BodyBoard of Supervisors
MeetingRegular Meeting
Date📅 March 4, 2025

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 – 0:0213 turns

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.780:15

Good morning everybody. It's my pleasure to call to order this meeting of the March 4, 2025 meeting of the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors. Madam

Roll call, called by Jacquelyne Alexander
Show transcript
Clerk please call the roll. Supervisor Lavenino? Here. Supervisor Lee? Here. Supervisor Hartman? Here Supervisor Nelson? Here and Chair Kaps? Here
ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.710:35

at this time please join us

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.780:37

in pledging the flag of allegiance. Okay. Our first order of business is to approve the minutes of our last meeting, February 25th. I need a motion for that please.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.811:10

Move approval.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:11

Second.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.781:12

Okay we have a motion and a second from Supervisor Hartman and Supervisor Nelson. All those in favor?

CommentBrandon KaysenProposed · by introduction1:19

Aye.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.781:20

Motion carries. Now Madam CEO, please give us your report.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:29

There's no report this morning Chair.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.781:32

Okay there we go moving right along. Any Madam Clerk are there any announcements or changes to the

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.711:36

agenda? Chair Caps and members of the board I just have one quick announcement this morning regarding public participation and for the Board of Supervisors methods of public participation and to provide public comment on general public comment or an item on the board's agenda Please see page 2 of the agenda. Individuals that would like to provide verbal public comment may do so via Zoom by registering in advance via the link available on page two. If you have any questions, please contact the Clerk of the Board's Office at area code 805-568-2240. Again that number is 805-5682240 and that concludes my announcements for today.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:15

Great okay now we move on to the administrative agenda. Any member has anyone from the public

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.712:20

requested to pull anything? Chair Caps and members of the board, we have no requests to speak from the public on the administrative agenda.

0:02 – 0:086 turns

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:28

Okay and I understand we have three requests from the board to pull maybe more so we have eight at this point 8 10 11 and 12 any further? I think we're good Okay then I'll approve, we will entertain a motion to approve the balance of the administrative agenda except for A10, A11 and A12. So moved.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.902:51

Seconded.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:54

Okay we have a motion and a second on the floor all those in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Motion passes right now we'll move on to resolutions Madam Clerk, when you're ready we'll move to the Employee

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.713:11

of the Month item number one. Chair Caps and members of the Board, Administrative Item Number One is sponsored by Supervisor Caps. It is to adopt a resolution of accommodation honoring Javier Celedon and David Webster of the Community Services Department as the March 2025 Employees of the Month for Santa Barbara County. And joining us in person today we have Jesus Armas The Director for Community Services Department, Javier Celadon, David Webster and Joe Davonic. And if you can please come to the podium and I will go ahead and read the resolution.

Whereas Javier Celadon and David Webster exemplify the county's organizational values of accountability, customer focus, equity and inclusion, innovation, trust and ethics. And whereas Javier Celadon and David Webster model the transformative behaviors of collaborative problem solving alignment with the county's vision risk taking data driven decision making and strategic thinking.

And whereas Javier Celadón and David Webster both demonstrated extraordinary technical skill and community dedication while tirelessly working to upgrade the Homeless Management Information Systems, HMIS software platform over the past five months. This upgrade will provide county leadership a significantly improved ability to visualize understand and serve people experiencing homelessness in our community.

And whereas without the use of a contracted intermediary to assist in the seamless migration of vast amounts of critical complex and confidential data Needed to track and assist unhoused individuals in receiving services and reacquiring housing Javier Celadon and David Webster saved the county hundreds of thousands of dollars in consulting costs and hundred of hours of system downtime by applying their tremendous technical skills in such an urgent and organized manner. And whereas by customizing and implementing user interface training sessions and licensing processes, Javier Celadon and David Webster worked extraordinary hours before during and after the recent holiday season to introduce this new software platform to 345 individuals work each day to serve people experiencing homelessness in our community.

And whereas by ensuring the county has a compliant HMIS, Javier Celadon David Webster were instrumental in maintaining the county's ability to submit state and federal reports and continue to facilitate our ability to make data-driven decisions when addressing homelessness. Now, therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors recognizes Javier Celedon and David Webster as employees of the month for March 2025. Pass and adopt it today.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed6:02

Chair Caps and members of the board, Jesus Armas with the department. I simply want to add my words of praise to the resolution that the clerk just read. Javier and David have done extraordinary work. The department as a whole, the division specifically take homelessness seriously but of course to be able to do an effective job requires that we utilize best available data to help guide our work and to make sure Thank you very much.

That utilizing our own resources enabled the county to save funds, to direct more critical efforts and more importantly to allow us to better serve our constituents. And let me invite Joe their supervisor just say a couple of remarks.

not transcribed≈15s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed7:02

Good morning Chair Kaps, members of the board. Yeah I just wanted to expand on why this nomination just made sense to me. Javier and David as a team of only two people are approaching the goal line on an IT project equal in its technical complexity and its significance in improving our ability to track understand and address homelessness in the most accurate efficiently possible As for me, about two years ago in another county far, far away I was part of initiating and leading an identical process to this information system overhaul. The team there did not yet have the experience that we have here in the realm of information systems. And as a result, we had to contract out through multiple consultants. I mean, we literally had consultants consulting consultants in this process and it costs you know, it was the cost was well over millions of dollars and it was over a four or five year period As the resolution states, David and Javier applied their expertise as a team of two people working late nights and weekends over this previous holiday season to achieve an identical implementation but in the fraction of time and cost.

So while the process hasn't always been smooth and there's still some work to do to get across the finish line I just think it's appropriate that their dedication to service be recognized at this level so thank you for giving us the opportunity in Community Services Department to recognize them

0:08 – 0:128 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 6Proposed8:30

Chair Caps, members of the board thank you for having us. Appreciate this honor. Jesus, Joe thank you so much and Javier and the whole team. You know it's been an honor and a privilege working in this role and couldn't have done it without the great support that we have and it is an important mission that we're working on and I believe that you know We will keep progressing and with the team we have. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed9:06

Chairman Capson, members of the board again thank you for this honor. I'd like to thank Jesus and Joe for choosing us for this. It really does mean a lot. We've put in a lot of effort into this migration because HMI system is one of the core parts of our homeless system in their community And just I want to make sure that everybody knows that our team is one of the big reasons we were able to make this happen.

We were responsible for doing all of this work and everybody on our team took up, picked up the slack where we would no longer be able to provide support so I think that's a key part that shouldn't be forgotten. Thank you.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.789:53

Congratulations to you both, Supervisor Hartman.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.819:56

Well I had a question how many agencies use this system and how many nonprofits use this system?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed10:06

Excellent question Board Member Hartman through the chair, I remember this time. We have almost 400 organizations that utilize and provide information to this database and it helps everyone keep track of what each is doing and how we can best allocate our resources.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8110:27

So I don't think it can be overstated. This system provides the skeleton that everything else hangs on and there's a lot of narratives about homelessness, but this is the data source that we can go to say these are the facts and so it really is a source that integrates the efforts of all these organizations That two people have worked to build this out and upgrade it is really phenomenal.

But it's a core system, and it's really an example of the kind of technology, the way we want technology to work in other areas in the county. So thank you for providing this example. I can't tell you how significant it is in the work that I do every day. Thank you.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.9011:23

Thank you Madam Chair. I just wanted to really thank this, both of you the whole department and that division especially because for a long time homelessness has been an issue for this board We didn't have the data. And so we're making decisions, spending a lot of money quite frankly on issues that we thought might help or we thought could be successful. I don't think it's any coincidence that the better data that we're getting from you now The more successful we're being on the other side of things. Cleaning out the riverbed, coming up with dignity moves, partnering with them and really making a difference in the community now. So data, data, data you know we were taking kind of a shotgun approach to everything and just let's hope this works.

I think now we're being a lot more strategic and a lot more surgical in our response on the limited dollars that we have thanks to you. You're making a difference in the community so we really appreciate your work.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7812:34

Thank you. Congratulations. Okay, Madam Chair, Madam Clerk, Administrative Item Number 2.

0:12 – 0:175 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.7112:44

Chair Kaps and members of the Board, Administrative Item Number 2 is sponsored by Supervisor Kaps and Supervisor Hartman. It is to adopt a resolution proclaiming March 8th 2025 as International Women's Day in Santa Barbara County. And joining us in person today we have Sydney Justman from Girls Inc. of Greater Santa Barbara We have Mika Nasta, and we have Emmy and Allie LaLiviere-Joseph. And if everyone can please join us at the podium and anyone else you'd like to join with you.

Now go ahead and read the resolution. Whereas International Women's Day is a time to celebrate women's achievements, and whereas women participate in all aspects of our society including our democratic institutions such as serving as elected representatives in the U.S. Congress, governors, county supervisors, mayors, judges, school board members and other public offices.

And whereas women have an important role in our economy and workforce despite the fact that in the U.S., women earn 82 cents for every dollar earned by men, and the gap is much wider for most women of color. And whereas across the globe many women and girls still face discrimination on the basis of sex and gender. And whereas in 1911, International Women's Day was honored for the first time in Austria, Denmark, Germany and Switzerland to advance women's rights including the right to vote. And whereas in 1977 the United Nations General Assembly proclaimed March 8th as an official UN holiday for women's rights and world peace.

And whereas in 2011, President Barack Obama proclaimed March to be Women's History Month calling on Americans to reflect on the extraordinary accomplishments of women in shaping our history. And whereas the theme for International Women's Day in 2025 is hashtag accelerate action focusing on achieving gender equality and the importance of addressing the systemic barriers that women face both in personal and professional spheres. Now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors declares March 8, 2025 as International Women's Day in Santa Barbara County and encourages all residents to celebrate women and recognize them as equal members and contributors to all aspects of our society. Passed and adopted today.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 8Proposed14:58

Thank you so much. It is such an honor for Girls Inc of Greater Santa Barbara to receive this resolution. We're so grateful to Chair Kaps, Supervisor Hartman and all the Board of Supervisors. Now more than ever we need to stand strong in the endeavor to create an equitable society where all members of our society and community have opportunities they need to thrive International Women's Day is an important moment to reflect on our progress and to celebrate the incredible achievements of women that have led us all here today.

I'm pleased and excited to introduce you to our incredible Girls Inc girls and future leaders, Micah, Emmy, and Allie. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 9Proposed15:52

Hello, my name is Allie and I'm seven years old. At Girls Inc., I learn how to be strong, smart and bold so I can become like the women we celebrate. Thank you! Have a good day!

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed16:12

Hello, my name is Emi. I'm nine years old and I want to thank Girls Inc for helping girls be strong, smart and bold leaders. I would also like to thank Supervisor Capps for helping with the traffic light situation and for recognizing Girls Inc on International Women's Day. Thank you!

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 11Proposed16:44

When I hear the words, Girls Inc., I think about surfing. I fondly remember the 10 of us girls all in the back of an old van sharing food and talking, our laughter warming our cold bodies from an afternoon on the waves. When I began this activity, I was surprisingly glued to the sand. A facilitator at the time sat with me day after day coaxing me to give the water a try. And once I finally embraced those waves, the story quickly changed and my summers soon became filled with surf camps. Through my time at Girls Inc., I have bolstered my confidence, curiosity and creativity. And in more recent times, I've been involved with Girls Inc. through the She Leads program learning about women filling unique career roles in a variety of fields. As a college-bound high school senior, I have enjoyed talking to these professionals about their alma maters and how their experiences have prepared them for their careers.

If my experiences at Girls Inc. has taught me anything, it's that though it might not be immediately evident, girls are everywhere in any industry offering a wide range of skills and perspectives to strengthen their workplace and to the communities to which they belong. Thank you very much.

0:17 – 0:225 turns

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8117:58

Supervisor Herman. I just wanted to recognize the tremendous work of Girls Inc in helping girls be strong and smart, and especially the word that attracts me is bold. And we've seen that demonstrated here today, and it really matters. Thank you so much.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7818:18

Yeah, thank you. I love that we are focusing on the future on this day of International Women's Day and I can attest to the boldness two examples so these girls who go to Girls Inc of Santa Barbara right along Hollister were facing a situation where every time they crossed from their school across Hollister. They didn't have enough time to get across the crosswalk because it was rather short, sort of designed for perhaps faster walkers at that age so they reached out to my office with their bold advocacy and And thanks to our public works, we're able to change that really quickly. I see Gary Smart here so it all worked and then they invited me to see it and to learn about it. And then the second example of bold is at a food bank event that Supervisor Hartman and I were there on Saturday.

I'm doing my thing and Emmy taps me on the shoulder comes up to me and says I'll see you at the board hearing. So she, these girls are already engaging in their government at such a young age and seeing that government is designed for you all to do what you need to do to have good lives. And I'll just add one last point. Girls Inc does so much for parents especially moms to be able to work and know that their kids are taken care of and that they're in safe loving environments while they're in the workforce which is also important part of this day. So thanks so much to Girls Inc Okay,

we will move on to the next administrative item.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.7119:54

That's a tough act to follow but administrative item number three is sponsored by Supervisor Kaps. It's to adopt a resolution commemorating the 100th anniversary of the County of Santa Barbara Public Health Department on February 24th 2025 and joining us in person today we have Dr. Mohamed Hammami and I will go ahead and read the resolution into the record.

Whereas the Santa Barbara County Public Health Department was established on February 24th, 1925 with the mission of controlling communicable disease, immunizing school children, implementing school health programs, enacting health inspections and promoting health for all county residents. And whereas the Santa Barbara County Public Health Department has worked tirelessly to improve the health of our communities by preventing disease, promoting wellness and health equity while ensuring access to needed healthcare and maintaining a safe and healthy environment for all residents.

And whereas the dedicated professionals and staff of Santa Barbara County Public Health Department have consistently demonstrated commitment, compassion and innovation in addressing the diverse health needs of the community through preventative care emergency response Health education and disease control, ensuring the safety and health of all residents since its inception.

And whereas the department has continually adapted to meet the changing health challenges over the decades including the successful management public health crisis The implementation of vaccination programs and the promotion of healthy lifestyles. And whereas February 24th, 2025 marks the 100th anniversary of the department's founding we will honor the legacy of Santa Barbara County Public Health Department while setting a vision for the future of health services in the county and now therefore it is hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors of Santa Barbara County does hereby recognize this milestone through the commemoration of the department's hundredth anniversary passed and adopted today.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed21:52

Thank you, Madam Chair and Supervisors. This is truly a monumental milestone. We celebrate public health but we also celebrate 100 years of wellness prevention protection, 100 years of childhood immunizations, 100 years of environmental health, 100 years of making sure that our county residents are safe and that their environment is safe and also our animals and pets are safe.

This is such a right time to celebrate this and to reaffirm the role of public health when science is being questioned, when prevention is being ignored, when facts are being misrepresented. And we hope that in 100 years, we still are here and protecting our citizens and preventing communicable diseases and making sure that the environment and the planet we live in is safe.

On a lighter note, each one of you has a bag next to their chair. This is a small souvenir commemorating our 100 years anniversary. Thank you for all your support and thank you very much.

0:23 – 0:256 turns

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7823:05

Thank You Dr. Hammami, Supervisor Hartman.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8123:07

Dr. Hammami how are we going to celebrate? What else are we gonna do to celebrate?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed23:17

So we have a lot of things for our centennial. One major thing is going to be as you can see, we are changing our logo and probably changing our name so we're coming back to the board with a request for calling us the health department so this way we are more inclusive and more comprehensive. We are also going back in with many community events as well highlighting Our role in the community and engaging the community. We are planning a, hopefully a short movie as well as a historical book if we have the funds for that.

And we are planning to celebrate with our staff and we are in the process very early of a fundraiser gala for our animal services so stay tuned we will keep you abreast.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8124:07

It's very exciting and please reach out to the board. You're usually very good at that but anyway we can help promote or be there, we want to celebrate with you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed24:15

Absolutely thank you

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7824:18

Thank you. I just wanted to add thanks to your team of hardworking people when you say the word public health, I met a public health doctor this weekend at one of the events who is in Carpinteria, your pediatrician there and I just thought as I walked away she could be making so much more money. Our healthcare industry is such a lucrative one for many people to choose that path but your team and the folks who work at Public Health have chosen a public path, meaning helping all of us. So I just wanted to say thank you.

Okay item number four I believe. Oh now we're moving excuse me we're moving to administrative items pulled by the board and the public so that would lead us to item A-10

0:25 – 0:2713 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.7125:09

Chair Kaps and members of the Board, Administrative Item Number 10 is from the Human Resources Department. It is to consider amendments to the Compensation Ordinance and Resolution for elected officials. And we did have a late request to speak from the public on this item as well.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7825:22

Okay. We'll take that public comment first.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.7125:24

And we will go to – we will remain here in Santa Barbara and we'll go to Karen Hauenstein.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed25:39

Hello Board of Supervisors and Joan. Good morning, Joan. You're my representative. Thank you. So I'm here today talking to you about this item because I want to know because you guys gave yourself a really big raise and I am hoping That our Department of Governmental Accountability or Efficiency here in Santa Barbara County is kind of going to be taken up by you guys?

Is that the idea? Okay. I'm very excited about that and also to track that, be involved in it if I can be. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.7126:39

And that concludes public comment on this item. Okay.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7826:44

Supervisor Nielsen?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed26:45

Yeah, I was just looking for a roll call vote.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7826:47

Excellent. Madam Clerk, a roll call vote please.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.9026:49

Well, I'll make a motion to move 810. Oh thank

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7826:51

you. We need that first. Appreciate it.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8126:53

I'll second.

Roll-call vote Passed 3–1 · 1 under review
Show transcript
Supervisor Lavinino? Aye. Supervisor Lee? Supervisor Hartman? Aye. Supervisor Nielsen? No. And Chair Kaps? Aye.
ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.7127:08

Motion passes 3-1-1.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7827:11

Administrative item number 11, please.

0:27 – 0:2915 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.7127:25

Chair Kaps and members of the board, administrative item number 11 is from the Public Health Department. It is to consider recommendations regarding an exclusive ambulance services provider agreement between the County of Santa Barbara and American Medical Response West AMR.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7827:41

Supervisor Nielsen?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed27:42

Yes again chair I was just looking for a roll call vote on this one as well.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.9027:48

I'll move staff recommendation on this item.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7827:50

I'll second. Okay time for a roll call vote.

Roll-call vote Passed 3–2 move staff recommendation on this item. I'll second. Okay time for a roll call
Show transcript
Supervisor Lavenino? Aye. Supervisor Lee? No. Supervisor Hartman? Aye. Supervisor Nelson? No. And Chair Kaps? Aye
ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.7128:10

Motion passes 3-2

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7828:11

Okay that brings us to our final administrative item that's been pulled and that's Item A12 when you're

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.7128:20

ready Chair Kaps and members of the Board, Administrative Item Number 12 is from the Public Health Department. It is to consider recommendations regarding the acceptance of $25,000 in grant award from PetSmart Charities to Animal Services and there's a four-fifths vote required on this item.

CommentBrandon KaysenProposed · by introduction28:39

Supervisor Lee? I just wanted to recognize all the hard work that Animal Services has been doing and to thank and appreciate the donation from PestSmart. And if you're looking for a sponsor for your fundraiser, please, I'll be honored to partake in it.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7828:58

Supervisor Hartman?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8129:00

Oh, I didn't realize I had my light on but I'd just like to echo. I believe Supervisor Lee has a couple of dogs he's very devoted to and we're all pet owners up here so very supportive.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7829:14

Well then I will entertain a motion perhaps from one of you two.

CommentBrandon KaysenProposed · by introduction29:17

I move to approve.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8129:18

Second.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7829:19

Okay all those in favor please say aye. Aye. Motion passes okay Now is the time, it's public comment. It's time for members of the public to speak on items that are not on our agenda. Madam Clerk are there any requests to speak on general public comment?

0:29 – 0:3612 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.7129:43

Chair Kaps and members of the board we have four requests to speak from the public on general public comment and they're all here in Santa Barbara. We're going to begin with Ronald Buckley to be followed by Diana Sandoval.

CommentRon BuckleyProposedself-stated30:00

Thank you, I know. I'm the guy that came here with a pineapple and some Swiss cheese now. I've got two hats and a toaster Good morning board my name is Ron Buckley. I've been County since 1971 when I got out of the Air Force after four years of service I Had prepared a comment for the telecommunication ordinance which didn't happen for various reasons I've modified that and they'd like to present it to you now I'd like you to imagine you're having coffee in your home and you hear a noise of trucks outside.

And you put on your Board of Supervisors hat, and you head out. It says who's in charge here? What are you doing? A burly man in a Crown Castle hat comes up and says, I'm the supervisor. We're putting a small cell tower on that pole by the side of your house. But it's 20 feet from my bedroom. How can you do that? It's allowed by the new county ordinance. If there is an existing pole, we can put a telephone, we can put a tower on that.

But why wasn't I notified about this? Oh, we put a sign on the pole about a month ago. Well, I didn't see the sign. How can I protest this? One, it's too late and two had you seen the sign, you could have written a letter. That's it. Well, I've heard these things are like a microwave oven with the door open. How powerful is that? I have no idea. I just installed them, but you can't complain about health reasons. The FCC rules.

I've heard they can cause fires. Is that possible? And do you have an automatic shutoff? No automatic shut off is required by the county rules. My toaster has a ULCSA sticker on it that assures me it's not going to burn down my house. That equipment you're installing, I see no notification on that. Not required by the county ordinance. That electronic box is huge.

Did the architectural board approve that? Nope. They took that out of the last ordinance review and they were allowed 28 cubic feet. Yeah, it's huge. Oh, this is nuts. I'm going to call my county supervisor. Wait a minute. I am a county supervisor. Now telecommunication ordinance should be solid like this cream-filled donut. It should be rich in content. It should be following FCC rules and it should also protect the citizens of the county.

I propose the ordinance that you voted for unanimously on February 4th has holes in it, like this donut. My recommendation is you have Mr. Tuttle and as a good staff of the Planning Commission review the ordinance and fill some of those holes. Thank you.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7833:02

Madam Chair. We

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.9033:05

don't normally comment on public comment, but since we just had the Oscars I want to nominate that for Public Comment of the Year. That was very well

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7833:13

done.

CommentRon BuckleyProposedself-stated33:14

Thank you my sympathy to use it. You have to listen to so many public comments are kind of boring if

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.9033:19

they were all as good as yours. It'd be a joy. So thank you very well done.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7833:23

Have a

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.9033:23

good

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7833:24

day. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.7133:25

We will now go to Diana Sandoval to be followed by Daryl Terrell.

CommentDiana SandovalProposedself-stated33:46

Hi, everyone. My name is Diana Sandoval and I'm here for the ninth time before the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors. Today is day four, $3,400 of unlawful fines from Santa Barbara County for protecting my constitutional and property rights. I'm here to share with you the unethical practice of planning and development in the county executive office.

Last week, I called out the county executive office in planning development for disregarding my legal rights, withholding records, selectively enforcing laws and retaliating against me. The county's official meeting minutes misrepresented my speech omitting key facts about misconduct illegal land taking and retaliation against me. The county reduced my testimony to vague quote concerns about an unpermitted bridge. This is just another example of how the county alters records to fit their narrative. Their false narrative at that.

So let me set the record straight again, my ultra wealthy neighbor was allowed by Planning and Development Director Plowman to build a commercial bridge in Tertiary Road that had been abandoned since 2006-2007 according to county records which they withheld from me. This illegal bridge is located in an environmentally sensitive habitat area and it's in an area known to cause flooding for the adjacent neighborhood. So, in 2024 without permits or even a site inspection my neighbor was allowed to build this dangerous bridge. The same bridge was already involved in a previous lawsuit after a person allegedly fell through it in 2017 and my previous property owner was sued. Despite this history Planning Development unlawfully approved rebuilding the bridge on failed abutments which is incredibly dangerous for the public.

After the work was done to make this illegal bridge seem legitimate, building official Craig Johnson issued an unlawful same-day over-the-counter permit knowing that the bridge was on my private property. This is an illegal taking of my land by the county and others. Despite the ongoing litigation, on Saturday Director Plowman and the county began pressuring me with a $3,000 fine plus an additional 100 per day for maintaining a lawful fence that they've known about and approved since 2021, they are now fining me up to $30,000 simply for preserving my constitutional and property rights into my trial.

I thought that being in litigation would encourage the county to act with some integrity, but that has not been the case. I even asked for oversight from the CEO, Mona Miyasato since she oversees the departments involved, but I never got a response. Wade Horton, the assistant CEO responded by saying they won't respond because quote, the litigation needs to play out. In my opinion this isn't just incompetence it's gross misconduct. Taxpayers deserve better. I'll see you at the next meeting.

0:36 – 0:428 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.7136:36

We will now go to Daryl Terrell to be followed by Karen Hauenstein, who is our final speaker. Darryl?

CommentDarryl TerrellProposedself-stated36:45

Good morning Madam Chair and Supervisors. My name is Darryl Terrell. I'm a City of Moreno Valley resident in Riverside County. Came three hours, four hours to get here. On May 17, 2022 at the Riverside County Board of Supervisors meeting I initiated a campaign to address a legal loophole in the state catalytic converter law AB 641 which became effective on January 1st 2024. This law enacted by our legislatures and Sacramento inadvertently left open the provision that permitted thieves to possess up to eight catalytic converters without a dismantler permit or proof of ownership and nothing happens to them.

So I began, as I said before, a campaign. I made three attempts at my Board of Supervisors meeting on September 12th 2023 they finally adopted that law what I call the one and done which says that if a thief is in possession of a detached catalytic converter they have to have a proof of ownership If they don't, they will face criminal charges and six months to a year in jail.

And as I said before, three of our counties, three of our cities and our counties had this ordinance prior to the adoption of the law. So I went up to 19 cities in my county and got the law changed I'm coming to you guys here because Sacramento has always have let us down again when it comes to things like that. We locally could change the law, we don't need them to pass a law. We could adopt the law like I submitted to you guys that Riverside County did that closed that loophole like Prop 36 did to Prop 47 and what that does is It holds people accountable and I've gone to Ventura County. I went to L.A. County. I have gone to Orange County. I have gone to Kern County. I've gone to Imperial County, I'm going to San Diego County because I feel passionate enough.

I could have done this at home. I could have called in but I didn't because I wanted to put a face on what I'm trying to do. Because it's time for us counties to stick together and do the right thing in protecting our residents locally. Because we can't count on Sacramento to do this and it's up to all of us to pass his ordinance And I can go back to LA County, Orange County, Imperial County and let them know that we're going to stick together and protect our residents. And we're going to do the job that Sacramento should have done. We shouldn't have to do this. I shouldn't have to come three or four hours to get here to do it. But that's the only way I see we got to get the job done. Thank you.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7839:45

I just wanted to ask thank you for your effort to be here. You said you submitted information to us?

CommentDarryl TerrellProposedself-stated39:50

Yes

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7839:51

ma'am. OK because I just want to make sure we have that contact information. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.7139:56

We will now go to our final speaker, Karen Hauenstein. Karen?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed40:04

What that man said makes a lot of sense. I was talking to him in the elevator earlier and we need to look at that. Earlier we were talking about the 5G antennas, the telecommunications stuff That's right, that has to be brought back. And the reason why is because your job is to avoid lawsuits, avoid them. So you don't wanna set up policies and ordinances that get you involved in drawing lawsuits out of the general public or the residents in the county.

We can't have 5G antennas within feet of people's homes. We cannot have that. Not after all of the money that's been spent on aesthetic things in our county. And I'm glad that we're recognizing the Public Health Department today, I am a client of our county public health system and I find it to be extremely adequate but we also need to recognize sitting in this room The protectors of our public safety and our public health, which is our Sheriff's Office. Which is being forced to deal with many, many issues of mental health on our streets.

The Public Health Department is not dealing with those things so much as our law enforcement In all of our communities. So I just want to make sure that we're recognizing that or recognizing that we are we have burdened our law enforcement with the liberal policies that the state has forced upon us and the liberal policies that kept our border open and allowed all the drugs in that are poisoning our communities, thank you.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7842:10

And that concludes general public comment for today. Thank you to all of our speakers, really appreciate it. Okay Madam Clerk will you please read

0:42 – 0:4713 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.7142:19

departmental item number one into the record? Chair Caps 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 Historic Landmarks Advisory Commission's designation of Arroyo Hondo Bridge as a county historic landmark

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed42:41

Good morning Madam Chair, members of the board. As Ms. Alexander indicated this is a historic designation of the Royal Hondo Bridge on the Gaviota Coast. Today we have David Billesbach he is the planner on the item and Nicole Liu supervisor and Travis Seward's deputy director with that I'll turn it over to Mr. Billesbach

CommentDavid BillisbachProposedself-stated43:09

Hello Supervisors, my name is David Billisbach. I'm here today with Planning and Development to present the Historic Landmarks Advisory Commission's designation of Arroyo Hondo Bridge as a County Historic Landmark On December 9th, 2024 the Historic Landmarks Advisory Commission HLAC initiated and adopted a resolution conferring landmark status on Arroyo-Hondo Bridge.

HLAC found that Arroyo-Hondo Bridge meets the eligibility requirements for a county historic landmark as described in County Code Chapter 18A and is worthy of protection. Additionally, the commission finds that the Arroyo Hondo Bridge is historically significant because it is representative of the county's architectural engineering political and economic history.

It is an outstanding example of classical revival style. It has a location with unique physical characteristics and is a view representing an established and familiar visual feature of the Gaviota Coast. It embodies elements of architectural design, detail, material or craftsmanship that represents a significant structural or architectural achievement or innovation.

And it reflects significant geographical patterns associated with historical settlement and growth in the region. Potential board actions are as follows. Approve the designation by and confirm the action of the Historic Landmarks Advisory Commission and the conditions to be imposed, and adopt a resolution with conditions designating Arroyo-Hondo Bridge as a county historic landmark and determine the action exempt from CEQA or modify the designation and adopt the modified resolution designating Arroyo-Hondo Bridge as and determine the action exempt from CEQA, or disapprove the designation of the Historic Landmarks Advisory Commission and determine the action exempt from CEQUA.

Staff recommends that your board vote to support the HLAC nomination with a modification to the board resolution to note mile marker 40.98 instead of 41.05 in the legal description. We also wanted to note that the property owner Caltrans is not opposed to the nomination has coordinated with HLAC through this process and has signed the HLAC landmark designation.

This concludes staff's presentation, and we are available for questions.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7845:42

Thank you so

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8145:42

much Supervisor Hartman. Well I really appreciate the work of HLAC in bringing this forward, I drive this every day and wasn't really aware. So I had just a question do we keep a notebook of all the different historic landmarks with with the information so that we can understand the little jewels scattered throughout

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed46:09

our county? Chair and Supervisor Hartman, on the Planning and Development webpage if you then go to the Historic Landmark Commission webpage they have a listing of all of the landmarks as well as links to the resolution.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8146:26

So there's a narrative that explains their significance? Yes. And then there is a plaque

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed46:30

on the landmark itself so... Chair of the HLAC, Keith Kaufman Gray is here and he might have more information about how plaques get placed.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8146:41

Okay thank you.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7846:45

Any other questions from the board? Supervisor Nelson.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed46:48

Yes thank you Chair Caps it's on Caltrans property is it owned by Caltrans the bridge itself at this point?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed46:57

Chair and Supervisor Nelson our understanding is yes

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed47:00

Okay, and so what is the future for the bridge? I mean obviously it's not being used by Caltrans. It's kind of just out there. Does Caltrans have any plans on making sure that it maintains its structural integrity? Is it used for trail users at this point? I mean is there any other cooperative uses for that structure?

0:47 – 0:548 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed47:26

Supervisor Nelson, I don't know if we have an awareness of any plans that Caltrans has at this point. We can certainly ask them. We have regular monthly meetings with them so we can ask but off the top my head, I don't really have an answer for that.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed47:40

Well, I think it'd be important for us to know and understand especially as we designate historical. And if it's, you know, Caltrans has some plans to tear down or let it fall into disrepair or is going to restrict people going across it? I mean, those are all important things for us to know as we move forward. I am completely supportive of the historical value of the bridge. But I think this, you know, I think it's important for us to understand its place though and the public can understand this place. You know, You know, people the public might have some expectations that come along with that. And so I think we need to somehow honor that by understanding a little better and publicize you know it seems with the coastal trail that that might be a logical location and when I drive by I think about that but I don't know if it's has integrity for people to be riding a biking across it.

You know there's obviously a lot of other work has been done on the 101 in that area just want to understand better in the future how that fits because If it isn't maintained because all structures need some level of maintenance, then where does that burden fall? Is that going to fall on Caltrans? They're trying to get rid as many responsibilities as possible and dump more on the locals which is a concern of mine.

Because yes, it has a ton of historical value but at what cost for us as Santa Barbara County taxpayers? So I just think we need to keep that in mind as a board as we move forward with this. But I think there needs to be a little bit better understanding for the entirety of the organization about what that exactly means and what are we actually going to do to help protect that.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed49:21

And for sure, yeah understood for sure and for sure they cannot tear it down without coming to the county that I do know. That would have to go through HLAC, but.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed49:30

But even in you know unmaintained I mean they could functionally do that right? So and they may be doing it now and I think that's also important for us to understand if this if they let it fall into disrepair and then at some point now a safety issue.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed49:46

Yeah.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed49:47

You know I think unmaintained bridges becomes a safety issue at some point Meanwhile, we're going to have some conflicts here. So it seems that there should have been and there should be a more comprehensive discussion about this bridge moving forward if we want to take the time and effort to add additional value to it more than just a plaque.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.7150:14

Any other questions from the board? Any requests to speak? Chair Kaps and members of the Board, we do have one request to speak from Keith Kaufman Gray. Keith?

CommentKeith Kaufmann GrayProposedself-stated50:28

Hi Chair Kaps and Supervisors. My name is Keith Kaufmann Gray and I am a chair of the Santa Barbara County Historic Landmarks Advisory Commission, HLAC. And today I'm speaking on my own behalf. The Orojondo Bridge is adjacent to southbound 101, it's 29.4 miles west of the city of Santa Barbara along the Gaviota Coast. The bridge was completed in 1919 over Orojondo Canyon as part of the original coast highway. During construction this site was isolated and all materials were shipped via the Southern Pacific Railroad's coastline. The bridge is a cast-in-place open spandel reinforced concrete arched bridge with parabolic arches surmounted by columns and round arches that support the deck. The designation of the bridge is similar to the Royal Seco Bridge in Pasadena, and appears to be directly influenced by that bridge built in 1913.

The Royal Hondo Bridge is eligible as a county landmark under Criteria A, C, F, G, and H. In February 2024, HLAC received the State of California Historic Report dated May 14, 1979 from Caltrans District 5 for the Arroyo Hondo Bridge. After working with Caltrans and receiving their support for the bridge as a Santa Barbara County landmark, the HLAC Subcommittee for Landmarks brought the bridge to the full HLAC on September 9th 2024 for discussion.

The HLAC unanimously decided to move forward with the drafting of a nomination for Arroyo Hondo Bridge. On December 9th, 2024, HLAC designated the Arroyo Honda Bridge as Santa Barbara County Historic Landmark Number 58. Arroyo Honda Bridge is in its original condition as when it was built in 1919 since traffic was removed from the expansion of Highway 101 in the early 1950's.

It is accessible to the public from the recently reopened southbound 101 Vista Point. I want to thank Caltrans District 5 for their continued support during the process to make Arroyo Hondo Bridge a county landmark. I also want to thank the Land Trust for Santa Barbara County, which owns the land around the bridge, for their support for this landmark. And I just want to quickly address about the bridge and What was mentioned about questions about maintenance. When it is, a landmark is designated and if you look in the resolution, Caltrans will come to us with any necessary repairs or needs that need done to it and then HSLAC will look at that. And Caltrans has been very good with us as far as coming to us with every little thing that needs to be done Let us have our input on it and so if there is a major structural problem, Caltrans will first come to HLAC.

We will look at it work with them. There's time that we have agreed that okay this bridge You know, it doesn't last forever. They don't have the money to do it. Maybe it needs to be replaced or torn down. So that's something that could be done down the road. We always work with Caltrans so if something like that happens, that is how the process works with HVAC.

And so today I just ask you to approve item A and confirm the action of the Santa Barbara County Historic Landmarks Advisory Commission. Thank you very much. Oh, there's a question about plaques. HLAC has a budget and we always look at if we have money in our budget, we will authorize to make plaques for landmarks. We have about three that this would be one of them down the road that probably next fiscal year if we have the money, then we'll authorize some money to put a plaque on this current bridge if you decide today to approve it. Thank you.

0:54 – 0:5713 turns

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7854:18

Thank You Mr. Kaufman Gray I just want to take the opportunity to thank you for your service and and the rest of your Commission I know how painstaking the kind of deal the diligence and work you put into this and it's really a passion so thank you it's a beautiful bridge and I appreciate the work Any questions or comments? Supervisor Nielsen.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed54:37

Yeah, just one comment in the future when we do have items that somebody owns like a bridge might be good to have Caltrans here just if they had some additional questions make sense as we're designating it historical their asset that they'd be here for that hearing so that would be just a request in the future but with if there's no other comments I'd be happy to make the motion of A which is to approve the designation And I believe that just A is the only, so it's not a project.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7855:10

And I'll second A through C.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed55:14

No we're not doing B and C. B and C are alternative motions. So I think it's

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed55:20

just A. You are correct. Chair and Supervisor, we're hoping that you could do actually modify the designation as recommended by staff

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed55:32

So can you explain, make sure I understand that then. So what does the modification do? Because I think one of the questions was about the mile marker right and that's an A.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed55:47

Staffs recommendation is that you modify the approve the designation with a modification to note mile marker 40.98 instead of 41.05 in the legal description

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed56:01

Okay, isn't that still number

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed56:08

A? Yes. Thank you we just wanted to make it clear that we'd like the modification.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed56:13

Okay well so that's encompassed in the motion I'm making. I believe that's a staff recommendation or is that... Council would you just make sure we're on the right track because that would be my intention so I just want to get that out there. So if that's A or B I'm happy with either motion

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed56:30

Supervisor Nielsen, members of the board. I think item A as it's stated in the agenda is the motion that you're looking for because it does state post-mile 40.98. I think the modifications were in some of the other documents.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed56:43

Right so that's kind of embedded in this motion is that fact and so but the legislative intent here is to satisfy what staff is asking for. So I'll stick with my motion of Item A And

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7857:06

we're good. I will second that motion. All those in favor? Aye. Motion passes thanks to the team, thanks to HLAC. All right, departmental item number two is the Hot Springs Trailhead enforcement. Madam Clerk will you please read it into

0:57 – 1:049 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.7157:33

the record? Chair Kaps and members of the board, department item number 2 is sponsored by Supervisor Lee. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding enforcement at the Hot Springs Trailhead on red flag warning days through 2025 and this is in the first district and there is a four-fifths vote required on this item

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed58:00

Madam Chair, it appears that we need a short break so we can see if we need to make a change on the first item.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7858:06

I appreciate that it felt like a little unsettled so we'll take a short break and we'll come back okay and we're back. Item number two which is the Hot Springs Trailhead Enforcement.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.7158:25

Chair Kaps and members of the board this item was previously right under the record but just as a friendly reminder, this is a departmental item number two sponsored by Supervisor Lee. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding enforcement at the Hot Springs trailhead on red flag warming days excuse me warning days through 2025 and this is in the first district and there is a forfeits vote required on this item.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.7858:49

Okay Supervisor Lee

CommentBrandon KaysenProposed · by introduction58:50

Thank you chair caps today, I just want to introduce you to. We Cooper and 8 off from my office and they'll be giving the presentation thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 17Proposed59:01

Thank you everyone. Today we have an item before you that for enforcement at the hot springs trailhead on red flag warning days through 2025 this is a pilot program meant Okay, the goals of the pilot program are to reduce wildfire ignition risks. To improve community safety and ensure visitors can clearly understand and comply with safety regulations. A little background.

Over the last five or six years, certainly since COVID, we have had increased visitor traffic at the Hot Springs Trail. Most of this is due to social media, TikTok posting and bringing a ton of attention to previously pretty local trailhead And so with that, with the increase in people using the trail has made an increased fire risk. In that area in particular it's a bit of a tinderbox. The dry vegetation steep terrain there strong sundowner winds and we have significant evidence of fires in the area even during burn ban periods and human caused ignition is very feasible through things like illegal campfires This is also an area that has seen historical disasters such as the T fire in 2008, the Thomas Fire in 2017 and of course the debris flow in 2018.

And all of this is coming on the heels of the increased concern about fire danger due to the very horrible Los Angeles area fires that happened recently. In this particular area there are a number of emergency response challenges, particularly due to increased visitor traffic even during high fire risk days. This strains our emergency services and their ingress egress abilities.

There are narrow roads in the area that increase evacuation concerns and congested roads during those times can hinder first responders during wildfire Events, but also during evacuations which during red flag warnings can come more quickly in those times. Now we have a few enforcement gaps that were just trying to close here currently parking enforcement exists, but it's been a bit inconsistent. The remote location of the area makes it a little difficult to consistently go to those areas and the red flag day restrictions mean stronger enforcement to reduce the highest fire risk.

This program is a one-time pilot program that runs through the end of this year. It's to pay the Sheriff's Office, a little bit over time Kick up the enforcement level on red flag warning days, which means days that have been designated by the proper fire authorities as being the highest risk of fire danger. We also have added a provision We're assuming a total of 20 red flag days and weather events. I would say this is probably overestimate but better safe than sorry Now this fund balance had been previously set aside for a parking study of a trail area that was meant in essence to help address these same issues that was at Cold Springs and those funds were not used so we're simply moving them over to address this pilot program.

The recommended actions for the board to direct County staff to coordinate with appropriate local state and federal agencies, including fire agencies in the U.S. Forest Service to develop parking restrictions and trail closures on red flag warning days through 2025 in the area of the hot springs trail in the first district and return to the board for required approvals second is to request that the county sheriff's office implement enforcement measures And request that County Sheriff's Office work with the Forest Service and CDFW to implement enforcement measures following heavy rainfall on the Hot Springs Trail to prevent illegal watershed modification and unauthorized activity.

Does anyone have any questions?

not transcribed≈5s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈18s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.781:03:57

Thank you, Mr. Cooper. Any questions from the board? Supervisor Hartman?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.811:04:02

Well first of all This trail has a long history of issues. So I would like a sense of how we've tried to address it so far and what the shortcomings have been or what has worked, and I'm specifically interested in whether a park ranger has authority to ticket in tow where do we lodge this enforcement capacity? Go for it.

1:04 – 1:0911 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:04:38

Supervisor Hartman through the chair, the Park Ranger does have authority to issue citations. However it's typically a last resort what we attempt to do is obviously counsel the visitors advise them of what the rules and procedures are and if they're cooperating we treat that effectively as a warning if you will However, there have been instances in prior years where it's gotten a little bit out of hand and on a few occasions the Rangers that were there had to call for law enforcement assistance. Our Rangers are not certified safety officers nor are they trained to that level and so to be safe obviously we engage with law enforcement for assistance.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.811:05:21

So basically our rangers can just talk to people, have a uniform, issue a citation if they're not cooperative. What are the results of the citation? A fine? How does that work?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:05:36

It's a fine. And our experience has been that when we attempted to cooperate in a similar vein a couple years ago, we had a trail assistant who really monitored the trail. Was there an hour or two before sunset and then an hour or two after closure? Just as a refresher trails are closed one hours or half-hour after sunset. And so obviously the closure will vary by season

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.811:06:06

So there are a number of different issues. One is to prevent people from going at night up there, another is just to prevent people on red flag days. You know when it's dry and I it could be any day you know not just a red flag day that where a fire could start so I think So all those are issues. So what was the experience with the person that we did have up there? Was that effective or not effective in your estimation?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:06:40

We it was I think moderately effective. Just as a reminder the trail under the county's jurisdiction is about a mile long and thereafter it's the national forest so our jurisdiction is constrained by that geography we did employ extra help for a period of time because it was not a recurring commitment from a funding standpoint in fact the funding was coming from some nearby neighbors they And we saw that for a second cycle and then funding ceased. We did try to keep it so that there was not an abrupt termination of that monitoring but absent additional funding, we had to curtail that oversight.

not transcribed≈15s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.811:07:33

So if we go forward with the pilot for the sheriff overtime, I'd be very interested in compare and contrast. I mean should it be a park ranger or should it be a sheriff? And then you know how much money is left in the parking of the hundred thousand parking

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 18Proposed1:08:00

Supervisor Hartman, there was $100,000 initially put aside for that. None of that has been used so this 25,000 comes off there'd be 75,000 left.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.811:08:10

So there will okay so that was set aside for this and I'm eager to get a long-term solution But I'm just not sure what the long-term solution is. So this is one, a pilot as you say it's a way to look at one way to do it but I'm really interested in getting some kind of a report afterwards about how the two compare and figure out how we do this long term. And I'm interested, not every place has a hot springs but this is an issue on other trail heads as well.

We are living in a different era and how we manage these trails to protect from fire It raises new questions for us. So I'm eager to learn from this example how we can better address other places.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 17Proposed1:09:09

Supervisor Hartman to the chair absolutely the entire purpose of this is for us to learn and find the best long term solutions to prevent fire dangers throughout the county.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.811:09:18

And so you will do a report that compares and contrasts the different approaches that we've used so far? And come back to the board. Obviously, we're going to have to consider this again and again.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 17Proposed1:09:30

Supervisor Harmon. Our goal is to have a report, however I would just like to say it will be difficult to have an apples-to-apples comparison of a daily ranger program versus a red flag specific enforcement program. So I'm frankly not entirely certain I'm wondering if you want to come up and say something.

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

1:10 – 1:1513 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 19Proposed1:10:21

Through the Chair, you know this program is something that we've looked forward to for many many years. In 2012 the County Board of Supervisors approved a no parking in the Mission Canyon area during Red Flag Days and that program has been very successful. Our usage of the Hot Springs trails and the impacts and the potential fire danger is real in this area. Last week we saw 12 hours of red flag conditions just on Tuesday night of last week And last night alone, our wind gusts were at 50 miles an hour with sustained winds of 40 miles an hour. So every effort we take to build a safer community through fire preparedness, this project is something we are very supportive of.

And we have been leaning in with our partners, both from the county, state and federal agencies on making changes. We've reinstituted all our fire roads in the area. We worked with Edison on having them maintain their permits that they pulled through the United States Forest Service on making sure we have appropriate access but without the clear access to a lot of these areas and especially the increased parking, the trail usage during red flag days That causes a concern for our community and the department as well. So we are 100 percent in support of this moving forward.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.781:11:47

Thank you. Supervisor Harmon, do you have a question?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.811:11:49

Yeah I do. What authority does Montecito Fire have

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 19Proposed1:11:56

Supervisor Hartman, through the chair in regards to parking or?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.811:12:00

In regards to people going on the trail and carrying propane and tiki torches and things like that.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 19Proposed1:12:09

Yeah well that's where our partners and our community members advise us of any situation that causes a fire concern through the 911 system or notification to our dispatch center so we respond to any concern of fire both day or night. Our folks have hiked up there at 2 a.m.. In the afternoon, we partner with the Sheriff's Department and also the law enforcement officers of the United States Forest Service to investigate any concern so we take the matter very seriously in regards to the red flag no parking that is something we rely determined or rely on County Roads and your board to help us with that

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.781:12:54

Supervisor Nelson.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:12:55

Yes, thank you Chair Caps and thank you Supervisor Lee for bringing this to the board I think this has been an ongoing issue for the last few years And this is the first time that we collectively as a board get to talk about it So I'm learning a lot about just you know in this presentation so my appreciation For you for bringing this first of all Just so I better understand the situation out there. This might be for Jesus. Thank You Chief Neils Is there a gate Is there closing hours out there? I mean, how do we keep people when it's appropriate or not inappropriate to be out on that trail. I guess with most county parks at sundown is that the same thing here? Is it at that point prohibited to being on the trail, the county trail?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:13:40

Supervisor Nielsen through the chair. Yes, the regulations that apply to this trail mimic those that are applied throughout the rest of the county's jurisdiction We've had some internal discussions about Enhancing the closure methods there including some better signage Including some closure areas a gate for example in the past there have been some People that have not appreciated those steps and consequently they vandalize signs, and they cut through some gates and the like. And so that's something that needs constant attention.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:14:15

So that's something that's going to be looked at moving forward? Because it makes sense that at some point we have some way to close it on these days instead of having a law enforcement deputy sitting there babysitting those.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:14:30

Yes.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:14:30

Like the trailhead. It seems that we should Close the trail when it went appropriate. And again, I've honestly never hiked the trail probably need to maybe it's not possible what I'm asking. I'm just trying to understand a little better you know when I was hearing about this reading about this I was thinking about Guadalupe Beach right we actually have A guard there, and so nobody goes out to Guadalupe Beach without going past a county ranger to that beach. And then there's also a population cap at Guadalupe Beach as well.

Do we have any population caps or restrictions on this trail?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:15:04

Supervisor Nielsen, through the chair. We do not have population restrictions and we are looking at internal discussions about restricting access to the parking area because that obviously has become a point of convenience and some people will park there and use I would caution that there are

not transcribed≈35s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

1:15 – 1:2212 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:15:54

You know it's you know attacking the parking seems to be dealing with the symptom and not the problem, right? I did see one of those TikTok videos of a bus driving by and a bunch of people running outside the bus up the trail. So I don't know if just dealing with the parking alone will solve some of the access issues in the overtaxing on the trail so it seems like actually addressing more acutely the problem whether that's a gate and maybe having a county I think there could be some more creativity with this.

especially when people are out there, when they're prohibited from being out there. But I think that we could probably be doing more and add some additional creativity moving forward out there so thank you.

not transcribed≈30s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:17:08

Again Supervisor Nelson this is not a staff position at the moment so to the extent that's going to create some additional demand on county resources and parks division resources specifically we'd like to identify those In the past we were able to use extra help in order to, extra help personnel that is recognizing our rangers were deployed elsewhere in the county and didn't want to detract from our other resources elsewhere. So we can continue to work in that regard and hopefully we can access some of these funds as well.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:17:42

If I could just how does the Guadalupe Beach Ranger work? How's that funded?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed1:17:49

My recollection is that we have a dedicated position out there that's part of our overall staffing for that part of the

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:17:55

county. Thank you.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.781:17:58

Supervisor Lavigny.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.901:18:00

Thank you, just a question about and I appreciate Supervisor Lee bringing this as well. But going throughout the county, not just to Guadalupe Beach. But I always think of Nahui Falls that has a sign right there that says do not cross this. This is dangerous and by order of whatever. That sign's all spray painted and shot up. And it's just another obstacle that most hikers like to climb over so.

The enforcement of it I think is key I think also what's key is trying to let people know before they access that spot because once they get up there, they're all ready to go hiking. They're not going to be happy. So I'm trying to figure out how are you going to get the message out that this is a red flag day and we encourage you not to go out hiking today?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed1:18:54

Thank you, through the chair. This is Aida Thaw, Deputy Chief with Supervisory Royalty's Office. So there is a stakeholder group that has been meeting on regular basis for the past few years. It's the Hot Springs Trail Stakeholder Group and they have also created two task force. They are working groups that are identifying not only possible solutions to the multiple problems that there are in this trail. This is just one of them but also create educational campaigns and public outreach.

We have a social media education task force that just started meeting for the first time in the month of February, and they are going to be conducting work to do exactly what the board is suggesting which is to do an intensive outreach campaign to educate better the public about the restrictions, the dangers, and the capabilities for delegation.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.781:19:52

Thank you. I just had a couple questions, and I just want to also echo the appreciation for the proactive nature we have been hearing about this for years and to finally have it here before the board thanks to Supervisor Lee and his team for a smart approach. I just wondered if you could speak about the volume? I have hiked the trail. I hike many of the trails and I've never seen a tour bus only at Hot Springs so can you speak about the volume of people that's very unique to this trail for sort of a celebrity factor?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed1:20:23

Yes, absolutely. Through the chair because of the social media impact and during the COVID pandemic years that everybody wanted to be outdoors there was a lot of outreach done by different postings Instagram etc. That attracted large amount of visitors to that trail most of the other trails in the country is just a hiking destination versus this one due to the illegal, you know pools that there are the hot springs over there and how they're portraying them in a way that it is much more beautified than how it is. It brings a lot of traction of visitors that they are not locals. That is what is causing the big problem on the high volume especially during like long weekends for holidays They experienced over 120 vehicles in that section of the surrounding, the entrance of the trail.

So it is a big issue because those vehicles do not allow for safety response vehicles to access clearly to the area. So that's why we are addressing this problem on different phases and phase one is the fire red flag fire conditions days which is what we're bringing today forward

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.781:21:44

Thank you. Yeah, in fact the last time I tried to hike that one I had to park so far away that it would have been a hike to get to the hike. So I just appreciate the fact that there's a social media aspect response that the Montecito Association and the task force is doing. So i'm sure we're going to hear from some folks in public comment perhaps now that's a good time for public comment on this item

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.711:22:05

Chair Kaps and members of the board, we have three requests to speak from the public on this item. We are going to remain here in Santa Barbara and begin with Vince Simonson to be followed by Orman Gaspar. Vince?

1:22 – 1:296 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 21Proposed1:22:19

Hello Board. Are we on? Vince Simonsen, local wildlife biologist. I've been hiking the Hot Springs Trail for 30 plus years and yes, the more visitors There have been more visitors that create parking problems and the possible fire concerns. This enforcement proposal focuses on red flag warning days, and it seems pretty reasonable but it slips in possible trail closures and the big one preventing illegal watershed modification basically shutting down the hot springs.

Now I'm all for some parking restrictions on red flag days More signage would be good too, especially about the fires and having fires up there. How about actually providing more and better parking locations? It's kind of a mess out there. It was also noted that the surge in visitation caused traffic congestion that could compromise evacuation routes I would suggest that a sundowner-driven wildfire would have thousands of people trying to evacuate out at Montecito's narrow winding roads.

Just a side on that, by the way, I drove up Hot Springs Road the other day and there was probably 10 new buildings going up up there so some of them actually right in the debris flow impact zone. So that area is just impacted already with vehicles But let's get back to the illegal modification that can cause erosion and impact flood safety. That's what it says in the docs, erosion and impact flood safety.

I'd like to know how rebuilding some pools will cause erosion and impact flood safety and why it's illegal? We're talking about rebuilding some small rock walls after a major storm The major storm actually caused lots of erosion and possibly impacted flood safety. And how would this be enforced? Would the sheriff's office actually be hiking up there every day to keep people from making the pools?

It's certainly not gonna be the Forest Service or Cal Fish and Wildlife. People are gonna remake the pools, to sit in. It's good for the body and the soul. Yes, disasters happen and will continue to happen but using scare tactics to shut down a beautiful spot is wrong. The Thomas Fire was not a result of trail congestion and the debris flow was certainly not because of some rock walls.

Sure some trail regulation is good but please remove the verbiage about the illegal watershed modification and unauthorized activity. Thank you very much

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.711:25:23

We will now go to Orman Gaspar, to be followed by Corey Heyman. Orman?

CommentOrman GasparProposed1:25:34

Good morning. So I'm a longtime resident. I live at 555 Hot Springs Road. I've had the property for over 40 years. My brothers and sisters that live directly in the area I remember standing in my driveway looking up at the hills during, when the T fire was just starting and the winds blowing 60 miles an hour. And there was really no place to go. I just assumed that my house was going to be gone. The winds luckily went another way and burned other homes.

You know lucky for me unlucky for other people. A really smart thing to do a trial like this, to figure out how to manage our trails in the Santa Barbara backcountry during red flag times and to deal with fire. Just putting human beings and fire in the proximity of brush is very dangerous. I've been up to Hot Springs Trail numerous times. Today, the last speaker talked about it being such a beautiful place. There's trash everywhere.

There is Band-Aids and junk in the area. There's a huge amount of people. that park on the roads and streets, and it's kind of out of control. Talked about the natural beauty of the ponds. When I was up there when I was like 18 years old in my early 20s hiking up there, there were no ponds. It was basically a dry creek bed or a small trickle And this has all been created by people who have come from out of the area and created this attraction that's now an internet sensation. That's frankly dangerous to my home, and I have no problem with people going and you know bathing but it's if you go up there you'll see it's kind of an underwhelming situation so anyway I appeal to at least trying this as a temporary solution.

It's you know it's super dangerous to have people going up there with tiki torches at night. I drive by there on my way home and you know it's pitch dark and they're still Multiple cars. I mean, I'm not talking about five cars. I'm talking about 10 plus maybe 20 cars still parked on the roads and those people are up at the trail. I don't know what they're doing but it's past dark.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.711:29:01

Thank you Orman that is your time.

CommentOrman GasparProposed1:29:03

Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.711:29:04

We will now go to Corey Heyman who is our final speaker on this item. Corey

1:29 – 1:348 turns

CommentCorey HeymanProposed1:29:11

Good morning thank you I first would like to thank Supervisor Lee for bringing this matter before the board today. And I thank you, members of the Board, for taking this seriously. My home and the Oak Creek Canyon Ranch Homeowners Association is just right adjacent to the Hot Springs Trail Network to the east We have about 10 homes in our association or 10 lots, about eight of which have been built out.

The Thomas fire burned through our neighborhood, burned through our road. It destroyed some accessory structures, landscape, avocado trees, hundreds of thousands of dollars in fire repair damage which at the time was mostly insured The fire risk is real, it's very fresh. We have no commercial insurance. We're all on the fair plan. So my board and I got together and we're well in excess of $50 million of exposed fire risk.

It's probably closer to a hundred million dollars of potential uninsured loss. The hot springs themselves are an attractive nuisance, inviting thousands of out-of-town tourists to the neighborhood. Engaging in this activity that you've heard about including illegal activity. We have illegal campfires. We've had hikers bring up tiki torches, I think we all read about that.

The storms last year caused camp debris to come down onto my property including propane cans so they're up there at night when they're not supposed to be. The park closes at sundown yet there's no enforcement to keep these people out. Excuse me. So this resolution before you I see is really a first step among many steps to protect the homeowners in our community from potential wildfire risk as a result of illegal fire activity up there.

I've heard county parks talk about the difficulty in closing the trail at night and enforcing the closure, I mean we have an entire We know that the hot springs are the attraction. And if we can deter hikers and users from coming to the trail network at night by closing, closing off the trailhead, closing off there's another little access point that we would need to close off on Hot Springs Road. If we can just have some barrier to entrance at night, that would provide some deterrence.

Well, we have enforcement and we should use that enforcement. We should not say well, we can't really enforce because they'll just vandalize, they won't comply. We need to be tougher on our enforcement because the fire risk is real and while the investigation into the Palisades Fire continues all eyes are on the trail in the Palisades neighborhood with respect to where it started from an illegal fire.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.711:32:34

Thank you Cori, that is your time. Thank you. And that concludes public comment on this item. Supervisor Lee.

CommentBrandon KaysenProposed · by introduction1:32:42

Good, thank you for the comments first I want to say thank you to staff for doing a great presentation and thank you to Mount Cedar Fire, the Sheriff's Department, Congressman Salute Carver-Hall and State Senator Monique LeMond for being great partners at this about this issue and appreciate the board support on this so I think we all agree and I would like to make a motion unless

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.811:33:08

oh

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.781:33:08

please Sure.

CommentBrandon KaysenProposed · by introduction1:33:11

Please go ahead.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.781:33:12

Yeah, we'll have deliberation now. Thank you Supervisor Lee. Supervisor Hartman?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.811:33:19

I wish there'd been more pictures in the presentation. I haven't typed it, but I have an invitation and I'm going to take them up on that. But it does seem from the description that this is a one of a kind. It's not really a model for trails elsewhere because of the hot springs and because of the celebrity factor and because of the social media. The hot springs themselves are on Forest Service property and so I know that Congressman Carbajal is working with people to figure out what to do there.

Given the cutbacks, I'm not sure we can expect a lot So I guess my first question is, your proposal is to direct county staff to coordinate with these various agencies. I think it's important that we know which department is responsible and do they have resources and how soon can they report back to us about coordinating and figuring out what is really a management plan for this area?

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

1:34 – 1:4112 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 20Proposed1:34:34

So through the chair, we are coordinating through the stakeholder group. The task force that were created are the ones that the Fire Safety Task Force is identifying what is the solution for these different aspects and we're prioritizing solutions from their recommendations of that small group. We are going to the different county departments to work with Public Works, to work with the Sheriff's Office, We are going to work with the different agencies that will be involved like U.S. forest and on those task force groups, all of them are represented.

So the implementation of the solutions are going to be phased out and as the director of parks department said there are internal conversations on how

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 17Proposed1:35:33

So the U.S. Forest Service has been in all of these meetings and Congressman Carbajal has been great on getting them to act, and in point of fact I think for the first time they have actually begun enforcing the illegal watershed modifications. They did just write a citation after the last rains for just that, so I think that the fear of not getting met halfway by the U.S. Forest Service is at this point maybe You know, maybe not quite what the reflective of what's going on the ground. So they've been quite good at actually sort of meeting the county halfway and doing their part to help enforcement. So

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:36:28

supervisor if you might my as far as County staffs involved it's mostly going to be at this point public works and likely the sheriff so I think we could ask Chris Nedden because he does plan to come back the item has staff coming back for actions the board still has to take to approve

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 22Proposed1:36:46

Thank you. Fire, county fire, Montecito Fire, CSD County Council, OEM Public Works. But we do have a model that we are following which has been done for Mission Canyon for the tunnel trail and so our plan is to get with the fire marshals and delineate the boundaries and bring back an item excuse me to set their red flag zones in the next couple months

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:37:24

And I think maybe the sheriff's office could come up and talk about what their plan would be, because the request is for the sheriff to take some activity. Take some actions.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 23Proposed1:37:43

Good morning. So the sheriff's plays like just a piece of this puzzle, we're just a part of this pie it's a collaborative effort. We've been having meetings for months now and this specific role we're talking about are we would come in and we would patrol the areas and get out education as far as people going up the trail if it's closed or possibly have to take enforcement action and also enforcement on the parking issues And at the same time, like we were talking earlier about we're coming up. We've been talking about new solutions for parking whether we're going to maybe build another fenced area parking or whatnot so these are all in discussion.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.811:38:26

And how long till you come back with the results of this? Are we going to wait through summer six months

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 17Proposed1:38:38

Supervisor Hartman to the chair, I think we would have to at least wait for a few red flag days to come back with anything. At this point in time, I mean, we're fairly recently offering... The expectation, I believe was to come back in probably early 2026 with the results as a whole. I mean more data equals better information from which to make decisions that was a general plan.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.811:39:05

Okay, well it seems like this is a start towards and you described this as phase one. And I'm just curious about what the other phases are and kind of who's in charge? And I guess it's your office is kind of taking a lead that the political leaders Congressman Carbajal and our state delegation so. Well, I'm very supportive. I think this is really a critical threat really and so I am very glad you brought it forward.

Thank

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:39:43

you to

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.781:39:43

President Nelson.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:39:44

Yes, thank you Chair Capsen. I'm going to be supportive as well again. I think that this is a tool but I really think it comes down to the parks side. You know this is their asset and instead of getting towards it has at this point I think there's really an obligation they have to come and say hey we need these additional resources to actually enforce county code You know, unfortunately in many cases we have code in place but we don't have enforcement in place and we end up having meetings to talk about eventually enforcing. I mean whether it's homelessness, food service or a trail. It's the same common problem where we already had the rules in place We actually need to do the enforcement and Mr. Armas needs to come to us and say, hey I need these additional resources to actually enforce on current county code or i'm going to have to make cuts somewhere else to deal with this acute problem within my organization and that's how I like to see this move forward.

I think it's great that we're going to go ahead and give some money to potentially the Sheriff's Department so that they can back them up but I think this really comes down to parks Saying hey, this is too much on the trail because if you actually limit the amount of people on the trail for safety reasons that will actually potentially solve some of the parking issues.

Some of the fire issues, making sure people are out there at the right times. We have rules in place we just need to actually enforce rules that we have in place. We didn't need to create more task force and more plans But again, I will support this effort. I hope in the future if there is additional need that we hear from the department. I think it's great that our elect leaders take some leadership here but I also have an expectation that the organization identifies these problems addresses them and comes to us and ways to solve them

1:41 – 1:439 turns

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.781:41:22

Well, I'll just add my support of this. I think it's a very smart approach. I just want to commend Supervisor Lee and his team for working with the community. I know the community has been up in arms on this issue for years and just judging by our inbox over the weekend we're flooded with support from those who use the trail live by the trail have experienced the fear of fire that the nuisance of the tour buses so The fact that the community is behind this, I think really shows me that you've nailed it and I'm happy to give my support.

CommentBrandon KaysenProposed · by introduction1:42:00

All right, thank you board and I hope to bring to the future discussion about additional phases and solutions we can have. So with that, I move to approve A through E,

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.901:42:14

agenda number two. Supervisor Lavendier? Just a quick question on the motion so did we get a time... We're going to let a couple of red flag days go by. Did we agree on when it's going to come back?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:42:29

Supervisor, I'd suggest coming back in six months just for a status update. There may not... we'll see how many red flag days we've had but it doesn't hurt you typically ask for a six-month update. I think we can do that.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.901:42:38

Okay then I'd be happy to support the motion.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:42:42

Thank you.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.781:42:43

Do we have a second? I'll second. Supervisor Hartman with the second. All those in favor please say aye. Aye. Motion carries unanimously thank you All right. Item number three, when folks are ready. Supervisor

CommentBrandon KaysenProposed · by introduction1:43:04

Lee? Chair Kaps, since I own a local restaurant, I'm going to recuse on this item until we get a letter from the FPPC. Thank you.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.781:43:12

Okay. Yeah, just judging from the transition we're going to take a five minute break here. Okay and we're back for departmental item number three roadside and sidewalk vending. Supervisor Lee do you just want to repeat

1:43 – 2:044 turns

CommentBrandon KaysenProposed · by introduction1:43:55

I do. Thank you, Chair Kaps. So since I own a local restaurant, I am going to recuse on this item until we get a letter from the FPPC. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.711:44:04

Okay and Chair Kaps, members of the board, departmental item number three is from Supervisor Hartman. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the formation of a task force to address unlawful roadside and sidewalk vending

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.811:44:18

And Chair Caps, my Chief of Staff Gina Fisher will be making the report. She's worked very hard on this.

CommentGina FisherProposedself-stated1:44:24

Thank you Supervisor Hartman. Take it away Ms. Fisher. All right good morning chair and supervisors. My name is Gina Fisher and I'm Supervisor Hartman's chief of staff. I'm here to present on a complex topic and hope to get board feedback guiding next steps for our county on this vaccine issue. And yes, just before lunch. This presentation is similar to the presentation I gave to SBCAG in October. However today I will share some updates since then. Additionally today includes some recommended actions that pertain to the county's role in addressing this problem. We seek board guidance in forming a task force, which can come back to the board with more specifics for implementing an enforcement strategy or best practices. Thus far individual departments mostly public health's environmental health services division has invested a lot of resources into tackling this issue and I have staff next to me for specifics about that.

Before I start, I want to share a few pictures to ground us in a place that emphasizes that this issue of unlawful roadside and sidewalk vending is really a public health and safety issue. These are a few images captured by our Public Health Department to visualize this. And I will explain them a little bit further in detail later on but it also includes Berman.

So how we got here? In 2018, Senate Bill 946 authored by then Senator Ricardo Lara was passed with the goal of empowering sidewalk vendors particularly those operating within the informal economy. The bill emerged from organized advocacy efforts in Los Angeles where street vendors were penalized by law enforcement for operating without permits This led to the decriminalization of sidewalk vending in Los Angeles by the Los Angeles City Council in 2017.

SB 946 subsequently extended these protections statewide, preventing the imposition of criminal penalties for sidewalk vendors and replacing them with administrative fines. The bill was widely seen as a safeguard for low-income and immigrant communities Particularly in the wake of federal immigration efforts ongoing at that time, that targeted the prioritization of deportation of undocumented individuals who had even relatively minor criminal offenses which could include a misdemeanor for sidewalk vending.

However, while SB 946 removed the threat of criminal penalties it has made it difficult for local jurisdictions to enforce regulations limiting sidewalk vending. In light of the passage of SB 946 local authorities have the opportunity to update their codes to reflect some time place or manner restrictions on sidewalk vending but by and large local jurisdictions no longer have the ability to significantly restrict, limit or deny vendors from operating or add barriers to the permitting process. Additionally, vendors are required to comply with ADA laws. Since I last presented to SBCAG our partners at CHP have informed us that this activity is expressly not allowed on state highways or state highway right of ways As such, CHP has started to issue warnings to vendors mostly on 246 through the Santa Ynez Valley and into the Lompoc area.

SB 946 meant local jurisdictions can't directly or indirectly ban sidewalk vending. If a vendor is permitted, jurisdictions cannot cap the number of vendors, cannot restrict vending to certain locations and cannot stop vending from occurring in parks unless there's a concessionaire agreement and can only impose vending restrictions if there is a justifiable restriction made for health safety and welfare considerations.

As we are seeing throughout our county and statewide, many vendors have emerged unpermitted knowing that the most consequence they face is a small administrative fine. Therefore they are incentivized to ignore local and state regulations. As a result there has been widespread noncompliance with vendor programs. Local governments and the League of California Cities were opposed to SB 946 for stripping local jurisdictions of meaningful enforcement tools, and noted that administrative fines are often too weak of a deterrent for unpermitted vending operations.

After the passage of SB 946, sidewalk vendors wanting to sell low-risk food items were still required to be permitted by their public health departments or in our case environmental health services. But some felt that those permitting requirements posed too much of a burden so in response to the lack of food vendors obtaining EHS certifications or health permits, the legislature responded.

Introducing Senate Bill 972. Senate Bill 972 was passed in 2022 to modernize the California Retail Food Code or Cal Code and simplify the permitting process for sidewalk vendors who want to sell low-risk items, food items. So as you can see, the push cart, a stand, a pedal cart or a wagon. Those were the low risk types of food sales that there was now streamlining permitting through EHS to do those types of sales, you're supposed to have a health permit.

Never were the tents with the hot food and open flame ever meant to be permitted or ever meant to be part of this process. So, sidewalk food vendors who are now legalized under SB 946 were not complying with the provisions of the Cal Code and were therefore unable to obtain permits from their local health departments to sell low-risk food legally. The goal of SB 972 was to address the barriers vendors faced under long-ago established food safety requirements, such as equipment standards that were designed for food truck operations but were not applicable to food carts. By easing these health code food permitting requirements, SB 972 aimed to further open economic opportunities for low income vendors and improve public health through better compliance.

Unfortunately, despite these reforms SB 946 coupled with SB 972 have largely failed to solve the problem. While it simplified the food handling permit process few vendors have gone through the legal steps to obtain necessary permits In fact, in Santa Barbara County only two vendors have attempted to go through the mobile food cart permit process with EHS which is the permitting agency for both the county and all cities.

One vendor applied for cut fruit and one for prepackaged ice cream despite multilingual outreach efforts. And as a reminder The same county department, EHS has successfully implemented the micro enterprise home kitchen operation or MECOS across our county. So there is a demonstrated willingness among county staff to permit these types of entrepreneurs. The reason for such noncompliance of SB 946 and 972 is simple. Without meaningful penalties for noncompliance, there is little incentive for vendors to adhere to the new rules. Vendors continue to operate outside the system knowing that at worst enforcement is limited to small fines.

The combined effect of SB 946 and 972 has left local governments in a difficult position. Without the ability to meaningfully enforce regulations, unpermitted and potentially unsafe food vending continues to proliferate. This situation calls for a coordinated response among local jurisdictions both cities and counties to create a unified strategy that balances the rights of vendors with the need to protect public health and safety Collaboration is essential to ensure that the original intent of these laws is realized while addressing the real world consequences that have emerged.

The primary reason for alarm over this issue is food safety and sanitation concerns. As such, I have a number of slides of unsafe food temperature readings. When already cooked or raw food is at temperatures between 41 degrees Fahrenheit and 135 degrees Fahrenheit, it enters the danger zone. The danger zone is a range where bacteria can rapidly grow and multiply. This type of hazard is often odorless, tasteless, and invisible making it difficult to detect without proper temperature monitoring Foods left too long in this range can become unsafe to eat, even if they look or smell fine. This is why food temperature readings are a critical tool for evaluating risk. So here we have a picture of cooked rice held at 68 degrees which is right in the danger zone And a bucket of raw meat with blood dripping down the sides, these are examples of items that the source was identified as Los Angeles County.

They came up to our county unrefrigerated the whole trip and so this means that this food based on the temperature readings has a huge public health potential for a huge public health safety. We have the danger zone in case USDA is really good about educating folks on that danger zone. So again, this is food with no refrigeration, no ice or no coolant. Its origin in these examples was Los Angeles County so it's been many hours in the danger zone. EHS reports that the overwhelming number of vendors they cite come from Los Angeles and very few are from our county. So we have cooked beans held at 80 degrees.

Literally a bag of cooked meat, like that was their transportation method. Just put cooked meat in a grocery bag at 75 degrees and that ice chest has no ice nothing to cool it's got dairy, meat other perishable food in there unrefrigerated and brought up to our county. This is the interior of the transportation vans that come up if EHS saw this In a commercial kitchen this filthy, they would shut it down. And they would have the tools to shut it down and impose meaningful penalties. So this is what the food is being transported in.

In this example, this vendor was attempting to operate in a location that had recently been treated with pesticides and was under a restricted entry interval or an REI of 72 hours. An REI is a designated period set by pesticide regulations during which entry to the treated area is strictly prohibited to prevent harmful exposure. For three days following pesticide application, no one's allowed to enter the area as residues may pose serious health risks. Despite the clearly posted do not enter warnings, the vendor attempted to serve food in this environment and so that picture on the left is it's the ground I mean that's their kitchen that they're serving out of and that's another picture next to it of the inside of the van in the filth of the equipment that they're serving food from And here's a picture of a cockroach that EHS found in a van, which is pretty common.

So these all pertain to the kind of the top food safety sanitation concerns and the kind of kitchen conditions. A major frustration and misconception that constituents have about these unlawful pop-up vendors is that it seems like no one is doing anything about it. I want the public to know that county environmental health staff are absolutely going out, doing inspections and issuing citations. It's been reported they've issued 137 notices of violation since January They do this after hours and on nights and weekends, and they always have bilingual staff with them. They bring bilingual brochures about proper food permitting procedures. However, this is very important for people to understand because of the way that state law was written it effectively is a blanket decriminalization of vending activity.

It is perfectly legal for vendors to refuse to provide their names or any identifying information upon inspection They can legally refuse to sign civil citations. Here is an example of the length health inspectors must still go through to issue a citation. So this is an example in the San Ynez Valley, public health goes out to roadside pop-up someone they give a name and They give just a name for a business owner, they give a phone number. When asked for a business owner address so that public health is aware of the origin of the food or the facilities it came from not provided.

Public Health makes notes of the different things they have there what's being sold, the foods The individuals just said we came from Los Angeles, nothing else was provided. They note there's no ice, that there's no handwashing stations, there's no utensil washing and then when they went to give this citation the individuals refused to sign. So if that wasn't enough, even if EHS staff were to be provided with identifying information the first notice of violation is a written warning. So in this case the vendors voluntarily packed up and left And after the vendors packed up and left, less than an hour-and-a-half later they returned to the exact same spot. The Eastside Business Association has written public comment letters. This is common in the city of Santa Barbara.

So EHS staff return. They cited them a second time. This citation would only be a $100 civil fine, but since they refused to provide any identifying information it begs the question what can EHS staff do? SB 946 has made traditional enforcement methods ineffective and let me emphasize this differs from the procedures if EHS was inspecting a brick-and-mortar establishment.

Since I last presented at SBCAG, EHS has started to utilize one other enforcement tool at their current disposal. And that is seizing food. When I prepared this presentation they had partnered with the City of Santa Maria to seize food that was deemed to be unsafe based on temperature readings. They've also done this in the San Ines Valley. So people reasonably have asked why don't we just do that as our main strategy? And the reason is because state law requires us to hold seized food for a specific number of days, even if we are seizing because we have reason to believe it is unsafe and a hazard to the public. But due process allows people the opportunity to claim their seized assets even if it's spoiled food. So EHS has run out of freezer storage space.

Solving that will likely be something the task force can do, but that's just another confine of the laws we have to deal with. So transitioning to other safety concerns here are examples of open flames in the public right-of-way right next to gas stations this actually is pretty common especially in the city of Santa Barbara and on the south coast Here are public safety concerns that pertain to fire, open flame, propane use and other hazardous materials.

These are all photos from the third district in the San Inez Valley which has especially high fire risk. The upper photos of discarded and littered propane hoses and nozzles and dry brush and the bottom right is a gas can sitting among brush and then they have the trompo type grills with the propane and open flames is pretty common. So this illustrates public safety concerns pertaining to roadside and traffic safety. Here's a photo from Highway 246 on the right, and the photo on the left is from the City of Santa Maria.

This activity also happens on Highway 154. Both roadways 154 and 246 are in state jurisdiction, Caltrans. But again since our last presentation at SB CAG, CHP which is Caltrans' enforcement agency has made a commitment to better warn vendors to get them to move off-state highway right of ways. The cities of Santa Barbara and Santa Maria deal with a lot of sidewalk and ADA intrusive setups.

Other concerns include the illegal dumping of grease straight into gutters and storm drains. In the city of Santa Barbara, as shown in the bottom middle on the right photo and the bottom left photo is the morning after nearly dumping on Highway 246 in the Solving Santa Anaz area. The upper photo depicts the very bright lights off 154 in the San Ines Valley, which is distracting. As you know a business would never be permitted to have such bright lights off the highway there and significantly... There's a significantly damaged bike path in Santa Barbara that was a new piece of infrastructure in the city that vendors would pop up there night after night and dump the grease directly on the sidewalk and into the storm drains so it's victim of illegal grease dumping Other concerns include unfair business practices, labor and tax collection issues.

Here is a photo of vendors setting up right outside of a permitted and regulated business in Santa Barbara, and a vendor setting up literally in front of a business in Santa Maria. So that tent in front of the Marcisco's is not that business. It's a pop-up vendor setting up right in front of their front—a permitted businesses' front door. The City of Santa Barbara has gathered information that frontline servers are likely working without proper compensation, and in fact may be newly arrived to this country and are working off debts owed to people.

Investigations have indicated that the frontline people are often being exploited. Investigation by other jurisdictions seems to strongly indicate that these are mostly sophisticated operations that take advantage of very vulnerable people who are put on the front lines. So in conclusion, changes in state law have made enforcement of what is even blatantly unlawful activity really hard to enforce as such the county and our partners will need to better collaborate share practices and come up with creative solutions to bring cessation to this activity There is one last point I'd really like the public to think about.

That is, folks may patronize these stands because they think they're being altruistic or that they're helping a neighbor out or that the hours of these operations are convenient and the food might even taste pretty good. But really people are taking a huge gamble with their health by consuming this unverified food and are also likely contributing to a system of exploitation while also undermining the bottom line of our local restaurants, our food trucks and our permitted culinary entrepreneurs. And with that I'm happy to answer any questions or defer to staff.

2:04 – 2:1330 turns

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:04:54

Well thanks for that presentation Miss Fisher. Questions from the board? Supervisor Lavadino.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.902:05:01

Thank you, Madam Chair. So I'm curious why with the League of California Cities and I don't know where CSAC weighed in on this is if they did?

CommentGina FisherProposedself-stated2:05:11

It was a mix. They ended up peeling off their support. I think once the exception for farmers markets, I don't know exactly but they were opposed and then some changes were made minor changes and then they repealed their opposition.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.902:05:25

Okay, so what kind of relationship did that legislation have to COVID? I'm kinda curious. I was wondering maybe if... Because I'm wondering if the political climate's changed at this point where we're not trying to... This kinda seemed like a solution to not going inside a restaurant that you're going to a pop-up or whatever. Did that have anything that had nothing to do with it?

CommentGina FisherProposedself-stated2:05:47

No, the state legislature passed the initial law a couple years before COVID.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.902:05:54

Okay. So what's gonna be different, because it seems like we have the laws in place. What's different? I can't imagine how frustrating it is for environmental health to show up and be like okay, we're shutting you down for now and then as long as you come back within an hour. I mean your guys they can't stay there all day so what's different now or what could we do different now than what we're doing right now? How does the task force help do that?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed2:06:24

Supervisor Lavinia, through the chair. I think one of the biggest successes we've had was when we had a multi-agency, multi-jurisdiction approach to it. Even now when we've started doing some impounds of adulterated or unapproved meats, it's been basically because of our partnership with the California Highway Patrol and the Sheriff's Department to make that happen.

We've really been when we're there, again. A frustrating situation when we're basically just waiting having them shut down and then basically they come back the next night or even the same night. So I think one of the big benefits of having a multi-jurisdictional task force or at least a place to discuss all the little pieces of this. I think that has some benefits to being able to coordinate our efforts.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.902:07:20

Okay, so do we have to the requirement on storing their food? Because to me that seems like the deterrent is to confiscate what they have with them. That would make sense to me that that's a business decision and you should that's the way you shut them down.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.812:07:35

And their equipment

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.902:07:36

but we don't have

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.812:07:37

a storage.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.902:07:38

So it's kind of the same thing when we've talked about the homeless situation you're required by law that you have to store their goods no one ever comes back for the goods I'm curious if on this has anybody ever come back and wanted Do you have any plans to

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed2:07:54

do that? No. We try to actually due to space and storage in the time frame of keeping impounded meat, if we can get them to basically voluntary discard, we do that and then we can seize it and discard it but we have under impound requirements they have an opportunity Do we have

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.902:08:18

to store it in a healthy manner or can we store it like they stored it?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed2:08:22

We do. We've purchased the freezer, food grade bags, containers to be able to basically preserve the condition of

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.902:08:29

the

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed2:08:29

food

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.902:08:30

that

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed2:08:30

we

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.902:08:30

have

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed2:08:30

seized.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.902:08:31

That seems like the requirement that would need to be... I mean because if you could just store it anywhere that would be pretty helpful.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed2:08:37

It would smell terrible

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.902:08:39

All right. So so state legislature is not helping us out here, but you actually believe you think that the multi jurisdictional task force gives you more weight or it doesn't really give us any more storage? Yeah, I'm just struggling with it. We have to do something and I just hate to do something. I think it gives

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.812:08:59

us different authorities. I think fire open flames they've got other authorities that they can go after this we learned in this process that Caltrans actually does have authority to get people out of the right-of-way and working with CHP so I think a coordinated approach understanding the different authorities The agencies have, but I do think confiscation is important and we have to find more space to hold this stuff.

This is an issue as Miss Fisher mentioned it's coming up from L.A. with a few people sending out lots of lots of vans and trucks with these and I guess they're making a lot of money

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.902:09:51

Or they wouldn't be doing it. Last question is, so do we have a commitment from those that are on this task force? It seems like a lot of this is at night weekends, that sort of thing. I know I'm sure our environmental health folks are in but are you gonna be able to get the CHP and Caltrans to commit to working odd hours? That seems like pretty heavy lift, I would imagine.

CommentGina FisherProposedself-stated2:10:16

I think that's the goal. The place that has a natural home is with EHS, they have the least authority to do anything because of the legislature. So the goal is to pull in where can we get creative? There's a real irony here that the legislature did this to protect certain communities. and took away our main deterrence to stop that activity. And so now we have to upstand a whole surveillance scheme, a whole other set of resources to curtail the activity. And that's what the task force and maybe seizures that what the experts get together and say this is what we can do and we'll do it after hours And this is what it's going to cost. City of Santa Barbara has been doing this work, they are really invested in the legal side and investigation trying to get to the top of the pyramid.

They are doing it I guess off book like they've never come before the council to say this is how much it's gonna cost us and they're just kind of doing it that way. The county of Ventura is about a year ahead of us, they came to the board in this way and said we want to get the task force there structured a little different so their enforcement's a little different. They have like an enforcement agency with enterprise funds and they put in money for a pilot. They're undergoing that pilot right now and they'll probably have a report back to their board in the next couple months. And so part of the task force is to lean on Ventura to say, you know they're ahead of us on this like is seizing actually working? You know what are they doing to help?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.902:11:56

So last question is are we on our ledge committee or we also talking trying to do a cleanup on the legislation? Because it sounds like I don't know any municipality that this isn't an issue and

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.812:12:11

The legislature so far is not very eager to change this but the Restaurant Association, one of the ironies is that it's hurting Latino restaurants almost more than any others. And and so they're organizing about unfair business practices and trying to bring it forward

CommentGina FisherProposedself-stated2:12:36

I would say that I think Supervisor Hartman's on ledge and despite maybe a reluctance from the legislature to address this, we can still do our part to comment letters, to do different things. And part of it is for our state lobbyists to help cue us into other jurisdictions. We know Ventura is dealing with this big time and to help tie us in to kind of build that momentum

2:13 – 2:198 turns

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:13:05

Okay, Supervisor Nielsen.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:13:06

Yes thank you Chair Caps. I know that the third district's been working on this for quite some time we've been working on in our office as well. We've got some of our unincorporated areas in Los Alamos and Orchid have been impacted by this as well and where we've seen success is enforcement. And so I know our offices had many conversations environmental health supporting the purchase and acquisition of the infrastructure necessary to to do the seizing of food and you know our office even offered to potentially purchase a c-train if needed to do this and the offer is still there if that there's a need. So I guess my question is for environmental health right now so how many times have we heard around 37 violations since January? How many times have we actually seized food at this point?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed2:14:00

Supervisor Nelson to the chair. We've calculated our impound data, of course you know we had to set the infrastructure and get the freezer and storage and components in on that since January we've seized 11 spindles of meat, the large chubs of uncooked meat 14 gallons of raw sliced cooked meat from the Santa Anaz Valley 415 pounds of cooked uncooked meat from Santa Maria Orchid locations so You know, it takes an incredible amount of time and effort in coordinating to get staff. This is evenings weekends we need to have law enforcement support so you know we've been out several times in the last month here. We're hoping that it has the intended effect.

It seems to be sort of our next step, but we needed that law enforcement support or jurisdictional support to be able to do it. Otherwise, we're there with a piece of paper and- Sure.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:15:00

And that's about it. So how many times is that you guys actually have seized food that you've seen them reopen that

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 22Proposed2:15:05

night? Supervisor Nelson through the chair. Not the same night that we've seized, but the next night.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:15:15

Okay so potentially the next night but it has ended for that night right and then you've taken a few hundred dollars worth of food at that point is there any tools to actually confiscate equipment?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed2:15:32

Supervisor Nielsen through the Chair, there are provisions in Cal Code for seizing equipment. We've not had the resources and infrastructure to be able to do that. We've had anecdotal reports and also reports from other jurisdictions where you know equipment seizures also They come back with more equipment. And on many of the equipment they have multiple vans, they have multiple equipment, they're coming out of L.A., they can pick up new equipment just as quickly as they can pick up meat sometimes. So it's another tool we have.

We're trying to do The quickest, easiest most efficient thing first and but we would as part of I think this task force. And if the board would like to have a report back on this at some point in time we can certainly look into what that might cost and what resources would be needed to impound equipment as well.

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:16:31

Yeah, I think that's where the where I'm at on this is again kind of going back to last item and in future items. No more meetings don't solve problems actually enforcement does and you know there's no wonder that you know this came from Laura can't fix the insurance crisis can't fix the food deal anyway that was a little dig sorry but you know that we need to enforce actual rules. I don't think we need more rules. We actually have them and we need to give you the tools to do your job and make sure that you have support from our other partners, whether that's fire or whether that's sheriff department. Obviously can't control the city's police departments or CHP but I think it'd be in their vested interest because if we're doing good enforcement in the unincorporated areas they're obviously going to go into the cities so they'll provide you the help as well You know, just hearing that, you know, confiscation ends it for that night.

Well, that's a good step and actually we've seen it, you know, it's happened in our area where that's confiscation they don't haven't come back for a couple weeks and now they're starting to come back because you know there's that feeling I think we have to have ongoing presence out there and I think that what I would love to hear from You know, environmental health over the next year or next through the budget cycle is potentially a budget expansion request whether we can deliberate that as a board. But talk about what would you need to really address this issue for the infrastructure on your side so that we can know whether we can give you those resources to solve that problem or not? Or what we're going to cut so that we can give you those tools because I don't think we are at this point and invest more on the enforcement side.

I don't think we need more rules, I don't think we need more meetings frankly if that's what we need to do to at least have a coordination meeting. I don't know if it needs to be much more formal than getting everybody to serve in their actual roles and if we're not going to enforce these roles then why do we have these rules in the first place? You know I'm not a big fan of having laws that just sit on the books that we watch people violate them but we don't do anything about them So that's where I like to see us actually just move forward with what we have on the books. You know, it's probably when you confiscate the food is probably kind of an immediate $500 fine and you start confiscating equipment that's in the thousands. And I do think that that's going to be lasting impactful at some point when you start to seize significant generators So they put $2 million into their pilot program.

I think we can rent a lot of C-trains and a lot of overtime to prevent that from happening. That's what, I wouldn't want to support that. I would rather put a few hundred thousand dollars into storage facilities rental and we can rent C-trains for a couple thousand dollars a month but they have the refrigeration units part of it. There's solutions out there that I think we can spend a lot less and just do enforcement under what we're at this point.

I would like to see something a little bit more efficient

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

2:19 – 2:2612 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:19:53

Thank you for those comments, Supervisor Nelson. And just a couple of things as you think about environmental health and what's ahead they are coming next week for the increase in their fees and that may not specifically be on this it's for other things that they do and so I think when you have that conversation you could also bring this up but We would ask for your support on that because it helps the whole division continue the work that they're doing. The second thing is that I want to just thank Supervisor Hartman and Supervisor Lee in the previous item, because we do have this loose thing called an eight-hour rule where we're trying to look at our staff time and how they are utilized. The board can't direct staff directly except through this process so thank you for doing that And so a task force, I know folks have been saying do we need a task force?

It's process. But I think this is a good way to coordinate and for us to keep our eyes on what is happening. I know my office has lent assistance to Mrs. Fisher as we go forward on this but maybe it's reporting back because you've given a lot of ideas already on how actions can occur and so maybe reporting back sooner than later once this gets kicked off.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:20:59

Supervisor Harmon, did you want to respond?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.812:21:01

Well so a question is again who might oversee or coordinate the task force and I'm not sure that my office is capable of doing that.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:21:16

Okay, before we get too far along we do have public comment but I just wanted to ask a couple questions prior. Thank you for the work. I mean clearly looking at the photos you've identified a real public health hazard and I know you've already done so through the asbestos of SBCAG and I learned a lot from that session. And it's not lost on me that we just are celebrating the 100th anniversary of Public Health and this need here to really educate people. So I did want to ask, what is the current education? You said that you've tried to inform people because my real concern is that those who eat this food are predominantly given that the food is mostly from the Mexican American culture a lot of Latino families some of whom right now are under a lot of new stress of potential new policies from the administration and so I just want Understand a little bit more how our actions potentially through this task force might be impacting those who are really struggling right now.

And, and this is a source of inexpensive food that speaks to their culture. So what kind of education thus far has happened to make sure that they understand the health risks?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed2:22:36

Chair Gaps, the Public Health Department has put a lot of effort into trying to educate those on the street in the communities. It's a really difficult issue. We have bilingual staff. We always send out bilingual staff. We have bilingual resources. We've tried to work with local organizations including Eastside Chambers and trying to get that message out. Even local meetings in Santa Barbara, in which we've had staff participate to try to share that message about food safety.

We're very cognizant of the needs in communities and being sensitive to those needs. We also have this struggle in which basically it's because you're low income or maybe not as well versed, you also deserve safe food. And so that's something that we're always out is like just because you can't afford it doesn't mean that you shouldn't have unsafe food and I think that's even more so the reason why we need to get that message out that like that is even more important in those communities and so that something that we've been trying to get that message out but doing it alone and environmental health has limited our ability to get that message out. And I think having, you know, maybe a more broad, you know, county discussion on this would help amplify that message where we can and so...

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:24:11

So is there one second? Has there been any outreach yet to this point with the organizations that support Latino community like CAWS or others at this point?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed2:24:25

not formally known.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.812:24:26

Supervisor

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:24:26

Hartman, you wanted to weigh

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.812:24:27

in? Yes I would the TV is here today RPIO will release a news release after about this issue there is a Santa Maria Spanish podcaster who's also covering this issue And we've certainly reached out through our newsletter and every opportunity we get. I believe the county also is counseling its staff not to patronize these areas. Again, these are very recent immigrants who are basically slave labor. The people working at these places are being terribly exploited And we know that from research that the city of Santa Barbara has done. And so it's not a good thing to be engaged in this whole enterprise.

CommentGina FisherProposedself-stated2:25:19

My other question for the, oh yes. If I may Chair Caps, some of the organizations most involved in this issue are like the Hispanic Chamber or the Eastside, I think the Eastside Business Association, I might have that title wrong but they've submitted public comment letters and whatnot and so I think They also try to engage their communities about this. And every time they go out, they have brochures and whatnot because I think there's you know sometimes government we can be bureaucratic and people don't understand our processes but then I pivot back to this is the same department that's done a lot of permits through the MECOS. They're equipped too and a lot of those are Latino folks trying to get into the informal economy that way And so I think that this department has a pretty good track record of connecting with those communities trying to get a toehold in.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:26:19

Yeah, appreciate that can before we go much further just if we can explain just a little bit of the history with food truck regulations it seems that that that has made some I just want to say thank you to the Board of Supervisors for all the work that they've been doing in terms of making progress, in terms of the permits that are involved and the safety issues. And just the distinction between what we're talking about food vending versus food trucks

2:26 – 2:356 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed2:26:49

Chair Caps, the mobile food trucks have been you know permitted and able to operate for quite some time. And we've spent a lot of effort with our local communities on trying to help facilitate that permitting process. We do actually as part of that permitting process we do have annual inspections there's Every year and we you know are there they're part of the regulated community. And so we're in contact if they have questions, we work with them and we've helped facilitate with many of the cities as far as you know their ability or restrictions on where they can operate how long And so we've had a lot of conversations around mobile food trucks.

And they are typically associated then with a home kitchen in which they can basically wash their utensils, they can get new equipment, they can have a place to store their meat and refrigerated items that meets safety requirements. And so there's a lot of infrastructure that goes into supporting mobile food trucks. You know, taking that and then basically taking the support sort of away. And so they're now you know doing it in a mobile fashion but without really the safeguards in place for food safety and it makes it very difficult for environmental health to make sure that they're complying with those requirements.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:28:16

And is the vision if the task force goes forward that there would be representation from those who represent Latino communities or Latino businesses?

CommentGina FisherProposedself-stated2:28:29

That, I mean that seems fine to me. It's good to have the board's guidance on what this can look like and what the recommended actions might be and how this will take

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:28:38

shape.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.902:28:42

Thank you Madam Chair and I see our district attorney is here and I noticed on that one slide where the person setting up right in front of the other restaurant what abilities Do we have in our district attorney's office with unfair business practices is that something that we are even looking at or just kind of curious where the legal realm comes in.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 25Proposed2:29:08

Supervisor Lavanino through the chair I'd say the biggest problem from particularly as regards the district attorney's office involvement is what you saw in the slide with the signature refused. Unfair business practice could be any violation of laws or regulation, it could be the improper storage of food, could provide the basis for a civil suit for an unfair business practice. You could have not paying I know there's a lot of at least evidence or supposition that the workers are in fact possibly victims of labor trafficking. Well, unlike Unlike sex trafficking in the human trafficking arena, the actual underlying activity is illegal.

So sex trafficking allows law enforcement a point of intersection with the victim whereas here It's from LA, but who in LA? What is the underlying umbrella entity that we could file a civil suit against so that becomes the problem with that. There aren't as stated generally criminal violations The civil violations we could file still require us to know the identity of the individuals. It requires the linkage, it requires the investigation as to who is making the money so we need to pierce that and I think my perspective on the task force, I kind of liken it to the business compliance unit we had during COVID Where it was, it was cities. It was county agencies cities.

Everybody was together talking about the problem to see where what we do have available and we were able to dispel a lot of myths for instance. What could the sheriff's department do? What could the DA's office do? What could the Department of Health do and at least gets us all in some of us have different sources of information. I may be getting information from the California District Attorneys Association, I can get on the phone with DA Nasarenko and see what his office is doing so the one thing that at least a task force at least getting the minds together in the room Thank you. Thank you very much supervisor Nelson I wholeheartedly appreciate your the fact that that you know your anti meeting because I have enough of them but in this case if we do get all the people together involved in this maybe The discussion part of it doesn't cost anybody any money.

My people, whoever whether it's myself, chief deputy and assistant deputy, my consumer protection unit they're on salary so I'm not paying any extra for them to actually participate in the meeting and maybe getting everybody together. Maybe then together we come to the board and say we need C trains All we have available is, let's make it unprofitable to do this in Santa Barbara County.

And the best solution we come up with is C-trains and that's something concrete then we can come to the board with but I'm more than willing to participate. Just frightful and looking because if that meat was at a restaurant. I could file a 17200 and I can assure you my consumer and environmental unit would be all over it for dumping grease into a waterway, for polluting waterways. That's something that we have filed cases on for dry cleaners, for any restaurant doing that. We have prosecuted historically businesses like Target for taking broken cases of cleaning fluid and just throwing it in the garbage instead of doing disposing of the hazardous waste in the appropriate manner.

That's something we would do, but this so in this arena I'm as all those issues that generally we address aren't available to us because I don't know who and that's That's a big part of the problem and I'm more than willing to participate in any group that digs a little further into the issue and uses the experience of other jurisdictions, come up with some actual solutions. Like I said even if it is sea trains, doing nothing puts us closer to a health crisis, puts us closer to somebody getting a foodborne illness which You know, not only distressing and uncomfortable can be fatal. And that's what none of us want to see. And if we can actually pierce the veil and get to trafficking then I have... We have the whole human trafficking task force, the victim witness division in my office can get involved but we have to know who.

not transcribed≈12s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈10s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

2:35 – 2:4012 turns

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:35:21

Okay Supervisor Nielsen but we do have some public that have been patiently waiting to comment. So one last question

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:35:26

and

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:35:27

then we can do more questions on the back end for sure. You

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:35:29

know one of the things I noticed was that the generators that are being used for operation, have you guys talked to APCD about those being used for commercial purposes at this point? I just thought that might be another tool.

CommentGina FisherProposedself-stated2:35:41

It's a good suggestion I haven't spoken to APCD so we'll add that to the list

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:35:48

Okay let's take a public comment thanks to those who've been waiting and we'll turn it over to the clerk for that.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.712:35:53

Chair Capston, members of the board, we have four requests to speak from the public on this item. We're going to begin on Zoom with Mark Filiboissian to be followed by Jesse Espinoza. Mark?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 26Proposed2:36:16

Hi can you hear me?

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.712:36:18

Yes, we can please proceed.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 26Proposed2:36:20

Fantastic 1st off I just want to think I believe it is Mrs Fisher for a great presentation apologize if that was not your name but I just thought as a great presentation did a great job laying out the issue 2nd. I just want to thank Supervisor Hartman for bringing forth this recommendation to tackle this ongoing issue. I live in the east side of Santa Barbara and witness firsthand this growing problem.

These street vendors are not abiding by the same laws and regulations that our local businesses have to, and the issue is getting worse. About a year ago it was just a single cart on Milpas. Now it's nightly pop-up tents that have been growing in size. They're even storing tents and tables during the day to reserve the street corner And it's the same street corner pretty much every single time. So it's well known where they're going to be. I'm not in the restaurant business, but my heart goes out to the local owners.

It's an extremely hard business and I think we're turning our back on the law abiding entrepreneurs. And as you know, the city attorney was saying this is the lack of adherence to food safety is really endangering our community. There's a lot of other reasons why I'm passionate about this and what more I could say, but I just want to say thank you to Supervisor Hartman. And I have full support and plead that we push forward to whatever we can do to combat this issue.

Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.712:37:50

We will now go to Jesse Espinoza to be followed by Jason Aguilar. Jesse?

CommentNow Madam CEOProposed · by introduction2:37:59

Thank you for letting me speak and I'd like to give out a good. Appreciate Miss Fisher, you were great on your presentation and right on with all your points. Um, I have been involved in this for a very long time over 3 years ago when it 1st started with the push cart vendors along with a couple of other people in the neighborhood. Uh, I do agree the situation has been getting at hand.

And something does need to be done. And I know the city of Santa Barbara, which I've been continually talking to Barbara Anderson what little they have done has not really put a dent in it. No disrespect to them but this is a super health hazard and it is more than that with the illegal food being brought up Help the whole nine yards. This really needs to be taken care of, and I really wish that the county and the city will work together on this situation because what's it gonna take?

Food outbreak, hepatitis, an explosion of propane generators which they've had in San Fernando Valley. There's just so many things wrong on this level and I'm tired of hearing that money and staffing is an issue. Okay, well we keep raising taxes people want better wages. Well let's change that around. Let's do something different. The city needs to start being proactive about this because it also is hurting the local restaurants.

I've been collating meetings to talk to certain people in the neighborhood. I've talked to certain restaurant vendors who have taken a very huge hit, and it would be sad to see some of these restaurant owners that are long time to be gone because they've been underbid by unpermitted, unlicensed, no health permits. I mean, I've seen horrible things. I've been following these guys for quite some time.

Observing them, like the last gentleman said they have somebody sitting at the auto zone watching their tables and their spots. So if there's something we can do to get this enforcement going, we really need it. Sea trains? I don't think so. I think what you need to do is get tougher like I've seen on YouTube in Riverside and San Bernardino County where they just keep confiscating everything and they are gonna continue to give you false information.

So I see my time is almost up and thank you very much

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

2:40 – 2:486 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.712:40:39

We will now go to Jason Aguilar and then we will return to Santa Barbara with Bay Melina. Jason?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 27Proposed2:40:45

Hello, sorry there's a... Good morning I'm here to speak on behalf of my parents that own La Villa Restaurante y Panaderia in Santa Maria. We're Hispanic, Mexican and bakery that have been in Santa Maria for 30 years. I wanted to comment on all the street vending happening in Santa Maria that's been greatly increasing with time. Numerous street vendors on Main Street We've also been affected by the amount of food trucks that have actually been popping up in our area. So that was also a small thing that we've noticed, that there's been very, how do you say it? There's been like too many in the area, in our radius where we do our business. So it's greatly affected us in that way and I wanted to comment on that to see if there was a way to limit the radiuses on where they could position themselves where they can do their business but that'll be all for today.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.712:41:56

And we will now return to Santa Barbara with Bey Molina who is our final speaker. Bey?

PresenterBey MolinaEastside Milk Business AssociationProposedself-stated2:42:07

Hi, I'm Bey Molina. I'm representing the Eastside Milk Business Association. We've been involved with this issue for eight years so this is not a new issue for us. I send you all already in advance my presentation and I'm so glad that I did because now Thank you for that report. Trucks from LA food that came for just 4th of July. There was no enforcement there was nobody looking at everybody to see who would not just on that one strip of Who was legal and who wasn't legal when they were all selling food?

The second thing I want to clarify is that the participants who are buying the food are not Latinos. About 40% are, the rest are not. I have been attacked, my friend has been attacked, Jesse has been attacked because we're trying to educate the community. And people said, what are you doing to these people? They're just trying to make a living. They don't understand the implications of what these people represent, what they're doing and what they're selling. Some of those pictures I think were mine and I have more pictures of food that oh my God would not gross you out or make you sick.

The other thing is that I don't feel there's an urgency. For us, eight years has been a long time. We have restaurants that no longer can tolerate or I'm sorry it doesn't tolerate. can continue to run businesses. We have a very well-known business in the west side who's losing, he could document $800 a night. How do these businesses continue to support? By the way on Milpa Street it is the white and the Latino businesses are suffering. It is just not the Latinos' businesses.

The second thing is that we have called a bunch of cities across the state, and we have talked to a number of legislators. And one of the things that I would like to see this task force do—and I'm sorry I'm rushing, I have so much to say—is that they do want language recommendations of potential amendments to that law. That law was meant to help people and unfortunately What has happened, as we all know is that went into the wrong hands. But there is a way of modifying some of the legislation in terms if they have language to help us because they're not going to walk away from the language you are correct. They're not going to walk away from the bills but they are willing to make some modifications to help our situation because this situation is statewide The other thing is that I do want to see more connections with the city and the county, and not only with this county but with other counties like Ventura, like San Diego, like other counties that have been doing and working on this project.

And take from what they have done to help us in Santa Barbara when we met with the health department with all due respect They've told us that they don't have enough resources or enough money to be there in the evenings. And I concur within an hour, they're all back. The other thing that I want to say that I didn't hear today is that this is becoming more violent. It's becoming a more violent situation and if you walk and any of you can go out there to Milpas Street, the people who are selling food has a black van, I don't know what you call it It's a black metal detector on their legs so that they have to be forced to stay there and work, which I think is slave labor maybe.

It's very obvious. The other thing that we have noticed, we have people that are looking at all of these on the east side and west side, and I can't talk about the north, I'm sorry. is that now we're seeing drugs and we've also seen guns in some of these facilities because people are paranoid. So this is not just an issue of food safety, it's an issue of safety period.

And so I just want... We're frustrated because we don't see the urgency to this issue and then it's not a brand new issue. It's not two years old It's been a long time coming and it's getting worse. And yes, we're dealing with an organized organization that has a lot of resources and money and they're not in Santa Barbara. We agree. And why that level of scrutiny hasn't been done? I don't know. That's...we have to worry about what's happening here.

But we understand that this is a huge problem, but we need this county to really step up more than it has.

not transcribed≈15s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:46:55

Thank you. Ms. Malina I had a couple questions for you. So thanks. You're clearly very close to this issue so I just wanted to ask your opinion about sort of you spoke to the urgency do you see the task force as being the best way to tackle this issue? Are there other solutions that you suggest?

PresenterBey MolinaEastside Milk Business AssociationProposedself-stated2:47:15

At this point I think we need the expertise of everybody. I don't think this is a one person, one department so I agree the task force is important. A couple of other representations on there, but I would also like to see expertise on we have to educate this community. What on the issue of supporting it if people didn't buy food they wouldn't be coming here they're coming because there is a market we have to kill that That, what do you call it? That necessity for people to buy. And the only way it's going to happen now if it comes from the county and the city. In your websites there should be something on there. There isn't anything on the county or the city website. We monitor everything. So we need that kind of expertise involved with the code enforcement.

I love what you said. And that concludes public comment on this item. Okay, back to the board for questions

not transcribed≈10s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

2:48 – 2:5716 turns

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:48:43

I just, Supervisor Nelson do you have more questions?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:48:47

Yeah go for it. So these are again what we consider the high-risk territory food service is but we're targeting here where it's not the low risk and have you seen any of these high risks pop ups that would be legal

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed2:49:08

Supervisor Nielsen through the chair, no. The high risk food pop-up stands that we're talking about could not obtain permits under current state or local law.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:49:19

Okay so the state stuff doesn't really matter these are all You know, they're all high risk. Not a single one that you've seen at this point and you've seen hundreds at this point could get a permit so we actually do have laws in place that prohibit this.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 24Proposed2:49:31

Yeah there's instances where they could modify their operations to become a compact mobile food operation but as they are currently we typically would explain that. We would go through what you can do, what you can't. The ones that we're having difficulties with are ones that could not be permitted under state law.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:49:51

And we've seen hundreds at this point and it's zero on the other side, right? That's a score card here. Okay thank you

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:49:59

I just had a couple more questions unless you, okay. Yeah it's very compelling obviously we need to be doing something. Just want to get a little better understanding of what a task force would actually look like maybe that's not known yet that you said that it would be TBD but I just have some of the concerns of the fiscal impact of creating a new body to address a problem. I'm not sure that's always the best solution. I get that there needs to be interagency and inner city, county but it seems to me that potentially a few meetings of getting all the people together It just feels as though the answers are right in front of us.

And what's needed is some coordination, but mostly what's needed is funding for the enforcement. I'd be much more compelled if this was an item and perhaps that's coming for more enforcement, but to create a task force without an end date with not really a sense of how much money it would cost Also, then you have in the background Ventura County spending already two million dollars already.

We could learn from their report in a couple of months. So I just want to...I'm supportive of a task force that I've been convinced especially from Miss Molina who's been working on this for eight years and literally lives with it that we need more coordination. I just want to put some boundaries on I think the task force is definitely necessary, but

not transcribed≈23s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.902:51:51

And I hate to continue to add items onto our budget workshop, but it might be an area to look for extra dollars which I know are in very short supply. But it's all a matter of priority for us and what's gonna get funded and what's not gonna get funded. But this is something I think we could talk about in workshops if something else It's not as high up on the chart that this is something because it really does come down to enforcement all these things always come down in person. There's nothing more frustrating and sitting up here than having all these rules we pass any.

You know, they just don't have any teeth in them because of we just don't have the funds to go out at night and on weekends and those types of things and do the follow-up. So yeah, I'm supportive of the task force but I would also like us to have staff direction to actually bring this back too as an item during budget workshops to kind of figure out what we might be able to do what it would take

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:52:57

Any other?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.812:52:58

Yeah, I think we need a task force across agencies. There's been a lot of learning separately in silos and how to bring that together. I think we know a lot. I think if people were talking together we could identify the source of this and figure out the best strategy for going after it. I also believe that the different agencies have authorities. Our public health has the least, but I think if we work with the other agencies then that we can do a lot more.

I think we obviously need more storage for food I think we have to confiscate equipment. I think there are storage yards may need fencing. I think we can get some ideas about what, what we can do to move forward. I know the city of Santa Barbara has invested enormously in the legal case and if we had some coordination there and went after you know the head of this that we might make some real progress.

But I do think the task force needs somebody who's coordinating it, and I don't know if the CEO's office is willing to assign a staff to do that but I think that would be key because otherwise I don' think it gets done

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:54:23

So Supervisors to the Chair, I think I've told Wade Horton Assistant CEO if the board wants to have a task force my recommendation would be to have it. If you just decide that I mean I know that we want to get to action and that's why Wade is great because he's He's short on talk and long on action. And I would say then we make it time limited so have a very, if it's six months to get everyone together and then come back or something like that but I agree we don't want this to live on and take a life of its own So maybe think about how long you'd want the task force to live.

And then the second thing is Supervisor Lavinino talking about, you do have budget workshops rather than ask departments what do you need? That's step one but two what can you reprioritize within your existing resources because of the district attorney, the fire, EHS we all have large work programs but if this is a priority of the board what can we shuffle around within our existing work to achieve this?

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.812:55:23

And just to underline that we have to do that with planning and development all the time, make hard decisions. And as far as the task force composition I think it can get too unwieldy if we get too many community organizations. I think it should be the government agencies and organizations that are invested in this they may consult with various business associations or community organizations but I think it gets Too difficult and awkward to figure out that and bring that in within this short period of time.

Yes, Supervisor Nielsen.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:56:00

Yes thank you so I think whatever we come up with why don't we say no longer than six months because we hope that we get action sooner right and because we don't want to wait that long if it's possible to get back. I think something interesting that we've seen some success without a community services department in the Santa Maria Riverbed is we've developed an MOU with the other jurisdictions right? So we've got now an M.O.U at the City of Santa Maria, San Luis Obispo County And I believe Caltrans with our county on, you know, defining whose responsibilities are what. And I think that should maybe be what the byproduct of this is, is a MOU or MOA that comes out and dictates our pathway forward as we move on ultimately enforcement and who has those costs?

You know, county will have the cost maybe for enforcement in unincorporated areas. to pitch in on these under incorporated areas because they're protecting those city businesses. So maybe something along those lines and that would help us kind of prioritize our time and effort in those jurisdictions that are motivated to get moving might it may have some return on investment sooner than later, and so maybe that could be a part of the bigger discussion

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:57:04

I had a jurisdictional question. If if if a task force is interagency city county with the and the regulations that might come from that task force, would they actually apply to the east side of Santa Barbara City?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:57:18

I think that if we can just like in the homeless encampments, we work with the other cities to say this is what are what we're doing. The county is doing and we want to find consistency. So environmental health because of environmental health for all of the county but for if you have any specific ordinances would probably have to go to both.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:57:36

Okay. I mean, I do see that benefit of getting folks together but again what we're talking about we don't have a price tag on and that makes me a little uncomfortable. Do we know is this three meetings? Is this a new staff person? Where are we? I don't see a budget item so it makes me just unsure as to what we're actually authorizing right now.

2:58 – 3:1114 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:58:02

Supervisor, I'm not sure what the Supervisor Hartman's intent was except to get it going but I think in this period of time we would come back with are there asks for more refrigeration or more fences to hold things in or what those would be and then it would be a board's decision. Again that's why I'm asking departments if they're listening today it is to start thinking about those things that you can do within your resources and if we need more resources we can come to the board.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:58:30

Okay, so as it is right now the task force is not doesn't come along with as the district attorney professed. It doesn't come along with additional staffing or funding. It's just it's folks doing their job but in a coordinated fashion and with a six-month up to six month is what we're currently operating under discussion? Is that satisfactory to Supervisor Hartman?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.812:58:51

Yeah, absolutely. And again I just want to emphasize the different agencies have authorities and if they're coordinated I think we can get a lot of bang for our existing buck but we haven't had that coordination and we need somebody to lead that. And again I think we need the board to say this is a priority for our community

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.782:59:13

And I hear you on just having government folks on the task force, otherwise it can sprawl. But I just will want to reiterate my point to make sure that those government folks are in contact with the communities that are most impacted, either the businesses or the neighbors living with this and living with the immediate dangers that are posed by the discussion today so...

Okay, well it looks as though we have some consensus. I would entertain a motion.

not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.812:59:51

So I would move the recommended actions on the board letter today but that this would be anchored in the CEO's office and six month duration and report back to the board. Up to six months?

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:00:11

Great.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:00:12

I'll second that.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:00:13

Okay, good work up here all in favor? Aye. Motion carries thanks to District 3 team good work and our environmental health thank you Great. Okay,

we'll move on to the next item when our staff is ready.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.713:00:55

Chair Kaps and members of the board, departmental item number four is from the General Services Department. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the countywide renewable energy development project decision.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 28Proposed3:01:57

All right. Chair Capps, members of the board. Great. Good morning. General Services Department today I want to reintroduce Brandon Kaysen our energy manager was going to give a topic today on solar development we've looked at eight different sites around the county for inclusion for solar and some of those with battery energy storage so with that I'll turn it over to Brandon

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:02:18

Thank you, Kirk. Chair Kaps and Supervisors of the Board, Brandon Cason here. I'm really grateful to have an opportunity to share an update with what we've been working on and excited to hear what you think about our plans. So today we're going to review our solar development update. The impetus of this project has spanned several years and excited to be at this point and hopeful to get direction on how you want to move forward with these projects.

So just real quick we'll do an overview of this development, a project timeline. A brief comparison of tariffs so this is net energy metering 2.0 versus net billing. Cost-benefit analysis for each site and then a summary and recommendations So it's probably come to no surprise to anyone here who looks at their utility bill. Electricity costs are rising quite quickly over the last decade we've seen about 70% increase in electricity costs which represents about five and a half percent year-over-year increases in electricity In addition to that, it's cost effective to develop renewable energy projects. It's a matter of resilience and being at the end of the service territory for both PG&E and SCE we do have certain threats.

And PSPS events are becoming no stranger so having renewable energy systems is a matter of priority for us in terms of resiliency. We have a zero net energy resolution, and that resolution necessitates the development of renewable energy infrastructure to meet those goals. And all projects that you'll see here today are represented in the Energy Assurance Plan as well as supporting general services and meeting some of the goals in the Climate Action Plan.

So today we're requesting direction on whether the Board of Supervisors would like to raise money, finance and own these projects or pursue power purchase agreements. And of course no action could be taken. So very quickly, project timeline. Back in 2022 the Energy Division began scoping out potential solar projects. Some of them had been identified and some new projects were included in this scope. Net energy metering 2.0 or NEM2 applications began in January 2023 with some reviews moving forward quite quickly, some extending well beyond a year Staff presented to the Board of Supervisors in August 2023 and laid out the pros and cons of pursuing power purchase agreements, particularly.

And we made a commitment to come back to the board with some financing options really understand the scope and the pros and cons of both and hopefully to make a decision here today. Staff hired Optiny to support us in developing an RFQP document so that we could solicit services for these projects. That RFQP was released in October 2024, and in January 25, Endelos & Engie received a notice of intent to award.

And so those are our recommended contractors for these projects. So five out of the eight proposed projects that we'll look at today have NEM2 interconnection agreements. The other three will need to pursue net billing tariff or NBT. The deadline to achieve permission to operate for NEM 2 projects is April 2026, so roughly between 24 and 36 months from the point of the application of interconnection.

It will be probably no surprise to hear that due to complexities and construction timelines, long lead time items, contract negotiations, that deadline is going to be incredibly challenging to achieve. Not impossible by any means but incredibly challenging. NEM 2 customers are credited one-to-one for excess electricity so if we overproduce power and export it to the grid we're credited at a one-to one basis Net billing tariff or net billing customers are compensated at an avoided cost. So a very simple way of putting it is when we export power as a net billing tariff, we are credited less than if we were in net energy metering too.

Typically why we see battery energy storage projects paired with net billing projects because the storage of that excess electricity used at a later date has a higher value than if we were to simply export it to the grid. So, we could store power in a battery and use it during peak energy hours which is between 4 and 9 p.m., that would potentially maximize the net savings for a net billing project Battery energy storage systems are best support efforts in resiliency at county facilities due to the ability to back up critical loads during power outages.

Net billing projects are typically financially less attractive than NEM2 projects by about 20 to 30% from what I've seen. However, all projects that we have been looking at are still financially attractive and provide net savings over the course of their lifespan regardless of the tariff situation. So staff will take into consideration both cost implications as well as financial and the viability of NEM 2 projects versus net billing, the addition of a battery or not.

So in the cost-benefit analysis we looked at 20 year time horizon for these projects Current solar developments, we expect to last 25-30 years even beyond that. But we chose 20 years for our financial analysis. The numbers that you'll see are in future costs so they haven't been brought to a present value just so that's clear. We told contractors to use a 3% annual escalator for electricity. And as I mentioned at the beginning, we're seeing 5 and 1⁄2%, 6%, 7%, sometimes up to 10% a year. So we felt that 3% was very conservative.

In the back of my mind if we can make a project pencil at 3%, it's a really good project. Ownership models—so if we were to own these projects, the price that you see includes our costs for operating, maintaining, cleaning, doing repairs and maintenance etc., The power purchase agreement prices also include those things. However, under a PPA model the county would not be responsible for cleaning repair maintenance warranties etc.

It's probably well understood but power purchase agreements require zero capital investment so it would not require debt financing and may be purchased outright at any time over that term agreement once the investment tax credits are capitalized by the developer So I'm going to go through Northern Branch Jail very slowly and kind of explain how we calculated these things. And then for the other subsequent sites, I'm going to move through them quite quickly.

So here we have our first site, the Northern Branch Jail. And I'm quite present too and sensitive that we will likely have a future development here so just let it be known that where you see the solar panels may change depending on the location of future developments. We're looking at just over a megawatt of ground-mounted solar arrays. It does have an M2 agreement.

This will produce roughly 36 million kilowatt hours over a 20 year time horizon, and the development cost as well as operations and maintenance for this project is about $5.7 million. with about $15 million in total savings, with a net savings of about $9.3 million. Under our power purchase agreement the levelized cost of energy is the average cost per kilowatt hour that the developer has presented to us over the course of 20 years. So in some cases, it's one cost in year one and the same cost in year 20. In other cases, it is lower and increases say at 1 or 2% a year over that 20-year time horizon.

The estimated total expense is what we expect the solar array to produce times that levelized cost of energy. So that's what we would spend to buy the power from the developer, and then the net savings is calculated by calculating what we expect to spend on electricity using that 3% escalator and subtracting our total expense providing a net savings. That net savings is essentially an avoided cost of electricity.

Next we have the Foster Road Campus. This is a 732 kilowatt solar canopy. Is there a question?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:11:41

Yeah, I just had a question about that one. If

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:11:44

that's okay with you we can keep going after that.

3:11 – 3:2211 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:11:51

That means we have to get it done by January 26, right?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:11:54

April 2026 is our deadline. Sorry,

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:11:56

April 2026. And if

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:11:58

you don't do these numbers change? These numbers would certainly change if the talking about the net savings and yes those certainly would change to some degree but I'm seeing about twenty to thirty percent.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:12:12

OK when are we going to get that information?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:12:15

I can provide that information as soon as we get direction on how we want to pursue these projects.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:12:22

Okay. Thank you, please proceed.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:12:26

Okay so next we have the Foster Road campus which is a 732 kilowatt solar canopy spread out throughout the campus. The direct purchase cost is roughly 4.7 million dollars with 8.8 million in net savings. A 24 cent per kilowatt hour levelized cost of energy with a 6.6 million net savings There's a site at Lake Kachuma, represents about a half megawatt of solar canopies.

Purchase price of $3.6 million with 2.1 million in net savings. A PPA 26 cents levelized cost of energy with roughly 1.4 million in net savings. Next, we have the Cayo Real campus solar expansion. We're looking at a 1.4 megawatt ground-mounted array located where the existing solar array is. This would be a net billing project. So the figures you see here are for the net billing tariff. The purchase price about $3.5 million with 8.5 million in net savings and $0.19 per kilowatt hour levelized cost of energy With a $3.7 million net savings over the lifespan of this project, I do want to pause and mention that the existing solar array that we have there is roughly 12 1⁄2 years old.

It's about a year and a half ahead of schedule in terms of covering our initial investment. And we expect over the next decade for that existing solar array to produce about $3 million in savings, in net savings over the next 10 years. The downtown campus, this site before I go into the details is being reviewed for potential future developments. So the community services department is looking at the feasibility of this location in the workforce housing study.

The decision to move forward and negotiate this project may be with an asterisk, but I just want to make mention that this was part of our project prior to learning about the workforce housing study. It's about a half megawatt solar canopy purchase price of 2.3 million and net savings of two point nine million dollars twenty six and a half cents costs of levelized cost of energy with a two point seven million dollar net savings And these last three projects are significantly smaller, but nonetheless great projects. Here we have the Santa Maria Animal Shelter 135 kilowatt solar canopies in the parking lots about $680,000 total costs with 1.3 million in anticipated net savings 35 cents per kilowatt hour PPA price with about 650 million in net savings Fire station 34, 73 kilowatt solar canopies.

About $400,000 total cost for construction with a 600,000 net savings. 37 cents per kilowatt hour levelized cost of energy for 190,000 in net savings. And last but not least we have the Aquatic Center out in New Quiama. A 38 kilowatt solar canopy. $270,000 total cost. $190,000 net savings with 47 cents per kilowatt hour levelized cost of energy. This project specifically is looking at zero net savings so with a 3% escalator we saw that it would meet our costs.

You know if we were to use a different escalator, we would see positive numbers there and vice versa. So here's a brief summary available to you the intent to award the site locations the tariff that we currently are looking at cost of ownership in the PPA. We can come back to this and visit it if you would like the project summary. The direct purchase or ownership of these projects clearly presents the highest return on investment. There's no hiding that, but due to the landscape there isn't just money available for us to grab onto and build these projects if that were the case we'd be in development on all of these already so they likely would have to be debt financed The capital cost, roughly $21.3 million with 55 million in net savings leaving a net benefit of about 33.7 million and you'll see that there's an estimated 40 million in net benefit if tax credits are attained Now there is some concern that those tax credits may not be available by the time these projects are completed.

So it's difficult to move forward with any sort of certainty that we will achieve those tax credits, but they are currently available for us. The PPA model or power purchase agreements require zero capital and the total avoided cost is roughly $23 million again over the course of a 20-year period Once direction is received, we can begin contract negotiations.

The purchase price in PPA terms will have to be negotiated and ultimately finalized. And while owning these systems—very attractive from a financial perspective but without an appetite to raise a large amount of capital to develop these projects The power purchase agreements present us with the most attractive options, something we can move forward with quickly and reserve that debt financing for other projects.

Just one slide on batteries because I know it's a hot topic and you will hear more from the Community Services Department about this. We are considering BESS infrastructure at each location where it is cost effective and feasible, where we have critical loads that need to be backed up during power outages. And while there are plenty of concerns with BESS infrastructure, myself included, There's a lot of best practices that have been defined to mitigate safety concerns and the efficacy of projects. The first and foremost is the major shift in battery chemistry that's used today.

Lithium iron phosphate batteries are significantly better, more advanced, safer than what we have seen in recent history. There's advanced monitoring and management systems to alert operators anytime a battery is operating outside of its characteristics. Regularly scheduled maintenance and commissioning, water-cooled systems help reduce the temperature and mitigate runoff.

Strategic location of battery infrastructure, making sure that they're not next to critical infrastructure. Adherence obviously to city and county ordinances and working with local fire authorities we have a long list of mitigation measures to ensure that these projects if we do decide to move forward with them are as safe as possible So contract execution will likely take some time. We're expecting at least 90 to 120 days once we receive direction, power purchase agreements are brand new to the county if we do decide to move forward in that direction there's a lot of learning to be had and been doing my homework and getting up to speed with those expectations and requirements.

Preliminary design should take roughly 60 days to complete and once purchase orders are issued NEM 2 projects will begin immediately, so prioritize due to timeline of implementation. NEM2 tariffs will transition to net billing tariffs automatically after 20 years. It's just baked into the law currently and net billing projects do have a more flexible start date and it's being considered for battery infrastructure just to see if it promotes efficiency and cost savings.

So the request for direction today is whether we want to one, look for debt financing opportunities and move forward with purchasing these solar arrays or any combination of them. Two which is staff's recommendation is to move forward with the negotiation of power purchase agreements for all sites and then come back to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation Three, to move forward with PPAs for NEM2 projects and postpone decision for net billing tariff projects or some other combination of ownership versus PPAs.

Of course could decide to not move forward with these projects if you so decide. So with that I will close off my presentation and present available for any questions that you might have.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:21:38

Thank you Mr. Cason, any questions from the board? Supervisor Hartman.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.813:21:42

So on the battery storage I didn't see that included in the cost could you discuss that?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:21:48

Yeah Supervisor Hartman through the chair. The cost for battery energy storage systems changes the economics considerably and so for an effort to simplify this presentation they haven't been included Not every location is a really good candidate for battery infrastructure. One, it's quite expensive and two there may not be critical loads or real financial case for why we should have one.

So for all of our net billing projects we are considering battery energy storage infrastructure both as a financial benefit as well as a resilience but this wasn't included in this presentation mainly for simplicity sake

3:22 – 3:2821 turns

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.813:22:39

In the NEM 2.0, does it have to require connection by April 2026?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:22:47

Yes Supervisor Hartman through the Chair it does that's our deadline for permission to operate

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.813:22:52

and we have interconnection agreements for six of the eight so we're confident that we can meet that

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:22:58

what are those

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.813:22:58

agreements like

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:23:01

Supervisor Harmon through the chair, those interconnection agreements we presented a size of the array and how it would be connected. There were single line drawings that were developed in order to submit our application now that interconnection agreements for NEM 2.0 out of the eight sites presented today, so we are expected to develop a project similar to what we submitted and we have until April 2026 for permission to operate.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.813:23:35

And then could you talk about the islandable microgrid where that would be and what that would look like in the kind of resilience it might offer?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:23:44

Yes, Supervisor Hartman through the chair. We were considering micro grids at any site where we are recommending battery energy storage systems. The islanding capability comes with considerable cost just to be able to have a controller and an ecosystem that can sustain itself it would require Upsizing our batteries may be beyond critical loads to be able to operate isolated from the grid. So it's an added alternate for all of our battery energy storage projects and that is seen more as a resiliency element than anything else, so it's an added cost for resiliency.

It wouldn't provide a financial benefit necessarily.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.813:24:32

And where are you thinking of locating this if we went forward?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:24:38

I think in my opinion, I think that the fire stations are all great candidates for micro grids. Any emergency service facility But there are some sites that might make good candidates, but that's what would come to the top of mind is anything that's providing an emergency service or connected to that operation.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.813:25:05

So I think we need battery storage and I'm not quite sure what that means financially so I have a question mark there.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:25:18

Supervisor Nelson?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:25:19

Yes thank you. So we had a board hearing on this back in 2023, right? And now we're here in 25 with about 14 months to go. All right. Yeah, I'm concerned I don't have enough information because you're not getting the full picture here. I'm not seeing what some of these projects look like if we don't meet the timeline. Are they still profitable or not? The board letter and the presentation are inconsistent on some of the different points. Quyama, for example, in the board letter it has as an M2.0 project. In the presentation it has it is a net MBT. All the math changes on this whether we can't make that deadline or not.

So anyway I'm concerned here how we can give you good direction on moving forward with some of this information. I guess some of these projects will make sense if we can get done by April 26th, some of them will not right?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:26:30

Supervisor Nelson through the chair. I would not feel confident presenting a project or financial contract that didn't present significant benefits to us even if we defaulted to a net billing tariff.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:26:46

How do you define significant?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:26:48

A significant change between net energy metering 2.0 and net billing. No,

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:26:53

a

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:26:53

significant benefit. Providing a financial return of cost savings to the county. So

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:26:59

some kind of cost savings. Yeah. Okay I've heard conversation about NEM 2. 0 potentially being repealed at the state is that conversations out there and have you looked at what that would look like for this?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:27:11

Yeah, Supervisor Nielsen to the chair. It certainly would put us in a great situation if that were to be the case. I know that there are lobbyists working at the state level and I'm tuned into those discussions but at this point it's not a whole lot of certainty as to whether or not that will be the case. There is a huge effort within the community to encourage the CPUC to provide a landscape where they can encourage more solar and battery projects but its Not clear whether or not that will move through.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:27:46

Okay, and then you know I know I've been talking about for quite some time about us trying to figure out a way to do this through our IST or our internal service fund to fund some of the stuff. Have we made the CO's office have we looked at that at all anymore? Internalizing this cost instead of just coming back to the general fund. You know these net savings are eventually to our various departments that are paying into our internal service fund and make certain, you know it seems like it should be an enterprise type of opportunity there is that any effort been made towards?

3:28 – 3:4224 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed3:28:25

Supervisor I think you're saying that if we went ahead and purchased ourselves into these projects having it funded from the ISF So in short, I think that this is the first time we're actually looking at what the costs would be. And so that would be the next step based on what your board's direction would be to us. But I think we would have to work with the auditor and see what can really be funded from the ISF and just you're right there benefits go back benefits would be going back to different departments and different facilities, but right now the ISF rates have been fluctuating. And so we do want to also look to see that we're not impacting our departments too much on the budget side.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:29:07

Yeah, and I appreciate that you know. But I mean that's where the savings is going to see out of. That's where are you know all these different agencies not even not only general fund agencies but you know some of our pass-through agencies are also going to be seeing benefits that are gonna be funded by dollars that we're going to potentially put general fund dollars into. So that's why I'm always saying hey let's make sure it's funded out of that, make our ISF really an enterprise fund so that that reinvestment can happen there and um so we can save those precious general fund dollars for precious general fund projects.

Um yeah I'm just uh I guess I'm just overall really concerned about whether we're gonna be able to hit these numbers. I feel like we've I'm not sure what we've done over the last year plus on this. It seems like it's gone slowly through this process and now we're going to have to rush to get somewhere to make some of these numbers work, and I'm frankly disappointed.

Some of these numbers don't make as much sense the further we go into this process, and I think that is a shame. So, big concern there moving forward. Just one last site-specific question. The Site 2, the Foster Road Campus, there's significant eucalyptus groves near there. Have you guys evaluated how to address the maintenance with that? I live next to an eucalyptus grove and it is not good for solar panels so

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:30:37

Yeah, Supervisor Nelson to the chair that cleaning and maintenance presents a lot of challenges depending on the location. That one in particular is going to require significant cleaning strategies so it is something that we have to address if we do locate it you know locate them there and it's taken into consideration when we get into design

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:30:58

And then I guess the last thing I have is that, you know we've have some background with at least one of these vendors where we didn't meet the timelines and I know that there was partly the fault of the county but has been an extended issue. I just want to make sure that's part of the thought process when we move forward and maybe put that into a contract of certain type of responsibilities if not meet meeting the timelines.

Project if one of the developers here says that they can hit that time frame, you know and then they can't. And it has significant negative impacts I want that on the developer. I don't want that on the county so if they sign up for it let's get them on the hook for that otherwise let's and maybe that's where we move forward with all these projects. I think we should be negotiating with both developers to make sure we hold their feet to the fire to see which one can hit these time frames

not transcribed≈6s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:32:02

I just wanted to clarify a couple of these questions because to me this is a real bright spot that we don't often talk about massive savings in here. You've put forward or added more details to our effort to save potentially up to $23 million dollars so And I believe in looking at what your presentation that it's actually, that's a conservative number because of your 3% escalation for the rise in utility costs. I understand residential rates have risen 48% over the last few years so can you just speak to how you came to that 3% assumption using this current projections and if it's actually more like 6-8%, what would that actually mean for our cost savings here?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:32:49

Yeah Chair Kaps that's a really great point and I appreciate you bringing that up. We so as I mentioned looking back at the last decade of just the county of Santa Barbara specifically we've seen the average cost of electricity increase 70 percent. So that's five and a half percent year over year for the last decade. I felt like presenting whatever we were to present today comes with some It's difficult to be as certain as I possibly can be with the figure I give you. I wanted to give you a sense as to whether or not these are financially viable or not, and I felt that if we chose an escalation rate that was much less than what we were actually experiencing, that I could come with a level of confidence that we're going to be able to achieve that.

So I chose 3% to be extremely conservative on our potential net benefits over 20 years So if we were to update that figure to five percent, six percent. We would see our net savings balloon and then you know there would be concern that it would be too large and like that it would be inflated.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:33:55

Yep

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:33:55

so I wanted to be careful about those figures.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:33:58

And that's why in my experience having worked on this at the school board most jurisdictions do this for cost savings because the cost savings are so tremendous because utilities traditional utilities have skyrocketed Recently I just paid my bill and it's insane. So, I just want to get you to clarify a little bit between I understand the deadline for that The NEM 2 is fast, quickly approaching as Supervisor Nelson has made clear. I understand it is not getting repealed but even if our majority of our projects don't get in under that deadline we would still see significant cost savings to the next phase which is net billing tariffs. Can you just explain a little bit more about what we might see there?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:34:47

Chair Caps, it's a valid question. I've been twisting and turning around this since we started this project as well. Every site is impacted by net billing a little bit differently and it just depends on what our maximum demand is at that specific facility and what the production capacity is of the solar array that we've designed over the course of a day. Back of the envelope I'm seeing a 20 to 30% reduction on net benefit, total net benefit if we were to not install battery.

That's basically the value that we don't get from exporting power to the grid under a net billing scenario. So that would be, you know, if we cut 30% off of all the net savings, that would be a rough figure that we could land at. Now some will be more or some will be less than that but that's I feel like a fair way to assess the potential financial impacts.

Now as I mentioned, we're looking at installing small batteries to be able to mitigate that potential loss of revenue. So there is certainly a scenario where we spend a little bit more for a battery but we actually save more than enough to cover the cost of that battery because of the tariff scenario.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:36:05

And thank you and this new, this proposal really demonstrates a shift towards power purchase agreements. I've been a fan of those because again as you've stated you put zero down and you reap the benefits so can you just explain how we kind of came to that or how you're making that recommendation?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:36:22

Yeah, Chair Kaps. When I started in this position there was no appetite to finance these projects outside of direct ownership and part of the reason we have been so slow to develop projects is the challenge of finding capital to implement these projects PPAs present a really wonderful opportunity for us to move forward and develop these projects without having to debt finance them. So back in August 23, there was an appetite at least to see what that looks like in terms of ownership and power purchase agreements.

Given the understanding of where the county is financially, that there are potentially some large ticket items that we may need to raise money for in the future. To have a zero capital cost investment into our future that provides resiliency and cost clarity really to understand how much we're going to spend on something like the variable nature of electricity over the next 20 years provides a lot of value in itself.

And these projects help us achieve a myriad of goals. So the fact that we can help achieve those goals with zero capital costs to me says it's really a big win for

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:37:37

us. Are you seeing more and more jurisdictions like counties moving in the direction of power purchase agreements?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:37:44

Yeah Chair Kapsch, for a long time I've been seeing cities and counties do this. I'm really close with UCSB as well and you drive around their campus there's solar everywhere and they only own one or two of those arrays because of the advantages of PPAs. And I might mention that there are significant costs in time constraints to county staff in performing maintenance whether it's inverters wiring panels And doing the cleaning the ground clearing and everything else that comes along with that. So having the power purchase agreement model our partners our future partners are incentivized to make sure that everything is functioning as best as possible.

So in that sense it provides value to us as well.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:38:29

Yeah, and what I appreciate that is that we're not trying something new here. I mean this is power purchase agreements have been tried and true in other jurisdictions again from the school district's point of view in Santa Barbara Unified the numbers have stayed in my head that we put down an initial cost of $800,000 for the capital And the benefits were 28 million over the eight-year contract. So it's not as though we're kind of going out on a limb here and trying some new experimental financing model, this is pretty much what the industry standard is for government to get in the solar game so I appreciate that we've had this conversation for this long purely on the finances because I contend that even if you were just looking at this issue from a fiscal lens you didn't care about I just want to say thank you so much for being here.

If you weren't enthusiastic about climate or renewables, structure if we move to the tariff situation, but anyway that's why I'm so enthusiastic. Can you just speak to that? I know that last presentation the existing projects had us at about 34% of our counties like utilities were based on renewables where would this get us if we if we move forward with these additional eight? I know maybe that's hard to pinpoint but just roughly how close to a hundred because I want us to get to 100

not transcribed≈19s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:40:01

Yeah, Chair Kapp so do I. And I want to do it responsibly and put the county in the best position possible. Currently we meet about 30 percent of our electricity demand from our solar renewable systems that we own. We also procure renewable energy in some capacity depending on where we are geographically So this, these eight projects represent a more than doubling of our current capacity. So going from about 3.84 megawatts to if we developed all these projects closer to 8, 8 1⁄2 megawatts so Doing rough math, that would take us to about 60-70% of all of our electricity demand from renewable sources. And then of course there's opportunities to procure renewable energy from the grid as well but developing our own systems gives us clarity as to what our expenses are going to be into the future.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:41:01

So doubling?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:41:02

Yeah. This will double our infrastructure.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:41:05

Excellent. I know we have public comment, but Supervisor Hartman did you have a couple

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.813:41:08

of questions

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:41:08

yet?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.813:41:09

So if we go with the PPA where's the risk if we don't finish by April 26 who bears? Yeah

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:41:19

Supervisor Hartman through the chair. The risks are so the cost of electricity from the PPAs won't change because the development cost to build the arrays doesn't change depending on the tariff The tariff change would impact us on the back end because if we are buying electricity at a certain rate and then we're exporting or selling that electricity to the grid at a reduced rate, then there's a disparity between those costs that may mitigate our benefits in the long run. I hope that makes sense.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.813:41:59

I guess so. And how do PPAs work with batteries?

3:42 – 3:4715 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:42:05

Supervisor Harmon through the chair, essentially we purchase the electricity coming from the solar array and the financing entity looks at the total cost of the project as a whole and smooths that out over 20 years in all the energy that it's going to create. So if the battery costs $200,000 for example that would be looped into the total cost of the project and would affect the PPA rate or how much we're spending for each unit of electricity. So it could be a cent or two or more or less depending on the size of the battery compared to the project as a whole.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.813:42:44

But the developer would finance the battery and then we would pay more?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:42:50

That's correct yeah.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:42:53

Okay, we're going to keep going with the questions here. Supervisor Nelson?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:42:57

Yeah one quick question so the battery decision is that are we making that at all today? No. Okay so it'll be a different discussion I know we're gonna have an item come back before the board in the future that's not a part of any of these proposals at this

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:43:08

point. Supervisor Nelson through the chair it's not and I'm more than happy to meet up with our partners at CSD to make sure that bridge is being built

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:43:20

Okay I just think that you know there's a lot of interest in that so if that does change in the future, I just think it should make sure something comes back to the board.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:43:30

Okay I think we're at a good pause here for public comment. Madam Clerk?

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.713:43:33

Chair Caput and members of the Board we have one request to speak from the public on this item and we are going to zoom with Tim Haid. Tim?

CommentTim HaidProposedself-stated3:43:45

Hi everyone can you hear me?

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.713:43:46

Yes we

CommentTim HaidProposedself-stated3:43:46

can please proceed All right, so my name is Tim Haid. I guess real quick on background of building microgrids and solar projects across the country for about the last 15 years. I also have extensive experience with PPAs and I'm happy to answer any questions about that but the important thing for this conversation is I want to make it clear I have no financial interest in any of these projects personally.

I'm here in my capacity as a citizen of Santa Barbara County There are two reasons I think approving these projects are a no-brainer. The first is safety on January 7th while firefighters were fighting the out of control lasers and the Palisades, an electrical transmission line in Altadena that looks very similar to the electrical transmission line that feeds southern Santa Barbara County Experienced an arc flash event that ultimately, allegedly ended up starting the Eaton fire. It killed 17 people, injured nine firefighters and probably caused about $50 billion of damage. We have to do something about this. Distributed energy resources like the ones that have been presented today are not the answer to this problem but they are a tool in the toolkit that we need to solve this problem for Santa Barbara County residents.

And we need to do more of these projects We need to get more experience. We need to learn how they work. Some of the questions that have been asked here today are great questions that don't have simple answers, but we don't know what the answers are because we don't have any practical experience. We don't have any actual data in the field outside of some projects that were done a decade ago and things have changed a lot in a decade. And the second reason we should do this is because it's an economic no-brainer. So I think there's been you know some conversation today about the 3% escalator that was used in these calculations Look, that's a really conservative number but I would argue it's unrealistically conservative. If you look at the situation with all three investor-owned utilities in California that includes PG&E and SCE that serve the majority if not everyone in Santa Barbara County in some way shape or form There is zero chance that there's going to be a 3% escalator over the next 20 years.

I think 6-8% is probably conservative and 8-10% is probably more realistic, and that's not my opinion. That's the consensus of experts in the industry and people who study the California electric grid really closely. That prompts an affordability crisis that we're currently experiencing but it's gonna get worse And we need to do projects that alleviate the economic burden for especially low-income and middle income households in our county. Projects like these can do that as well, so from my perspective this is a necessity from a safety standpoint and it's an economic no-brainer and I would love to see these projects get approved. Thank you for your time.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.713:46:37

And that concludes public comment on this item

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:46:41

Can I just ask our speaker since he does solar for a living, can you just talk about the difference if we do shift any of these projects because of timing to net billing tariffs? Does that give you any...

CommentTim HaidProposedself-stated3:46:56

Yeah, it's not going to matter right there is a way to make the economics of these projects work as compared to utility electric rates with or without NEM2. NEM 2 is essentially think about it like a subsidy so NEM two is a subsidy that you should take if it's available and I think the county has done a really good job of developing projects that maximize the value of that subsidy and maximize economics But if that subsidy goes away or we don't hit the deadlines, there are all sorts of technical adjustments that Brendan and his team can make to ensure that the economics of these projects pass the pencil. So I'm 0% concerned about one not meeting the deadline because we have more than enough time to commission these projects by April of 2026.

But even if we don't, there's a variety of things we can do to make sure that the economics pencil under the net billing tax.

3:47 – 3:5314 turns

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:47:48

Thank you so much appreciate it. Supervisor Lavigno.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.903:47:53

Just question about okay, so on this deadline of April 2026 does the project have to be completed by then? And okay, so I'm just going on past history. I'm glad the speaker said that because these are large projects some of them and I do not see that happening. I'm supportive of this, but it's going to have to pencil out without the you know, I just can't see us making this the one area of concern. I also have is General Service is going to have their hands full how much of this so this is all going to be consulted out? This is all going to be a third party doing the construction Your guys' plate's going to be full over the next couple of years. A couple other major projects that we've got going on, how comfortable are you that this is another something on the plate that you can manage with the time constraint that we have?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 28Proposed3:49:07

Supervisor Lavagnino, through the chair. Confident that we can do these projects I mean we're already trying to develop a plan for the other projects that we know are coming how we're gonna staff those but I'm confident we can do this energy project

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.903:49:22

okay do we have a priority list is that the priority list the list that we have so we start with the Northern Branch Jail the most the one that would bring us the most savings or do we try to knock off some of the others that are easier

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:49:36

Supervisor Lavagnino through the chair. I my personal recommendation would be to negotiate all these projects and to move forward as quickly as possible with our NEM 2 projects and work with our partners to do some legwork ahead of you know in what can we do now is to get us ourselves in the best position possible and expect that That staff won't present a project that doesn't have a financial benefit under the worst case scenario, which is they default to net billing.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.903:50:11

Okay do we have a... So these have not been I noticed you already have listed contractors available are they here that can give us that vote of confidence that these things are going to be done?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:50:28

Supervisor Lavanino, we do have one of our contractors here with us. You would like to hear from them?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.903:50:35

Yeah just like to you know and when you come up if you can talk about other projects you've done in the county it'd be helpful

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 30Proposed3:50:50

Thank you, Mister case and good afternoon chair caps members of the board are shoe Jane with ng services. We have done more projects for California counties than anybody else including solar projects. I can name 10 counties that we've done solar projects with. We are currently be completed the project for Santa Barbara unified that was 14 sites. I think Including battery storage.

We are doing 28 sites with Ventura Unified right now, eight sites with Pleasant Valley Unified Union School District I think. So we have a lot of experience with solar. Let me ask you

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.903:51:38

this, I don't mean to interrupt but you've got everybody and their brother is going to be trying to beat this April 26 deadline?

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 30Proposed3:51:44

Right. So we have a plan in place, we've discussed that with staff so the contract will take some time to negotiate but we are willing to develop these projects completely at our risk which means some of the activities that we need to do like geotech analysis like figuring out you know what the soil type is at each site underground locating because we need to figure out where the utilities run And then there's a topographical survey. There's roughly around $400,000 to $500,000 worth of work that we have committed to staff that we will do it in advance of the contract being signed and are completely at our risk to put us and the county in the best position to meet NEM 2.0.

We feel if the county is agile in the contract negotiations Fairly confident that we'll meet it. And you've worked with us before? We have not worked with the County of

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.903:52:48

Santa Barbara. I'm not sure agile is an adjective that's been used to describe us, but...

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:52:56

It's a new day.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.903:52:56

It's a new day. So yeah. Okay. Well, I appreciate you being here. Thank you. Thank you. All right.

3:53 – 4:0226 turns

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.813:53:05

Supervisor Hartman. I would be prepared to make a motion great move A B 3 C in today's staff report

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:53:16

Let me just double check which one that is That would be Move forward with the power purchase agreements for all net energy metering two point. Oh, I'm sorry you it's number two Is that what you wanted?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.813:53:30

Oh I'm sorry, yeah B2 all projects not just the.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:53:35

Yeah good that's one I can second unless yes I will second that one Supervisor Lee did you have a question or comment?

CommentBrandon KaysenProposed · by introduction3:53:43

I just want to say I'm confident that staff will do a great job and provide these services so looking forward to your next report

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:53:53

Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.713:53:54

Okay so members of the board just for a point of clarification that was to approve staff recommendations a B 2 and C yeah for sequence.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:54:04

I have one last question on the motion.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.713:54:06

Sure.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:54:08

The question for staff. You know, we have NG here and then there's Endelos who is the one that did the Better Avia Center. Was there any of the projects that NG could potentially get done on 2.0 that Endelosis may be doing the net billing on here? Is an option for us? Did you guys look at that? You know, and she's the big dog. I mean they've got all the resources and are here presently in there. They have a lot of risk capital at stake so I understand and appreciate trying to work also the local company that we have some experience with but The thing here is when we go to net billing, taxpayers in Santa Barbara County are going to lose millions that we potentially would have had over these 20 years. And that's what I'm really disappointed about this taking so long to get back to the board because ultimately taxpayers lost on this.

I mean yes it was a great day move forward and celebrate it but the opportunity cost was significant and disappointing that we didn't hit that. So is there still an opportunity here potentially with maybe NG to go ahead and hit NIM 2.0 on any of these other projects?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:55:16

Supervisor Nielsen, through the chair. The one site that has been tentatively awarded to Endelos that we have an M2 agreement for that is quite large and challenging is the downtown campus. That would be the one that we could entertain. And you know, we have intentions to award this to Endelos but if we felt like it was in our best interest to look at that I'm willing to entertain that. But that would be the only site that has been tentatively awarded to Endelos that we find ourselves in that predicament.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:55:55

And I guess that's the other question here. If we're moving forward with that project, because I think that's who we are, then we've foreclosed housing on this site, right? We're going to make a 20-year commitment. I don't know if this site is in our housing element. Does anybody know about if it is or not?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed3:56:09

It's

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:56:10

not. Okay. All right. So I was just curious about that. So we're foreclosing that concept which I'm indifferent about but I just wanted to make sure that we know that that's part of the decision we're making here today.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed3:56:20

Could you hold on one second? Yeah.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed3:56:27

Well thank you for the ability to lower this chair caps members of the board. The point just raises a critical one as you know we have been working on our workforce housing study for a better part of a year And when the staff made the presentation, they did make reference to an asterisk on that site for that very reason. We are scheduled to come before you on April 8th to present the results of that study. That study does suggest that housing be considered for that site and so while general services can continue to do the work that's been described this morning we would suggest that the board is best able to evaluate the priority associated with that project with the housing Once you hear the presentation on the workforce housing study, I think those can be done in parallel without sacrificing one over the other if you decide to move in a different direction than what's been presented.

I hope that clarifies in response to your question, Mr. Nelson?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:57:30

It does so thank you for that. It sounds like we're going to move both in parallel while we have these discussions and maybe you should also in parallel have the conversation with NG on that side as well if it's an opportunity there. If we do move forward, I only see with their power purchase agreement is only a $2.7 million benefit to the taxpayers Under that scenario, that potentially would be more if it was under NIM 2.0 versus the net building one so anyway something that we should consider moving forward. I'm okay with the motion right now especially knowing- Do you want

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.813:58:02

to incorporate that into the motion or just direction?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:58:04

Well I think if I think we know that they're both moving forward so I guess it's not a full commitment at this point the board because those agreements will come back to us after you guys have negotiated them

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:58:13

Yeah, Supervisor Nielsen through the Chair. They'll be moving in tandem and if we, if the board decides that we want to isolate that facility for a workforce development then we'll stop negotiations.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:58:24

And I just want to reiterate that this does not include battery at this point. Again, I think we need to do some further investigation before our board makes any commitments on batteries so staff don't think hey yeah I will come back to the board and get battery on this in the future to make it work. I think we need to vet that out here as a board as we get more information in the future.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.783:58:44

I know we're having a discussion on battery safety coming up, so that might help you with that. Supervisor Lavinia, did you have a comment?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.903:58:51

I have a question about... So it says in here that the lead time for some of the switches and transformers would be 40 weeks. I'm doing the math right now and it takes two to three months to negotiate the contract. We're already behind schedule. So how do we get our while we're negotiating We get those long lead time items already contracted.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 29Proposed3:59:18

Yeah, Supervisor Lavagnino through the Chair. Those long lead time items are top of mind and we're looking at alternatives that meet the same need maybe slightly lower efficiency but we can get much quicker. Okay. And you know issuing those POs as quickly as possible so there's a variety of strategies that we're looking at to mitigate those lead times.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.903:59:40

I'd hate to get down to the last...I mean I think we sat at Betarabia for quite a while waiting for a switch or a transformer and it's like Now with this looming, I think having backup ideas whether it's cannibalizing from something else we already have or whatever. We need to hit those dates and then figure it out from there so all right cool glad you're already thinking about that.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.784:00:04

Supervisor Arben do you want to comment further? Well, I just want to acknowledge that here we have from the dais just more urgency faster. Let's do this about solar and it's music to my ears. It's one of the reasons I am a supervisor. I think that our government needs to be leading by example when it comes to sustainability when it comes to our own taxpayer funded dollars buildings and what you presented even if it's not as even if I think you've heard this urgency that we got to make this deadline, but even if not in terms of the next funding structure of net billing tariffs it still is a tremendous and to your point Supervisor Nelson the taxpayers would really lose out if we don't do anything related to this.

This is a cost-saving benefit. It's better for our environment. It' s just a win-win-win and thank you for your passion to be doing this and to our consultants. I hope that you hear the urgency from this board to make these agreements, the contracts work as quickly as possible so that we can really get moving on something that's tremendously valuable. So we have a motion already on the floor. I seconded with that. I will call all in favor.

Aye. Motion carries. Thank you. Okay. Oops. With this we don't have closed session so we will take a, would you like 30 minute break? Whatever staff needs. Let's make it simple and come back at 2 o'clock does that work? Thanks. Okay everybody thanks we're back two o'clock With two more departmental items to go item number 5 amendments to Chapter 46 a housing

4:02 – 4:104 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.714:02:05

madam clerk chair caps and members of the board departmental item number fives from the Community Services Department it is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding an ordinance to amend County Code chapter 46 a inclusionary housing.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed4:02:19

Chair Capps, members of the board. Good afternoon we're here today to review with you some recommended changes to our inclusionary housing ordinance as noted in the report it's been about a decade since it was last looked at and in addition to which of course the housing element identified an update to that is one of the tasks to be performed and so this afternoon Joe Dosvanek Lucille Boss and Andrew Kish are here to present the item and were of course available to answer questions at the conclusion

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed4:02:51

So good afternoon, Chair Caps and members of the board. I just wanted to take a moment and comment as to why we're bringing this item to your board today. As Jesus said over a decade ago, the County Santa Barbara's Board of Supervisors adopted what is still the current version of county code chapter 46A. County Code Chapter 46A articulates our county's Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.

This is the ordinance that reflects the local policies aiming to create affordable housing by encouraging or even requiring developers to include a specified share of below market rate units in their market rate rental or homeowner developments. And because it has been over 10 years since staff has proposed updates for Chapter 46A, it is clear that the need for affordable housing has increased significantly and state housing laws have evolved.

In fact during recent deliberations regarding our current county housing element update your board recognized this and directed staff to update Chapter 46A in such a way that it supports increasing our supply of affordable housing while reflecting current state housing law. So that's what we're here to propose for your consideration today. And for the details on this issue, I turn it over to Andrew Kish, one of CSD senior housing specialists and resident expert on inclusionary housing.

Andrew?

CommentKaren HauensteinProposed · by introduction4:04:07

Thank you Joe. Thank you Jesus. Good afternoon chair caps and members of the board. We are here today to amend the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance or IHO with the specific actions described in the adopted housing element update and with recent updates to state law. The Board of Supervisors adopted the IHO more than a decade ago since then, the county's need for affordable housing has increased and the state legislature has passed many new state housing laws The adopted housing element update calls for amendments to the IHO, to ensure compliance with these new state laws and increase the required term affordability by replacing the residential second unit provision to include accessory dwelling units or ADUs.

Increasing the length of time the unit retains the sales price restriction from 45 years to 90 years. Considering the application of IHO requirements to 100% rental housing developments and making any other changes required to comply with state law. This amendment changes the definition of residential second unit or RSU, to now be accessory dwelling unit or ADU Since 2017, the county has amended its zoning ordinances to comply with new state ADU laws. And this includes replacing the term residential second unit with accessory dwelling unit.

The purpose and intent of the IHO is to retain the long-term affordability of its deed restricted units used to meet the housing needs of all economic segments of the community Action to preserve the longevity and availability of these units is proposed with this amendment by extending the affordability term for the IHO's ownership units to 90 years. By extending the affordability term, the county's deed-restricted units remain affordable for a longer period providing housing for generations of our local workforce.

Currently, the county's IHO does not apply to 100% rental projects. And this is inconsistent with what is permitted under state law. Staff recommends the board adopt an amendment to the IHO and require that 100% residential rental projects include a percentage of affordable rental units based on rental affordability levels of each income category per housing market area.

Extending the IHO requirements to 100% rental developments will help the county in meeting its six-cycle RENA goals. This pro forma feasibility analysis from a rental housing project in the City of Santa Maria illustrates that a project with similar rental unit mix and development costs would be financially feasible to build. This analysis designates 5% of the project's units to be affordable to each household income category of very low, low, moderate and missing middle for a total of 20% de-restricted affordable rental units within this project.

Staff recommends that residential rental projects may waive IHO requirements if the median rent per HMA is affordable to a particular income category. This slide shows the data driving the decision of when IHO requirements for 100% rental projects may be waived for an income category and a housing market area on an annual basis. For example, in the third row of the fourth column we can see that the moderate income household's maximum affordable housing payment of $3,573 per month exceeds the median rent for Santa Maria, Lompoc and Buelton but does not exceed the median rent for the South Coast.

In this case, the IHO requirements for a developer to build 5% of the project as deed-restricted affordable units for moderate income households would only apply to projects in the South Coast where the median rent exceeds what is affordable to the moderate income category. Another recommended amendment to the IHO for consistency with new state law is the application of the county's Model Resale Restrictive Covenant to ownership units produced through a State Density Bonus Program.

State Density Bonus Law was amended in 2014 to use an equity sharing agreement between the initial owner and the county for affordable ownership units produced. Only the initial owner of an affordable unit would share the property's appreciation with the county based upon the percentage of the original subsidy received. By using the State Density Bonus Law Equity Share Agreement, the affordable housing deed restriction would expire as soon as the initial occupant sells their unit.

This amendment removes the equity sharing provision and preserves the unit's affordability for a term of 90 years through the use of our model resale restrictive covenant. The IHO allows for a household to build equity with a 90 year covenant, but its purpose is not to maximize the investment of one owner rather our program's objective is to provide a home for workforce households to reside close to their place of employment.

And I'd like to turn the presentation back over to Joe Dysmonick, Deputy Director of HCD.

4:10 – 4:2021 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed4:10:18

Thank you for your attention this afternoon and here are the recommended actions that we provide and would look forward to your deliberations and comments.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.784:10:30

Thank you for the presentation. Questions from the board? Supervisor Hermann

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.814:10:34

Yeah, I have a couple. So we're going to convert the residential second units to accessory dwelling units. Residential second units were permitted under the regular process and therefore are allowed to have Thank you very much.

not transcribed≈20s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
CommentKaren HauensteinProposed · by introduction4:11:13

Supervisor Hartman through the board, I don't believe so. The provision allowing for a developer to build now what's now an ADU versus what used to be an RSU can still satisfy inclusionary housing requirements in smaller projects but to your point I don't believe what you suggested was true in the case that the rent control for the RSU. Is that what your, can you state

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.814:11:43

that? It's my understanding that accessory dwelling units cannot be short-term rental. That was the understanding why they got the expedited permit process was to contribute to our housing stock for people who live here not But some people went through the residential second unit process and I'm just wondering if they get converted to AEDUs, what rules apply to them?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed4:12:16

Supervisor Hartman. I as supervisor Hartman through the chair Off the cuff, I think those original permits with RSU still have their provisions but I need to look into it. They would be non-conforming essentially at this point but if their permit conditions allow for them to have an STR then they would still be able to do that Just by converting the language in the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance wouldn't have an effect on that. We're just, we don't have that term anymore but I need to look into that and get back to the board on that to confirm. My next

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.814:13:04

question is 90 years the longest we'll have by state law?

CommentKaren HauensteinProposed · by introduction4:13:13

Supervisor Hartman through the chair. There's nothing in state law that says it can't be longer necessarily what we tried to do with the 90-year term was to mirror the other local jurisdictions that apply that same long-term affordability which we currently see certainly within the city of Santa Barbara

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.814:13:33

Seems like we'd want to do it as long as we're allowed to do it. Does that same 90-year period apply to rental units? Should we adopt that?

CommentKaren HauensteinProposed · by introduction4:13:43

Supervisor Hartman through the chair, yes. That same 90 year term of affordability would apply to the rental units if that is adopted

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.814:13:52

And then I didn't fully understand the state density bonus, the issue that you were describing. Could you go back and walk me through that a little more

CommentKaren HauensteinProposed · by introduction4:14:05

slowly? Yeah, not a problem. So Supervisor Hartman through the chair, the State Density Bonus Law presently it requires that ownership units produced under the State Density Bonus Program apply an equity share provision to the deed restriction. And that's only applicable to the initial owner, so hypothetically if there is a market rate unit that potentially would sell for $500,000 and if under our program we would reduce that price making it below market rate at $400,000 Then that initial owner gets a 20% subsidy on the purchase price.

When the initial owner eventually sells their unit, then they have to share 20% of the equity that they'll earn when they sell it at fair market value. They'll share that 20% equity back with the county. So if they hold onto it for 10, 15, 20 years, the unit eventually is worth $1 million. Then they would have to share 200,000 with the county, 20%, as a result of that initial subsidy.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.814:15:10

So only 20%. Now, I remember back several years. Say you have a two-bedroom apartment and your family grows, you want a three bedroom apartment that they sell to a sister or brother and then they get... And so it stays in the family and it doesn't... How do we deal with the equity in that?

CommentKaren HauensteinProposed · by introduction4:15:33

Sure. Supervisor Hartman for the chair we have since implemented a lottery system which originally was only applied to initial or new developments that same lottery system has is now applied to each and every purchase and repurchase of the unit so we don't prevent people from participating in the lottery if they have a relationship with the owner but we certainly provide more equity within the selection process by allowing others to participate

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.814:16:03

It's not so much a windfall to one

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed4:16:05

family. Just to clarify the equity comment that Andrew referenced, we have some competing objectives here in that concept provided under state density bonus sharing and equity At the risk of losing the permanent affordability of that unit. What is being recommended to the board is indicating that we are siding with a permanent affordability allowing the initial buyer to reap some benefit but not on a go forward basis thereafter.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:16:37

Thank

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.814:16:38

you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:16:41

Supervisor Nielsen. Yes, thank you Chair Kaps to hit on the ADU issue that's been a concern of mine too I believe planning staff has eliminated that without board direction which is a big concern of mine they just merged ADU and residential which are two different things but again I think that's the problem again I don't think there was any staff or board direction to do that but I think staff has done that so I think to recognize those that do have them I know Supervisor Hartman has one I have one It should be probably ADU or residential second unit to recognize those that have them.

Or we would want to potentially pursue that pathway if we ever restored the code back to the way that it was before direction, because they are two different things. Let's see. Going back to the rental portion, Sorry, slide number six. Consider the application of inclusionary housing for rental housing development. So I read a bunch of studies on this and it doesn't necessarily correlate just because it creates funds for that, doesn't necessarily have a positive impact on additional affordability in housing. So can you cite some studies? Did you guys do some economic research on this? How did we get to the concept that by applying inclusionary housing that would be able to better meet our needs?

CommentKaren HauensteinProposed · by introduction4:18:14

Certainly supervisor Nelson through the chair. We worked with our consultant that we're using for our workforce housing study Harrison Associates and they helped us to develop this pro forma analysis to determine whether or not a rental project would pencil if they applied the inclusionary housing requirements of I'm going The existing code chapter 46A has a list of exempted projects, one of which is 100% rental projects. And the rationale behind that was that in the past prior to 2017, the application of inclusionary requirements Rental projects was considered a form of rent control and then therefore in violation of Costa-Hawkins. However, since then in 2017 the state legislature passed Assembly Bill 1505 they call it the Palmer Fix which allows the local jurisdiction to apply inclusionary requirements to rental projects without it being considered as rent control.

So the goal was for us to identify a way to increase amount of units that can be created in order for us to meet those goals.

not transcribed≈19s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:19:43

So I think you're saying what the legalities of it, so I'm talking about the practicality of it right? So inclusionary housing makes it more expensive for a developer to do a project right? So which is a tax and you tax things that you do less of we want people to build residential properties or rental properties but now by including this additional tax on them inclusionary housing ordinance which puts some additional requirements The it's not going to attract the same investment, right? Because there's going to be that extra burden on the project.

And so did you do any studying on how many projects are likely not to move forward with this in place?

4:20 – 4:298 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed4:20:25

Supervisor Nelson through the chair. One of the, again one of the competing values that the board has to resolve and wrestle with is the objectives that are outlined in the housing element towards a pursuit of residents that are going to be in rental properties and in the housing element we did make a representation to the state that we would be advancing the extension of this coverage to rental properties The argument of course is that for many of our residents in this county, the only housing that's affordable to the extent that it's affordable is rental as compared to ownership. And so when we have developments that are factoring that in there is, as your comment suggests We have seen in other communities an Essentially make it viable as you heard through many of the rezone requests a commitment to produce rental housing of certain percentages and so we think this is consistent with that direction.

not transcribed≈22s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:21:46

Yeah, I just guess I've been on notice that it will likely lead to less projects because they'll be like the project's more expensive. So you know we're already having difficulty attracting that come in investment especially with raising interest rates so I'm just board should be unnoticed that this is you know it is a policy but there's a consequence for that policy so and that's again that's a concern of mine if we go to the next slide eight and has the median rental prices Where did we get those numbers from? Because I remember during the housing element, we weren't able to get median rental prices. So we didn't know what those were during the housing element. Our office, my office had to go out there and get those for especially northern Santa Barbara County.

So where did we get these numbers? And they're kind of curious to me.

CommentKaren HauensteinProposed · by introduction4:22:31

Supervisor Nelson through the chair, these numbers specifically were drawn from Zillow.com However, moving forward when we're determining whether or not to apply the inclusionary requirements to rental projects what we'll be using is a software. It's an analytic software through Yardi dot com and what they do is called the Yardi matrix and we've subscribed CSD has to get access to the market rate rents for apartment buildings of 50 units or more throughout each one of the housing market areas. So we can make a deep dive into all of the available rents at any point in time throughout the year to determine what that median rent is so moving forward in order for us to determine if the inclusionary requirements would apply because we're comparing what's affordable, if that moderate income household can afford Rent in Santa Maria, then we would say that a developer can waive that obligation to build rentals for the moderate-income households So we won't use Zillow.

We're gonna use The data that's provided through the Yardi software and we have a variety of different apartment complexes Listed within each HMA that does give us the real time data over the rent that is being charged

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:23:50

Okay, so Yardie has access to private contracts between an apartment and their tenants?

CommentKaren HauensteinProposed · by introduction4:23:57

Yardie communicates directly with the property management companies for each one of

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:24:00

those. So it kind of surprises me because I know when we went through our study that our office commissioned that's often closely held information between a tenant and their landlords. So I'm interested in that especially these numbers like you have on here the median rent in Buellton being considerably less than the City of Santa Maria You know, and that's not accurate on a market basis. I think we would all know that instinctively so I'm concerned about the numbers that were published here as part of this conversation.

And I know that from our experience you know there are definitely some of these rental numbers when you'll hit those numbers if you look for them but there's also considerably you know if you actually go and find out I think we got about 2500 pieces, 2500 rental prices because we agreed to disaggregate the actual locations with a bunch of the. property management companies in our area. And I think that's probably the more accurate way of actually knowing what the median market is, is contacting those that are actually on the ground.

So and for us and especially in the housing element for the North County we found that most of the rentals, I think 85% of them were already meeting these requirements on our rental market at least in the Santa Maria and Lompoc Valleys Are those above? Of course, there's something that above and those are going to be those outliers there. But the actual relationship between landlords and tenants were already on the affordability category. And I guess that's one of my concerns here too is also moving us forward is especially in the North County where we are meeting these numbers often by market.

It's a different scenario here. And so I'm concerned especially on multi-unit projects they don't have the upside Like you have in the South County where you can go and charge excessive rents. adding another tax on these North County projects are more likely not to make them happen, which will probably make a lot of my constituents happy. I don't really want to have multi-unit projects but I do think we're actually competing on some of the North County projects with one goal of having more funds for affordable housing projects that with also getting projects built in and in the North County who doesn't who don't have the same level of potential upside on rents you know you looking at that it's almost it's over double the rent down the South Coast But we're going to put the same essentially burden on both.

And so, you know I think that's gonna be a real challenge there. You know I already was contacted by one I just want to make sure that we're aware that these numbers are tight already to make these things profitable. There's a lot of money up front, there's a lot of uncertainty with interest rates. skyrocketing costs that they can't control, these are going to end up scaring some people away from moving forward with these projects.

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
CommentKaren HauensteinProposed · by introduction4:27:02

Supervisor Nelson through the Chair, we do have our consultants on available on the phone via Zoom. We wanted to make sure that they were here and available for any questions that you guys may have in reference to the feasibility of the application of the inclusionary requirements to rental projects if if you like they can walk through that pro forma slide to give some more details. Sure

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:27:25

well I mean I saw the slide and you know that means potentially less net operating income But that's sometimes the difference between a project moving forward and not. I mean, what's the last? Obviously the value of property changes the investment risk, right? So when you have less return they're gonna want less risk so these things don't happen in a vacuum. And I think up here we sometimes think it does and aren't fully realizing that here with that.

And I guess it's really just a philosophy and you know, I would prefer that we have changed to turn over to somebody like at UCSB their economics department to look at this because actually I think they might have a different view on how inclusionary housing helps or hurts You know our rental market on actually getting units built. I think it'd be a great thing to turn over to them, to have them look at because I bet you they'll come back say an inclusionary housing actually leads to less housing affordable housing and so that's one reason why I'm not big supportive on this package there are some things I do like I do like the The state density bonus law for ownership units. I think that's great to continue that incentive all the way through the process if we're going to do that, it shouldn't be a windfall for a single owner and that's to build a unit that goes for sale right?

Is that what I understand which we don't do a lot of those to be honest but it would be nice to have that in place in the future when somebody gets that unit that they get to experience some of that profit that they might be able to flip and that's what we want. We want turnover on some of these affordable units. The problem that what we do here When we create permanent affordability is we make permanent renters often because, you know the rent's so cheap compared to what the opposite would be and for them to ever own something they'll probably have to move out of our area which is a disincentive. And they also can't make enough money to afford to buy something or else they lose their unit. So it's this really bad cycle of incentives that we set up for our constituents and I just hate that cause it really creates a permanent underclass in our community.

And I think the state might like it but I think it's really bad For our community overall.

4:29 – 4:3514 turns

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.814:29:39

Supervisor Hartman if the consultants available, I would like to have him walk through the profile.

CommentKaren HauensteinProposed · by introduction4:29:45

Certainly Jacqueline.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed4:29:48

We have a consultants available on zoom. I believe

CommentKaren HauensteinProposed · by introduction4:29:50

we do yes Hita Mosesman and Michael Kuhn are available on Zoom.

PresenterHeaton MosesmanCommunity Development and Housing at Harrison AssociatesProposedself-stated4:29:57

Good afternoon. Good

CommentKaren HauensteinProposed · by introduction4:30:02

afternoon Hita.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed4:30:05

Supervisor Hartman, did you have a question for the consultant that she can speak to?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.814:30:08

The suggestion was they could walk through the pro forma and show us and we can get into the application in a little more detail.

CommentKaren HauensteinProposed · by introduction4:30:27

Kida do you have the ability to go through the pro forma analysis for the element departments?

PresenterHeaton MosesmanCommunity Development and Housing at Harrison AssociatesProposedself-stated4:30:33

Uh, yes, just to clarify question. Are we going through the slide on the performa? Or are we would you like to see a different item?

CommentKaren HauensteinProposed · by introduction4:30:44

I think this slide is fine that's what we have presented so there thank you

PresenterHeaton MosesmanCommunity Development and Housing at Harrison AssociatesProposedself-stated4:30:48

great. Great okay. So, um. Good afternoon everyone. My name is Heaton Mosesman and I'm the Vice President of Community Development and Housing at Harrison Associates. We conducted an economic analysis related to your inclusionary housing requirements, including the rental, the proposed rental requirement for inclusionary. Um, what we did is we ran and I'm going to try not to get super technical in this description because I think it takes away from the bottom line or the bigger picture. But we did something called a residual land value analysis.

Many developers will look at this to determine whether to move forward with a project whether to. To begin the process of getting entitlements and doing a development project. So, basically what that is is you look at revenues minus costs including profit for everything except land value. If that number is and hopefully that number is positive, that your revenues exceed your costs. And then you compare what's left over the Delta to the value per acre of what's leftover In terms of the project that you're looking at, so we did prototype projects and 1 of them is the elements apartment in Santa Maria. So, we took a lot size for this particular real life project.

We looked at what was left over from revenues minus costs, including profit and then we looked at the market value per acre of land in the Santa Maria area. According to CoStar, which is a data analytics subscription that developers investors commercial real estate folks use kind of the gold standard of data. We looked at the value per acre of land in Santa Maria and we compared that to what was left over when you subtract revenues from costs including profit to make sure that there would be enough leftover to purchase The 1 or 2 acres that would need to be purchased of land to do the development project in terms of costs, we use Marshall and swift construction cost index. It's also a core logic product.

We incorporate things like demolition costs, site prep. Those are included permit cost development impact fees things like that into the analysis and what we found here is that in this prototype project which is the elements apartments again a project that was completed recently is that there was there was a good amount of profit Enough to have inclusionary units be part of the project.

Rental projects are, for the most part as compared to for sale much more profitable in today's market and you have a larger pool of people to choose from because market rents in many of your housing market areas really match up with what it costs to build plus the profit you need from your investors as a developer. So we found that comparing what was left over after a project cost and revenues are incorporated, there was up to 200% more value in what they could purchase the land for as a result of our pro forma, as compared to what it costs to actually buy that land according to COSTAR. So there was a really large buffer.

What we found for rental projects including the elements apartments significant enough to withstand the additional cost of doing some inclusionary units And I'm happy to answer any clarifying questions on that.

not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.814:35:09

That was very helpful, thank

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:35:11

you. I've got a question. Sure. So when an investor looks at those two options which one are they more likely to invest their money into?

4:35 – 4:419 turns

PresenterHeaton MosesmanCommunity Development and Housing at Harrison AssociatesProposedself-stated4:35:23

You know, I think that there are a number of factors that lead to choosing a particular jurisdiction to develop in the county versus city. For example, I think that the other thing that comes into play. In addition to the numbers is how quickly you can get the project built. So, it depends on what the streamlining from the housing element programs are happening in the county versus perhaps the city of Santa Maria. I know that developers also look at that in development time as money because financing costs to your point are going up and are higher than they have been in the last 5 years.

So there are some other factors, but we really did find that there was a very, very large buffer. Rental projects have significant profit in this market because rents are fairly high and developers typically go with what the market rent is for that area. So if the land costs less than Santa Maria versus Santa Barbara, for example, those land costs are significantly different Given the land cost in the Santa Maria project, that project was able to make a great deal of profit because the rents were high enough versus the cost to develop.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:36:48

I guess my question was if you're all things being equal. If you're a developer and you're looking at the 2 projects which 1 would you prefer to invest your funds into?

PresenterHeaton MosesmanCommunity Development and Housing at Harrison AssociatesProposedself-stated4:36:59

I agree with you that developers would choose the project that was more profitable, but there are other factors. I think that would go into that. The other thing I wanted to mention is that because of the housing element process and sort of the pressure from the state a lot of jurisdictions put into their housing elements if they don't have inclusionary housing. to look at it and study it, to enact it. So I think we're going to be seeing a lot more inclusionary requirements occurring over the next few years and perhaps even in the county.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:37:34

Real quick how many acres was that project?

PresenterHeaton MosesmanCommunity Development and Housing at Harrison AssociatesProposedself-stated4:37:38

I believe it was two to three acres was my recollection.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:37:44

Okay so potentially it would take out maybe five million dollars of Profit out of that project. You know, taking your difference there times let's say three acres and I think it was more like six or seven acres but I'm just saying it's a lot of money and when you're looking at these projects, I guess here's my big point and I appreciate your answers. A lot of it sounds more like advocacy than actual analysis which I understand that is perspective so I mean there aren't a lot of people breaking down our doors To build some of these projects. There's a lot of people trying to entitle things because they want to flip it and make some money, but there's a lot of concern out there on these projects I've been talking to a lot of developers and it's not a easy environment.

And so I'm just saying if we want to clear the hurdles to expedite and attract money to developments for more projects, this isn't one of the strategies that we should be going down. I mean it is a strategy and it may stick money into another fund but it may have some consequences that might lead to us not having the same investment locally you know we have it's a very difficult Environment in Santa Barbara County, you know because of the delay and time it takes to get anything through the process. Land values are high.

To me this is just another brick on it like I said I'll have some constituents that will like this because it's likely to see more projects not pencil but I think it's contrary to what we're hoping to get done up here which is getting more affordable units built

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.784:39:21

Yeah, just a friendly disagreement. I don't see...I mean we live in Santa Barbara County. I think there's quite the demand for development of housing. We certainly agree with you it's certainly a different situation on the South Coast when we saw so many market rate units being built for rents. People get excited that there's a new project coming in across from a school. Turns out that the studio goes for $5500.

I just don't see a slowing down of development interest. I do see, you know anecdotally what we hear about from developers is they're pulling out potentially because of costs and delays etc but not because of what they can get for the units. But again I appreciate the conversation and I just wanted to talk about the 90-year increase. Thanks to the league for weighing in on that as a really smart way to go, I understand a lot of other areas are moving towards a 90 year covenant and can you just speak to that a little bit further?

CommentKaren HauensteinProposed · by introduction4:40:23

Members of the Board, Chair Capps. Currently we have a 45-year rolling 9D covenant so one owner would own it for a period of 45 years and then it would go market rate. We've been seeing that come 2030, 2031, a majority almost more than three fourths of the existing affordable housing stock by that time those deed restrictions would have expired. So if it's a matter Preserving units and making sure that units are still available for generations of workforce households The option of a longer-term affordability covenant with 90 years specifically is the route to go And it's only applicable. It doesn't reset on each owner necessarily So it would be a cumulative 90 years of a deed restriction so that could make three four or five different owners But as long as that ninety years has been applied after that term, it would go market rate

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.784:41:20

Great, and I appreciated that the league included in their letter in support of this study out of UCLA Lewis Center showing that we need to think longer term in terms of a 90-year covenant. That's more ideal so I appreciate that we're making that recommendation. Any other questions from the board? Should we see if there is public comment?

4:41 – 4:518 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.714:41:43

Chair Kapsen, members of the Board, we have no request to speak from the public on this item.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.784:41:49

Okay. Are we wrapped up on questions? Ready to any comments, deliberation?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.814:41:57

Supervisor Hartman? I'm prepared to move staff recommendation A through C.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.784:42:05

We have a motion and a second by Supervisor Lee. Any other discussion? We're good. Okay. Would you like a roll call vote? Sounds good. Roll call vote please Madam Clerk

Roll-call vote Passed 4–1 motion and a second by Supervisor Lee. Any other discussion? We're good. Okay. Would you like a roll call vote? Sounds good. Roll call
Show transcript
Supervisor Lavenino? Aye. Supervisor Lee? Aye Supervisor Hartman? Aye Supervisor Nelson? No Chair caps aye
ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.714:42:27

motion passes four to one

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.784:42:30

Thank you, thanks Okay now we are ready to move to our final departmental item Item number six we are moving right along today only 245

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.714:42:44

Chair Caps and members of the board, departmental item number six is from the county executive office. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the second quarter budget status report for fiscal year 2024 through 2025.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 18Proposed4:43:05

Good afternoon chair caps, members of the board Today I'll be providing a second quarter update on the fiscal year 24-25 budget. Just some background on how we prepare this report, departments prepare estimates for how they will end the fiscal year based on two quarters of actuals and then projections for the remaining two quarters We then compare these projections to their annual budget and note the variance. If a department in the general fund has a projected variance, positive or negative of $300,000 or more, or a special revenue fund has a variance of $500,000 or more we write it up in our report and present it here.

Here we see the general fund as a whole is projected to end the year close to $12 million positive. Most departments are projecting slight positive balances with a three in blue on the right meeting the reportable threshold. On the left, we see two departments projecting reportable negative variances compared to budget. We'll discuss these five departments more specifically on the next slides and just to note the $11.912 million any surplus the general fund ends each year with just as a reminder that is what we use in the following fiscal year as the one-time source of funds that we will put towards new projects or other needs General revenues is the department where all the general funds discretionary revenue is recorded and includes property taxes, TOT sales and more.

A $10 million surplus or just under 3% of the budget is projected here mostly driven by higher than anticipated property taxes in transient occupancy tax. The property tax is coming from higher than budgeted growth in the assessed value this fiscal year. The TOT increase is primarily due to the recently passed rate increase to 14% that went into effect in January.

Other significant drivers include interest income and property transfer taxes coming in higher than budgeted. All of these projected actuals have been factored into the baseline for the preliminary 2526 budget that we'll be discussing in April. Cannabis tax revenues are projected to come in about $700,000 under budget for about 5.4 million dollars on the year on a budget of 6.1 million mostly due to attrition of licensed cultivators.

The quarter 2 cannabis report coming later this month will speak to the drivers of tax revenue as well as the budgeted uses of the cannabis tax revenue. This shortfall gets covered by cannabis tax fund balance that we hold in general county programs and does not impact the overall general revenue $10 million positive variance we see here. The Probation Department and County Executive Office are also showing positive variances of 1.4 million and 644,000 respectively both driven by salary savings on vacant funded positions And consistent with trends at the end of last fiscal year and our quarter one projections in the fall, the Community Services Department Parks Division continues to be impacted by lower than anticipated revenues due to unanticipated delays in both the opening of the Goleta Beach restaurant and completion of the RV improvement project at Kachuma.

When the current year budget was being built around this time last year, it was anticipated that the Goleta Beach restaurant would be open and operating for the full fiscal year. But it only just opened for dinner service a few weeks ago. The RV project was anticipated to be completed in June of 2024 but is now slated for a May 25 completion due mostly to electrical equipment delays on the project.

The department is holding non-essential staffing vacancies open in an attempt to generate additional salary savings to help offset these lost revenues. And the current negative 570,000 reflects those assumed savings. So general fund support will likely be necessary to balance their budget at year end unless more significant midyear cuts are made. The Sheriff's budget is trending about where it was at quarter one, around three quarters of a million dollars negative.

Similar to prior years the negative has driven mostly by overtime costs exceeding their budget but being mostly not quite covered by salary savings due to numerous funded vacancies. As they fill and train positions, they no longer get the salary savings generated by the vacancy but often still have staff working overtime to cover those patroller custody duties until the new staff is fully trained and able to take their post which often takes months. This overlap is typically why their salary savings don't entirely cover their extra overtime.

We continue to maintain a set-aside of Prop 172 funding in general county programs to mitigate overtime costs, new higher incentives and overhires that can be released with CEO recommendation and board approval by the end of the fiscal year. In addition to that shortfall, other general county program set-asides will need to be released before the end of the fiscal year to fund other unbudgeted costs in the Sheriff's budget. Specifically jail medical cost increases that were included in the one year extension that went into effect earlier this year and which expires at the end of this month as well as anticipated increase from a new contract that would be in effect starting April 1st Additionally, there are impacts to the Sheriff's budget due to the DSA side letter agreed to earlier this year that included lump sum payments, longevity pay and salary increases that weren't anticipated when the budget was adopted.

The cumulative impact of these costs are likely to be $5 million or more for which we have been holding balances in general county programs in anticipation of this to help them close the fiscal year. In our special revenue funds, we had two reportable funds both in the IT department. The IT Shared Services Fund anticipates a $1.2 million positive variance mostly driven by salary savings and lower than expected costs in planned services and supplies expenditures.

However they intend to use much of this towards other hardware and software costs such as co-pilot licenses and data governance efforts. In the IT Communications Fund, they're projecting a negative $1 million variance driven by large monthly increases in billing from former telephone service provider Lumen prior to the county switching over to Frontier earlier this year.

Salary savings are covering part of this variance with remainder planned to be covered by reserves in the communications fund. Finally, a look at funded vacancies in the county. As of quarter two about 533 of the county's roughly 4700 adopted funded positions were vacant. It's an 11% vacancy rate down very slightly from 12% in quarter one. Departments with the highest quarter two vacancy rates include the CEO's office, child support services, information technology, behavioral wellness and probation Reasons for vacancies include holding some open intentionally due to future budget uncertainties, recently added or recently vacated positions that are in active recruitment now but yet to be filled.

And as always for certain departments there are certain difficult-to-fill positions that often require technical or specialized skill sets. Savings generated through vacant funded positions in the general fund will return to the general fund at the end of the fiscal year and are reflected in the overall positive variance in the General Fund that I discussed earlier in the presentation.

And that brings me to recommended actions, which is to receive and file and make this equal determination. Thank you.

4:51 – 4:5521 turns

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.784:51:10

Thank You Mr. Clemente questions from the board Supervisor Nielsen.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:51:16

So I'm confused, um, I thought we were in financial ruin? Just reading the news, I'm sorry. I'll let that just sit there. Um so we're looking at a positive variance at the end of year?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 18Proposed4:51:31

We are looking, the general fund looks to end 10 million. So we have a balanced budget and

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:51:35

we're likely to have a surplus at the end of the year?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 18Proposed4:51:38

That's correct for this fiscal year.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:51:40

Wow, sure nobody will talk about that. That said I was kind of struck it struck me though that we have about 12% funded but unfilled positions I thought we'd see more variance with that many positions. I mean 12% of our workforce, 500 positions and we're only really you know and most of the variances have been driven by excess tax revenue. Sounds like most departments are kind of riding level even with all those underfunded positions which gives me a little bit of concern where are those dollars that are supposed to be going to you know full-time equivalencies going within their departments so I think that would

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed4:52:22

Supervisors some of these are not, you list all the vacancies and they're not all general fund positions.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:52:27

Okay

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed4:52:27

so that's probably what

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:52:29

gets to your issue. So in the projection we're really focusing on general fund departments there?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 18Proposed4:52:36

The 11.9 is specifically general fund, the only two reportable special revenue funds that I talked about was the two IT ones. There are numerous other special revenue funds a lot of those vacancies are in funds like behavioral wellness and public health. They often are using fund balance to cover their budgets if they have vacancies they're going to draw less fund balance and still show zero variance and so it doesn't pop out here but that is where a lot of the county's vacancies occur. Yeah

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:53:03

thank you for reminding me of that because I mean, that's 10% of our workforce. And we have hundreds of millions of dollars of payroll so I was thinking a bigger number but that helps me understand why that's not there and then obviously one of them some of these departments that are general fund get made up by overtime that eat into that like the Sheriff's Department and we're into the negative.

So thank you Paul for reminding me.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.784:53:30

Supervisor Lavinia?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.904:53:31

Thank you, Madam Chair. I think this is a good time for a public service announcement that if anybody would like a job we have 533 of them so if you're interested in IT or probation or mental health or social services we got a spot for you come on down the pay is apparently exorbitant benefits are outrageous so I'm not sure why we have any openings but let's close them up

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.784:54:03

All right, I do want to just acknowledge while we you know remain committed to fiscal prudence so many of our neighbors are making cuts and I just really want to thank the team. We have to stay in this direction it's we're facing some serious headwinds to that effect but again many many of our neighboring counties many of our neighboring districts are actually doing or seeing cuts and we're in the black here today And everybody should go try out Goleta Beach Restaurant, my PSA. It's open and I know we'll be hopefully seeing that variance close in that department due to that opening. I have yet to be there myself but I went and toured it and it's beautiful so looking forward to that.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.814:54:50

And then to Kachuma this summer. Into Kachuma this summer

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.784:54:53

there we go. Well I think this board might be out of questions for today any public comment?

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.714:55:00

Chair Caput, members of the board we have no request to speak from the public on this item.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.784:55:05

Public is as well so I move A and B on today's board letter.

CommentBrandon KaysenProposed · by introduction4:55:09

I'll second.

ElectedLaura CappsSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.784:55:10

Okay we've got a motion and a second all those in favor? Aye. Motion carries thank you Mr. Clemente and to the team okay with that I will adjourn our meeting until next Tuesday the 11th March 11th