BodyBoard of Supervisors
MeetingRegular Meeting
Date📅 November 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 – 0:0613 turns

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.830:07 · ≈ 9:00 AM

Okay, now we're ready. It is I am Laura Capps and good morning everybody it is my honor to call to order this meeting of the November 4th 2025 meeting of the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors. Madam Clerk please call the roll.

Roll call, called by Jacquelyne Alexander
Show transcript
Supervisor Lee here. Supervisor Lavinino here. Supervisor Hartman here. Supervisor Nelson here and Chair Capp's here
ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.860:31 · ≈ 9:00 AM

and please join us

Pledge of Allegiance, led by Jacquelyne Alexanderceremonial · click to expand
ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.830:32 · ≈ 9:00 AM

in pledging allegiance to

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.860:32 · ≈ 9:00 AM

the

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.830:33 · ≈ 9:00 AM

flag Ready, begin.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed0:46 · ≈ 9:00 AM

one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.830:57 · ≈ 9:00 AM

Thanks everyone for joining before we begin. I just do want to acknowledge that it is election day and I hope everyone has either voted or is making a plan to vote. There we go, Supervisor Nelson? And I also do wanna acknowledge the sad news of, I woke up to that the passing of our former Vice President Dick Cheney. He was our 46th vice president, also our secretary defense. He served honorably as a member of Congress for 10 years from Wyoming and also had the distinction of being our youngest White House chief of staff ever.

So we wanna acknowledge his family and his service this country. With that, we will move to our first item of business which is the approval of minutes from our last meeting which was October 21st. Hartman moves approval.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role1:47 · ≈ 9:01 AM

Second.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:48 · ≈ 9:01 AM

Great! We have a motion and a second. All those in favor please say aye.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role1:51 · ≈ 9:01 AM

Aye.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:52 · ≈ 9:01 AM

Motion passes. Madam CEO do you have a report for us this morning? There's no report this morning chair. Okay And Madam Clerk, do we have any announcements for our agenda? Chair Kaps and

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:06 · ≈ 9:02 AM

members of the board I do have a few announcements this morning. We received a withdrawal request from Supervisor Nelson's office to withdraw administrative item number 31 from today's agenda. Administrative item number 31 is sponsored by Supervisor Nelson and it is to approve the reappointment I would like to note for the public and anyone watching today that we will be taking, we do plan on taking two breaks today.

AM and one at 1 PM. So again, we will be taking two breaks today there are there is no closed session agenda or lunch break so we'll just be taking two breaks one at 11 and one Additionally, for information on the Board of Supervisors methods of public participation and instructions on how to provide public comment on items listed on today's agenda or during general public comment please refer to 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 5, 6, 8 to 2, 4, 0. And lastly I did just want to announce that as everyone can see better is live here in the room today we are very full and we do have quite a large crowd for an item on today's agenda And we have opened up to the room next door, the Board of Supervisors Conference Room and as well as downstairs the Planning Commission hearing room for overflow. So if members do not have a seat yet and you are lined on the back or double rowed in the back, we are going to ask you to move to those other overflow rooms.

There is about 10 spots still available In the conference room and additionally, some more spots downstairs. And I'm going to turn it over to our fire marshal Fred Tan who can maybe help explain the room when it is at capacity and some availability downstairs. Fred?

not transcribed≈17s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:19 · ≈ 9:04 AM

Sure. Coincidentally, I'm presenting fire code today for next year.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:23 · ≈ 9:04 AM

Perfect!

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:24 · ≈ 9:04 AM

But we do the fire code does make allowances and requirements for access along the aisleways so if there's an open seat which i think some have possibly disappeared, I would encourage everyone to take an open seat. We want to conduct this meeting safely. I know this is a very important topic to many of you that are here But if we don't get any volunteers to move to the conference room next door or the planning commission room, I'll start making some choices and make sure we can get people in and out of here for egress in case something does happen. So if we can clear the walls along this side just because that access is impeded And I think we're going to be okay with one row of individuals. But if we're getting to the second row, we are having some, we are getting a little cramp in this alleyway here.

So if you can't find a space and you're finding yourself squeezing in, I think you're gonna have to find a different spot here. And folks to the back and Jacqueline, are they going to be able to make public comment from the PC?

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.865:46 · ≈ 9:05 AM

Yes. That's a great question We do have a member of my office down in the Planning Commission hearing room accepting speaker slips So please just fill those out and we'll have staff running those up to us I will be calling off three people at a time so if you are in the planning commission room You'll hear your name when you do hear your name. Please make your way upstairs. We do have elevators and stairwell to help guide you up here So again, if you are in the planning commission room or the board conference room and you did sign up to speak, you will be able to hear your name and then just make your way to the hearing room to provide your comments.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed6:21 · ≈ 9:06 AM

There's one more seat up here if anyone wants to take that. And then everyone on this side wall over here we're gonna have to ask you to make a move Either next door or down in the Planning Commission room downstairs. And then, I understand you guys are county employees but we do have to keep an access clear here so let me go take a look.

0:06 – 0:092 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.866:46 · ≈ 9:06 AM

And while Fred is doing that I did just, I think most folks are aware now but just so everyone is aware that is providing comments for departmental item number three regarding our stable appeal. The chair has indicated that each individual will be getting one and a half minutes to speak so that is for everybody across the board one and a half minutes per speaker today not the presenters of course just for public comment on that item And additionally, just a friendly reminder to folks that are in person if you can please silence your cell phones now. That would be greatly appreciated.

It helps eliminate disturbances today. I'll just give Fred another minute in case he wanted to make any other announcements. And there's one more spot up here in the front if a member of the public wants to snag that spot in the front row. Thank you everyone for your cooperation and patience this morning already I believe that concludes Yeah it's from Fire Marshal and that concludes my announcements this morning.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.838:05 · ≈ 9:08 AM

Well thanks to our fire marshal clearly safety is number one here but also is decorum, this is democracy in action folks so we're going to keep it up for any newcomers we do Really appreciate clapping during the resolution portion, which is coming next in our agenda. But when it comes to public comment we keep it quiet and respectful so that we can continue our items and we can just show any kind of support with a wave of the hands but definitely no clapping or booing or jeering of any sort. So I might need to remind folks later on of that but hopefully not.

Okay, with that we will move on to our administrative agenda. Thanks Madam Clerk. Would any board members like to pull any items from the administrative agenda? Okay then it's just me with A25. Would any members of the public have they requested to pull any items of the administrative agenda?

0:09 – 0:1310 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.869:06 · ≈ 9:09 AM

Chair Kaps and members of the board, we have two requests to speak on administrative item number 8.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.839:11 · ≈ 9:09 AM

Administrative item number 8. Okay so now I'll entertain a motion to approve the balance of the administrative agenda except for those 2 items, item A8 and A25.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.879:22 · ≈ 9:09 AM

So moved.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.839:23 · ≈ 9:09 AM

Thank you Supervisor Hartman. May I have a second please? Second. Thank you Supervisor Nelson.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.869:28 · ≈ 9:09 AM

Chair Kaps, members of the board before we vote that includes the withdrawal of the announcement that I made for A31.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.839:36 · ≈ 9:09 AM

Okay so that includes, that motion includes also that withdrawal. All those in favor please say aye. Aye. Motion carries. Okay next as I mentioned we'll have the resolution portion of the agenda. Madam Clerk please read administrative item number one into the record.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.8610:02 · ≈ 9:10 AM

Chair caps and members of the board administrative item number one is sponsored by supervisor Hartman it is to adopt a resolution honoring Christopher Niman of the California surf lifesaving associations. CSLSA 2025 junior lifeguard lifeguard of the year and joining us in person today we have Christopher Niman and Christopher's mother Heather McNamara. And Enzo if you'd like to join us at the podium I'll go ahead and read their resolution Whereas the California Surf Lifesaving Association, CSLSA in partnership with the Santa Barbara County Parks Junior Lifeguard Program is dedicated to promoting ocean safety, lifesaving skills, physical fitness teamwork and youth leadership throughout California. And whereas Christopher Nyman a participant of the Lompoc Teen Center and member of the Santa Barbara County Junior Lifeguard Program has demonstrated exceptional leadership We are proud to be a part of the Lompoc teen center, an organization that empowers youth to achieve academic success, college readiness and self-confidence through mentorship, leadership opportunities, service And whereas while a freshman in high school guided by a lifelong respect for the ocean and community service, Christopher played a pivotal role in reopening the junior lifeguard program at Halama Beach.

In collaboration with the teen center and whereas in recognition of his outstanding achievements, the CSLSA has named Christopher Nyman that 2025 Junior Lifeguard of the Year honoring his exemplary commitment to safety, mentorship and community service. Qualities that embody the highest ideals of the CSLA LSA, the County of Santa Barbara in the spirit of youth leadership that strengthens coastal communities. Now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Barbara does hereby recognize Christopher Nyman for his exceptional achievements and contributions as the 2025 CSLSA Junior Life Credit of the Year passed and adopted today.

not transcribed≈14s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed12:19 · ≈ 9:12 AM

I would like to thank Supervisor Hartman and Casey in the Lompoc Teen Center for this opportunity. Thank you.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.8712:35 · ≈ 9:12 AM

Supervisor Hartman. Well, I just wanted to add Christopher is an example of what the Lompoc Teen Center accomplishes. Youth have wanted for at least a decade for a teen center and I think it's existed now for about four years or so. It offers a place near the high school, Lompoc High School where kids can go after school. They can go on Friday nights. There's games, there's tutoring. You can win points and go on amazing field trips and you can come up with ideas that get implemented in the way that Christopher's did so it really offers a tremendous set of resources for Lompoc youth and we're so proud of Christopher for taking advantage of it.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.8313:30 · ≈ 9:13 AM

Thank you. Madam Clerk, item number two please.

0:13 – 0:176 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.8613:34 · ≈ 9:13 AM

Chair Caps and members of the Board, Administrative Item Number Two sponsored by Supervisor Caps it is to adopt a resolution of commendation honoring John Nichols of the Information Technology Department as the November 2025 Employee of the Month for Santa Barbara County and joining us in person today we have John Nichols and Department Director Chris Sherwig and I'll go ahead and read the resolution.

Whereas John Nichols exemplifies the county's organizational values of accountability, customer focus, equity and inclusion, innovation, trust and ethics. And whereas John models the transformative behaviors of collaborative problem solving alignment with the county's vision risk taking data driven decision making and strategic thinking. And whereas John has been loyally serving the county and its residents for over 28 years, he collaborates with departments, vendors and contractors to ensure that they can rely on critical radio communications channels to ensure the safety of our community. John is generous with his knowledge training new radio shop staff in assessing department's communication needs to implement appropriate solutions. Beyond the technical elements of his job, he is key in helping his co-workers connect with one another as he brings this deep experience and enthusiasm for Santa Maria style barbecue to the table.

Ensuring all enjoy the department's annual Summer All Hands. And whereas John has played a pivotal role in the success of the Information Technology Department's project to modernize the public safety radio network. These upgrades support critical communications for the Sheriff's Office, Fire and EMS Ambulance Services, Probation Courts, District Attorney Community Services and County Health Departments. And are essential to strengthening emergency response capabilities and enhancing coordination among public safety personnel countywide.

And whereas among his many other contributions, John has also recently been indispensable in returning the Valley Peak Radio Tower to operational status after a battery fire in November 2023 and subsequent severe weather over the course of the past two years. He worked closely with The Nature Conservancy and The Battery Manufacturer to fully restore the site's operation. John's professionalism, technical expertise, and unwavering dedication embody the highest standards of public service He is a respected leader and a valued contributor to the county, and to the Information Technology Department. And now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Barbara does hereby acknowledge John Nichols as Employee of the Month for November 2025.

Passed and adopted today.

CommentPasha Madhavi I'mProposedself-stated16:13 · ≈ 9:16 AM

There you go.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed16:19 · ≈ 9:16 AM

Well good morning Chair Caps and members of the board. It is a pleasure to recognize John today, a valued member of the County and Information Technology Division. John brings exceptional expertise in radio communications and consistently embodies the core values of our county. His dedication to supporting others his strong relationships with colleagues and vendors and his collaborative spirit make him an indispensable part of our team Beyond his technical contributions, John is also the heart behind our summer all-hands retreat leading the charge at the grill and bringing people together through his legendary barbecue skills.

This recognition is well earned and on behalf of all of ITD we extend our sincere appreciation for everything you do John congratulations

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.8317:15 · ≈ 9:17 AM

Mr. Nichols, before you go I just want to thank you. You are a real team player and I can imagine over your time here at the county there's been a lot of upgrades to technology and I just want to thank you for your dedication to this county.

PresenterLauren KaplanExxon Mobil Corporation and its affiliatesProposedself-stated17:31 · ≈ 9:17 AM

Thank you.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.8317:31 · ≈ 9:17 AM

You're welcome. Okay Madam Clerk?

0:17 – 0:233 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.8617:45 · ≈ 9:17 AM

Chair Kaps and members of the board, administrative item number three is sponsored by Supervisor Lee. It is to adopt a resolution of commendation honoring Stacey Janus upon her retirement from the Information Technology Department after over 33 years of faithful and distinguished service to the citizens of Santa Barbara County. And joining us in person today we have Stacey Janus.

Whereas Stacey Janice started her career with the County of Santa Barbara in 1988 as a temporary worker in elections and general services while attending UCSB, and held her first regular position as an account clerk three in social services in 1992. Stacey returned to general services in 1994 as an account clerk three, and in 1996 she was promoted to the role of departmental assistant senior working in telephone services. In 2008, Stacey was promoted to EDP Office Automation Coordinator and in 2021 to her current role as EDP Office Automation Coordinator Senior. And whereas during her tenure at the county, Stacey was recognized as County Employee of the Month in December 2014 and again in November 2019. She also served as a member of the Information Technology Department Transition Team in 2022 as part of the county's transition to the new Information Technology Department in 2023.

And whereas in her 30 years in telephone services, Stacey saw the county's telephone and voicemail systems through numerous complex upgrades moving to digital remote units and PBXs. And from there upgrading again adding VoIP telephones. She helped in virtualizing telephone application servers and implementing voice recognition functionality on the voicemail system and much more.

She contributed to five-digit calling easing communication between County employees and the E911 system. Supporting the safety of everyone in the county. And whereas Stacy's job knowledge, skills and experience have contributed greatly to the overall professionalism and success of information technology and communications at the county. Stacey also made significant contributions in other areas from serving as the ITD marketing team lead from 2022-2025. To working at the EOC Logistics Communications Unit since 2007. And she was a faculty member of the Employees University from 2000-2007 And whereas Stacey is commended for her faithful and devoted service to the county community, Stacey's technical expertise, dedication, professionalism, positive demeanor and her skilled storytelling will be greatly missed by her friends and associates throughout the county.

Now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Barbara does hereby acknowledge and commend Stacey Janice upon her retirement from the Information Technology Department passed and adopted today.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed20:57 · ≈ 9:20 AM

Members of the board, my fellow county employees, family and friends. My voice is bad because I've been cheering for the Dodgers. Whether you're in this room or watching online, I'm so grateful for your presence. It means the world to me. One of the best decisions I ever made was randomly picking a temp agency out of the yellow pages. That choice led me to my career and where I'm standing today.

Working for the county wasn't on my life's bingo card, but along the way I found myself, my home, my purpose both in work and in life. I've had the privilege of working along some incredible people. The hard work was always balanced with support and plenty of laughter. For that I am deeply grateful. I always knew I wanted to help people. I found a non-traditional way by working for departments that support everyone else.

It's a different type of service, but one that I take great pride in. To everyone I worked with over the years you shaped my life in more ways than can express. The last 37 years have been an adventure. I truly love my job working for the county and being part of something bigger than myself. Thank you very much.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed22:12 · ≈ 9:22 AM

It is a privilege to speak on behalf of the Information Technology Division in support of this resolution of commendation for Stacey Janos. I invite you to reflect back to 1988, the year Stacey began her remarkable journey with the county. For more than three decades she has been a cornerstone of our telephone services providing steadfast leadership and technical expertise that has shaped our communications infrastructure Stacy's unwavering positivity, her enthusiastic participation in countless volunteer initiatives and her deep institutional knowledge have made a lasting impact.

Her absence will be deeply felt not only for the role she played but for the spirit she brought to our team. Stacey your contributions have left an indelible mark and the shoes you leave behind will be very difficult to fill on behalf of all of us thank you for your years of dedicated service You have truly earned your retirement and we wish you continued joy and fulfillment in the next chapter.

0:23 – 0:2710 turns

ElectedRoy LeeSupervisor, District 1Proposedvoiceprint 0.8423:21 · ≈ 9:23 AM

Supervisor Lee. So Stacey, what's the plan for retirement?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed23:30 · ≈ 9:23 AM

Dodger games, Ram games, traveling. Big sports nut everybody here who knows me knows that and just relaxing for the first time in pretty much my life. Thank you all.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.8323:57 · ≈ 9:23 AM

Okay. That was Wonderful resolutions. And now we will move to the administrative items pulled by the board and the public, first the public. Just give a moment as these folks depart. Okay. Let's move to Administrative Item Number 8, which was pulled by the public.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.8624:31 · ≈ 9:24 AM

Yes Chair Kaps and members of the board and before we proceed to Administrative Item Number 8 I did just want to make a quick announcement there are a couple seats that opened up here in the front. There are three thank you Jesus if you would like to snag those seats in the front please do so and thank you again for everyone's cooperation and patience this morning I really appreciate it We will now go to administrative item number 8. This is sponsored by the Board of Supervisors. It is to consider recommendations regarding a San Ynez Regional Trail Connector, SYRTC study memorandum of understanding and this is in the 3rd district and there's a forfeits vote required on this item. And we do have one request to speak from the public and I did just want to note for the board that we do have Fred Luna from SBCAG available on Zoom as well if there are any questions.

And we will now go to Zoom with Kathy Rosenthal. Good morning. Can you hear me? Yes, we can please proceed.

PresenterKathy RosenthalSanta Ynez Valley Riders in our coalition to save Santa Barbara County equestriaProposedself-stated25:31 · ≈ 9:25 AM

Okay. Good morning Madam Chair and members of the board. My name is Kathy Rosenthal and I represent the Santa Ynez Valley Riders in our coalition to save Santa Barbara County equestrian trails. I first wanted to say we are in complete support of trails up here in Santa Ynez Valley for equestrian riders. And this particular project, the Santa Ynez Valley River Trail has been in works for many years We've been very active in including equestrian access on this trail, and rightly so. This trail is also a transportation corridor for the valley.

We wanted to again reiterate that the original idea for this was the Ventura River Trail down in Ojai. Which accommodates pedestrians, bikes and equestrian riders. And we wanted to make sure that the design going forward includes that. We wanted to also say that we had a community meeting in the summer of 2024 in which there were a great many equestrians supporting this project but also wanted to see the road shoulders or the trail shoulders wide enough so that equestrians would be able to traverse the trail as well And do so safely. So I wanted to include that this comment as the design goes forward we will be involved in following the project as it is developed and approved and we thank you again for the time to speak and we'll be in touch.

Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.8627:10 · ≈ 9:27 AM

Thank you. And that concludes public comment on that item and again Fred Luna from SBCAG is available for any questions the board may have.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.8327:19 · ≈ 9:27 AM

Okay, any questions from the board? No. Then I will entertain a motion on this item A8.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.8727:25 · ≈ 9:27 AM

Move approval.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role27:26 · ≈ 9:27 AM

Second.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.8327:27 · ≈ 9:27 AM

Okay we have a motion and second all those in favor please say aye. Aye. Motion carries. Okay then our second item when you're ready Madam Clerk is Item A25 an administrative item that I pulled from the agenda

0:27 – 0:3410 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.8627:43 · ≈ 9:27 AM

Yes, Chair Kapsa and members of the Board. Administrative Item Number 25 is from the Sheriff Coroner's Office. It is to consider recommendations regarding an amendment to the Enterprise Fleet Management Equity Lease Agreement.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.8327:54 · ≈ 9:27 AM

Thank you. Yeah, if you could please explain it I had some questions just about the fact that this is a last-minute request that's coming at us about an expansion. I know it's not additional funding from the general fund but unanticipated costs that are coming related to our enterprise rental fleet and so if you could just explain and I'd had some additional questions but I wanted to give you the chance to please explain what What's at hand?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 6Proposed28:25 · ≈ 9:28 AM

Okay, I appreciate you letting me have this opportunity to talk to you about it. What we're asking for is an increase in the existing contract purchasing authority. The original contract was negotiated back prior to COVID. Since then, we've exceeded the normal 3-4% annual increases that were and that contract amount was based on some years during COVID. It was 6%, 11%.

That increase that was unanticipated due to the pandemic is what's reflected here in the additional amount that we would like to have the authority to use to pay for this contract. It's not asking for any more money than we're budgeted for, and we don't anticipate needing additional funds You know once this contract is over and we do anticipate, well we will be coming back to you early next year with a comparison between Enterprise and GSA. We're currently working with the GSA folks on that right now and have been for a couple of weeks, months now, to make sure that we have an apples-to-apples comparison between two very different ways of managing a fleet.

We're not going to bring anything to you that we haven't found an agreement with the GSA on so that we make sure that we have the best decision made and the most economical decision made. And either way that it goes, it's not going to result in us asking for more money one way or the other. Does that make sense to you?

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.8329:50 · ≈ 9:29 AM

I think so. So just my understanding was that this was a pilot project prior to COVID as you mentioned where the Sheriff's Department wanted to go outside of our central centralized fleet I know that happens in other departments, but it's been. I just want to understand, I'm glad you have committed to an evaluation of that pilot project because by nature pilot projects are pilot and need to be evaluated to see why is it that we're having a centralized And I just want to see.

I don't know if there's unanticipated costs with the centralized program, but again this would be a flag for me. And I do have another question you say that we won't be coming back for additional funds but my understanding from our budget team is that there's only $160,000 left in the budget for this program, yet there would be a total of about 350 to for the remainder of the contract. So would you be coming back for that additional 190 to get through the remainder of the contract?

not transcribed≈18s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈19s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 6Proposed31:33 · ≈ 9:31 AM

No we're not anticipating needing to do that at all and like I say when we get back to The New Year's when we're able to give you the comparison between the two of them. I think you'll find that regardless of whether it was Enterprise, GS or your own personal vehicles that the price did go up significantly over the COVID years supply chain logistics maintenance now all that sort of stuff increased equally sort of like a rising tide lifts all boats unfortunately this rising tide was rising the cost of all of the automobile industry across the board We're going to iron out any of the differences that we have in between enterprise and the GSA models so that we can give you a good comparison.

And whichever way works out the most economical, we're gonna go with and either way shouldn't require an increase in the budget one way or the other.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.8332:33 · ≈ 9:32 AM

So that evaluation of this pilot project is 100% going to happen? Before it's, before this contract with Enterprise is renewed.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 6Proposed32:43 · ≈ 9:32 AM

Yes speaking with the GS folks just this morning about it we're gonna make that happen so that you can see it before this contract ends and so we can make the best decision because we all want to save money together

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.8332:56 · ≈ 9:32 AM

Okay, I just again well maybe I can make that part of the motion but I do want to have some assurances of that because again this is about the third or fourth unanticipated cost that's come before the board. This one gives me less heartburn because it's not additional pressure of on the general fund at a time when we're considering layoffs and other departments. That's helpful that this is an additional cost, but there's been a lot of unanticipated costs from the Sheriff's Department I'm repeating myself because of the consternation that has caused not just to the board but to other departments and to the public so I think I've made my point I don't know if there's any other questions or Comments? Supervisor Lee.

ElectedRoy LeeSupervisor, District 1Proposedvoiceprint 0.8433:45 · ≈ 9:33 AM

Just a question, can you define what the fleet is specifically in the Sheriff's Department? Is it patrol cars?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 6Proposed33:52 · ≈ 9:33 AM

What does that mean? Supervise Lee through the chair yeah this is all of our vehicles right now it's kind of divided up where the patrol side is managed by GS I'm generalizing right now and the rest of the vehicles are managed by Enterprise and we're sort of comparing how those work out

0:34 – 0:3612 turns

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role34:14 · ≈ 9:34 AM

Supervisor

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.8334:14 · ≈ 9:34 AM

Nielsen.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role34:15 · ≈ 9:34 AM

Yes, thank you Chair Kaps. So you said you'd come back to us by the end of this contract so this contract ends in a couple months here so we're looking at having something here by potentially into February is that what I'm or?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 6Proposed34:25 · ≈ 9:34 AM

Before that I hope yes. Okay

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role34:27 · ≈ 9:34 AM

all right so yeah I think part of the motion if you would like me make it for you Supervisor or Chair Kaps would be Go with staff recommendation but also direction that the pilot project come back for a D item before the board.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.8334:42 · ≈ 9:34 AM

Yeah, yes with Director Loggerquist's buy-in obviously because again I'm not sure exactly It wasn't on the board when the decision was made to have the pilot project. I'm sure there was merit to it at the time, but I just note again that there's been a lot of unanticipated costs from this department, the total of $16.7 million in year-end shortfalls since 2020 so...

It's a lot that we've been asked to and some departments come to the board ahead of time when there's unanticipated costs. And I'm just asking you, that might be a good approach given the frequency of these types of expenditures? That's fair enough yes. Okay. Just

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role35:26 · ≈ 9:35 AM

trying to help out with your motion for this return back to the board by the end of February for a report to the board so pass this recommended action along with that direction.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.8335:37 · ≈ 9:35 AM

Sure, if you want to make that motion.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role35:39 · ≈ 9:35 AM

Okay. Yeah, that's my motion staff recommendation along with a report back to the board by the end of February of 2026. I'm

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.8335:46 · ≈ 9:35 AM

happy to second that. All those in favor?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 6Proposed35:51 · ≈ 9:35 AM

Aye. Thanks look forward to talking to you about this later on.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.8335:55 · ≈ 9:35 AM

Thank you. Okay with that we have finished the administrative agenda and now we move to the portion of the agenda for general public comment. So just to be very clear, this is for the time when the public can speak to us and the public about items that are not on the agenda. Madam Clerk do we have folks that have signed up for general public comment?

0:36 – 0:417 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.8636:24 · ≈ 9:36 AM

Yes, Chair Kaps and members of the board. We have four members of the public requesting to speak in general public comment and if you are a member of the public I believe there is one who signed up for general public comment Larry Barrett. You might be in the planning commission room if you want to make your way up we will get to you momentarily. We'll begin on zoom with Daniel H to be followed by Renny Strong. Daniel?

And Daniel, we have unmuted you on our end. If you can please unmute on your end to provide your comments? Again, Daniel, we have unmuted you on our end. If you can please unmute on your end to provide your comments. I see you are still muted. All righty, we will return to Daniel momentarily. We are going to go to Rennie Strong and then we will go to Karen Hauenstein.

Rennie? And Rennie, we have unmuted you on our end if you can please unmute on your end to provide your comments. Yes, please proceed.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed37:51 · ≈ 9:37 AM

Very good thank you. Good day everybody. Everybody this is Renny Dean Strong also known as Mr. Soloflex thanks to Phil Donahue. I'm speaking solo flex means a lot to me it's changed my life um i got to travel the world i got to be on tv And I've got to witness a lot of things and different cultures living in Barcelona, Spain and Milan, Italy. There's a lot of things that I've seen that no one should have to see. And there's things I haven't seen but I feel.

I'm speaking out to everybody and seeing all these crimes against humanity that are taking place And all these injustices. And you all need to know that this system is, it's a C-Y-S-T. It's a cyst, it's a disease and these puppets that are up on that stage they play both sides. They're called coyotes in the native indigenous way so I'm honoring my grandmother and grandfather on my mom's side who was a Johnny Lou Purtle, Slawoski now I'm married to a Marine and was a paralegal to the top law firm on Oahu. John Yamani, I took on the line of fires and the fires that are going on here. I'm giving you guys a lot of information really quickly but we need to say no more.

We're not playing your guy's game anymore. And Steve Stavely my uncle who is head of Department of Justice of California Police down in Buena Park he was the chief of police of the whole state of California Arnold Schwarzenegger, so that's my mom's only brother-in-law. And when I asked about the COVID 1984 and the jabs and about the geoengineering our skies from the Air Force bases which my dad was in two tours in Vietnam as I spoke before about that.

And all these harms that are going on, the direct energy weapon to firing, the fires that are started by this own government And these heads here that are just puppets, they're getting paid. And you guys need to know this, they live. John Carpenter talked about it and others and I will so I'm running for by the way Arnold Schwarzenegger is my cousin supposedly two Austrians on my dad's side grandfather's side Leonard Strong. So I like to put my seat in and that we vote for new leadership in our communities towns The governor, I will be the governor. I'll be the mayor. I will be the county head supervisor or whatever.

Whatever we need that the ambassador of the 805 is what I call it on Stop Geoengineering California Facebook page and again stop going after ice needs to get dismantled people need to say no more to these thugs with guns and obviously there's so much brainwashing MK alternates that people need to know what that means go back and replay this And follow me on the 805 Santa Barbara County Crimes Against Humanity.

And Ren Strong, I have R-E-N-N S-T-R-O-N G and let's transform these National Guard armories that...

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.8641:06 · ≈ 9:41 AM

Thank

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed41:06 · ≈ 9:41 AM

you,

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.8641:06 · ≈ 9:41 AM

Rennie, that is your time.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed41:07 · ≈ 9:41 AM

They're on Canon Perdido.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.8641:11 · ≈ 9:41 AM

We will now return here in Santa Barbara with Karen Hauenstein to be followed by Larry Barrett.

0:41 – 0:473 turns

CommentCoast AuditsProposedself-stated41:29 · ≈ 9:41 AM

I am Coast Audits on YouTube. Good morning public, good morning gatekeepers, good morning corrupt liberal elite and Bob. Don't look at me like that, Steve. I know all about you. You grew up in a quasi-Bohemian Grove situation and I think it might be leading you around a little bit but that's okay. We forgive everybody, okay? But when we take a really close look at this county, a really close one We see these partisan strongholds.

We see long established partisan networks, and then we see a lot of mistakes. Mistakes made by this county are all controlled by the liberal elite attorneys who work for the county Beginning with the Queen of Corruption, Joyce Dudley. Joyce Dudley and her corruption and permissiveness is the reason why to this day we have a sexual predator working in classification at our South County Jail.

I am Coast Audits on YouTube. Anyone who's listening to this comment right now, if you know of corruption in our county contact me through Coast Audits on YouTube. It will be investigated and it will be exposed. Going onto our list all of County Council is liberal elite All of the district attorney's office is liberal elite. Even Tracy Makuga, the head public defender she is also liberal elite. Roy why are you laughing? This is not a laughing matter I'm certain of it.

Joan Hartman you're an attorney so was John Park When you look at the planning that's gone in to what you've done, it's very interesting. I am Coast Audits on YouTube. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.8644:24 · ≈ 9:44 AM

We will now go to Larry Berent then we will return to Zoom to try Daniel H again. Larry?

CommentLarry BarrettProposedself-stated44:39 · ≈ 9:44 AM

Can I let the hubbub die down or should I start speaking? Chair Kaps, Supervisors. I'm Larry Barrett from Indivisible Santa Barbara a member of the 805 Immigrant Coalition. A few weeks ago, this board addressed its confessed lack of knowledge about the activities of immigration enforcement in this county by asking Sheriff Brown to share some of what he learns from ICE, deep conflicting notices.

These are notices ICE provides to local law enforcement to warn them of impending ICE actions. But Sheriff Brown turned you down. He said that sharing information he receives from ICE after the fact Could be construed as obstruction of justice or, quote, interfere with ongoing federal prosecutions. Well as excuses go this makes my dog ate my homework sound like creative genius.

Let's state the obvious. Giving us information about ISIS prior activities cannot impact those prior activities because you have cause and at a later point you have effect. Unless the sheriff claims the power to disobey natural law, he must be claiming that sharing what he knows about ICE's prior actions could impact ICE's ability to take future actions. But that doesn't make sense because ICE itself provides detailed information about its own activities. It's here in this report.

Details on use of force incidents by category and injury, forced compliance of vehicles, types of force used, types that result in injuries. ICE shares it all. The sheriff could use ICE's own reporting as a model of how to share information in a way that is perfectly kosher in ICE's eyes. But the sheriff turned you down flat and as he offered no plausible explanation, I'll suggest one.

The sheriff realizes that ICE is operating as a secret police but it's part of ICE's plan to use this secrecy as a tool to terrorize the community and that the sheriff actively supports this plan. Now does that sound unfair to you? And maybe it does so I challenge you to come up with your own explanation Is it that the sheriff routinely fails to make sense? So this is just business as usual for him.

Or, is he just messing with you? Does he disrespect you in general? Or does he think he's above the law and accountable to no one? Does he have something to hide? Why speculate? The sheriff refused your reasonable request for information, offered no plausible reason why so the ball is in your court. Now you ask the sheriff to explain his explanation here in a public forum with the public present and able to make public comment because that is what democracy looks like.

Thank you.

0:47 – 0:568 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.8647:38 · ≈ 9:47 AM

We will now return to Zoom with Daniel H. Daniel

CommentLarry BarrettProposed47:46 · ≈ 9:47 AM

Everybody hear me?

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.8647:47 · ≈ 9:47 AM

Yes, we can please proceed Daniel.

CommentLarry BarrettProposed47:49 · ≈ 9:47 AM

Thank you good morning chair members of the board I just wanted to take a moment to sort of speak about something that's not often spoken about at these meetings which is simply just saying thank you to the Santa Barbara County firefighters and emergency crews what just happened in LA this past year as an example of the department that i feel goes underappreciated there was recently a fire on the On the near the caves, the wind caves and that could have easily spread to cover hundreds of acres in high wind and they were there. within 30 minutes, putting it out.

So I just want to call to their strength and spirit and the action that they take in hearing some of the other comments just generally on this in this meeting. I think there's a lot of talk and not a lot of action so we should follow what the firefighters are doing by taking action. We should stand up for what we believe in. I unfortunately don't have a YouTube channel or anything else to promote. I'm just here to spread goodwill thank you

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.8648:51 · ≈ 9:48 AM

And that concludes general public comment for today.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.8348:55 · ≈ 9:48 AM

Well, thank you to all of our speakers for speaking. We'll hear from many others in a little bit and so now we will head to our first departmental item number one which as the fire marshal mentioned is the California Fire Code for 2025

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.8649:13 · ≈ 9:49 AM

Yes, thank you Chair Kaps and members of the board. Departmental item number one is from the Fire Department. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding amending Chapter 15 of the Santa Barbara County Code with the adoption of the 2025 California Fire Code.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed49:29 · ≈ 9:49 AM

Chair Kaps, members of the board, thank you for having me here this morning. I didn't know the fire code was so popular. Chief Hartwig is joining me here. Every three years, you see a fire marshal here in this seat presenting the Fire Code. We also have five other fire marshals in the county for the other jurisdictions, the local jurisdictions presenting their amendments to the Fire Code.

The Fire Code, our amendments, the resulting Chapter 15 amendments These are the results of work by the international code Council. The fire code is typically born out of some type of tragedy. Major examples would be theaters that are overcrowded, not made in the early 1900s, not lit with candles and doors that were swinging inward so people can get out. As a result of such tragic events, the fire code amendments come into play.

The California Fire Code which would be coming into which would come into state law on January 1st, 2026 is an adoption of the International Fire Code with California amendments. We take into account local considerations and make amendments further amendments to the California fire code and amend that into Chapter 15 which I think the board members all have before them The major changes in the fire code are not varied. We are taking, I'll go as I go through these.

The 2022 fire code will be superseded by the 2025 version. It will come into law on January 1st 2026. The Chapter 15 adoption which we're asking and recommending the board adopts today will come into play as well on January 1st, 2026. The fire department adopts a 2025 California Fire Code with specific amendments and thereby that becomes a Santa Barbara County Fire Code.

The Fire Department also amended Chapter 6 of the new 2025 California Wildland Urban Interface Code. This code was historically Chapter 49 in the fire code, This year California created a new code and my counterparts with the planning, with county planning in the building official will be bringing that today I believe. But their creation of the WUE fire code takes combines title 14 fire safe regulations chapter 49 of the fire code and also chapter 7 of the building code into one code The majority of the changes that we made in the, for the chapter 15 amendments were some language and terminology changes to just stay consistent with the building official and the fire code, and the building code. There was also updates from the International and the California Code Council There's consideration of current industry practices as well.

And then we also consider our ability to fight fire when we make amendments to the code. The City of Los Angeles actually creates its own code based off the International Code and the California Fire Code, it's the Los Angeles Fire Code and it's available through that jurisdiction because they have so many nuances. We just have a few, but one of them being we don't have the 100 fire stations that Los Angeles City has and the 200 fire stations LA County has. So we're a smaller agency and we need the Fire Code amendments to help us fight fire locally.

We adjusted, we also adjusted some fee numbering as some new fees were added to the California Fire Code or changed. So there was some adjusted fees but there are no fee increases associated with this code adoption. And again, one of the major modifications was deleting Chapter 49 which was defensible space and vegetation management and adding it to Chapter 10 of the Santa Barbara Code with a building official.

Which also still allows the fire department to enforce that code. The actions to date, we work with County Council to provide input along with the Office of the State Fire Marshal. A lot of the other local fire marshals we've met to make sure that we are all in line. We also made Chapter 15 amendments available for review at the county clerk's office and on our website.

So far, we have not had any opposition to the code or comments to the code. We've met with business and stakeholders, the business community and stakeholders. And at this time we don't have any opposition to the code. And at this time, we're asking to make some of the recommended actions which is consider the introduction of the ordinance amending Chapter 15 of the Santa Barbara County Code to adopt a 2025 California Fire Code with local amendments as the enforcement code in all areas within the Santa Barbara County Fire Protection District and all other unincorporated areas of the county where the Santa Barbara County Fire Department is the authority having jurisdiction unless otherwise specified by this ordinance. And one more time, as of now there's been no opposition to stakeholders.

The other recommendations would be on November 18th 2025 to consider the adoption of an ordinance amending Chapter 15 of the Santa Barbara County Code as set forth above Consider and approve adoption of a resolution of legislative findings supporting amendments to the California Fire Code. And determine that the adoption of this ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act in compliance with section 15061B3, no possibility of impact on the environment.

With that if there's any questions I'm welcome to take them.

not transcribed≈11s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈10s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

0:56 – 1:0315 turns

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.8356:27 · ≈ 9:56 AM

Thank you so much. Questions from the board? Supervisor Nelson.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role56:30 · ≈ 9:56 AM

Yes, thank you Chair Kaps and thank you Mr. Dan for your presentation. Make sure I understand it correctly when we adopt this we can adopt it with additional language to make things more strict but we can't think make things more permissive is that correct?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed56:46 · ≈ 9:56 AM

That is correct. Yeah, we can make things more strict but we can't be less restrictive than the fire code.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role56:51 · ≈ 9:56 AM

Okay so right here is the minimum that we're able to potentially have in our code here. So I just wanted to clarify that and I'll probably ask the same question with the next item as well just so the public understands what we're doing here. And then my next question is you know you mentioned that you know the fire code is done on a national level and the state level and it's influenced by LA County What discretion do you have as the fire marshal when there are unique circumstances that take place within our county to be able to adjust the conditions to meet the fire code and still satisfy it? Do you still have some discretion and some flexibility?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed57:28 · ≈ 9:57 AM

I still have some discretion, as you see, to determine same practical effect. To take elements of a of a development or an existing structure to determine that a number of improvements might serve the same purpose as what is intended by code. My staff in planning and engineering, in code enforcement, arson investigations they have to adhere to the code in our development standards as written And then as modifications come in, requests come in then we're allowed to they'll bring them to the deputy farm marshal myself and sometimes a fire chief and we can make a determination that everything as a whole might have the same practical effect as what the code intended. Okay thank you for that.

not transcribed≈7s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.8358:21 · ≈ 9:58 AM

Supervisor Lee?

ElectedRoy LeeSupervisor, District 1Proposedvoiceprint 0.8458:22 · ≈ 9:58 AM

So, how does this new proposed policies compare to other fire agencies in the county? Are they consistent or different? Is there issues with that?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed58:35 · ≈ 9:58 AM

Typically county fire codes and amendments are a little less restrictive than some of the cities that are in the county. You know Montecito having two station department with a pretty fairly They have a good size geographic footprint that goes up in the foothills. They may have more, they may have a little bit more restrictions in their code. They also have a different fee structure so we all have different free structures were funded differently But each city might have a little bit more restrictiveness than us based off what their capacity is to fight fire.

In most cases, the Fire Code when we're dealing with it deals with access, sprinklers, water supplies. So we're generally in the ballpark with one another. And how's the feedback from the other fire chiefs? Are they supportive? So far, yeah, the fire chiefs and the fire marshals We've you know there have been a lot of different issues this year. Fire hazard severity zones which we brought forth early this year was a hot topic those are introduced those have an effect on on the fire code and the building code But yeah, these codes are supported by the local fire chiefs. Thank you.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:00:01 · ≈ 10:00 AM

Supervisor Hartman?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.871:00:02 · ≈ 10:00 AM

Two questions. Does this have any does this code have any reference to zone zero yet?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:00:09 · ≈ 10:00 AM

So in Chapter 10 of the building code, of the Santa Barbara County Code, in Article 7 is where Chapter 49 was moved into. So Santa Barbara County Fire and the local fire marshals have been implementing Zone Zero requirements on new construction for a couple of years now. They've made it into our development standards, we don't have a retroactive enforcement piece yet but we did include some Zone Zero requirements into the Chapter Six amendments in the chapter of The chapter six amendments of the WUE code into the chapter 10 amendments of the Santa Barbara County Code. Those are related to new construction, new development that we're already doing through our development standards and it'll capture whatever the state decides this next year to take.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.871:01:12 · ≈ 10:01 AM

So we expect maybe in the next three-year update it will apply retroactively to existing structures as well?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:01:20 · ≈ 10:01 AM

Yeah, as you may know it's a hot topic up at, pun not intended. It is a hot topic up in the Board of Forestry. It was a nine hour meeting yesterday and it's ongoing but they are working through that and I expect that whatever the state passes will become law but we'll have, as Supervisor Nelson had asked, we will have the ability to gain same practical effect on some things and work with our constituents so...

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.871:01:50 · ≈ 10:01 AM

And then I have a question about the width of roads that are required. I have a lot of constituents in my district who live in associations and the roads aren't up to standard, and they worry that they would be told they can't have any modifications to their homes, ADUs and things until all the roads are brought up to code. Could you elaborate on that?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:02:15 · ≈ 10:02 AM

Sure, so a lot of in your district Supervisor Hartman. A lot of it is subject to Title 14 the fire safe regulations that require 20 foot roads especially on the private roads we have been working with a lot of the communities there to more than piecemeal to ensure at least the main arteries are meeting some type of requirement you know the intent of Title 14 and the fire safe regulations requiring the 20-foot road on any access where a number of units or residential units are accessed is again, a result of tragic events, large fires.

Anecdotally there was a 10 foot row that accessed 50 homes and fire engines couldn't make it up in Northern California You know that as a result of that and other scenarios, we require the 20-foot road so fire engines can make it in as they come out. In some jurisdictions it becomes very difficult because you have to do a land taking or purchase easements from your neighbors but in the San Ynez Valley I was working on I was working on the Lake Fire last year and you know, I can't go anywhere now without having the fire marshal hat on. You know dinner movie theaters whatever so working on that fire you know is driving roads to make sure that people could get out as we could get in. So there's not a lot of discomfort I have in your jurisdiction at this point.

1:04 – 1:0711 turns

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:04:00 · ≈ 10:04 AM

I just have a question, one question. I know that there's a lot of grants and cost-sharing potential out there if you could just explain for people who wanted to home harden and really get their homes or their condos safer. Could you talk about some of those resources that exist? I know there's so much public interest especially after the LA fires.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:04:24 · ≈ 10:04 AM

Sure. You know one of our very strong One of our very strong partners in this county is the Fire Safe Council. It's almost just a really good partnership with the county fire marshal staff and also the other local jurisdictions. There is an effort by the state, there was an effort to create some home hardening grants. I think their first project exceeded their expectations by three to four times what it could have been so There are discussions. I don't know really of any actual programs right now that will fund home hardening programs.

The Fire Safety Council is offering home hardening assessments, fire department staff assist with those. There is a lot of guidance. You know, I think I've spoken to some groups where there could be a good better best scenario you know where a good is just doing your zero to five feet making sure the flammable materials You replace the wooden fence to start with. You replace a wooden fence that's next to your home. Start clearing vegetation so that it's an ember-resistant zone, so there's less wicks around your home.

That's a good start. Removing those trash cans away from the structures, especially on the upwind side if there is a sundowner event. Removing furniture in sundowner events away from the home. So there's good, better and then the best is like total remodels. And so I do believe there will be help obviously the state and the states having some budget issues right now but we're keeping up with it and offering it when we can.

But as a start think that the home hardening inspections are really good start and then we can start working our way to making Santa Barbara County more fire safe. Safer I

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:06:20 · ≈ 10:06 AM

should

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:06:21 · ≈ 10:06 AM

say.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:06:22 · ≈ 10:06 AM

Thanks for that. Okay, I think that's probably it on the questions do we have public comment on this agenda item? Chair Kapsen members of the board we have

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.861:06:31 · ≈ 10:06 AM

no request to speak from the public on this item.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:06:34 · ≈ 10:06 AM

Okay I will entertain a motion on this item. Supervisor Hartman.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.871:06:38 · ≈ 10:06 AM

Madam chair I move A through D in today's staff

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:06:42 · ≈ 10:06 AM

report.

ElectedRoy LeeSupervisor, District 1Proposedvoiceprint 0.841:06:43 · ≈ 10:06 AM

I'll second.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:06:44 · ≈ 10:06 AM

Okay we have a motion and a second all those in favor please say aye. Aye. Motion carries Thanks to our fire marshal and our fire chief, Mark Hartwig. Okay. That's all right. Okay support for our fire team thank you now we'll move on to departmental item number two.

1:07 – 1:1313 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.861:07:13 · ≈ 10:07 AM

Chair Kaps and members of the board, departmental item number two is from the Planning and Development Department. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the adoption of 2025 California Building Standards Codes and local amendments to Chapter 10 of the Santa Barbara County Code building regulations.

CommentDavid CardonaProposed · by introduction1:07:31 · ≈ 10:07 AM

All right, Director

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.861:07:32 · ≈ 10:07 AM

Plowman.

CommentDavid CardonaProposed · by introduction1:07:33 · ≈ 10:07 AM

Good morning Madam Chair and members of the board. We have before you today the update to the California Building Code and re-adoption of our local codes. I have our building official, County Building Official Craig Johnson with me and Assistant Director Jeff Wilson and they will be making the presentation.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 8Proposed1:07:57 · ≈ 10:07 AM

Good morning Madam Chair and members of the board Today, we bring forward the adoption of the 2025 Building Standards Code as well as the local amendments to Chapter 10. Today, we are proposing or recommending that we carry forward all the local amendments that we have done previously and re-adopt those as part of the 2025 Building Standards Code adoption with a few minor changes one of which Fire Marshal Fred Tan indicated earlier which is the adoption or recommended adoption of the new part seven of the building standards code, which is the California Wildland Urban Interface Code.

We worked closely with Fire Marshal Fred Tan to combine our efforts and so with that we're recommending adopting that part seven as part of the chapter 10 building regulations. With a few amendments those amendments mainly are to support Fred Tan or Fire Marshal Fred Tan there's a lot to say over and over again Which has to do with construction material as well as fire protection. In addition, we've added into the local amendments to Chapter 10 items related to the Fire Department that have to deal with fire abatement as well as some other fire protection requirements.

In addition in prior years, we have adopted a county higher fire hazard area map with Part 7 of the new California Wildland Urban Interface Code They have designated the process for designating high fire hazard areas and with the mapping. And so in concert with the Fire Department, we'll be using the state responsible area and the local responsible areas as a designated very high fire hazard areas. And that is what the new part seven will be applicable to. And so we will no longer need to adopt the county's high fire hazard area map.

In addition, other changes on the local level that we're talking about is that we're adding a provision for emergency permits. However, we found that that deals with any of entitlements or helps members of the community deal with the planning permits. However it doesn't reach as far as the building permits and so with adding this local amendment it allows the building official to authorize work in emergency situation. So then the planning and building can work in tandem in addressing emergency situations and authorizing work for life health safety issues Other updates that we're recommending is bringing the Housing Code and Dangerous Building Code up to date, replacing the 1997 Uniform Housing Code and the 1997 Abatement of Dangerous Building Codes with the 2024 International Property Maintenance Code.

That's a more up-to-date code than the 97 versions and allows for staff in the department to address these issues as they come up. And today our recommended actions is to approve the first reading, read the title and waive the first reading and then continue to the administrative agenda on November 18th. To adopt the 2025 building standards code as well as any of the local amendments. And so we're here and available to answer any questions.

not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:11:29 · ≈ 10:11 AM

Thank you, Mr. Wilson. Questions from the board? Supervisor Nelson.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role1:11:32 · ≈ 10:11 AM

Yes thank you Chair Kaps. Similarly that I asked the Fire Marshal earlier this the standards that we're having coming down from the state and we need to adopt these and we can be more restrictive but not permissive is that correct?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 8Proposed1:11:45 · ≈ 10:11 AM

Supervisor Nelson through the chair that is correct.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role1:11:47 · ≈ 10:11 AM

Okay and again what like the question I had for the fire marshal, what is the discretion of the building official when it comes to potentially finding conflicts but their ability to potentially based on the circumstances of the project make discretionary changes?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 9Proposed1:12:10 · ≈ 10:12 AM

Supervisor, the code has left the interpretation of the code up to local jurisdictions for many decades. Which you think about it that's what it has to be otherwise every jurisdiction would want to go to the state for every decision but it also allows the local jurisdiction to accept alternate means and methods and you know to use our judgment to approve other methods when we feel it's appropriate

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role1:12:35 · ≈ 10:12 AM

So some condition might offset another one that might not be able to be met elsewhere, kind of like what the fire marshal was discussing?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 9Proposed1:12:43 · ≈ 10:12 AM

Absolutely.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role1:12:44 · ≈ 10:12 AM

Yes. All right thank you and then I guess my next question is about the higher high fire hazard zones that are becoming more and more important. You know often there's land that's not maintained that are adjacent to homes or properties Where does the responsibility come on a neighboring property when it comes to working through this? Does this now put some onus on a neighbor to make sure that they're clearing their property that's adjacent to urban areas?

1:13 – 1:169 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:13:19 · ≈ 10:13 AM

Supervisor Nielsen to the chair. We go through a bit of a process and that's described in the updates for, in part seven. If there's if we receive a complaint we'll go and conduct a fire hazard assessment to see if there's actually a fire hazard that exists. And then based off that will determine whether the fire hazard is on county lands on a neighboring private parcel, parcel land and then we'll make contact there.

You know county fire does take as with the second most amount of state responsibility acres that we protect 830,000 acres twice as many as Ventura County almost twice as many as LA County We do remain proactive in taking these these complaints and when we determine the fire hazard We have gone and taken some action either through enforcement or found a way to get it done through our personnel.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role1:14:21 · ≈ 10:14 AM

Well, thank you for that. And I think that's also just kind of reminder for us in the county where we own a lot of those lands that are adjacent to some urban areas or there might be some public state lands Airport district lands or whatnot that are adjacent to our urban areas that probably have some high fire risks and trying to make sure that we're doing our part as public agencies to abate those potential problems. So thank you for that reminder and I appreciate this, and I'll go ahead and support this when the time comes.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:14:48 · ≈ 10:14 AM

Okay other questions from the board? No questions, so then

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.861:14:54 · ≈ 10:14 AM

public comment if there is any. Chair Katz and members of the board we have no request to speak on this item from the public. Okay pretty straightforward Supervisor Lee.

ElectedRoy LeeSupervisor, District 1Proposedvoiceprint 0.841:15:05 · ≈ 10:15 AM

Is public comment over?

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:15:06 · ≈ 10:15 AM

Public comments over.

ElectedRoy LeeSupervisor, District 1Proposedvoiceprint 0.841:15:07 · ≈ 10:15 AM

Then I move to approve staff recommendation A B and C.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.871:15:12 · ≈ 10:15 AM

Hartman seconds.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:15:14 · ≈ 10:15 AM

Okay we have a motion a second all those in favor. Aye. Motion carries. Okay on to departmental item number three and I'll just note that we are ahead of the expected schedule. We have a long one ahead of us. I think we're going to still go till 11 for the interpreter as well so Okay we're going to move on to departmental item number three which is the Sable appeal. Madam Clerk?

1:16 – 1:2316 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.861:16:02 · ≈ 10:16 AM

Chair Kaps and members of the board, departmental item number three is from the planning and development department. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the appeals of the Planning Commission approval of the Sable Offshore Corporation's change of owner operator and guarantor for the Santa Anaz unit SYU Pacific Offshore Pipeline Company, POPCO, gas plant and Los Flores pipeline system final development plan FDP permits. This is in the first third and fourth districts.

CommentDavid CardonaProposed · by introduction1:16:30 · ≈ 10:16 AM

Okay, Director Plowman. Yes, Madam Chair and members of the board as Ms. Alexander indicated we are returning to the Board. We were last here in February and the Board will be reconsidering the appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of the transfer of the owner operator and guarantor from Exxon to Sable. Today I have Aaron Greggs deputy director of our Energy Middlesex Compliance and Enforcement team and he will be making the presentation

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.871:17:01 · ≈ 10:17 AM

Supervisor Herman. Madam Chair, before that would you like our ex parte? Sure we can do that beforehand good call.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:17:09 · ≈ 10:17 AM

Ex parte please. So why don't we start with you Supervisor Herman?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.871:17:12 · ≈ 10:17 AM

Sure, on October 27th I met with UCSB Student Organization Environmental Affairs Board where they shared their concerns about the pipeline given its age and prior history. I have regular monthly meetings with EDC the topic of Sable has come up With regard to the permit transfer in only two meetings, specifically focused on the letter that they were going to write. I met with them on 1023 for one hour and there they talked about the structure of the letter that they planned to submit I met with them again for a half hour meeting on November 3rd, where they asked if I had any questions about the letter they had submitted.

And I did have some questions about financial liability in the event of a spill or decommissioning. Neither Sable nor the Center for Biological Diversity reached out for a meeting And I also did some personal research on state and federal funds for spills and decommissioning because I did not find much in our record yet on that. The Federal Oil Pollution Acts Liability Trust Fund, and the oil spill response trust fund.

In addition, Sable has submitted a letter requesting that I recuse from this matter Based on two issues, one is conflict of interest. The FPPC has concluded that I don't have a disqualifying financial interest in this particular decision. The facts surrounding my property interest remain unchanged from the FPPC's June advice letter. Regarding bias, I believe that Sable's letter has taken remarks out of context. I can and will base my decision solely on the evidence in the record and the applicable standards under Chapter 25B. My past policy positions do not prevent me from fairly evaluating whether the applicant meets the legal requirements under 25 B.

Thank you Supervisor Hartman.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:19:15 · ≈ 10:19 AM

Supervisor Lee?

ElectedRoy LeeSupervisor, District 1Proposedvoiceprint 0.841:19:16 · ≈ 10:19 AM

I have met with EDC on a monthly basis and multiple times as well as Sable and ExxonMobil represent to us multiple times. That's my expertise.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:19:27 · ≈ 10:19 AM

Okay. Supervisors Nelson?

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role1:19:31 · ≈ 10:19 AM

Yes, thank you Chair Kapsch. I've met a couple of times with Steve Gregg from Exxon on March 27th as well as the phone call yesterday on 10-4 Also my past disclosed expertise from the last hearing would go as well. I also met on 825 with Caldwell Flores, as well as Lee Danielson about the project. Thank you.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisor, District 5Proposedvoiceprint 0.931:19:59 · ≈ 10:19 AM

Thank you. I also met with Caldwell Flores on 825 and Lee Danielson, Director of Governmental Affairs. Caldwell is president of Sable Offshore. Also, I'm taking into consideration articles that I've read that are public. The one discussing October 3rd, I know was the Attorney General Bonta's lawsuit. Also articles about California Coastal Commission versus Sable.

Also read the letter of state fire marshal detailing deficiencies and also just recently another article that came out October 31st, the Hunter Brook article. So I've taken those all those are all in kind of public record that I read before the hearing

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:20:48 · ≈ 10:20 AM

Thank you and I'll add my expertise as well. I also do meet regularly with the Environmental Defense Center, most recently with Tara Renfigo and Linda Kropp. I also met recently with UCSB's Environmental Affairs Board, Vivian Chiang Kai and Izzy Szyszek. I did not hear from the applicant Sable. I also did not hear from the Center for Biological Diversity And in reference to the request that I recuse myself, I joined Supervisor Hartman in making a statement. There is no question that I believe fervently that we have a climate crisis on our hands. There's no question that I'm a lifelong environmentalist but today's hearing is not about that. It is also about...not about us being a rubber stamp It is about us looking at the facts and the evidence and making a determination.

That is what I did on February 25th, and that is what I will do again today. Thank you. Okay. Expertise over.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.861:21:52 · ≈ 10:21 AM

Madam Clerk? Chair Kaps and members of the board yes my apologies before we proceed to staff's presentation I do have a number of public comment that was received afternoon on Friday, October 31st. That will need to be voted into the record to be included as a part of the record and I can go through those now. The first public comment letter is from Pasha Madhavi, received October 31st at 159.

A letter from Noah Bolin, heal the ocean October 31st at 243. A letter from Helen Johnson November 2nd 947 we received 386 public comment letters from Civic Hub on October 31st between the hours of 118 and 137. A letter from Nicholas Sebastian on November 3rd at 1011, a letter from Lawrence Severance November 3rd 1212, a letter from Katie Davis on November 3rd at 1240, a letter from Alina Neeragotis for on November third 335, a letter from Gregory Sater November 3rd 429, a letter for Kalena Sapp on November third At 5 p.m.. And at 5 27 p.M.. And lastly a letter from Christy Lynn on November 3rd at 1138 So again if the board would like to include those as a part of the record they would need to be voted in by the board Supervisor

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:23:16 · ≈ 10:23 AM

Hartman

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.871:23:17 · ≈ 10:23 AM

I move that we accept those items as the clerk read them into the record

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role1:23:23 · ≈ 10:23 AM

Okay, good comment

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:23:26 · ≈ 10:23 AM

Supervisor Nielsen.

not transcribed≈18s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

1:23 – 1:304 turns

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role1:23:43 · ≈ 10:23 AM

For these meetings and so I'm not going to move this forward. I know that we've been trying to kind of find that time to make the hard stop here. Maybe this is not for some my colleagues, but it is for me, so I am not going to vote to add those into the record. Thank you.

Roll-call vote Passed 4–1
Show transcript
Yeah I appreciate that. I normally, I agree with you usually it's about the actual presentations and materials from applicants or the appellants but public comment anyway I'm happy to support at this time so we'll do a roll call vote. Supervisor Lee? Aye. Supervisor Lavinino? Aye Supervisor Hartman? Aye Supervisor Nelson? No And Chair Kaps? Aye
ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.861:24:21 · ≈ 10:24 AM

Motion passes 4-1 Okay

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:24:27 · ≈ 10:24 AM

Now we will move to staff presentation. Mr. Briggs.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed1:24:33 · ≈ 10:24 AM

Good morning, Supervisors and members of the public. Today the Board is considering two appeals of the Planning Commission's approval to transfer county permits from ExxonMobil to Sable Offshore Corporation for a change of owner, operator and guarantor of the CENINEZ unit, the Popco gas plant in the Los Flores pipeline system. Because of the nature of these appeals, we have multiple parties involved on both sides and I'd like to quickly introduce who will be leading each of the teams.

The applicant team includes both Sable Offshore Corporation represented by Steve Rush and also ExxonMobil represented by Lauren Kaplan. And the appellants consist of two groups first the Center for Biological Diversity together with the Wishtoyo Foundation to be represented by Rachel Matthews And secondly, the Environmental Defense Center together with Get Oil Out in the Santa Barbara County Action Network represented by Linda Kropp and Tara Rengifo.

The applicant's request is to transfer the county permits or final development plan permits for number one A change of owner, operator and guarantor of the San Ynez unit permit from Exxon Mobil to Sable. Two, a change of operator and guarantor of the Popco gas plant permit from Exxon Mobil to Sable. And three, a change of operator of the Los Flores pipeline systems permit from Exxon Mobil Pipeline Company in a change of guarantorer from Exxon Mobil to Sable.

Under these requests, POPCO remains the legal owner of the gas plant and Pacific Pipeline Company remains the legal owner of the Las Flores pipeline system. Important to note, these requests are to transfer the county permits for the individual assets and not the underlying transfer of the assets themselves. Also, the transfers do not include authorization for restarted facilities or any work or continued operations at the facilities.

This slide shows the facility's locations. On the left are the Santa Ynez unit facilities outlined in white, which are located along the Gaviota Coast between El Capitan and Refugio. The Popco Gas Plant is a small portion of that area located in the middle of the canyon. On the right is a map showing the alignment of the Los Flores Pipeline System as it stretches 122 linear miles from Los Flores Canyon and eventually ending at the Pentland Delivery Point in Kern County.

A bit of background on the facilities and the permit transfers. The Santa Ynez Unit Facility and Popco Gas Plant treat oil and gas produced from offshore platforms Hondo, Harmony, and Heritage. Under normal circumstances, oil is transported for sale via the Common Carrier Las Flores Pipeline System formerly known as the Plains Pipeline from the canyon to Kern County.

A pipeline spill in 2015 under Plains All-American caused the pipelines and facilities to shut in. However, activities still occur to maintain facility integrity. Pacific Pipeline Company an ExxonMobil subsidiary acquired the system from Plains in 2022 and the board approved a permit transfer in 2023. Sable acquired the SYU Popco and Pacific Pipeline Company in February of 24 and submitted applications to transfer the assets in March of that year.

The original decision maker for the requested transfers was the Planning Commission who approved them on October 30th of last year. Following the approval, appeals were filed by both the EDC and the CBD. The appeals were initially considered by your board earlier this year on February 25th where the board voted 2-2 thereby resulting in no action. Sable and ExxonMobil subsequently filed suit in Federal District Court.

On September 12th, the court issued an order directing the board to hold a de novo public hearing to affirm, deny or modify the Planning Commission's decision in compliance with County Code Chapter 25B within 60 days. The 60-day deadline for the board action is November 11th. If the board is unable to reach a vote that affirms, reverses or modifies the Planning Commission's decision within this time period, the order directs the board to hold another de novo public hearing within 45 days and so on.

A majority vote is required to meet the requirements of the judge's order. For code consistency, this table outlines the requirements of Chapter 25B for each of the owner, guarantor and operator. Chapter 25B is limited to nine findings for the three changes which are summarized in the left-hand column. The February 25th hearing materials and complete record for this request were included in this item's set hearing letter.

Attachment A of the board letter includes the findings for approval adopted by the Planning Commission. The appellant's appeal issues were previously presented in detail during the February hearing earlier this year, and fully analyzed in the February 25th board letter Staff is not going to walk through each of the 13 appeal issues in detail again today, but rather provide a brief overview.

The salient appeal issues relate to adequacy of the financial guarantees and questions about Sable's financial responsibility, concerns about Sable's ability to safely manage and operate the facilities, spill prevention and response, and state and federal agency compliance issues which have continued since the February hearing. Again, staff's responses to these issues were detailed in the February 25th materials and presentation.

While new facts have emerged since the February hearing, staff continues to recommend that the findings for approval be made. In conclusion, staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors 1. Deny the appeals 2. Make the findings for approval 3. Determine the requests are not a project pursuant to CEQA And four, grant de novo approval of the permit transfers subject to the conditions of approval.

And this completes our presentation we're available for questions.

1:31 – 1:3612 turns

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:31:03 · ≈ 10:31 AM

Thank you to our planning development team. Questions for staff at this point? Supervisor Hartman.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.871:31:08 · ≈ 10:31 AM

Yeah, what kind of financial assurance do we have or do you believe we can require in the event of a spill?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed1:31:20 · ≈ 10:31 AM

Madam Chair and Supervisor Hartman so the financial assurances that we can require are limited by the project's conditions of approval and We have two facilities essentially that could result in a spill. That would be the SYU, the onshore facility and the pipelines that come ashore from the offshore platforms are state and federal waters. We have a certificate of financial responsibility through OSPR for $100 million and that is the maximum amount allowed and required by OSPR.

And then separately for the onshore pipeline, we also have certificates of financial responsibility and the dollar amount escapes me at this time but essentially what we can require is limited by each project's conditions of approval. And then beyond that, Sable has their own insurance that goes well above and beyond what's required by OSPR in their Certificates of Financial Responsibility

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.871:32:29 · ≈ 10:32 AM

So how do you read Section 25B or how do you interpret that, that we're allowed to ask for information needed to make financial guarantees finding? Or any other information that we may need to approve a change in owner operator or guarantor in accordance with the chapter. Or the requirement again that the operator has the resources necessary to operate the permitted facility. I mean those are, that's what Chapter 25B says and that's what I interpret my job up here is to determine whether we have the information to make that finding and all we have is very little to go on

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed1:33:18 · ≈ 10:33 AM

I don't have an answer for that.

CommentDavid CardonaProposed · by introduction1:33:22 · ≈ 10:33 AM

Supervisor Hartman through the chair. That is certainly, it's the board's discretion at this point. The staff reviewed the information that was provided and then there's been additional supplemental insurance that's been provided and had concluded that it satisfied the requirements of Chapter 25B. It's the Board's discretion to make a different decision on that compliance

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.871:33:52 · ≈ 10:33 AM

So I guess I'll put it out there right now. I have a lot of questions about that and information that the record doesn't really respond to. Does the permit require that the owner operator have financial responsibility to clean up a spill? What kind of policy is it? Is it an occurrence-based pollution liability insurance and would it still pay out if Sable was later bankrupt or dissolved. What are the policy limits, time frame per incident and in the aggregate what if there's negligence or even gross negligence involved If the permits haven't been complied with, does the policy still cover damage? I mean, I've got a whole list of questions but those are the kinds of things that I think we have a right to understand.

CommentDavid CardonaProposed · by introduction1:34:47 · ≈ 10:34 AM

Supervisor Hartman through the chair, some of those questions I think are best posed to

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.871:34:51 · ≈ 10:34 AM

Sable. And and I'm getting them out there because I know we're gonna hear and I don't want to play hide-the-ball. I'm just saying these are some of my concerns.

CommentDavid CardonaProposed · by introduction1:35:00 · ≈ 10:35 AM

It's my understanding that they have offered to have their insurance broker meet with the county. They have not provided us with the actual policy but questions can be asked and be answered by Sable

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.871:35:16 · ≈ 10:35 AM

Okay, well again I'll leave it at that. I have more but that's kind of my line of questioning.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:35:25 · ≈ 10:35 AM

Thank you, Supervisor Harmon. I had one question for staff and actually for County Council. I just wanted to before we really dive in here to just understand scope of time period because this is quite unusual to be doing a redo, deja vu here. The judge as everyone hopefully understands has ordered that we redo this vote from February 25th. And so I just want to understand timeframe. A lot has happened since February 25th A lot has happened since over a year ago when the Planning Commission voted the way they did and a lot has happened since staff has deemed, made the recommendation that the application was complete. And so my question well I also want to note that the judge in her ruling said that quote the board has the authority to conduct a de novo fact-finding and is not just quote giving a thumbs up or down.

So I just want to as before we dive in Thank you Madam Chair and members of the board.

not transcribed≈18s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

1:36 – 1:5311 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 11Proposed1:36:48 · ≈ 10:36 AM

Your question on, can the board consider any records or activities that post-date the application? The answer to that is yes. There are some findings that on compliance with existing permits that require the board to only consider compliance as the date of the application was deemed complete but the other findings including many of the other findings do not include that limitation. So yes, for many of the findings you can consider information all the way up until today's hearing.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:37:22 · ≈ 10:37 AM

So we're looking at compliance up to date? All of the things that have happened to date. Thank you Okay. Any other questions for staff? So as indicated, we are going to take a break at 11 o'clock. I think it's a good time to do so before we move into the next portion of the hearing. Okay. Thanks everybody. We will now move to the appellant presentation, but first our clerk has a couple announcements

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.861:38:18 · ≈ 10:38 AM

Thank You chair caps and members of the board Yes I did just want to note for members of the public who would like to speak on this item today departmental item number three regarding the appeal of the Sable offshore corporations change of owner that if you haven't already submitted your speaker slip to the clerk here in The Santa Barbara hearing room or the Planning Commission hearing room or on Zoom online to please do so now. We will be closing public comment after the appellant's presentation, so in about the next 20 minutes we will be closing public comments if you have not gotten your request to speak in yet please do so now. Additionally I did just want to remind the public that each speaker will be speaking for a minute and a half or allotted that amount of time And for our one o'clock break, we did receive a request for it to be a little bit longer.

So we're going to be taking a 30-minute recess at 1 o'clock for lunch and that concludes my announcements.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:39:13 · ≈ 10:39 AM

Okay good things okay so now we move like I said to the appellant presentation which will be 20 minutes excuse me. And since I didn't pronounce your name very well, could you please introduce yourself? Yes. Taryn Hefo. Thank you.

not transcribed≈6s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed1:39:34 · ≈ 10:39 AM

Okay. Taryn Hefo with the Environmental Defense Center. Madam

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisor, District 5Proposedvoiceprint 0.931:39:39 · ≈ 10:39 AM

Chair. There's a button on the side if you can just lift it up so I can hear you. Yeah there you go. Awesome.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed1:39:45 · ≈ 10:39 AM

How's this?

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:39:45 · ≈ 10:39 AM

Wonderful.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed1:39:46 · ≈ 10:39 AM

Is that better?

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:39:46 · ≈ 10:39 AM

Yeah that's great we can we can hear you loud and clear.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed1:39:49 · ≈ 10:39 AM

Okay all right Well good morning Chair Kaps and Supervisors. My name is Taryn Hefo, I'm a Senior Attorney with the Environmental Defense Center and with me today is Linda Kropp our Chief Counsel. We are here today on behalf of EDC, GU, SB CAN, Santa Barbara Channel Keeper and our local chapter of the Sierra Club It has been nearly nine months since this board last evaluated whether to give Sable the green light to control the SYU, Popco Gas Plant and the Lost Forest Pipeline System.

Today's hearing is about Sable. What have they been up to? As you'll learn today, this company has created its own minefield of litigation, fines, notices of violation and even criminal charges in a matter of months. Their reps may come up here next and say, so what? Give us the permits. But 25B does not allow that. There are several findings that this board must make to approve a permit transfer under 25B.

My presentation will focus on three of those findings and why each lacks evidentiary support in the record. First, SABLE is not capable of safely and responsibly operating these facilities Second, there are existing permit compliance issues with respect to the pipeline in particular. Third, Sable clearly does not have the financial wherewithal and resources to respond to a disaster.

As I and the Center will explain, Sable's disregard for our community, our natural resources, our laws must be met with a resounding no vote today. Briefly, it is important that the board is aware of how much information is missing from the board letter. And this is not a comment on staff. This is purely because substantial evidence must support the findings. So this is what this oops I think it's a little hard to see the slide. I don't know if I clicked out but.

This is what this slide shows, and I will call out a few of those. So the board letter states that SABLE has completed all necessary repairs. That's not true. On October 22nd, the fire marshal issued SABLE a deficiency notice for incomplete work informing SABLE that the incomplete repairs prevent restart of the pipelines. They also left out that on October 15th, Judge Anderle denied Sable's writ confirming that Coastal Commission has the authority to require a new CDP for the repairs.

And taken together this shows that Sable cannot legally perform additional repair work because the Coastal Commission injunction is still in place. The board letter doesn't even mention violations that have occurred during Sable's recent operations as documented by the county and APCD. You can't just skirt bad laws by omitting them, bad facts by omitting them.

And finally the board letter doesn't even mention that Sable has been criminally charged. If this board is supposed to decide whether Sable can safely and lawfully operate how could that not include the fact that they're facing a felony complaint? Turning to 25B, this ordinance prohibits the transfer of county permits unless a permittee complies with the 25B requirements.

There is a lot of misinformation about what 25B does and the scope of the board's authority in making its decision. Fortunately these exact questions have been front and center in recent lawsuit and were answered in the judge's ruling. The Honorable Dolly M. G recognized that one codified purpose of 25B is to safeguard the natural resources and environment of the County of Santa Barbara.

Given its purpose, Judge G declared, 25B does not merely provide for the transfer of FDPs. It creates an administrative process designed to bar the transfer of FDPs to a transferee that would place the environment at risk. This is a de novo hearing, meaning what qualifies as safe operation and adequate financial responsibility is for this board to decide anew and pursuant to its discretion.

A federal court agrees with us on this. In a September 12th order Judge G made clear Chapter 25B gives the board discretion to evaluate the evidence, seek more information if needed, and decide whether the findings support a permit transfer. Sable spin doesn't even merit debate when a federal judge has already confirmed exactly how much authority the board has.

So let's dig into this first finding 25b requires is showing that sable is capable of safely and responsibly operating the facilities no reasonable person would reach this conclusion Before diving into the evidence, I want to make sure we have a shared understanding of this finding. County Council has clearly stated that the board has broad discretion to consider all relevant evidence of operator capability. County Council affirmatively rejected Sable's narrow construction of this finding as contrary to the plain language of the ordinance.

Sable is embroiled in an extraordinary amount of civil and criminal litigation. These cases, and the administrative processes that led up to them show that this company lacks the skills to operate safely and in compliance with the law as required by 25B. On September 16th, our DA filed criminal charges against Sable for environmental violations including five felony violations.

Sable only acquired these facilities from Exxon last year. It doesn't even have all of its approvals to begin operating but our own DA has gathered enough evidence of Sable's alleged indifference to the law and disregard for our county's natural resources to bring criminal charges against this company. On October 3rd, the AG brought a lawsuit against Sable on behalf of the Regional Water Board for civil liabilities and injunctive relief.

Several allegations by the AG in the complaint provide evidence of Sable's inability to operate safely and responsibly. For example, the AG accused Sable of making statements that were patently false, deliberately avoiding its obligation to obtain waste discharge requirements before commencing work, evading regulation and not acting as a responsible operator would.

Notably, our AG found Sable's management to be misinformed, incompetent and incorrect at best. Why should our county think Sable would be any differently here? This case arose after Sable repeatedly ignored cease and desist orders and continued unpermitted work in sensitive coastal habitats, prompting the commission to impose an $18 million penalty. On October 15th a Superior Court judge fully upheld the Commission's actions, a big loss for Sable. This is clear evidence of a company that refuses to follow the law.

I mentioned the securities fraud lawsuit mainly because it relates to the State Land Commission Chair's very public reprimanding of Sable, which is also missing from the board letter. In that letter, the chair denounced Sable's May 19th press release announcing that it had restarted operations at the SYU because it had not. Most relevant to these proceedings, the chair said Sable's action raised serious questions about its willingness to be a responsible operator and a transparent operator.

She also found Sable to have a willful disregard for the directives of regulatory agencies. You just heard in the words of the District Attorney, the State Attorney General, a Superior Court Judge and the State Lands Commission Chair. The reasons why SABLE has not demonstrated it can operate responsibly or lawfully. This slide summarizes several recent notices of violations leaks and spills at the facilities.

Let's start with the county because the board letter itself omits this information. Two spills occurred at the facilities in August, a chemical spill of hydrochloric acid and a spill of sludge material. The cause of the sludge release was operator error. The county also sent Sable a notice of violation in April for its nighttime construction activities, i.e., outside of the work hours identified in the permits. Not only was Sable operating without a permit, since that decision is before you today. But this violation also demonstrates the company's inability to comply with the simplest and most objective permit requirement when they can work.

On the topic of leaks and spills in a little over two months, Sable received four violations from our local air district further demonstrating it lacks the skills necessary to operate in compliance with the permit and county code. And regarding the Coastal Commission and Regional Board lawsuits, I want to emphasize that these actions followed repeated notices and orders that Sable ignored. Further demonstrating its willful disregard for the law and important safety requirements.

So based on this record no reasonable person could conclude that Sable meets the operator capability requirement and the board must deny Sable's applications. Let's turn to the next finding which is outlined in part here. As an aside, this is the only finding that has a limit on what information can be provided and that is as of the date that the application is deemed complete. And that's explained in our comment letter. Sable however tries to stretch that narrow limitation to every finding in 25B. That language simply doesn't exist as further confirmed by Judge Gee's September ruling and County Council today.

In the interest of time, I will summarize this issue quickly. Effective cathodic protection was a central design feature reviewed in the 1985 EIR-EIS. Condition A7 in the pipeline permit requires that approved design be followed or deviations be approved, neither of which have occurred here. At the time Sable's applications were deemed complete, the pipeline's cathodic protection system was not effective according to PHMSA itself.

Since the waivers were approved after Sable's applications were deemed complete, they are not relevant to this finding. Either way, the October 22nd fire marshal letter confirms that Sable has not even fully complied with those requirements. As a result, the board cannot make this finding because of substantial conformity determination has not been made pursuant to A7.

And lastly, I to be followed by the center will discuss what financial assurances and resources are required under two of the 25B findings. So the remainder of my presentation will focus on why Sable has not demonstrated that it has sufficient capital to remediate after a spill or accident. All of the permits hold SABA liable in the event of an oil spill or other accident from the facilities. This slide, in particular, shows an excerpt from the SYU permit condition.

When read in conjunction with the 25B findings on the previous slide, the proposed operator must demonstrate that it has sufficient financial resources to cover its liabilities under each permit including paying for spill cleanup. The risk of an accident is not merely hypothetical. Having already seen the damage that these facilities can cause, it would be incredibly irresponsible and inconsistent with 25B not to ensure SABLE can respond to a similar disaster.

According to Plains, the 2015 spill cost around $870 million. That's roughly the same amount as Sable's growing debt to Exxon, the due date for which is extended only if the company receives 225 million in equity contributions. And even Sable acknowledged itself there's no guarantee it will be able to satisfy the necessary conditions to effect the amendment.

If not, the payment still comes due early next year. A significant amount of the company's cash flow is already from financing, meaning it is basically borrowing to finance a business that is now running towards a cliff with a huge debt payment owed. But at some point, it could become either too expensive or too risky for investors to keep betting on. So what would happen if Sable diminishes its remaining cash and a spill occurs during or shortly after restart?

25B puts the onus squarely on SABLE as the proposed operator to show that it has the financial capacity to pay for cleanup and restoration to pre-spill conditions. The February board letter's reliance on federal funding for spill response is entirely speculative and problematic for many reasons. To name a few, there is a statutory cap on the funding available and limitations based on where the spill is as well as what substance is discharged.

And once again, no insurance policy was provided. Without reviewing the policies it's impossible to assess the adequacy of Sables Insurance which prohibits the county from making any financial assurance findings. Without the policy there are so many questions as you can see from this slide. So based on this record it's impossible to assess the adequacy of Sables Insurance to comply with the permit terms thereby prohibiting the board from making the financial assurances findings.

In sum, the board cannot make the requisite findings to approve Sable's transfer applications. Nor as the center will explain can it find that Sable provided adequate financial guarantees for abandonment. Thus we respectfully request that you deny Sable's applications and direct staff to cease allowing Sable to operate the facilities. I yield my remaining time to the center to complete the presentation for appellants.

1:53 – 1:582 turns

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:53:27 · ≈ 10:53 AM

Thank you very much. Questions from the board? Not at this time. Okay, thank you. Please proceed. Thank you.

PresenterRachel MatthewsAppellant Center for Biological Diversity and Wishtoyo FoundationProposedself-stated1:54:11 · ≈ 10:54 AM

Good morning Supervisors, I'm Rachel Matthews here on behalf of the Appellant Center for Biological Diversity and Wishtoyo Foundation. So as you've just heard, in the months since the board's last hearing, Sable has dug itself into deep legal trouble. It has defied agency orders and it has damaged Santa Barbara's sensitive waterways and ecosystems. We fully agree with our colleagues at EDC that this should disqualify Sable under Chapter 25B.

But the board should also think about the future obligations that Sable will have In particular, Sable is obligated to decommission or abandon the facilities at the end of production. Currently the county has no bond or other financial guarantee to back up Sable's compliance with this obligation. This should raise your hackles. Oil and gas company defaults on decommissioning are so costly and so common that many surety companies won't even take on that risk anymore. The county shouldn't take on the risk either.

But we wouldn't be here today if your job was to just rubber stamp these permits and to move on. The financial guarantees findings in Chapter 25B require the board to independently determine which methods of financial assurances are necessary to assure compliance with the law, and whether these need to be updated. Chapter 25B also specifically asks the board to consider the financial record of the applicant and it authorizes you to impose additional conditions on the permits.

So as I said, Sable hasn't posted a decommissioning bond even though the county can require one under all three permits. For example, the Popco permit requires Sable to post a bond but planning staff have misinterpreted this requirement to mean that Sable doesn't have to post a bond until the exact time that the obligation to decommission kicks in and that's when the facilities are shut down.

This is contrary to the language of the permits itself And it also defies reason. Oil and gas regulators require decommissioning bonds before production begins, because that's the only way they can ensure that they're actually protected. So it's not clear why Exxon was never required to post a bond despite the requirements in their permits. And while Exxon is a huge global company, the stakes have changed significantly or will change significantly with Sable taking over.

So here's what we know right now. Sable is a new company, its only assets are the SYU including its corrosion-prone pipeline. It has a history of noncompliance it is 875 million dollars in debt to Exxon and its corporate filings are filled with warnings about its own solvency We also know that decommissioning facilities is extremely expensive. It's going to cost over $471 million to decommission the offshore assets alone, and we also know that CalGEM has asked for a $32 million bond for the Los Flores Canyon facilities.

We don't know how much it's going to cost to decommission the pipeline though. Finally, we know that when operators default their predecessors may end up spending years in litigation fighting their responsibilities rather than just stepping into cleanup because all of those liabilities are long gone from their books. On the other hand there is important information that the board doesn't have.

There is as I mentioned there's no estimate of in the record of how much it will cost to decommission all of these onshore facilities The board also doesn't have a credit rating for Sable or any other reliable measure of its credit worthiness, which is one of the main ways that regulators assess bonding levels. Market capitalization is just too volatile to give you a good sense of whether a company is liable to default.

And then finally, there's no proof on the record that Sable has complied with its federal and state bonding requirements including the CalGem bond that I mentioned earlier. So on this record, the board can't possibly make the financial guarantees finding and it would be irresponsible to transfer these permits without additional financial protections. And so we ask that you vote to reverse. Thank you.

1:58 – 2:0426 turns

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.831:58:55 · ≈ 10:58 AM

Thank you. Just, thank you very much. Any questions at this point for the appellant? Supervisor Hartman.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.871:59:07 · ≈ 10:59 AM

Yeah. So for some of the assets, Sable is not the owner that they're the operator. Would the owner have liability and particularly would Exxon have any liability or how would you talk about that for onshore decommissioning?

PresenterRachel MatthewsAppellant Center for Biological Diversity and Wishtoyo FoundationProposedself-stated1:59:27 · ≈ 10:59 AM

So all three of the permits require the permit holder to decommission the facilities. So I don't know if it comes down to owner versus operator versus guarantor, but the fact is that whoever owns a facility there needs to be a decommissioning bond for the facilities under the permits and that requirement has not been filled.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.871:59:55 · ≈ 10:59 AM

That's an operator responsibility?

PresenterRachel MatthewsAppellant Center for Biological Diversity and Wishtoyo FoundationProposedself-stated1:59:57 · ≈ 10:59 AM

That's a permit responsibility.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.872:00:00 · ≈ 11:00 AM

Of the operator?

PresenterRachel MatthewsAppellant Center for Biological Diversity and Wishtoyo FoundationProposedself-stated2:00:02 · ≈ 11:00 AM

Yes, owner-operator

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role2:00:03 · ≈ 11:00 AM

yeah.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.832:00:08 · ≈ 11:00 AM

Supervisor Nelson.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role2:00:09 · ≈ 11:00 AM

Yeah thank you I have a question for EDC. Hi,

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed2:00:26 · ≈ 11:00 AM

Terran you fell with EDC.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role2:00:28 · ≈ 11:00 AM

Yeah thank you um you know we're talking about the fact that Sable's had some oil spills and they're being prosecuted by a district attorney as part of the reason why they shouldn't own or operate a facility so I guess I'm trying to make sure I understand that logic there. So your logic is an operator who has spills and has been prosecuted by the district attorney is not a responsible party? Is that what you contend?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed2:00:50 · ≈ 11:00 AM

I think we're getting a few, so a few pieces here. So it all falls under the finding of operator capability which is does SABLE have the necessary skills training and resources to comply with the

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role2:01:01 · ≈ 11:01 AM

permits? You brought up some spills that they've had.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed2:01:03 · ≈ 11:01 AM

So the spills that I referenced were specific to within the county at the facilities themselves The AG complaint is related to the administrative process before the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and that's with regards to work that they performed in the repair work around that situation. So I'm not sure which one you're

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role2:01:27 · ≈ 11:01 AM

referring to. You also mentioned a criminal prosecution by the District Attorney's Office?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed2:01:31 · ≈ 11:01 AM

That's right. So that's also with regards to their unpermitted repair or the repair work that violate, potentially violated certain environmental laws.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role2:01:42 · ≈ 11:01 AM

I'm just trying to understand the logic. So if you have spills, you're being prosecuted by the district attorney's office, you're probably not responsible? Operator, is that what the conclusion?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed2:01:51 · ≈ 11:01 AM

I don't think you can just pull one piece of evidence out. It's about substantial evidence under the law and here we have substantial evidence for all the reasons I detailed today of why they cannot make a finding of... The board cannot make a finding of operator capability.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role2:02:05 · ≈ 11:02 AM

But you believe those things are evidence of that? They go to substantial evidence of that.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.832:02:13 · ≈ 11:02 AM

Okay, I think we're good with our questions for now. And at this point, I'm going to close public comment before we go to the applicant. So public comment is now closed. Thank you. We'll go to our applicant, Sable.

CommentAnd just for clarificationProposedself-stated2:02:34 · ≈ 11:02 AM

And just for clarification, we're going to split our time with ExxonMobil. Sable is going to be 15 minutes and then we'll be switching over to ExxonMobil.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.832:02:41 · ≈ 11:02 AM

OK. That sounds good.

CommentAnd just for clarificationProposedself-stated2:02:44 · ≈ 11:02 AM

Also before we begin I would just like to formally renew our request for recusal of Chair Kaps and Supervisor Hartman. We do understand that you are rejecting that but for the record I need to renew it here.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.832:02:57 · ≈ 11:02 AM

Thank you.

PresenterSteve RushEnvironmental Regulatory Affairs for Sable Offshore CorporationProposedself-stated2:03:00 · ≈ 11:03 AM

All right. Good morning, Madam Chair and Board. My name is Steve Rush. I am Vice President of Environmental Regulatory Affairs for Sable Offshore Corporation. The staff has already recommended and the Planning Commission has approved. We ask that you here today deny the appeals and approve our application or change in owner-operator and guarantor for the SYU project, Popco Gas Plant, and Los Flores Pipeline Systems to Sable Offshore Corporation.

As Mr. Briggs noted, Sable acquired these facilities in February of 2024 and has been working with the county state and federal regulators. And just to be really clear on that point, Sable owns the facilities. We bought the facilities were operating facilities we hire the staff a lot of who are here today And we're paying the county and state taxes on these facilities. The limited purpose of this hearing is to seek approval of the transfer of the county permits for these facilities under County Code 25B.

Your planning commission approved these transfers, and county staff recommends that you approve them as well, and the law requires it. Our counsel Jessica Stubbins-Bena will now address the next item.

2:04 – 2:122 turns

CommentAnd just for clarificationProposedself-stated2:04:36 · ≈ 11:04 AM

Before voting today and especially in light of the court order requiring the hearing, I want to talk a moment about what Chapter 25B actually requires. And I will note contrary to what counsel for appellants said, the court has not yet interpreted Chapter 25 B. Judge G., in fact, expressly deferred the interpretation of Chapter 25b. She did not adopt either side's interpretation Because the board had failed to vote and she wanted to review the board's vote. And so, she directed us to come back here have you make a decision but she has not ruled that it is discretionary or not discretionary.

And county council in fact has only taken the position that a single of the nine factors one that's applicable to operators only has any room for discretion. So I just want to get that out of the way. Chapter 25B outlines the specific narrow inquiry required by the county when evaluating a change of owner, operator or guarantor. Sections 25 B9 and B10 contain the specific findings.

Again nine of these apply to operator only one applies to guarantor and only five apply to owner. And County Council has conceded that the one that applies to guarantor and the five which applied to owner are not discretionary They are ministerial and there is no room for subjective views when a matter is ministerial. The county's inquiry under Chapter 25B is also significantly limited by federal and state preemption, which restrict local regulation with respect to several key areas.

First, pipeline safety design and operation are fully preempted by federal law through the Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Act, which vests exclusive authority in PHMSA, which has delegated it to the Office of the State Fire Marshal. And in quote from the statute, the Office of the State Fire Marshal has exclusive safety regulatory and enforcement authority over intrastate hazardous liquid pipelines. Why do I mention that? Because there's been a lot of questions already today. There will be more about pipeline safety, about Sable's operator capabilities with respect to the pipeline. That is 100% preempted by federal law and it is not something that this county can consider.

Second, evidence of financial responsibility for spill response is governed exclusively by the State Office of Spill Prevention and Response, OSPR. The county cannot lawfully impose additional or different financial spill requirements beyond those required by state law. That field is occupied and that too is preempted. As you heard earlier, Sable has the maximum responsibility under the state law standard of $100 million for each facility. It has however significant additional financial responsibilities including $700 million in insurance which we'll talk about in a minute.

I will note for Supervisor Hartman The insurance, we did offer to share it with staff. Our brokers have met with staff and it does apply in all of the situations that you are concerned about. We're happy to continue that conversation but the insurance is fully viable in the event of a spill. Third preemption is also established by the California State Lands Commission, which regulates various offshore by Bessie and by Cal OSHA, which also have regulations that impact local jurisdiction. And finally in 1980 this county recognized its own limitations with respect to pipeline operations in the Celeron settlement.

Here are the nine factors, the owner, the operator and the guarantor. And I will note again just with respect to the financial guarantees because this is something we heard a lot about earlier. The actual language of the financial guarantees finding here is simply that Insurance bonds and instruments approved by the county are necessary to comply with a permit, and any county ordinance have been updated to reflect the new owner and will remain in effect. This is not a new finding it is just updating with the new owners information.

Back to Steve.

PresenterSteve RushEnvironmental Regulatory Affairs for Sable Offshore CorporationProposedself-stated2:08:44 · ≈ 11:08 AM

The Planning Commission's findings confirm that Sable has met all the County Code requirements And there's no basis to find that these requirements are not now satisfied. Again, this is preempted by OSPR, O-S-P-R. But to be clear, Sable exceeds the financial requirements under 25G as the Planning Commission found and the Staff Report confirms. There's a lot of detail on this slide but the bottom line is Jessica has mentioned that there's more than $700 million in insurance to address any incident.

And this was to address the Board's previous concern that 400 million wasn't enough so we've upped it to 700 million. Next slide. Stable certificates of financial responsibility are on file and approved by the state. That plan is based on an operating pipeline, not a pipeline without flowing oil as has been claimed by the appellants. All compliance and contingency plans have been updated and reviewed by staff as required by 25B including a valid and effective spill contingency plan.

Staff has reviewed all these plans more than required by 25B and confirmed they've been updated consistent with 25B. In each of the last two years, we've successfully completed two emergency response drills per year and were complimented by the agencies present. In fact, they've used those drills as a training ground for their own agency personnel. Most importantly, SABLE meets and exceeds the operator capability requirements.

As evidenced by all the experience levels of staff most notably in similar situations Santa Barbara Channel Outer Continental Shelf and associated onshore facilities our extensive track record shows it has the experience necessary to continue to safely operate these facilities as exemplified over the past year. The Planning Commission notes That extensive subject matter expertise of Sable's management team represent an average of 31 years of experience operating oil and gas facilities within the county, and the on-site management teams more than two decades of average experience.

We've had zero major incidents involving crude oil and gas facilities within the United States. Sable's management team has demonstrated its ability to operate these facilities in an exemplary fashion. Also we have an awesome field operations workforce as I mentioned many of you who are here today This finding is narrow and requires the county to review specifically enumerated compliance records and corrective actions for major incidents at similar facilities. And again, this is preempted for the pipeline.

OSFM, the fire marshal has exclusive jurisdiction over pipeline safety and design. We've demonstrated a strong commitment to world-class quality and safety. SABLE implements rigorous testing programs to ensure that production facilities operate safely. Our enhanced safety protocols and management systems are overseen by our experienced team, who are key to our longstanding record of safely and successfully operating oil and gas production facilities in California and in the Santa Barbara Channel.

The board has already looked at cathodic protection when it approved the transfers to ExxonMobil. While cathodic protection remains fully in place on the pipeline, this board already correctly found that cathodic protection is not a condition of the FBP. Before the February 25 hearing, county staff confirmed again that Exxon, or excuse me, that Sable's in full compliance and there are no changes from September 23 with respects to the board's cathodics protection findings.

2:12 – 2:171 turns

CommentAnd just for clarificationProposedself-stated2:12:33 · ≈ 11:12 AM

After the Planning Commission approved the transfers, as you all know two appeals were filed. These appeals significantly misstate the facts and misrepresent the county code. They're an effort to distract the board from the mandatory and narrow requirements of Chapter 25B One thing I do want to note with respect to the court order, while the court has not yet construed Chapter 25B she has confirmed that this board must follow the code and cannot simply act on things that are outside its text. Other concerns that are outside Actual County Council is correct that it appears only in some provisions, but the effect of the code as well as the process that's in place including the review process we believe requires that the entire application be considered as of that date.

So again just noting that for the record. One thing to note here is that a permit transfer appeal is a quasi-judicial process, which requires a full and fair due process hearing. This is not a political decision. Procedural due process requires that applicants have fair notice in the statute of the requirements they are required to follow, and the board does not have authority to add extra requirements not in the text of Chapter 25B. They would violate due process if they determine the appeals based on materials that are not fairly disclosed within the text of the ordinance.

We already talked about this. The board cannot consider information in our view that postdates the applications, but to be clear and as we'll talk about it in a moment, consideration of later timed information does not change the outcome under Chapter 25B regardless. I'm going to quickly go through the next few slides because I think they are well covered in our written submission and I'm mindful that I have three minutes left so I will jump through these responses to some of appellant specific arguments, but I do want to focus here on a few things we've heard today with respect to resources and the ability to add a decommissioning bond or require other additional financial assurances that are not in the permit. The appellants have relied on a draft version of the statute and the provisions that they've talked about including the idea that they can just add a decommissioning bond or that we have to show responsibility for for shutdown of the facilities that they could require additional financial assurances.

Those were all specifically removed from the draft statute, and in fact when they were specifically removed staff issued a report that was actually initially submitted to this board by EDC and that report confirmed That neither the financial guarantees nor the abandonment findings impose any unspecified financial requirements. They simply require that the provisions in permits and ordinances are adhered to, and confirmed that they would not open up the permits for renegotiation of financial responsibility other than when the permit's already provided for that. So there is no ability of this board to add additional financial requirements beyond those in the permit And contrary to appellant's contention, the permits do not require a decommissioning bond until the facilities are shut down.

And that's very clear and that's the way the county has interpreted the permits since 1988. In the legislative history I think we covered that already because Chapter 25B is such a narrow statute and a mandatory one, appellants are asking the board to look beyond it They've asked to focus on the dispute with the Coastal Commission. I will note that everything that Sable did with respect to the Coastal Commission was authorized by the county specifically, and it would be arbitrary and capricious for the county to deny a permit transfer based on conduct that it authorized. With respect to the Air District and a few small spills which were mentioned today, These were all self-reported, they were immediately corrected. There was no damage to the environment in any of them.

The Air District was consistent with historical operations at SYU and in fact based on appellant submission we had the exact same number of violations as Santa Barbara County Fire Department. All to say this is not the sort of systemic noncompliance that would justify or demonstrate a fair to comply with county permits. With respect to the Water Board and the related criminal charges, we are engaged in active resolution with respect to the agencies to reach a resolution. Several of the Water Board sites have been retroactively permitted. We are working to try to retroactively permit the others.

And with respect to the criminal charges they are vigorously disputed. In the United States of America you are presumed innocent until proven otherwise and we do not believe that allegations I would like to

not transcribed≈19s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈18s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

2:18 – 2:231 turns

PresenterLauren KaplanExxon Mobil Corporation and its affiliatesProposedself-stated2:18:28 · ≈ 11:18 AM

Is it this button? All right, almost good afternoon. I am Lauren Kaplan and I'm speaking on behalf of Exxon Mobil Corporation and its affiliates. Exxon Mobil is participating in today's hearing as the prior owner, operator and guarantor of these facilities with long held permits in the county. And as one of the county's biggest taxpayers for many decades paying millions of dollars each year in property taxes.

I'd like to start just by way of background to emphasize that the permits that we're discussing here today were issued in 1987, 1988 and 1993 which was all well before Chapter 25B was passed in 2001. In operating the facilities ExxonMobil was a good partner to the county and had a long history of safe incident-free operations ExxonMobil worked diligently to meet the county's regulations and stated preferences for oil and gas operations.

Exxomobil previously used an offshore vessel to transport oil, and when the county stated a different preference it moved its facilities onshore. Now, consistent with the county's preference, ExxonMobil seeks to transfer the FDPs for the assets to Sable but the county has refused to act on the transfer. The presentations by the applicants and planning staff demonstrate that the requirements of Chapter 25B have been met and the Planning Commission's prior approval should be upheld.

I'm here just to make three additional points. First, ExxonMobil sold these assets with the understanding that the county's rules would be applied objectively and fairly. The county's role in FTP transfers under Chapter 25B is limited to ensuring compliance with specific enumerated requirements. Any broader construction of these requirements grants the county unbridled discretion to reject permit transfers based on arbitrary and random criteria.

No one could operate or sell a business in this county if such standards are in place. ExxonMobil expects that Supervisor Lee, as a business owner, you would understand the need for this consistency. You need to have assurance that you can sell or transfer your business without ministerial ordinances effectively blocking that transfer. It cannot be that Chapter 25B's purpose is to prevent large oil companies from selling to smaller ones or that the board is empowered to do essentially anything to prevent this from happening. This interpretation would make asset transfers by companies like ExxonMobil, which is one of the world's largest oil companies virtually impossible.

Second, ExxonMobil has experienced inconsistent application of this regulation. Exxon Mobil has been here before I've been here before in 2023 when Plains sold the pipeline to Exxom Mobile the county confirmed Chapter 25 B's narrow scope and approved that transfer Chair Capps, you confirmed at that 2023 hearing that a change of ownership is an administrative action and it does not have any impacts on the environment. And in approving a transfer all the county is doing is ensuring that the county permit actually matches the company that owns the pipeline and that is important.

Yet in February 2025, the board failed to vote in favor of transferring the permits to actually match the company that has owned the pipeline for now almost two years and Chair Kapp cited pipeline safety as the rationale for her denial vote. And that is not something that the board should be considering. In the February 2025 hearing, Chair Caps, you acknowledged that Sable met the requirements of a checklist. That should have been the end of the inquiry.

Supervisor Hartman? You've recused yourself from every proceeding involving ExxonMobil in this pipeline including the prior owner-operator transfer because the line runs adjacent to the northeast corner of your property and now you have determined without any change of circumstances or legal advice that you are no longer required to recuse yourself If the board takes the approach that the appellants are advocating for, the county will have converted a routine ministerial paperwork change into an undeterminable process subject to this board's political whims.

This arbitrary approach seriously jeopardizes the constitutionality of 25B and the board should tread carefully if the county wishes to have any future review opportunity for oil and gas permit transfers. Now finally, I want to make clear that the county's actions threaten to violate ExxonMobil's vested rights to own operate and sell these assets and Exxomobil will take whatever actions are necessary to protect those rights. The county cannot unjustifiably deny the ExxonMobil affiliates the ability to exit from their permits despite the sale of the facilities. Doing so would infringe on their constitutionally protected rights and substantially impede the performance of the contract that Exxomobile has with Sable. Exxomobile will continue to exercise its legal rights to ensure the permits are transferred and will seek to recover from the county all damages incurred.

Thank you.

2:23 – 2:3017 turns

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.832:23:47 · ≈ 11:23 AM

Okay. Any questions at this point? Excuse me, let's have some quiet. Any questions at this point? Supervisor Hartman.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.872:24:01 · ≈ 11:24 AM

Yeah I have a couple. The first is would you allow that the county has authority to protect public health, coastal resources and taxpayers

CommentAnd just for clarificationProposedself-stated2:24:17 · ≈ 11:24 AM

I think the county has authority in certain areas. They don't have broad, general authority to construe any statute to protect those things. They're bound by the words in the statute and they are in some areas preempted by federal and state law.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.872:24:39 · ≈ 11:24 AM

Is Sable, are there any other state or federal issues that Sable is facing other than the ones that have been pointed to today such as OSHA?

CommentAnd just for clarificationProposedself-stated2:24:53 · ≈ 11:24 AM

I'm not certain whether there are any other state and federal issues that Sable is facing. I will note that state and federal issues are expressly outside the scope of Chapter 25B, so it is certainly possible but they're not part of my preparation for this hearing. There were a number of state and federal issues mentioned and again state and federal authorities are at the authorities with jurisdiction.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.872:25:16 · ≈ 11:25 AM

I think a culture of responsibility and safety in protecting workers and the environment and the citizens is very much a county responsibility. If there were a spill, is Exxon still on the hook?

CommentAnd just for clarificationProposedself-stated2:25:38 · ≈ 11:25 AM

If there were a spill, Sable's insurance would almost certainly cover it. While appellants mentioned a very large number for cleanup of the prior spill, in fact the hard cleanup costs by their own estimates were around 110-120 million tops The pipeline now has a much lower potential discharge in a worst case scenario spill, which is something the Office of the State Fire Commissioner has confirmed. So more than likely the 700 million would fully cover this bill and then some with respect to Who is still on the hook beyond that? I know that there is a county requirement for prior owner liability with abandonment. I don't believe there is one with respect to spill response, but again, spill response is governed by OSPR and is specifically set in Sable has fully maximally put in the amount that is required by state law for spill response

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.872:26:40 · ≈ 11:26 AM

Could we talk a little bit more about decommissioning? If in fact Sable did go bankrupt after a spill, who would be responsible for decommissioning. The ordinance does say that the previous owner is on the hook but evidently the plain reading of the ordinance isn't something that you're willing to accept on its face So I guess. I

CommentAnd just for clarificationProposedself-stated2:27:07 · ≈ 11:27 AM

disagree, I vehemently agree that the plain reading of the ordinance is correct and should be applied by this board. I don't think that's what some of you are interested in doing but in fact I do think that the statute says that the board may look to prior owners in the event of decommissioning. I will also note again that the board considered in 2001 adding an express decommissioning requirement to Chapter 25B they did not ultimately add that It was expressly removed and their own staff confirmed that no decommissioning requirements could be required consistent with the actual adopted language of the statute.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.872:27:44 · ≈ 11:27 AM

I believe 25B does in fact assert that the previous owner would be responsible for decommissioning.

CommentAnd just for clarificationProposedself-stated2:27:51 · ≈ 11:27 AM

Yes, I mean additional decommissioning bonds not already required by the permit. That was

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.872:27:55 · ≈ 11:27 AM

what I

CommentAnd just for clarificationProposedself-stated2:27:55 · ≈ 11:27 AM

was referring to there.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.872:27:58 · ≈ 11:27 AM

So what do you make of the required, or at least 25B saying that we can ask for information needed to assure the financial guarantees finding? Or any other information that the county may require to approve any change in owner operator or guarantor.

CommentAnd just for clarificationProposedself-stated2:28:18 · ≈ 11:28 AM

Well I have two responses to that Supervisor Hartman. The first is that the statute, the ordinance evolved as it was written and as I just discussed it was originally written to be quite broad in fact there were going to be additional ordinances adopted specifically with respect to financial responsibility over time and in negotiation with Industry leaders as well as people who raised concerns about the proposed breadth of the ordinance, it narrowed. And so the financial assurances that were originally contemplated under the initial draft when that language was introduced were broader and they were narrowed in the final draft. The second thing I would note is that this applies to a wide variety of permits. Some of which may have broader financial requirements than these permits do, in which case a broader inquiry might be appropriate.

But here you are limited to looking at what is necessary to comply with the permit and with the county ordinances and that is a short list.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.872:29:14 · ≈ 11:29 AM

I don't see a list really here. I see a requirement that we have some discretion in asking for information to be assured that indeed there is the financial capability

CommentAnd just for clarificationProposedself-stated2:29:30 · ≈ 11:29 AM

You may ask for information, Supervisor Hartman but you are limited to confirming and I'm quoting from the chapter that the necessary insurance bonds or other instruments or methods of financial responsibility approved by the county and necessary to comply with a permit in any county ordinance have been updated if necessary to reflect the new owners and will remain in full effect following the ownership change. And again staff confirmed today but also in 2001 that did not permit The addition of unspecified financial assurances.

2:30 – 2:3516 turns

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.872:30:08 · ≈ 11:30 AM

I guess it's a difference of interpretation then.

CommentAnd just for clarificationProposedself-stated2:30:11 · ≈ 11:30 AM

So it seems.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.872:30:12 · ≈ 11:30 AM

Thank you.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.832:30:16 · ≈ 11:30 AM

Supervisor Lee.

ElectedRoy LeeSupervisor, District 1Proposedvoiceprint 0.842:30:17 · ≈ 11:30 AM

So earlier, you made a statement about comparing yourself to our county firefighters about violations. Can you clarify that?

CommentAnd just for clarificationProposedself-stated2:30:26 · ≈ 11:30 AM

Yes, we were looking at the documents EDC submitted with their filing which did include a small number of air quality board review board notices of violation as well as I think two self-reported small spills that had no environmental impact. And we would just count it up there are a number Supervisor Lee, just to add to that. If you look back at the history of just SYU

not transcribed≈22s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
PresenterSteve RushEnvironmental Regulatory Affairs for Sable Offshore CorporationProposedself-stated2:31:15 · ≈ 11:31 AM

The amount of those small infractions with the APCD is consistent going back 10, 15 years. Actually back to when I worked on SYU for their prior owner same thing. I mean these are typical we self-report every little thing. I mean that regulations in Santa Barbara County are probably the most stringent in the world and any slight deviation and we send millions of data points to APCD so you can Conceive that you're going to have these minor discretions and there's processes to address those, and we are addressed, have addressed those.

CommentAnd just for clarificationProposedself-stated2:31:51 · ≈ 11:31 AM

And Supervisor Lee, to be clear my comparison to the firefighters was not in any way shape or form to malign the firefighters but to emphasize the fact that the very best organizations in this county still sometimes run afoul of their quality requirements because there are so many

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.832:32:10 · ≈ 11:32 AM

Okay, I had just one question. So we're clear that Chapter 25B states that the applicant has this quote skills training and resources necessary to operate the permitted facility in compliance with the permit and all applicable county codes. In February of this year, contrary to the mischaracterization by Exxon, I asked a lot of questions about the resources part of that statement.

Specifically, I asked for the insurance policy and was kind of given a non-answer when asked if it could be produced. So to this date has that insurance policy been produced?

CommentAnd just for clarificationProposedself-stated2:32:51 · ≈ 11:32 AM

It has not, Chair Caps. We have repeatedly offered to staff to share it with them because of legal issues we cannot have it placed in the public record. However, we have offered to have an in-camera review. We have offered to have our brokers sit down and walk through the liabilities and exclusions. We have done everything other than place our confidential insurance into the public record and we remain willing to do that. There is no issue with our insurance that would affect the county's recovery.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.832:33:23 · ≈ 11:33 AM

Thank you, okay any other questions? Okay thank you I believe at this point we'll move to just looking at the clerk I think we moved to public comment at this point let us have the final number here

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:33:54 · ≈ 11:33 AM

Chair Kaps and members of the board, before we proceed with public comment I did just want to make a quick note for the record that Supervisor Hartman did submit to my office the aforementioned ex parte that she had regarding research on state and federal funds for oil spill response. And that is now available online And I believe it is being passed out and is going to be made available in the back of the room. We are having some printer issues at the moment, but copies are being made for anyone who's interested in the ex parte that was mentioned by Supervisor Hartman.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.832:34:36 · ≈ 11:34 AM

Okay so we will begin with public comment to this agenda item which is departmental item number three.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:34:44 · ≈ 11:34 AM

And we have 95 requests to speak on this item. And if you are a member of the public and signed up on Zoom, if you can please log in now. It looks like there's quite a number of public members who signed up that are not logged into Zoom. So if you are watching and not logged into Zoom, please log in now. And a reminder to those, public comment has been closed. It was closed at 1140 so we're not taking any additional speakers that's in person and on Zoom. So if you signed up after 1140, the public comment period was already closed.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.832:35:19 · ≈ 11:35 AM

And we are going to take a break at 1 o'clock. So, we'll get through just a small portion of those at the beginning and then we'll proceed after that one o'clock break.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:35:28 · ≈ 11:35 AM

And each speaker will be receiving allotted a minute and a half to speak. We'll begin on Zoom with Christina Sandoval to be followed by Michael Leons. Christina?

2:35 – 2:4116 turns

PresenterChristina SandovalUCSB Coal Point Reserve on the Goleta Coast 10 miles south of where the refuel oProposedself-stated2:35:42 · ≈ 11:35 AM

Can you

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:35:43 · ≈ 11:35 AM

hear

PresenterChristina SandovalUCSB Coal Point Reserve on the Goleta Coast 10 miles south of where the refuel oProposedself-stated2:35:43 · ≈ 11:35 AM

me?

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:35:45 · ≈ 11:35 AM

Yes, we can please proceed.

PresenterChristina SandovalUCSB Coal Point Reserve on the Goleta Coast 10 miles south of where the refuel oProposedself-stated2:35:47 · ≈ 11:35 AM

Wonderful, thank you. My name is Christina Sandoval. I'm the director of the UCSB Coal Point Reserve on the Goleta Coast 10 miles south of where the refuel oil spill occurred. I am at the Reserve every day serving, teaching and engaging the public about the preservation of our coastline. I tell them about the devastating effects of a refugio oil spill. We documented that animals covered in oil, snowy plovers with patches of oil on their feathers We watched the snowy plovers eating oil accidentally while trying to clean themselves. We documented infertility on snowy plovers following their oil spew. I also learned about a hard lesson, oil companies do not pay sufficiently for the damages they cause. As a steward of the California coast, I do not support the renewal of the oil exploration on our coast based on this recent history of negligence and disregard for the environment.

And because the direction we needed to go is renewable energy. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:37:02 · ≈ 11:37 AM

We will now go to Michael Leons to be followed by Christopher Alexander.

PresenterMichael LyonsGet Oil OutProposedself-stated2:37:11 · ≈ 11:37 AM

Good afternoon. Can you hear me?

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:37:13 · ≈ 11:37 AM

Yes, we can please proceed.

PresenterMichael LyonsGet Oil OutProposedself-stated2:37:16 · ≈ 11:37 AM

Good afternoon I'm Michael Lyons board president of Get Oil Out. Sable simply can't be trusted to operate safely responsibly and in compliance with the law. Several recent leaks spills and notice of violations from local agencies including Santa Barbara County are missing from the staff report and include two spills at their facilities in August this year. One was 280 gallons of hydrochloric acid, the other was about 5,000 cubic feet of sludge caused by operator error. Some of the sludge leaked outside the area it was supposed to be contained in.

Santa Barbara County also sent Sable notice a violation April this year because county residents complained about construction happening late at night outside the allowed work hours This shows the company wasn't following one of the most basic rules of all, when they're allowed to work. In addition two months ago our local air pollution control district issued four separate notice of violations to Sable for not allowing air pollution permit rules.

Following air pollution permit rules there's a pattern here. The operator has repeatedly failed to comply with agreed upon rules and laws that protect public health and environment. Allowing Sable to continue Its pattern of careless operation serves to our community and environment at a cost far greater than the profit Sable will generate from their oil. Please don't let this occur on your watch. Nobody wants to say, I told you so.

Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:38:48 · ≈ 11:38 AM

We will now go to Christopher Alexander to be followed by Elizabeth Martinez. Christopher?

CommentChristopher AlexanderProposedself-stated2:38:56 · ≈ 11:38 AM

Good afternoon. Can you hear me?

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:38:57 · ≈ 11:38 AM

Yes, we can. Please proceed.

CommentChristopher AlexanderProposedself-stated2:39:00 · ≈ 11:39 AM

My name is Christopher Alexander. I'm with a company called Apex and over the past year 21 of our most experienced, most meticulous and most dedicated pipeline inspectors have served at worksites throughout the Las Flores Pipeline System. Our folks are seasoned professionals. They are safety leaders who are working side by side with the maintenance crews, biologists even archaeologists All to ensure that the work gets done right.

Our team members are also proud outdoorsmen, they breathe the same air, they walk the same trails and they share the same concern for our natural environment as other members of this community. And so that's why every time they step onto a job site, the protection of people and the environment is their very highest priority. Our company provides inspection services to many different energy companies, not just in California but across the United States. And I can tell you the quality of the repair work on the Las Flores pipeline represents the highest construction and maintenance standards in our industry.

Our inspectors have seen it firsthand in the field each and every day. And as board members, you should listen to their expertise. Show business leaders in Santa Barbara County that permitting decisions like this one will be made within the limits of the law and with consideration of the legitimate experts in the field. We strongly support Sable, and we respectfully ask the Board of Supervisors to follow the expertise including that of their own staff. Follow the law.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:40:35 · ≈ 11:40 AM

That

CommentChristopher AlexanderProposedself-stated2:40:35 · ≈ 11:40 AM

is your time. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:40:37 · ≈ 11:40 AM

We will now go to Elizabeth Martinez to be followed by Ken Huff. Elizabeth? Elizabeth, we have unmuted you on our end. If you can please unmute on your end to provide your comments. Elizabeth, we have unmuted you on our end. If you can please unmute to provide your comments. All righty moving on we will go to Ken Huff to be followed by Lisa Gilfillan.

2:41 – 2:469 turns

PresenterKen HuffSanta Barbara County Action Network which is represented by EDC on this matterProposedself-stated2:41:17 · ≈ 11:41 AM

Good afternoon, Chair Capps and Supervisors. I'm Ken Huff, Co-Executive Director of Santa Barbara County Action Network which is represented by EDC on this matter. When I addressed your board last February, I focused on the genesis and the purposes of Chapter 25B. I noted the recent track record at the time of SABLE which had not been operating within the regulatory framework. Since that time, SABLE's violations have continued and grown by leaps and bounds as described by EDC.

The defective pipeline runs through North County, where I live. A year ago, I described the risks to the Cuyama Valley to the Planning Commission. Sable's draft integrated contingency plan includes a graph illustrating the volume of oil that would spill into the Cuyama Valley near the river resulting from a worst-case spill. The unsafe pipeline rises 1,300 feet between a safety valve in the valley and the next valve at the top of the mountains before the drop into Kern Even if the valves were immediately closed upon a breach in Cuyama Valley, almost all the oil from the mountain top on down would flow by gravity into Cuyama Valley. That would be more than 1.7 million gallons, 14 times the size of the Plains Pipeline spill 10 years ago and 400 times the size of the tanker truck spill into the Cuyama River a few years ago.

Please protect our water and communities by denying these permit transfers. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:42:44 · ≈ 11:42 AM

And it appears Lisa Gilfillan has left the Zoom meeting, so we will now go to Candice Mennegan to be followed by Juan Larez. Candice? And Candice, we have unmuted you on our end. There you go.

PresenterCandace MenneganCoastal Ranches Conservancy who has been a fierce advocate for the environment iProposedself-stated2:43:05 · ≈ 11:43 AM

Hi there, good morning Chair Caps and Supervisors. My name is Candace Mennegan and I'm the Executive Director of Coastal Ranches Conservancy who has been a fierce advocate for the environment in 76 miles of the Gaviota Coast for the past 20 years. The Gaviota Coast makes up 15% of Southern California's coastline and represents 50% of California's remaining rural coastline and is the largest intact remnant of this Mediterranean type ecosystem.

A coastline that is now very much a threat of Sable's ongoing operations. This pipeline runs through state parks, county parks, several land trust properties and is home to an array of endangered species from Southern California steelhead, snowy plovers, California red-legged frogs, and many of our precious waterways and marine life along the marine sanctuaries.

On February 15th, while hiking at Barone Ranch with my family I saw Sable Staff actually throw signage aside to say stay out of sensitive habitat. And for the past year, I've really been watching them disturb sensitive habitats up and down the coastline. We implore you to take the duty of care owed to our environment, our communities, to heart in making your decision today and denying the transfer of this permit to safeguard our communities and our biodiversity. Thank you so much.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:44:32 · ≈ 11:44 AM

We will now go to Juan Larez to be followed by Chelsea Marquez.

CommentJuan LattisProposedself-stated2:44:41 · ≈ 11:44 AM

Thank you. My name is Juan Lattis, I'm speaking in opposition to item 3 and the transfer of permits from ExxonMobil to Sable Offshore Corporation. This proposal moves our region backwards. Sable has already demonstrated an inability to operate responsibly. The company performed extensive work along the San Ynez unit pipeline corridor without required permits leading to the Coastal Commission to issue an $18 million penalty for excavation, vegetation removal, and construction in sensitive coastal areas.

Superior Court Judge agreed these permits were required and the Attorney General since filed criminal charges related to environmental violations. This is not a minor compliance issue, it shows a pattern of disregarding community safeguards. Reauthorizing this operator would put our health coastline and economy at continued risk from aging infrastructure tied to a pipeline that already caused a major spill in 2015.

Our region deserves partners who respect our laws and are aligned with a safer, forward-looking energy future. SABLE has not shown that. I urge you to vote no on item three. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:45:46 · ≈ 11:45 AM

We will now go to Chelsea Marquez to be followed by Thomas Becker. Chelsea?

CommentChelsea MarquezProposedself-stated2:45:55 · ≈ 11:45 AM

Can you guys hear me?

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:45:57 · ≈ 11:45 AM

Yes we can please proceed

CommentChelsea MarquezProposedself-stated2:45:59 · ≈ 11:45 AM

Perfect. My name is Chelsea Marquez, and as a current environmental studies major at UCSB I'm strongly opposed to Sable's proposed offshore oil drilling. The economic benefits of this project don't outweigh the potential environmental risks. Having done research for Professor Martin on Standard Oil which is now ExxonMobil and the proposed offshore oil drilling in Morro Bay it is clear that offshore oil drilling should not occur in ecologically sensitive areas The offshore oil drilling project in Morro Bay was ultimately rejected because the area was recognized as environmentally sensitive. Santa Barbara, just like Morro Bay is an ecologically sensitive region home to endangered species and unique geography. For these reasons I strongly urge opposition in offshore oil drilling in Santa Barbara.

Thank you.

2:46 – 2:5111 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:46:44 · ≈ 11:46 AM

We will now go to Thomas Becker to be followed by Larry Pickford.

CommentThomas BeckerProposed2:46:59 · ≈ 11:46 AM

Thank you. Can you hear me?

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:47:01 · ≈ 11:47 AM

Yes, we can please proceed.

CommentThomas BeckerProposed2:47:02 · ≈ 11:47 AM

Thank you if the applicant meets the legal conditions that are required to transfer ownership then the transfer must be allowed It is unlawful for the board to place conditions on the transfer that are not required under the codes or statutes that control the transfer process. Placing new requirements on the transfer, that are not codified or applicable to the existing permits is a kind of ex post facto law.

For instance, the second district supervisor wants to make it a condition that the applicants submit their entire insurance policy for public review. That is a condition that is not required under existing codes or statutes for transferring of ownership. Everyone who wants to have laws applied equally and fairly should be very concerned about this Board of Supervisors trying to impose conditions That are basically ex post facto. Anybody should be concerned, regardless of your position on this issue. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:48:23 · ≈ 11:48 AM

And we will now go to Larry Bickford. Are you in person? All righty. To be followed by Mike Umbro. Larry?

CommentLarry BickfordProposed2:48:35 · ≈ 11:48 AM

Thank you.

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.832:48:48 · ≈ 11:48 AM

There you go.

CommentLarry BickfordProposed2:48:50 · ≈ 11:48 AM

In the financial news, the last couple of days there's been a lot of information indicating that Sable is financially in big trouble. Stock price is down 75% year to date 25% in the last two days. Revenue growth for three consecutive years has been zero. The balance sheet strength indicates serious liquidity issues The financial strength scores indicates that the company is in financial distress. A lot of this stems from a quarter of a billion dollar loan that was offered and is pending by ExxonMobil, contingent upon other successful fundraising endeavors. All this brings a bottom line.

Sable might not be able to cover Any additional operation expenses going forward? What security does the county have that should the company fail, the pipeline won't? That's it. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:50:02 · ≈ 11:50 AM

We will now go to Mike Umbro to be followed by Julia Bickford.

PresenterMike Humberpledge that said liberty and justice for all not liberty injustice for those witProposedself-stated2:50:10 · ≈ 11:50 AM

Hello, my name is Mike Humber with Californians for Energy and Science. We started this meeting with the pledge that said liberty and justice for all not liberty injustice for those with grievances that have no scientific basis and no fact behind them Now, Chair Caps, you mentioned you're concerned about global warming. I wonder how your opinion has changed now that Bill Gates has said it is not an existential threat at all? He just said that last week but maybe the smiling faces to my right here have given you science that Bill Gates isn't aware of.

Supervisor Lee, you run a restaurant. Do you cook with electricity only or do you use natural gas? Supervisor Hartman, you live in this area. You have property in this area. Would you rather have the product move safely to shore on pipeline with a responsible operator that has demonstrated success in this region? Or would you rather have tankers Tankers are responsible for seven of the 10 largest spills in the United States waters, not pipelines. Tankers. So you're inviting more spill risk. And finally on the issue of responsibility, Exxon will own this responsibility cradle to grave Not to mention they are fully bonded and capable of responding to this spill. So please lead with facts, please deny this appeal and lead with facts not emotion because Californians need facts and affordable reliable local energy.

Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:51:50 · ≈ 11:51 AM

We will now go to Julia Bickford to be followed by Lucy G. Julia?

2:52 – 2:588 turns

CommentJulia BickfordProposedself-stated2:52:02 · ≈ 11:52 AM

Second, I'm short. Hello, I'm apparently here in person too. My name is Julia Bickford. I was born and raised here. I've studied environmental science for my whole academic career and I would just like to point out that there is not as the previous speaker stated a choice between tankers or pipelines. There's a choice between oil or renewable energy And that should really be on the table.

And these, this pipeline is absolutely going to spill. Sable has committed multiple violations over the past several years and we in Santa Barbara know the history of oil spills and have no desire to repeat that. The only responsible choice to protect our fragile marine ecosystems that we all love and the people who live here is to deny this permit And refuse to let them operate these pipelines that are already corroded.

And thank you so much. Please, please deny this appeal. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:53:23 · ≈ 11:53 AM

We will now go to Lucy G to be followed by Sineha Nambodiri. Lucy?

CommentLucyProposed2:53:38 · ≈ 11:53 AM

Hi Chair Kaps and Supervisors. I'm Lucy, a Santa Barbara resident and a student here. I am here to oppose the permit transfer of the pipeline from ExxonMobil to Sable. It has been 10 years since the refugio spill from this same corroded pipeline. I hope that we can learn from history and stop Sable's plan to restart the same harmful process that damaged our biodiversity, our oceans, and community last time.

We know any more toxic oil waste released in the oceans will have immeasurably devastating impacts on the environment and our community. Sable's actions reflect a record of noncompliance and unsafe operations, including ignoring cease and desist orders. I would not trust them to responsibly implement an oil pipeline. I strongly urge you to protect the safety and future of our beautiful home county and state by not permitting Sable to gain the permits and later on restart the pipeline. Thank you for your time.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:54:39 · ≈ 11:54 AM

We will now go to Saneha Nambodiri, to be followed by Ethan Madej. Saneha?

CommentSaneha NambodiriProposed2:54:48 · ≈ 11:54 AM

Hi my name is Sanehat and I'm a UCSB student here at the Environmental Affairs Board. I am here because I know that SABLE threatens the future of my health and safety. We have seen in the past how pipelines off our coasts have caused spills that have too devastating of a toll. And our history is there for us to learn from it. However, it is not just a threat of a spill but the pipeline, the excavations and the drilling itself that harms us.

Unclean decommissioned and uncapped pipes continue to leak and pollute our waters. This is the same pipeline that's corroded and it's unsafe to operate without proper protections. This is a leaky pipeline paired with a leaky company just a recipe for disaster. They have faced numerous violations and cease-and-desist orders leading to numerous unpaid fines. When the inevitable spill happens, they would not be able to pay for their remediation and the responsibility will fall on the public and the blood will lie on your hands.

Rules are only rules if we are able to uphold them. And Sable has disrespected and threatened these rules, and they are bullying you. Please do not be bullied by them. It is your responsibility to care for our environment and our futures. Instead of being in class I'm here fighting for my well-being and yours. Please don't give up our land and oceans to those that do not deserve it and that don't appreciate it. Let me remind you that these out-of-state bullies did not elect you, but we did. Protect your constituents by not allowing SABLE to restart this villainous pipeline and deny the application for the permit transfer. Thank you so much for taking the time to hear us today.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:56:20 · ≈ 11:56 AM

And before we proceed with Ethan Madej, I did just want to make an announcement for those members of the public who are in other locations that have signed up for public comment particularly ones that have signed up for public comment perhaps in the planning commission room. I see five members of the public there are at least I see about seven seats available in our audience so you're welcome to Make your way up here. At least seven seats are available up here, thank you. We will now go to Ethan Madej to be followed by Barbara Mayanda Garcia. Ethan?

CommentEthan MadejProposedself-stated2:56:55 · ≈ 11:56 AM

Hi there, I am Ethan Madej and I'm a 10th grader at Santa Barbara High School. As a young person this decision will affect me for the rest of my life and our Santa Barbara community for the rest of my life. And we need to stand up to big oil and fight for the future not cling on to the past decisions of the past laws of the past bad deals of the past We need to move forward, we can't go back in time anymore. We are moving towards a more sustainable renewable future. We cannot support big oil to take away and threaten our community, to threaten our beaches, our oceans and our future. As a young person this is a deeply personal issue to me because I will be living with this decision for the rest of my life And I'm the president of the Santa Barbara High School Environmental Club.

And I am representing Santa Barbara High School and numerous other schools in Santa Barbara County. The young people, the high schoolers of Santa Barbara say no. We say no to Sable. We hope you will as well. Thank you for stopping other projects. Thank you for your hard work in this area. And I urge you to continue that rhetoric today. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.862:58:12 · ≈ 11:58 AM

We will now go to Barbara Maianda Garcia, to be followed by Alex Borjas. Barbara? Is Barbara here? Looks like Barbara may have left. Barbara if you're in another room please just alert the clerk in the back of the room and we will go back to you. We will now go to Alex Borjas to be followed by Milena Seymour.

2:58 – 3:048 turns

CommentAlex I'mProposedself-stated2:58:45 · ≈ 11:58 AM

All right. Hi all, my name is Alex I'm a student at UC Santa Barbara and I don't want to talk about the environmental impact that this could potentially have. I want to talk about the finances of Sable. This last quarter Sable reported almost a billion dollars of debt. Additionally this last Monday their stock prices dropped 30% to an all-time low after they revealed that they need to fundraise hundreds of millions if they want to extend their loan with Exxon. On top of that, also starting Monday they started investigations into their CEO for insider trading after he coordinated with other private investors in order to I mean I guess raise funds that they don't already have.

This is a history of not being financially responsible which is required for the permits to be transferred. Functionally if they don't have this money themselves they're gambling with public funds because it means that they get bailed out by the state or they make money profiting off of our environment The points I brought up certainly do not seem to suggest that Sable has the resources to operate these facilities and even if submitting insurance is not explicitly in the code, it is something that is allowed if we want to verify Sable's claims. It's ironic to characterize this a rejection of the permits as picking and choosing the law when Sable themselves have been openly defiant of the state multiple times.

A company with almost a billion dollars of debt, multiple criminal charges, insider trading and begging for money for loans is obviously not signs of a responsible community and definitely not something that I want protecting our coast in the future. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:00:20 · ≈ 12:00 PM

We will now go to Malena Seymour to be followed by Lila Wareland. Malena?

PresenterMalena SeymourUCSB's Environmental Law ClubProposedself-stated3:00:32 · ≈ 12:00 PM

Hi, my name is Malena Seymour. I'm vice president of UCSB's Environmental Law Club. Despite Sable's claims they have not demonstrated that they possess the proper resources and training to validate this permit transfer as per Chapter 25b because if they did have proper training they wouldn't have already violated countless regulations. If they had proper resources they wouldn't be in so much debt When a company demonstrates the corrupt and disrespectful actions that Sable has, we must listen to them. Sable has proven time and time again that they are unafraid to explicitly violate basic laws and regulations that exist to preserve the health of our community.

No one is above the law, and with 21 criminal charges, Sable is one of those companies for which the approval of a permit is simply dangerous. I hope you use your vote today and consider this. Have a good one. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:01:23 · ≈ 12:01 PM

We will now go to Lila Whereland before by Olivia Johnson, Lila.

CommentLila WorlandProposedself-stated3:01:31 · ≈ 12:01 PM

Alrighty, hello. Dear supervisors thank you for representing the county today. My name is Lila Worland and I'm in complete opposition to the potential restart of the pipeline owned by Sable Offshore Corporation. They've had a consistent disregard for following due process in their attempts to restart the pipeline. As a community member I'm extremely worried about the environmental consequences of transferring the permit as a member of the Environmental Law Club I would like County to consider Sables lacking in financials operational capacity and non-compliance with existing permit conditions Seeing how terrible the 2015 oil spill was for the California coast is a main reason why community members here are so worried, as oil companies aren't held responsible to clean up properly.

And according to the admin draft EIR and EIS statement taken when Exxon wanted to fix and restart the pipeline it was predicted to result in a spill every year or rupture every four and would amount to an event twice the size of the 2015 refugio oil spill. Exxon eventually abandoned these plans and sold them disabled. In transferring these old Exxon permits, it will reward their nefarious improper and defiant behavior. Therefore it will be irresponsible for the county to approve these permit transfers. Thank you

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:02:40 · ≈ 12:02 PM

We will now go to Olivia Johnson to be followed by Mike Caldwell And if anyone's looking for spots there are still a few more seats up here in the front row

CommentOlivia JohnsonProposedself-stated3:02:49 · ≈ 12:02 PM

Hi, my name is Olivia Johnson and I'm an Education Chair on UCSB's Environmental Affairs Board. I am extremely concerned about the potential restart of the oil pipeline owned by Sable Offshore. It is imperative that I use my voice to advocate for the animals and ecosystems that will suffer profoundly from the recommissioning of this pipeline. The critical habitats that are in danger from this pipeline serve as homes to valuable species that have already suffered enough from oil spills in the past. It is immoral to make hundreds of species the innocent victims of capitalistic gluttony. Furthermore, Sable is a foreign, unestablished and financially unstable corporation. They've proven to be untrustworthy and unlawful continuing work on their facilities without a proper permit despite three state agencies serving them notices of violations and two cease-and-desist orders from the Coastal Commission.

It would be presumptuous to assume that Sable will follow the conditions of the permit, considering their previous offenses. We as members of the community should not be responsible for Sable's greed and lack of accountability when the pipeline inevitably corrodes and causes a devastating ecological and economic disaster. Preventing the transfer of leases to Sable is a deplorable human and animal rights issue.

Having access to the clean and thriving ocean and coastline that defines Santa Barbara, and has defined my experience as a UCSB student as well. The beaches of Ivey serve as a personal research laboratory and sanctuary for marine life. I am continuously grateful to have a healthy ocean on my doorstep to explore and learn from. Please do the right thing by stopping Sable offshore in granting the same privilege for generations of students like me to come. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:04:22 · ≈ 12:04 PM

We will now go to Mike Caldwell to be followed by Nikki Tlaiby.

3:04 – 3:108 turns

CommentMike CaldwellProposedself-stated3:04:32 · ≈ 12:04 PM

Good afternoon. My name is Mike Caldwell and I'm here to support Sable. We have, my company has worked for Sable for the last two years, two-and-a-half years working on this facility helping repairs and we've gotten to know them very well work with their management very well they're very involved in what goes on out in the field And we believe that there is no question whatsoever that they're able to operate this facility.

I've been in the business myself for 40 years now, worked with a lot of different companies but we strongly believe they are capable of running the facility without a doubt and every portion of it. We were in favor them doing the work and that's it. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:05:33 · ≈ 12:05 PM

We will now go to Nikki Talibi to be followed by Ted Morton. Nikki?

PresenterNikki TalibiUCSB's Environmental Affairs BoardProposedself-stated3:05:40 · ≈ 12:05 PM

Good morning Board and Chair Caps, thank you for hearing from us again. My name is Nikki Talibi and I'm here representing UCSB's Environmental Affairs Board. This pipeline is not just an arbitrary thing. This legislation that this decision is based on has a purpose. If this was just a simple transfer of a name, then none of us would be here today and a lot of us are here today. This company cannot be trusted with the ownership of the Santa Ynez unit In an industry where it is so critical to have a responsible operator given the technicality of operations, I'm asking the board to please take into consideration their inability to comply with authority up till now. The felony charges from both the district attorney and state attorney general may not yet be conclusive but these permits should not be transferred disabled until these charges are resolved and the damage is repaired.

It is required that a permit holder have a record of compliance and they cannot be deemed a responsible operator with multiple ongoing felony charges and unpaid fines. Please do not take this as a simple name transfer. There is a pipeline unit attached to this lease, and you have the decision of whether Sable Offshore is a responsible operator. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:07:02 · ≈ 12:07 PM

We will now go to Ted Morton to be followed by Maureen Ellenberger. Ted?

PresenterTed MortonSanta Barbara Channel KeeperProposedself-stated3:07:08 · ≈ 12:07 PM

Good afternoon, Chair Kaps and members of the board. My name is Ted Morton and I'm the Executive Director of Santa Barbara Channel Keeper. In February, I used my full time before you to list all of the cease-and-desist orders and notice of violations issued against Sable at that time. Since then several agencies and public officials have taken further action to enforce environmental laws against the company demonstrating Sable does not have the skills necessary to operate the facilities in compliance with the permits safely and responsibly.

Building on the Coastal Commission issuing Sable its largest fine ever, the California Attorney General filed a lawsuit against the company on behalf of the Regional Water Board. The AG's complaint asserts Sable's management was, quote, at best misinformed, incompetent and incorrect. At worst, Sable was simply bamboozling the regional board to meet the critical deadline. Either way substantial penalties are warranted for Sable egregious conduct, end quote. I would also like to raise a significant point that was surprisingly omitted from the staff report. In September, the Santa Barbara County District Attorney filed 21 criminal charges against Sable.

Including five felony counts for knowingly discharging a pollutant into a waterway while it was excavating and repairing the corroded pipeline. These legal actions reveal a disturbing pattern of violating laws that protect waterways, habitat, wildlife and our communities. Showing SABLE does not meet the operator capability requirements of 25B. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:08:38 · ≈ 12:08 PM

We will now go to Maureen Ellenberger to be followed by Ken Polley.

PresenterMaureen Ellenberger8000 membersProposedself-stated3:08:42 · ≈ 12:08 PM

Maureen? Good morning Chair Kaps and Supervisors, thank you so much for this opportunity. My name is Maureen Ellenberger I am the chair of the Sierra Club Santa Barbara Ventura Chapter representing 8000 members. Under Chapter 25, you must make all required findings to approve this transfer. I urge you to deny because you cannot make the finding that Sable has adequate financial resources and insurance to comply with permit requirements. While staff reports Sable has increased insurance to 700 million, Sable still hasn't provided the full policy. This matters because insurance doesn't always pay out as expected and 700 million may not be remotely adequate. It is easy to find an example where the stated value of an insurance policy did not mean that that was the number that was actually paid out.

Right here in our own backyard, look at Plains All-Americans Refugio Beach Spill. Ten years later, Plains still hasn't been fully reimbursed by their insurers. After settling a class action suit for $230 million, insurance carriers denied the coverage claiming damages were not covered by their policies. Here's the critical difference. Plain has multiple revenue streams. Sable's offshore facilities are their only asset. If there is a major spill and operations shut down, Sable could simply declare bankruptcy rather than spend years fighting insurers for reimbursements that may never come. You cannot make this required finding therefore you cannot approve this transfer. Thank you very much.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:10:19 · ≈ 12:10 PM

We will now go to Ken Polley to be followed by Molly Troop.

3:10 – 3:1713 turns

CommentKen Pally I'mProposedself-stated3:10:30 · ≈ 12:10 PM

Chairwoman Capps and Board of Supervisors, thank you for allowing this public testimony. My name is Ken Pally I'm a resident of Nolita. I am on the Executive Committee of Surfrider Foundation Santa Barbara Chapter. I respect the work that county staff do but in this case I believe they got it wrong in approving the transfer of ownership of the Gaviota pipeline from Exxon to Sable Innumerable violations of law and various COSA Act rules and regulations reveal Sable to be an irresponsible partner of questionable financial stability for such a dangerous project as the restart of this tired, old worn-out pipeline. If Exxon Oil A huge multi-billion dollar corporation with many decades of experience all over the world thought this pipeline made economic sense.

They would not have sold it to Zabel. I urge the Board of Supervisors to deny the transfer of ownership, thank you. Get some rest Bob!

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:11:36 · ≈ 12:11 PM

You will now go to Molly Troop to be followed by Jonathan Ullman. Molly?

CommentMolly TroopProposedself-stated3:11:42 · ≈ 12:11 PM

Good afternoon Chair Kaps and Board of Supervisors. My name is Molly Troop, and I'm a resident of Santa Barbara. I'm opposed to the transfer of these permits. Sable's track record as you've heard speaks for itself with regard to whether or not it will operate these important facilities in question responsibly. I echo all of the comments you've heard before me by those who have spoken before me and urge you to deny these permits. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:12:11 · ≈ 12:12 PM

We will now go to Jonathan Ullman to be followed by Aidan Mercedes. Jonathan?

PresenterJonathan UllmanSanta Barbara Ventura Chapter of the Sierra ClubProposedself-stated3:12:20 · ≈ 12:12 PM

Hi, my name is Jonathan Ullman and I'm the director of the Santa Barbara Ventura Chapter of the Sierra Club. Today I want to talk about gambling. Texas-based Sable has been gambling with our community's land and water since it formed. They do not have the critical corrosion technology required in the permits. According to the county, restarting the pipeline would likely lead to another spill every year and a major rupture every four years.

Sable bet on a corroded pipeline and kept doubling down. Sable was too small to cover the costs of another major spill. And it was so reckless, it racked up $18 million in fines and 21 criminal charges. Sable does not have the financial or operational capacity to safely reliably operate the facilities to protect the environment and public health. Don't gamble our jewels, the Santa Barbara County Coast on this company.

Please deny the transfer.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:13:33 · ≈ 12:13 PM

We will now go to Aiden Macedus to be followed by Elena Danielson. Aiden?

CommentAiden MaestasProposedself-stated3:13:42 · ≈ 12:13 PM

Hello, my name is Aiden Maestas. I'm a second year student at UCSB. I am here to urge you all to vote against the staff recommendations and I'm urging you not to transfer these permits to Sable Offshore. First off this company is a risky investment. Over the past three years they have had little to no revenue growth. The company is in substantial debt And they've made enemies of their own investors and their stock prices continue to violently swing. By voting for staff recommendations, you are investing in a company that cannot promise economic growth in this community and cannot promise to clean an oil spill when one happens.

Secondly, this company cannot be trusted. They've lied and misled to their own investors, and are facing a lawsuit. The Santa Barbara County District Attorney filed criminal charges against the company. They violated three cease-and-desist orders and refused to pay the $18 million fine for these violations. They've ignored warnings that they are in violation of California's water code. They've consistently undermined the authority of the government. If they are willing to lie and mislead their own investors, they're willing to do the same to you. It's clear they don't care about your authority, they don't care about the environment, and they certainly don't care about the Santa Barbara community. The Board of Supervisors voted to phase out oil.

By voting for staff recommendations, you are backing out of that promise. However, by voting against the permits not only will you be protecting the environment in the SB community, you are standing to uphold the authority of the government. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:15:13 · ≈ 12:15 PM

We will now go to Elena Danielson to be followed by Kylan Hobart. Elena?

CommentElena DanielsonProposedself-stated3:15:25 · ≈ 12:15 PM

Dear Supervisors and all, my name is Elena Danielson. All of you have been elected to protect the interest of Santa Barbara County and your mission includes protecting local economy jobs quality of life for everyone who calls this county home. Proving a stable offshore permit transfer is not about politics. It's about everyone's constitutional right to own and sell their business and transfer the title to new owner, period. It is about people and affordable housing for young kids. And then by the way, I'm a mother of two and a grandmother of three. And then these kids wouldn't be able to afford to live here in two or three years. Also Santa Barbara County just some facts uses roughly half a million gallons of gasoline and diesel every single day to power farm equipment school buses delivery trucks hospitals emergency vehicles There is no other available energy yet to power our airplanes Spacecrafts and military ships, wake up kids.

And you wouldn't be able to raise as much money as- Excuse

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.833:16:34 · ≈ 12:16 PM

me ma'am. Ma'am

CommentElena DanielsonProposedself-stated3:16:35 · ≈ 12:16 PM

you need to address

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.833:16:35 · ≈ 12:16 PM

the board

CommentElena DanielsonProposedself-stated3:16:36 · ≈ 12:16 PM

not the audience. Over $200,000 from the Environmental Defense Council. So today more than 200,000 people work in the county and over 20,000 have to commute in daily. They depend on fuel to get here. So I ask you today to stand for common sense and vote yes, and also stop demonizing Sable. These people- Thank you that is your time. They've been part of this community thank you. Thank you ma'am.

3:17 – 3:227 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:17:14 · ≈ 12:17 PM

We will now go to Kylan Hobart to be followed by Adam Mango. Kylan?

PresenterKylan Hobartdirector of the Isla Vista Community Services District where I represent the 15Proposedself-stated3:17:19 · ≈ 12:17 PM

Good afternoon, my name is Kylan Hobart and I serve as a director of the Isla Vista Community Services District where I represent the 15,000 students and long-term residents that call our Oceanside community home. In Isla Vista we represent the next generation. You can see the faces of many Ivey residents in the audience today. They are here because they recognize the long-term impacts of decisions like these. Our board voted unanimously to adopt a resolution that opposes the restart of the Sable Pipeline and urges the Board of Supervisors to use their permitting authority to deny these permits and ensure the health and safety of Santa Barbara residents. Sable Offshore has consistently demonstrated a lack of responsibility and caution in handling this project, With a record $18 million fine from the California Coastal Commission and 21 criminal charges, Sable cannot be trusted to operate on our coast.

In a community that's experienced a catastrophic oil spill just 10 years ago this kind of behavior is unacceptable. Under the county's ordinance transferring permits is prohibited when it could place the environment and public health at risk. The IVCSD asks the county to consider this and vote to protect our residents. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:18:34 · ≈ 12:18 PM

We will now go to Adam Mango to be followed by Jose Crespo. Adam?

CommentAdam MangoProposed3:18:43 · ≈ 12:18 PM

Thank you, thank you Supervisor Kaps. My name is Adam and I work for Sable. I also live right here on the Mesa. I was born and raised here and I'm sadly to admit one of those slow Prius drivers I drive to work, when I drive to work one of my Tesla driving coworkers sometimes gets stuck behind me and he's always complaining why are you going so slow in that Prius?

I say that because we live here. We're from here. It's been said several times. We've been here longer than some of the students that are here because we are members of this community and we as Sable employees can assure you that we do everything as safe as we can and I know That they, that Sable employees including myself care for the environment as much as everybody in this room. We want to do it right.

We are doing it right. We sincerely truly want the best for the environment because a vote for importing oil is a vote to deforest the rainforest and take oil made from the rainforest and bring it locally produced oil is far friendlier to the environment than importing it from Brazil and Guyana and Ecuador. The signs outside that say, that are against Sable should what they actually say is cut down the rainforest.

Locally produced oil is done right to the highest standards and I can attest we're doing it at the best in the world. Thank you guys.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:20:23 · ≈ 12:20 PM

We will now go to Jose Crespo to be followed by John Holk-Leitner. Jose?

CommentJose Crespo I'mProposedself-stated3:20:29 · ≈ 12:20 PM

Thank you for your time today, my name is Jose Crespo I'm here in support of SABLE we are here for one purpose to determine whether SABLE offshore has met the requirements for transferring the existing permits under Chapter 25b those requirements are objective and based on operational capability financial responsibility and compliance with regulatory obligations Sable has met those requirements. County staff confirmed it, the Planning Commission confirmed it, federal regulators overseeing the system under a consent degree have also confirmed compliance. By every legal and technical measure the criteria are satisfied. This board already deadlocked once not because the standards were unclear but because ideology got in the way The permitting process is not supposed to be a political stage or symbolic vote.

When the criteria are met and approval is still withheld, government agencies lose legitimacy. That is not regulation. That is government process being weaponized for ideological reasons. Utilizing government power to stop a simple name change on a set of permits in order to execute larger political goals is not only a politically capricious and egregious act, it's an unlawful power grab. I'd like to remind everyone that we live here too. We care about our coast, and we completed repairs and upgrades under strict oversight. We can protect the environment and support working families at the same time. Those goals are not mutually exclusive. Sable brings well-paying jobs and millions in tax revenue to real families in this county, mine included.

I respectfully ask you to follow the law, honor the standards, deny the appeal, and approve the permit transfers, not because it is convenient or popular but because it is a correct and lawful decision. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:22:04 · ≈ 12:22 PM

We will now go to John Hoke Leitner to be followed by Audrey McDonald.

3:22 – 3:305 turns

CommentJohn HoekleitnerProposedself-stated3:22:14 · ≈ 12:22 PM

Thank you board for hearing me today. My name is John Hoekleitner, a lifelong resident of Santa Maria Valley and Santa Barbara County Pacific Petroleum's my company and we have 242 hard-working taxpayers that are based out of our Santa Maria operations I'm in full support of you guys following the law and just putting Sable back in business and help support the economy in Santa Barbara County We're always in a tax deficit And we're always looking for money And this pipeline paid around the clock, 24 hours a day. And it's a good investment for the county and for all the employees and gives everybody good paying jobs. I have a lot of people working for me and they're all very happy to be here. Thank you very much.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:23:01 · ≈ 12:23 PM

And we will now go to Audrey McDonald who will be our final speaker before we break for lunch. Audrey? Is Audrey here? How about Jolice Alvarado? Jolice. All righty, how about Sophia Manzano or Erin Stockwell? Sasha Stevens. Michelle Pazzini. All righty, we will go to Michelle Pazzini and then we will break for lunch. Thank you.

CommentMichelle PaciniProposedself-stated3:23:55 · ≈ 12:23 PM

I don't know if this is lucky or unlucky being just before lunch. Anyway, well good afternoon Madam Chair and members of the board. My name's Michelle Pacini. I am a longtime resident of Santa Barbara and I've been an environmental and land use consultant in this county for 25 years. I spent the past two years working with Sable's dedicated very experienced staff on regulatory compliance matters I also spent seven years in my career as an energy specialist at the County Planning and Development Department.

And I spent that time during the time that Chapter 25B was amended to include the additional provisions which we're talking about today, which substantially raised the bar for new owners and operators to qualify. One thing I learned during my time at the county is that permits run with the land. Property transfers happen all over the county, the state, and the country.

New owners take on both the benefits and the burdens of those permits as part of that transfer. The discourse here is well beyond what the matter that's really before the board today. It isn't about whether oil is good or bad, it's not even about SYU restart. It's about property rights in compliance with nine findings. It' s about whether SABLE completed the checklist of obligations under Chapter 25B for the transfer of the permits As reviewed by the county staff on a number of occasions now, these criteria have been met. The Planning Commission agreed with these factual findings and I urge the board to find the same, approve the transfers and deny the appeals. Thank you.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.833:25:40 · ≈ 12:25 PM

Okay thanks to our speakers so far and we will come back a little after 1 30 Okay, we are back in the midst of public comment. I believe we're about halfway through with about 48 more if folks are still here so thanks thus far Madam Clerk please proceed

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:29:29 · ≈ 12:29 PM

Yes, thank you Chair Kaps and members of the board. And for any members of the public who are still in the Planning Commission hearing room or the overflow Board of Supervisors conference room I just wanted to let you know this room has cleared out quite a bit and there are a number of open seats so if you are in those other locations please feel free to make your way up to the hearing room on the fourth floor and find yourself a seat. And before we proceed I just wanted to double check that some of our members before break are still not in. Audrey McDonald?

Joe lease Alvarado and Sophia Manzano. Alrighty, we will now go to Sasha Stevens to be followed by Aaron Stockwell. Sasha?

3:30 – 3:3610 turns

PresenterSasha Stevensing Santa Barbara CountyProposedself-stated3:30:16 · ≈ 12:30 PM

Good afternoon Madam Chair, members of the board. My name is Sasha Stevens. I'm the business manager for plumbers and pipefitters local union 114, and I representing Santa Barbara County. I am here on behalf of my members to express our strong support for the approval of the permit transfer of the San Ynez unit assets. Lost Forest Pipeline System and Pacific Offshore Pipeline Company facilities to stable energy. Reopening Lost Forest Canyon Under responsible modern management would mean good paying local jobs, a revenue source for our communities and a safer more sustainable energy future. California has some of the strictest and most advanced environmental safety regulations in the world and our members are trained and certified to meet and exceed these standards.

When we produce energy locally under California oversight, we do it cleaner, safer and with accountability. When we block local production, we don't reduce demand We just import more oil from foreign countries with far fewer protections for workers, our communities and our planet. As skilled and trained plumbers and pipefitters we are the forefront of clean and sustainable energy infrastructure from carbon capture systems to hydrogen geothermal technologies.

We want to be part of building the bridge between today's energy needs and tomorrow's renewable solutions. Our members have proudly built and maintained California's energy and utility infrastructure for generations. Keeping this work local through project labor agreements ensures the community benefits stay here, brings broader community benefits by supporting local businesses, generating tax revenue, and strengthening the regional workforce pipeline through apprenticeship and training opportunities. In a time when Santa Barbara County- Thank you that is your time. Was I?

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:31:56 · ≈ 12:31 PM

Thank you that is your time. All right thank you

PresenterSasha Stevensing Santa Barbara CountyProposedself-stated3:31:58 · ≈ 12:31 PM

appreciate your time.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:31:59 · ≈ 12:31 PM

We will now go to Aaron Stockwell to be followed by Jenna McGovern. Aaron?

PresenterAaron Stockwell I'm35Proposedself-stated3:32:13 · ≈ 12:32 PM

Sorry about that. Okay, good afternoon Chair Caps and Supervisors. My name is Aaron Stockwell I'm an international representative for the United Association. I represent 35,000 UA members here in the state of California we do plumbing pipe fitting refrigeration sprinkler fitting and pipeliner work all across the state of California. Sable has invested tens of millions of dollars in thousands of labor hours to make the pipeline system as safe and modern as any country utilizing our highly skilled and trained members. Cable understands that these needs are both care for the environment and meet the state's needs where oil and gas are not mutually exclusive, but can be simultaneously done without sacrificing one for the other.

The project will strengthen the local economy while ensuring safe environmentally responsible operations Sable continues to work diligently and safely, responsibly to resume petroleum transport through the Los Flores pipeline system in accordance with the federal consent decree. We're proud of the work we do at Sable Offshore and we know that the company has satisfied the requirements of the permit transfer.

I believe the projects would operate in a much cleaner and safer for the environment if they were under the regulation of the state of California government rather than the federal government, if the pipeline is not allowed to go into operation. Thank you for your time. We urge a yes vote for the transfer.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:33:48 · ≈ 12:33 PM

We will now go to Jenna McGovern to be followed by Izzy Szyszek. Jenna?

CommentJenna McGovernProposedself-stated3:33:55 · ≈ 12:33 PM

Good afternoon, supervisors. My name is Jenna McGovern. Thank you for your time today. I'm urging you to approve the appeal and halt the transfer of permits to Sable. During the meeting in February we talked extensively about Sable's noncompliance. I would think that with this meeting inevitably looming, Sable would attempt to prove that they could keep a clean record but from what we've seen today this is entirely not the case. In less than one year, they've racked up more cease and desist criminal charges from the DA and a massive fine from the state. This utter disregard and disrespect is just a glimpse into what our future would look like if Sable takes over.

Chapter 25B grants you the power to enforce extra screening on lease transfers to new owners and was intended to cover this exact situation. I urge you to use it and see this project for what it is, a destructive money grab. The county's decision today will mark whether we're going to progress as a community or destroy our only home. I hope you make the right decision today. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:34:55 · ≈ 12:34 PM

We will now go to Izzy Sistak to be followed by Pascual Morales. Izzy?

PresenterIzzy Sistakstudent environmental organizationProposedself-stated3:35:04 · ≈ 12:35 PM

Hi supervisors, thank you for your time. My name is Izzy Sistak and I'm a representative from the Environmental Affairs Board at UCSB Obviously I'm representing a student environmental organization, so we care a lot about climate change and having a livable future. And you've also heard a lot of public comments today on the other side about the economy jobs and profits. I personally care about all of these things but that's obviously not what we're talking about here today. What is on the table today is is Sable Offshore a safe and reliable operator for the Santa Ynez unit and its pipeline? That's the purpose of Section 25B.

And the answer could not be more obvious that it's absolutely not. It's based on, that conclusion is based on their failure to demonstrate technical capability and experience required by demonstrated capability threshold of 25B section 3A. Sable's inadequate financial responsibility and mostly they're astounding history of non-compliance and ongoing violations.

Since the last time this item was heard, there's just been a mounting pile of violations and lawsuits. And it's like every week something else happens and it's like how are we even still considering this? I don't see how a sane unbiased legislator could look at this record and call Sable a reliable operator. So please keep this community safe from another inevitable oil spill at the hands of this reckless operator. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:36:29 · ≈ 12:36 PM

We will now go to Pascual Morales to be followed by Chris Genkis.

3:36 – 3:428 turns

CommentPascual MoralesProposedself-stated3:36:36 · ≈ 12:36 PM

Good afternoon. My name is Pascual Morales, and I live here in Santa Barbara. I am proud to work with Sable Offshore Corporation. For me this isn't just a job. This is part of my life. I've worked at the San Yanez unit and I want to say please don't separate us from the community. We live here too. We're your neighbors. We're your family. We want this to be as safe as possible like I said because we live here too.

We are proud that Sable has invested millions and labor, and money to build arguably the safest pipeline to operate. We don't wanna just meet standards, we wanna be the gold standard, okay? If we won't do it somebody else will with less care and integrity. Let Santa Barbara be known as a place where we've learned from the past where we've taken every precaution since 2015 and we've shown that our mistakes don't define us how we grow from them does.

This isn't abstract to me, it's fulfilling to know that I can provide energy to my neighbors. We want this operation to be together with the community and with Sable to be as safe as possible so for our families and for our future let us be the gold standard please approve the permit thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:37:50 · ≈ 12:37 PM

We will now go to Chris Gankas to be followed by Evan Brown. Chris

CommentChristopher GenkisProposedself-stated3:38:01 · ≈ 12:38 PM

Good afternoon Chair Kaps and members of the board. My name is Christopher Genkis I live local, grew up local went to high school here elementary school junior high. I've been in this industry now for 33 years. I worked overseas for several of those years I've been back here after being overseas, and our facility works under some of the most stringent regulations on the planet. That makes me proud to say that I work for a facility that makes the cleanest oil in the world. Our facility is under some of the tightest regulations out of anything that I've ever seen working overseas.

We're regulated by the APCD. Every other country I've been to did not have anything similar to the APCD. So, I can tell you Sable's more than qualified to run this asset. We have real jobs, real families and we all depend on these jobs. If you care about... if you truly care about this please place your politics aside and do the right thing. I strongly support Sable and respectfully ask that you approve this permit transfer.

Thank you for your time.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:39:19 · ≈ 12:39 PM

We will now go to Evan Braun, to be followed by Charlotte Pinnegar. Evan?

CommentEvan BraunProposedself-stated3:39:27 · ≈ 12:39 PM

Good afternoon Supervisors and I appreciate you for taking my comment. My name is Evan Braun and I'm a current freshman at UCSB in the Surfrider organization and I am deeply distraught about the potential transferring of Permits Disabled offshore so I wanted to tell you a little story. And at that very moment we heard a loud whack from outside in the fields came a sickening smack of an axe on a tree then we heard the tree fall, the very last strephala tree of them all No more trees, no more needs, no more work to be done. So in no time my uncles and aunts everyone all waved me goodbye they jumped into my cars and drove away under the smoke smuggled stars now all that was left me the bats the bad smelling sky was my big empty factory the Lorax and I if you couldn't tell this story is from the Lorax the same story my environmental science teacher used to protest Potential Quarry being built in my hometown back in 2011.

It's honestly quite frustrating and sad that it's years later, and we are still having to use children's books to teach adults basic responsibility. To remind you why you shouldn't make choices that could irreversibly harm our planet and our community, and to teach you that profit means nothing if there is no planet left to profit from. To teach you that compassion means caring for future generations that will have to inherit the consequences of your reckless decisions, not just caring for yourselves.

Now left here in this mess was a small pile of rocks with the word unless. Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better it's not. We care and now it's your turn to prove that you do too. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:40:49 · ≈ 12:40 PM

We will now go to Charlotte Pinnaker to be followed by John H Steed. Charlotte?

CommentCharlotte PenningerProposedself-stated3:41:00 · ≈ 12:41 PM

Good afternoon. My name is Charlotte Penninger and I'm also one of the many students here from UCSB. We all are aware of the spill that happened 10 years ago on the refugio pipeline under the previous ownership, which blackened our coastline. Now I would like to cover some of those losses we saw then so we can project what could happen in the future. Over 200 dead birds were documented and many more uncounted.

Sea lions washed up lifeless on the sand over 100 carcasses were recorded It seeped into kelp forests where otters once thrived, leaving several deceased. Over a thousand of our animals died within days and many more disappeared silently beneath the waves. Those images will never leave this community's memory. The spill aided the degradation of kelp forests, crippled sensitive ecosystems and left a near $96 million dollar scar on Central Coast economy.

Stable Offshore wants to restart the same pipelines under the claim that will help the economy, but you can't balance economy on a dead ocean. There should be an understanding that short-term profits and energy amount arguments cannot outweigh the long term environmental and community risk. Offshore drilling does not advance energy security. It only locks us into an outdated infrastructure.

I am particularly worried about the lack of disaster planning, as we reiterated earlier within 25B. Sable has already been fined $18 million by the CCC for unauthorized work while simultaneously being over a billion dollars in debt. That's not the track record of a company prepared to operate safely on our waters. I'm asking you please don't let this happen again because I know we can all comprehend that seven wrongs don't make a right. Protect our coast, the wildlife and the generations who will inherit what we decide. Thank

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:42:47 · ≈ 12:42 PM

you. We will now go to John H. Steed, to be followed by Adriana Russo. John?

3:42 – 3:486 turns

CommentJohn SteedProposedself-stated3:42:56 · ≈ 12:42 PM

Good afternoon Board Chairman Kaps. My name is John Steed I live in Supervisor Lee's district on Toro Canyon Road and I am a recovering lawyer. I practiced international business and transactional law for 40 years And I attended the hearing in February before this board where I learned that staff had not reviewed the insurance policies themselves, that Sable is relying on to demonstrate in part their financial capability.

It is inconceivable to me as a practicing business lawyer that anyone would rely simply on the existence of certificates of insurance to take comfort in the existence of insurance because the insurance will depend on several factors. One is what did the applicant for insurance represent to the insurance company at the time it applied for the insurance? Lots of very, very important information went into that application I'm sure and the insurance company relied on that to issue its policies.

The policies will also contain conditions and exclusions. Those conditions and exclusions while they were of interest to me in February became drastically more Interesting because of the subsequent developments in the Sables criminal prosecutions and violations of law. So I just say don't take the insurance unless you see the policies. Thank you

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:44:42 · ≈ 12:44 PM

We will now go to Adriana Russo to be followed by Camden Conrad, Adriana Is there an Adriana? All righty, we will now go to Camden Conrad to be followed by Jason Wall. Camden? Is that Camden coming down? No. We will now go to Jason Wall to be followed by Sophia Kofed. Jason?

PresenterJason WallDoty Brothers on behalf of Sable and I just want to say that I am strongly in suProposedself-stated3:45:17 · ≈ 12:45 PM

Good afternoon Chair and the Board. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Jason Wall, I'm here with Doty Brothers on behalf of Sable and I just want to say that I am strongly in support of Sable as a change of owner and operator. We've had the privilege to partner with Sable for the past couple years. The men and women who have been working who have and who are working for this, are the same workforce who has been maintaining the oil and gas pipelines throughout Southern California for the past I want to say 30-40 years even before that. So they acknowledge an experience in the safety records of these individuals far meet and exceed what's being done here with Sable.

From the start, SABLE has been continued or has committed to supporting the people of Santa Barbara County and ensuring that all preparation and repairs met or exceeded the requirements. Doty and our other union allies have similar values which we uphold which are quality, integrity and safety. And by the way, safety is non-negotiable. It's not something we take very lightly and SABLE is in the same aspect as that.

Reopening the line will strengthen California's energy independence, protecting jobs along the Central Coast and keep production under our own environmental laws which is where it belongs. We are proud of the work we do with Sable Offshore and we know the company has satisfied the requirements for this permit transfer. As one who has seen their works firsthand I can tell you Sable is more than qualified to operate these assets.

I strongly support Sable and respectfully ask that you approve this permit transfer. Santa Barbara's future depends on it, thank you again for your time.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:46:54 · ≈ 12:46 PM

We will now go to Sophia Kofet to be followed by Kristen Miller. Sophia?

CommentSophia KofetProposed3:47:00 · ≈ 12:47 PM

Thank you. The Exxon and Sable lawyers have argued that the board must advise by Chapter 25B, and I agree. The 25B3C and 25B4 emphasize compliance with all applicable laws, permits, and regulations. But since February, Sable Offshore has faced a growing list of violations including unpermitted work. In fact, the Office of the State Fire Marshal explicitly told Sable to complete all required repairs before restart, and those orders are still unresolved. This is a company that has received an $18 million fine. It has violated three cease and desist orders, as Santa Barbara judge ruled their work is in violation of the California Coastal Act. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife issued notices for damaging sensitive habitat and Sable itself issued false information to affect stock prices.

25B is clear if a company cannot demonstrate compliance the county cannot approve a transfer. This is not a political question it's a legal one You must uphold 25b and deny this transfer until compliance is fully proven. Thank you

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:48:08 · ≈ 12:48 PM

We will now go to Kristen Miller to be followed by Johnny Metconville Kristen

3:48 – 3:548 turns

PresenterKristen MillerSanta Barbara South Coast Chamber of Commerce representing 850 business membersProposedself-stated3:48:15 · ≈ 12:48 PM

Hello Chair Kaps and Supervisors. I'm Kristen Miller, President and CEO of the Santa Barbara South Coast Chamber of Commerce representing 850 business members in 75,000 jobs in the region. We're here to support the Sable owner-operator change transition An equitable and fair process should mean that our government does not favor or disfavor specific industries based upon political preferences. Businesses are already struggling with meeting the conflicting federal, state and local regulations. Denying this operator-owner change based on a desire to prevent operation of the facility sets a dangerous precedent of continued uncertainty.

It sends a message to our business community that projects and applications can be denied even if they meet all the appropriate legal requirements. This business in question will generate five million dollars in annual tax revenue for Santa Barbara County, and create new living wage jobs. Given the county's recent budget challenges and tax increases, this additional revenue should not be taken lightly. And the exposure to costly litigation that could cost county taxpayers millions more.

Please support an equitable process in an economically sustainable county by approving Sable's application for an owner-operator change. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:49:37 · ≈ 12:49 PM

We will now go to Johnny McConville to be followed by Jake Twamey.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed3:49:49 · ≈ 12:49 PM

Hi, yeah I'm just a concerned UCSB student. Yeah so it seems like Sable Offshore tries and likes to portray itself as a simple good faith business in Santa Barbara on par with our local restaurants shops and fisheries simply seeking this minuscule permit transfer But the last time I checked, Uncle Chen's isn't operating a facility with a history of spilling hundreds of thousands of gallons of crude oil onto our coastline and beaches. Let's also remember that your local Santa Barbara mom-and-pop shop isn't being litigated by the District Attorney and State Attorney General on behalf of multiple state agencies. Sable claims that denying their permit transfer would somehow damage the legitimacy of the county in the face of local businesses, but I can say with absolute confidence that many of the business owners here in Santa Barbara are wholly and unequivocally opposed to this pipeline.

The same one that once put many of them out of work for weeks. Not to mention that Sabley is financially Unstable and not ready to bear the cost of a spill. This company does not represent Santa Barbara values, our local economy and community thrive on clean coasts, not an oil spill. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:51:07 · ≈ 12:51 PM

We will now go to Jake Twomey to be followed by Kara Kaltenbach. Jake?

CommentJake TwomeyProposed3:51:14 · ≈ 12:51 PM

Supervisors, my name is Jake. I'm the chair of a group called CalPERS students which represents over 30,000 dues paying members across the state of California and I want to talk about stable as an operator do we need to even say again how many infractions that they've had time and time again? The pattern that they have exhibited is going up to state agencies denying that they have the authority to do anything and then repeatedly violating the law They're also very unreliable. If you need any evidence of their financial precarious situation, look at their plummeting stock price. Look at the fact that if their shareholders are not selling they're suing Sable for misleading them.

Sable is shameless. They don't respect Santa Barbarans, and I don't think that we have any place in giving them the ability to restart this pipeline or giving them the leases to be able to do so. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:52:16 · ≈ 12:52 PM

We will now go to Kara Kaltenbach to be followed by Ava Lawson. Kara? Is there a Kara here? Ready we will go to Ava Lawson to be followed by Steve Balcom. Ava?

CommentAva Lawson I'mProposedself-stated3:52:37 · ≈ 12:52 PM

Good afternoon members of the board my name is Ava Lawson I'm a UCSB student And in this very room today we heard Sable describe small oil spills as having no impact on the environment, which is not possible. There is always an impact on the environment of such events and it shows a callous disregard for the environment and makes them untrustworthy as an operator of an oil pipeline. I also question the notion that's oil operations under Sable will be cleaner as they are bound by strict California regulations when they have continued to show their unwillingness to comply with these regulations I simply just don't trust that they will follow the regulations until it's too late, at which point them having a $700 million insurance plan won't matter because the damage will have been done.

I was in third grade when the 2015 oil spill occurred, and I seem to remember better the devastation than many in this room. I remember images and videos of birds struggling to breathe and struggling to move. We still have ducks on bottles of Dawn dish soap to represent that Dawn is strong enough to get oil off of ducks. We shouldn't need dish soap to get oil off of ducks.

I remind you that the 2015 spill was not a freak accident. The pipeline corroded and it will corrode again. We have to start valuing animals and ecosystems as much as ourselves so we can continue to coexist in the future. Sable threatens this vision, and I urge you to deny their request. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:54:09 · ≈ 12:54 PM

We will now go to Steve Balcombe to be followed by Mar Lopez. Steve?

3:54 – 4:0210 turns

PresenterSteve BalcomSableProposedself-stated3:54:19 · ≈ 12:54 PM

Good afternoon, my name is Steve Balcom on behalf of Sable. I've had over 200 employees been working for Sable until Santa Barbara shut them down. I know some of my employees asked to get this going so they could feed their families but I noticed there's an agenda on both sides don't don't get me wrong and I've been hearing about you know mammals that got killed with the oil leak I don't know if you look at how many mammals are killed a year just with the transportation of these ships coming to the United States.

Look into that, don't take my word for it, right? Santa Barbara right now leaking 20-25 ton of oil a day out of your ocean here. Look and see how we can mitigate that because there is a way to mitigate that but don't take my word for it. You guys need to look at it yourself. I look at California, we are transporting 60% of our oil from other countries. I don't get it.

Sable is a safe operating company. I've worked for every oil company here in California. It's not true that they don't know what they're doing believe me. Again, I'm just looking after California why are we transporting this? When Sable can give us 20% of that oil. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:55:50 · ≈ 12:55 PM

We will now go to Mar Lopez to be followed by Maria Edmonds-Smith.

CommentMar LopezProposedself-stated3:56:04 · ≈ 12:56 PM

Hello, good evening to you all. I am Mar Lopez, a first year at UC Santa Barbara. I come here as a concerned member of this community for the future of our coast and the livelihood of everyone. Sable may say that they will follow every regulation, every law, every rule everything but think about it have they in the past? No, Sable has been charged with five felony counts that include knowingly discharging material into nearby creeks and waterways and violating the California Fish and Game Code and the Water Code.

Who's to say Sable's attitude and actions towards our environment will change and improve? Who's to say another oil spill won't happen again? You can't argue with the fact that oil kills because it has. The 2015 refugio oil spill murdered hundreds of innocent animals, including birds, sea lions and dolphins. If that death toll were humans there would be an even bigger outrage to stop Sable from obtaining this transfer of a permit.

Sable will ruin our beautiful and sensitive coast. This will not only affect the animals of our coast but every living breathing being in this county. Stop Sable Pipeline because if not now when? Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:57:24 · ≈ 12:57 PM

We will now go to Mariah Edmond-Smith to be followed by Stephanie Caters. Mariah?

CommentMariah Edmond-SmithProposedself-stated3:57:36 · ≈ 12:57 PM

My name is Mariah Edmond-Smith and I am a full time resident on the rural Gaviota Coast. My children are fourth generation residents in Gaviota and they attend our rural public school. The 2015 Refugio oil spill happened four miles from our home. Crude oil directly contaminated our property. I volunteered to help clean up the 2015 oil spill. It was one of the worst experiences of my life. If you don't know how expensive it is to temporarily relocate your family from a disaster, please consider yourself blessed.

But this wasn't the first oil spill that I've experienced because I was born in Valdez, Alaska in 1989 during one of the biggest oil spills in U.S. history. Here's my proof. My family worked for Alyeska Oil Pipeline. More than 10 million gallons of crude oil spilled into Prince William Sound, the second largest U. S. spill in U .S. waters and the cost of the cleanup effort was astronomical.

Also, I'd like to voice that it's very offensive to many rural Santa Barbara residents to attempt to recuse Santa Barbara board representatives that live near the pipeline. If you attempt to remove representatives that live near the pipeline, you are attempting to sway the vote to only representatives that do not live near the pipeline and this takes away representation of rural Santa Barbara residents regardless of political affiliation.

Please say no to the sable transfer. I am from a family who worked for an oil pipeline. I have personally experienced two oil spills, my children have experienced an oil spill and I'm here today in hopes that my grandchildren will never be forced to experience an oil spill. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.863:59:15 · ≈ 12:59 PM

We will now go to Stephanie Caters to be followed by Bill Woodbridge. Good

CommentStephanie CatersProposedself-stated3:59:21 · ≈ 12:59 PM

afternoon, my name is Stephanie Caters. I urge you to approve the permit transfer. The Planning Commission voted yes approving the permit transfer a year ago. You should honor that. I'm an environmentalist. I've lived in Santa Barbara for decades and I work for Sable. I can assure you firsthand that we at Sable care about the environment as much as everybody in this room.

Sable's repairs exceed the mandated requirements. Sable has invested tens of millions of dollars to make the pipeline system safe and state-of-the-art. Sable's management team has operated in Santa Barbara County for 20 years, receiving numerous safety and environmental awards. Last year over 60% of California's oil was imported. That's not stockpiled, it's used, it's needed. It's used in concrete and steel bridges and batteries even for EVs and solar and wind farms can't be made without petroleum products.

Let's reduce our reliance on foreign oil imports California leads the world in environmental regulation. We have the cleanest extraction standards once operational, Sable will generate five million dollars a year in tax revenue for Santa Barbara County. A common-sense vote is yes to approve the permit.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:00:56 · ≈ 1:00 PM

We will now go to Bill Woodbridge be followed by Drew Hart.

CommentBill Woodbridge I'mProposedself-stated4:01:01 · ≈ 1:01 PM

Chair Caps and Supervisors, thank you very much. My name is Bill Woodbridge I'm from Goleta. You've heard that Sable's stock price has crashed yes from $32 two months ago to $7.52 yesterday it dropped 30% yesterday alone what does that tell you about the lost confidence that Sables own shareholders have in this company? The investor rats are abandoning the ship which they know may soon sink Sable lied to its own shareholders, and they have no problem misinterpreting intentionally the code so they can feed you disinformation and misinformation that fits their profits.

Chapter 25 prohibits the transfer of permits to any entity if doing so would place the environment and public health at risk. EDC has shown that Sable has not provided evidence to demonstrate that the company possesses the skills, training and especially the resources necessary to operate the facilities in compliance with the permits and all applicable county codes. Chapter 25 was intended to protect the public from this exact scenario. This corrupt and lawful firm has been fined 18 million dollars, which it has not paid and had 21 criminal charges filed against it. Is that who you would trust to be an ethical operator of this disaster waiting to happen?

It's not a problem with the employees. It's a problem with management. We urge the board to deny the applications for transfer of permits and direct staff to cease allowing Sable to operate the facilities in question. Thank you very much.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:02:40 · ≈ 1:02 PM

We will now go to Drew Hart to be followed by Juan Cardenas. Drew?

4:02 – 4:089 turns

CommentDrew HartProposed4:02:50 · ≈ 1:02 PM

Greetings, I'm retired and don't have I don't have a big stake in anything, but I moved here. I'd lived in Los Angeles years ago and then I lived in Virginia for 20 and I moved back because I missed California and one place I kept dreaming about while I was away from California was the very same place that's being threatened today It's a pure expression of the greatness of the state and it's one of the most beautiful places I've seen, not just in California but on the North American continent. Now I'm going to tell you a little story. I went to New York for the film festival last month and I got to my hotel and went out to dinner in Greenwich Village and I sat down at a bar with two nice looking well-dressed executive types sitting next to me and I said well what's going on?

We're childhood friends from Houston and one of them said, well I'm still in Houston. I said that's interesting. I've always wanted to go there. Said what do you do? He said oh I'm the CFO of Sable Offshore and I looked at him and I said really? Well I'm from Santa Barbara and we're going to stop you. So anyway and I also said Why do you want to extract oil from such an incredibly beautiful place? Can't you get it from a more ordinary place?" He said, the oil isn't there. It's here. I said well that's redacted. That's your

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.834:04:29 · ≈ 1:04 PM

time sir. All

CommentDrew HartProposed4:04:30 · ≈ 1:04 PM

right. You have the idea.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:04:34 · ≈ 1:04 PM

We will now go to Juan Cardenas to be followed by Evie Lynn.

PresenterJuan Cardenasour 2Proposedself-stated4:04:42 · ≈ 1:04 PM

Good afternoon, my name is Juan Cardenas and I am a business representative for Labor International Union of North America Local 220. On behalf of our 2,500 hardworking men and women many who live and work in Santa Barbara County, I am here to express our support for the approval of the permit transfers to Sable. As leaders in our industry we at La Una Local 220 have confidence in Sable's ability to safely manage these assets Today, many have expressed concerns about what might happen if the permit transfers are approved. However, I want to take a moment to consider what will happen if these permits are approved. First, these assets through the employment of our highly skilled and trained workforce will provide some of the cleanest oil in the world under the strictest regulations.

Second, these assets will provide much needed revenue for the county And third, these assets will provide hundreds of good-paying jobs. Therefore I respectfully ask that you approve the permit transfers to SABLE. Thank you for your time and consideration.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:05:43 · ≈ 1:05 PM

We will now go to Evie Lynn to be followed by Eric Rochelle. Evie?

CommentEvie LynnProposed4:05:50 · ≈ 1:05 PM

Good afternoon, my name is Evie and I'm the Vice President and Helicopter Pilot at Aspen Helicopters in Oxnard. Previous to Aspen Helicopters, I was a helicopter pilot for the U.S. Coast Guard. Throughout my 26-year aviation career, I have experienced hundreds of offshore oil facilities and completed flight operations with those same facilities. Myself and the entire Aspen team have been conducting multiple flight operations with Sable each week, and with that prior to Exxon. Prior to them, Exxon. The Sable team has always acted with the utmost professionalism, respect of the flight crews instructions, and weather decisions.

Furthermore, Sable has sought input from Aspen to ensure Sable's aviation facilities are safe, taking this feedback, and making the proper adjustments to their equipment when needed. Sable has proven to be good stewards of this aviation equipment, their business relationship with us and dedicated to safety improvements. Please finalize the transfer of the Santa Ynez unit assets to Sable so clear responsibility for the assets exist and Sable can fully apply their stewardship actions to those assets.

This will also allow Sable the property that is afforded to them by law and full rights. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:07:10 · ≈ 1:07 PM

We will now go to Eric Rochelle, to be followed by Robert Bueno. Eric?

CommentEric RochelleProposedself-stated4:07:17 · ≈ 1:07 PM

Good afternoon Chair Kaps, members of the board. My name is Eric Rochelle. I work for Sable Offshore. In my role, I support the environmental and regulatory compliance of the Lost Forest Canyon facility and the three offshore platforms. I'm a registered professional geologist in the state of California, and I've been working in the environmental consulting field for the past 13 years.

I started with Sable in February of this year and a majority of my time has been spent engaging with the various oversight agencies and regulators that oversee both onshore and offshore operations. I report our daily activities to them, and I meet with them onsite to confirm our operations are in compliance with the numerous permit conditions that we operate under.

I'm a current county resident. I started my education at Santa Barbara City College My daughter currently attends high school here in Santa Barbara and I'm just one of many Santa Barbara County professionals that Sable employs, not to mention the hundreds of local contractors, union workers and consultants that we work with and their families as well. The bottom line, we're proud of the work we do here at Sable. The company has satisfied the requirements for this permit transfer and I urge you all to follow county staff recommendations and approve the permit transfer. Thank you for your time.

4:08 – 4:158 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:08:32 · ≈ 1:08 PM

We will now go to Robert Bueno to be followed by Mati Weah. Robert?

CommentRobert BuenoProposedself-stated4:08:41 · ≈ 1:08 PM

Good afternoon, Supervisors. My name is Robert Bueno. I was born and raised in the Lompoc area and I've worked at Las Flores Canyon since 2008 first with Exxon and now with Sable offshore. I have three daughters that were raised here and it's disappointing to see our own state and county choose to import oil from countries where women don't even have basic rights instead of supporting safe local energy right here at home. Sorry, I'm a little nervous As Supervisor Laura Capps mentioned earlier, the county itself is facing potential layoffs as we speak.

At a time when Santa Barbara's financial future is at risk, Sable Offshore offers a real solution. Once operational, Sable will generate over $5 million in annual tax revenue for the county and create more than 300 new family-sustained jobs. Supervisor Joan Hartman, like you mentioned earlier, you care deeply about protecting workers and families. That's exactly what we're asking for today.

For you to help protect these local jobs and the people who make this county run. Sable Offshore isn't just a company it's hundreds of local people in the last 45 days more than 250 workers and contractors have been laid off because of these delays I personally know 80 of them by name. These are our fathers, mothers, coaches, neighbors who keep this community alive.

At the end of the day we are just asking for the fairness for our leaders to follow the law and set political aside and do what's right for Santa Barbara working families. Also I know a lot have mentioned that our management- That is your time.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:10:30 · ≈ 1:10 PM

We will now go to Mati Weah to be followed by Melody Peterson. Mati?

CommentRobert BuenoProposed4:10:45 · ≈ 1:10 PM

Hakuj, Board of Supervisors, Honorable Chair. Thank you for this opportunity to speak on behalf of our ancestors I'm the Tribal Chairman of Coastal Band of Chumash Nation, and I represent tribal members from Ventura County, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo. Very impressive to hear the concerns of all those that are wanting to have a transfer and denying a transfer.

My elders said the English language is like sorcery. You can manipulate it. You can make a lie sound like a truth. When I think of our ancestors, I think of this country that was born of violence. How 90% of our people were killed to make America great. I think of these impressive young people that came up here today with courage to speak on behalf of their future because they are the mothers and fathers and leaders of tomorrow.

And the citizens of this county that appointed all of you to make decisions for the well-being and the health not just of the people but but of the coastlines and lands and our planet. We've always led the way as California people, we're indigenous people of this land 13,000 years of history and now you bury your dead on our land make the right decision decide with your conscience not with the influence of those that bring that power To this kind of political arena and creating political genocides to our people.

I appreciate this moment to be here and to listen to the system that creates regulatory process to be followed, not to be broken.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:12:41 · ≈ 1:12 PM

Thank you

CommentRobert BuenoProposed4:12:42 · ≈ 1:12 PM

very much.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:12:44 · ≈ 1:12 PM

We will now go to Melody Peterson to be followed by Tavin Schmidt. Is Melody not here? We will now go to Tevin Schmidt, to be followed by Steve Higgins. Tevin? Tevin. All righty. Steve Higgins. Matthew Kamoa. Josie McDonald. Perhaps they're making our way up from the Planning Commission Room. Mary Holtum? Is there a Mary? Martin Rodriguez? And after Martin, we will have Spencer Hymas.

Martin?

CommentMartin RodriguezProposed4:13:48 · ≈ 1:13 PM

Good afternoon Chair Kaps, Board of Supervisors. Martin Rodriguez, I'm President of the Building Trades Tri-Counties as well as Business Agent for the Ironworkers Local 433. And the E-Board of State Building Trades representing 750,000 construction people. You know I'm going to cut it short let's approve this and permit transfer the applicant has made their case.

The motions you know are out there. I mean the applicants made a case in the appellant has their opinions and I get it but this has already been approved by the Planning Commission 25B to the letter of the law that we interpret here at the county in our jurisdiction, it's been followed. You know fact is in the County of Santa Barbara 16.9% unemployment. That's wrong here in this county at this moment.

It's not just building trades people, it''s not just oil field people, Constant and it's going to get worse. I look at the individuals behind me, and there's no just transition for them It's just unemployed if we don't move forward this that's what it means just unemployed We have an industry that is still viable here We're trying to struggle to keep it alive because it does generate tax Income it does pay for our law enforcement. It does pay for our fire and We don't have any viable plan to replace these jobs right now. Offshore wind industry is dead, we're not going to build nothing there for 20 years. We might do some infrastructure up north.

4:15 – 4:2719 turns

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:15:35 · ≈ 1:15 PM

Thank you that is your time. We will now go to Spencer Jimenez to be followed by David Cardona. Spencer?

CommentSpencer JaimezProposedself-stated4:15:54 · ≈ 1:15 PM

Hello, my name is Spencer Jaimez. I work for Sacred Places Institute for Indigenous People. My family is Samoan Shemash and we're from the island of Limu, Santa Cruz Island and here in Santa Barbara, Sioux County as we know it. I was raised in our canoe family. My father, David Jaimez is a Tomo captain and my sister Eva Pagolin is also a Tomo captain and takes care of the Mooptami, San Ynez's canoe built by Reggie Pagolin.

And my entire life along with like my brothers and sisters and the rest of our family, our canoe family depends on the health of our oceans and our beaches to properly take care of everything we need to do, to be able to practice our religion freely. And Sable Offshore, Exxon, these oil companies, extractive industries gets in the way of us being able to properly do our culture, practice our culture. It's a federally and internationally protected right for us to do And practice our culture. So we're asking this board to take care of what needs to be taken and protect our ocean, protect our tribe's rights and any further decision being made on extractive industries, we urge this board to do the proper work to do consultation with all of our tribes.

So Kakuna'an thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:17:34 · ≈ 1:17 PM

We will now go to David Cardona, to be followed by Nancy Black. David?

CommentDavid CardonaProposedself-stated4:17:45 · ≈ 1:17 PM

Good afternoon Board of Supervisors. My name is David Cardona I work for Stable Offshore. I've worked at Los Flores County facility for the past five and a half years. I absolutely believe the world is moving towards green energy and that's a good thing but that doesn't mean we can just throw away fossil fuels They are still the foundation of the world that runs today.

Oil and petroleum aren't just for fuel, they're used in hygiene products, makeup, clothing, shoes, rubber tires, batteries, the list goes on. But until there's another energy source that can replace all of that we'll continue to need oil to meet the world's basic needs. So I truly hope that you make the right choice today and approve the transfer of names so we can keep providing energy and the jobs our communities depend on. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:18:36 · ≈ 1:18 PM

We will now go to Nancy Black, to be followed by Bill Hickman. Nancy? No Nancy? We will now go to Bill Hickman, to be followed by Hudson View. Bill?

PresenterBill HickmanSurfrider FoundationProposedself-stated4:18:51 · ≈ 1:18 PM

Thank you. Hello, my name is Bill Hickman with the Surfrider Foundation. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today and I encourage you to deny the transfer of permits. Sable's record makes it clear that the company is either unwilling or unable to follow the law and operate safely. I lost faith in Sable a while ago and looks like investors are bailing on Sable also as other speakers have noted. The presentation from Sable included a market capitalization valuation from June when it was at its peak and now it's probably 20% or less of that number as their stock has tumbled 80 percent or more during that time while the broader market has soared and had substantial gains during the same period.

As a side note, the discussions today to talk about Local oil, foreign oil, rainforest oil, natural seepage. They're all red herrings to try to distract people from the real national energy emergency which is too slow of a transition to clean energy and the jobs associated with it. So please deny the transfer of the permit today and continue the transition to clean energy. Thank you for your time.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:20:07 · ≈ 1:20 PM

We will now go to Hudson View to be followed by Brooke Balthazer. Hudson? No, Hudson? How about Brooke Balthazer to be followed by Joshua Medrano. Brooke?

CommentBrooke BalthazerProposed4:20:24 · ≈ 1:20 PM

Okay. Good afternoon, Supervisors and Chair Caps. My name is Brooke and I'm the Community Organizing Manager at Climate First Replacing Oil & Gas or CFROG. I'm here today like many others to urge you to deny Sable's application to transfer permits as they have failed to prove themselves as a trustworthy or reliable operator. Sable has shown time and time again that they have no respect for our community, no respect for our laws and no interest in complying with them. From numerous cease-and-desist orders to an $18 million penalty to 21 criminal charges this company has shown a complete disregard for accountability in their relentless pursuit of profit And in a time where this behavior is not only enabled but rewarded, it is imperative that our local elected bodies stand firm to protect our communities from companies like Sable.

The evidence is clear. Sable is not financially equipped for another oil spill as seen by their falling stock prices and consistently poor quarterly financial reports. Sable assumes that they are above the law despite the many violations they've acquired from nearly every decision-making body involved in this issue. And Sable does not act in good faith, which is evident in their efforts to try to avoid any sense of accountability, transparency or responsibility. The decision before you is a simple one. Will you deny the permit transfer and stand firm with your communities against reckless corporations, or will you set a precedent that this board enables corporate greed by putting profit before people? I urge you to choose the former. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:21:52 · ≈ 1:21 PM

We will now go to Joshua Medrano to be followed by Emery Solars. My apologies. Is Joshua here? All righty. Emery Solars, Lena Coombs, Art Leavitt, Katie Davis and then we will go back to Zoom with Pasha Madavi.

CommentBrooke BalthazerProposed4:22:27 · ≈ 1:22 PM

Okay I would like, this is Katie Davis. I would like to speak to the comparison that Sable made between the Santa Barbara County fire and their violations. Their violations involved failing to operate important infrastructure like vapor recovery venting systems of motion emissions monitoring And that's particularly concerning because there are spills, hundreds of gallons of hydrochloric acid that burns. It caused respiratory distress. It's highly reactive, potentially explosive and the thousands of cubic tons of sludge was laced with barium which is also highly reactive and toxic so I don't think Santa Barbara County Fire is doing this kind of thing and it shows that this is a particularly non-compliant This is a particularly risky operation.

The Trump administration withdrew offshore leases in the Atlantic and Florida after Republican opposition. It's widely opposed, and this is an old infrastructure decade beyond its projected lifespan that they're operating. And so I would like to stand up for the taxpayers who are really going to be on the risk at risk if this goes through and they operate this, and local businesses because the most important economy in the entire United States is coastal California. We have the highest GDP. Thank you

not transcribed≈14s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:24:02 · ≈ 1:24 PM

We will now return to Zoom with Pasha Madhavi, to be followed by Kelsey Dowdy who is our final speaker. Pasha? Pasha we have unmuted you on our end if you can please unmute. There you go.

CommentPasha Madhavi I'mProposedself-stated4:24:21 · ≈ 1:24 PM

Excellent. Can you hear me all right? Yes,

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:24:23 · ≈ 1:24 PM

yes we can. Please proceed.

CommentPasha Madhavi I'mProposedself-stated4:24:26 · ≈ 1:24 PM

Thank you very much my name is Pasha Madhavi I'm a professor at UCSB And I am here to urge you all to deny the transfer of permits to Sable Offshore. In particular, I wanna speak to a number of the company's baseless claims regarding restarting the Santa Ynez unit. The first is that restarting this unit and restarting production will not stabilize gasoline prices.

In fact state agencies like the Division of Petroleum Market Oversight part of the California Energy Commission As found in a new report, the gasoline prices are not high because of declining production. They're high because of refinery margins and what TPMO calls the mystery gasoline surcharge that's levied on us by the oil industry since the Torrance Refinery fire in 2015.

They estimate that these industry shenanigans there really is no other word for it $59 billion. So increasing production is not going to do anything, let's go after the real source of the problem for gasoline prices. The second is that restarting the San Andres unit will not significantly contribute to county property taxes. That's been an issue that's talked a lot about today. Taxes from the oil industry are a paltry 0.2% of county tax revenue and it's being generous. You know who pays taxes in our county?

Hotels, restaurants, fisheries, farmers. So many of whom are going to be devastated if there's another oil spill like in 2015.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:26:00 · ≈ 1:26 PM

Thank you, Pasha. That is your time.

CommentPasha Madhavi I'mProposedself-stated4:26:01 · ≈ 1:26 PM

Thank you very much. Thank you.

ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:26:03 · ≈ 1:26 PM

We will now go to Kelsey Dowdy. Kelsey? Can you

CommentKelsey DowdyProposedself-stated4:26:11 · ≈ 1:26 PM

hear me? Yes we can please proceed. Thank you okay hi my name is Kelsey Dowdy I have a PhD in ecosystem ecology and I witnessed the 2015 refugio oil spill aftermath and you can still see the effects. Ecosystem recovery from oil spills can take decades if it happens at all, and some of the toxic effects for humans include cancer and endocrine disruption, and there's also killing of animals through hypothermia, food web disruptions...

So obviously we depend on our healthy coast for food and for clean water and recreation. It's so much a part of our lives here in Santa Barbara, especially for. You know, people who have lived here for generations and whose ancestors have lived here and who continue to live so close to the ocean. And Sable is just obviously not doing everything possible to ensure that there's no spill. Sable has repeatedly demonstrated a disregard for water and land and life. And if they say their leaders in oil safety then why do they continue to violate environmental regulations? If they don't take our health or local ecology seriously I don't think we should take them seriously and I really ask that you, the Board of Supervisors, seriously consider our health and well-being above all profit, above all processes.

And see that these violations are significant for the health of our whole community for generations. Thank you so much. Please deny permit transfer.

not transcribed≈10s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:27:42 · ≈ 1:27 PM

And chair caps members of the board we do have one final speaker here in Santa Barbara I believe it. We just miss spelt it on our list, but we are going to sherry Higgins who is our final speaker Sherry.

4:28 – 4:4315 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed4:28:01 · ≈ 1:28 PM

Good afternoon, board of Supervisors. I would urge you to please help us created for the world, for the sky, the land, the water and the inhabitants in all of those places. Thank you.

not transcribed≈40s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.864:28:54 · ≈ 1:28 PM

And that concludes public comment on this item.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.834:28:59 · ≈ 1:28 PM

Well thank you. Thank you to every person that spoke. We got through that list of 96 very swiftly. I really appreciate it. Appreciate the respect that everybody showed as well. Okay so now we move on to the appellant rebuttal for 10 minutes Do I have that? Yes. You all set? Okay.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed4:29:30 · ≈ 1:29 PM

Make sure this is high enough Okay, can you hear me? All right. Thank you. Taryn Hefo on behalf of Appellants with the Environmental Defense Center So there's a few points I want to address with my time The first is to talk about the court decisions that refute the statements by Sables Council today And I would like to emphasize there's a reason I use direct quotes in my presentation and photos of the actual order and pleadings and whatever else in my presentation but just Hit on some of those again. Again, these are direct quotes from the order from Judge Gee in her September 12th ruling in the Sable versus County litigation.

So with regards to 25B she says quote chapter 25 B provides that the board's hearing shall be de novo and the board shall hold a public hearing this suggests that the board has the authority to engage in affirmative acts that go beyond merely reviewing the administrative record and giving a thumbs up or down. Here, the board has the authority to conduct de novo fact-finding."

The court continued she said the board quote has discretion to decide which action of the three to take she means affirm modify or reverse and discretion within its de novo review process end quote She also says, quote, these discretionary actions are separate from the mandatory and ministerial process of hearing and affirmatively acting on the appeal. End quote.

And finally she concludes in other words the board's de novo review of the planning commission's decision is discretionary. I mean, that's pretty clear and what she says the board's role is here and it's discretion. And this is a de novo hearing. I also would like to quickly address Judge Anderley's recent ruling in the Coastal Commission litigation that was on October 15th. And in his ruling he ruled in favor of Coastal Commission and rejected Sable's claims finding Sable repairs were not authorized by county permits.

Next, there were a lot of arguments made about preemption so just to touch on a few of those today. The county is not preempted under a theory of field preemption from requiring financial assurances for a spill separate from the coffers. There's no case that really supports Staples' theory they cite two statutes but nothing in that language expressly states or even suggests that authority over financial responsibility is reserved to OSPR Exclusive of local governments. And the purpose of 25B, financial assurance requirements and OSPR's certificates of financial responsibility scheme differ in purpose. So the former is primarily intended to assure an entity is capable of remediating a spill but the latter provides a means of clarifying what entity maintains liability.

And on federal preemption, Sable points to the Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Act and specifically its express preemption provision. But that provision applies to interstate pipelines and the Los Flores pipeline system is an intrastate pipeline so the express preemption provision does not restrict state or local authorities from regulating intrastate pipelines And on the fire marshal or state law preemption, the fire marshal has assumed jurisdiction over the state's intrastate pipelines pursuant to its federal certification.

And it's authority however is limited to matters of pipeline safety and integrity so the infrastructure. And here we're looking at whether an operator is capable of safely and responsibly operating a pipeline facility. It's not a matter, it's a separate matter than what's entrusted to the fire marshal. There was also a reference that there's, appellants are asking for unbridled discretion from the board in terms of the 25B findings. And that is just not the case. We're not suggesting that at all. We're really looking at the plain language of the ordinance itself. So Chapter 25B cabins the Board's discretion to scrutinize the qualifications of a proposed transferee based on the express parameters set forth in the required findings. So for operator capability, for example it limits the county's inquiry into a proposed operators skills training and resources with regards to the permit requirements and county code requirements.

On decommissioning, Sable's interpretation and the county staffs' interpretation of when the facility's decommissioning performance bonds would be required. They're saying it would be immediately following the permanent shutdown of the facilities is illogical and contrary to the plain language of the permit terms That's why in our letter, we actually pulled the permit language out so you can see how each condition is fully set forth in the permits themselves.

It's also inconsistent with County Code Section 35-153. The condition in reality says that the abandonment should occur immediately following shutdown which makes sense but the bonding requirement is not so qualified. And lastly, I would like to emphasize that the lawsuits that we reference in our presentation today and also in our comments, those stem from a very in-depth evidentiary process at the administrative phase and through administrative proceedings. That's from multiple notices of violations or directives, or orders hearings etc. So that's what led to those lawsuits but it needs to be emphasized that there was a whole process and a bunch of evidence that went into the subsequent litigation so the county has demonstrated that it will approve a change of owner and operator where appropriate Exxon went through this process just a few years ago.

So both Sable and Exxon knew that they would need board approval pursuant to Chapter 25B, and for all the reasons stated today we urge the Board to deny the applications to transfer the permits and direct staff to order Sable to immediately cease any and all operations at the facilities. And I have some remaining time if my colleague would like to join.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.834:35:47 · ≈ 1:35 PM

Actually, I'm told that you also both of you, if you need it or would like it, you have a minute and 44 seconds remaining from your presentation time earlier.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed4:35:58 · ≈ 1:35 PM

If we need it, we'll

PresenterRachel MatthewsAppellant Center for Biological Diversity and Wishtoyo FoundationProposedself-stated4:35:59 · ≈ 1:35 PM

add it

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed4:35:59 · ≈ 1:35 PM

on. Thank you very

PresenterRachel MatthewsAppellant Center for Biological Diversity and Wishtoyo FoundationProposedself-stated4:36:00 · ≈ 1:36 PM

much. Trying to be efficient with our time. So, I just had a couple of small points to make specific to the financial guarantees finding. I wanted to flag that the language in that finding is that the financial guarantees have been updated if necessary to reflect the new operator and Sable has wants you to think that that just means a change in name and that's just not the case. I mean reflect what?

Their financial status, and you know that because Chapter 25B requires submission of financial information and it requires you to consider the financial capacity of the new operator. So that analysis is contained within that finding. I also wanted to address the fact that the existing permits already require decommissioning bonds. That language was in my presentation, it's not a new requirement but again the finding for financial guarantees does inherently evolve evaluating the financial capacity of the applicant so that was that was the only thing I had to add thank you

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.834:37:12 · ≈ 1:37 PM

Thank You We can take any questions from the board at this point or we can do them at the end. Okay.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisor, District 5Proposedvoiceprint 0.934:37:22 · ≈ 1:37 PM

I have a question.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.834:37:23 · ≈ 1:37 PM

Okay, Supervisor Levenham. Oh

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisor, District 5Proposedvoiceprint 0.934:37:24 · ≈ 1:37 PM

is it just EDC? It would be just

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.834:37:27 · ≈ 1:37 PM

of the applicant. Okay we'll move to applicant rebuttal ten

CommentAnd just for clarificationProposedself-stated4:37:34 · ≈ 1:37 PM

minutes. Thank you Madam Supervisor, Madam Chair, Supervisors. I want to address a few things that the applicants just or the appellants just said and then circle back to some questions that have been raised today. The first point is about the discretion under Chapter 25B and what Judge G. Hauser has not ruled. To be clear, she has not ruled that any particular part of Chapter 25B exercises any particular kind of discretion. She did rule that this board was required to hear the matter de novo and that they had discretion to approve, modify or denied the appeals and that they had to exercise their discretion to do one of those things. But she has not ruled, for instance, that one subsection or another does or does not grant the board discretion.

And I suspect no matter what happens today we will be back before her asking her to clarify those points. I will note again that County Council has said that of the nine, they've only said that the last finding for operator capability has any discretionary component. The remaining eight, at least Council has reflected our ministerial. I note that especially because owner and guarantor Do not involve any findings that the county has declared our discretionary. So just noting that for the record again, we disagree that any of the findings allow discretion to the degree that has been advocated today which would allow decommissioning bonds or new and additional financial assurances. And again, I will point to the staff report from 2001 referenced in our papers and in our presentation which confirmed that when they removed those provisions from the draft they no longer were in the document and that...

Again, I'll quote it again Neither the financial guarantees nor the abandonment findings impose any unspecified financial requirements. They simply require that financial responsibility and abandonment provisions in permits and ordinances are adhered to, so it's simply not the case that new operator means you get to impose new and different findings and requirements.

I also want to speak today about the notices of violation that have come up a few different times. The vast majority of them with respect to the Water Board, the pending criminal charges and the Coastal Commission disputes all relate to repairs that were mandated by the Office of the State Fire Marshal and the question was whether or not additional permits were required either by the Coastal Commission Department of Fish and Wildlife or the Water Board. And those involved moving dirt, right? We're not talking about hazardous waste discharges or something like that. There is a dispute. It's active. I am not trying to minimize it but none of those are safety violations in the sense of any kind of oil spill or discharge of hazardous materials.

The only two hazardous materials discharges that we've got in the entire record were the ones that were raised, a small spill of hydrochloric acid and a spill of quote sludge. Both of which were self-reported by SABL. And if you look EDCs actually attached the actual reports to their letter, you can see that they were small, that they were appropriately cleaned up immediately, that they were reported immediately and they do not evidence systemic non-compliance of any kind.

And again, I would say that pretty much anyone who operates any kind of business that involves dealing with hazardous materials is going to occasionally have you know something small that they will then fix and report as Sable did here. We have again offered To continue the conversation regarding insurance policies, it's not required by the code. But County Council has talked to our broker.

I'm sure the board could inquire from them if the insurance policies are adequate. I will note again that that's not something that Chapter 25B requires. There's no requirement of insurance in the bonds, sorry in the permits or in the code itself but our insurance is good and Relatedly their decommissioning bonds, again the appellants have excerpted a portion. If you read the entire provision in context it's clear that the obligation to provide a decommissioning bond applies at the end of the life of the facilities when they have been inactivated and that is the way that this board and this county has interpreted them for Almost 40 years, I think it would raise serious due process considerations if the board were to suddenly impose a new and different requirement based on that language.

We have also repeatedly asked what SABLE could do to possibly satisfy the board's conditions because none have been articulated other than the concern about insurance, which we raised nearly double what there was before and we've repeatedly offered to provide further information. But beyond that the answer seems to be just don't be SABLE and or don't operate oil and gas facilities and neither of those is a legally sufficient answer.

I think that is the bulk of what I wanted to respond to. I know there are questions that the board has, so I will stop there

not transcribed≈7s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

4:43 – 4:5033 turns

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.834:43:18 · ≈ 1:43 PM

Okay,

CommentAnd just for clarificationProposedself-stated4:43:18 · ≈ 1:43 PM

thank

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.834:43:18 · ≈ 1:43 PM

you. Thank you very much We will move to staff comments. Supervisor Nielsen, or did you have a question? I have a

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role4:43:26 · ≈ 1:43 PM

question for staff.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.834:43:28 · ≈ 1:43 PM

Okay. So staff, did you, Director Plowman or Mr. Briggs, did you want to give any reaction to anything that was said first or just take questions either way?

CommentDavid CardonaProposed · by introduction4:43:40 · ≈ 1:43 PM

Madam Chair, we'll just take the questions.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.834:43:42 · ≈ 1:43 PM

Okay, sounds good. I think Supervisor Laviano was

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisor, District 5Proposedvoiceprint 0.934:43:45 · ≈ 1:43 PM

next. Thank you. I think my question is directed to County Council. So what I'm trying to do is clear up a little bit of confusion today about what we're doing today and whether it affects opening or closing the pipeline. And I guess what I want to ask first is if you could just kind of give us a 30 second on SB 237 so how that law changed and what's required now after January 1st?

SB 237 amended the public resources code and so after January 1st it will require a new coastal

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 11Proposed4:44:15 · ≈ 1:44 PM

development permit for repair, reactivation and maintenance of an oil and gas facility including an oil pipeline that has been idled inactive or out of service for five years or more. So that the last part is a quote.

not transcribed≈12s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisor, District 5Proposedvoiceprint 0.934:44:45 · ≈ 1:44 PM

So then I guess this part is for P&D staff is it so let's just say in a world where this was approved how do you see that affecting this particular project?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed4:44:59 · ≈ 1:44 PM

So Madam Chair and Supervisor Lavinia, the Lost Flores Pipeline would fit that description. And it would appear that we would need to process a CDP prior to restart of the line. Okay

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisor, District 5Proposedvoiceprint 0.934:45:16 · ≈ 1:45 PM

so I kind of want that. I think that was kind of lost in this hearing a little bit too. If this board approves this transfer it just doesn't automatically open up the pipeline

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed4:45:28 · ≈ 1:45 PM

Absolutely not. Okay,

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisor, District 5Proposedvoiceprint 0.934:45:29 · ≈ 1:45 PM

great. Thank you.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.834:45:32 · ≈ 1:45 PM

Supervisor Nielsen?

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role4:45:33 · ≈ 1:45 PM

Yes, thank you and I'm trying to clear up the confusion too because what I'm hearing some different things here today was that, you know, getting started restarting the pipeline as Supervisor Lavigny and the transfer of the asset who owns the San Ynez facility right now? I mean who's the actual owner?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed4:45:53 · ≈ 1:45 PM

So Madam Chair and Supervisor Nelson, the owner of the facility is Sable Offshore Corporation.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role4:45:57 · ≈ 1:45 PM

Okay so they own it? Correct. Who's operating it out right now?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed4:46:03 · ≈ 1:46 PM

So the operator would also be Sable Offshore Corporation however the permits have not been transferred to the new operators so technically speaking ExxonMobil is still the operator of record.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role4:46:17 · ≈ 1:46 PM

Does that change how we regulate it from the county's perspective? No. Okay, so we don't issue them a notice of violation at some point over that or cease and desist or that they can stop operating because there's a different name on the permit? We have not done that. We've not done that. Is that something that was within our purview?

CommentDavid CardonaProposed · by introduction4:46:43 · ≈ 1:46 PM

Madam Chair, Supervisor Nelson There have been discussions about that, and letters have referenced something along those lines. And I think what we would have to do is take a look at the set of circumstances and analyze whether or not it warranted any kind of enforcement action. So I'm not prepared to answer that question today but would want to look at the facts and determine what was actually occurring on the ground.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role4:47:12 · ≈ 1:47 PM

I think it's really important to this conversation because It really depends on what's going on, right? If that is in fact where we could actually get you know have some kind of cease and desist because the permit was transferred then this means something. If it doesn't this is really some type of exercise so I'm just trying to sparse that out a little bit Could

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.874:47:39 · ≈ 1:47 PM

I follow up on that? It's related.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role4:47:43 · ≈ 1:47 PM

Okay, I've still got some questions along with that but if you wanted to pop in on that yeah sure.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.874:47:47 · ≈ 1:47 PM

So I guess we're trying to get at what is the effect of a transfer or not transfer and and I guess my question is more specific and is Exxon on the hook if there were a spill if there were some question about something that's financial responsibility

CommentDavid CardonaProposed · by introduction4:48:11 · ≈ 1:48 PM

Supervisor Hartman through the chair, I think that is an excellent question. And they are the owner operator currently on our permit and I think we would look to them to assist with something provided they're still considered the permit holder if an incident were to occur.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role4:48:39 · ≈ 1:48 PM

So with typical, if I could have it back for a moment. So typical oil and gas operations if they're, if an owner goes under We typically go to the previous owners, is that correct? For remediation for cleanup. Typically our system works here.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed4:48:58 · ≈ 1:48 PM

So Madam Chair and Supervisor Nelson so in the case of a spill or some type of operational incident we would not look to the prior owner operator. In the case of abandonment we would. So if we're talking about Sable walking away from abandonment responsibilities for the onshore facilities, we would look back to Exxon and they would be responsible for that.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role4:49:19 · ≈ 1:49 PM

Okay that's I think helpful as well. All right so Sable owns it, they operate it just permits not in their name. Do they own the permit? I mean even though it's not transferred to them, I mean having a permit is actually there's some ownership to that part of the bundle of the property rights right?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed4:49:36 · ≈ 1:49 PM

So I think we're getting to the core of some... Exactly. Yeah, so Sable has purchased these assets from ExxonMobil and there's an expectation that they are able to follow through on the permits that would be transferred with the land under any other normal circumstances. Here we have Chapter 25B which makes things a little cloudy in this regard I think some of the hesitation that you hear coming from staff is that there's, there are legal issues that are wound up in all of this and takings issues that could involve large amounts of money. And it's very difficult to say with certainty that we have the ability to stop this transfer and tell Sable they're not able to operate these facilities when in fact they own them.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role4:50:23 · ≈ 1:50 PM

Okay and so I guess another thing for some of especially the younger kids that are here today that we're advocating, they think the vote that we have here is about restart or operation. Does this vote have anything to do with that?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed4:50:35 · ≈ 1:50 PM

No. Okay

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role4:50:36 · ≈ 1:50 PM

all right just wanted to clarify that. All right that's it for now on questions from me thank you.

4:50 – 4:5819 turns

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.834:50:45 · ≈ 1:50 PM

Supervisor Harmon, do you have further questions?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.874:50:48 · ≈ 1:50 PM

I did have a question about the abandonment issue. I'm looking in 25B about liability for abandonment and there it says that if the current owner or operator does not have financial resources to fully cover the cost then the immediately preceding owner or operators shall be responsible. I know in offshore matters that the company, the lease for the offshore contains that obligation. But I'm just wondering how strong this ordinance is if Exxon, I mean just, I mean the worst case scenario and I think that's what we're here sort of considering is a company that may be having some financial distress Early on, there is a spill.

A bankruptcy and then what happens about abandoning these facilities and who is responsible? I would imagine that if the permit transferred, Exxon would challenge this in 25B. airtight is this at protecting us from the worst case scenario?

not transcribed≈11s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed4:52:08 · ≈ 1:52 PM

So Madam Chair and Supervisor Hartman, in this case the language that you see there in 25B about prior owners being responsible for abandonment responsibilities is very similar to the language that is required by the state. And so we're not fully reliant upon 25B if we were to go after a prior owner, Exxon in this case for abandonment because we have state law that supports that as well.

And right now, you know CalGem and Sable are in disagreement about some of those requirements but at the end of the day I think the state law is pretty clear and that prior owners will be responsible

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.874:52:54 · ≈ 1:52 PM

And are there any exclusions or exceptions, or is that just like strict liability?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed4:53:00 · ≈ 1:53 PM

I have not heard of any exceptions to that.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.834:53:07 · ≈ 1:53 PM

Supervisor Lee.

ElectedRoy LeeSupervisor, District 1Proposedvoiceprint 0.844:53:08 · ≈ 1:53 PM

So Erin, is one example of Veneco with Chevron in Carpinteria, is that one example of... So Madam Chair

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed4:53:14 · ≈ 1:53 PM

and Supervisor Lee, Veneco is in state waters and so the regulations there are a little bit different but the concept is the same. So if you were to look at the law, it's going to say roughly the same thing with different language. But generally speaking, the concept of going after a previous owner is codified both onshore and offshore.

ElectedRoy LeeSupervisor, District 1Proposedvoiceprint 0.844:53:37 · ≈ 1:53 PM

And how long have you can you say that this Chevron has been working to decommission the Venicle company? It's been over 20 years, right? At least.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed4:53:52 · ≈ 1:53 PM

Well they went out of business shortly after the spill and the state has been working with prior owners I think it was mostly ExxonMobil since that time to abandon Platform Holly and the onshore facilities. Great. It's still a work in progress. Yes.

ElectedRoy LeeSupervisor, District 1Proposedvoiceprint 0.844:54:10 · ≈ 1:54 PM

The Carpintero Valley so got it

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.834:54:15 · ≈ 1:54 PM

I actually had a question for the appellant. In the rebuttal, applicant Sable characterized the spills as small and you spent a lot of time tracking oil companies and their infractions. Could you again part of our chart are central to our charge here today is to evaluate the skills training and resources and whether or not they are necessary to comply with I would like to ask you a couple of questions about the county codes. Could you characterize their skills? This is for you all, EDC.

either the skills or the training that would lead to these kind of infractions that have led to the enforcement actions from the state and elsewhere.

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed4:55:16 · ≈ 1:55 PM

Yes, and actually Linda would you want to join me up here too to respond to the other? Okay. So speaking specifically with regards to the Regional Board and the Coastal Commission were that involved the repair work on the pipeline which was for is that what you're referring to?

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.834:55:39 · ≈ 1:55 PM

Yeah so I know I kind of sprung this on you so I'll just repeat so again 25B Asks us to look at the skills, resources and training to see if the Applicant can comply with county code. I'm just zoning in on the skills to see if they're necessary and in rebuttal, they just mentioned that these bills that have happened that you've indicated were quote small So could you just put them in context so I can understand since you as an organization track oil companies and their activities and their infractions

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed4:56:19 · ≈ 1:56 PM

Yeah. So the spills themselves, I mean again this comes back to the whole of the evidence here that's before you and the spills that we're talking about is just one piece of everything that we discussed today. The point is to show that before you've even made a decision if the permit should transfer and before they've even started operating, we already have examples of spills occurring at these facilities And also violations of APCD's permit requirements. And it just is an indicator and evidence to show whether or not they have the quote necessary skills to comply with their permits, it goes to that finding and is relevant to that finding. But again I just want to emphasize but one example of the way this company has operated within just the past few months before even restarting these facilities My colleague add on to that too.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.834:57:19 · ≈ 1:57 PM

Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed4:57:22 · ≈ 1:57 PM

Thank you for your question, I think that gets to the heart of the matter here. I've been doing this for over 30 years dealt with a lot of oil companies. I've never seen the kind of behavior as with this company. I don't know if I've ever even seen a company with one cease and desist order letter let alone three numerous notices of violation A criminal complaint with 21 charges including five felonies, an attorney general complaint.

Numerous violations of the state water code and the state fish and game code. I've never seen one and this company is just Racking them up. So I've never seen anything like this and the Coastal Commission has said that at the town hall, that they've never seen a company operate so blatantly in disregard of the law and their cease-and-desist orders in their history. And they have a longer history than I do.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.834:58:22 · ≈ 1:58 PM

So when it comes to what we're tasked with evaluating today on a... When it comes to egregiousness on scale of 1 to 10, it would be a ten. Thank you

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed4:58:34 · ≈ 1:58 PM

Yes.

4:58 – 5:0711 turns

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.834:58:39 · ≈ 1:58 PM

Any other further questions?

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role4:58:41 · ≈ 1:58 PM

Yeah, yeah I think that begs a little bit of question that I like to ask staff about skills and training on it so I think Mr. Briggs you've been out there quite a bit and I want to be really careful here because there's a lot of people, especially these men and women in the room here that are the responsible parties for this. What's your assessment of this organization on the skills and training that's currently taking place from your experience for your decade plus experience as a regulator in

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed4:59:11 · ≈ 1:59 PM

this field? So Madam Chair and Supervisor Nelson, I have kind of two thoughts that would respond to your question. Number one we on our team we have an engineering I'm sorry petroleum engineer who oversees the system safety He's been working here since the facility opened under ExxonMobil, so he has almost 40 years of experience. He's been working directly with Sable to go through all of the audit items for the facility to make sure that everything is operating Properly prior to restart and per our system safety committee they have completed all the Prior to restart items identified in the audit matrix, so they've successfully worked through all of those issues with his oversight and then secondly Sable was required to hold Spill drills for both the pipeline facility and SYU and that's in concert with OSPR and the fire department and the EPA, and all the relevant agencies.

And they successfully completed both of those exercises so when it comes to you know the measurable safety related and experience related requirements of SABLE they've met both of those.

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role5:00:33 · ≈ 2:00 PM

Okay and I just just to be fair to SABLE would you agree with staff that with their assessment I just a yes or no is fine. We don't need we don't need to hold it. Absolutely OK, thank you that's all right.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.835:00:49 · ≈ 2:00 PM

Okay, any further questions from the board? Supervisor Hartman.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.875:00:52 · ≈ 2:00 PM

Just a question for staff. So were you out there monitoring as the modifications of the pipeline took place? Were you out there on a regular basis overseeing that?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed5:01:03 · ≈ 2:01 PM

Yes so our petroleum engineer has a weekly site visit he's out there two days a week. He's in constant contact with their staff as needed. So he's been at the facility essentially for the last three or four months

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.875:01:18 · ≈ 2:01 PM

So how do you respond then to the other agencies violations that they've recorded and are pursuing?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed5:01:27 · ≈ 2:01 PM

So Madam Chair and Supervisor Hartman, The violation items are not necessarily related to Sable's ability to ensure the facilities are safe for operation. They're more Are

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.835:01:57 · ≈ 2:01 PM

we done with questions? Shall we move into deliberations? Sounds good. Anyone like to lead off? I mean, we've done this before. Anybody want to go?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisor, District 5Proposedvoiceprint 0.935:02:14 · ≈ 2:02 PM

Not my favorite team. Ohtani. Ohtani, okay. All right I'll be Ohtani today. All right so as many of you know I've been a strong supporter of Santa Barbara County's oil industry for that I've received plenty of nasty emails letters to the editor chastising me but my support has been rooted in two basic reasons one is this industry provides head-of-household jobs and create pathways out of poverty many of them do not require college degree Our North County oil and gas workers are able to buy homes and flip the script of generational poverty to generational wealth. And secondly, this county's in dire need of additional revenue which allows us to provide the essential services to our constituents.

Less oil revenue regardless if you think $5 million is not that much means less money spent on parks roads libraries and other priorities So when I was getting ready for today's hearing, I don't think any of us slept great last night. My mind went back to 16 years ago when I sat with my wife and I told her I was interested in running for county supervisor but I didn't want to do it without her support.

My wife hates politics And she knew exactly what the job included, which was nights away from home, loss of privacy at the grocery store and having every vote scrutinized by the public. But she said she was 100% supportive on one condition and that was that I would always vote my conscience. I would never back down to a crowded hearing room. I would simply do what I thought was right.

And in February, that's what I did. I voted to approve the transfer permits disabled. I'm gonna vote my conscience again today But the landscape has changed dramatically since February. I take this job seriously, we all do. Especially when we're sitting in a quasi-judicial hearing where we assume the role of a judge examining and weighing the evidence. This cannot be as it's been stated many times today, this cannot be a political decision. It has to be rooted in examination of the ordinance And after reviewing the ordinance very carefully, I simply cannot make the finding that quote, Sable has the skills training and resources to operate the facility in compliance with the permit and all applicable county codes. And has demonstrated the ability to comply with compliance plans in 25B.

This is what I based this on. To me the following are facts they're not emotions. Since February, Sable has been charged criminally 21 times with five of those charges being felonies. And it's important to note for the record that these have not been adjudicated but they are still part of the evidence. The California Coastal Commission levied an $18 million fine, the highest ever issued by the commission and as many of you know while I don't always agree with them Thus far, the courts have backed them up.

Attorney General of the State of California has filed his own lawsuit and the stock price is down over 80% off of its high in May. The final straw for me was a Hunter Brooke article which was as disturbing as anything I've read. The fallout from that recorded phone call has already been severe and this is before regulators have weighed in. I have many friends in the oil industry and I will continue to support efforts to access our natural resources, but it has to be done responsibly by operators who put safety above profits.

To the employees here today, I've sat through many of these hearings and I've supported you in the industry 100%. This decision today does not lay at the feet of this board and this dais. It lays with a misguided management of Sable. In my opinion, they gave me no option. I'm not a rubber stamp. The evidence in this case is overwhelming. There is something wrong with the strategy of Sable's leadership.

Trying to simply bulldoze through the permitting process has not been helpful and is not the way we expect businesses in Santa Barbara County can conduct themselves. Right or wrong, oil is held to an even higher standard here but without spilling a single drop of oil, Sable has managed to push back the reputation of the industry 20 years. If I was another Santa Barbara County gas and oil operator, I'd be livid Stables management actions have reeked of desperation, and with desperation comes poor decision-making.

They've given me no choice but to uphold the appeal and find that if they have the skills, training, and resources to operate safely, they certainly have not yet demonstrated that to me. I'll be supporting the appeal.

5:07 – 5:136 turns

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.835:07:16 · ≈ 2:07 PM

Okay, thank you. Anyone like to go next? Supervisor Hartman?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.875:07:25 · ≈ 2:07 PM

What more is there to say? We learned from the 2015 refugio spill what happens when we relinquish responsibility and 25B gives us findings that we must, that is we shall make before we transfer a permit And we clearly haven't been able to make those findings yet. And I won't repeat all the violations but just add that there is an SEC complaint likely to be more so, I mean, I think that really goes to the financial capability of this company.

It has to give us considerable pause about the resources that the company has available to meet its obligations. I'm very concerned about bankruptcies, they're very common in the energy sector especially in oil. I did have some articles in The Record that show a GAO study about the number of bankruptcies And I think we as a county have duty as local government to protect the public health, safety and safeguard the county's natural resources. That's what local government does and that's what 25B does. And I don't think that responsibility is preempted by other legislation.

None of us are insurance experts But I would like, if we would pursue this, to hire a consultant who could hear our concerns and analyze the insurance policy because it's very complicated. And we know that insurance companies don't want to pay and there's just many, many questions that aren't answered by this. And I think we haven't done a searching analysis on that and it's really required I don't really know from what I've heard from staff today exactly what the effect of not transferring the permit is, but I do believe that it helps to keep Exxon on the hook both for spill and for abandonment if necessary. And I think that's really important given such a financially precarious company.

So I, before I could make these findings we would have to have those non-compliance issues resolved. We would have to have an insurance expert assess the policy and at this time quite frankly I can't make the findings either that there are the resources skills and training to transfer this permit Supervisor

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.835:10:34 · ≈ 2:10 PM

Lee.

ElectedRoy LeeSupervisor, District 1Proposedvoiceprint 0.845:10:34 · ≈ 2:10 PM

I'll go next so to say well, so you owe our County firefighters apology if you don't go after them then You're wrong about that. So I just want to make sure that you understand I'm not gonna repeat what Joan and Bob Steve said I fully agree with you I support upholding of the appeals And now that's it

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.835:11:00 · ≈ 2:11 PM

I'll

UnidentifiedCounty Executive OfficerProposed · by role5:11:01 · ≈ 2:11 PM

be the contrarian today. First off, I don't think 25B is lawful and will ultimately hold up Once this, we make a decision here. But just come to my comments by the logic that an operator with the history of spills and ongoing prosecution by the district attorney is automatically deemed not a responsible party. That logic doesn't hold water with me ironically, not only is that true for Sable and Plains All-American Pipeline but it's also true for Santa Barbara County itself.

Something often ignored by advocates is that we at the county have done the same thing In fact, a far greater environmental damage was done by one of our local sanitation districts which dumped seven times the amount of sewage in the Pacific Ocean than what was released in the Gaviota oil spill. It's interesting how some will pick and choose their outrage. I feel bad for the public and for my colleagues.

The public has been led to believe this denial today will somehow stop the restart The operation of offshore production and that it will change the liability of Sable, Exxon or Osper. Or change the future remediation requirements I believe it will not as for my colleagues I feel for them because I think they've also been painted somewhat into a corner here as that this might be some type of litmus test on their whether they care about the environment or not Unfortunately, I believe as I did back in February that this is political theater. Much of this is operation of bad faith by a few.

As I mentioned during our oil and gas discussions couple weeks ago, I'll put my record on practically dealing with environmental impacts of oil and gas in our community up against anyone else in this room. Oil and gas operations and their environmental impacts have a disproportionate impact on my constituents. The simple truth is that the only way we will mitigate those impacts is by working with oil and gas companies in good faith, not against them.

But it's clear in San Barbara County that's a difficult to do. Local oil production has become a proxy war for broader declared climate crisis. I support the transfer and therefore I will vote against any motion tonight. Thank you

5:13 – 5:1611 turns

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.835:13:19 · ≈ 2:13 PM

Thank you. I just wanted to thank students from UCSB and Santa Barbara High. I actually think you've done an amazing job of understanding what we're actually voting on here today. It's incredibly narrow and complex, but your comments spoke exactly to the heart of the matter. Thank you for being here. Supervisor Lavagnino, I really respect where you landed. I share your growing concerns. I expressed my concerns in February they largely centered on the resources part of our charge with that with the 25B with the skills training and resources. I zeroed in on the insurance policy.

Really was concerned about the fact that the company existed due to a loan from The company that had sold it to me, that just anyway enough has been said. But now since February my concerns have only grown on the resources front But my concerns on the skills due to all of the many violations that have been discussed, that led the headlines, that have led state headlines, that have led state investigations has grown. So I will be supporting the majority of the board here in supporting the appeal.

So with that we will take a motion. Supervisor Hartman, would you like to do the

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.875:14:44 · ≈ 2:14 PM

honors? Well I guess we have to come back with finance for denial so maybe we can hear from County Council what that would entail.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 11Proposed5:14:53 · ≈ 2:14 PM

Yes, County Council Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the board. So my recommendation would be today you would continue the item with direction staff to prepare the findings and then come back and I believe that the recommendation is December 16th. December

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.835:15:16 · ≈ 2:15 PM

16th so it will be findings for denial? Correct. And that still is within within the confines of the court. Yes,

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 11Proposed5:15:30 · ≈ 2:15 PM

yes it is. Just one second. Are we good? Okay. Yes, Madam Chair, we're good. So if someone would like to make a motion for the continuance in the direction of staff. Supervisor Lee would like to make the motion.

ElectedRoy LeeSupervisor, District 1Proposedvoiceprint 0.845:15:50 · ≈ 2:15 PM

All right I move to continue this hearing to December 16th with direction through staff to return with findings to approve the appeal and deny the change of owner operator and guarantor.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.835:16:05 · ≈ 2:16 PM

Okay and I will

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisor, District 3Proposedvoiceprint 0.875:16:10 · ≈ 2:16 PM

I will second.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.835:16:11 · ≈ 2:16 PM

Okay, and we'll do a roll call vote please.

Roll-call vote Passed 4–1 move to continue this hearing to December 16th with direction through staff to return with findings to approve the appeal and deny the chang
Show transcript
Supervisor Lee? Aye. Supervisor Lavenino? Aye Supervisor Hartman? Aye Supervisor Nelson? No And Chair Kaps? Aye
ClerkJacquelyne AlexanderChief Deputy Clerk of the BoardProposedvoiceprint 0.865:16:28 · ≈ 2:16 PM

Motion passes 4 to 1.

ElectedLaura CappsChair, District 2Proposedvoiceprint 0.835:16:29 · ≈ 2:16 PM

Thank you Okay, thank you everybody With that We will adjourn. I was just checking and we will be back on November 18th in Santa Maria.

not transcribed≈6s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen