on the details of the contractual arrangement between the county and Mustang. There are clearly a lot of issues What we're concerned about is that there are larger issues that will not be solved simply by terminating a contract.
Very interested to hear from Mr. Rellis just now, and he had an interesting proposal. We are similarly urging you to approach this With all hands on deck perspective. We really need solutions to the operational issues, the regulatory issues that are happening at the Resource Center to rectify the violations, to achieve the 60% diversion rate that was promised and further to improve the quality of compost. I won't get into all the specific issues and understand the chair's desire to stay narrowly focused on the contract itself but we do urge the board and public works to develop a plan to address all of these problems, and to achieve the level of success that the community expects to result from this very substantial investment in the Resource Center.
We have been engaged probably more than most. We've developed some expertise in these issues. We're very eager to sit down and help work these problems out, and we would ask that This continued to be discussed and not relegated to closed door contractual negotiations, but that there be real public involvement in how we can make this resource center function as it should.
And again, GCC is very willing and open to collaborating with all of you to make that happen. So thank you.
And that concludes public comment on this item.
Well, we'll go to rebuttals and then further questions from the board if there is any.
Thank you chair. We would like to respond and have a rebuttal. We did review the public comments posted on Legistar this morning over the weekend and even heard this afternoon. We do have a couple of slides, but you know I'll limit it to one to be more concise in our rebuttal. Please keep in mind however that we're here for termination of the agreement with MSB based on the ways that MSB has breached that agreement.
So there's been a lot of discussions with regards to the finances. So I'd like to speak to that financial, have a financial discussion. Everyone that the Taheegus Resource Recovery Project was a bid project to design build and operate MSB developed that performa or otherwise known as the operating budget for the resource center. The county approved amendments to that operating budget several times Per the process defined in the agreement.
MSB continues to not provide audited financials and recyclable material documentation to support its claims for additional cash flow assistance under the terms of the agreement. While the county has diligently reviewed and processed initial cash flow assistance payments, subsequent requests were not supported by appropriate documentation received from MSB. And because of this, the county has also hired Ernst and Young to review MSB's operating budget and evaluate the validity of the existing operating expenses that it's claiming to incur.
The contract also provides avenues for MSB to generate revenue which MSB has failed to capitalize on. Energy to SCE, selling excess compost And acquiring additional customers with needs for processing recyclables. It should be noted that the amount of money MSBOs, its subcontractors is significant and it includes projects that were not approved by the county and therefore outside of the scope of work for the resource center.
That means the county's not obligated to pay those out-of-scope services. MSB is obligated under its agreement with the county to pay its subcontractors for work done at the Resource Center, and we have paid MSB through processing fees. MSB's failure to make these payments is a basis for determining that there has been a breach of our agreement as previously noted.
I'll yield the rest.
6:05 – 6:1011 turns
Can we have her, is that it? Great. Mr. Nelson you have a question?
Yeah thank you Chair Williams I have a question about this slide and kind of slightly address it there what if the agreement's terminated what's going to happen to those subcontractors and will the county assume those liabilities?
I'm sorry can you repeat that?
Sorry yeah. What is going to happen to the subcontractors If this agreement is terminated, and would the county be assuming those liabilities?
Thank you for that question. So the county is not contractually obligated to pay MSB subcontractors for which it's already paid MSB to pay those subcontractors. We are aware of some subcontracts such as Deani Building Corporations, for example, where we are retaining some revenues that would be going to them The resource center contingent upon passing of acceptance tests approximately $200,000. And so we would be paying that directly to for example Dionne's one of the subs upon project completion but like I mentioned earlier a lot of the subs have been doing work outside of the scope and so we are not obligated to pay and I think MSB should be Actually responding to those questions as far as the subs that have done work outside of the scope.
I think if MSB answers that question, they'll say well don't terminate so we can go ahead and pay our subcontractors right?
Sure. So then that kind of poses the question of like impacts for delaying termination if you will. And there are significant impacts if we propose... If we're proposing and contemplating Delaying a termination and the ongoing risk of MSB not paying subs for work that the county continues to pay MSB. And we have noticed that MSB has deprioritized paying operational expenses by choosing to pay certain financial obligations over others, that's a significant risk.
Also delaying termination we've learned is Not a good, not a good course of action. We previously were notified by MSB of like the potential to assignment of the operations to another vendor and we were reached by Mr. John Dewey on February 28th of this year about the potential to assignment for another operator. We followed up with him in writing in March and April and that was unfruitful. He did not continue Follow the provisions of the agreement that goes into assignment so that we can do our due diligence. You know, another impact from potential delay is the fact that this could result in guaranteed energy production rate being inaccurately set prior to June of 2024.
So what that would end up being is the way that we are able to generate money for our biogas at the engines would not be there and we could be facing additional fees from SCE over a 20-year agreement. And then one other thing to consider is that the longer MSB does not divert waste from the landfill, the quicker it fills up and we do know that we are reaching landfill capacity in March of 2026 so there are significant risks to delaying further this determination
Thank you for that answer. I guess what I'm struggling with and I don't want to focus on one subcontractor, it's probably inappropriate to focus on a single subcontractor but I would imagine if I was a subcontractor doing work for MSB on a county facility, I would assume that MSB was a partner with the county on that and for them to potentially not be reimbursed for those expenses seems To be a challenge that I'm concerned about as we look at this. So just put that on the record.
Supervisor Hartman?
Yes, I think MSB's argument is that the recycling market wasn't as projected and so the revenue fell short. There were changed conditions in the world out there that they couldn't predict or be responsible for and as I understand their argument then we were supposed to make that up by raising rates So, how would you respond to that? That shortfall is kind of the basis of all the violations and all the difficulties.
Thank You Supervisor Hartman through the chair I'll ask Mr. Johnson to address that question.
6:10 – 6:163 turns
Supervisor Hartman through the Chair Williams Tipping fees have been increased and as Ms. Gonzalez-Knight mentioned in the presentation, we've had six amendments to this contract which has included not just increase in tipping fees and fees paid to MSB but also significant declines in revenue projections. We did have high revenue projections back in the start of this project but currently we have projected half of what is Currently being what was originally projected. So we've adjusted that, we've increased tipping fees. We've also lowered the amount we expected to get from recyclables consistently and the one thing that we haven't done currently is we have a seventh amendment that was on the table that would increase tipping fees. And we came to an agreement on a pro forma, but we weren't able to come to an agreement on many other aspects.
I don't want to dive into the details, but there were other differences between staff and MSB in the 7th Amendment and that's why the 7th Amendment was not moving forward. As Ms. Gonzales-Knight pointed out, we've made many, many concessions financially and many changes to the tipping fee and many changes to operational costs both for the county and on his end as well to accommodate those changes.
MSB can go and do their rebuttal. You went just a tad over in your And they went a tad over in their rebuttal, so you have a little bit more than five minutes.
Thank you Chair Williams. Thank you Jessica Diaz for MSB Investors LLC. I'd like to address a few points and almost all of them really relate to the financial aspects of this partnership and contract implementation. The first issue is the subcontractors, which I completely understand is a topic of curiosity and importance to this board. First, MSB is not aware of any subcontractors that have operated outside their approved scope of work.
Second, there was a reference to MSB deprioritizing operations of the project. which could not be further from the truth. MSB has been diligently and consistently pleading with the county to provide the operating revenue necessary for successful project operations. As a result of the county's failure to do so, MSB has been forced to triage the critical expenses.
As I mentioned during my presentation there has been a $10 million shortfall absorbed between MSB and its subcontractors. That brings me to the second point, which is the increase in tip fees and whether the funding was ever remitted to MSB. A few items. First, the tip fees were increased two years behind schedule and well behind the necessity of payment to fund critical operating expenses Perhaps more importantly, the revenue from the tip fee increases was never actually remitted to MSB as the private partner.
So MSB was not able to reinvest that revenue stream into paying subcontractors working on accrued maintenance items or any of the other priorities that both MSB and the county have with respect to the project The final category of important factual context here relates to the proposed assignment of the MSB agreement, the negotiation of the Seventh Amendment and the opportunity for a third party investor to really broaden the pie here. And increase the amount that's available for the county, the rate payers and the public to capitalize on.
The private investor requested a break-even or balanced budget from county staff, and it took over 10 months to provide that. As a result, MSB lost the opportunity to recoup a significant return on its investment from the entrance of a new operator investor into the project. As to the draft of the Seventh Amendment It is true that there were outstanding items that had yet to be negotiated. Unfortunately, Public Works did not provide the counterproposal for the Second Amendment until October of 2023, just almost immediately before the county issued the notice of intent to terminate MSB's contract.
As to the remainder of the items addressed in the public comments as to regulatory issues and compliance, I would simply refer to MSB's detailed written submission outlining in detail all of the facts and communications that have gone into its diligent record of compliance with the regulatory oversight agencies. Thank you again to this board for your time and attention to this important matter.
6:16 – 6:236 turns
Any questions for MSB? We'll go to deliberation. Mr. Nelson.
Yes, I just think this question might be for council it might be for Public Works and I know you guys are wearing two hats here This is an enterprise fund. Is that my understanding? Is this how these expenses and liabilities roll up? I just want to make sure that I'm clear on that, so it's a enterprise fund that ultimately the decisions that are made by this board, by these contracts roll up to eventually rate payers. Is that how this all works? Okay, just wanted to confirm that as we move forward.
And if we do terminate and there is litigation, that would also be assumed through the Enterprise Fund or does that pierce that at some point and hit us in the general fund?
Supervisor Nelson, members of the board. Yes, that's my understanding is it all costs related to this would go through the Enterprise Fund.
OK, so that's helpful. Again, I have some heartburn about You know, it's an awkward situation here where you know we're not experts at all this and we often have to rely on our staff. Our staff is asking us to terminate, you know? And so when there's conflict I usually turn to some of my county staff to try to figure out the solution and to inform me and that's why this relationship is in this circumstance and this hearing is very difficult for me as a supervisor to wrestle with. So I want to hear from My colleagues, especially since most of this will impact their constituents and their rate payers.
But that's where I'm wrestling with right now. I do also have a lot of heartburn with work that's been done by some contractors on the site to making sure that they are compensated. I know that there is agreements in place for them to understand their risk but at the same time if Operator on a county facility asked me to do work on their facility. I would be doing that with the belief that That there's the revenue behind it, that you're improving a county facility and that there's some value there. That they would be expected to actually get paid for those bills. So I've been asking that question all along. I know there is a significant subcontractor in the North County but there's other subcontractors as well that may be on the hook for those costs.
And if we do move towards termination, Made whole in this process. And so that's my big concern and heartburn as I wrestle with this, making sure that the little guys even though that some of them are big guys aren't left holding the bag.
I do think that's an excellent point though. That is one of the recommendations that staff have is to For us to direct them to have a direct relationship with those subs and they're all of them are enumerated, including the ones you mentioned in the recommendation. I, you know, I would summarize the problem here. In, you know, one one word over leveraging. I was very predisposed to support Um.
MSB I liked their vision, even though you know the execution was for as for some time fallen short. But to me the reaction of public works trying to incrementally enable us to go forward, including spending millions That arguably is the responsibility of MSB was not to be like, great. We're making progress it was to continue to leverage in my opinion and I don't see how the county's patients could continue Past regulatory violations, past continuing to not pay subs.
And what hangs in the balance is our ability to meet our greenhouse gas reduction goals and our responsibility to the City of Santa Barbara, the City of Goleta, City of Solvang These are our partners. And so I do think, you know that it with a heavy heart because I hoped this was going to work better but we have to make this facility work as it was designed to work. It is an imperative for us financially. It's an imperative for us Because of landfill capacity and it is in my view even more imperative from the perspective of protecting our environment for generations to come.
And because of that, the personal feelings that I have are not as important as the very imperative To get this facility to work as it should and that's why I will be supporting staff recommendation Supervisor Hartman
Yeah, none of us feels good being up here and I think Public Works made it clear they've never done this before. It's a public works is one of our star departments. The complaints go back for several years and I know that Public Works has hired various consultants to give us a read on is this well designed? Can this you know where what is the source of the problem?
And I believe in the three different studies we've had, it comes down to operations. It's well designed, well built and it's really operations. From my perspective, the violations and the complaints have reached a crescendo. And we really need to do something dramatic. We can't continue as we've done negotiating and trying to make it work and doing another study.
So I'm ready to bite the bullet and terminate the contract. I don't see another course of action here.
6:23 – 6:289 turns
Do
you
like to make a motion?
I've got it. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The reason why I could never be a judge, I think is because they take things too personally. And so even though, you know, for Bob and I this is this some people might think this is easier for us because we're in North County and our rate payers are not going to be affected as much as yours. But I still look at the county as you know, as we Say one county, one future. This is something we all have to get right. And I was going back and looking at all the past quotes and what board members had to say.
Supervisor Farr once she said that it doesn't really matter what we do until we cut down on our consumption. And she said, and I don't think that's going to happen anytime soon. So this is a problem that's going to plague us for quite a while. I just saw the recent story on KSBY where they were talking about Tahecus and it said that South County residents actually per capita throw away twice as much as other Californians which was shocking to me.
So we do have to change our habits but one of the things that always interests me in the human nature is that I've seen with couples and in relationships is when one of the, what always just baffles me is when one of the people, and it doesn't always translate to business. But when somebody doesn't wanna be your partner, the other person trying to fight to keep you as the partner, I've never really understood that dynamic.
Today for me we crossed the Rubicon because for me there's no going back. I basically really don't wanna be a partner With an organization that came in here and I've worked with Public Works for 13 years now. Not only have I not had them come to me and tell me that they wanted to terminate somebody, I've never heard him say a negative word about one of our contractors.
Yeah there's times when they're asking for improvement but I've never heard them bad mouth anybody. To say that our reputation as a partner is going to suffer in the community if we terminate this. I took that personally because I think the opposite, we would be doing a disservice to the community if we continue down this path so you know and then one of the quotes too was litigation can be ugly and it might reveal facts that aren't good for the county well then we need to hear those Because today I didn't hear anything like that.
We have a lot of work ahead of us, and I just don't think I see a path forward with the current partner. And I do agree with Anna and Mr. Rellis that before we jump into another partnership, you know, I'd really like to see us bring back some analysis That we all can make that decision together on. So I'll be supporting staff recommendation today.
Okay, Supervisor Kaps.
Yeah just real quickly I support everything that's been said for me it seems as though it's been more than enough time and I feel the same weight of responsibility to our rate payers, to our climate, to our city partners that we can't continue with a partner that isn't working so happy to support their recommendation
Is there a motion?
Move staff recommendation.
Is there a second? I'll second. Motion by Hartman, second by Lavagnino. All those in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Thank you so much. We are adjourned to Tuesday, January 9th, 2023 in Santa Barbara. Sorry 2024 in Santa Barbara. The head of the party will be taking control.