Board of Supervisors — 2025-03-11

Good morning everybody. I'm happy to call to order the March 11th, 2025 meeting of the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors. We have a special opening by Supervisors Nelson and Lavinia.

Thank you Madam Chair. Just wanted to Thank you. Good morning, everyone and welcome to the board of Supervisors open today's meeting in memory of Jim blinds. Jim was a beloved figure and a pillar of our community up here in Santa Maria. Grew up on the Rockfront ranch out the one 66. And spent his youth going back There's a story of my dad giving him a bloody nose, which then when I looked at his age Jim is seven years younger than my dad. So that's something we're all proud of.

Jim was a co-founded the Community Bank of Santa Maria in 2000. I think most people know Jim as a huge storyteller usually took about 15 20 minutes to get to where he was going but at the end it was always good. He basically raised And I'm not exaggerating, it has to be millions of dollars for local charities. There's a lot of his friends that spent $500-$1,000 on a plate of cookies or a pie all going to a worthy cause.

We had a service yesterday at Pacific Christian Church overflowing crowd I think the poignant part was when they played the country song, Empty Saddles. They had the saddle up there with his hat and the event started at 1007 because Jim always said that if you tell people ten o'clock they'll show up 1010 15 but if you say 1007 everybody was in their seat at 1007 so California State Champion Auctioneer was a huge supporter of Allan Hancock College and all of our local community, and he will be sorely missed.

Yes, thank you Supervisor Lavinio. Jim was larger than life and definitely a beloved member of our community. The funeral or the service that we had really focused on the three things that were most important to him which is his faith, his family and his community. He was left behind by his wife Kathy, two sons John and Patrick as well as five grandchildren.

John was a pillar of our community And a reminder of what a difference somebody can make when they put others first. He will be missed.

Okay next item of business is the approval of the minutes from our last meeting which was March 4th 2025

Move approval.

Thanks, Supervisor Hartman. Second. Thanks, Supervisor Lee. All those in favor please say aye. Motion passes. Next we have the CEO's report.

There is no report this morning chair

There we go, moving right along. Madam Clerk are there any announcements or changes to our agenda today?

Chair Kaps and members of the board I have a couple quick announcements this morning. We received a request from the department to withdraw departmental item number four from the agenda. Departmental item number four is from the Public Health Department it is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding environmental health services fee resolutions and ordinances The board of Supervisors meeting Individuals that would like to provide verbal public comment may do so via Zoom by registering in advance via the link available on page 2. If you have any questions, please contact the Clerk of the Board's Office at area code 805-568-2240 again that's 805 568 2240 and that concludes my announcements for today.

Okay just want to make sure folks heard that because we got some emails about a departmental item number four that that's been withdrawn for this meeting so we can move on to the administrative agenda I see that we have three items pulled from my colleagues item a 3, a 10, and a 13. Madam Clerk are there any items pulled by the members of the public?

Chair Kapsch and members of the board we did just have a request for administrative item number five from the public.

Okay great okay well I will now entertain a motion to approve the balance of

So moved.

Thank you supervisor second thank you supervisor Hartman so we have a motion and a second all those in favor say aye any opposed no motion passes

do we need a motion about the withdrawal

if we are able to do that now if there's no comments

yes chair caps and members of the board if we can move to withdraw departmental item number four from the agenda

so

moved Second.

Okay, thank you. We have a motion to second all those in favor.

Aye.

Okay when you're ready we will move on to resolutions to be presented.

Chair caps and members of the board administrative item number one is sponsored by supervisor Hartman it is to adopt a resolution proclaiming March 10th 2025 as Tibet day in Santa Barbara County and joining us here in person today we have Teppo to cool. And if he can please make his way to the podium. Whereas on March 10th, 1959 Tibetans took a stand together for the freedom of their homeland. The people of the Tibetan capital Lhasa fearing for their life of the Dalai Lama surrounded his residence organized a guard and called for with the withdrawal of Chinese forces from Tibet and the restoration of Tibet's freedom And whereas Chinese statistics estimate 87,000 Tibetans were killed arrested or deported to labor camps during the suppression of the 1959 uprising which also led to the forced exile of the Dalai Lama and tens of thousands of other Tibetans.

Whereas today the government of the People's Republic of China remains engaged in the severe repression of Tibet's unique religious cultural and linguistic heritage and is engaged in gross violations of human rights including extrajudicial detentions Disappearances and torture. And whereas the Tibetan people have not given up their struggle for fundamental human rights and freedoms, Tibetans today are still striving to gain their freedoms back to practice and preserve their natural identity as they remain under China's communist rule. Whereas Santa Barbara Friends of Tibet and Santa Barbara Summit for Tibet are two of many international groups working together for this same goal. We stand by the Tibetan people who have long been our unwavering friends by displaying the Tibetan flag one day a year that symbolizes our support of human rights in China and worldwide.

Now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Barbara declares March 10th, 2025 as Tibet Day in Santa Barbara County and authorizes the Department of General Services to fly the Tibetan flag on March 20th, 2025 at the Santa Barbara County Administration Building. Passed and adopted today.

My name is Depo Durku I'm a Tibetan Lama who lives in Santa Barbara. Today we commemorate the 66th anniversary of the Tibetan National Uprising against Communist China's occupation of Tibet, that immense suffering Tibetans have endured including the death of over a million people and exile of His Holiness the Dalai Lama and thousands of Tibetans. The Communist Chinese government is accused of implementing policies aimed at erasing Tibetan identity, restricting religious freedoms, surprising the Tibetan language and causing environmental destructions.

Despite these challenges, Tibetans' commitment to non-violence and middle way approach seeking a peaceful resolution through dialogue The leadership of the Dalai Lama, particularly his effort to revive ancient Indian wisdom, promote human values and integrate modern science with Buddhist philosophy. Various Tibetan institutions and educational initiatives are recognized for preserving Tibetan culture and contributing to global knowledge.

The Communist China of violating the international laws and democracy principles by oppressing Tibetan while calling for global support. It reaffirmed the unity and resilience of Tibetans, expressed that gratitude to nations and organizations that support their cause. Finally it honored His Holiness the Great 14th Dalai Lama's 90th birthday marking it as the year of compassion and conclude with a prayer for his long life and the success of Tibetan Circle and world peace.

Santa Barbara Semipal, Tibet and Santa Barbara Friends of Tibet. Our sincere extends our sincere gratitude to all the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors to support in solidarity and recognizing the Tibetan freedom and specially sponsored the resolution by Supervisor John Hartman. We deeply appreciated the county of Santa Barbara Board of Supervisors for issuing proclamation and resolution declaring March 10

I would just like to add that Tibet is really a trustee of one of the world's greatest cultures and spiritual traditions. And it's really permeated cultures throughout the rest of the world and here in Santa Barbara. People who are undergoing such repression, it really matters when others stand with you and say we value your fight and we stand next to you. Thank you for being here today and reminding us.

Okay thank you so we will now move on to administrative items pulled by the board in the public starting with administrative item number three

Chair Capps and members of the board, administrative item number three is from the Community Services Department. This is a second reading of an ordinance to consider recommendations regarding an ordinance to amend County Code Chapter 46A inclusionary housing.

Chair Capps I was just looking for a roll call vote if that's okay?

Oh sure that works. Okay Madam Clerk when you're ready we'll take a roll call

vote. I'll move staff recommendation. Thank you.

I'll second.

Thank you

motion passes four to one okay And moving on chair caps and members of the board administrative item number 5 is from the community services department is to consider recommendations regarding revisions to the encampment response protocol. And unfortunately, our member of the public who has pulled this item is not joined us on zoom and we did just reach out to them so perhaps we can circle

back if they're back on at the end of that this administrative items being pulled yes absolutely Sounds good. Administrative item number 10

know that. Chair caps members of the board administrative I'm number tennis from the planning and development department it is to consider recommendations regarding the 2024 comprehensive plan annual progress report.

Okay supervisor Lee and Hartman pulled at surprise early. Oh, I missed that. I apologize supervisor Hartman it's all you on a 10

well first of all. I don't think I've ever realized what an enormous amount of work is going on in our long range planning department. I mean, this is absolutely staggering and I realize how much I don't know about a lot of the work that's happening. So so I had a couple of questions just if you could give us a brief summary of where we stand on arena projections Good morning,

Madam chair members of the board. So it's slow going on meeting our arena numbers and I think we had expected that we do have a number We will be subject like because it's hard to produce the lower income units. We will be subject to what was formerly SB 35. But is now SB 4.23 which allows for streamlining of residential projects as long as they provide a certain level of affordability and then they're consistent with the general plan and zoning we have seen some SP 35 But since I've been here, I've seen two at least.

One in South County and then there was one in North County as well.

And what level of affordability applies? There's been a lot of discussion in Sacramento about changing it from 20%. So what is it now? For SB 35?

I believe it's 50%.

That's what the staff report said.

Yes.

Would we get many of those?

It's really hard to say. I can't really predict that, but I haven't seen a whole lot of them in the six years I've been here, but you just don't know sometimes the affordable housing providers will go for those sites and I think that is what happened on in Patterson

So I have two more questions and about programs. The ordinance on workforce preference, how is that progressing? That's really close

to my heart. Yeah yeah so this is the our local preference concept that we want to bring forward and we've done a great amount of research on that and there are jurisdictions that do have local preference We have a number of programs that are active currently and we've looked at those and we're drafting something now. To bring options back to the board, And that was one of the things that we wanted to look at is creating a system where the units when they come online, but they're offered to the local workforce for let's say for 60 days and then they can be opened up to the rest of the market so we are working on that I'm I'm working with CSD to talk to them about how

And are you also looking, I mean that helps for the first buyer but we're trying to keep it in the workforce over time and see if there was some geographic area within which we could say people needed to work. So we are

We're going to do will bring options back to the board and we're looking at doing the most that we can is particularly difficult with for sale units because they they are then sold by another owner and then It's a little bit easier. And I have spoken with the development community and they're open to re listing those sites are those units once they come open after the first renter is gone for 30 days to local employees so we're going to do what we can and will bring those options back to the board and get direction to draft a code that matches what your recommendations are

Great, thank you. And then I didn't realize we had this as a program in our housing element the low income community revitalization and I just wondered which communities and what kinds of actions?

So those are still to be determined but we have our disadvantaged communities that have been identified which one of them is Isla Vista We're going to be doing an inspection program there, a pilot inspection program. And then we have our other communities. We have Los Alamos. We have Gary, Sisqua, Cuyama and so there are efforts and this is something we work with CSD on revitalization efforts but we haven't undertaken those just yet.

But we do have a number of things I wanted to share with that we have been doing since we adopted the housing element because I know some board members had questions about that. And we, of course, accomplished three zones which was the big program that we needed to get done and we the inclusionary housing ordinance has been updated something you took action on today We made changes to SB 9 and adopted a program that makes it our local program. We updated the ADU laws, we are in the process of working with an architect to develop our pre-approved ADU plans.

We're in the middle of drafting our residential and commercial zoning ordinance amendments to make it easier for housing to be constructed in those zones and we will be going to decision makers this summer And we are in the process of moving forward an emergency shelter ordinance amendment and then we've been working with CSD on the pro housing designation so a lot has been happening.

And there's still a lot to work on, but the other thing I wanted to let the board know is that we do in our work program have something cited for future work on farmworker housing. And that's something we'll talk about when we come back to the board at the beginning of April, when we bring the work program.

And then just one final question. We'll be looking at the Long Range Work Program coming up soon and I just wondered why we don't couple this report with that because it gives it a greater context. We see these projects but now I see You know everything you're doing right great. That's a very

good question and I think it's just historically been that way it said we've presented the item to the Planning Commission then we traditionally had on the administrative agenda for the board because it's something we need to get into the state by certain deadline and it's been a little sometimes our work program comes in March and sometimes it comes a little bit later in April, but it's something I can certainly look at

I think it would be helpful again. We can get frustrated that we can't get our favorite thing on the work program but when we understand the full range of all that you're working on, I think it makes me at least a little more understanding. Sure. Thank you.

Yeah, I think that makes sense as well so thank you Director Pomann. Supervisor Nelson?

Yes, thank you Chair Kapsch. I had a question about something you said Ms. Pomann and you said We'd be back under SB 35. I mean we've already, we're not out of compliance with ARENA at this moment are we? And is that a determination that you make or the board makes or the state makes?

The state makes that

determination. So they sent us a letter saying we're out of compliance already?

They'll send, I think we are not quite out of compliance yet but we expect to be out of compliance because we can't, we're not producing the low-income units at the rate that is expected by the state.

So that would open up all those...

It doesn't open up Builders Remedy It doesn't do that. It's not out of compliance with the housing element, it's making insufficient progress.

And that's defined?

That's determined by the state.

Yeah but what's the definition of insufficient progress?

I'd actually, you know what? I'd have to come back

with that. Make sure we have this on an item soon because it's a big deal for a lot of our communities to fully understand this. This item is obviously going a little far astray from what is agendized here but what you're alerting this board to is significant and impactful for all of our communities and is definitely worthy of either a open or closed session item to discuss it further.

And Supervisors we can certainly bring something back and we can discuss it at gender view with the Chair. In fact, at one point we thought of bringing this as a D item but then we weren't sure how long this agenda would be because other items were on but then got pulled off and just for your awareness on page 5 of 6 we do have a section in the board letter that does have the sites of the code section for streamlined ministerial approval process that Ms. Plowman I think just referred to

And it is defined, I think essentially as proportional share towards meeting our arena based on building permits issued on an annual basis at all income levels. So that's how it's defined by the state.

Okay, so it sounds like we'll return to that in future meetings. Okay thanks Director Plowman. Oh we need a motion for that. Supervisor Herman were you making one?

I move staff recommendation.

To confirm that's just receiving file right?

Yes.

I'll second that.

Okay all those in favor please say aye.

Aye.

Motion carries Okay, our last administrative item that's been pulled is Item Number 13. Madam Clerk when you're ready.

Chair Capps and members of the board administrative item number 13 is from Supervisor Capps. It is to consider recommendations regarding a community forum on cannabis odor in Carpinteria, and we did have one late request to speak from the public on this item as well Okay We can take that comment first And we will remain here in Santa Maria with Karen Hauenstein Karen

You weren't on the Board of Supervisors, but Joan Hartman was and so was Steve when the Unfair and untenable cannabis ordinance was accepted. Greg Hart was a major mover on that one, and the way that that was devised was to protect certain constituents in our area of Sabata Canyon. The Ashbrook McLeish interests and Junak interests Now, my findings are going to be presented in all the public forums dealing with the cannabis issue.

And what's happening with this public meeting on the 14th is this is what results after you create a problem that treats people unfairly. So we're having The odor issue, which is very relative and subjective. And a lot of people are complaining about it but why aren't people complaining about the fact that businesses were ruined in North County? Millions and millions of dollars was lost by legitimate businesses in North County because you outlawed commercial cannabis inside EDRNs, but only in North County.

Not in South County where you have all of this very dense odor issue happening and thank you very much for having this on the 14th I will be there also thank you And

that concludes public comment on this item.

Okay, Supervisor

Lee? I just want to thank you Supervisor Katz for bringing this forward and I'm very excited to bring this discussion to the CARP community. It's a great opportunity to listen to the people and hopefully create better policy based on them so I'm very excited and great feedback from the CARP community that they're looking forward to it. Thank you

Thank you and on the screen is a draft agenda but Supervisor Hermann, you pulled it as well.

Yes in the board letter it says that this is a community forum and I've heard that it's really a special board meeting And the two are very different in terms of who on the board is expected to attend. If it's a board meeting, then all board meeting members are expected to attend. If it's a community meeting, then it's the person who represents that district or an ad hoc committee. What staff is expected to attend? Is it just staff presenting county policy as would be a community meeting? Or is it the staff, the clerk and the CEO with County Council?

And what is the product of the meeting? Is it background information for a supervisor ad hoc to bring back to the board, or is this really where three members of the board are going to be in its? It's really perceived as information and decision making. Is it a community forum or is it a special board meeting? So I guess that's my first question and then I have other questions beyond

that. Well, I'm happy to answer those are good questions the terminology. I'm still relatively new so I don't really I'm not really bound by sort of these terminologies but this is meant to be a community for him that all board members are invited to participate in really my intention was to be I believe the government should be We want to make sure that we function a community meeting to the exact area so that people don't have to travel. So that it's more convenient for them. The government meets people where they are is really one of the many goals of this some other goals are outlined, but really at this point before we take final action hopefully on the 18th to hear some feedback on the policies and not be bound by the 3 minutes have there impact it and have a lot of really sound in my experience.

And I'm sure supervisor Lee would concur, sound policy feedback at this juncture all board members are invited but not expected again it just speaks to my vision of government. It was what we did on the school board where if there was an issue at particular school or neighborhood we went to that area And I don't want to be bound by the, I mean we have to adhere to the Brown Act but I don't want the Brown Act to limit our ability to really converse with people in a way that's what I see government should be as a dialogue and this is really a dialogue. So to answer your question no I don' anticipate much staff, hardly any staff preparation other than noticing it which would happen after this vote if passed, but really to be present if there's questions.

But this is driven by me who called it and of course Supervisor Lee if he attends which I anticipate he would because these are his constituents so hopefully that answers some of your questions.

So you don't expect the clerk or the county council or the CEO to attend. It would be a community meeting and you would only have two board members. I mean, I think we should have County Council weigh in on the Brown Act. We're bound by that and there's a lot of good reasons for it. And I certainly agree that all of us have many community meetings and they're very significant in Transparency and hearing from people, but a board meeting in a community meeting are two different things.

Sure, I'll let you speak Supervisor Nelson. Again, I don't want to get bound down by the process. I just am hoping to have a good dialogue. So Supervisor Nelson?

Yeah, thank you Chair Kapsch and I just wanted to add a little bit more of the context and background to this. It's been well known in the community that Supervisor Kapsch and i've been working on cannabis odor and so we're brown-acted together. This is an issue that we've been having internal meetings with our offices but in advance of this meeting At the board next week, there's been a need in Carpinteria to voices to be heard as well as having Supervisor Lee you know who represents these people for goodness sake want to be part of discussion. And so if it wasn't for the fact that Supervisor Caps and I had already Brown acted on this issue then absolutely everything you envisioned there Supervisor Hartman would be able to happen without it being a special meeting but because we In advance, before even Supervisor Lee was seated, Brown acted on this issue.

We need to go through some more formal processes. I actually had reached out to County Council to try to figure out some other way to do this and not call it a board meeting but I believe that we're ultimately just restricted under the Brown Act It probably didn't anticipate something like this, you know way back when and we can call it whatever we need to make sure it doesn't set some undue precedent. But I think this is just a really odd situation on the circumstance having a supervisor in his district That wants to hear from this community as well as some of the other board members who, you know were early on on setting some different policy pieces in this place. So I don't see this is a huge precedent in the sense of negative precedent as much as just we're trying to legally follow the Brown Act and still be able to correspond and hear from constituents.

And this is the way to do that as far as I've heard from County Council.

Supervisor Lavinia?

Well, thank you Madam Chair. So I have some issues with it but at the core of you want this to be more conversational less rigid that's perfect. That's where you really get the information because

yeah

at a meeting you're getting three minutes at a time and I get that. That's why I think we have held community forums in the past. I think most of us have done them The one I can think of just recently is when Guadalupe flooded. I went out there with Public Works, they made a short presentation and then we opened it up and it wasn't just three minutes. It was conversation mostly negative of getting yelled at but that's what it's all about and that's where you say taking the government to the people I think is important because we needed to go out there and take that and then come back to the board and say we need to take action and that's what we ended up doing but This seems like a special Board of Supervisors meeting, which I will not be able to support because the fact that.

I think the better way to do it is in a community forum, you're going to get better input. Better more conversational leads to better outcomes and it's going to cost us less money to do if we take CEO's office County Council Clerk's Office and have it as a regular meeting. There's a cost associated with that as well plus the fact that when I look at just the to me I understand it's been a huge issue in Carpinteria.

We just recently voted 5-0, I think we all are starting to agree where we need to move this idea and I know there are some concerns now with the public about what came out of the Planning Commission but we're going to hear this next Tuesday. It's already on the agenda for next Tuesday. Carpinteria is 11 miles away from Santa Barbara where the meeting is. I don't understand why we would Two days or three days before that meeting, go down and have a whole board meeting.

I could see a community forum where everybody gets to have their issue out whoever's there whatever two supervisors are there because that's what's allowed to be able to come back and say this is what the community wants and it's I don't think it's I don't think it's unclear what the community wants either. It's not like we would, I'm pretty sure after dozens and dozens and dozens of meeting on cannabis odor that we've all come to the conclusion that something needs to be done more than what has been done so I would totally support a community forum but when you make it a special board meeting Then and you say well, you're kind of invited or you're not invite if I don't show up now that reflects negatively on me.

And why didn't you go down to Carpinteria on Friday? So I don't feel like I'm being invited if it's a special board meeting. I have to be there. I need to be there so That's my concerns. I think you know long run community forums are the best way to deal with things because you get the feedback without the three-minute window but if we make it a special meeting I don't think we're going to get what we want out of it.

Well, I appreciate that and again I didn't come up with the terminology special hearing but I also just you know you have amazing experience and the Guadalupe Town Hall you did was like I think interesting it makes me think about an interesting example that in hindsight I would have loved to have been there because it was a big ticket item nine million dollars is my memory correct? So ideally I could have had the opportunity if we had just again used the Brown Act, I believe in the way that allows for more facilitation as opposed to limiting it. So I think Supervisor Nelson explained the unique circumstances as to why this one isn't the two folks who brought forward the proposal so I don't see this exact situation happening again and I think similar to your Guadalupe Town Hall you did that prior to the vote I would imagine?

And so in the same way and I can't really see it on the screen, but it's not just to vent. We know we've heard that we know how people feel and how strongly but I'm specifically looking for feedback on three policy areas that have been discussed at the Planning Commission have been discussed here a little bit, but I want to flush that out a bit more. So that's the feedback. I'm seeking not just an opportunity for people to You know, so sort of be pro-con binary on this issue. But again I appreciate your and if I had known to call it something different. I just again, I am still relatively new not as new supervisor Lee but I don't I didn't intend to make it so that you felt obliged to come as a special hearing. I just wanted to work within the confines of the law and be as flexible and responsive and actually really have questions from people about these 3 policy areas before we decide on Tuesday.

So hopefully that explains a little bit. Supervisor Hartman?

Yeah, I heard a couple of things one that this is a unique situation and two you'd like to do it more like at Guadalupe and other places. When we have three board members attending a meeting that is a special board meeting and that requires That the County Council and the CEO and others be there. Doing this, it's a way to evade the Brown Act is and that to me doesn't seem correct. The Brown Act is designed to make sure that the business of the people is conducted in public We have a meeting coming up three or four days later and it sure seems to me that those who aren't at that meeting can think, gee what kind of decisions? What kind of information is being considered there that isn't. And that could be for board members and members the public these procedures once you start Fiddling with them, you create tension and expectations and a lack of clarity.

And it seems like there would be a premature decision made where we all don't have access to that information. So I think our governance should be structured, predictable and disciplined. I think that's good process and a community meeting goodness knows I know Supervisor Capshew had many to great effect as have other supervisors on this board. I've got four coming up in the next month so that's a different animal and it requires different things of the staff and the board So I just think we're going down a wrong path here that we shouldn't evade the Brown Act by creating a special meeting three days before the actual meeting where certain people will participate and others won't, and we really don't have a good sense of what kinds of deliberations are happening outside the eye of the general meeting.

Well again, everyone's invited and I think as much as I admire you have a difference of our processes. I don't believe our processes are perfect. I think that there is always room for improvement. I think we have new people on boards so that we bring fresh ideas. I'm focused on getting good results for Tuesday the 18th and perhaps and I certainly checked with County Council and CEO's office and there was no hesitation about their their level of staffing issues. So I don't know if our County Council wants to address the fact that this is evading the Brown Act.

Madam Chair, members of the board so first to just address community meetings any two supervisors that are brown acted or any single supervisor is allowed to have a community meeting. Supervisor Nelson addressed this earlier but here we have two supervisors that were already brown acted And so they could hold a community forum. But if we want, if they want to include a third supervisor than the Brown Act requires that we have that as a special meeting and so the action before you today is to authorize a special meeting I understand it's called to host a community forum. I think that's just terminology, but it is a special meeting of the Board of Supervisors that must comply with the Brown Act and so any structure that's created for the meeting will need to comply with the Brown Act Under our procedures and under the Brown Act, the chair of the Board of Supervisors has authority to set a special meeting or the majority of the board can set a special meeting at your discretion.