BodyBoard of Supervisors
MeetingRegular Meeting
Date📅 March 5, 2024

UnGovr Transcript

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

0:00 – 0:0417 turns

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.670:15

Our next item of business is the approval of minutes from the February 27, 2024 meeting.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed0:21

Move approval.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.670:22

Second. OK we need one minute I'm sorry. We've got a little technical issues today so we're going to move a little slower. Okay we have a motion from Supervisor Hartman and second from Supervisor Nelson. Let's take a roll call vote because I do need to, I was absent from that meeting.

Roll-call vote Passed 4–0 motion from Supervisor Hartman and second from Supervisor Nelson. Let's take a roll call
Show transcript
Supervisor Nelson? Aye. Supervisor Williams? Aye Supervisor Capps? Aye Supervisor Hartman? Aye And Chair Lavagnino? I will abstain.

Okay Madam Clerk are there any announcements or changes to our agenda today?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:06

Chair Lavinino and members of the board, I do have a few announcements this morning. Go

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.671:11

ahead.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:13

We received a request from the sponsoring supervisor to continue administrative item number one to the April 2nd board meeting. Administrative item number one is a resolution to be presented by Supervisor Lavinino honoring Ted Sten upon the conclusion of his service on the Santa Barbara County Board of Retirement. This continuation can be added to the balance of the administrative agenda. In addition, I have a quick announcement to make on administrative item number eight Administrative item number eight is from the County Executive Office. It is to consider recommendations regarding an appointment of the Public Works Department Director prior to board action on administrative item number eight in accordance with government code section 54953 subdivision C3, the public works department director salary information shall be summarized verbally.

Effective April 1st 2024 Chris Sneddon's biweekly salary will be approximately $8,624. Additionally we received a request from the department to withdraw administrative item number 25 from the agenda. Administrative item number 25 is sponsored by Supervisor Nelson, it is to approve the appointment of David Ketelar to the Behavioral Wellness Commission term ending January 1st 2027 and this withdrawal can also be added to the balance of the administrative agenda.

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 questions please contact the Clerk of the Board's Office at 805-568-2240. Again that number is 805-5682240 and that concludes my announcements for today.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.672:53

Thank you very much. Do we have a CEO's report for today?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:58

No report this morning Chair.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.672:59

Okay, that takes us to our administrative agenda.

Next item of business is the administrative agenda would any board members like to pull any items from the administrative agenda? Supervisor Hartman.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:11

A7 and A16. 7

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.673:14

and 16. Supervisor Nelson.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role3:17

Yes I'd like to speak on A7 and 16 but I would also like to poll 19 and 21. I need to recuse myself from those two.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.673:25

Okay. Supervisor Williams. Madam Clerk do we have any items to be pulled from the public?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role3:37

Chair Lavagnino, members of the board yes. We have requests from the public to speak on administrative items number 4 7 8 and 16.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.673:45

Are there any items that we are not pulling? That would be the balance so I'll now entertain a motion to approve the balance of the administrative agenda except for the items that have been pulled 4, 7, 8, 16, 19 and 21.

0:04 – 0:087 turns

CommentSherry FosterProposed · by introduction4:03

So moved.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.674:05

Moved and seconded all those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay We're gonna go to resolutions to be presented. We'll come back to the balance, to those items that were pulled in just a moment. We will move to administrative item number two. Madam Clerk can we please read that into the record?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role4:27

Chair Lavinino and members of the board, Administrative Item Number Two is sponsored by Supervisor Capps and Supervisor Hartman. It is to adopt a resolution designating March 2024 as Women's History Month in Santa Barbara County. And joining us in person today we have Kathy O'Dell and Nikki Parr And if you can please join us at the podium. And I will go ahead and read the resolution, whereas the month of March is recognized as Women's History Month and International Women's Day is on March 8th 2024 and whereas the month and day are a global celebration of the economic cultural social and political achievements of women and whereas we celebrate and highlight the invaluable contributions and triumphs women have made in our community And whereas the County of Santa Barbara wishes to uphold the achievements, educate on the challenges and provide more exposure to the rights of women and gender equality and equity.

And whereas the gender gap in power and leadership remains entrenched both locally and globally. An additional 360 billion per year is needed to achieve gender equality and women's empowerment across key global goals And 54% of countries still lack laws in all key areas of gender equality. And whereas Women's Economic Ventures is a champion of empowering women, dedicated to uplifting and supporting historically marginalized communities to identify and address barriers to achieving economic success. And whereas in the last five years WEAVE has assisted 2,100 local women entrepreneurs and their businesses creating 6,000 jobs fueling the local economy Equipping women with the tools and education to launch and grow a thriving business. And setting the bar for what is possible for women to accomplish in our community.

Now therefore, be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors declares March Women's History Month and March 8th as International Women's Day and is especially grateful for women's economic ventures who so boldly lift up and empower the women of Santa Barbara County passed and adopted today.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed6:37

I'm proud to accept this on the behalf of all the women in the community, and particularly the entrepreneurial women that WEAVE serves as they continue to bring their new business concepts and ideas to fruition. To add to women's history, we go back looking through women's history and see how many things that we all interact with every day that we didn't know were invented by women.

like the washing machine and the windshield wiper. And actually it was a woman who first discovered laser technology for cataract surgery, and we know that someplace amongst all of the women we serve here in Santa Barbara County there are those with other new compelling ideas so we thank you for acknowledging that.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.677:28

Thank you for being

CommentSherry FosterProposed · by introduction7:30

here. Go vote! Yeah, thank you. I just wanted to thank our speakers and I love the focus on economic empowerment because it goes hand in hand with discrimination, with poverty, with all of the things associated with the strives that women still need to make. It wasn't too long ago where a woman would have to have her husband signed in order to get a loan. All of these things are still things that we need to fight for and having Weave right here in our community for so long doing such amazing work, has helped so many men and women and so many children. Thank you.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.678:10

Thank you all right this takes us to the administrative items have been pulled by the board in the public we'll take up the administrative items pulled in numerical order Madam Clerk can you please read administrative item number four into the record?

0:08 – 0:1926 turns

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role8:27

Chair Lavinino and members of the board, administrative item number four is from the Auditor-Controller's Office. It is to consider recommendations regarding the renewal of a contract with Brown Armstrong Accountancy Corporation, Brown Armstrong for the county's annual financial audits and we have one request to speak on this item from the public and we are going to go to Chuck Williams here in Santa Barbara. Chuck?

PresenterChuck Williamsmyself today And I wasn't going to speak on anything on this but I come across tProposedself-stated8:53

Hi I'm Chuck Williams from Old Town Orchid. I'm representing myself today And I wasn't going to speak on anything on this but I come across this in the agenda. commitment to specific projects which may result potentially in significant physical impacts on the environment. And there is a specific project that this would apply to in Old Town Orchid and it has to do with a roundabout, and there are significant impacts with that. I'm going to leave it at that and speak again at the next item.

Thank you.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role9:36

And that concludes public comment on this item. Okay

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.679:40

let's go to item A7 please can you read that into the record?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role9:43

And Chair Lavagnino, members of the board would you like to get a vote on this item or

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.679:46

take them all together? Go ahead can I get a motion on A4 please?

CommentSherry FosterProposed · by introduction9:53

Second.

Roll-call vote Passed Moved by Joan Hartmann · Seconded by Laura Capps
Show transcript
Moved by Supervisor Hartman seconded by Supervisor Capps all those in favor aye any opposed passes unanimously Takes us to A7.
UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role10:12

Chair Lavinino and members of the board, administrative item number seven is from the County Executive Office. It is to adopt a resolution to amend the 2024 Board of Supervisors schedule of meeting dates and locations to add an additional meeting at 2 p.m. on Tuesday March 19th 2024 to conduct a housing element rezone workshop to be held in the Planning Commission hearing room. And we have one request to speak from the public on this item.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6710:42

Okay I think Supervisor Hartman also hold this item so why don't we have Supervisor Hartman go first and then we'll.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed10:48

Sure, well the first thing is I'm very excited about this workshop. We did have a previous workshop where the board articulated criteria that they would like to see in project proposals as we consider the rezones and this will be the opportunity actually to hear from developers. The way it's scheduled as i understand it it's simply to look at South County given that I represent certain areas in mid and north county However you define it, I would also like to include or invite those who would like to present at this meeting. So that's my first plea and my second is that UCSB is also providing about 750 units and if they could be invited to attend if they'd like to describe those in the schedule when what kind how they envision that unfolding at which economic levels, that would also be great.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6711:50

Okay Supervisor Capps?

CommentSherry FosterProposed · by introduction11:52

Thank you I'd like to echo the request for UCSB which is as we all know a linchpin to our housing challenges right now to be part of this meeting. I'm really glad we're having this meeting it was suggestion that came I believe from the League of Women Voters and more transparency so that developers who are seeking rezones from us They get to there's awareness from the public about what kind of promises are being made, what kind of plans they have that will affect all of us. So I appreciate this hearing and look forward to it.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role12:21

Supervisor Nelson? Yes thank you Chair Lavanino I understand the concern that this might be just a South County, the way it's designed right now. And I wanted to address that for a moment. I understand that down the south is very different situation than we have up north. Down south there's a lot of difficult choices to be made in the North County. We're fortunate enough to have a significant inventory and not the same level of demand In the in the North County we haven't necessarily had the same level of advocacy and sophistication that has gone with many of our projects hiring consultants to come and put together projects and presentations.

And what my concern about now at the last you know lately Late in the process asking them to present would put some of the really good projects at a disadvantage that haven't gone out and hired those consultants, the government affairs professionals to promote their project to the board. As Supervisor Hartman pointed out that she also represents North County as well but all but two of the North County projects are in my district and so I'd ask if we want to go ahead and do a North County presentation that we give maybe the North County But you don't have any concern if somebody wants to do it that has a project that wants to I do. I think that we should give them the time so it's a level playing field for all the North County projects.

Well,

not transcribed≈22s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6714:06

I only know of. Okay well let's go to Director Plowman.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed14:12

Mr. Chair members of the board a month delay would delay the ultimate conclusion of the rezone process and I would not recommend that. But certainly the board's option.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6714:29

Okay, well let's go to public comment.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role14:33

Chair Lavinino and members of the board we have one request to speak from the public on this item and we are going to zoom with Michael Stolte. Michael? Good morning

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed14:51

esteemed members of the board I'm here to speak on behalf of Keysight 26 Which was included in the housing element voted on December 5th, 2023. It has come to our attention that only projects within the housing element in South County are invited to the rezone workshop and we would like to request that our North County site also be invited. We believe that our project has valuable components that lend itself to being rezoned and we would appreciate the opportunity to partake in the workshop.

Alternatively if we are not included We would only have the standard three minutes to speak about the merits of our project on the day of the rezone hearings. We respectfully request that our project be given the same opportunity as others in the south. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role15:42

And that concludes public comment on this item.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6715:45

Okay, well it's to the board how does anybody want to proceed? I'll just say personally, I mean, I think he's going to come to the meeting anyway and speak for three minutes and then have his thing outside. So I don't know why we just don't give the extra seven minutes.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role16:01

I guess my concern is that none of the other North County projects that all asked about this have been told at this point that it was gonna be a South County hearing so if it's all them at a disadvantage to that one project And that's one project. That's also at the same time has an application to be annexed into the city of Santa Maria, so it's I'm not inclined to give out that project special treatment versus the rest of the you know, I don't know 30 North County sites that are out there again if we need wanted to give the north a rest of the projects in North County.

That's great, but it's going to delay the whole entire process. I think the choices that we have to make in the North County aren't about necessarily the bells and whistles of a project, but because we have a lot of options and not as much of demand, we can look at things like VMTs, public resources, neighborhood compatibility, as probably higher values than some of the choices you're gonna have to make down in the South Coast. So that's why, as somebody who has a majority of the North County projects in my district, As we call the beauty contest because I didn't think we needed it, because I thought there was a lot of other good criteria up there for our board to make some good decisions. So I'm not supportive adding the North County without an extension on this presentation.

Okay well Supervisor Hartman

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed17:18

Well I'm very eager to have the Bailey Avenue project presented as well and I'm eager to see what, to understand better what the North County projects are like. If people are invited and I can't see saying you can only have three minutes and others can have ten it seems only fair that those who would like to present are given that opportunity and if people don't want to That's fine too. It's not as it's not as competitive in North County, but I'm still very eager to see what the projects are being proposed.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role17:56

I don't disagree, but I think we need more time to be fair to those North County projects

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6718:00

so... Well it is two weeks away and you said if it's a month, a month would have been okay but two weeks? I just think if you've got Look, I didn't like doing this whole thing to start with of an outside meeting. But if you're going to do an outside meeting for purposes of allowing more transparency in that to tell somebody that they can't present is...I just don't think it's good policy.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role18:23

One additional question and maybe it's for Supervisor Hartman or Director Plowman. So the Bailey Avenue one, that's not up for rezone though? Or is it? It's my understanding that, and with that so projects to have that weren't up for rezone. That are just builder remedies projects they're also going to be presenting too? I mean does that kind of opens up kind of the floodgate as well of projects that we might be presenting in that

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed18:48

day? Supervisor Nelson through the chair, that site was not up for a rezone. So it is not actually included in our housing element. So we had not anticipated them making a presentation It is a builder's remedy project.

0:19 – 0:2311 turns

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6719:10

Supervisor Caps?

CommentSherry FosterProposed · by introduction19:11

Yeah I just, I think that the projects in the north should be given equal time maybe it doesn't have to be a month but maybe that's something that staff can just work out of a schedule where we tack on at the end like we're doing on the 19th a special meeting maybe it's only half hour long or something I don't know I just think Supervisor Nielsen raises good points of fairness and I also would like to hear more about these North County projects.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed19:39

Supervisor Williams. So, I think we should not delay and I think we should make a decision to either cure them all this day or not and the reason is because we are already We in our heads have eight years to produce this housing. It's starting to be more like seven years and if we don't produce it with the milestones then we lose zoning authority and so I just think it's pretty important to use every block of a few weeks, and I know it's been very difficult you know for the chair and the clerk's office to be able to schedule us in the first place, so I think if we're going to have North County folks present it should At this meeting just because we, we've got to do it.

And I'll hunker down I think the 10 minute thing is a really good happy medium because it's shorter than an appeal hearing but longer than public comment. It's you know that whoever came up with that idea I think was smart about format and so whoever that was thank you for doing that and I you know I do think that everybody should get a chance to do And if everybody's going to get a chance, it's going to be that date.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6720:56

Supervisor Nielsen?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role20:56

Yeah

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6720:57

so

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role20:58

again I think it's okay you know that was an afternoon and I wasn't gonna be here that's why he was scheduled that day on the afternoon because I wasn't gonna be here in the afternoon. So again I'm if this is what with the conversation we wanted to have back previously and we wanted to kind of let them know that there would be a beauty pageant for the North County projects as well I'd have been okay with that and I still think that's okay I don't want to delay it You know, I guess if you guys want to move forward with that. You know, I'm not going to kick and scream too much but I do think that it gives a single project a little bit of a disadvantage. A project that's probably more unique than any other projects combined because of the political entanglements and that that project has.

But I guess ultimately the conversation is gonna be the five of us in early May That we are thoughtful and maybe not necessarily use the same type of criteria on that day. That's the important day really for me not necessarily this one. So I'm okay with the, if you guys want to hear that one. It sounds like there's votes for that and I'll move along but ask for some consideration when we get to that point in May because I do think that there's a lot of balancing and it's something we call the tool, a balancing that we've been trying to do up in the North County to make this work and make sure that the right projects get built at the right places so thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed22:23

So I would move include Tuesday March 19th into our hearing schedule and that we invite UCSB to present if they would like to, and that we invite any North County projects that are part of our housing element to also present at their discretion.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6722:44

All right and Director Plowman you're good with that?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed22:47

Yes sir.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6722:48

Okay all right so you have a motion okay is there a second? Second by Supervisor Williams. All those in favor, aye? Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously okay perfect that takes us to administrative item number eight

0:23 – 0:242 turns

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role23:22

Chair Lavanino and members of the Board, Administrative Item number 8 is from the County Executive Office. It is to consider recommendations regarding an appointment of the Public Works Department Director. And we do have one request to speak from the public on this item and we are going to remain here in Santa Barbara with Chuck Williams. Chuck?

PresenterChuck Williamsmyself today And I wasn't going to speak on anything on this but I come across tProposedself-stated23:42

Thank you once again. I am not a big CEQA fan. But I really don't like it when it's being misused and this is a situation where it could be misused. And it's a long story, and I'm not going to go into it because you guys have already been down this road and it involves the Orkut Oasis Senior Center. This roundabout has been put in because of that senior center. I'm getting there.

Let's get there. This project is going to have trucks and cars and tractors and school buses and parents hauling school kids, and you think that roundabout won't need maintenance for all of these pieces of equipment? I am absolutely opposed to this being approved for that particular project.

0:27 – 0:3316 turns

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6727:31

When we start with Supervisor Hartman.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed27:34

So I pulled this item and I just wanted a progress report or update between when this board approved the $1.5 million and to date and how you see it unfolding?

CommentDirector PlowmanProposed · by introduction27:48

Sure, good morning Supervisor Hartman through the chair So the project has completed the initial stages of the preliminary engineering, so we've completed the survey and the right-of-way surveys along the levee. We've completed some conceptual 30% plans just for use in the environmental documents. There's still a long way to go to detailing out the plans and working with the stakeholders We've incorporated the components at Bonita School Road into the bridge project, so there'll be an under-crossing in the bridge project to accommodate a potential future path.

And we've had several meetings with stakeholders including the Corps of Engineers and the farmer representative groups and some other community members just to get initial feedback on the project and inform how we move forward with the process of developing the project. This item will get the EIR going so that there's a lot of studies that will be involved in that and we'll continue to stakeholder process throughout that to address not just the environmental issues but the other things that need to be worked out for our project to move forward.

And the goal would be over the next year to complete the EIR and move the project along to where we have the input considered from the stakeholders and kind of built into the project so that it's positioned for potential future funding.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed29:19

And what interactions have we had with the Corps of Engineers about this, so far?

CommentDirector PlowmanProposed · by introduction29:27

Supervisor Hartman through the Chair, we've had meetings with them and informal discussions about feasibility and about some of the constraints. And they don't give formal responses but there aren't things that would make the project infeasible. There just are constraints that you would have to work within to get permits for a project like this but there are trails on levees that are core levees throughout the country.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6729:56

Thank you. Supervisor Nielsen?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role29:58

Yes, thank you Chair Lovenino. As we do the environmental study my understanding in CEQA that ag resources is an area that's to be studied. Can you tell me that ag resources will be studied and be studied thoroughly because I do think a CEQA document supposed to inform the board of impacts and I think we should be very clear and eyes wide open on what those impacts are if this board ultimately goes through with permitting and building that trail.

CommentDirector PlowmanProposed · by introduction30:25

Supervisor Nelson to the Chair, yes there will be studies of those impacts through the environmental impact study process. I think the other thing we need to be mindful of is there are impacts that there may be that aren't specifically CEQA impacts but might be regulatory or other impacts that we need to look at as well so we'll be working with the Ag Commissioner and other stakeholder groups to see what those impacts are as well

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role30:55

I guess my last question was, I know. One of the requests that I had was that we do the survey work and the engineering work in advance of spending too much money out for this project. My understanding is that we still don't have access along the entirety of the proposed project area, that some of this is private property. And at this point, we haven't had much success in acquiring that or working with the property owners.

I'll just say right now that's my concern with moving forward to spending another $300,000 if to get to a point You know, we might be stymied in the end. The million and a half that we've committed from the county was to mitigate a previous environmental impact and impact to recreational opportunities. I think there's a lot of great other recreational opportunities in the North County but there's always not enough funds so I really want to husband these funds as best as possible to make sure that we're not spending them if it ultimately going to end up with a dead end. And so could you give us the status of acquiring or actually getting access for the entirety of the proposed trail?

CommentDirector PlowmanProposed · by introduction32:00

Sure, Supervisor Nelson through the Chair I believe you're referring to the west end where there would be a connection point into the city of Guadalupe and this sort of sequence of project development is to get early preliminary plans and then go do the environmental process That has to be done before we get into the phase of looking at utility coordination and permitting right away, those types of things. So getting that project defined and studied under CEQA is the first step, and then the next step would be to pursue any right-of-way acquisitions or other utility work or things like that that need to happen.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role32:37

So once the environmental document's done, you'd go through that process after approval of a project? Or can help me where that fits in the timeline?

CommentDirector PlowmanProposed · by introduction32:47

Sure, Supervisor Nielsen through the Chair. Once the board certifies the environmental document that would begin the process of looking into the acquisition.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role32:58

And what's the timeline on that?

CommentDirector PlowmanProposed · by introduction33:00

So the environmental document should be done in the next six to twelve months. Thank

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6733:04

you. Okay we have a public speaker on this Madam Clerk

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role33:15

Chair Lavinino and members of the board, yes that is correct. We have one request to speak from the public on this item and we are going to Zoom with Claire Weinman. Claire?

0:33 – 0:3713 turns

PresenterClaire WeinmanGrower Shipper Association of Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo countiesProposedself-stated33:33

Good morning confirming you can hear

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role33:34

me? Yes Claire we can hear you it's very quiet so if you could just speak loud and clear that would be greatly appreciated.

PresenterClaire WeinmanGrower Shipper Association of Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo countiesProposedself-stated33:41

Okay branch voice copy that. Good morning, my name is Claire Weinman. I'm the president of the Grower Shipper Association of Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties. We still have some major concerns about the project's underlying fundamentals for that specific use in that specific location. We would love to see this funding invested in North County that's a better fit and there are many worthy projects.

We're very concerned about the project description being utilized and the importance of this very early on. If the project does move forward, we would like to ask for closer coordination more so than it has been for this specific item and to pursue the Cadillac Tesla design option for the extensive concerns with the conflicts that it would create. Thank you.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role34:28

And that concludes public comment on this item.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6734:31

All right thank you very much for that. Claire can we get Supervisor Nielsen?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role34:36

Yeah I think thank you Mr. Chair Lavigny. I think Ms. Wynum brings up a good point So when you look at the projects and the project alternatives, I imagine you're looking at, I guess where are we at with the project description? Is it what was agreed to at the board previously with the more robust as Claire called it, the Cadillac or Tesla version. Is that still what we're studying as the preferred alternative?

CommentDirector PlowmanProposed · by introduction35:04

Supervisor Nielsen through the Chair, yes that's the general starting point and then you know the EIR will call out specific mitigations if any that would have elements that would need to be included to mitigate. And then there may be other elements that would be added or modified based on working with stakeholder groups and direction from your board.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role35:24

Well, I think a lot of those ideas that you know Supervisor Lavinia had pointed out at that hearing are good opportunities to mitigate the impact to ag resources which so is if those start to go away as project alternatives then I think we even need to get more robust. and the impact to ag resources, and get deeper into there. So I hope that's not the route we go down.

So I'm going to actually abstain at this one. I'm still concerned about access and fully having a bid out project before we move forward spending these funds. So, I'm not going to stand in the way but I'm not gonna move forward today. Supervisor Hartman.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed36:02

Move staff recommendation.

Roll-call vote Moved by Joan Hartmann
Show transcript
Yeah I just want to make a real quick comment that I am kind of where Supervisor Nelson is, I mean I want this thing I want to see it move forward but just because it's such a delicate area where that path is and there's so many interactions with ag we have this has to be done right if we're gonna do it and so I'm on board for the full Cadillac model and but if we get down to where you know we start taking elements away for whatever reason whether it's cost or could be a myriad of other reasons I'm gonna be very challenged to support it. So, we have a motion by Supervisor Hartman. I'll second. All those in favor?
CommentSherry FosterProposed · by introduction36:51

Aye.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6736:52

And Supervisor Nelson? Abstain. Is abstaining

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role37:16

Chair Lavinino and members of the board, my apologies again. I think those technical issues will just continue throughout our day today but let the record reflect that that motion was passed with four yeses and one abstention from Supervisor Nelson. Thank you.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6737:30

Okay it takes us to item A-19.

0:37 – 0:4013 turns

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role37:38

Supervisor Lavinino, I'm actually going to recuse myself on that so go ahead before they read it into the record

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6737:42

okay

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role37:44

For the record on A-19 and A-21, there are two vendors having to do with Tahigas that were donors of my campaign more than $250. So out of abundance of caution I'm going to go ahead and abstain and leave the room for these two items. I previously had another item Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the board. All right, thank you. And if for some reason that my vote was needed to further this I would make sure I did what was proper to actually have the item moved or delayed so that I could participate it's always my priority to vote on things and not to have to recuse myself but we've got some new rules in place and unfortunately it hits me on this one so um thank you okay all

not transcribed≈27s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6738:50

right Supervisor Nelson's left of the building so can I, can we read in 19 and 21 please?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role38:57

Chair Lavanino and members of the board administrative item number 19 is from the Public Works Department. It is to consider recommendations regarding an agreement for services of independent contractor with Diani Building Corporation and this is in the third district and there is a fourthest vote required on this item. Additionally administrative item number 21 is sponsored by the Public Works Department It is to consider recommendations regarding an agreement with Pacific Petroleum California Inc. for hauling and storing Resource Center waste liquids. This is in the third district, and there is also a fourth this vote required on this item.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed39:30

Okay. Move A-19 and A-21? I'll

CommentSherry FosterProposed · by introduction39:36

second.

Roll-call vote Moved by Joan Hartmann · Seconded by Laura Capps
Show transcript
Okay moved by Supervisor Hartman seconded by Supervisor Capps all those in favor of 19 and 21? Aye.

Any

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6739:44

opposed?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role39:49

Okay. And Chair Lavagnino, members of the board, the way our system is set up if we can also get that second motion on A21?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed40:06

Move A21. And I second.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6740:09

All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously with one recusal. Okay I think that got us through our administrative agenda. It takes us to general public comment and now it's time for members of the public to speak on items that are not on today's agenda. Madam Clerk, are there any requests to speak on general public comment?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role40:37

Chair Lavinino, members of the board yes we have 12 requests to speak in general public comment today

0:40 – 0:5010 turns

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6740:42

okay

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role40:44

and we will begin here in Santa Barbara with Chuck Williams to be followed by Sherry Foster

PresenterChuck Williamsmyself today And I wasn't going to speak on anything on this but I come across tProposedself-stated40:53

Good morning once again. Chuck Williams representing New California State. I like to think this board wants free and fair elections, unfortunately they are not. There is now proof our elections have been manipulated for the last 30 to 40 years. You've already heard some of that proof. New California State has access to other groups in 52 different counties working throughout California on this corrupt 2020 election system.

Can this board please tell us how and why this voting system was approved signed off and why it is not corrupt? You can continue to be part of the problem or you can be the solution. It is really up to you guys I do want to see anyone I do. I do not want to see anyone on this board go to jail over this election because clearly you have not been properly trained on the Dominion voting system or voting laws February 27th, 2024 paraphrasing Shelby Bunch stated in an open board meeting with Riverside County Supervisors. The Dominion voting machine operating manual setup instruction says voting machines cannot be set up without first being connected to the Internet.

Our short three-minute public comment periods are not enough time for these important issues. This board is protected from liability to a certain point in time, but when we try to explain these serious election crimes to you, you blow them off because you don't want to know about the system. You lose that liability protection making you all open to be sued by anyone.

I've sat here a few times, but last week I saw Supervisor Hartman sitting there with her head down and eyes shut almost snoring. We are trying to help you with this terrible situation. Serious crimes have been and are being committed. You cannot certify another election without forensic audit. Corrupt voting system 2020 algorithms also show Gavin Newsom lost the recall election, Salud Carbajal lost the election to Andy Caldwell. Restrained with time limits to speak we cannot tell you the devastating problems. We are requesting a special public session with this board and Sheriff Brown The known facts today do not justify your certification of the 2020 election. We call on you to correct this mistake that is devastating America, decertify this fraudulent 2020 election, the election that is destroying this great country.

Thank you. Thank you next.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role43:36

We will now go to Sherry Foster to be followed by Marcia Wertz.

CommentSherry FosterProposed43:42

Yes, Chair Lavinino and the Board I did request six minutes to speak today. I don't know if I have that

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6743:50

time. Ma'am we were going to go down to two minutes because of how many speakers we had but we'll give you the full three minutes.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role43:55

Sorry my apologies Chair Lavinino members of the board I did not notify our chair in advance that was an ADA request so we will be providing six minutes today thank you

CommentSherry FosterProposed44:04

okay thank you I'm going to be starting with a reading from Romans 4 from the NIV Bible, verses 21 through 31. Righteousness through faith but now righteousness from God apart from law has been made known to which the law and the prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement. Through faith in his blood he did this to demonstrate his justice because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished. He did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so has to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.

Where then is boasting? It is excluded on what principle? On that of observing the law? No but on that of faith for we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law. Is God the god of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too. Since there is only one God who will justify the circumcised by faith and by uncircumcised through that same faith do we then nullify the law by this faith? Not at all rather we uphold the law.

And now I need to make an announcement yesterday the Supreme Court This is from the Gateway Pundit article. The Supreme Court ruled 9-0 to put Trump back on the Colorado ballot, a unanimous decision and it states the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday unanimously ruled Trump can stay on the Colorado primary 2024 ballot The Supreme Court said the states lack the power to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution against presidential candidates. For this reason given, responsibility for enforcing section against federal office holders and candidates rests with Congress and not the states. The judgment of the Colorado Supreme Court therefore cannot stand, the high court ruling said.

And now I'm going to go to our my sample ballot. Okay, I read I have always been registered as an American independent so mine is green but you can see here voting for the U.S. president depends on the political party preference you are registered with. I'm registered with qualified political party if you are registered with one of the following Political parties in California, you may only vote for that party presidential candidates. Which means because I switched to Republicans so I could vote for President Trump, I received an AI ballot and then I received this ballot once I changed to Republican because he was not listed on the American Independent ballot. This is the problem with Having the American Independent Party, the Libertarian Party, the Democratic Party, Peace and Freedom Party, Green Party, Republican Party.

So it's like it segregates All these political affiliations to where it should all be on one, it should all be on one balance. And I'm saying that basically, it should only be we the people who should be allowed to vote no matter what our party preferences because it is discrimination and when I took my ethics course last year A racial discrimination is defined as an unfavorable treatment of people because of their race, prejudice and discrimination can be directed at traits other than race including sexual orientation age gender ethnicity religion and national origin. Discrimination based on any of these can be a violation of law policy. A prevalent, almost invisible kind of racism is institutional or structural racism is an equal treatment that arises from the way organizations institutions antisocial systems operate The people who work within such systems may and may not be racially prejudiced, but the systems themselves cause racial discrimination and inequality.

Respect for persons and justice are two fundamental moral principles. Respect states that each person has equal inherent value regardless of social status, power, prestige, and racial or ethnic identity. We fail to respect people if we inhibit their freedom of choice, speech and action, violate rights, coerce or enslave them, discriminate against them or use them to achieve ends that is not their own.

Justice says that equals must be treated equally and fairly. That is people must be treated the same unless there's morally relevant difference between them and they must get what is due to them. Strong affirmative action illustrates that many conflicts about race, racism, institutional racism and discrimination that arises from it. It is the use of policies and procedures to favor individuals because of their race, gender or ethnic background. It is a kind of preferential treatment. That is your time. Thank you.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6750:15

And then I'm going to close the balance of public comment. So there'll be no more adding on anybody after the original 15 speakers.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role50:23

We will now go to Marcia Wirtz, followed by Leanne Wolover. Marcia?

0:50 – 0:553 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 6Proposed50:32

Good morning, everyone. Marcia Wirtz, Santa Barbara County resident and I'd like to start with happy to just say well good morning to everybody and everyone here today. I'd like to just say Happy Election Day right? So everyone get out there and vote and all of you at home get out there and vote don't forget to submit your votes. So I'm speaking today on behalf of Phillip Gallanders he's Santa Barbara excuse me let me raise this just a little bit Santa Barbara County Vice Chair for the State of New California and I have a few documents here for the Board of Supervisors. Would someone like to take those down please?

And the subject is regarding New California State Declarations. Supervisor, Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors. This cover letter is being made available to you and your colleagues on the board of supervisors to give you a deeper and wider understanding of the vocal presentations made to the board by several members of the Santa Barbara Committee, the state of New California.

The document attached is the complete 12th Declaration of Default issued by the state of New California to declare specific failures of the current California government. This declaration of default is the 12th declaration to be proclaimed, and it follows ten declarations of truth and 190 grievances over recent years, over several years. These documents have all been publicly proclaimed by new California state members in front of the State Capitol in Sacramento, in front of county courthouses, in front of county buildings, and in front city halls throughout the county.

And throughout the state, thus publicly declaring to California State and county officials the grievances and positions. The documents have declared the continuous failure of officials of the state of California and counties of the state of California to uphold their constitutional oaths of office to protect and defend the people of California from invasion and to protect the people of California with a Republican form of government.

Given the many failures of the state of California, it is the desire of the people of the 52 counties which will comprise the state of New California to follow the U.S. Constitution Article 4 Sections 3 and 4 and to join the compact of the United States of America and to become free citizens of a free state as the 51st State of the Union. Sincerely Philip Gallanders, Santa Barbara County Vice Chair, State of New California. Thank you very much have a great day!

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role53:22

We will now go to Leanne Wollover, to be followed by Barbara Ireland. Leanne?

PresenterLeanne WolloverorganizatProposedself-stated53:36

Good morning board. I need to put this up now. Good morning board. My name is Leanne Wollover. I am the chair and a senator of the state in New California for Santa Barbara County Dear Board of Supervisors, I am writing to you on behalf of the organization in New California Santa Barbara County to inform you that many of the people who reside in the county of Santa Barbara would like to see the process for the elections for Santa Barbara County take place in one day consisting of paper ballot elections and to eliminate the use of the electronic voting machines. New California Santa Barbara County has gathered roughly 860 signatures from registered voters who reside in the county of Santa Barbara and want one day elections consisting on paper ballots, elections and to eliminate the use of the electronic voting machines.

In addition, the paper ballots would be counted the same day attached with these letters to each one of you well The letters is the ballots, the original ballots that we're going to be giving you. The residents of Santa Barbara County who have signed the petitions for in-person, one day paper ballot elections and the elimination of electronic voting devices clearly want to see a fair and cost effective election process by going towards one day paper ballot elections with the same day ballot counting. We'll ensure the integrity of the election process and shall provide transparency If this board has any questions I would like, I would be more than happy to meet with any of the supervisors and answer the questions that you may have. Thank you.

0:55 – 1:038 turns

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role55:54

We will now go to Barbara Ireland to be followed by Rosalie Hardoin. Barbara?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed56:07

Good morning Board of Supervisors. I didn't come prepared to say anything this morning, but I do want to say that I support my friends here with the election integrity that's so very important and I strongly believe in paper ballot same day voting. Thank you.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role56:27

We will now go to Rosalie Hardwin to be followed by Michael English.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 8Proposed56:38

Good morning Board of Supervisors. It is the right for each county in the United States to make their own decisions about how they tally votes for their elections. A woman named Linda Rance from Osage County, Missouri traveled to Louisiana after hearing about an effective system that they created for hand counting votes. She in turn has created a handbook on how to go about setting it up. She brought the details to the clerk and Board of Supervisors in Osage County who agreed to replace the voting machines and tabulators with the hand count system on April 4th, 2023 in Osage County Missouri.

The residents were introduced to the new hand count system in their statewide election. Instead of watching their ballots being inserted into a machine that has been proven to be hackable and that a large percentage of the population of voters distrust, They instead dropped their ballots into a secure ballot box at each precinct polling place. They trusted the teams of both Democrats and Republicans who volunteered to count their ballots at their neighborhood precincts in the open, at the same facility where they voted.

After doing a little research, Linda Rance found out there was another county in Missouri called Worth County that has been utilizing a hand-count system there for the past 10 years. Missouri isn't the only state taking action to get rid of voting machines in their state. In addition, Cleaborn County in Arkansas also made the decision to return to the old-fashioned way of counting ballots after it was determined that voters no longer trust the voting machines which have been proven in court to be able to change votes These voting computers and tabulators are in fact connected to the internet as well as the electronic poll iPads, which are used to check-in voters at the polling places.

All of them can be manipulated fraudulently without visual detection. This is why we must cancel our county's contract with dominion election machines, tabulators and electronic polling books. This is essentially why we need to go back to one day Only hand count precinct voting with voter and citizenship ID required, as well as the final results proclaimed the night of the election. We need to do away with massive mail-in ballot scheme that was forced upon us during COVID, as well as eliminating the unsupervised drop boxes. Colonel Conrad Reynolds from Arkansas stated, I quote, the machines do not read the names on the ballots. Instead they scan barcodes which humans cannot read. They also utilize proprietary software that we are not allowed to examine.

This all means voters cannot verify that their vote is being counted properly as mandated by state law end quote. On January 9th 2020 top executives from Dominion Voting Systems amongst others testified before Congress. The question asked of them was if voting machines were 100%

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.6759:46

So we're going to follow the rules here. OK you have three minutes. Thank you.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role59:53

We will now go to Michael English should be followed by Amy Blair. Michael.

PresenterMichael EnglishSanta Barbara Voting Integrity ProjectProposedself-stated1:00:03

Hello, I'm Michael English with the Santa Barbara Voting Integrity Project. Today I'd like to draw your attention to the ineffectiveness of our voter registration system. The U.S. Constitution requires that only citizens have the right to vote. The Santa Barbara County Elections Office has told me that they rely on the Secretary of State to verify citizenship.

Yet according to the California Secretary of State's website, the voter registration card you signed under penalty or perjury declaring that you are a citizen is the only citizenship proof required for voting. If no one is verifying citizenship we do not have a representative government. In 2016 California certified VoteCal, a multi-million dollar statewide online database to track voters as they move between counties.

Though incomplete and unreliable, it has evolved an additional capability creating online voter registrations. The DMV and a couple of California cities use VoteCal in this way to automatically register people. And if you're not careful, this will happen every time you make records change. Such registrations are fed directly into each county's voter registration database.

There are also seven nongovernmental agencies that also use VoteCal, left-leaning nonprofit organizations that are effectively super PACs like NextGen America, Rock the Vote and TurboVote There's also corporate participants like left-leaning Trilogy Interactive LLC and Conic Incorporated, which was fined $5 million in January of this year for leaking L.A. County election office information directly to their counterparts in the Communist Chinese Party.

Most of these organizations are based out of state and all of them have direct access to our state's voter registration system. Once a voter is registered, it is very difficult to get them removed taking at least eight years to remove a voter whose mailings have been returned undeliverable. I've personally canvassed dozens of homes in the county and been surprised at how many active voters no longer live at their registered address or have passed away.

Our vote returns show massive signs of manipulation since we started sending out mail-in ballots universally. I shared with you previously how fraudulent mail-in ballots can easily and legally be authorized, and now you can see how cheaters can create a vast pool of voter registrations to use for fraudulent voting. Without a voter registration database like the one the board authorizes funds for, the cheaters would have no fuel for that kind of manipulation.

I urge you to defund the use of voter registration databases and steer our elections towards requiring both residency and voter eligibility verification in person with transparent and auditable vote counting at full public view at the polling places. Thank

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:03:06

you. We will now go to Amy Blair to be followed by Lisa Sloan. Amy?

1:03 – 1:084 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 9Proposed1:03:24

Good morning Chair Lavignino and honorable board members. If President Abraham Lincoln said in his Gettysburg Address that this country's government is of the people, by the people, for the people then that means you all have been elected by we the people to represent us and we demand better representation. So here we all are, will you represent us? Will you listen to our concerns with election integrity? Will you take our suggestions seriously because as you will be hearing today we have plenty of suggestions that we would love for you to consider. We see the concerns of the people being embraced in other places like Shasta, Georgia, Arizona to name a few can you please help secure Our concerns here in the incredible Santa Barbara as well.

We are required to show ID for any number of things, purchasing tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, visits to the doctor, hotel rentals, house rentals, car rentals, fishing and hunting licenses, purchasing firearms. I even need an ID when I just drive a car. If all these common activities in life require me to show ID Surely, it cannot be considered disenfranchising anyone to require ID when we vote. To say otherwise flies in the face of all of these other things I listed. One might say that those things are not constitutional rights like voting but that is not correct. The Constitution declares that we have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness And all those things fall in that category. When the vote results show such significant signs of potential manipulation, it is all the more critical to ensure that the right to express our voices through elections are secured properly.

Mail-in ballots have introduced such a distance between the voter and the counting of the vote that the chain of custody is impossible to maintain. It is time for us to return to an in-person voting and to verify that the voter is who they say they are by showing ID, just as we have to do in any number of the other important matters that I listed. I urge you to defund the use of voter registration databases which are used in place of requiring ID and steer our elections toward requiring both residency and voter eligibility verification in person with transparent and auditable vote counting in full public view at the public polling places.

Thank you.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:05:37

We will now go to Lisa Sloan, to be followed by Grace Wallace. Lisa?

CommentLisa SloanProposedself-stated1:05:47

Good morning Chair Labagnino and honorable board members. I'm Lisa Sloan a 38 year resident of Santa Barbara County. Like apples of gold in settings of silver is the word spoken in right circumstances from Proverbs 25 verse 11 The circumstances we currently face are the positioning of China's hackers on American infrastructure. FBI Director Christopher Wray recently warned Congress about a range of threats against the United States, including heightened terrorist risk after the October 7th attack on Israel.

Long before this warning during the 2020 national election at 11 p.m on November 3rd, I remember seeing votes in Pennsylvania subtracted from one candidate and added to the other live on CNN. A clip of this event was recorded and can be seen in Professor David Clement's documentary Let My People Go. In November 2022 when I went to observe ballot processing, a Santa Barbara County elections official responded to my question about system vulnerability that no the Dominion machines are not connected to the Internet. However as I mentioned during public comment on February 13th The current contract with Dominion requires in Appendix D that the vendor provide a minimum of $2 million in cybersecurity liability insurance. Why would this be required if the system is not vulnerable to hacking?

California's Shasta County Board of Supervisors, as well as over 200 counties nationwide have tossed out the machines in favor of single day hand counting paper ballots with photo ID required in a grassroots movement to restore voter confidence. Would Chair Lavagnino consider the changing circumstances and put an item on the agenda? to evaluate the benefits of hand counting paper ballots for our next election.

An added benefit would be the revenue savings because estimated manual counting costs are less than $2 per ballot compared to estimates of $8 each for Dominion. Indeed, to celebrate the revenue saved we could display a centerpiece here on the dais with the proverbial apples of gold in settings of silver. Thank you so much

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:08:33

We will now go to Grace Wallace to be followed by Margo Hamill. Grace?

1:08 – 1:135 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed1:08:43

Let's see if I can work this fancy desk Good morning board and thank you for this opportunity to speak. I came here today because I want to show you that I have two ballots so again just like the other lady said what's to stop me from voting both ballots?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.671:09:04

The barcode on there is what stopping you if you try to put both of those in they're not going to count both of those only one

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed1:09:11

okay but do we really have that confidence in knowing that also Also, but thank you. I appreciate that also my son came over he brought his ballot and he said I'm not gonna vote mom so now what's this? I have a third ballot the system of smelling these out It's crazy because there are so many ballots that are out there. As I was making phone calls, phone banking for those running for office on a page of 43 numbers, 13 was relocation, disconnected numbers. I talked to people in other states what about all of their ballots? Who are voting those ballots? Those ballots are just loose and out there. Thirteen out of 43.

So I would like to recommend that we go back to one day same voting, same thing with my son. If it was one day voting this, I wouldn't have this ballot in my hand right now because he would've went same day voting, I wouldn't have his ballot. So I would like to recommend that and also I would like to recommend that we have a meeting, that we have a meeting sit down and talk what's wrong with sitting down and talking getting information and looking at the evidence? What's wrong with that? And so, that way people don't feel like their voice doesn't matter because in three minutes they cut off. So I would like to encourage the Board of Supervisors to please hear our cry and to stop this mail-in ballots all this going on and to find time to meet with the American people or Californians or Santa Barbara people and also The public have lost faith in our system.

My three ballots, so why? But he said there's a barcode. But what about the 13 that was sent that's out somewhere with wrong numbers and people that's in another state that's left California? So I would like to recommend one day voting and that we have a meeting where we could sit down and talk and present the evidence to you. Thank you.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:11:23

We will now go to Margo Hamill to be followed by Erin Christian who is our final speaker. Margot.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 11Proposed1:11:28

Margaret, thank you. Hi board I'm also with the same day hand count vote people it's pretty much it's a confidence in our election system it's critical for the functioning of our society when COVID appeared people were afraid and willing to trust our government to do the right thing while the use of mail-in ballots may have been necessary to alleviate those fears until a sense of safety could be restored That condition no longer exists.

At this point, the way that COVID was handled in general has created a large sense of distrust among many and the continued use of universal mail-in ballots perpetuates and grows that sense of distrust. We've been disconnected from each other and it's important for our local government, which was a significant participant in creating the disconnection to also be part of reconnecting our community. There was a time when we all came together on election day with many volunteers to help with the administrative aspects of performing an election The elderly were always especially helpful with those administrative aspects. This served an important social backbone, which needs to be strengthened once again.

I urge you to do what you can to build back our community by defunding the use of mail-in ballots and the centralizing tallying machines that keep us disconnected from each other and suspicious of the outcomes. Steer our elections towards requiring both residency and voter eligibility verification in person with transparent and audible vote counting in full public view at the polling places.

Do I still have time? Yesterday, sorry February 12th the Georgia State House voted 167 to 1 to pass a bill requiring all ballots have official watermarks on them to prevent counterfeiting. This simple step would eliminate a big method of the cheating that happened in Fulton County where multiple election workers swore they saw Fulton County count thousands upon thousands of fictitious Biden ballots in 2020. That lawsuit is still ongoing in court.

Thank you.

1:13 – 1:176 turns

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.671:13:43

Thank you.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:13:45

And we will now go to our final speaker on Zoom, Eric Christian. Eric?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed1:13:53

Hello can you hear me?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:13:55

Yes we can please proceed.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed1:13:57

Thank You Eric Christian Executive Director of the Coalition for Fair Employment and Construction I just wanted to take a few moments to go back over a couple of resolutions the board has approved in last number of months Both pertaining to project labor agreements, which is something the board has approved recently on construction projects funded by taxpayers. We've warned you what this is going to mean to increasing costs and reducing your bidders. On the 7th of November, we adopted a resolution honoring R.W. Scott Construction, Vince Lopez Jr., and Sons General Engineering For jobs well done with regards to, I quote, local contractors R.W. Scott Construction Company and Vince Lopez & Sons General Engineering, all respected family-owned businesses based in the Santa Maria Valley responded to the county's emergency request for assistance when larger contractors did not, postponing previously scheduled work at great inconvenience to undertake the monumental task of clearing over 1 million cubic yards of accumulated sediment and debris and reshaping over four miles of riverbed before the November 1st 2023 deadline.

Those are two companies that will not be able to bid under the county's project labor agreement because of the implicit and explicit discriminatory provisions of that PLA. Last month, the board chose to recognize the Strauss Wind Project whereas the Strauss Wind Project was proud to employ skilled union labor and contractor sports construction and then it went on.

I find this ironic because another way the project labor agreements are implemented is through the abuse of the California Environmental Quality Act. We call it green mail instead of blackmail, CEQA abuse in which South San Francisco Bay law firm in this case, California Unions for Reliable Energy appealed and appealed over and over again this project moving forward until the owner quote unquote agreed to a project labor agreement Then Supervisors Williams and Hartman saluted these workers for getting work that they only were given because the bidding process to have this project go forward had CEQA abuse employed against it, and thereby harming not only the meaning of CEQA but the owner's ability to build this project in a timely manner. For two years they appealed this project, and only when they were extorted into signing a PLA Did a PLA get put into place?

And yet, a resolution was put forward awarding the fact that this had gone to union workers. Union workers get work all the time as do non-union workers under PLAs the non-union workers are being discriminated against and PLAs should not be especially when CEQA extortion is put into play should not be rewarded with resolutions that seem to single out only certain workers for I just want to highlight how these are both intertwined in the issue of project labor agreements and the irony of those resolutions. Thank you.

not transcribed≈18s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.671:17:16

10-minute recess and come back for departmental item number one. All right we are, we're back from our break and we will take Madam Clerk can you please read departmental item number one into the record?

1:17 – 1:2511 turns

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:17:38

Chair Lavinino and members of the board, departmental item number one is from the planning and development department. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the Erickson appeal of the County Planning Commission approval of Verizon Wireless at Camino Mallorca case numbers 23 APL 40 22 DBP 2322 CDP 146 and 19 BAR I do have two documents that we received after our noon deadline on Friday, March 1st.

To be voted into the record and accepted. The first is a public comment letter from Sarah Erickson received Friday March 1st at 1 30 p.m And the second is an additional public comment letter received from Jean Turner on behalf of Hildegard Loggerquist, and that was received Saturday March 2nd at 9 49 p. m And again if we can get those two items voted into the record

not transcribed≈27s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.671:18:53

I get a motion to accept those items

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:18:56

So moved.

Roll-call vote Moved by Joan Hartmann · Seconded by Bob Nelson
Show transcript
Second. Moved by Supervisor Hartman, seconded by Supervisor Nelson. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Alright we will bring those into the record and since this is a quasi-judicial hearing we will call also for ex parte communications does anybody have anything that we need to report? I have no ex parte communication.
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed1:19:21

Neither do I.

CommentSherry FosterProposed · by introduction1:19:23

Oh yes, I do. My staff and I did a site visit with the appellant and her father on February 28th. My staff met with representatives of Verizon also on February 28th and I discussed with my planning commissioner and the planning and development staff.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed1:19:37

Thank you. Supervisor Williams? I met via Zoom phone with the applicant or with the appellant last week I have not met with the applicant though my staff have asked questions.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.671:19:53

Okay and I have nothing to report so we will be following a time certain presentation list here we'll start with the staff presentation you have 10 minutes

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:20:09

Mr. Chair members of the board today I have Willow Brown who is the planner on the case that's been appealed We have Joe Dargle, a supervising planner and Travis Seward's deputy director. With that I'm going to turn it over to Ms. Brown to make her presentation.

CommentWillow BrownProposedself-stated1:20:29

Good morning Mr. Chair members of the board my name is Willow Brown. I will be presenting the Erickson Appeal. Located at 6897 Trigo Road where the appellant resides outlined in orange and the existing pole in the public right-of-way that the facility is proposed to be located on in red These are photo simulations of the proposed facility. The equipment is supposed to be located on an existing 44 foot wood utility pole in a public right-of-way and consists of an antenna, two radio units, and a Verizon fiber line.

The attachments would not increase the height of the pole. I will now summarize the project's history. In 2020, the project was first reviewed by the South Board of Architectural Review, and the original application for the current location at 6897 Chigo Road was admitted. Between January and March 2021, the project was reviewed by the PC which ultimately directed the applicant to construct a significantly less expensive and more comprehensive operational utility pole Verizon conducted a robust alternative site analysis consisting of 14 alternative sites and ultimately revised the project proposal to go back to the original location. In June 2023, staff approved the director level development plan and the SBAR denied a design review application.

Both actions were appealed to the PC. In December 2023, the project was heard by the PC and they took action to approve the project. This action was then appealed to the Board of Supervisors. I will now go through the appeal issues. In the first appeal issue, the appellant asserts that there has been an abuse of discretion. They claim that there are inconsistencies in who Verizon says the facility will serve and what the propagation maps show. In response, staff finds that the hearing before the board is denoted as a breach of the residential areas of West Isla Vista.

In the second appeal issue, the appellant claims staff encouraged the applicant to apply at the current location despite prior rejection by the PC. They also state that the location is not least intrusive. Finally they claim Verizon was allowed to postpone a hearing date when they were not given the same opportunity. In response, staff finds that the project was not denied by the PC but was withdrawn to review other locations as directed. Additionally, the applicant did robust alternative site analysis and determined that this is the best location for the facility. There's not finding for the location to be the least intrusive however, the PC found project consistent with all required findings for project approval. With regard to the appellant's request for a later hearing date, D&D staff followed standard practice for scheduling the hearing and is on the path to recreational areas.

In response, staff finds that the facility is in conformance with the scale and character of the community because it is small in size, will be mounted on an existing pole, and is consistent with other facilities throughout the community. There's no requirement prohibiting facilities adjacent to recreational areas, and it will not interfere with the use of any recreational area or access to the coast.

In the fourth appeal issue, the appellant claims the project is inconsistent with Article 2 because it is substantially visible and is in close proximity to two other substantially visible facilities. In response, staff finds that the facility is not substantially visible. The facility is considered to be substantially visible if it stands out as a conspicuous feature of the landscape or breaks the skyline when viewed with the naked eye.

The appellant claims the project is inconsistent with an ordinance requirement prohibiting antennas from protruding more than two feet horizontally, and the CEQA exemption does not apply because CEQAs only allows exemptions for limited numbers of new small facilities. And this is now the third small facility in less than 250 feet. In response, staff finds that there's no requirement prohibiting antennas from protruding more than two feet horizontally unless it is facade mounted which this antenna is not. Additionally the CEQA exemption applies because each application for telecommunication facility is analyzed for CEQAs impacts and similar development in the vicinity has developed over time in conformance with applicable ordinance policy and FCC regulations will not result in a cumulatively significant impact under CEQA.

The director shall establish and maintain a list of information that must accompany every application for telecommunication facilities, including lists of other nearby facilities. In response, staff finds that there is no requirement to demonstrate that the area would not otherwise be served by the carrier. Additionally, the applicant submitted all the information required for telecommunications applications with the initial submittal, and the information demonstrates compliance with all applicable Article 2 requirements.

In summary, the project is consistent with all applicable Article 2 regulations for telecommunication facilities and complies with all FCC regulations. The facility will be compatible with the surrounding area and will not impact views of the coast or access to the coastal recreational areas. The facility will located on an existing pole and will be painted brown to match Staff 23 APL 40 make the required findings for approval of the project. Determine the project is exempt from CEQA and approve the project which consists of approval of the development plan and coastal development permit, preliminary and final design review approval subject to conditions included as attachment 2 of the board letter. Staff is available to answer any questions.

Thank you.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.671:25:01

Great thank you very much. Any questions for staff? Supervisor Nielsen?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:25:04

Yes thank you Chair Labadino. I'm just kind of curious you know we're also when the goals sometimes in governments is to underground some of these poles. So I know that there's like rule 28 monies that come from the utilities that go towards that. How does that work with a pole like this that now is going to have dual use so if in the future if there are funds available to go ahead and do undergrounding which is something that I'm a big fan of what would happen to the use on this? Would that prohibit a future underground project

1:25 – 1:4121 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:25:40

Supervisor Nelson through the chair. It's a good question. Obviously, the cellular facilities need to be mounted in the air to be able to work and we have a lot of them across the county. So I presume additional poles would have to be erected if they were going underground utilities to be able to mount those facilities. But I have not run into that before. So

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:26:07

there's not a lot of funds to do it so that hasn't happened too often, but I think it is kind of a goal that we try to get those underground. I mean they're big. It's kind of an antiquated way of doing it and I think it's you know we're seeing that in other parts of the state that were undergrounding utilities more and more and that's so I'm just curious about Um, permanency that comes with this project because now it's has an antenna on air that would prohibit future undergrounding opportunities. And so that's why I was the question came from.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.671:26:42

Any other questions? Supervisor Caps?

CommentSherry FosterProposed · by introduction1:26:44

Perhaps to illustrate the answer to that could you go back to the photo of the surrounding area just how populated it is with overground. I appreciate, I definitely appreciate the comment especially in Isla Vista. It is a lot of wires, a lot of low wires and I don't have a technical term for that. I know shoes are often involved but it is quite, it is conspicuous if you use the word within the presentation of the amount of wires that are in Isla Vista again I don' think that's an upper debate at this moment but I appreciate the comment

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed1:27:22

I had some questions about why some of the alternative sites were deemed equivalent of intrusive. You know, I guess the first one I thought of was the ones on Fortuna but that may have something to do with the Recreation and Park District allowing that as a site What about the one that was going to be the proposed site across the street from this one that was chosen. Is that deemed equivalent in intrusiveness only because it is not an existing poll?

Tell me about that.

CommentWillow BrownProposedself-stated1:28:07

Mr. Chair, Supervisor Williams, the applicant We'll discuss alternative locations, but the pole across the street is within the eucalyptus trees. You can see them on the photo simulations on the right and to get past some of the eucalyptus trees are up to 70 feet in height so the alternative site analysis said a pole would have to be around 75 feet tall for the service to get past the eucalyptus trees And also an alternative site analysis for the poles along Fortuna Road. They are 500 feet north of their proposed facility and so they replaced there. Good

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:28:41

question, so this is who owns the current pole? And it's in a I guess a right-of-way, a public right away is that where it's at? So does Verizon end up paying a fee to County Public Works here how does that exactly work and what are the numbers there?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed1:29:07

So Mr. Chair, Supervisor Nielsen I believe it's an SCE poll we can have the applicant confirm and what the actual fees are to the county for right-of-way space.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.671:29:17

Great thank you. All right we're now ready for our appellant Sarah Erickson for 10 minutes please.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:29:29

And chair Lavagnino members of the board just for the record Sarah is presenting via zoom

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed1:29:35

okay Hi, everyone is at the last meeting. The PowerPoint was presented by staff is that going to happen at this meeting?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:29:52

Yes, Sarah we will we are pulling that up as we speak Thank you

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed1:29:55

okay fantastic thank you very much I'll just say next slide.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.671:30:02

Okay we'll hold your time until we get our presentation your presentation up here

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed1:30:06

okay fantastic thank you so much

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.671:30:10

Okay, we're

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed1:30:11

on the

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.671:30:12

1st slide. Yeah. All

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed1:30:13

right. Hello Supervisors my name is Sarah Erickson and I'm representing my father Ron Erickson who's at Dialysis. We represent over 20 long-term community members on the west end of Isla Vista who oppose a wireless facility being placed directly adjacent to our residential properties on very small lots. In fact, most of my family members are Verizon customers as are many of our neighbors. And we have a liable cell phone reception and data service currently with Verizon. This facility everyone would support and not oppose this facility being placed on any of those three poles. I know there are two residents who have said that they don't want to know Fortuna but everyone else will stand down because those three locations are straight away from the residence which is then the community's United position.

Next slide please. My family moved to the Trigo House in Isla Vista in 1986. I was raised in that house. The west end of Ivy is mostly single-family homes owned by the residents. My father Ron still lives there since he's retired and has chronic health conditions and compromised immune system. He spends the majority of his time at home, I visit him several times a week. We have known a plethora of our other long-term residents on the west end of Ivy for decades.

The City of Santa Barbara has a telecom ordinance which gives the Planning Department the power to turn down applications and find better aesthetic locations. Many cities have minimum setbacks from residential windows for these facilities. Santa Barbara categorizes a location within 500 feet as the most discouraged location for these facilities, and that it shall not be placed within 20 feet of a residential dwelling window. This location would not be approved if it was in the City of Santa Barbara. Besides aesthetics, fire hazards and decreased property values are concerns as well. The picture here is of a eucalyptus branch that fell on a utility line and pool on Camino Mallorca which is common as is UCSB students throwing articles of clothing or shoes on utility lines.

Now what are the fire risks if the eucalyptus branch or site only stands? And wrote that I am incorrect This is just semantics in an effort to complete the issue because while technically Verizon withdrew their original application at this location, the reason was because the plan commissioners asked them to find another location because they were not in approval of the facility being placed here. So essentially this location was denied and rejected The Chair of the Planning Commission, John Park invested a lot of time walking with our community to look at better sites and try to understand concerns on both sides. At the January 2021 hearing, John Park set a public record that he did not like this site and could not vote in favor or support it.

His opposition to this location hasn't wavered since then. Next slide please. There are six alternative locations in Verizon's report that most everyone in the community will support. For several of the alternate locations, Verizon uses this term with very little substantive justification. The Verizon reports do not prove that the current proposed location is the only location. A planner has stated on public record that Verizon exhausted all efforts to find alternate locations and this is the only location. This is not accurate. Last year, our community was shocked to learn that the planners recommended Verizon submit yet another application here at the exact same place that everyone had already opposed or would not support. John Parkin, in his last hearing a few months ago said this is the worst location for this facility and there were other locations that will be better.

He also stated his disappointment with the fact that Verizon has made so much time on this one it appears the planners and Verizon are endeavoring to use legal loopholes to ram it through despite the overwhelming opposition. This is one of our grievances in this appeal. It's not a grievance regarding a Planning Commission hearing, it is a grievance about the entire process that has got us to this point including the planning staff responses and their agenda letter to the supervisors for today's meeting. Our request does not seem unreasonable please put it on a poll on Fortuna Road next slide please We think the current location is most intrusive. On the left side of this picture is my father Ron's bedroom, where he spends the majority of his time resting.

Ron has stage 4 cancer and has been on dialysis for over 10 years. Note that all pictures Verizon presents on this location fail to include how close I am to his bedroom. If the facility were to be placed at the other side of Ron's house in the bathroom downstairs, the facility would actually be further away from Ron's bedroom than this pole. If approved it would be as if the cell facility were inside our home that is why we want a location at least a street width away. If we were to sell this property it is reasonable to assume that the property value will be discounted because who wants one of these facilities that close to a bedroom? Next slide please This is an existing wireless facility, just a short walk up from the location.

It is substantially visible. As Bob Nelson and Laura Kapp referenced we would love undergrounding because I use already littered with telephone poles and wires and adding these small cell facilities just exasperates the aesthetic. These next several slides list some of the coastal zoning ordinances that we do not think are being met. Public viewing areas include public roads, trails and recreational areas. And these facilities should be substantially visible from these types of areas.

John Park at the early hearings in 2021 talked about the views to the ocean that you can see if you stand anywhere on Camino New Yorka. If you turn around there are sweeping views of the mountains and agree it is quite a lovely view worth preserving. The picture in the planner's presentation appears to not being scale and looks a little stretched and skewed. It doesn't fully capture what it feels like when you're standing on the street headed to the ocean. Next slide please.

I'll go through these, I just want to. Protected marine area in our region next slide please. This is a list of all the parks and open spaces within it just a few blocks we've got 6 different parks and open spaces that's 28 acres of open space preserved. Next slide please. Just 2 blocks away you see the staircase on the beach with one of the best sunsets and surf spots and next slide please.

This is an aerial that shows the coal oil plant reserve to the left and the pathways to get up there. We don't think having three of these cell facilities in a short walk distance on one of the main local roads to access these picturesque recreational areas are in skill and character.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.671:36:03

Yeah, you'll have five minutes during rebuttal so Tricia Knight from the applicant will have ten minutes please.

PresenterTricia KnightVerizon Wireless this morning I will give a brief presentationProposedself-stated1:36:11

Good morning Mr. Chair, members of the board my name is Tricia Knight representing Verizon Wireless this morning I will give a brief presentation. I hear a lot of discussion about the alternatives that were presented with the project you have a couple copies of both original alternative analysis as well as a supplemental analysis that includes those polls on Fortuna Road that have been mentioned. I'm going to go through and start my presentation I'm prepared to go through each one of those in detail if you so desire if one comes up and we want to go into more detail On those particular polls. I also just want to make note, I've got Mr David Wachowski attending remotely as well as a radio frequency engineer should any questions come up about the report or coverage.

So go ahead and start my presentation. New applications Subsequently being denied by SBAR twice, planning commission once and then arrived back at this in that time frame it's noteworthy that the ordinance for telecommunications facility was revised. And so when we went to go resubmit we had new ordinance requirements that we had to meet one of them being existing structures preferred over new structures. So the previous application that we had pursued after all those random meetings was a new pole streets with away from residential vacant lot unfortunately SBAR denied that application as well.

to the application that's before you today, which was approved in December and subsequently appealed. Next slide please. Thank you. Just giving a brief summary of the design of the pole. And so there's an agreement that if there is a pole that's available, that meets the safety requirements, that's structurally sound enough to do so then we can locate on that pole. And so it's just a utility agreement amongst utility to utility. I hope that answers your question. This particular project is small in scale. The antenna is two feet tall by 14 six inches in diameter And it's located at a height of 30 feet, eight inches. The radius is concealed in that small shroud at a height of 17 feet six inches and measures 70 inches tall by 20 inches wide and 20 inches deep.

There's very limited space in the right-of-way on the sidewalks in Isla Vista which is the reason for the pole mounted equipment. Next slide please. This gives a little bit more you have a copy of the site plans within your packet if you have. That is yellow illustrates the gap in coverage when you're talking about small cells in the areas that they're serving If you look to the east, you'll see the area in green.

That is overwhelmed quite often meaning that there's lanes on the highway to get overrun by the dense population in Isla Vista which can be a concern not only when special events or anything are going on but also during emergency situations where that may be an issue. So this poll if we go to the next slide please. If this is approved and constructed it would see that significantly also completes that service gap as well as offloading that capacity from that exhaustive facility in eastern area. Next slide.

So this is also how it relieves that what we call mid-capacity. Approved and constructed, you can see that gap and also the capacity issue is relieved. Next slide please. So as a part of our alternative site analysis within your packet there's 14 different alternatives. Most recent ones are in the most northern section of this map here 11 12 13 14 9 11 12 which was the Fortuna Road poles that we were asked to consider at the tail end And so I'm going to go to the next slide please.

So they're ruled out for various reasons and so just gonna go through them briefly as a categories you either have lack of whole space. A Southern California Edison has separation requirements that require two feet from in which the ordinance asks that we not only locate on an existing structure first, but ideally no height increases. We've got those safety rules that I just spoke of denial by SBAR not in the right-of-way which is we are utility locating on a public utility. That agreement with the Joint Poll Association needs to be located in the right-of way and then less intrusive is also a standard set by the federal government when it comes to citing these facilities And so less intrusive is if I've got a 75 foot pole in the middle of a residential neighborhood versus a hole at 44 feet in height, you can use your own discretion but you want to conclude that the 44 foot existing pole would be less intrusive.

And if we can go to the last slide. To get a poll to be installed on any of those existing light or utility poles, would they have any concerns? And we had two in opposition and one In support and so more illustrating that in all of these moves that we've made, there is opposition in locations at each one of those. And we feel the location that you're considering today is the least intrusive with my two minutes I'm gonna go ahead and go through the alternative site analysis well if we could do the toggle from the put us out that table beginning of the project that goes through the reasons for each one of the polls. There we go okay We now go to public comment. Do we have any requests from the public to speak on this matter?

not transcribed≈22s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

1:41 – 1:4611 turns

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:41:31

Chair Lavinino and members of the board, yes we have 10 requests to speak on this item. And we are going to begin on Zoom with Jay Grundle to be followed by Maureen Kruzan. And Jay, we have unmuted you on our end. If you can please unmute on your end to provide your comments? All righty, we will return to Jay momentarily. We will now go to Maureen Cruzan to be followed by Bruce Murdoch. Maureen? Oh, we just lost Mauree.

We will now go to Bruce Murdoch, to be followed by Dwayne Bonham. Bruce? Bruce if you can please unmute yourself to provide your

CommentBruce MurdochProposedself-stated1:42:39

comments. I finally got it going. Okay are we ready?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:42:48

Yes, please proceed with your

CommentBruce MurdochProposedself-stated1:42:49

comments. I'm Bruce Murdoch. I am a 52-year resident in the R1 single family area of Alavista. I also came there 1963. I am an electrical engineer having graduated in electrical engineering from UC Berkeley in 1963. I have 35 years of industrial experience designing military electronics including military radio equipment. I now have an electrical engineering consulting business where I design build and deliver electronic products Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm a member of the board of Supervisors. I work for a company called Channel City Development Company also known as CCDC. I don't support the approval of case number 23ABC00040 i.e. denied by Verizon.

In order to achieve higher data rates for 5G without increasing the assigned bandwidth Maximum RF energy radiated at 120 watts, that's plus 20.8 dBm. That's logarithmic. Every time you go down 10 dB in logs, you go down a factor of ten in power. Other 5G antenna locations located in foliage have caused the foliage to ignite and burn. I mean, 120 watts is a lot of power.

Therefore, locations on utility poles in foliage are rejected. You already know that. The proposed location for this transmitting and receiving antenna is 26 feet. The pole is 26 feet away from the occupied second story bedroom. Yeah, the antenna's about 24 feet away from that bedroom. A previously proposed node location adjacent to a buildable vacant lot at the corner of Salvador Atari and Camino Lindo which has that property has a water meter was rejected because of its proximity to a home that could be constructed there. It would be about 10 feet away. A lot is owned by Nancy Viverette at 6867 Salvador Tarde.

There are several other locations in R1 where a node could be located on the utility pole in the public right-of-way that are not immediately adjacent to occupied homes, and you've already heard about that. The big thing, the elephant in the room Because Verizon wants to provide 5G cell service to UCSB's faculty housing, which is located on university property immediately west of the R1 housing area.

Put the node there. I learned in an email from Lisa that Sarah, I mean what I'm saying that a guy named Daniel Sweeney of UCSB wants to talk to Verizon regarding a location on UCSV land Boy, everybody wins. So in a previous board activity on this subject I've asked, this is several times, so I've asked for radio frequency link analysis. I'm an engineer, I can read that stuff, I can understand it. Particularly the 5G radio frequency power of that would illuminate the second story bedroom at 6897 San Diego Road.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.671:45:59

I am sorry but

CommentBruce MurdochProposedself-stated1:45:59

your time's up. Government received. Okay thank you.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:46:06

We will now go to Dwayne Bonham to be followed by David Witowski. Dwayne?

CommentDwayne BonhamProposed1:46:18

Hello.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:46:19

Hi, Dwaynen we can hear you please proceed. This is

CommentDwayne BonhamProposed1:46:22

Dwayen Bonham RF engineer for Verizon Wireless I just wanted to let everybody know with the Board of Supervisors that I am available for any questions that may arise and I will let things proceed thank you

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:46:36

Thank you, Dwayne. We will now go to David Witkowski to be followed by Jeremy Stroop. David?

1:46 – 1:533 turns

CommentDavid Witkowski I'mProposedself-stated1:46:48

Good morning Chair and Supervisors. My name is David Witkowski I'm an RF engineer that has been retained to speak to this matter By way of my credentials, I wanted to let you know that I am an electrical engineer. UC graduated. I serve on the International Committee for Electromagnetic Safety, the IEEE-ICES which actually sets the standard For RF safety and that standard, which is known as the C-95 has adopted by governments around the world. And it serves as the basis for regulatory standards such as those provided by the FCC also serve on the IEEE committee on man radiation, which is an ad hoc group that works around the ICS and the C 95.

I have reviewed the electromagnetic engineering report, which was submitted for this site. I find no concerns with this. The levels are lower than the public exposure standard. They reach only approximately to the 25% level. It's important to recognize that the 25% level as set by the IEEE C-95 and adopted by the FCC actually provides a 50 dB margin on top of The level at which an effect can be measured on the human body.

People who are in homes nearby will not receive that level because the worst case analysis that comes in with the EME specifically is to the outside of the building, but of course the building itself will attenuate those signals. Responding to Mr. Murdoch's comment about 120 watts being high power and igniting trees, that is not an effect that we see in the real world.

The power levels from this site are within tolerance and I see no cause for concern available to you if you have any further questions. Thank you.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:49:07

We will now go to Jeremy Stroop, to be followed by Chris Moeller. Jeremy? And Jeremy we have unmuted you on our end if you can please unmute on your end to provide your comments. Jeremy Stroop? All righty, we will now go to Chris Moller and then we will return to the Santa Barbara Hearing Room with Jean Loggerquist-Turner. Chris? Chris Moller? All righty, we will now return to the Santa Barbara Hearing Room with Jean Loggerquist Turner to be followed by Chris Gallery. Jean?

CommentJean TurnerProposedself-stated1:50:00

Good morning. I'm Jean Turner and I'm here to represent myself and my mom who has been a resident of Isla Vista since 1961. She still lives in the family home, and I have three reasons why I think this appeal should be approved. I don't think the process has been fair due process has not been followed. And this location at 6897 Trigo Road was previously It is denied, so it violates collateral estoppel doctrine which is essentially double jeopardy.

And I don't think that the planning commission and others have listened to the valid concerns because like the location in faculty housing that Bruce Murdoch recommended is on a light pole standard. It's not near any, not too close to any of the faculty housing. is located in a position where it can serve them better. It would be on a light standard. I've looked at photographs on the internet of 5G facilities that are on light standards, and it seems like it would be nice and high away from the eucalyptus trees which are so problematic and would solve a lot of other issues. The only problem with it is it's not in a public right-of-way but I know that UCSB's main campus has several towers, antennas and stuff located there because there's a high demand for data.

This need for a wireless 5G facility was brought about because of UCSB faculty housing needing more data transmission capability During COVID. So I think locating it on the other side of the tree line would better service the faculty there and would be better for future needs of data transmission. I also looked at the county guidelines, Sarah brought this up but if there were... The city guidelines categorizes I urge the county to develop a set of regulations for placement of 5G facilities. Looking on the Internet, too, it's like the new lawn ornament is a 5G facility and I think that's what is happening with this location, it's way too close to a residence.

And then I just wanted to emphasize that there are concerns safety, there's fire safety, health, aesthetics and property values and the location that Mr. Murdoch identified. Thank you, that is your time.

1:53 – 2:005 turns

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:53:13

We will now go to Chris Gallery to be followed by Nancy Barrette.

CommentChris MoellerProposed1:53:21

Good morning Supervisors, excuse me I'm here as a co-owner of 6897 Twigo Road Sarah is my stepdaughter and my husband and family and numerous members of the community have opposed this location for over four years. The proposed location is visible on the utility pole right next to the house, it would be unsightly and eye-catching to anyone walking up or down Camino Mallorca.

It's the westernmost edge of Isla Vista and it leads to the open space, the beach, the bluff top trail heading out to Coal Oil Point It would be also within close view of our home, as you know. Isla Vista has long been treated as an area where things are tolerated because the perception is that everyone in I-V is a temporary resident and has no real stake in the community.

The west end of I-v which is an R1 neighborhood has many long term owner occupied homes. We've lived here since 1985 but several of our neighbors have been here longer Along Camino Mayorca, which is the street where this utility would be placed, five of the six homes are owner-occupied and have been for decades. On Del Playa, Sabado Tarde and Trigo Road, the streets that connect to Camino Mayorca as well as other nearby streets, there are more long-term residents who have also always valued the natural beauty of Camino Mayorca which leads to the natural open field. It has a maintained trail and it's great surfing spots are out there.

So I ask you not to allow this popular walking and biking area to become spoiled with another Verizon box I don't understand why the County of Santa Barbara would be eager to satisfy Verizon's desire for a convenient, cheap solution for their expansion instead of the community's request to preserve the natural beauty of the area. There are already two similar facilities within a block of that location and we don't want a third on this short gateway to the multi-use recreational area.

Other California jurisdictions have stood up for their residents and created design guidelines for these facilities that prevent them from being located so close to residential space. We deserve nothing less. We don't want to set a precedent that the west end of Isla Vista is the easy go-to place for them, especially within 20 feet or so of a bedroom window.

Thank you. That is your time.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:56:32

We will now go to Nancy Vivrett, who is our final speaker. Nancy?

PresenterNancy VivrettSanta Barbara Botanic Garden for the last 50 yearsProposedself-stated1:56:40

Good morning. Thank you for your time and attention. I really appreciate that. My name is Nancy Vivrett. It's actually Dr. Nancy Vivrett. I've been a plant ecologist with the Santa Barbara Botanic Garden for the last 50 years. In that period of time, I have studied climate conditions and change in vegetation. That's my area of specialty. In that period of time I have been following patterns of rainfall in Santa Barbara.

Over that period of time, and of course the commercial people knew this all along, they called it the mid-winter drought. We actually have a bimodal period of rainfall, have had in the past where it rains for awhile and then it stops for at least four weeks, the temperature goes up And the farmers have to irrigate their field. That's the midwinter drought in one hundred and fifty years of watching this data we have never missed a midwinter drought until this year.

This year we did not have a midwinter drought. That meant all we've only had 15 inches of rain that is nothing for this area but if it doesn't dry out in between then areas like Isla Vista which is a wetland and has been forever. We have clay lenses which don't let the water go through since you saw the property in November on the night of February 8 9 when the windstorm came through One telephone pole went down on Abrego.

One very large, old shallow-rooted eucalyptus went down at the corner of Sueño and Camino Corto blocking access to the western end of Isla Vista. And then a second eucalyptus tree went down on Stork by the Post office across Stork blocking access to the fire department and blocking access to Isla Vista. I wanted to go out and film whether or not those high trees are actually going across and touching the pole as it currently exists on Mallorca which is lined with these shallowly rooted very large And very old eucalyptus.

But as I started out the door, my phone rang. It was Southern California Edison. Move to the interior of your house and shelter in place. Do not attempt to leave your property. My pole was the regular telephone pole at the end of my driveway, was leaning at 10%, ten degrees. And it's in a wetland. That whole block is a high water table when they came to replace the pole when they dug the hole it run it filled with water so they came again with a truckload of rocks and material to secure that pole. Thank you. That is your time. I'm sorry thank you very much. We are in a new normal and it's going to get worse.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.671:59:59

Thank you Okay that opens us up to the rebuttal response period. We'll have the applicant, I'm sorry the appellant has five minutes.

2:00 – 2:1112 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed2:00:12

Hi everyone, thank you. I'd like to speak about the gap in coverage. In the January 2021 Planning Commission meeting John Park on public record mentions talking to Verizon and learning that the primary focus for the facility was to enhance services for UCSB faculty housing. He called it the elephant in the room And because faculty housing didn't want it on their property due to aesthetics, Verizon was looking for a location nearby that would be able to serve them.

Most recently at the last Planning Commission hearing an engineer said that the trees would block reception and UCSB faculty housing wouldn't be served And the propagation maps that supposedly demonstrate a gap in coverage reference mobile cell phone coverage and that there's capacity exhaustion that leads to connectivity issues and call failures. But then, in the last hearing, the engineer agreed with us That the cell reception is fine and that there aren't drop calls.

And so it's, this is part of that grievance of like what is the purpose of this facility for after four years? Like we still are confused and back to one of the points that I made in my appeal Asked that the jurisdiction, the cities and counties recognize that they do have jurisdiction to ask for proof. Further proof. The city of Santa Barbara code authorizes the director in their discretion to select and retain an independent consultant with specialized training experience and expertise in telecommunications And issues in connection with any permit application for telecom facilities. So Santa Barbara gives their decision makers jurisdiction to request further proof those propagation maps and the statement I can write like layman don't really understand it very well, I'm sure the planners also are not experts as are the supervisors and So it makes sense to me that it would be in the best interest to really make sure that it's clear that there actually is a gap and what is the purpose of this facility.

On the polls on Fortuna Road, the overwhelming majority except for two people We're going to stand down, please put a facility on one of those three Fortuna Road poles. The alternative analysis that Verizon put together said because the replacement poles on the Fortuno Road locations are between 41 and 44 feet that they're not less intrusive And it doesn't make sense to me. The replacement pole at this location is going to be 44 feet, so 41 feet, 44 feet that's all the same.

Today was mentioned that wouldn't be sufficient coverage for what their objective is and we're not clear what their objective is. It's just flip-flops. So there hasn't been transparency around that. And I'd like to understand the CEQA that only allows a limited number of new small facilities. Could, could I understand that better? I mean two of these facilities in a short blocks span seems like a limited number. It's starting to become more than a limited number and three in just a short block span is a cluster so that's That's really the bulk of what I'd like to find out more about.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.672:04:25

Okay, are you finished with your time?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed2:04:27

Yes.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.672:04:28

Okay we have back to the applicant for five minutes for rebuttal

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role2:04:32

and Chair Lavagnino members of the board I would just like to note that the applicant did reserve two minutes so I'm adding two minutes to the five minutes

PresenterTricia KnightVerizon Wireless this morning I will give a brief presentationProposedself-stated2:04:42

Thank you very much. With that time I would like to answer a couple of the issues that were brought up during the public comment as well as the appellant's rebuttal and then I'm going to defer to the board to see if you do want me to go over any specific, I can start going through them and see how much time I have so I'll start with that. None of this has been easy or cheap or we haven't gone about this lightly Verizon doesn't go and spend all of this time Looking for something that isn't very needed.

When we're talking about capacity, this is infrastructure to us now. Most people have cell phones versus landlines and so when it comes down to floods fires all of which Santa Barbara has had or any other emergencies on campus that we've seen unfortunately those lanes on that highway get overwhelmed and there's a need for more capacity. It's actually better from a strengthened signal standpoint to have more facilities at a very low frequency than it would be to have a large facility at a higher power level. So that's what these small cells do they're very low power there within the communities closer to the users, your phone does not have to operate as heavily to get that same signal because it's not going as far. And so we have done our due diligence and trying to reach out move to alternate locations meet with planning commissioners coming to where we are now.

And so I feel strongly that what we've presented before you and what staff has gone over shows you the best facility, 14 different alternatives were looked at no matter where we are, we are going to find someone who's not going to be happy but it does strengthen the infrastructure that is so needed when it comes to not only these students going in and out of their classrooms and everybody who mulls around Isla Vista but in a true emergency. We don't know if you've heard most recently about A network's going down where people cannot get a hold of anyone. And so if you have an alternate Verizon facility, a friend can get ahold of somebody, so on and so forth. So it's important to have all of these building blocks.

And with that said I'm just gonna break into the alternatives analysis just a little bit. So if we can, there we go thank you. And so I'm gonna sort of breeze over that. If you want anyone to stop in one particular piece, just let me know. So number one is the existing facility before you today And then we go down to number two on, I think we can talk about it anyway. The next one is an existing facility not far away. Once again small facilities lower power outage so we've got the same type of design and then the lower... locate two carriers.

And so if you go down to the next one number four at the bottom there this is the one that's across the street but it's a guide pole and so FCE does not allow location on guide poles We

move to the next slide, please. This is where you get a better illustration of some of those separation requirements that we're talking about from existing communication power lines on number six has a light there's two feet so we can't separate from the lines and the lights and locate on an existing structure moving down to the next slide please number seven.

Once again we've got a light in some existing communication and cross arms. Number eight is a photo simulation of the standalone pole that we went to as a secondary application just outside of this basketball I'm going to speak to as covering campus facility housing UCSB facility housing. That is not the objective here, as you saw in those coverage maps. It's offloading that capacity of that facility on the east side and then also filling in reported in previous hearings that is now being clarified and shown by those maps.

And I believe oh and then so that concludes that. And the overloading of those poles that would require a taller pole to get those separations number 12 you can see that light and all those existing lines we can't get the separations or we'd need a taller pole. And then the next two slides you'll see both have lights and just communication lines on them. can meet the separations and it meets those needs to strengthen the network. And I'm available for any questions.

not transcribed≈18s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.672:09:09

All right, thank you. If we have any, we'll call you back. Okay. Thank you so much. You're welcome. All right this takes us back to staff if there's anything you heard during the hearing that you'd like to address? I'd like to take care of that now.

CommentWillow BrownProposedself-stated2:09:21

Mr. Chair and Supervisors, I'll just reiterate that the facility meets all Article 2 requirements and FCC regulations and I'm available for any questions.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.672:09:30

Thank you bring it back to the board For comment and deliberation, Supervisor Caps.

CommentSherry FosterProposed · by introduction2:09:35

Thank you I appreciate all of the parties involved this has been four long years of a lot of work and resources. I particularly appreciate Ms. Erickson going to bat for her child at home and her ailing father. I can understand that and see why and also the argument that things sort of get shoved into IV and I understand that perception I'm sympathetic to that argument. I do have a couple of questions for Verizon, you actually addressed a lot of them in my rebuttal the question I had about UCSB this being about faculty housing I remember as a kid when that faculty housing was was built so you address it I believe in that map.

And I just want to add a lay of the land. If you look on Zillow today, there are about four or five places right around this property where rents are $11,000, $14,000 because landlords are cramming in about 16 kids. So I just wondered if you could speak to the population density as opposed to the faculty housing, just how that's implicated with that coverage map?

PresenterTricia KnightVerizon Wireless this morning I will give a brief presentationProposedself-stated2:10:47

With respect to who it's serving more of. Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and defer to Dwayne Bonham who is on. He can speak to that very clearly. Does he need to raise his hand or anything? He's one of the speakers and I don't know. Dwayne are you there?

2:11 – 2:1719 turns

CommentDwayne BonhamProposed2:11:06

Yes, I am here.

PresenterTricia KnightVerizon Wireless this morning I will give a brief presentationProposedself-stated2:11:07

Okay did you hear the question?

CommentDwayne BonhamProposed2:11:10

Yeah, population density maps that I reviewed several years ago when we started this project showed population density in Isla Vista matching population densities that we'd see in San Francisco where housing is stacked vertically. It was some of the highest it was the highest we have on the Central Coast and Outside of San Francisco was the highest I'd seen in any other areas. So you are right that we do see landlords packing a large number of students into the facilities that are up for rent there. I also like to speak to the thing at housing, the tree line along there creates kind of what's called an RF fence.

If I'm gonna put something on the Isla Vista side, that's to cover the Isla Vista side. To get onto the housing on the... I think that would be the west side of the tree line. I will have to have something on the west side of the tree line. One isn't gonna cover the other. So I hope that helps.

CommentSherry FosterProposed · by introduction2:12:29

Thank you, that does help. And the one pole that is next to the tree line, I think you referred to that as a guide post? Can you just reiterate that please where there isn't any existing

PresenterTricia KnightVerizon Wireless this morning I will give a brief presentationProposedself-stated2:12:41

utilities? Yes so it's an existing pole owned by Southern California Edison but it has a guy wire that leads down the line and holds the whole system together and they do not allow locations of facilities such as wireless on guide poles.

CommentSherry FosterProposed · by introduction2:12:56

And a follow-up question on that, the point has been made about there's how many other boxes there are. Can you speak to those are different companies? How that works, how you share the poles I think.

PresenterTricia KnightVerizon Wireless this morning I will give a brief presentationProposedself-stated2:13:08

That is the two that you looked at in that alternative side analysis one of them is AT&T and one of them is T-Mobile so versus co-locating you know like we would normally see when telecom first came out towers on a hillside everyone kind of locating these are usually one pole per carrier just to keep that small footprint

CommentSherry FosterProposed · by introduction2:13:26

Okay, thank you. I believe I have a question now for staff that came up in the presentations of our change in ordinance where new utilities need to be put on existing poles can you just refresh me on that history and when that occurred?

CommentWillow BrownProposedself-stated2:13:43

Mr. Chair, Supervisor Capps the change in the ordinance was for the permit requirement it was a conditional use permit when the facility was first applied for and then it was shifted down to Tier 2 or Tier 2 is shifted down to a director level development plan but I believe the requirement to locate on an existing pole has was already a requirement

CommentSherry FosterProposed · by introduction2:14:05

okay I have comments for later but those are my questions thank you very much chair.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.672:14:10

Supervisor Hertman

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:14:13

I think this is for planning and development. There was an assertion that the City of Santa Barbara has design guidelines, and that somehow that would be more protective or allow greater discretion. And I just wanted a comment about that.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:14:36

Supervisor Hartman through the chair. We have looked at the Santa Barbara's standards and we'll be incorporating some objective standards into our new ordinance amendment but there are some very clear guidelines, not design guidelines but guidelines that we have to work within from the FCC but there are some objective standards that we can use but they're not your typical design guidelines

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:15:05

I see, so just so I understand we're preempted by the federal law from doing very much. We have some discretion within aesthetics and other areas. So you're saying that we're now developing objective standards and they go beyond aesthetics? That's correct. Could you just give us a hint

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:15:33

I'm afraid that if I gave you a hint, I might be wrong about exactly what it is because I haven't seen any of it yet. But it's not relevant to this case today? That's correct and we will be, looks like we're going to be in hearings in the fall on this. But there is some leeway as you, we have some fairly strict guidelines that we have to follow through the FCC but they do give us some leeway on a few things. And we are including objective standards so that we can leverage those for the community.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:16:06

Thank you.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.672:16:08

Supervisor Nelson and Williams?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role2:16:11

Yes thank you Chair Lavanino. I guess my comment Supervisor Williams.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed2:16:24

I really wanted to concentrate and get a little bit more information on the Fortuna alternatives 12, 13 and 14. I understand that the other one is on recreation park district land so that's why it's not viable but from the map it looked like these other three are on the Open space probably still owned by Recreation Park District or one of those acquisitions. But why you know just sort of intuitively something that's across the street as opposed to on a resident side of the street seems like it would be less intrusive and I understand that there may be some members of the public who don't want the Fortuna ones either but Why it may be that I don't understand what the criteria of less intrusive is attempting to articulate but you know why wouldn't.

I understand that it's more of a hassle because you need to do a higher poll but why why why wouldn't the ones across the street from residences as opposed to on the same side of the street not be less intrusive

2:17 – 2:259 turns

CommentWillow BrownProposedself-stated2:17:51

Mr. Chair, Supervisor Williams pursuant to the supplemental alternative site analysis since the poles on Fortuna Road are not there next to the open space rather than within the center of the coverage objective which is surrounded by more residences it's a less effective network design that would require additional small cell facilities in the vicinity eventually to serve the objective And then I can let the applicant speak to additional information. So

not transcribed≈7s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed2:18:26

the issue would be that it wouldn't be less intrusive because it probably would mean that there still needed to be another one done,

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.672:18:34

okay? You might have referenced the one I was gonna ask about. The one I think it was number eight that was denied by the SBAR. It sounded like Verizon was okay with that location and who so what happened at SBAR We'll throw a monkey wrench into that location.

CommentWillow BrownProposedself-stated2:18:57

Mr. Chair, this would be a new poll which doesn't meet the Article 2 requirement to put an existing poll if that's possible.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.672:19:06

Okay. So is Article 2 ours? Or is that the federal? Okay, Article 2 is ours and I know that that's kind of something we've pushed in the past but to try to co-locate and put on existing polls. Okay let's open it up for deliberation. If there are no other questions, Supervisor Caps why don't you lead off?

CommentSherry FosterProposed · by introduction2:19:27

Thank you again just want to repeat the appreciation for all the work and so many years and Ms. Erickson her family for going to bat for their neighborhood I do for me this raises a lot of extraneous but important issues that I believe Supervisor Nelson started off with was just as the overcrowding of Isla Vista with so many multiple wires that are sagging It's an incredibly dense area despite its natural habitat with amazing vistas and surface points and eucalyptus, but yet it's as we heard today as dense as San Francisco. So that adds to the challenges here.

As much as I am sympathetic Appeal here, I have to deny it because of the policy set before us and the law which is that it isn't conspicuous. You can't just deny on the aesthetics so I'm going to uphold the staff's work as well as the planning commission and move to deny but I just do again want to highlight the issues related to Isla Vista stemming from housing and overcrowdedness The need to be diligent. I'm more curious about sort of how we deal with multiple utilities in the future and design standards for that, so I appreciate the conversation moving in that direction.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role2:20:45

Thank you. Thank you Supervisor Nielsen. Yes thank you Chair Lavinia. You know I'm going to support Supervisor Capps in denying the appeal but I do think there's ongoing concerns there You know, this is four years in the process and to go back to the starting gate on this for coverage would probably be something that would be ultimately a disservice to that community that needs to have that connectivity.

I do think it raises questions though about The concentration of utilities on some of these poles and I think that those ultimately, part of the co-op has their franchise agreement with the county to use our county right away for those. I think that's something as a board we probably should take a look at it. I'm sure that those agreements are really old You know, if they were to build this tower somewhere else they would be paying significant amount of funds to the property owner.

Those probably aren't we're not seeing those types of revenues back into the county and that's something I'm really interested in us exploring because I think that that's a lost opportunity and with those funds we could really invest in the right-of-way and maybe underground some of these facilities in the future so you know I think that there are some public purposes here. I think also because these are probably the least cost options for these utilities They're gravitating to these spots instead of maybe investing in other locations. So I think we as a board may be in through CO's office we can take a deeper dive with Public Works to look at some of these franchise agreements make sure that they are up-to-date and that they're something that's paying something that's much more of a market rate because I think we'll get different proposals in the future frankly, because I think you know there will be a little bit more careful about where they put these and make sure that they invest appropriately but I think where we're at today under the current regulations, Curtin Franchise Agreements.

And I'm ready to move forward with denying the appeal and grant approval. Supervisor Hartman?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:22:35

Yes well I agree with my colleagues on the board that it's kind of a rat's nest of wires in Isla Vista and this case raises the issue as demand increases where are they going to go where it seems to be more and more constrained. And admittedly, I think the Verizon did a robust alternative analysis of sites but there aren't many alternatives. Eventually, I think we'll have fiber optic underground and I recently heard on the radio that Verizon is going to have a space-based broadband where everyone, everywhere anytime will be served. Maybe that will be its focus largely on underserved areas like Africa but maybe that's the ultimate solution but here we're stuck where the federal government has usurped much of our authority were very limited and I think there was an exhaustive analysis done of every other alternative that people could think of and we just haven't been able to come up with a good one.

So, I too have to deny the appeal.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed2:23:54

Supervisor Williams? I agree with my colleagues that this brings up a number of issues that is hard to discern without further analysis, like how much coverage is enough coverage? Why you can't do more common carrier use. How many companies really need to have a facility in a geographic area to have adequate Emergency redundancy, that's a real outstanding question from this.

So while I do feel that we're somewhat constrained because of the timeline and because of a lack of concrete alternatives here or at least enough analysis to truly resurrect one of the alternatives, I'm not very happy about it and will pay a whole lot more attention The objective standards and what we can do to kind of make this maybe easier for residents in the future.

2:25 – 2:2810 turns

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.672:25:03

And I'm going to join my colleagues, but I think this process is too long for the lack of authority that we have on this board. Thought Verizon puts on, we've been saying four years but it looked like you had a six year. I mean to go through something for six years and bring it to a board that we feel there's not a whole lot we can do about it just seems like an exercise in futility and so we've got take a look at some things. I also agree that they did a robust look around obviously they have to find an area that works for the coverage but I felt that did a good job doing that And I also agree with Supervisor Nelson that undergrounding, I mean when you drive through areas like Westlake and Thousand Oaks you don't realize why you think it looks so nice there until you start looking around and you're like wow everything's you know they've undergrounded everything.

And I recently went to Thailand and I actually took a picture If we think we have a lot of wires, I am telling you that it is unbelievable what can happen in the third world country of how they get their electricity and cell coverage and all that. So I appreciate the fact that we have a process where we go through this and we analyze and we do these things because it does make a quality-of-life difference for everybody. And so with that, I will seek a motion

CommentSherry FosterProposed · by introduction2:26:31

I will move to deny the appeal.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:26:35

Second.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.672:26:36

Okay, with the other is there other action on their clerk?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role2:26:42

Chair Lavagnino and members of the board yes that would be to approve staff recommendations A through D to deny the appeal and grant de novo approval at the project.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.672:26:50

Okay perfect that was your motion in a second okay thank you very much everybody for being here We'll now be recessing to closed session. Can County Council please read the items up for consideration today?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed2:27:07

Thank you Mr. Chair, members of the board. In closed session today the board is scheduled to consider three cases of anticipated litigation significant exposure civil litigation there are claims which are attached to the agenda item which explain the three claims and one item of anticipated litigation deciding whether to initiate litigation in one case and the time estimate is 30 minutes.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.672:27:31

30 minutes we'll be back at around 1240 1245 somewhere in there Wow, actually I gotta go find my ballot. All right welcome back we're reconvening the meeting of March 5th 2024 County Council can you please report out from closed session?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed2:28:29

Thank you Mr. Chair, members of the board. The board met in closed session on three items of significant exposure to civil litigation with the claims that are attached to the agenda and one item of deciding whether to initiate civil litigation and the board took no reportable action.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.672:28:43

All right we're adjourned to Tuesday March 12th 2024 in Santa Maria